Low-Altitude, Overcooled Scree Slope: Insights into Temperature Distribution Using High-Resolution Thermal Imagery in the Romanian Carpathians
, Iosif Lopătiță 2, Petru Urdea 1,2, Oana Berzescu 1,2 and Alexandru Onaca 1,2,*
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe description of the methods should be improved as it is not stated how the authors distinguished between vent holes and the rock surface. Did they just use the temperature difference?.
The colours of the boxes in Figures 9 and 10 should be more varied.
Author Response
Reviewer #1 – Comments and Responses
Comment 1:
The description of the methods should be improved as it is not stated how the authors distinguished between vent holes and the rock surface. Did they just use the temperature difference?
Response:
We appreciate the reviewer’s feedback regarding the methodology. To clarify how vent holes and rock surfaces were distinguished, the following detailed explanation has been added to the Methodology section (Lines 322-332): `To differentiate between vent holes and rock surfaces, a combination of thermal im-agery, RGB orthomosaics, and field observations was used. Vent holes were identified based on their distinct thermal signatures, which exhibited temperature contrasts rela-tive to the surrounding rock surfaces. These thermal anomalies were further validated using RGB imagery, where visible openings, cracks or depressions indicated potential air circulation pathways. Field observations provided an additional verification step, ensuring the accurate mapping of vent holes and rock surfaces across all seasonal da-tasets. Cross-referencing thermal and RGB data helped reduce misclassification errors, particularly in shaded areas where temperature variations alone may not reliably dis-tinguish between surface features.`
Comment 2:
The colours of the boxes in Figures 9 and 10 should be more varied.
Response:
Figure 9 has been replaced with a new, more comprehensive graph that incorporates additional datasets, providing a more complete analysis. Additionally, the boxplot colors have been adjusted to enhance contrast between categories, improving visual clarity and differentiation.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsTitle: Investigating the Thermal Dynamics of a Low-Altitude Cold Scree at Detunata Goală (Romania), using UAV-based infrared thermography
• Summary
This research assesses high-resolution UAV-based infrared thermography to characterize the thermal regime of a low-altitude cold scree at in the Western Romanian Carpathians. Two field surveys in this research were conducted to capture seasonal thermal dynamics between winter and spring. The analysis revealed significant temperature gradients within the colder scree slope in forest-insulated lower sections and warmer solar-exposed upper regions. The persistent presence of ice and low temperatures during the warm season suggests the potential existence of isolated permafrost. A seasonal inversion of temperatures between vent holes and surrounding rock surfaces was observed, with vent holes exhibiting warmer temperatures in winter and cooler in spring. This highlights the influence of external climatic factors and internal airflow processes within the scree. The results confirm the chimney effect, where colder air infiltrates the lower talus, warms as it ascends, and exits at higher elevations. These findings demonstrate the efficacy of UAV-based thermal imagery in detecting microclimatic variability and elucidating thermal processes governing talus slopes. They provide valuable insights into extra-zonal permafrost behavior, particularly under the impacts of global climate change.
• Comments (Major issues)
1. Figure 1, please add C, D, E, F of the corresponding locations in location A or B.
2. It is better to explain the individual part of the drone in Figure 3 derived from the introductions in Figure 2 (Data Acquisition), i.e., which part is DJI Zenmuse H20T and DJI D-RTK 2?
3. Line 218~223, the introductions of software and hardware should be summaried in the tables for clearer understanding.
4. What is “TS–RG systems”, please explain it.
5. This research lack of the detailed introductions like individual figures about the process in generating orthophoto in Agisoft Metashape Professional, which will reduce the readability about this research.
6. Table 1, in No. of Images Processed, what does 395/398 (433/491) mean individually?
7. Figure 11, the annotation of the bounding box cannot be seen clearly, please improve the resolution or add the zoom-in images. And please add where is “in” and “out”, separately.
8. If possible, please explain more novelty about this research that the other researchers can refer.
• Comments (Minor issues)
1. Table 1, “Dense Point Cloud” should be used “,” instead of “.” for separating the numbers.
2. Table 1, and please use “16th, Dec. 2023” instead of “16.12.2023”.
3. Table 2, please add unit ℃
Author Response
Reviewer #2 – Comments and Responses
Comment 1:
Figure 1, please add C, D, E, F of the corresponding locations in location A or B.
Response:
We have revised Figure 1 to better illustrate the spatial context of each image. The updates include adding dashed lines to link ground images (C, F) and aerial images (D, E) to their approximate locations, incorporating curved lines to represent the viewing perspectives of the aerial images, marking camera positions with red dots for improved clarity, and refining the caption to explicitly describe these modifications. These adjustments enhance the figure’s readability and ensure a clearer interpretation.
Comment 2:
It is better to explain the individual part of the drone in Figure 3 derived from the introductions in Figure 2 (Data Acquisition), i.e., which part is DJI Zenmuse H20T and DJI D-RTK 2?
Response:
Labels have been added to each image in Figure 3 to clearly identify and describe the components of the equipment used in the study. Additionally, the caption of Figure 2 has been updated to provide more detailed explanations of each component's function. Specifically, the caption now includes a description of the workflow, highlighting the integration of field data collection using the DJI Matrice 300 RTK UAV, equipped with the Zenmuse H20T sensor for infrared imagery acquisition, and the DJI D-RTK 2 GNSS base station for accurate georeferencing. These revisions enhance clarity and improve the reader’s understanding of the figures.
Comment 3:
Line 218~223, the introductions of software and hardware should be summarised in the tables for clearer understanding.
Response:
The software and hardware information has been consolidated into a table for improved clarity (Table S2 in the Supplementary Materials).
Comment 4:
What is “TS–RG systems”, please explain it.
Response:
We have removed the phrase "TS–RG systems" as our study focuses on a scree slope at the study site. We have maintained the terminology consistent with this context.
Comment 5:
This research lack of the detailed introductions like individual figures about the process in generating orthophoto in Agisoft Metashape Professional, which will reduce the readability about this research.
Response:
To improve the clarity of the processing workflow, we have added two new figures in the Supplementary Materials (Figure S1 & S2), detailing the steps in ImageJ and Agisoft Metashape for generating the orthomosaics.
Comment 6:
Table 1, in No. of Images Processed, what does 395/398 (433/491) mean individually?
Response:
The table row heading has been revised to clarify its meaning, explicitly indicating the number of images successfully aligned and processed out of the total available. The table has been completed with the new datasets and moved to the Supplementary Materials. Additionally, we have added a note in the methodology chapter to address cases of misalignment: `Some misalignment issues were observed, particularly in the thermal datasets, where low contrast and grayscale nature of TIFF thermal images resulted in an insufficient number of tie point for automatic alignment.`
Comment 7:
Figure 11, the annotation of the bounding box cannot be seen clearly, please improve the resolution or add the zoom-in images. And please add where is “in” and “out”, separately.
Response:
Figures 11 and 12 (now Figures 13 and 14) have been redesigned to improve the visibility of temperature values both inside and outside the vent holes. Additionally, "In" and "Out" labels have been added to each thermal image to enhance clarity and facilitate a more intuitive interpretation.
Comment 8:
If possible, please explain more novelty about this research that the other researchers can refer.
Response:
We appreciate the reviewer’s suggestion to further highlight the novelty of our research. To address this, a more detailed discussion of the study’s novelty has been added to the Discussion section, emphasizing how our findings contribute to existing research and provide reference points for future studies: `Low-altitude permafrost sites, situated well below the typical altitudinal limit for permafrost occurrence, are exceptionally rare in the scientific literature [5]. The limited existing studies mainly concentrate on mapping permafrost using geophysical methods and boreholes [8], along with measuring ground temperatures via data loggers and documenting BTS conditions at close of the cold season [7]. In some cases [11], individual thermal images captured for specific voids are used to support the cooling of the substrate. However, no previous study has employed UAV thermal imagery to map the spatial distribution of ground surface temperatures across different seasons. This approach has significant strengths, as it allows for the rapid acquisition of ground temperature data at an unprecedented spatial resolution.`
Comment 9:
Table 1, “Dense Point Cloud” should be used “,” instead of “.” For separating the numbers.
Response:
The number formatting throughout Table 1 (now Table S1 in the Supplementary Materials) has been corrected, replacing dots with commas to ensure consistency and improve clarity.
Comment 10:
Table 1, and please use “16th, Dec. 2023” instead of “16.12.2023”.
Response:
All dates in Table 1 (now Table S1 in the Supplementary Materials) have been updated to follow the "16th, Dec. 2023" format, replacing the previous "DD.MM.YYYY" style for consistency and improved readability.
Comment 11:
Table 2, please add unit ℃.
Response:
The unit (℃) has been added to Table 2 as requested.
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe submitted manuscript uses UAV-based infrared thermography to investigate the thermal dynamics of low-altitude cold scree at Detunata Goala in Romania. The research highlights significant temperature gradients and the presence of isolated permafrost influenced by the chimney effect and external climatic factors. The findings provide insights into permafrost behavior under climate change impacts. However, I think that the manuscript should address the following issues:
Comment 1. The manuscript presents research based on two field campaigns conducted in December and April, which may not fully capture the annual variability and long-term trends in thermal dynamics and permafrost behavior. Furthermore, the absence of long-term monitoring limits the ability to assess changes over time and understand the impact of climate change on permafrost dynamics more comprehensively. The authors should evaluate how this affects their findings and/or conclusions.
Comment 2. The focus on a single scree slope may limit the generalizability of findings to other similar environments or regions, potentially overlooking site-specific factors. Is there any similar work done by other Authors that could be used to compare conclusions and findings? How does the spatial restriction affect the presented findings and/or conclusions?
Comment 3. While UAV-based thermal data provides valuable insights, the lack of on-site ground sensors for validation might limit the accuracy of temperature readings and interpretations. Did the authors conduct any experiments or measurements to assess the accuracy of the results?
Comment 4. The impact of snow cover on thermal dynamics is mentioned, but the manuscript does not fully account for its variability and influence on temperature distributions. Please elaborate on this issue.
Comment 5. The manuscript discusses the chimney effect and air circulation within the screen, but the complexity of airflow dynamics is oversimplified and not fully explored. Please conduct a more in-depth description and analysis of this phenomenon, as it is crucial in this case.
Comment 6. The use of standardized emissivity and other physical parameters in thermal data processing could introduce errors if these assumptions do not accurately reflect the specific conditions of the study site. This is a major problem that should be addressed and corrected.
Author Response
Reviewer #3 – Comments and Responses
Comment 1:
The manuscript presents research based on two field campaigns conducted in December and April, which may not fully capture the annual variability and long-term trends in thermal dynamics and permafrost behavior. Furthermore, the absence of long-term monitoring limits the ability to assess changes over time and understand the impact of climate change on permafrost dynamics more comprehensively. The authors should evaluate how this affects their findings and/or conclusions.
Response:
We appreciate the reviewer’s feedback and have addressed this concern by incorporating two additional field campaigns from October 2024 (the end of the warm season conditions) and February 2025 (mid-winter conditions). This expanded dataset enhances our ability to assess seasonal thermal variability. The October dataset captures daytime conditions with solar radiation influence on thermal characteristics of the scree before snow onset. The February dataset includes a nighttime survey and a daytime survey, allowing us to examine thermal contrasts under different conditions. These additions provide a more comprehensive perspective on thermal evolution of the ground in different seasons.
Comment 2:
The focus on a single scree slope may limit the generalizability of findings to other similar environments or regions, potentially overlooking site-specific factors. Is there any similar work done by other Authors that could be used to compare conclusions and findings? How does the spatial restriction affect the presented findings and/or conclusions?
