Dynamic Monitoring of Winter Wheat Health in Mining Subsidence Areas by Combined Active and Passive Remote Sensing Technology

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article presented deals with a topic that is certainly interesting and valid for some specific areas where mining activities can have a significant impact on agricultural activity. Although the article is well organized and the topics covered in a clear and exhaustive manner, minor changes are necessary before it is ready for publication. Below are some specific comments.

Abstract: the abstract is too long and should be reduced to around 200 words as requested by the guide for authors, it would also be useful to reduce the use of too many acronyms and, for those necessary, include the extended text.

Lines 92-95: the erosion phenomenon is not correctly connected to the topic covered. Although there is a relationship between soil disturbance from mining activities and (potential) erosion this should be better described.

Lines 140-144: this section sounds more like a materials and methods please revise the text or move the entire section to the beginning of the materials and methods chapter related to the development of the SACHI index.

Caption figure 1: the caption and image contain acronyms which must be explained in the image itself or in its caption (everything other than text must be readable on its own) please edit accordingly and check all other figures and tables.

Line 212: “sister satellites” please adopt more scientific language.

Line 225: regarding cloud cover, if a limit has been set in the copernicus platform it would be useful to indicate it or alternatively the degree of cloud cover recorded for the downloaded images should be reported.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Only in the introduction chapter are there several repetitive periods that complicate reading and the fluency of the language overall. e.g. lines 90-92 (repetition of lines 55-56), lines 102-104.

In some parts (especially in the introduction) there are adjectives and forms of sentence construction that are misleading and not relevant to scientific language, e.g. line 116 "...for inversion of potato leaf area index", line 156 "...with sufficient sunshine", line 161 "...ginger soil and calcareous chestnut soil. Please report certain and measurable numbers or definitions, not qualitative adjectives.

Author Response

Thank you very much for taking the time to read our paper carefully and for your very constructive comments. These comments are extremely valuable and instructive for the revision and improvement of this study. We have revised and responded to your comments and hope to receive your approval. We upload them as attachment. Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper titled "Dynamic Monitoring of Winter Wheat Health in Mining Subsidence Areas by Combined Active and Passive Remote Sensing Technology" effectively addresses the complex issue of the overlap between coal mining and grain production, highlighting the conflicts arising from the pursuit of efficient mining practices and the need to enhance arable land for increased grain production and food security. The study investigates the impact of mining subsidence on crop growth by introducing various vegetation indices, mainly focusing on winter wheat in subsidence areas.

The paper's findings, such as the delayed growth stages of winter wheat in subsidence areas and the comprehensive health index (SACHI) revealing poorer wheat health, contribute valuable insights to the ongoing discourse on balancing coal mining and farmland capacity. Integrating multiple indices in SACHI provides a nuanced understanding of the health status of winter wheat, paving the way for informed decision-making in coal mining and agriculture.

The paper is commendable and warrants recommendation for publication with minor corrections. However, certain aspects raised questions, and seeking clarification on these points would enhance the paper's overall coherence:

1. Environmental and Ecological Benefits: While the paper touches on the conflict between coal mining and arable land, it would be beneficial to elaborate on the potential environmental and ecological benefits associated with the proposed "green mining" practices mentioned in the introduction. How do these practices contribute to sustainable land use, and what positive impacts might they have on the ecosystem?

2. Economic Impacts: Further elaboration on the potential economic impacts of the contradiction between efficient coal mining and increased farmland production capacity would strengthen the paper. Mainly, how does this contradiction affect local economies in the coal-grain production overlapping areas, and what implications does it have for food security?

3. Red-edge Vegetation Indices: Using red-edge vegetation indices, such as NDRE2 and CIre, is a pivotal aspect of the study. Could the paper provide more details on how these indices contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of winter wheat health in mining subsidence areas? Are there unique challenges or considerations specific to this context that must be addressed in applying these indices?

For Discussion:

1. Limitations of SACHI: It would be valuable to discuss potential limitations or challenges associated with using the SACHI. Are there specific conditions or factors that may affect its accuracy in reflecting the health status of winter wheat, and how might these challenges be mitigated?

2. Irregular Time Series Intervals: The impact of irregular time series intervals caused by cloud shading in Sentinel-2 data is acknowledged. Could the paper delve into more detail on how these irregularities affect the reliability of experimental results, and are there proposed strategies or considerations for mitigating this interference in future studies?

3. Alternative Remote Sensing Technologies: Considering the acknowledged uncertainties in mining subsidence time and impact area, are there alternative remote sensing technologies or data sources, such as SAR data, that could be explored to enhance the assessment of winter wheat's growth and health status? How might these alternatives overcome the impact of meteorological factors on time series data?

4. Generalizability of Findings: Given the uncertainties in mining subsidence time and impact area, it would be insightful to discuss the potential implications for the generalizability of the study's findings. How might these uncertainties be addressed or accounted for in future research to ensure the robustness and applicability of the results to broader contexts?

 

Author Response

Thank you very much for taking the time to read our paper carefully and for your very constructive comments. These comments are extremely valuable and instructive for the revision and improvement of this study. We have revised and responded to your comments and hope to receive your approval. We upload them as attachment. Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf