Three Methods of Site-Specific Yield Mapping as a Data Source for the Delineation of Management Zones in Winter Wheat
, Martin Mittermayer 2, Franz-Xaver Maidl 2, Jürgen Schwarzensteiner 3, Kurt-Jürgen Hülsbergen 2 and Heinz Bernhardt 1
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The idea of the manuscript is good and the manuscript was written well, my concern that the authors have been published paper in the same area "https://mdpi-res.com/d_attachment/agronomy/agronomy-12-01455/article_deploy/agronomy-12-01455.pdf?version=1655461856"
Therefore, the authors should revise all data well, to avoid plagiarism.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer 1,
first of all, thank you for your comments. I have made a slight revision and revised all data well. All data are different. In this paper are yield data and in the other paper nitrogen uptake data from a different trial.
Reviewer 2 Report
This paper evaluated three yield-mapping methods at three fields. The scientific problem was significant. Experiments and methods were rational. Results were accurate. The article was very concise. I suggested this paper can be published after minor revised.
1) the title didn’t reflect the main content of paper which focused on comparison of three methods.
2) Why only showed Filed B in figure 1?
3) Figure 3-5 were similar. Why combine them as a figure?
4) Table 5 and figure 6 were the major results in this paper. May be added 1:1 line at figure 6.
5) the conclusions were vague.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer 2,
first of all, thank you for your comments. They definitely improve the paper. We have made a revision based on all comments.
1) We have revised the title.
2) The figure is the same for all three fields, just the number of plots differed due to the size of the fields.
3) We discussed this point and came to the conclusion that in our opinion it is clearer separately.
4) A very good point! Thanks! We added 1:1 lines in figure 6.
5) We have revised the conclusions.
Reviewer 3 Report
Dear Authors,
Please see the attached file
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Dear Reviewer 3,
first of all, thank you very much for your comments. They definitely improve the paper.
1) We revised the title.
2) + 3) We revised the introduction and added informations regarding your comment.
4) We added a map with the trial sites.
5) + 6) We defined this based on the soil fertility index. We added informations in the text and a citation.
7) + 8) + 9) We revised this chapter and added informations regarding the seedbed preparation.
10) Sentinel 2 is right. We added this.
11) We revised this chapter and added informations regarding PROMET.
12) We quoted a reference.
13) Generating of these polygons is reported in 2.3. and the procedure for aggregating these yield data per plot is reported in 2.5.
14) We discussed this point and concluded that this section is important to state our comparison of measured and modeled data, which is important for the accuracy of the study.
15) We added informations in 2.4.