Response:
We acknowledge the reviewer’s concern regarding the study's focus on a single scree slope. To enhance the broader applicability of our findings, we have expanded our dataset by incorporating additional seasonal surveys and data from the forest sector, which has different microclimatic conditions compared to the open scree slope. This allows us to analyze how thermal processes vary between contrasting environments, particularly in February when snow cover, shading, and ventilation effects differ significantly between the two settings. We have also included a discussion of similar studies in cold climate regions, highlighting common thermal patterns and site-specific differences (Lines 892-905). While local factors influence some results, the fundamental thermal processes we observe are relevant to other periglacial and permafrost-affected environments: `Low-altitude permafrost sites, situated well below the typical altitudinal limit for permafrost occurrence, are exceptionally rare in the scientific literature [5]. The limited existing studies mainly concentrate on mapping permafrost using geophysical methods and boreholes [8], along with measuring ground temperatures via data loggers and documenting snow-bottom temperature conditions at close of the cold season [7]. In some cases [11], individual thermal images captured for specific voids are used to support the cooling of the substrate. However, no previous study has employed UAV thermal imagery to map the spatial distribution of ground surface temperatures across different seasons. This approach has significant strengths, as it allows for the rapid acquisition of ground temperature data at an unprecedented spatial resolution. Despite using different methodological approaches, our findings are consistent with previous results reported at similar sites in the Swiss Alps [8], Austrian Alps [6], Central German Uplands [16], Japan [2] and the White Mountains (USA) [11], which also highlighted that the chimney effect is responsible for cooling the lower part of the scree deposits.`
Comment 3:
While UAV-based thermal data provides valuable insights, the lack of on-site ground sensors for validation might limit the accuracy of temperature readings and interpretations. Did the authors conduct any experiments or measurements to assess the accuracy of the results?
Response:
To ensure the accuracy of our UAV-based thermal data, we used on-site ground surface temperature measurements to calibrate the thermal datasets for both the forest sector and the open scree slope. We also used an on-site temperature and humidity sensor during each field campaign to account for atmospheric conditions that could influence UAV-derived thermal measurements and improve data calibration. These measurements allowed us to adjust the UAV-derived temperatures accordingly and improve the reliability of our interpretations. The technique used for measuring ground temperature for validation and calibration, which involved a snow probe equipped with a temperature sensor, is now presented in Figure 3. This method ensured accurate in-situ temperature readings, helping to account for variations in terrain conditions, snow cover, and shading effects across different environments. Information about the use of the on-site temperature and humidity sensors for data calibration and validation in each field campaign has been added to the manuscript for clarification (Lines 202-212 and Lines 562-571): `To refine the accuracy and reliability of the UAV-based thermal imagery, on-site environmental measurements were conducted during each field campaign. Air temperature and humidity were recorded using a Nielsen-Kellerman Kestrel 4000 Thermo-Hygrometer to assess atmospheric conditions influencing thermal emissions. Ground surface temperature (GST) measurements were performed using snow probes at various depths to provide reference data for calibrating the physical parameters used in thermal image processing. These measurements were essential for thermal image calibration, ensuring accurate temperature extraction and minimizing potential deviations caused by atmospheric influences and surface emissivity variations. The collected data were later integrated into the analysis workflow to refine the interpretation of thermal anomalies and improve the reliability of UAV-derived temperature datasets.` ; `Calibration of the February 2025 vent hole temperature dataset was performed by correlating UAV-derived thermal measurements with in-situ ground surface temperature (GST) data (Figure 16). The adjustment process refined the distance parameter to optimize alignment between the datasets, resulting in a strong correlation (R² = 0.9423). This calibration confirmed that vent hole temperatures obtained from UAV-based thermal imagery were consistently lower than GST measurements while maintaining the same overall trend. The regression analysis provides a reference for temperature retrieval accuracy and highlights the importance of accounting for distance effects in UAV thermal surveys.`
Comment 4:
The impact of snow cover on thermal dynamics is mentioned, but the manuscript does not fully account for its variability and influence on temperature distributions. Please elaborate on this issue.
Response:
To address this issue, we have incorporated the new February 2025 dataset, which specifically assesses the influence of snow presence on surface temperature. This dataset includes both a nighttime survey with reduced snow cover and a daytime survey following fresh snowfall, allowing for a direct comparison of thermal variations under different snow conditions. Additionally, we have expanded the discussion on snow cover controlling role on ground surface temperature distribution at Detunata site (Lines 837-849): `Snow cover plays a significant role in periglacial environments, as its onset prevents ground cooling during the cold season due to its thermal insulating properties. However, at sites where snow thickness is relatively thin, such as Detunata, and where internal ventilation is enhanced by the high porosity of debris, the snow cover does not have a significant impact on ground cooling. According to [39], the winter phase of the chimney mechanism persists despite the presence of continuous snow cover, which can range from 1 to 3 meters thick. Thanks to efficient air circulation at Detunata, a dense network of snow funnels forms during winter, facilitating continuous air exchange between the substrate and the atmosphere [7]. Furthermore, in the upper part of the slope, where warm air is expelled during winter, the outflow of warm air inhibits the accumulation of snow [7]. However, in February 2025, we noted that immediately after the fresh snow began to accumulate, chimney circulation decreased slightly, leading to a reduction in the thermal differences between the lower and upper parts of the scree slope.`
Comment 5:
The manuscript discusses the chimney effect and air circulation within the scree, but the complexity of airflow dynamics is oversimplified and not fully explored. Please conduct a more in-depth description and analysis of this phenomenon, as it is crucial in this case.
Response:
We acknowledge the reviewer’s concern regarding the discussion of airflow dynamics. To address this, we have added a more in-depth discussion on the chimney effect and air circulation within the scree, considering factors such as ventilation patterns, thermal gradients, and seasonal variability. These additions provide a more comprehensive analysis of how airflow influences surface and subsurface temperature distributions, improving the understanding of its role in the observed thermal dynamics (Lines 821-836): `The direction and velocity of airflow within loose sediment accumulations fluctuate mainly due to the thermal contrast between external and ground air, creating a driving pressure gradient [39]. During winter, warm air, being lighter than the colder atmospheric air, rises and escapes from the upper part of the slope (Figure 7). As a result of this movement, cold air is pulled into the lower section of the scree and can rapidly cool de substrate [39]. This process is clearly observed at the Detunata cold scree slope before the onset of snow cover when the lowest ground surface temperatures are concentrated in the lower third of the slope. Once the ground is covered by a substantial snow layer, the intensity of chimney circulation appears to weaken at Detunata site (Figure 11). Even so, the air expelled through the funnels in the upper part of the slope is a few degrees warmer than that in the lower part (Figure 11). When the outside air temperature exceeds that of the interior, dense, cold air is gravitationally released at the base of the talus slope [4]. As a result, external warm air is diffusely drawn into the upper part of the slope [5]. This mechanism is particularly evident during the April and October campaigns at Detunata, when ground cooling is most pronounced in the lower part of the slope, as highlighted in previous studies [4-8,16-17,39].`
Comment 6:
The use of standardized emissivity and other physical parameters in thermal data processing could introduce errors if these assumptions do not accurately reflect the specific conditions of the study site. This is a major problem that should be addressed and corrected.
