Development of a Pre-Automatized Processing Chain for Agricultural Monitoring Using a Multi-Sensor and Multi-Temporal Approach

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors 1.Introduction is too long, make it shorter (two pages maximum).

2. in the Abstract, add what's novelty about this article:
"The novelty consists in investigating the multi-temporal pattern of radiometric indices and radar backscatter to detect the different phenological stages of each crop, identifying the Day of the Year (DoY) in which the classes showed greater separability".

3. In figures number 6, 8,9,10 (especially number 6), readability can be improved.



Comments on the Quality of English Language

English language is fine. Only minor editing can be required.

Author Response

Thank you for the revision. Please see the attachment

Kind regards.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The author proposes a crop classification technology method that integrates optical and radar data, which has a certain effect on solving crop classification in the research area of this article. However, the following suggestions still need to be considered in order to better improve the overall level and logical organization of the article.

1、There have been many studies on the fusion of radar and optical data to achieve crop classification. The author should comprehensively summarize the scientific ideas and limitations of existing research in the Introduction section, in order to introduce the scientificity and rationality of this study.

2、Figure 4, "mosaiking"-->mosaicking.

3、In section pre-processing, the effect of pansharpening should be better than direct resampling for Sentinel-2 data from a resolution of 60 meters to 10 meters.

4、In line 221, the author mentioned resulting dataset included more than 100 types of crop, can the author provide a detailed introduction to this dataset? How is it made and produced? How accurate is the data? On what basis did the author merge them into 24 categories?

5、The method proposed by the author can achieve good results in the small areas shown in the article. Would it also be applicable in a different scenario? If it needs to be applied to a larger region, such as those agricultural powers, what kind of results will occur? Can we analyze its application scenarios and effects, as well as the reasons behind it?

6、The discussion section should be separated into at least two chapters, demonstrating the advantages and limitations of the proposed method from different perspectives, as well as the underlying limiting factors.

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Minor editing of English language required.

Author Response

Thank you for the revision. Please see the attachment

Kind regards.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Many previous studies have demonstrated the superiority of the integration of optical and SAR data for crop monitoring than the single optical or SAR data. Therefore, the science innovation of this study is limited. On the other hand, the technical novelty of the used algorithm is limited, which is the main reason that the overall accuracy was still low even though optical and SAR data were integrated.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The manuscript should be carefully polished by a native speaker.

Author Response

Thank you for the revision. Please see the attachment

Kind regards.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear All,

Please see the posted comments inside the texts.

Sincerely Yours,

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

I have posted them inside the texts, please, follow them

Author Response

Thank you for the revision. Please see the attachment

Kind regards.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have provided detailed responses to all review comments and agree to accept them according to the current version

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Minor editing of English language required

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

No further comments.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

It is better to check the whole manuscript before publication.

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

OK, the author has fixed the requested points.

Thanks,