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 ofResponse 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