the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Monsoon Asia Rice Calendar: a gridded rice calendar in monsoon Asia based on Sentinel-1 and Sentinel-2 images
Abstract. An accurate and spatially explicit large-scale rice calendar can enhance understanding of agricultural practices and their ecological services, particularly in monsoon Asia. However, currently available global- or continental-scale rice calendars suffer from coarse resolution, poor recording, and outdated information, which do not provide detailed and consistent information on rice phenology. To address this limitation, this study mapped a new (2019 to 2020) gridded (0.5° × 0.5° resolution) rice calendar for monsoon Asia based on Sentinel-1 and Sentinel-2 satellite images. The novelty of this rice calendar lies in the development of a consistent optimal methodological framework that allows spatially explicit characterization of the rice transplanting date, harvest date, and number of rice croppings. The methodological framework incorporates two steps: (1) detection of rice phenological dates and number of rice croppings through combination of a feature-based algorithm and the fitted Weibull function, and (2) spatio-temporal integration of the detected transplanting and harvest dates using von Mises maximum likelihood estimates. Results revealed that the proposed rice calendar can accurately identify the rice phenological dates for three croppings in monsoon Asia. When compared with single rice data from the census-based RiceAtlas rice calendar, the proposed rice calendar outperformed the MODIS-based RICA rice calendar. It exhibited bias of 4 and −6 days for transplanting and harvest dates, respectively, with marked improvement in MAE by 10 and 15 days, and in RMSE by 6 and 15 days for transplanting and harvest dates, respectively. In total, the proposed rice calendar can detect single, double, and triple rice cropping with area of 5.3 × 106, 4.5 × 106, and 0.9 × 106 km2, respectively. This novel gridded rice calendar fills the gaps in finer-resolution rice calendars across major global rice production areas, facilitating research on rice phenology that is relevant to the climate change.
- Preprint
(2640 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(1524 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: final response (author comments only)
-
RC1: 'Comment on essd-2023-283', Anonymous Referee #1, 08 Oct 2023
Zhao et al. mapped a new (2019 to 2020) gridded (0.5° × 0.5° resolution) rice calendar for monsoon Asia based on Sentinel-1 and Sentinel-2 satellite images for monitoring the rice transplanting date, harvest date, and number of rice croppings. Its result may reveal the rice phenological dates for three croppings in monsoon Asia. However, three major points needed to be improved.
#1 The authors use two steps to map the rice calendar: (1) detection of rice phenological dates and number of rice croppings through combination of a feature-based algorithm and the fitted Weibull function, and (2) spatio-temporal integration of the detected transplanting and harvest dates using von Mises maximum likelihood estimates. However, there is no logical relationship between the two steps. In its current version, it seems that the authors use two different methods (combination of a feature-based algorithm and the fitted Weibull function, and von Mises maximum likelihood estimates) to monitor the rice phenological dates, but did not compare the advantages and disadvantages of the two methods. Maybe the output from step one would be the input to step two? The authors should explain the logical relationship, because this is the key of this study.
#2 The validation of the accuracy of the results is weak and scarce. The authors only compare the identified rice phenological dates with the existing products, including the RiceAtlas rice calendar, the RICA rice calendar, and the SAGE rice calendar, instead of field observation of rice phenology. It is inappropriate because the existing products themselves have identification errors, thus lacking of reliability. Therefore, it is meaningless to verify the detection results using the biased information. The authors should add the contents about verifying the results with actual field observations of rice phenology.
#3 The authors emphasize for many times that the proposed rice calendar fills the gaps in high resolution rice calendars, like Line 27, and Line 96 (high spatial resolution, 0.5°). However, there are currently so many high resolution satellites images, like Landsat images for 30 m and Sentinel-1/2 satellite images for 10 m. The spatial resolution for 0.5° of the proposed rice calendar cannot be called high resolution.
Minor issues
- Line 129-130, the authors aggregated rice distribution map at 500 m resolution into 0.5° resolution by randomly selecting 20 rice fields to derive the average phenology. This process is unreasonable because 20 fields are not representative. It is suggested that the authors should first calculate the planting fraction for rice paddy at 0.5° resolution based on rice distribution map at 500 m resolution, derive the pixels which have a higher planting proportion like 80%, and then extracting the average phenology of above pixels.
- Line 175-178, Step 1-1 and Step 1-2 describe the same thing. It is suggested that these two steps be combined.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2023-283-RC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Xin Zhao, 17 Oct 2023
We would like to express our sincere thanks for the valuable comments and constructive suggestions by the reviewer, which have significantly improved the quality of this work. We have addressed these comments in the following responses. Please refer to the attachment for point-by-point responses.
-
AC3: 'Reply on RC1', Xin Zhao, 15 Nov 2023
While responding to reviewer1’s comments (RC1), we had not yet received comments from another reviewer, and we could not upload the revised manuscript on 17th October due to system issue. Therefore, the page numbers in that response are based on the original submission. We have now made further revisions to the manuscript based on all the reviewer’s comments. Consequently, the page numbers have been updated to reflect the changes in the revised manuscript. We are now uploading the response to reviewer1 again for the reviewers and readers’ to review.
-
AC4: 'Reply on RC1', Xin Zhao, 15 Nov 2023
While responding to reviewer1’s comments (RC1), we had not yet received comments from another reviewer, and we could not upload the revised manuscript on 17th October due to system issue. Therefore, the page numbers in that response are based on the original submission. We have now made further revisions to the manuscript based on all the reviewer’s comments. Consequently, the page numbers have been updated to reflect the changes in the revised manuscript. We are now uploading the response to reviewer1 again for the reviewers and readers’ to review.
-
RC2: 'Comment on essd-2023-283', Anonymous Referee #2, 23 Oct 2023
In my opinion, the study is original and such datasets are needed; also, the approaches implementing Sentinel data in these tasks are important to develop. However, I have some major concerns regarding the manuscript which are described below.
In the abstract, the authors state that other datasets are characterized by coarse resolution, while their dataset is, in fact, very coarse (0.5 degrees, approximately 55km). I suggest rephrasing or clarifying this statement. Also, why is the final calendar characterized by such low resolution when Sentinel data used in this study have a resolution of 10m?
Furthermore, I have concerns regarding the accuracy assessment of the calendar. The dates of transplanting and harvesting are validated with the Rice Atlas, which has a national or subnational resolution, correct? It seems, therefore, inappropriate to validate the proposed calendar using such data.
In my opinion, the paper is too long, especially the discussion section, where some wordings and repetitions could be eliminated. The authors should reconsider the most crucial outcomes or applications of their approach and dataset. The limitations section, which is important, can be condensed into one or two paragraphs, for example. Some parts of the introduction can also be shortened. The methods are complex, resulting in a lengthy chapter; however maybe the authors might consider moving certain sections to supplementary materials?
Finally, the GEE/Colab code is missing.
Other comments:
- The link to dataset should be at the end of abstract also.
- In the abstract and in the whole manuscript I suggest changing units of area from 5.3 x106 to millions of kilometres, for example 5.3 mln of km.
- Line 106: rephrase to something like “The analysed area.... (Fig 1)”
- Figure 1 – so the study area includes all the countries shown in grey, with bold black borders – it is not fully clear from the figure, maybe add to legend. Also consider adding country names to the map.
- Line 130 – what is the average size of a paddy field in these regions, is 20 samples enough to represent it for such large grid?
- Line 135 – the codes/notebooks should be included in the paper.
- Line 160 – these are widely used metrics; I think their equations are redundant
- Lines 197-205 – this is very complex and somehow hard to follow. Maybe it can be put into a table and moved it to supplementary materials. Also, why such dates were used?
- Line 200 – what is EVI arc?
- Line 207 – that part as the equation format
- Line 210 – From R: “To cite package 'cardidates' in publications use: Rolinski, S., Horn, H., Petzoldt, T., Paul, L. (2007). Identification of cardinal dates in phytoplankton time series to enable the analysis of long-term trends. Oecologia 153, 997--1008. doi:10.1007/s00442-007-0783-2"
- Figure 3 description: there is no grey area in the charts
- Line 265 – cite the ‘circular’ package properly
- The figures 4-7 – parts of the figures’ captions are redundant as they include the information already provided in the figure (e.g., what is in upper, middle lower panels etc.)
- Lines 303-305 – maybe add median dates to the figures as well
- Figure 9 caption – there is no grey dotted line
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2023-283-RC2 -
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Xin Zhao, 15 Nov 2023
We would like to express our sincere thanks for the valuable comments and constructive suggestions by the reviewer, which have significantly improved the quality of this work. We have addressed these comments in the following responses. Please refer to the attachment for point-by-point responses.
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
617 | 174 | 31 | 822 | 41 | 26 | 27 |
- HTML: 617
- PDF: 174
- XML: 31
- Total: 822
- Supplement: 41
- BibTeX: 26
- EndNote: 27
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1