Rainfall Erosivity in Peru: A New Gridded Dataset Based on GPM-IMERG and Comprehensive Assessment (2000–2020)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I don't have any comments regarding the presentation of the paper. There should be more comparative papers like this to assess the quality of the satellite measured data.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper presents a study on soil erosion in Peru and examines how satellite-derived precipitation estimates can be utilized for this purpose. The methodology contains certain shortcomings, particularly in the description of datasets, statistical analysis, and a clear delineation of the potential uses of the results. I believe there's a need to make enhancements in the analysis, methodology, and potential application of the findings. Additionally, some figures appear incomplete, lacking certain results. Specific comments are in the document.

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The English needs to be reviewed urgently.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

There are some minor corrections to be made, as mentioned in the attached file.

 

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper evaluates the performance of a new gridded dataset (PISCO_reed) of Peruvian rainfall erosivity and erosivity density through a new calibration method that merges data from the IMERG v06 product with hourly records from automatic weather stations for the period 2000-2020. There are several issues that need to be addressed.

1. The numbers (a) and (b) in the caption to Figure 5 in the text are not labeled in Figure 5.

2. Line 395 in the text says " Figure 5 shows a variability between 0 to 28", but in Figure 5 it shows that the values of the multiplicative factor range from 1 to 12.

3. It is recommended that when analyzing the results of an image, the image be placed immediately after the analyzed paragraph to facilitate the reader's understanding in conjunction with the image.

4. In lines 459 to 460 of the text, it is stated that "the spatial variability of hazardous areas in Peru is shown in figure A1", but in fact figure 12 is a map of the spatial variability of hazardous areas in Peru. A similar situation occurs in lines 473 to 474 of the text.

5. The research background of the article does not adequately address the current status and impacts of rainfall erosivity in Peru, nor does it clearly state the research questions and hypotheses; consideration could be given to adding a relevant literature review and problem statement.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx