Does Applying Subsampling in Quantile Mapping Affect the Climate Change Signal?

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

I have read the manuscript and I see the topic is interesting but I would like to ask you to address the following points before the manuscript can be ready for publication:

1 - How you calibrate in the period 1950 - 2005 and validate in the period 1950 - 2100?

2 - The calibratin period needs to be divided to two time segments: evaluation and validation.

3 - The introduction is short in comparison with number of references. This point should be revised.

4 - Considering the combination of QM and subsampling methods complicates interpretation of the results. I suggest to focus on one QM method with multiple subsampling timescales or multiple QM with one subsampling time scale to approach a good conclusion.

Best Regards

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Review of “Does applying subsampling in quantile mapping affect the climate change signal?”

Manuscript: hydrology-3164701

Author: Philipp Reiter , Markus C. Casper

 

General evaluation: 

This study investigate effect of subsampling and quantile mapping method on climate change signal. The topic is interesting, and the results are useful as it provide some documentation and guidance for regional climate change impact studies. The method is valid and the results are nicely presented. The general quality of this manuscript is good, and no major scientific issues are noted. However, there are two parts in the manuscript are not detailed enough, which must be improved - please see specific comments.

 

Specific comments:

1. In the 2nd paragraph of the introduction, the authors summarised the literature that wether climate change signal is sensible to be altered or preserved with bias correction is subject to debate. Only the author names or the citation IDs are include in this part, which is too abstract. Please include more details with a few examples of the typical justification from each school of research. 
2. In the “material and methods” section, line 49-50, the authors only mentioned that the quantile mapping and subsampling methods can be found in two references. Note that the readers want to understand what is doing in this study without downloading the other two papers and searching for details therein. Please add key details of these method, including equations where possible in this section for completeness of the manuscript.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I think that the manuscript is well organized, and the topic of subsampling in quantile mapping is clearly of interest into the context of climate change.  I have only two minor comments:

From line 181, Authors could organize the final section “conclusions”

Authors should at least theoretically discuss in Sect. 4 how their analysis could be transferred into the Extreme Values analysis in terms of probability distribution, that is a topic of great interest for stakeholders (see, for example, De Luca et al. 2024, Kotz et al. 2024, Pant et al. 2024)

Suggested references

De Luca D.L.;  Ridolfi E.;  Russo F.;  Moccia B.;  Napolitano F. (2024).  Climate change effects on rainfall extreme value distribution: the role of skewness.  Journal of Hydrology, 634, Article 130958.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2024.130958

Kotz M, Lange S, Wenz L, Levermann A. 2024.  Constraining the pattern and magnitude of projected extreme precipitation change in a multimodel ensemble.  Journal of Climate 37: 97–111

Pant, M., Bhatla, R., Ghosh, S. et al.  How climate change is affecting the summer monsoon extreme rainfall pattern over the Indo-Gangetic Plains of India: present and future perspectives.  Clim Dyn 62, 1055–1075 (2024).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-023-06953-x"

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

I am glad that you could address the comments properly and now I see that the manuscript quality is improved and it can be suitable for publication in hydrology journal.

Best Regards