Improving the Evapotranspiration Estimation under Cloudy Condition by Extending the Ts-VI Triangle Model

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript "remotesensing-1182228" deals with the interesting and useful topic of a method to improve the availability of ET estimates from the Ts-VI model after using an LST reconstruction algorithm in the presence of clouds.

The manuscript is well written and well documented and can be published in the remotes sensing journal after minor improvements (minor revision).

English language and style are fine / minor spell check required.

Authors should consider the following comments (please find the attached pdf "remotesensing-1182228-peer-review-v1_rev.pdf"

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Thanks for your positive remarks.

We have substantially revised our manuscript based on your comments. 

The modified parts were marked in red in the revised manuscript.

Reviewer 2 Report

In my point of view in this research, the researcher has done a good job in presentation of a method to improve the availability of ET estimates from surface temperature and vegetation index model based on remote sensing land surface temperature. The work appears very much innovative, interesting and merits to be published in journal like Remote Sensing. However, I list some comments and suggestions for improvements below:

1. 'Introduction': The literature review needs to be revised and add the missing references (Lines 44-51; 60-70).
2. Line 74-82: Remove.
3. 'Materials and Methods': This section must be shortened.
4. Description of error metrics (Line 389-391) is not results and should be moved to the “Materials and Methods” section.
5. Avoid to used “we” or “our” throughout the text.
6. R², RMSE, BIAS, and MAE need to add equations and the missing references.
7. The definition of abbreviations should be mentioned at the bottom of tables and figures.
8. The discussion must be supported using recent publications.
9. The conclusions of the work are not found. "Conclusions" section is not just a repetition of the results and should be limited to considerations that are very important in your study.

Author Response

Thanks for your positive remarks.

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

In my point of view in this research, the researcher has done a good job in presentation of a method to improve the availability of ET estimates from surface temperature and vegetation index model based on remote sensing land surface temperature. However, the conclusions must have no values.

Finally, I recommend accepting this research for publication in ‘Remote Sensing’ after making the required revision.

Author Response

Thanks for your positive remarks.

We delete the values in the conclusion part to fit the required revision.