Dear Jason

Thank you for your contribution to the OzFlux special issue, and detailed responses to the two reviewers' comments. Please provide a revised manuscript with explaining how your responses have been incorporated into the manuscript by a point by point.

Regards,
Youngryel

Dear authors

Thank you for the revised work. I went through the manuscript and I felt it has been improved significantly. In particular, addition of two NZ sites into the analysis strengthened this overview article.

I have a few minor comments. Please check below and incorporate into the final version.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
L114: Remove “ChinaFlux” as it is a national network, not a regional network. AsiaFlux includes China.

L183-187: The authors raised three key questions, but it is unclear where they responded. I recommend answering to those questions at the last chapter with bullet points. If the authors did not intend to answer those questions, I would recommend removing this as readers might be confused. I found other three questions at the last chapter (L522-525); although I am a big fan of questions, I felt too many questions without answers in a manuscript would make readers empty.

L130: remove one dot after “records”

L369: Please explain how APAR was computed to estimate RUE. It seems Garbulsky et al., (2010) used MODIS fPAR, thus I guess the authors used MODIS fPAR and flux tower PAR data.

L374: Remove “Rain Use Eff” which was used three times through the manuscript with spelled-out name, rainfall use efficiency.

Dear authors

Thank you for incorporating comments. I see this is a nice overview paper on this special issue.

Best wishes,
Youngryel