PONE-D-21-08328

Application of Edge Computing and GIS in Ecological Water Requirement Prediction and Optimal Allocation of Water Resources in Irrigation Area

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Li,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Jun 12 2021 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

• A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.
• A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.
• An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Haibin Lv

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

1. PLOS requires an ORCID iD for the corresponding author in Editorial Manager on papers submitted after December 6th, 2016. Please ensure that you have an ORCID iD and that it is validated in Editorial Manager. To do this, go to ‘Update my Information’ (in the upper left-hand corner of the main menu), and click on the Fetch/Validate link next to the ORCID field. This will take you to the ORCID site and allow you to create a new iD or authenticate a pre-existing iD in Editorial Manager. Please see the following video for instructions on linking an ORCID iD to your Editorial Manager account: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xcclfuvtxQ

1. Please include captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of your manuscript, and update any in-text citations to match accordingly. Please see our Supporting Information guidelines for more information: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/supporting-information.

Additional Editor Comments:

In this study, the advanced edge computing and GIS technology were used to design the prediction model of water resources in the irrigation area, and to predict the allocation of water resources and the calculation of water quantity in the irrigation area. The research methods are advanced, and the research results have high practical application value. But the content of the article needs to be improved. First of all, we should explain the design basis of the optimal allocation of water resources. In addition, the research methods of resource monitoring based on GIS need more detailed explanation. How edge computing is combined with GIS also needs to be explained.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Partly

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: This research focuses on the prediction and distribution of water resources in the irrigation area, and uses the more advanced edge computing and GIS technology at this stage to design a water resource prediction model for the irrigation area, and predicts the allocation of water resources and the calculation of water volume. And the model has achieved good results in actual data applications. The method of this article is more advanced, the research results are reasonable, and the practical application value is high. Therefore, this article can be published after minor revisions.

This article needs improvement in the following areas:

1) "cloud computing" appears in the keywords. It is inappropriate to use cloud computing as the keyword of this article, because cloud computing is not a key research issue, so the author is recommended to replace the keyword "cloud computing".

2) In the second part of "Literature Review", the author discusses the ecosystem of the irrigation area. Is the cited article similar to the situation of the irrigation area in this article? It is recommended that the author try to cite research similar to the irrigation area of this article.

3) It is recommended that the author further expand the limitations of previous research and the practical problems that need to be solved in this article in the literature review.

4) In the first paragraph of the introduction, there is too much introduction to the background, and it is recommended that the author delete this, so as to make the article more concise.

5) In the introduction, the author mentioned lake pollution and sandstorms, which seem to have little connection with the article, so it is recommended that the author delete these expressions to highlight the focus of the article.

6) In the introduction to the irrigation area ecosystem in the literature review, the author cited research from 2012 to 2013. This is a long time away from the present, and the real-time research is insufficient. Therefore, it is recommended to refer to more advanced research content.

7) In the "Optimal allocation of water resources" part of the literature review, the author cited articles in the urban water supply system, which has insufficient relevance to the study of the irrigation area. The author should choose more closely related studies.

8) In both the second part of the literature review and the third part of the research methods, there is a content with "Optimal allocation of water resources" as the title, and the author needs to modify this.

9) In the explanation of equation (15), some letters are not written in italics, and the author needs to modify this. At the same time, it is recommended that the author conduct a more detailed examination of the full text.

10) The author is recommended to explain the advantages of using edge technology in more detail in the article.

11) Please further highlight the innovation of research.

Reviewer #2: The purpose of this paper is to combine the edge computing technology with GIS image data from the perspective of sustainable development. The prediction model of water resources in irrigation area is established to determine the optimal allocation of water quality and water quantity with the goal of maximizing the comprehensive benefit. Finally, the actual effect of the model is verified by a specific example data of a province. The results show that the ecological prediction model based on edge calculation and GIS image has good performance in water resource prediction, and the accuracy rate can be maintained above 90%. The research results of the author have a strong practical and guiding significance for the sustainable utilization and management of irrigation areas. The experimental results of the paper are rich and reasonable, and the logic of the paper is appropriate. However, there are still some shortcomings in the paper, which need to be revised and published.

A. Full names should be given for proper nouns that appear for the first time in the article, such as GIS and MEC.

B. Introduction part is recommended to make appropriate deletion and preliminary treatment. The current one is a little long.

C. What is the source of Eq. 1?

D. What is the basis for the design of Optimal allocation of water resources in search methodology?

E. The GIS-based resource monitoring part of Research Methodology needs a more detailed explanation.

F. Formulas (2)-(15) is not related to the article, so it is suggested to delete it or explain.

G. Model Performance Analysis should provide a more detailed analysis of Figure 6.

H. The comparative experiment is missing in the benefit analysis.

Reviewer #3: The authors report that the ecological prediction model of irrigation area based on edge calculation and GIS image has good performance in water resources prediction. Specifically, the accuracy can achieve up to 90%. The prediction model of ecological water demand and optimal allocation of water resources in irrigation area is based on the principle of high-quality water supply. From the perspective of sustainable development, edge computing technology is combined with GIS (Geographic Information Science) image data. In this manuscript, the prediction model of water resources in irrigation area is established. The optimal allocation of water resource quality and quantity is determined with the goal of maximizing the comprehensive benefit. Finally, the actual effect of the model is verified by a specific example data of a province. This study provides some reference for the research of image visualization calculation and information processing. This manuscript can be considered in this journal if the following issues are properly addressed.:

a. It would be helpful to explain the concept of "water and soil engineering" in the section "The ecosystem in the irrigation area" in more detail.

b. It is suggested to add one or two tables in the results section to summarize the results.

c. A Convolutional Neural Network algorithm is used in this paper, the authors should consider including a more detailed introduction of this algorithm.

d. The prediction model of ecological water demand based on MEC and GIS is used in this paper, but the introduction of MEC is insufficient and needs to be provided.

e. Three coordination layers are used in the "Optimal allocation of water resources" in this paper. The first layer has insufficient description of crop water production function and the author needs to supplement the specific situation.

f. Remote sensing technology is used in the section "GIS-based Resource Monitoring", but there is a lack of introduction to remote sensing technology, which needs to be supplemented.

g. Many equations have been provided in the section of "Edge Computing Processing", but the meaning of variables in the equations have not been provided, which should be properly updated.

h. The section "GIS-based Resource Monitoring" involves the use of GIS technology, therefore it would be helpful to include more description about GIS technology.

i. The conclusion only includes the types of technologies used, where lacks the comparison between different technologies, especially the pros and cons of different technologies.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Application of Edge Computing and GIS in Ecological Water Requirement Prediction and Optimal Allocation of Water Resources in Irrigation Area

PONE-D-21-08328R1

Dear Dr. Li,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Haibin Lv

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

All of previous issues have been addressed.

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #3: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: This research focuses on the prediction and distribution of water resources in the irrigation area, and uses the more advanced edge computing and GIS technology at this stage to design a water resource prediction model for the irrigation area, and predicts the allocation of water resources and the calculation of water volume. And the model has achieved good results in actual data applications. The method of this article is more advanced, the research results are reasonable, and the practical application value is high. The author has made the satisfactory modification, conform to the requirements of the published.I agree that published the research.

Reviewer #3: All questions in the last comments have been addressed, the manuscript is now acceptable for publication.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #3: No