|I thank the authors for having taken into account most of my remarks, and for their intensive work to make their paper a lot better. |
It is interesting to see the different behaviours and sensitivities between the two types of low-flow regimes (summer and winter) and it highlights the importance of making the distinction between these regimes in this kind of study. I also think that one of the most interesting result is that the different calibration variants do not impact the same features of the low-flows in the reference period as in the future period.
At last, do you think you could explain the relative contribution from hydrological modelling higher for winter low-flows than for summer low-flows by a transfer of hydrological regime in these catchments, from snow-dominated to rain-dominated regimes ? Snow processes parameters that control the discharge and that are calibrated in the reference period may not play such an important role in the future, whereas soil storages parameters would be of greater importance in a regime where evapotranspiration increase. It would be interesting to see if the range of these soil storages parameters obtained from different calibration variants are bigger in these winter low-flows catchments or not . Even if their study has been carried out focusing on mean hydrological regime, Magand et al., 2015 suggest that « the differences in parameters related to the soil are stifled in present time by the dominant snow process. ». I think that the results of this paper support this suggestion.
To sum up about this paper, the scientific content has been improved ; the methods used are more rigorous ; the bibliography that was already quite complete, has been expanded ; the readibility has been a lot improved ; the figures were already well built and telling a lot, they still are. The legends in the paper I downloaded were missing, but once they will be added, I definitely recommend the publication of this excellent paper.
The few misprints I found are listed below :
Page 2, line 5 : the future period 2021-2050
Page 8, line 4 : I would not refer here to Hingray and Said, Lafaysse et al., 2014 or Vidal et al., 2015 in this part as their method are a bit different, but I would only refer to them in the discussion as it is already done.
Page 8, 9 : The authors should be consistent in their notations and chose between SSE and SSe
Page 11, line 6 : « While yellow bullets/dots/circles indicate 130 stations with dominant summer (June-November) low-flow occurrence, blue bullets/dots/circles indicate 132 gauges… »
Page 12, line 25 : There is an extra dot.
Page 12, line 29-30 : I think that ZQ should not be preceded by « the ».
Page 14, I would delete from line 8 to line 13 because it should be in the legend of figure 6.
Page 16, line 2 : « …, but only one set of hydrological model parameters. »
Magand, C., Ducharne, A., Le Moine, N., & Brigode, P. (2015). Parameter transferability under changing climate: case study with a land surface model in the Durance watershed, France. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 60(7-8), 1408-1423.