Response:
To minimize potential errors, on-site measurements of humidity, air temperature, and ground temperature were conducted during each field campaign to ensure accurate calibration of the UAV-derived thermal data (Lines 273-294): `During the conversion process, critical physical parameters measured on-site were calibrated to enhance the precision of temperature readings. These parameters included atmospheric humidity, ambient air temperature, sensor-to-surface distance, and emissivity, all of which were adjusted based on the prevailing climatic conditions during each survey. In December, the ambient temperature was -2°C, humidity was 80%, and emissivity was set to 0.97. For April, the temperature increased to 5°C, humidity was recorded at 75%, and emissivity was adjusted to 0.94, following the findings of [37] for massive basalt surfaces. In October, air temperature was 7°C, humidity was 70%, and emissivity remained at 0.94. In February, emissivity values differed between the nighttime and daytime surveys. For the nighttime surveys, emissivity was set at 0.96 due to the high humidity (90%) and an air temperature of 0°C. For the day-time survey, emissivity was increased to 0.98 to account for the presence of fresh snow, with humidity at 80% and air temperature at -4°C. For the thermal surveys conducted in the forest sector, emissivity values remained 0.98 in both December and February, with humidity levels at 85% and air temperatures of -2°C and -4°C, respectively. In April, emissivity was adjusted to 0.94, with humidity recorded at 75% and an air tem-perature of 5°C.` Additionally, an uncertainty discussion has been added to highlight the importance of validation and calibration data for improving the absolute temperature accuracy of UAV thermal imagery (Lines 929-947): `The calibration of UAV-derived thermal data is subject to multiple uncertainties related to atmospheric and surface conditions. Key factors influencing accuracy include air temperature, humidity, emissivity, and sensor-to-surface distance, all of which must be carefully measured on-site and adjusted during data processing. High humidity levels (above 85%) have been observed to overcorrect UAV thermal readings, leading to artificially lower temperatures, while low humidity (50–60%) can result in an overestimation of surface temperatures. A balanced humidity range (70–75%) has been found to provide the most reliable correction, aligning UAV readings with GST and in-situ measurements. Notably, changing the humidity setting from 75% to 85% results in approximately a 1°C decrease in recorded temperatures, while adjusting emissivity between 0.94 and 0.99 alters temperature values by only about 0.1°C. In contrast, the sensor distance parameter plays a critical role in thermal accuracy, as improper selection can lead to temperature variations exceeding 5°C. Determining the appropriate distance-to-subject value is essential, as even small adjustments can result in notable changes in recorded temperatures. In this study, calibration was performed by adjusting the distance parameter based on GST measurements, reinforcing the need for precise field data to refine UAV thermal imagery. These uncertainties emphasize the importance of integrating ground-based measurements for validation and employing systematic calibration procedures to enhance the reliability of UAV thermal datasets.`
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe title of this paper seems to be somehow inconsistent with the topic presented in the abstract, and this paper appears to be more suitable for journals such as “Remote Sensing” or “Climate”.
The first sentence of the abstract indicates that this paper primarily focuses on methodology or technical research. Although it involves “remote sensing”, it is not closely related to “land use change assessment”.
There are numerous issues with improper citation formatting and layout, e.g., Line 35.
The Introduction section is relatively short, whereas the description of the study area is quite lengthy, containing redundant content that is not highly relevant to this paper's main topic. Meanwhile the authors should also avoid excessively short paragraphs.
In Table 1, it is unusual to present datasets in the results section unless this paper specifically focuses on data acquisition and processing. As for Table 2, tables in the Land journal are generally expected to follow the three-line format.
The subheading of Section 3.1 does not align well with its content.
The results section includes some methodological content, while the discussion section contains a significant amount of results-related content. For instance, Lines 447–452 should belong to the results section rather than the discussion section.
The conclusion section is also somewhat lengthy. Moreover, this section suggests that this paper is a case study rather than a methodological study. Regardless, the paper primarily focused on the “thermal conditions” rather than “land use assessment”. Therefore, I recommend that the authors consider submitting it to a more appropriate journal.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageFurther improvement is still needed.
Author Response
Reviewer #4 – Comments and Responses
Comment 1:
The title of this paper seems to be somehow inconsistent with the topic presented in the abstract, and this paper appears to be more suitable for journals such as “Remote Sensing” or “Climate”.
Response:
This case study is among the few that examine low-altitude extra-zonal permafrost conditions worldwide. Its primary objective is to gain deeper insights into land-climate interactions at a key site for permafrost occurrence at low altitudes. While thermal images captured by UAV serve as the sole method of observation, the study's main scientific focus lies in analyzing energy fluxes at the ground-air-snow interface. According to Land journal, publications related to land system science, landscape, soil and water, land-climate interactions, land modeling, and data processing are highly encouraged, making this study a valuable contribution to the field. To improve consistency, we have refined both the title and abstract to better align with the study's focus and key findings. While our research involves thermal remote sensing techniques, its primary focus is on surface temperature variability, snow cover effects, and periglacial thermal dynamics within a specific landscape setting. The manuscript contributes to understanding how terrain and seasonal factors influence ground thermal regimes, making it relevant for readers interested in landscape-scale environmental processes rather than purely remote sensing methodologies.
Comment 2:
The first sentence of the abstract indicates that this paper primarily focuses on methodology or technical research. Although it involves “remote sensing”, it is not closely related to “land use change assessment”.
Response:
To improve clarity, we have adjusted the abstract to better reflect the scientific focus of the study rather than emphasizing methodological aspects. The revised version highlights the thermal dynamics, seasonal variability, and environmental implications of the study rather than positioning it as a technical or methodological paper. Regarding its relevance to Land and the Land Use Change Assessment special issue, our research contributes to understanding the relationships between advective heat fluxes and environmental controlling factors (climatic conditions and topographical and ecological characteristics). These factors are essential in assessing land surface changes, especially in permafrost and periglacial landscapes where climate-driven variations in thermal regimes can significantly impact land stability, ecological processes, and long-term landscape evolution. This study shows that land surface temperature is highly dependent on land cover characteristics. By integrating UAV-based thermal monitoring with in-situ measurements, this study provides valuable insights into land-atmosphere interactions relevant to changing environmental conditions (See previous comment response).
Comment 3:
There are numerous issues with improper citation formatting and layout, e.g., Line 35.
Response:
All citation issues, including those on Line 35, have been carefully reviewed and corrected to align with the journal's guidelines.
Comment 4:
The Introduction section is relatively short, whereas the description of the study area is quite lengthy, containing redundant content that is not highly relevant to this paper’s main topic. Meanwhile the authors should also avoid excessively short paragraphs.
Response:
To enhance clarity and maintain balance, irrelevant information from the study area section has been removed, ensuring that only the most pertinent details are retained. Additionally, the Introduction has been expanded to provide a stronger contextual background, offering a more comprehensive foundation for the study. Furthermore, short paragraphs have been reformulated to improve readability and enhance the logical flow of the text. These revisions contribute to a more cohesive and structured presentation of the study’s objectives and findings.
Comment 5:
In Table 1, it is unusual to present datasets in the results section unless this paper specifically focuses on data acquisition and processing. As for Table 2, tables in the Land journal are generally expected to follow the three-line format.
Response:
Table 1 has been relocated to the Methodology section, as it is more relevant in the context of data acquisition and processing. Additionally, Table 2 has been reformatted to adhere to the journal’s three-line format, ensuring consistency with publication guidelines.
Comment 6:
The subheading of Section 3.1 does not align well with its content.
Response:
To improve clarity and alignment with the section’s content, the subheading has been rephrased into `UAV-derived Thermal and RGB Maps` to better reflect the topics discussed.
Comment 7:
The results section includes some methodological content, while the discussion section contains a significant amount of results-related content. For instance, Lines 447–452 should belong to the results section rather than the discussion section.
Response:
We appreciate the reviewer’s feedback regarding the organization of the manuscript. To improve clarity and logical flow, the text has been better structured within the appropriate chapters. Methodological content previously found in the Results section has been moved to the Methodology section, while results-related content from the Discussion section, including Lines 447–452, has been relocated to the Results section where appropriate.
