Evapotranspiration Assessment by Remote Sensing in Brazil with Focus on Amazon Biome: Scientometric Analysis and Perspectives for Applications in Agro-Environmental Studies

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I like the work very much, it is well prepared.

The Authors spent time reviewing a large amount of literature and, what I consider an advantage, they used an appropriate library in the R package, which definitely made their work easier.

The Authors downloaded data from the Web of Science, Scielo, and Scopus library databases. Why did the Authors choose these databases (because they are the largest or most popular)? There are definitely Web of Science and Scopus are the most famous. It is known, however, that these databases do not contain many publications. So what about publications on evapotranspiration written by Brazilians in journals not indexed in these databases? And what about publications written in a language other than English - in this case probably Portuguese?

Apart from that, I have a few minor comments.

However, I would ask the Authors to provide the Material and Methods chapter with the scope of data downloaded from databases - there is information that data is downloaded up to 2022 - but it is not known from which year (and Fig. 1 contains data from 2001 If the data sequence begins in 2001, why, for example, in Table 1 (page 6) and the next table (on page 7, the table is called Figure 1), there is no data from earlier years?

Please correct the numbering of figures and tables - there are double Figure 1 (pages 3 and 7), Figure 2 (pages 4 and 8) and Figure 3 (pages 5 and 10), as well as table 1 (pages 6 and 14). And in Figure 1 (page 7) it should be called Table 2.

Please correct the title of the vertical axis in Figure 1 (on page 4) to "number of articles".

Author Response

The authors acknowledged the comments provided by Reviewer 1 regarding our paper. The detailed responses can be found in the attached file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Editor,

I read the manuscript carefully and commented on the author's research. This paper analyzes the literature on evapotranspiration estimation using remote sensing techniques in Brazil by means of a scient metric analysis method, in order to understand the trends, research collaborations, spatial distribution, main methods and key applications in this field, and suggests future research directions. The research content and conclusion have certain practicability. However, the manuscript still requires editing, and here are some excerpts:

1. Abstract: Enhance the core significance of this study.

2. Introduction：Elaborate on the main conceptual framework of this study, accompanied by visuals for a clearer presentation.

3. Figures 1 and 2 are too coarse, and their expressive content is limited.

4. Considering the inclusion of terms such as "Amazon" and "biotic communities" in the article title, it is advisable to incorporate "Amazon" and "biotic communities" as field searches in the article database selection.

5. Line 123: Provide a detailed analysis and explanation of the sharp decrease in the number of articles published in 2022.

6. Discussion: Emphasize the innovation and significance of this study, highlighting its theoretical implications (supporting, challenging, or modifying existing theories) and practical applications. Avoid a mere objective description of the research results.

7. Conclusion: Include a discussion on the limitations of the study and provide insights for future research.

8. References: The formatting and other details need further verification and standardization.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf