Spatial and Temporal Variability of Extreme Hydroclimatic Events in the Bani River Basin

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

We would like to sincerely thank you for your insightful comments and valuable suggestions, which have significantly contributed to enhancing the manuscript. We have carefully addressed all the comments and implemented the necessary revisions.

Please find the response letter attached.

Best regards,

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Line 94 to 101: The authors used CHIRPS precipitation data and justified their choice based on its high resolution. However, this justification alone is insufficient to validate the use of these data. It is crucial to rely on scientific references that demonstrate the reliability of CHIRPS data in the study region. Otherwise, the credibility of your study may be called into question.

Line 107: The authors used the maximum 5-day rainfall index (RX5DAY) but did not include the 1-day rainfall index (RX1DAY), despite using Qmax for daily discharge in their analysis. I recommend either providing a justification for not including RX1DAY or incorporating it into your analysis to ensure consistency and strengthen the study's methodological framework.

3.2.1. Tests for trend analysis: The authors used the Modified Mann-Kendall (MMK) test to examine spatial and interannual trends in extreme rainfall and river flow across the Bani River Basin (BRB) for the period 1991–2020. It is crucial to justify the use of this test, as the Mann-Kendall (MK) test is the most commonly applied in such studies, rather than the MMK. While the authors selected the appropriate test for these indices, they did so without providing any justification. It should be noted that in any trend or stage analysis exercise, it is essential to assess whether the time series data are independent. If serial correlation is present in the time series, it can significantly impact the trend analysis results. Positive autocorrelation can artificially induce a trend in a time series, while negative autocorrelation can weaken a trend if one actually exists. These statistical characteristics have significant implications for trend and stage analyses. To the best of our knowledge, these indices are autocorrelated. Therefore, we recommend consulting the following three articles to inspire and strengthen the justification for your choice of this test.

Ehsanzadeh, E. & Adamowski, K. (2010) Trends in timing of low stream flows in Canada: impact of autocorrelation and long-term persistence. Hydrological Processes, 24(8), 970–980. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.7533  

Hamitouche, Y., Zeroual, A., Meddi, M., Assani, A. A., & Alkama, R. (2024). Changes in extreme precipitation indices across Algeria climate zones. International Journal of Climatology.  https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.8467  

Serinaldi, F. & Kilsby, C.G. (2016) The importance of prewhitening in change point analysis under persistence. Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment, 30, 763–777. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-015-1041-5    

 

For Figure 3, it is essential to indicate the coordinate system used. Please specify whether it is a geographic coordinate system (e.g., WGS84) or a projected coordinate system (e.g., UTM Zone 30N). Including this information ensures clarity and allows for reproducibility in spatial analyses.

For Table 3, it is important to add the unit "mm/year" in the column for Sen’s slope to clearly indicate the unit of measurement for the values presented. This ensures that the readers can easily interpret the data.

Article lacks an essential discussion section. This part is crucial because it allows you to compare your results with those of other existing studies, interpret your findings in a broader context, and justify your methodological choices. The discussion also serves to highlight the originality of your conclusions and contribute to the advancement of knowledge in the field. Furthermore, a well-developed discussion enables other researchers to cite your work when incorporating it into their own studies. I therefore recommend adding this section to improve the coherence of your article and its scientific impact.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

We would like to sincerely thank you for your insightful comments and valuable suggestions, which have significantly contributed to enhancing the manuscript. We have carefully addressed all the comments and implemented the necessary revisions.

Please find the response letter attached.

Best regards,

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have responded well to the requested suggestions