Determining the Extent of Soil Degradation Processes Using Trend Analyses at a Regional Multispectral Scale
, Mohamed R. Metwalli 2, Maofang Gao 3, Francesco Toscano 4, Costanza Fiorentino 4, Antonio Scopa 4,* and Paola D’Antonio 4Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
I would like to thank the authors for the good work. The paper is good written and scientific originality is found. However, there is some remarks that could help enhance the paper quality :
- In the introduction section (line 99-103) : Please add references of the many spectral indices that have been developed especially by academics like you mentioned.
- The introduction is generally good and is focused on the scope of the study. But it looks not coherent and fragmented into 4 main issues :
1- first paragraph: SD impact globally and more significant for low-income countries.
2- second paragraph: The contribution of RS in mapping (LULC) and for earth observation
3- third paragraph: The utility of multi-spectral tools and techniques in LULC mapping, especially bare grounds
4- last paragraph: the state of degradation is too complex in Egypt and in the Nile Delta. the benefits of using SD assessment for sustainable management strategies.
Introduction must be homogeneous and coherent.
- Materials and methods:
In the study area you have forgot to mention minimum temperature. Are you sure average maximum temperature in August is 17°C ??!!
line 123: Please mention the name of the author with MDPI reference style (author name (year) [14]). Please correct it in other sections (line 138 : references [43], etc.)
figure 1: You have not mention the source of the first supervised map
figure 2 : add a legend to the figure
there is too many abbreviations and I have found a difficulties looking for the meaning of them and some of them are written in full length after they were mentioned in abbreviation (like EC, ESP, BD) and some of them are only available in abbreviation style (especially remote sensing indices).
- The result section: figure 4 must be mentioned before in the text (or should be putted after line 200 where you reference it).
figure 5 is not mentioned at all in the text of that section. either you mention it before or changed it to the following section where you have actually reference it (line 212).
Remote sensing results section:
It could be more helpful for readers if you put a slight overview of every remote sensing index in the material and data section. the definition, context of using and interpretation.
Figure 6 : You have not put the legend for any map. you must add classification meaning of the colours or an interpretating colour map of each index.
You mentioned before that the remote sensing indices are applied based on Landsat 8 imageries from 2013 to 2023. I have found in figure 6 a single interpreting map for each RSI. Could you add the corresponding year or is that a 2013-2023 average interpreting RSI map ?
Could you also try a different way of representing this figure and make it more legible without zooming in (maybe A3 format).
Author Response
Dear reviewer
I submit the corrections made to the text according to your suggestions
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper concerns the study of land degradation phenomena around the Nile delta. The study is interesting but the presentation of the work needs to be improved. Many acronyms are not explicit but above all the formulas are not indicated. Even the statistical analysis is not explicit and therefore, in the following form the paper is nothing more than a sequence of satellite images. In my opinion the authors should add a section in the methods where they define the single index and also the statistical methodologies used to derive the results. There are problems in Table 1 which appears incomplete
Author Response
Dear reviewer
I submit the corrections made to the text according to your suggestions
Best regards
Prof. Antonio Scopa
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Thank you for the efforts made in this enhanced format. Corrections are significantly found. Still some minor corrections:
- The introduction is still fragmented and apparently the author has not made many changes compared to the old version (one 2 to 3 lines).
- you have some English mistakes : line 127 : "figure 1 contains includes using digital..."
-about the supervised classification, you have not cited the accuracy of the obtained supervised which is fundamental to rely on for the following work.
- you still using abbreviation before referring it in the long format, (line 160 what is EC, ESP, BD ?) .
- I have not find the usefulness for implementing Landsat 8 wavelength (table 1). It is publicly available and there is no specific reason to put it.
-figure 7 still have legibility problems. especially the last two figures. If you cannot manage a enhanced format, you can keep it in this way. I did focus on this figure because it highlights the scope of the paper.
Author Response
Thanks for your efforts.
Prof. Antonio Scopa
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
The revised paper can be published in the present form.
Author Response
Thanks for your efforts.
Prof. Antonio Scopa
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
