Identification of Eight Pterocarpus Species and Two Dalbergia Species Using Visible/Near-Infrared (Vis/NIR) Hyperspectral Imaging (HSI)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The article is very interesting, the sense of improving and implementing new techniques in the identification of woods of commercial interest, in places where simplified and low-cost methods are needed, in addition to not depending 100% on a traditional taxonomy laboratory that takes time to identify and at higher costs (although this is a more valid and assertive analysis). The methodology and results presented in this paper show other alternatives of field identification of a wood and seem to be a technique that can be applied. But the authors do not explain or mention under what conservation treatment the woods were analyzed, that is, the wood was natural, varnished, with formaldehyde, some enamel, etc. So it could influence the results of the identification. Also some woods secrete different substances if they are in the center of the marrow or near the cambuim, they found some difference. These are questions that can enrich the work without detracting from the work developed.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 1 Comments

Point 1: But the authors do not explain or mention under what conservation treatment the woods were analyzed, that is, the wood was natural, varnished, with formaldehyde, some enamel, etc. So it could influence the results of the identification.

Response 1: We have explained in the “2.1. Samples” section that the wood samples are natural.

Point 2: Also some woods secrete different substances if they are in the center of the marrow or near the cambuim, they found some difference.

Response 2: All samples in this study were sap wood and have been annotated in the manuscript. Meanwhile, we have discussed this issue in the “4. Discussion” section.

We tried our best to improve the manuscript and made some changes in the manuscript. These changes will not influence the content and framework of the paper. We appreciate for reviewer’s warm work earnestly, and hope that the correction will meet with approval.

Once again, thank you very much for your comments and suggestions.

Reviewer 2 Report

Very interesting research about a particularly interesting and gradually more important topic.

I find the article competent and complete.

Line 64: I would like to have a slightly more detailed description of the technology, as well as its benefits compared to other techniques but above all, its limitations.

Line 71: Can you name those studies?

Line 97: Change Latin names to scientific classification. The same is in Table 1.

Line 107: Change to 20 cubic mm. 

Line 148, 149, and 152: Change corresponding to correspond. 

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 1 Comments

Point 1: Line 64: I would like to have a slightly more detailed description of the technology, as well as its benefits compared to other techniques but above all, its limitations.

Response 1: We have made a detailed description of Vis/NIR-HSI technology in “1. Introduction” section and introduced its benefits and limitations.

Point 2: Line 71: Can you name those studies?

Response 2: We have listed relevant studies in this part.

Point 3: Line 97: Change Latin names to scientific classification. The same is in Table 1.

Response 3: We are very sorry for our negligence, the “Latin names” have been changed to “scientific classification.”

Point 4: Line 107: Change to 20 cubic mm.

Response 4: We have changed “20 mm x 20 mm x 20 mm” to “20 cubic mm.”

Point 5: Line 148, 149, and 152: Change corresponding to correspond.

Response 5: We are very sorry for our incorrect writing; we have changed corresponding to correspond.

We tried our best to improve the manuscript and made some changes in the manuscript. These changes will not influence the content and framework of the paper. We appreciate for reviewer’s warm work earnestly, and hope that the correction will meet with approval.

Once again, thank you very much for your comments and suggestions.