Algorithm for wireless sensor networks in ginseng field in precision agriculture

Changcheng Li; Deyun Chen; Chengjun Xie; You Tang

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0263401

Peer Review History

Original SubmissionAugust 30, 2021
26 Nov 2021 Decision Letter - Chi-Tsun Cheng, Editor PONE-D-21-28152Algorithm for Wireless Sensor Networks in Ginseng Field in Precision AgriculturePLOS ONE Dear Dr. Chen, 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 Jan 10 2022 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: https://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, Chi-Tsun Cheng, Ph.D., M.Sc., B.Eng. 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 2. Thank you for stating the following in the Acknowledgments/ Financial Disclosure Section of your manuscript: This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Project No. 60972127, 61072111 and 60672156) and Key Project of Jilin Provincial Science and Technology Department (Project No. 20100503) and the Project for Science and Tech-nology Center and Science and Technology Service Platform (Project No. 20180623004TC). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. We note that you have provided additional information within the Acknowledgements Section that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. Please note that funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form. Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows: This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Project No. 60972127, 61072111 and 60672156) and Key Project of Jilin Provincial Science and Technology Department (Project No. 20100503) and the Project for Science and Tech-nology Center and Science and Technology Service Platform (Project No. 20180623004TC). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf. 3. 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 4. We note you have included a table to which you do not refer in the text of your manuscript. Please ensure that you refer to Table 1 in your text; if accepted, production will need this reference to link the reader to the Table. 5. Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice. Additional Editor Comments: Further elaboration on the experiment setup is required. The rationale of the selected evaluation criteria has not be explained clearly. The connection between the results (i.e. figures) and the intrepretations in the analysis section should be highlighted and extended further. [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: Yes ******** 2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: N/A ****** 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 ****** 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 ****** 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: The paper proposed an algorithm for high-efficiency wireless sensor networks for a ginseng field explained well. But parameters settings and description of the experimental parameters need more explanation. May be accepted for the publication. Reviewer #2: The paper presents Algorithm for Wireless Sensor Networks in Ginseng Field in Precision Agriculture. The overall architecture and main component are describes. Since statistical analysis should be performed rigorously, you can add a table contains many aspects comparing existing algorithms to the proposed algorithm and specify the method of testing that had been used in the study as well. ****** 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 [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. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263401.r001
Revision 1
16 Dec 2021 Author Response List of Responses Dear Editors and Reviewers: Thank you for your letter and for the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Algorithm for Wireless Sensor Networks in Ginseng Field in Precision Agriculture”, (Manuscript Number: PONE-D-21-28152). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We have studied comments carefully and have made corrections which we hope meet with approval. Revised portions are marked in red in the paper. The main corrections in the paper and responses to the reviewer’s comments are as follows: Part one: Journal additional requirements revision 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 Response: As per your advice and PLOS ONE's style requirements, the following changes are made: the first word of both the title and the subtitle, as well as all the proper nouns and generic names are modified. The postal addresses of the corresponding authors are deleted, and their initials are placed in brackets after their e-mail addresses. The fonts of the level-one headings, level-two headings and level-three headings are changed into 18pt bold, 16pt bold and 14pt bold respectively. The formats of level-four headings 3.3.2.1 Cluster head selection phase and 3.3.2.2 Networking phase are changed into (1) Cluster head selection phase and (2) Networking phase. The word "Figure" used to refer to the figures in the paper is abbreviated as "Fig". The revisions are marked in red. 2. Thank you for stating the following in the Acknowledgments/ Financial Disclosure Section of your manuscript: This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Project No. 60972127, 61072111 and 60672156) and Key Project of Jilin Provincial Science and Technology Department (Project No. 20100503) and the Project for Science and Tech-nology Center and Science and Technology Service Platform (Project No. 20180623004TC). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. We note that you have provided additional information within the Acknowledgements Section that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. Please note that funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form. Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows: This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Project No. 60972127, 61072111 and 60672156) and Key Project of Jilin Provincial Science and Technology Department (Project No. 20100503) and the Project for Science and Tech-nology Center and Science and Technology Service Platform (Project No. 20180623004TC). The funders had no role instudy design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf. Response: As per your advice and PLOS ONE's relevant requirements, the funding-related text is removed from our manuscript. The funding information declared in the Funding Statement section of our online submission form is correct, and "None" is presented in the Acknowledgements section. 3. 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 Response: As per your advice, an ORCID iD has been obtained, i.e. 0000-0003-2081-9999, and it has been validated in Editorial Manager. 4. We note you have included a table to which you do not refer in the text of your manuscript. Please ensure that you refer to Table 1 in your text; if accepted, production will need this reference to link the reader to the Table. Response: As per your advice, the table number "Table I" is changed to "Table 1", and a description is added to refer to Table 1 in the text of our manuscript, and the sentence "The parameter settings in the experiment are shown in Table 1." is added. The corrections are marked in red. 5. Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice. As per your advice, the whole reference list has been checked, and reference No.13 is changed from "Chinese Pharmacopoeia. Part 12015; 8" to "State Pharmacopoeia Commission. Chinese Pharmacopoeia. Beijing: China Medical Science and Technology Press; 2015. PP. 260-261". Part two, Responses to the reviewer's comments: 1. Additional Editor Comments: Further elaboration on the experiment setup is required. The rationale of the selected evaluation criteria has not be explained clearly. The connection between the results (i.e. figures) and the intrepretations in the analysis section should be highlighted and extended further. Response: As per your advice, further elaboration on the experiment setup is provided, Table 2, Table 3 and Table 4 are added to explain the rationale of the evaluation criteria, and algorithm comparison is highlighted and extended further with respect to the experiment results in different situations. 2. Reviewers #1: The paper proposed an algorithm for high-efficiency wireless sensor networks for a ginseng field explained well. But parameters settings and description of the experimental parameters need more explanation. May be accepted for the publication. Response: As per the reviewer's advice, a detailed description of the experimental parameters is added, which is placed after Table 1 and marked in red, as follows: As shown in Table 1, 50 to 300 wireless sensors are deployed in the network at random; and their physical position cannot be changed, but such equipment has the function of transmitting power adjustment; and power consumption of the node for transmitting/receiving 1bit data Eelec=50nJ/bit. In the proposed algorithm, Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) is taken as the basis of algorithm optimization; and in the particle update rules, number of particles m=10, selected self-learning factors C1 and C2=0.5, inertial coefficient λ=0.5, and maximum number of optimizations of the particle p=30. 3. Reviewer #2: The paper presents Algorithm for Wireless Sensor Networks in Ginseng Field in Precision Agriculture. The overall architecture and main component are describes. Since statistical analysis should be performed rigorously, you can add a table contains many aspects comparing existing algorithms to the proposed algorithm and specify the method of testing that had been used in the study as well. Response: As per the reviewer's advice, Table 2, Table 3 and Table 4 are added, in which algorithm comparison is provided on network life cycle under different numbers of nodes, on network life cycle under difference distances of central node, and on network life cycle under different distances between central node and other nodes, as follows. In the algorithm comparison, the existing algorithms are contrasted with the proposed algorithm, and the test method is indicated. The revisions are marked in red. Table 2 Algorithm comparison on network lifecycle under different numbers of nodes Number of nodes Algorithm 50 100 150 200 250 300 LEACH 471 830 1380 1890 2198 2258 BCDCP 488 960 1603 2260 2460 2680 ECHERP 493 1180 1900 2301 2597 2732 Proposed algorithm 502 1302 2301 2587 2730 2886 Table 3 Algorithm comparison on network life cycle under different distances of central node Distance of central node Algorithm 50 75 100 125 150 175 LEACH 1896 1800 1687 1409 1001 690 BCDCP 2386 2205 2098 1689 1201 834 ECHERP 2500 2402 2385 2045 1480 960 Proposed algorithm 2598 2523 2443 2303 1513 1000 Table 4 Algorithm comparison on network life cycle under difference distances between central node and other nodes Number of other nodes Algorithm 150 100 50 0 LEACH 4102 5540 7054 8579 BCDCP 6940 7602 8569 9509 ECHERP 7340 8402 9230 10301 Proposed algorithm 7580 8501 9474 10503 We tried our best to improve the manuscript and made some changes to the manuscript. These changes will not influence the content and framework of the paper. And here we did not list the changes but marked in red in the revised paper. We appreciate for Editors/Reviewers/ warm work earnestly, and hope that the correction will meet with approval. Once again, thank you very much for your comments and suggestions. Attachments Attachment Submitted filename: renamed_766a8.docx https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263401.r002
19 Jan 2022 Decision Letter - Chi-Tsun Cheng, Editor Algorithm for wireless sensor networks in ginseng field in precision agriculture PONE-D-21-28152R1 Dear Dr. Chen, 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, Chi-Tsun Cheng, Ph.D., M.Sc., B.Eng. Academic Editor PLOS ONE Additional Editor Comments (optional): All issues have been resolved in the current version. The paper is recommended to be accepted. 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 #2: 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 #2: Yes ****** 3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: 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: No Reviewer #2: 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 #2: 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: (No Response) Reviewer #2: (No Response) ****** 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 #2: No https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263401.r003
Formally Accepted
27 Jan 2022 Acceptance Letter - Chi-Tsun Cheng, Editor PONE-D-21-28152R1 Algorithm for wireless sensor networks in ginseng field in precision agriculture Dear Dr. Chen: I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department. If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. 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. If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org. Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access. Kind regards, PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff on behalf of Dr. Chi-Tsun Cheng Academic Editor PLOS ONE https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263401.r004

Open letter on the publication of peer review reports

PLOS recognizes the benefits of transparency in the peer review process. Therefore, we enable the publication of all of the content of peer review and author responses alongside final, published articles. Reviewers remain anonymous, unless they choose to reveal their names.

We encourage other journals to join us in this initiative. We hope that our action inspires the community, including researchers, research funders, and research institutions, to recognize the benefits of published peer review reports for all parts of the research system.

Learn more at ASAPbio .