Response to reviewers Manuscript title Author name The authors would like to thank Reviewer 1 for their acknowledgement that we have addressed all their concerns.We would also like to thank Reviewer 2 for their additional insights on this revised manuscript. We have addressed all comments from Reviewer 2,below. Finally,please note that all line numbers refer to those in the updated manuscript (these are different in the tracked changes document). REVIEWER #1 Reviewer comment Author response I believe the authors have adequately We thank the reviewer for taking the time to address my concerns with the original manuscript and it is now ready and read the manuscript again and to ensure the corrections were communicated as intended. appropriate for publication in Journal Name. REVIEWER #2 Reviewer comment Author response L29 It might be more accurate to say 'X' Agreed and we have changed this rather than justY' wording as requested. L32 This whole line could be removed As this paper is largely examining the associated processes,we feel that the line is more informative if left as-is. L66 You could add Wang et al.,2012, We have added a reference to Wang Nature (2012)on line68. L70 para-add in that aspects of 2014 have This has been included on line 73. also been examined. L83 add'was'before 'more' Added-thanks for picking up the typo. L189 You could probably remove 'and the We agree this was confusing and intraseasonal variation in each year was have removed the statement as different',or clarify. suggested. Fig 2.In caption it would be good to mention We by amending the opening again that rain is representative of soil sentence of the Figure 2 caption to: conditions. "(a)shows the time series of the Australian area-averaged Australian rainfall,which is representative of
Response to reviewers Manuscript title Author name The authors would like to thank Reviewer 1 for their acknowledgement that we have addressed all their concerns. We would also like to thank Reviewer 2 for their additional insights on this revised manuscript. We have addressed all comments from Reviewer 2, below. Finally, please note that all line numbers refer to those in the updated manuscript (these are different in the tracked changes document). REVIEWER #1 Reviewer comment Author response I believe the authors have adequately address my concerns with the original manuscript and it is now ready and appropriate for publication in Journal Name. We thank the reviewer for taking the time to read the manuscript again and to ensure the corrections were communicated as intended. REVIEWER #2 Reviewer comment Author response L29 It might be more accurate to say ‘X’ rather than just ‘Y’ Agreed and we have changed this wording as requested. L32 This whole line could be removed As this paper is largely examining the associated processes, we feel that the line is more informative if left as-is. L66 You could add Wang et al., 2012, Nature We have added a reference to Wang (2012) on line 68. L70 para - add in that aspects of 2014 have also been examined. This has been included on line 73. L83 add 'was' before 'more' Added – thanks for picking up the typo. L189 You could probably remove 'and the intraseasonal variation in each year was different', or clarify. We agree this was confusing and have removed the statement as suggested. Fig 2. In caption it would be good to mention again that rain is representative of soil conditions. We by amending the opening sentence of the Figure 2 caption to: “(a) shows the time series of the Australian area-averaged Australian rainfall, which is representative of
soil moisture conditions." L203 add 'below'after 'provided' This has now been corrected. L217 Add Figlb-g to the list of figures that The reference has been added. show the link between high Tmax and high PV P223 add 'is'before 'typical' This has now been corrected. P245 add 'the'before large- This has now been corrected. L294/5 Please clarify 'second third(...)' Thank you for highlighting this mistake.Somehow important information had been deleted in the submitted version.This has been corrected and reads as below on lines 305-307 Fig 4 The dashed obs line is a bit hard to The dashed line of the observations read.If you can,perhaps replace with a thin has been replaced with a solid black solid line. line in Figure 4. L325 para:Do you want to answer the This is already answered in the last question you posed in para 2 of intro here? sentence of the last paragraph of the conclusion.where we state. "We have demonstrated that XYZ" We have not included this statement where suggested to avoid repetition
soil moisture conditions .” L203 add 'below' after 'provided' This has now been corrected. L217 Add Fig1b-g to the list of figures that show the link between high Tmax and high PV The reference has been added. P223 add 'is' before 'typical' This has now been corrected. P245 add 'the' before large- This has now been corrected. L294/5 Please clarify 'second third (...)' Thank you for highlighting this mistake. Somehow important information had been deleted in the submitted version. This has been corrected and reads as below on lines 305-307. Fig 4 The dashed obs line is a bit hard to read. If you can, perhaps replace with a thin solid line. The dashed line of the observations has been replaced with a solid black line in Figure 4. L325 para: Do you want to answer the question you posed in para 2 of intro here? This is already answered in the last sentence of the last paragraph of the conclusion, where we state, “We have demonstrated that XYZ” We have not included this statement where suggested to avoid repetition
