A Comprehensive Review of Scab Disease Detection on Rosaceae Family Fruits via UAV Imagery
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report (Previous Reviewer 1)
Summary: Comments and Suggestions: - The expression "comprehensive review" in the title needs to be capitalized. - Section 2 needs to be summarized in tabular form. - The authors are invited to add a new figure that describes the structure of the paper. - In addition, the authors need to provide details about the adopted search methodology (e.g., search query, databases, inclusion/exclusion criteria, etc.) - The security aspects related to UAVs communications need to be studied. - For this purpose, the authors are invited to consider the following interesting paper (and others) and include it in the list of references: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/9842403 and https://www.mdpi.com/2504-446X/6/1/10 - Environmental and economic aspects related to the use of the considered technology also need to be covered. - The last section is too long and needs to be split into shorter sections.
Author Response
Thank you for considering our manuscript and providing kind comments and suggestions. All the revised work is highlighted in yellow color. The response to each comment is given below,
Comment 1: The expression "comprehensive review" in the title needs to be capitalized.
Response: The expression "comprehensive review" is capitalized.
Comment 2: Section 2 needs to be summarized in tabular form.
Response: Section 2 is also summarized in table 1.
Comment 3: The authors are invited to add a new figure that describes the structure of the paper.
Response: The diagram of the paper structure is also added in the paper organization subsection.
Comment 4: In addition, the authors need to provide details about the adopted search methodology (e.g., search query, databases, inclusion/exclusion criteria, etc.)
Response: The research methodology is added in the introduction section.
Comment 5: The security aspects related to UAVs communications need to be studied. - For this purpose, the authors are invited to consider the following interesting paper (and others) and include it in the list of references: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/9842403 and https://www.mdpi.com/2504-446X/6/1/10
Response: Considering the security aspects related to UAV communications, an overview of both the suggested papers is included in Sections 4 and 5. Moreover, these references are added to the reference list.
Comment 6: Environmental and economic aspects related to the use of the considered technology also need to be covered.
Response: Economic and environmental aspects of the considered technology are also included in Section 5.
Comment 7: The last section is too long and needs to be split into shorter sections.
Response: Section 9 is also split into two sections.
Reviewer 2 Report (Previous Reviewer 2)
The manuscript has been significantly improved. A major limitation of the review remains, which is very limited information specific to the use of drones for scab detection/monitoring. Particularly, the discussion of the dimentions of resolution, and how it is specifically influenced by the sensor and platform choices in relation to scab detection could be further improved, but the most important points were at least mentioned.
In spite of the limitations there is enough general and useful information in the revision to make the review useful, and it could justify publication, in my opinion.
The language was also much improved, with only minor revision required.
Author Response
Thank you for considering our manuscript and providing kind comments and suggestions. All the revised work is highlighted in green color. The response to each comment is given below,
Comment 1: A major limitation of the review remains, which is very limited information specific to the use of drones for scab detection/monitoring. Particularly, the discussion of the dimentions of resolution, and how it is specifically influenced by the sensor and platform choices in relation to scab detection could be further improved, but the most important points were at least mentioned.
Response: Dimensions of resolution are discussed and how these are influenced by sensors and platforms is explained.
Comment 2: The language was also much improved, with only minor revision required.
Response: A minor revision is also done.
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report (Previous Reviewer 1)
The authors took into consideration my remarks. I have no more suggestions to make. Good luck.
This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Summary: This study gathers latest research and professional approaches to help researchers and farmers use UAV imagery and AI more effectively. This paper reviews experiments on detecting Scab on Rosaceae fruits. Methods for analyzing UAV-obtained photos and diagnosing illnesses are briefly explored. Advantages and limitations of various UAVs and image sensors are also discussed.
Comments and Suggestions: - The paper is well-written and well-structured. In addition, it addresses an interesting hot topic related to the use of UAV and AI techniques in agriculture. - The authors need to pay attention to the layout of the paper. Some lines are larger than others. The fonts used in some figures are huge. Etc. - The paper contains a large number of sections that needs to be reduced by merging some sections together, like sections 9 and 10, for example. - There are different types of UAVs. Which ones are better adapted to be used in the agriculture field? - Section 4 could be enriched with some figures and tables which illustrate and summarize the key points presented in this section. - In some cases, it may be better for farmers to use their smartphones as an alternative for taking photos of trees. The authors are invited to give a brief overview of this alternative. For this purpose, they may include the following references and others: 1. https://www.hindawi.com/journals/js/2015/195308/ 2. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9327468 3. https://www.mdpi.com/2624-7402/4/3/42 - In tables 1 and 2, the authors need to insert the number corresponding to each reference they are citing. - The security of the data captured by UAVs and transmitted to servers is of huge importance. The authors are also invited to provide a brief overview of this aspect. For this goal, they may consider including the following references. 1. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-27668-7_11 2. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9842403 3. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0140366419310242 - The authors may also cover an important aspect related to the use of satellite images as a complement to the photos captured by UAVs. - Another important aspect to cover deals with the use of formal techniques for validating the use of AI techniques. For this purpose, the following references may be included: 1. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-031-19759-8_24 2. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-031-17244-1_1 - It is not clear how all results presented in the paper are specific to a particular type of plants and a particular type of diseases. - The future work directions are presented in a good manner. They need to be reformulated in a better manner. - Details about the specific contribution of each author in this work are missing.
Reviewer 2 Report
This is a review of scab detection in Rosaceae fruits using UAV imagery. Unfortunately, the review has serious shortcomings.
The language needs major revision. In some instances the language is incorrect to the extent that the intended meaning becomes difficult to ascertain.
The review is disorganised. The same concepts are discussed or mentioned in various sections. The organization should be made clearer, and information on a particlar concept or issue should be discussed in one section, to the extent possible.
In several cases, concepts or challenges are only mentioned or listed, without any discussion of the conditions that lead to challenges, or the specific ways in which it relates to scab detection. If the review claims to be on scab detection the information should be specifically related to scab disease.
Scab disease should be defined, the causing pathogens described, and the disease pathogenesis in relation to its effects should be described. It should then be discussed how the disease characteristics specifically influence te challenges associated with UAV-based remote sensing.
The term "resolution" is not used consistently in light of the dimentions of resolution (temporal, spectral, spatial, radiometric). Be specific in your discussion of resolution and how the different dimentions of resolution are impacted by sensor type and platform type, and then how it impacts scab disease detection.
Provide specific information about the UAV platform that lead to problems in disease detection (of scab disease), or provide specific examples.
The image examples (figures 2 and 3) do not appear to be from a UAV platform, and it is not clear how they are relevant.
