Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript presents the results of very extensive research on the design and application of machine-vision-based complementary seeding device to reduce the miss-seeding rate. The results are of great practical use. However, there are some minor comments.

lines 37-44: Please provide references.

lines 47-71: Please add references on onion.

2. Materials and Methods: More detailed information on the plant material should be added.

2.2.1. Image acquisition: How many images were acquired in total?

There is no discussion of the results against the background of the available literature.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Authors

Some specific comments are in the manuscript

General comments

Title: In opinion of this reviewer, title is weak respect the topic that author are working

Abstrac: I think it is incomplete

Introduction: Even thought authors mentioned the importance of the device in the process of seeding, some themes are not aboarded, such as the importance of the wavelength.

Objective: The objective must be aligned with the title and conclussion, in this case, I belive authors should to be explicit and contundent in the objective

Materials: In opinion of this reviewer, it is too information in the materials and methods, suggestion, found a way to get better 

Results: May be, authors sholud explain, why it is important the wavelength in the electrion of empty hole

Conclussion: I think, are very similar to results

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx