Application of TRMM Precipitation Data to Evaluate Drought and Its Effects on Water Resources Instability

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

In its current form, the revised manuscript is suitable for publication in MDPI Applied Sciences.

Author Response

We thank you for providing us the useful and valued comments. In the revised manuscript, we have incorporated all your suggestions and other Reviewers’ comments to improve the quality of the work. we are pleased that our response addressed all your concerns.

Reviewer 2 Report

In this paper, the authors studied drought and its effects upon water resources using remote sensing data. The conclusions are supported by enough evidence and the paper is
well written. The authors resubmitted the manuscript by incorporating updates on my previous comments. I have only the following comments and would like to request the authors to to make a minor revision to have the manuscript considered for publication.
a) What does BIAS stand for? What is the significance of this parameter, please elaborate in the manuscript. Please explain Figure 3 different BIAS conditions and their co-relation to other statistical indicators.

 

Author Response

Reviewer 2

Thanks for your observation and comments. We did our best to incorporate all your valued comments. In the review process and based on your comment, we believe the paper has been significantly improved.

 

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In this paper, the authors studied drought and its effects upon water resources using remote sensing data. The conclusions are supported by enough evidence and the paper is well written. The authors resubmitted the manuscript by incorporating updates on my previous comments. I have only the following comments and would like to request the authors to to make a minor revision to have the manuscript considered for publication.a) What does BIAS stand for? What is the significance of this parameter, please elaborate in the manuscript. Please explain Figure 3 different BIAS conditions and their co-relation to other statistical indicators.

Thanks for your comment. It has been incorporated in the text. Kindly see the description of Eq. (6) in the manuscript; lines 148-152. We added more descriptions in line 151.  In case of Fig. 3, we have modified the sentences as below. Kindly see line: 148-152 and 227-232. Hope our attempt satisfies the respected referee.

 

According to Figure 3, the model, apart from Sanqor and Gilan-e-Gharb stations, overestimates the precipitation at all stations. The maximum overestimation for Kermanshah station was 8.38 mm, which is about 2% relative to the total BIAS average monthly rainfall at 439 mm. Moriasi et al. [20] stated that the relative BIAS values ​​were less than 10% of the model's very good performance, between 10% and 15% of the model's good performance, and between 15% and 25% of the model's relatively good performance.

Reviewer 3 Report

In view of climate changes, the phenomenon of draught is becoming an increasingly serious problem. Proper assessment of the scale and occurrence of draught provides the applicative basis for potential measures aimed at the reduction of its effects. In my opinion, the article is interesting, and corresponds with the problem currently intensively analysed in the global literature. After introducing the following comments, I recommend printing the article.

Introduction

What are the objectives of the paper? Please specify them clearly. I do not consider the assessment of precision of data concerning atmospheric precipitation TRMM as an objective. Several lines above, the authors present a broad collection of publications (from different regions), emphasising that in each case the observations showed high consistency, while it is obvious at the moment.

In the case of height above sea level, the colour scale should be selected in accordance with commonly adopted standards.

Please add figures presenting land use and geology. It is important in the context of water resources (rate of water circulation, evaporation, etc.).

Line 170: What programme was used specifically?

Why was the SPI index used instead of SPEI which is an expanded version of the former one (considering precipitation and potential evapotranspiration)?

Results and Discussion

The discussion part should definitely be expanded. It should cover issues concerning draught in the analysed regions and throughout Iran. What new do results obtained in this study contribute in the context of the existing literature? I present example studies below (there are more of them of course).

Multi-year assessment of drought changes in the Kermanshah city by standardized precipitation index, 2016. International Journal of Pharmacy and Technology, 8

Analysis of SPI drought class transitions due to climate change. Case study: Kermanshah (Iran), 2016. Water Resources, 43

Drought sensitivity mapping using two one-class support vector machine algorithms, 2017.  Atmospheric Research, 193,

Drought and Desertification in Iran, 2019, Hydrology, 6

Effect of Air Temperature on Historical Trend of Long-Term Droughts in Different Climates of Iran, Water Resources Management,2017, 31

Author Response

Reviewer 3

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In view of climate changes, the phenomenon of draught is becoming an increasingly serious problem. Proper assessment of the scale and occurrence of draught provides the applicative basis for potential measures aimed at the reduction of its effects. In my opinion, the article is interesting, and corresponds with the problem currently intensively analysed in the global literature. After introducing the following comments, I recommend printing the article.

Introduction

What are the objectives of the paper? Please specify them clearly. I do not consider the assessment of precision of data concerning atmospheric precipitation TRMM as an objective. Several lines above, the authors present a broad collection of publications (from different regions), emphasising that in each case the observations showed high consistency, while it is obvious at the moment.

We agree with the referee that the TRMM has been applied in many regions. However. droughts and water resources shortages can cause devastating consequence on the environment, economic and social. Therefore, understanding and monitoring drought across different times and places extremely important from researcher to decision makers. Droughts could impact by the reduction in groundwater levels of wells, discharge of spring, decrease of streamflow, discharge of rivers, quants and lake storage over several consecutive years, and often affect large areas (Smakhtin, 2001).

We have modified the objectives as follow and stated in the text: “The aims of this study are in two folds, firstly analysis drought condition using observed precipitation and remote sensing TRMM data and secondly analysis relationship of drought to spring/fountain discharge for the Kermanshah province.” 

 Smakhtin, V. U. (2001) Low flow hydrology: a review. J. Hydrol. 240, 147–186. 

In the case of height above sea level, the colour scale should be selected in accordance with commonly adopted standards.

 

We agree with the respected referee. The colors for heights above sea level as scale are assigned inappropriate accordance with commonly adopted standards. However, it is not altering or influences our results. We definitely use this valued comments in our future researches.

Please add figures presenting land use and geology. It is important in the context of water resources (rate of water circulation, evaporation, etc.).

We thank the referee for his/her valued comments. However, extracted such a useful map needs more data collection and analysis. To meet the concerns of the honorable referee, we incorporate related text to the manuscript describing land uses and geology. Kindly see section 2.1.

Line 170: What programme was used specifically?

Thanks for your comment. The MS-Excel, MATLAB, SPSS and GIS used for data mining, statistical analysis, extraction of data, manipulation, raster calculation as well mapping. These softwares are addressed in Section 2.5.1.

Why was the SPI index used instead of SPEI which is an expanded version of the former one (considering precipitation and potential evapotranspiration)?

As the respected referee has well pointed out, the SPEI method considers the water balance of precipitation (precipitation - evapotranspiration) and also uses different statistical distributions tools for calculations. These two conditions affect drought and for example can convert drought severity to other type of drought conditions. The aim of this study is to identify the drought occurrence rather than drought type, which has been achieved by the SPI method for this article.  For future research the recommendation of referee will be consider using both methods. Thanks for your accurate comment.

Results and Discussion

The discussion part should definitely be expanded. It should cover issues concerning draught in the analysed regions and throughout Iran. What new do results obtained in this study contribute in the context of the existing literature? I present example studies below (there are more of them of course).

Multi-year assessment of drought changes in the Kermanshah city by standardized precipitation index, 2016. International Journal of Pharmacy and Technology, 8

Analysis of SPI drought class transitions due to climate change. Case study: Kermanshah (Iran), 2016. Water Resources, 43

Drought sensitivity mapping using two one-class support vector machine algorithms, 2017.  Atmospheric Research, 193,

Drought and Desertification in Iran, 2019, Hydrology, 6

Effect of Air Temperature on Historical Trend of Long-Term Droughts in Different Climates of Iran, Water Resources Management,2017, 31

We thank the referee for his/her valued comments and recommendations. We found the references relevant and interesting, and incorporated in the manuscript.

We found the references relevant and interesting and incorporated in the text. Thanks for sharing your knowledge with us to improve the paper presentation and content.  

