Urban and Peri-Urban Vegetation Monitoring Using Satellite MODIS NDVI Time Series, Singular Spectrum Analysis, and Fisher–Shannon Statistical Method

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript presents an interesting approach in analyses of the green areas in urban environment. As such the topic is in the scope of the journal and would be important for the scientific audience. However, the manuscript in its present form seems to be half done. One of the shortcomings of the manuscript is its structure. There is no chapter Results where the readers could get the insight what the authors analyzed in this particular study.

The Chapter Discussion does not contain a single citation or reference to similar studies published by other researchers. I suggest the authors to search the literature and discuss their results within the broader context and rewrite the Discussion. Moreover, the Introduction should be improved and amended with additional published works. Currently it contains seven references, which is not enough to present the state-of-art. 

I suggest authors to thoroughly improve their manuscript and resubmit it.

 

 

Other comments:

 

Ln 38-40: Please add some references here.

Ln 50: Please correct the sentence and add a reference.   … because they can induce …

 

Ln 79:  this sentence belongs into Methods chapter.  

 

Ln 85, 88-90: amend the sentence: red and near-infrared parts of the electromagnetic spectrum; Please provide the wavelengths of these parts used in your analyses.

 

Ln 192-202: Please add some references and move to introduction.

 

Ln 203- 207: -- repetition with current introduction

 

Ln 215: Please provide the info about spatial resolution and satellite revisit time.

 

Ln 306: were --- where  Please correct the sentence.

 

Ln 319-320; 332: Correct the expressions: un heath; un-heath ----  unhealthy; health --- healthy.

 

Figure 9: trees were not investigated inside the Colosseum, but in green areas beside it

 

Ln 353-58:  This repetition with current introduction is redundant.

 

Ln 371: replace the dot

Ln 306: were --- where  Please correct the sentence.

Ln 319-320; 332: Correct the expressions: un heath; un-heath ----  unhealthy; health --- healthy.

 

Author Response

The authors appreciated the reviewer's comments and hope to have answered everything to the best of their ability.

 

Ln 38-40: Please add some references here. Addressed

Ln 50: Please correct the sentence and add a reference.   … because they can induce … Addressed

Ln 79:  this sentence belongs into Methods chapter.  Addressed

Ln 85, 88-90: amend the sentence: red and near-infrared parts of the electromagnetic spectrum; Please provide the wavelengths of these parts used in your analyses. Addressed

Ln 192-202: Please add some references and move to introduction. Addressed

Ln 203- 207: -- repetition with current introduction. removed

Ln 215: Please provide the info about spatial resolution and satellite revisit time. We have added a table (2) to illustrate all the specifications of the MODIS data used

Ln 306: were --- where  Please correct the sentence. Addressed

Ln 319-320; 332: Correct the expressions: un heath; un-heath ----  unhealthy; health --- healthy. Addressed

Figure 9: trees were not investigated inside the Colosseum, but in green areas beside it Addressed

Ln 353-58:  This repetition with current introduction is redundant. Removed

Ln 371: replace the dot. Replaced

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Ln 306: were --- where  Please correct the sentence. Addressed

Ln 319-320; 332: Correct the expressions: un heath; un-heath ----  unhealthy; health --- healthy. Addressed

 

Reviewer 2 Report

Quantitative results are expected at abstract. 

Methodology needs improvements and through inclusion of available literature.

References looks limited.

Author Response

The authors appreciated the reviewer's comments and hope to have answered everything to the best of their ability.

 

Quantitative results are expected at abstract. Addressed

Methodology needs improvements and through inclusion of available literature. Addressed

References looks limited. Addressed

Reviewer 3 Report

1- The abstract must contain the major findings and results which answer the questions of the paper and a summary stating the implications of the results got.

2- The description of the nature problem and current state of knowledge are missing in the introduction.

The statement of purpose/hypothesis is not very clear, and the literature review the previous study is very weak.

3-in the materials part a detailed explanation about the used MODIS imagery is needed (MODIS spatial resolution is suitable for such study and why?)

4- In the methods section the normalization step and the SSA methods should be well explained.

5- How did Fisher Shannon transformation positively influenced the study result?

 

6-Is it possible to add the comparison result with independent data sets and ancillary information.

Author Response

The authors appreciated the reviewer's comments and hope to have answered everything to the best of their ability.

 

1- The abstract must contain the major findings and results which answer the questions of the paper and a summary stating the implications of the results got. Addressed

2- The description of the nature problem and current state of knowledge are missing in the introduction. Addressed

The statement of purpose/hypothesis is not very clear, and the literature review the previous study is very weak. Addressed: We have tried to add in the introduction of the text to clarify these points.

3-in the materials part a detailed explanation about the used MODIS imagery is needed (MODIS spatial resolution is suitable for such study and why?)

Added:

“The choice to use MODIS data was virtually a mandatory one. In fact, the MOD13Q1.006 data, as shown in Table 2, has:

(i) freely available data in GEE;

(ii) a spatial resolution of 250 m/pixel attested to be useful in this type of analysis in other studies [49,72];

(ii) a temporal resolution or revisit time of 16 days, the result of which is an interpola-tion of multi-day acquisitions for which the best pixels are then selected as reported in [74–76];

(iii) a temporal coverage of more than twenty years;

In particular, points (ii) and (iii) were relevant in the choice of sensor, and in prefer-ring MODIS to higher resolution sensors such as Landsat. Since the analyses conducted need a large and continuous (without null values) time series of observations in order to work at their best.”

4- In the methods section the normalization step and the SSA methods should be well explained. Addressed

5- How did Fisher Shannon transformation positively influenced the study result? As we have already highlighted in our paper, the FS method was used to characterize the complexity of each analysed time series by calculating two quantities (FIM and SEP). The joint use of these two quantities within the FSIP has shown that healthy and unhealthy sites could be clearly discriminated.

6-Is it possible to add the comparison result with independent data sets and ancillary information.

The text compares with third-party data produced and publicly available as part of the Global Forest Watch project. In addition, some studies have been added that report on the pine tree problem especially in the area of southern Italy (e.g. Rome). In addition, in order to be clearer on the feedback of the results, texts and newspaper articles have also been reported to indicate how impactful the topic has been on a social and naturalistic level.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Sustainability-2469024         

The authors have significantly improved their manuscript according to suggestions and comments. However, their results are still unclearly presented and mixed with the chapter Methods. Figures 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 are RESULTS and belong to chapter 3. Results and Discussion! Along with these Figures the majority of the text from Line 352 to Line 394 also belongs to the Results.

 

I have some other comments before the acceptance of this contribution.

 

The title: I suggest to omit the method from the title and shorten it a bit to :

»Monitoring of the urban and peri-urban vegetation health and extent using satellite MODIS NDVI time series and Singular Spectrum Analysis”

 

Ln 22: Please write scientific names of genus and species in italics »Toumeyella parvicornis«; species names are in lowercase.

I suggest to check this issue throughout the text (e.g. Ln 89, 225, 464).

 

Ln 88: Xylella Fastidiosa – in italics and species name in lowercase

 

Ln 95-96: I suggest to write English and Italian names of the cities once and then continue with Italian names. Pilot sites were located both in urban areas such as Milan (Milano), Turin (Torino), and Rome (Roma) as well as in peri-urban areas ….

 

Table 1: Does climate of Milano and Castel Volturno differ from other sites? If not, the last column should be unified.

 

Ln 222-224: Write scientific names in italics.

Correct name is Asparagus acutifolius, Myrtus communis.

 

Figures 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 are RESULTS and belong to chapter 3. Results and Discussion.

Along with these Figures the majority of the text from Line 352 to Line 394 also belongs to the Results.

 

Ln 392: I suggest different sentence in the Caption:  … using the Global Forest Change dataset for the years 2000 to 2021 published by Hansen et al. [81] and Potapov et al. [82]:  

 

Ln 404-409: Sentences are repeating – delete sentences in Ln 404-406.

 

Ln 464:  I suggest to write:  …. parasitic beetle Toumeyella parvicornis that has attacked pine trees in these areas … 

 

Ln 500: I suggest to omit “ they are rich in biodiversity” since this was not analyzed in your study.

 

I suggest to include another reference where the NDVI is used to monitor the development and vitality of common reed:  Ojdanič N. et al. 2023  doi.org/10.3390/plants12051006

Author Response

Dear reviewer, we really appreciate your comments and suggestions. We have, as for the first round, resolved all the comments except for the one about changing the title, which, after discussion among us authors, we prefer to keep as is.  Below are the point-by-point responses.

Best regards

 

The title: I suggest to omit the method from the title and shorten it a bit to :

»Monitoring of the urban and peri-urban vegetation health and extent using satellite MODIS NDVI time series and Singular Spectrum Analysis” We appreciate the comment but prefer to keep the original title

Ln 22: Please write scientific names of genus and species in italics »Toumeyella parvicornis«; species names are in lowercase. I suggest to check this issue throughout the text (e.g. Ln 89, 225, 464). Addressed

Ln 88: Xylella Fastidiosa – in italics and species name in lowercase Addressed

Ln 95-96: I suggest to write English and Italian names of the cities once and then continue with Italian names. Pilot sites were located both in urban areas such as Milan (Milano), Turin (Torino), and Rome (Roma) as well as in peri-urban areas …. Addressed

Table 1: Does climate of Milano and Castel Volturno differ from other sites? If not, the last column should be unified. Corrected

Ln 222-224: Write scientific names in italics.

Correct name is Asparagus acutifolius, Myrtus communis. Addressed

Figures 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 are RESULTS and belong to chapter 3. Results and Discussion.

Along with these Figures the majority of the text from Line 352 to Line 394 also belongs to the Results. The entire section has been moved to the results as requested.

Ln 392: I suggest different sentence in the Caption:  … using the Global Forest Change dataset for the years 2000 to 2021 published by Hansen et al. [81] and Potapov et al. [82]:  Addressed

Ln 404-409: Sentences are repeating – delete sentences in Ln 404-406. Removed

Ln 464:  I suggest to write:  …. parasitic beetle Toumeyella parvicornis that has attacked pine trees in these areas … addressed

Ln 500: I suggest to omit “ they are rich in biodiversity” since this was not analyzed in your study. Addressed

I suggest to include another reference where the NDVI is used to monitor the development and vitality of common reed:  Ojdanič N. et al. 2023  doi.org/10.3390/plants12051006 Added

Reviewer 3 Report

Well improved

 

Author Response

Dear reviewer, we really appreciated your comments and suggestions. Thank you.

Best Regards