Comments to Author revision... 118 Peer Review Report / Journal of Hydrology: Regional Studies 9 2017 117–118∗ItisunclearinthismanuscriptwhatarethecalibrationcoefficientsusedinthesixEToeq
Trang 1Journal of Hydrology: Regional Studies 9 (2017) 117–118
Journal of Hydrology: Regional
Studies
j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e :w w w e l s e v i e r c o m / l o c a t e / e j r h
Peer review report 2 on “Analyses, Calibration and Validation of
Evapotranspiration Models to Predict Grass-Reference
Evapotranspiration in the Senegal River Delta”
1 Original Submission
2 Comments to Author
revision
DOI of the original article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrh.2016.06.003
2214-5818/$ – see front matter
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrh.2016.12.036
Trang 2118 Peer Review Report / Journal of Hydrology: Regional Studies 9 (2017) 117–118
∗ItisunclearinthismanuscriptwhatarethecalibrationcoefficientsusedinthesixEToequationsbasedonmodelcalibration
IassumeEquations2−7arebasedontheoriginalequationsdevelopedbytherespectiveauthors.So,onwhatbasis statisticalperformanceimprovedfromTable2toTable3?
∗AllsixequationswerecalibratedusingdatafromtheSaint-Louissite.ButthemodelperformanceisbetteratNdiayesite
ascomparedtoSaint-Louissite(Table4vs.Table5).Authorsshouldincludesomeexplanationinthemanuscriptonthis aspect
∗Authorsshouldgivesomemoredetailsaboutsensitivityanalysisregarding(a)whichequationofETowasusedfor sensi-tivityanalysis?(b)Whichyear/month/daydatawereusedforsensitivityanalysis?(c)Howmanydatapointswereused forsensitivityanalysis?
∗Properformatforcitingreferencesshouldbeusedthroughoutthemanuscript.ThesixselectedEToequationsshouldbe listedproperlyatthefirstmentionwithinthetextinproperformat.Forexample,itisuncleartoareaderwhatisTrabert
orMahringerorAlbrecht(Line103)
∗Consistentsymbolshouldbeusedwithinthemanuscripttorepresentanyshortform.Forexample,Penman-Monteith methodisshownasPM-EToatsomeplacesandP-M-EToatotherplaces
∗Therearedifferentfonts/spacingusedatdifferentplacesthroughoutthemanuscriptincludingreferences,probablydue
tocutandpaste.Authorsareadvisedtomakesurethatuniformfontandlinespacingareusedinthemanuscript Specificcomments:
Line213:TheinterceptvalueforValiantzas2isnot−1.55asseeninFigure1
Line214:AstheValiantzas2equationalsorequirestemperature,relativehumidity,windspeed,andsolarradiationdata forcomputationofETothenwhynotjustusestandardizedPenman−MonteithmethodforestimatingETo
Line230:WhatisPMF-56asitisnotdefinedanywhereinthemanuscript
Line247-250:WhichcitationiscorrectValipour(2015)orValipour(2014)?
Line354:Authorsshoulddeletethispart“primarilyforwaterresourcesandirrigationmanagementintheSenegalRiver Deltawherelowlandirrigatedriceisthepredominantproductionandwheresoilsalinizationisbecomingrecurrentthreat
tofoodproductionandtheenvironmentalsustainability”intheconclusionsectionastheseaspectsarenotdirectlyrelated
totheworkcarriedoutinthisstudy
Table2:IsitforSaint-LouissiteorforNdiayesite?Pleasemakethetableheadingself-explanatory
Figure5:ThefigurecaptionismisleadingasthereisnothingaboutseasonalityofETointhisfigure
Figure6:Pleaseincludeyear/yearsforwhichthesesensitivitycoefficientsarebasedupon
4.1 Recommendation
MinorRevision
Itisgoodtoseethattheauthorshavemadesignificantchangesinthemanuscriptbasedonpreviousreviewedcomments Therevisedmanuscriptisinmuchbettershapeascomparedtothepreviousversion.However,themanuscriptstillneeds thorougheditorialreviewastherearestillsomeerrorswhichwerepointedoutforpreviousversionofthemanuscript.For example,Valipour(2014)isusedinmaintext(Line222)butthereisnocitationforValipour(2014)inthereferencesection
Ontheotherhand,Valipour(2014a,b,c)arelistedinthereferencesbutneverreferredinthemaintext.Similarly,PMF-56
isusedinTable2butneverdefinedwhatisPMF-56inthewholemanuscript.ThePenman-MonteithgrassreferenceETis referredasPM-EToinmostofthemaintextbutitisshownasP-M-EToinFigures1,2,3,4.AuthorsshouldalsocheckFigure
5tomakesurethatsensitivityofETotosolarradiation(RS)issameassensitivitytoVPD(orjusttheplottingerror)
RameshK.Singh USGSEROS,47914252ndStreet,SiouxFalls,SD57198,UnitedStates