Modeling Influence of Soil Properties in Different Gradients of Soil Moisture: The Case of the Valencia Anchor Station Validation Site, Spain

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This work is interesting for validating satellite soil moisture algorithms in comparison with small-scale ground-based and point moisture measurements. I have a number of questions.

1. The abstract needs to be rewritten a little more specifically. It has been said too broadly and without reading the article it is completely impossible to judge either the methods or the results.
2. Section 2.2. Please, indicate, from what depth, on average, soil samples were taken to measure moisture.
3. 2.3. It seems to me that this is not the density of the soil (2.65 g/cm3). This value can be related to the density of the mineral. Soil density is usually about 1.5?
4. It would be nice if on fig. 2, the quantities dimensions were indicated and the abscissa axes were title.
5. Give a reference for the equation in line 404 or indicate how it turned out.
6. Indicate the dimension of the value on the legend fig. 5.
7. You've done a lot of work. But I do not see the answer to the main question of this research! What am I talking about! When we calculate the integral numerically, methods have been developed for the optimal placement of nodes for any integrand function on an interval (for example, Gauss-Legendre quadrature). There are also two-dimensional quadratures. Therefore, the problem of finding the average moisture content in SMOS pixel is the usual integration, it is necessary to optimally find the nodes of the grid. Tell me, at how many minimum points should I measure soil moisture in a 50x50 km SMOS pixel, so that the average moisture value for the minimum number of points coincides with the average value for the entire SMOS pixel with an error of less than 4%. In this case, what is the minimum distance between the points and in the nodes of what grid shape should this minimum number of points be located?
8. In Conclusion please, post the answer to the question in point 7.

Author Response

In word document:

First The answers to the questions (pages 1 -7) and in second part the manuscript reviewed

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Greetings Dear Authors:

The MS titled "Modeling influence of soil properties in different gradients of soil moisture: the case of the Valencia Anchor Station validation site, Spain" sounds a very interesting topic. However there are few challenges that needs to be verified and taken care before accepting it for publication. I am attaching the PDF version that I reviwed summarizing the comments, suggestions and questions. 

Considering the importance of the topic (as specified by title) as well as the intensive work carried by your team, I recommend this manuscript, but only if it was revised and re-submitted by performing a major revision.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

In pdf all changes with comments.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Authors: 

After carefully reviewing the revised MS, I find that you revised the new MS as per the comments and suggestions made by me (from my previous review). I also see the work is re-done satisfactorily, with few but necessary minor revisions for e.g. text formating and here and there.

Author Response

Thank you for your review and suggestions.