around 9700 words against 10700 in the previous version). 3. The section title 'study area' was changed to 'study area and data collection'. Its text was rewritten from former sections 2 and 3.3 (in reply to referee #1's suggestion). A figure representing the watershed position was included. 5 4. Section 3 was fully revised according to the new thread. Subsection 3.3 was separated into three subparts, two of which moved to the introduction and to the revised section 2. Other subsections of section 3 are now based on the mean approach, the analytical approach, the half-load discharge and the return periods.5. The recurrence interval of a certain discharge like the effective discharge is traditionally calculated in 10 hydrology. However, this return period is only based on hydrologic distributions (from the distributions of mean and maximum discharge). We propose in this paper something more original, calculating a recurrence interval of the effective discharge compared to the distribution of annual half-load discharge, which was obtained from both water and sediment data time series, and investigate its additional information. The text was clarified accordingly. 15 6. Figure 3 was redrawn in semi-log scale.7. The comparison of the two calculations makes it possible to add information on the limits of the analytical method (based on a probability density function for the flow frequency). It did not provide good results in semi-arid environments because the sediment rating curve introduces errors (designed as 'of the first type' in the paper) and because pronounced asymmetric probability distributions failed to 20 reproduce good frequencies of high discharge (errors 'of second type'). Consequently, this comparison shows that the mean method by decomposition of histogram classes is the most suitable in a semiarid environment. This had never been tested in the literature. It's an original result. This was emphasized in subsection 5.4. 8. To be consistent all along the paper with the subsection "Elementary contributions and budgets", QY50 25 (i.e. the water discharge that delimits 50% of the cumulative sediment yield) was preferred to QY1/2 in the revised version of the paper. 4
Replies by the authorsThe paper is interesting and well within the scope of the journal, nevertheless it needs to be reinforced with reference to several points, mainly regarding paper clarity and organization.Reply: Thanks for the general comment and all your suggestions to makes the paper better organized and 5 clearer.The title should more informative and let the reader know that it deals with sediment transport and hydrological implications.
Reply:We propose a new title: "Mean and analytical methods to characterize the efficiency of floods to move sediments in a small semi-arid basin". The mean method refers to the use of histograms where each 10 class of discharge is represented by its mean value, and the analytical method in which the dominant discharge is defined as the solution of h'(Q)=0 where h(Q)= f(Q).g(Q), f(Q) being a probability ...