This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript entitled as "Application of TRMM precipitation data to evaluate drought and its effects on water resources instability" investigates drought and its effects upon water resources in Kermanshah (Iran) employing TRMM satellite precipitation, synoptic stations, and fountain discharge data. To this end, monthly precipitation data from the synoptic stations and TRMM satellite were collected and processes in the GIS environment. Based on the obtained results, the authors claimed that the TRMM precipitation data were of high accuracy. Besides, when the authors compare the fountain discharges and drought index results, they verified that the drought has caused a remarkable decrease in the fountain charges. This manuscript has a potential for a second review after applying the issues and addressing the shortcomings listed below:

1-The authors should polish/revise some grammatical mistakes and typos along the manuscript. For instance, ‘Standardized Precipitation. Standardized Precipitation Index…(repetition)’, ‘…data of the synoptic…’, ‘…a more- than- 60%...’, ‘…showed that…(repetition, try to use different words)’, ‘Figures. 10 (c) and (d)…’.

2-In the Abstract section, the acronyms “TRMM” and “GIS” should be given after mentioning the full version of them. Same situation is valid for “NASA” in the Introduction section. 

3-The transition to the last paragraph of the Introduction section is weak. The authors should work on to improve.

4-The resolution of Figures 1-3,5,7,9 should be updated. In addition, the corresponding references should be provided if these figures are taken from some other study.

5-The meaning of, for example, “P” and “O” should be given after Eq.2, not after Eq. 6. The authors should follow the same fashion for each equation.

6-In its current form, the manuscript is lack of the importance and effect of wireless antenna/sensor network on water/drought monitoring mechanisms. The authors should discuss this in their work, while properly mentioned and cited the following studies: [(i) Meteorol. Appl. 2016, 23, 91-100; (ii) Ad Hoc Netw., 2014, 13, 2-18; (iii) Adv. Electron. Mater. 2017, 3, 1700170].

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 1 Comments

We thank you for providing us the useful and valued comments. In the revised manuscript, we have incorporated all your suggestions and other Reviewers’ comments to improve the quality of the work. Our response to your comments is given below.

 

The manuscript entitled as "Application of TRMM precipitation data to evaluate drought and its effects on water resources instability" investigates drought and its effects upon water resources in Kermanshah (Iran) employing TRMM satellite precipitation, synoptic stations, and fountain discharge data. To this end, monthly precipitation data from the synoptic stations and TRMM satellite were collected and processes in the GIS environment. Based on the obtained results, the authors claimed that the TRMM precipitation data were of high accuracy. Besides, when the authors compare the fountain discharges and drought index results, they verified that the drought has caused a remarkable decrease in the fountain charges. This manuscript has a potential for a second review after applying the issues and addressing the shortcomings listed below:

We thank the respected referee for his/her accurate reading and understanding of the paper. 

1-The authors should polish/revise some grammatical mistakes and typos along the manuscript. For instance, ‘Standardized Precipitation. Standardized Precipitation Index…(repetition)’, ‘…data of the synoptic…’, ‘…a more- than- 60%...’, ‘…showed that…(repetition, try to use different words)’, ‘Figures. 10 (c) and (d)…’.

This has been modified in the entire text. Thanks.

2-In the Abstract section, the acronyms “TRMM” and “GIS” should be given after mentioning the full version of them. Same situation is valid for “NASA” in the Introduction section. 

Thanks for your valued comments. This has been modified in the entire text and the abbreviations were described in their first display in the text.   

3-The transition to the last paragraph of the Introduction section is weak. The authors should work on to improve.

We thank you for this comment. We incorporated a statement to transfer to the next paragraph, as requested. Kindly see line 76.

4-The resolution of Figures 1-3,5,7,9 should be updated. In addition, the corresponding references should be provided if these figures are taken from some other study.

We thank you for this comment. We did our best to improve the Figs. quality and resolution.

5-The meaning of, for example, “P” and “O” should be given after Eq.2, not after Eq. 6. The authors should follow the same fashion for each equation.

We have considered and incorporated this point in the revised manuscript Kindly see the description following the equations in the manuscript, Lines 112- 132.

 

 

6-In its current form, the manuscript is lack of the importance and effect of wireless antenna/sensor network on water/drought monitoring mechanisms. The authors should discuss this in their work, while properly mentioned and cited the following studies: [(i) Meteorol. Appl. 2016, 23, 91-100; (ii) Ad Hoc Netw., 2014, 13, 2-18; (iii) Adv. Electron. Mater. 2017, 3, 1700170].

We think that this is not a relevant comment on our paper.

 

We have incorporated all your comments and other reviewers’ to alter the quality of our works. We believe that your comments improved our manuscript and it is now suitable for publication in the journal. Thanks!

 

Reviewer 2 Report

In this paper, the authors studied drought and its effects upon water resources using remote sensing data. The conclusions are supported by enough evidence and the paper is well written. The authors need to address these following concerns with minor revision before it can be considered for publication.

a) What does BIAS stand for? What is the significance of this parameter, please elaborate in the manuscript. What is the ideal value of BIAS that verifies TRMM data set to be appropriate/valid? Please explain Figure 3 different BIAS conditions and their co-relation to other statistical indicators.
b) When EF=1, the efficiency of TRMM satellite in the estimation of the real precipitation sounds appropriate. However, in your data- "The results of EF (0.6-0.8) attest that TRMM satellite is able to both predict the real
precipitation of the province and estimate the extreme precipitations at an admissible precision". Please provide a reference to prove that this 0.6-0.8 EF Range is enough to say the TRMM dataset verification is valid or appropriate.
c) What is GIS, please elaborate in the manuscript?
d) How did you calculate or obtain normalized fountain discharge data, please elaborate and explain in detail min-max range of its values with the corresponding significance of those values.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 2

 

Thanks for your observation and comments. We did our best to incorporate all your valued comments. In the review process and based on your comment, we believe the paper has been significantly improved.

In this paper, the authors studied drought and its effects upon water resources using remote sensing data. The conclusions are supported by enough evidence and the paper is well written. The authors need to address these following concerns with minor revision before it can be considered for publication.

We thank you for the encouraging comments. In the revised manuscript, we have attended and incorporated all your suggestions to improve the quality of our work. Following is our response to your comments:

a) What does BIAS stand for? What is the significance of this parameter, please elaborate in the manuscript. What is the ideal value of BIAS that verifies TRMM data set to be appropriate/valid? Please explain Figure 3 different BIAS conditions and their co-relation to other statistical indicators. 

Thanks for your accurate comments on the used statistic measure. We have modified the sentences as requested. Kindly see line: 136-139 and 213-218.

b) When EF=1, the efficiency of TRMM satellite in the estimation of the real precipitation sounds appropriate. However, in your data- "The results of EF (0.6-0.8) attest that TRMM satellite is able to both predict the real precipitation of the province and estimate the extreme precipitations at an admissible precision". Please provide a reference to prove that this 0.6-0.8 EF Range is enough to say the TRMM dataset verification is valid or appropriate.

We have considered and incorporated this point in the revised manuscript. Also a references was added to the text and references list was updated. Thanks for your accurate comment. Kindly see line.203.  

c) What is GIS, please elaborate in the manuscript?

Thanks for your accurate comment. We have considered and incorporated the description of GIS abbreviation in the revised manuscript.

d) How did you calculate or obtain normalized fountain discharge data, please elaborate and explain in detail min-max range of its values with the corresponding significance of those values.

Thanks for your valued comment.  The Normalized Fountain Discharge equation has been added to the text as Eq. 8 with a proper reference.

 

We have incorporated all your comments and other reviewers’ to alter the quality of our works. We believe that your comments improved our manuscript and it is now suitable for publication in the journal. Thanks!

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Although the authors try to respond my questions, the revisions not conducted correctly. To this end, I need to reject the revised manuscript.