Crop Water Productivity, Applied Water Productivity and Economic Decision Making
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors make the valid point that many modellers present optimised estimates of water productivity based on scenarios where rainfall patterns are known ex ante, which is unrealistic in ‘field” conditions. They claim in this analysis to have acknowledged and incorporated the stochastic nature of rainfall. However, it. Is clear from the following paragraph that effective rainfall in the study area is closest to zero:
> The minimum and Q25% quantile rainfall are not reflected on Figure 3 because there 176 is 50% likelihood that rainfall will be zero or less than 1.6 mm. Rainfall does not contribute 177 much toward satisfying crop water demand as there is a 75% chance that rainfall in any 178 week will be below 5mm. However, there is a small probability (1/49) that rainfall may 179 contribute as much as 40mm towards satisfying crop water demand.
Thus the analysis defaults to the the case of what to do when water is known and limited, which is not really novel.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer
Thanks for your review. Your comments resulted in a better quality paper.
Attached please find our response to your comments
Regards
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
General:
1.please check the number of subpart: of Data, mathematical is not correct. Result is 4 and discussion is 4 again?.
- what is the conclusion of this work??. I don’t see this part in the text
Keywords: Please consider delete: water productivity, that are already in the title.
Optimization of that????
INTRODUCTION
lines 30-33: why don’t use the WUE concept?.
Lines 79-80: I don't understand this sentence, there are a large current literature is about this deficit irrigation in which there are not significantly differences
Line 85-86: commonly known, but when you calculate the irrigation doses, you take into account the type of soil to consider these losses
DATA
Figure 2: incomplete legend
Lines 160-166: commonly known, maybe you could shorten this part
Line 169: “2.3 Rainfall”
Figure 3: incomplete legend
Line 182 “2.4 Available soil water”
Lines 183-184: commonly known
Line 203 “2.5. Economic Parameters”
Line 210: seeds cost are included into the harvesting cost?
Line 216 is number 3
Line 217 is number 3.1
Lines 224-229: according to line 231 etm should be in capital letter
Line 240 : etm should be in capital letter
Line 262-285: difficult reading lines
RESULTS
Line 330-332: commonly known
Line 364-365: why do you say this statement?, there are currently many sensors that allow these estimates
Line 365-368 there are a large current literature is about this deficit irrigation in which there are not significantly differences
Lines: 434-435: what type of irrigation system do you meant by uniform and non-uniform: surface drip, subsurface, pivot? If you use subsurface drip irrigation you don't have soil evapotranspiration only loss by plant transpiration
Comments for author File: Comments.docx
Author Response
Dear Reviewer
Thanks for your review. Your comments resulted in a better quality paper.
Attached please find our response to your comments.
Regards
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
In my original comments on this paper, I suggested that it was too long, and would better be divided into two—the first explaining the methodology for incorporating stochasticity into the projection of optimum irrigation strategies, and the second describing the strategic implications of the analysis in the field from the farmer’s perspective.
The authors declined that suggestion. By now, with the addition of brief new explanations of key issues, I still do not fully understand what has been analysed.
I have nothing to add to my comments so far, and believe that if published in this form, few readers will grasp the implications (which, again, in my first comments, I suggested are interesting).
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
thank for your comments and help me to understand some question about your work
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
