Evaluation of FAO-56 Procedures for Estimating Reference Evapotranspiration Using Missing Climatic Data for a Brazilian Tropical Savanna
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Please see the attachment
Comments for author File: Comments.docx
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Authors,
The manuscript addresses the limitation of the data and its impact on water resource management. ET is a very important component of water balance and needs a lot of attention. I found your study very interesting, however, I have some questions/suggestions/feedback.
I was curious why the response for December, Jan, Feb at times is different when performance was checked with RMSE and MBE?
Besides the dry and wet season, it would be great to see how the variation across quarters.
I am very intrigued with Figure 2. It is surprising to see the variation of soil and air temperature. Usually, the soil temperature is lower than the air temperature. In your study, the data shows a different trend. Is it a regional-specific observation? If so, it would be good to add a few stations (at least 3 stations)
It would be good to see VPD and Windspeed on two different graphs rather than the same graph on two y-axes.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear Authors,
After thoroughly going through the revised manuscript, the authors have addressed all of the comments and in doing so they have improved the quality of the manuscript. The authors have addressed all previous concerns expressed by the reviewers and in the process have improved the work, confirmed the validity of their findings, and gained confidence in their introduction, methods, results, and conclusions. I would like to congratulate the authors for their interesting and well-executed work and I recommend this manuscript for publication in Water (MDPI) in its current form.
Reviewer 2 Report
Great work with revisions