Comment 8:
The conclusion section is also somewhat lengthy. Moreover, this section suggests that this paper is a case study rather than a methodological study. Regardless, the paper primarily focused on the “thermal conditions” rather than “land use assessment”. Therefore, I recommend that the authors consider submitting it to a more appropriate journal.
Response:
To improve conciseness, the conclusions have been shortened to include only the most relevant findings, ensuring a more focused summary of the study’s key contributions. Regarding the journal’s suitability, while this study primarily investigates thermal conditions, its implications extend beyond methodology to land-atmosphere interactions and environmental processes. The findings provide insights into how terrain, snow cover, and seasonal changes influence surface temperatures, which are relevant for understanding land stability, periglacial processes, and climate-driven landscape evolution. These aspects align with the scope of Land, particularly in the context of land use and environmental change in periglacial and mountainous regions.
Comment 9:
The English could be improved to more clearly express the research.
Response:
The English was improved by a native speaker.
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThank you for providing the requested amendments and answers.
Author Response
Comments and Suggestions for Authors: Thank you for providing the requested amendments and answers.
Response: We sincerely appreciate your thorough review and valuable feedback on our manuscript. Your insightful comments have significantly contributed to improving the clarity and quality of our study.
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis paper may be accepted after the following issues are addressed.
Line 86: There are too many specific goals; The authors should try to avoid overly short paragraphs and listing content.
Line 99: The title should generally be "Methodology and Materials".
I suggest that the authors try their best to combine the conclusion into one paragraph and avoid listing content.
Author Response
Comments and Suggestions for Authors: This paper may be accepted after the following issues are addressed.
Response: Thank you for your constructive comments. We fully agree with your observations and find your insights highly valuable.
Line 86: There are too many specific goals; The authors should try to avoid overly short paragraphs and listing content.
Response: To improve readability and cohesion, we have revised this section by redusing the number of specific goals and integrating the objectives into a more narrative format, avoiding a bullet-point list. This adjustment ensures a smoother flow while maintaining clarity. Thank you for this valuable feedback.
`This study aims to bridge the gap in high-resolution, multi-seasonal thermal monitoring of scree slopes using UAV-based infrared thermography (IRT). To achieve this, we will generate high-resolution thermal orthomosaics from UAV-acquired imagery collected during four field campaigns (December 2023, April 2024, October 2024, and February 2025) at Detunata Goală. These datasets will be used to analyze the spatial and seasonal variability of surface temperatures across the scree slope. Additionally, we will establish methodological benchmarks for UAV-based thermal image acquisition and processing in extrazonal permafrost environments.`
Line 99: The title should generally be "Methodology and Materials". I suggest that the authors try their best to combine the conclusion into one paragraph and avoid listing content.
Thank you for your insightful suggestions. We have adopted the recommended title for Chapter 2 and revised the conclusion to present the findings in a single, cohesive paragraph, ensuring clarity and readability while avoiding a list format. We appreciate your valuable feedback.
`This study analyzed the seasonal thermal dynamics of the scree slope at Detunata Goală using UAV-based infrared thermography, emphasizing temperature gradients and the chimney effect's role in air circulation. The results indicate that colder air accumulates in the lower scree, while warmer air is expelled at higher elevations, with the strongest contrasts observed in December and April and the lowest variations in February due to snow cover. Temperature differences between surface types are also evident, as rock surfaces experience more pronounced variations than vent holes, and the upper debris accumulation consistently exhibits higher temperatures than the lower scree. The largest discrepancies occur in October and April, while the coldest temperatures are recorded in December and February. Vent holes remain colder than rock surfaces, particularly in warmer months. UAV-derived high-resolution infrared thermography effectively captured these microclimatic variations, demonstrating its utility in periglacial research. Integrating UAV thermal data with geophysical surveys, time-lapse imaging, and long-term ground surface temperature monitoring can enhance the assessment of periglacial environments. Furthermore, continued ground-based validation and careful calibration of physical parameters are crucial for improving the accuracy of thermal mapping.`
