Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

-

Author Response

Thanks for the positive reviews.

Reviewer 2 Report

Although I have never been directly involved in sugarcane breeding practices. The description that the authors provided is clear and understandable. The methodology presented is rather standard, but the conclusions are draw without ambiguity. 

Author Response

Thanks you for the positive review

Reviewer 3 Report

Abstract:

What is GA?

Line 27; describe the name USDA?

Explain the main variables used in Identification of Selection Preferences

Give more information about the NGRDI SD and CIELab in the Introduction.

Material and methods

Lines between 108 and 125; the equations should be edited. Not use as texts.

The author uses many abbreviations (NGRDIM, TGIM, 161 a*, b*, u*, v*, GA, and GGA). It could be reduced

Figure 1. the results are not clear. Maybe, the authors could use more than 1 figure to explain the result

There are a lot of information in legend of Figures. The text is difficult to follow.

The authors could inform the name of genetic material, if there is.

Lines 412 and 419: explain the environmental conditions that affect the cane yield.

Author Response

Abstract:

What is GA?

Line 27; describe the name USDA?

Response: Both GA and USDA were fully written out in the abstract.

Explain the main variables used in Identification of Selection Preferences

Response: Additional sentences were added to the Abstract to explain the purpose “Selection is made quickly, is subjective, and related to the appearance of yield and vigor.” And “To understand selection preferences better and if remote sensing techniques could be used to increase efficiency, twelve sugarcane seedling families each having approximately 263 seedlings were planted in two replications at the USDA-ARS Ardoyne farm.”

Give more information about the NGRDI SD and CIELab in the Introduction.

Response: Additional information was added about CIELab and NGRDI in the introduction.

Material and methods

Lines between 108 and 125; the equations should be edited. Not use as texts.

Response: Inline equations are allowed by the Journal and the equations are simple.

The author uses many abbreviations (NGRDIM, TGIM, 161 a*, b*, u*, v*, GA, and GGA). It could be reduced

Response: These are standard abbreviations that are simpler than writing them out.

Figure 1. the results are not clear. Maybe, the authors could use more than 1 figure to explain the result

Response: Figure 1 was split into figure 1 and 2.

There are a lot of information in legend of Figures. The text is difficult to follow.

Response: The information in the figures was added to ensure that the figures stand alone. These could be eliminated if the Journal approves.

The authors could inform the name of genetic material, if there is.

Response: Other than the parents that are listed in Table 1 the materials do not have an official name yet.

Lines 412 and 419: explain the environmental conditions that affect the cane yield.

Response: The statement “conditions such as temperature or precipitation rates” was added to the discussion.