Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors,

Great work on the manuscript. My comments are in the attached report.

All the best.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the English and suggestions are included in the report.

Author Response

"Please see the attachment."

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Please see my comments in the attachment.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

The quality of English language can be further improved.

Author Response

 "Please see the attachment."

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

I am glad to see substantial improvements made by authors. It highly improves the quality of the manuscript. Before its acceptance, please double check the manuscript with the following comments.

1.     P1 L1, the title is not proper. The definition of ‘discrimination’ in English is the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people or things, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex. My suggestion would be ‘Mapping insect-proof screened citrus orchards using Sentinel-2 MSI time-series images’. Please determine the final title with all co-authors.

2.     P4 L143, try ‘red, green, and blue bands as displayed in red, green, and blue channels for Landsat image’ in Figure 1’s caption. 

3.     P8 L229, in Figure 3, ‘textural’ is adjective.

4.     P10 L283, the part of variable explanations could be placed as the footnote of the table, like, ‘Note: NDVI(i,j)n refers to…’.

5.     P14 L365, the explanation part ‘…The numbers 1-4…’ could be placed as the footnote as well. Same in P16 L412, Table 6.

6.     P15 L381, please label the percentage for each bar in Figure 7.

7.     P15, what happened between L385 to L389?

The quality of English language is generally good, yet some minor mistakes should be fixed. Please see my comments for authors.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf