Next Article in Journal
Spatiotemporal Analysis of NO2 Production Using TROPOMI Time-Series Images and Google Earth Engine in a Middle Eastern Country
Next Article in Special Issue
A Novel Workflow for Crop Type Mapping with a Time Series of Synthetic Aperture Radar and Optical Images in the Google Earth Engine
Previous Article in Journal
Desert Locust Cropland Damage Differentiated from Drought, with Multi-Source Remote Sensing in Ethiopia
Previous Article in Special Issue
Designing a European-Wide Crop Type Mapping Approach Based on Machine Learning Algorithms Using LUCAS Field Survey and Sentinel-2 Data
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Satellite-Based Evidences to Improve Cropland Productivity on the High-Standard Farmland Project Regions in Henan Province, China

Remote Sens. 2022, 14(7), 1724; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs14071724
by Huimin Yan 1,2,*, Wenpeng Du 1,2, Ying Zhou 3, Liang Luo 4 and Zhong’en Niu 5
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Remote Sens. 2022, 14(7), 1724; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs14071724
Submission received: 31 December 2021 / Revised: 22 March 2022 / Accepted: 31 March 2022 / Published: 2 April 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Remote Sensing Applications in Agricultural Ecosystems)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper presents results of studies on the Satellite based evidences for improvement of cropland productivity on the high standard farmland project regions in Henan. I have reviewed the paper thoroughly with interest and I think there are some main issues as follow:

  1. Logical confusion. The title is on nationwide scale, but actually the study just focuses on some counties of Henan Province.
  2. The concepts are unclear. The authors drive the VPM to calculate the NPP, but the cropland productivity is a quite different concept. Maybe there exist some complex relationships between NPP and cropland productivity depending on crop varieties, planting patterns and so on. The author does not show a convincing conversion relationship between them in the whole paper.
  3. The level of writing does not meet the level of academic papers. There are some mixtures of results and methods, results and discussion and so on.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Please find the attachment for my comments. 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop