Multi-Year Cereal Crop Classification Model in a Semi-Arid Region Using Sentinel-2 and Landsat 7–8 Data

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Good job! Please check my comments below:

1.      Line 56, 58, 70, 151, 165, what are the full names of FROM-GLC10, ELC10, CART, OLI, GEE?

2.      Introduction, lack of research innovation. In lines 102-104, what is the disadvantage of this method? What is the difference between this method and the method you proposed in this study?

3.      Lines 127-132, you mentioned the average rainfall and temperature, is it based on the past 30 years? Or which years did you refer to?

4.      Lines 138-139, is it agriculture years 2019 to 2020? Or one growing season 2019 to 2020?

5.      Lines 170-178, what is the ground truth data? Is it field(s) with different classes (crop species) you verified?

6.      Lines 199-227, including figures 2 and 3, might be moved to the results section.

7.      Section 2.3.2, which programming language did you use? What are the libraries or packages used?

8.      Lines 333, the latitude and longitude of this figure is unclear, high-resolution image or the same degree-minute-second as figure 1 can be considered. Same issue for figures 7, 8, and 9.

Author Response

Dear Editor,

We would like to thank you for the opportunity to resubmit a revised version of this manuscript. We would also like to take this opportunity to thank you for your positive comments and helpful suggestions for corrections or modifications. We believe this has helped to improve the revised manuscript submitted to the editor. You will find attached a letter responding to your valuable comments.
We sincerely hope that the revised manuscript will be accepted for publication.

Yours sincerely
Manel Khlif
On behalf of the authors

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

This study developed a multi-year classification model for winter cereal in a semi-arid region, the Kairouan area, and found an early cereal classification model  in February. The manuscript is interesting and informative. I have some small suggestions.

1. I suggest to add  more detal information of table and figure legends. Current version such as table 3 is unacceptable.

2. I am wondering whether all the index shown in table 3 were used in this study. And which combination is effective in distinguishing specific crops. If possible, I suggest to add introduction in the part of Method.

Author Response

Dear Editor,

We would like to thank you for the opportunity to resubmit a revised version of this manuscript. We would also like to take this opportunity to thank you for your positive comments and helpful suggestions for corrections or modifications. We believe this has helped to improve the revised manuscript submitted to the editor. You will find attached a letter responding to your valuable comments.
We sincerely hope that the revised manuscript will be accepted for publication.

Yours sincerely
Manel Khlif
On behalf of the authors

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

This  manuscript looks good. I just have few minor comments:

(1) The last paragraph of Introduction can be deleted as it does not contain useful information.

(2) Table 1 shoud be changed to a three-line table, just like the others in the manuscript.

(3) I suggest that the authors should clarify how early cereal classification is mapped and how it is used to agriculture management. 

Author Response

Dear Editor,

We would like to thank you for the opportunity to resubmit a revised version of this manuscript. We would also like to take this opportunity to thank you for your positive comments and helpful suggestions for corrections or modifications. We believe this has helped to improve the revised manuscript submitted to the editor. You will find attached a letter responding to your valuable comments.
We sincerely hope that the revised manuscript will be accepted for publication.

Yours sincerely
Manel Khlif
On behalf of the authors

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Excellent job! Please check my minor comments below:

1.      Figure 3, why not set the subfigure a and b the same start position, figure b looks a little bit left.

2.      Figures 5, 6, and 7, incomplete figure, missing the bottom part.

3.      Line 540, citation error

Author Response

Dear Editor and reviewers,

We are sincerely grateful for the opportunity to resubmit a revised copy of our manuscript. We would like to express our heartfelt appreciation for the positive feedback and invaluable comments provided by you during the previous review process. Your guidance and suggestions have been instrumental in enhancing the quality of our work. We believe that these modifications have substantially strengthened and enriched the revised manuscript.
We hope you find the revised manuscript suitable for publication.

Sincerely,
Manel Khlif
On behalf of all the co-authors. 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf