Next Article in Journal
Study on the Influence of Shear Indenter Parameters on the In Situ Shear Strength Test
Previous Article in Journal
Overview on the Development of Intelligent Methods for Mineral Resource Prediction under the Background of Geological Big Data
Previous Article in Special Issue
Insights into the Metallogenesis of the Felsic Volcanic Hosted Mundiyawas-Khera Cu Deposit, Alwar Basin, Western India
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Mining Residues Characterization and Sentinel-2A Mapping for the Valorization and Efficient Resource Use by Multidisciplinary Strategy

Minerals 2022, 12(5), 617; https://doi.org/10.3390/min12050617
by Daniela Guglietta 1,*, Aida Maria Conte 1, Matteo Paciucci 1, Daniele Passeri 2, Francesca Trapasso 1 and Rosamaria Salvatori 3
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Minerals 2022, 12(5), 617; https://doi.org/10.3390/min12050617
Submission received: 23 March 2022 / Revised: 3 May 2022 / Accepted: 11 May 2022 / Published: 12 May 2022

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript entitled "Mining Residues Characterization and Sentinel-2A Mapping for the Valorisation and Efficient Resource Use by Multidisci-plinary Strategy, submitted to minerals, may be considered accepted due to the following reasons.

 

In this research, Sentinel-2A image classification combined with hyperspectral signatures and mineralogical, physical and chemical characterization analysis, has produced a map of mining residues. The results prove the ability of this multidisciplinary strategy to map the minerals of interest contained in mining waste. The references are suited, the manuscript is completed, the results are meaningful. Therefore it is suggested that it is suitable to be published in journal minerals.

 

 

 

 

Author Response

We wish to thank the reviewer 1 for appreciating our work

Reviewer 2 Report

The proposed article describe a research with remarkable potential impact, based on state of art processes using state of art instruments. It also demonstrates a good control of probable errors.

 

The reviewer suggests the following corrections:

Line 54: Replace “resilience” with “resilient”

Line 109: ASD is the acronym for?

Line 253: Delete extra space

Line 251: Elements describing the mineralogical composition of the 100 samples should be listed following the percentage of concentration, from the highest value to the lowest.

Line 257: Same as above

Figure 6: UPGMA dendrogram do not show the scale for the Euclidean distance. Please use a reference for the node height/linkage distance. Possible references figures:

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/UPGMA-Cluster-analysis-based-on-Pearson-distances-of-all-components-of-S-annuum_fig1_304791999

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/UPGMA-clustering-of-10-samples-taken-along-a-vertical-gradient-form-the-small-eutrophic_fig4_11010715

Line 283: Please use a reference unit to express the accuracy values.

Figure 9: Images and correspondent description not clear.

“Appendix B” repeats all the images' description in the article. Redundant.

Line 356: “D” should not be in bolt

Author Response

We wish to thank the reviewer 2 for very helpful comments

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper written by the following Authors: Daniela Guglietta, Aida Maria Conte, Matteo Paciucci, Daniele Passeri, Francesca Trapasso, Rosamaria Salvatori, entitled “Mining Residues Characterization and Sentinel- 2A Mapping for the Valorisation and Efficient Resource Use by Multidisci- 3 plinary Strategy” presents an interesting study on a mining residues by multidisciplinary strategy in order to valorise and promote an efficient resource use.

 

Although the paper is interesting, I have some major concerns:

 

Title

The title reflects the results presented here.

 

Abstract

The abstract is lacking the aim of the study, material and methods description as well as an informative conclusion. It should be written in more details.

 

Material and Methods

  1. What was the reason for an optimized man- 118 agement of Fe and Mn-rich residues in the Indian mine area of Joda West?
  2. Figure 2 has too small legend. It should be corrected.
  3. Description of applied setup should be placed in the manuscript.

 

Discussion

  1. Presented results should be compared to the results of other scientists, presented in the manuscripts from the same field.
  2. In the discussion part three is no limitation to the studies. It should be included in the manuscript.

Author Response

We wish to thank the reviewer 3 for your comments

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

I accept the manuscript in the present form.

Back to TopTop