This review focused on NIRS applications for cassava and yam. In general, this review may attract the limited interesting for the researcher who focuses on cassava or yam. The structure is not clear and should be re-organized. In addition, this review mainly focuses on the harvest or processed part, NIRS for the cassava or yam plant phenotyping should be taken into consideration. More discussion of NIRS data analysis, future challenges and potential solutions also should be added and discussed. To attract more readers, some references of other tuber crops, such as sweet potato, potato, carrot, and taro, should be added and discussed. Or at least, discuss the potential extension to other tuber crops.

Introduction:
1. The first paragraph is too long, which should be divided to 2 or 3 paragraphs. The Tables should be cited in order in the main text.
2. This review focus on cassava and yam, thus the importance of them should be briefly described here.

Method:
7. Page 4: No need to describe how to search the references using one paragraph.
8. Page 4: “The technique measures the interactions between electromagnetic radiation and vibrational properties of chemical bonds.” Please add the reference.
9. “The result of the search generated only 46 references on the application of NIRS in cassava phenotyping and 8 references for yam (Tables 2 and 4).” I can not find all the references in Table 2 or Table 4?
10. Page 5: Please explain PLC and PCA when first mentioned in main text.
11. Page 5: “The main results found in the literature about the application of non-destructive methods for high throughput phenotyping of root, tuber and banana (RTB) crops and RTB products are summarized in Table 2.” Citing of Table 2 is correct?

Conclusion:
12. Please unify “HIS” or “HIS” in the main text.
13. The conclusion is too long. Some part could be moved to “future challenge” part?
14. I suggestion the authors add another part “future challenge”, and also propose some potential solutions of the future challenges.
15. Some conclusions could be extended to other tuber crops, such as sweet potatoes, taro?

Table:
16. The Tables should be cited in order in the main text.
17. To match the scope of review “high-throughput”. The measuring efficiency should be added in the different methods of the Tables
18. Table 2: Please explain “ground”. And what are the differences between “fresh”, “mashed”, “intact”, and “processed”? What are the differences between “processed”, “starch”, and “flour”?
19. Table 3: “the determination coefficient for prediction (r 2 pred) and the standard error of prediction (SEP or RMSEP). SEC and SEP were calculated using an” ? this sentence is not complete. Also please add the company information of different hardware or software mentioned in this Table.
20. I suggest that Table 1, Table 2, and Table 3 should be combined to one Table.
21. Table 4: please add the company information of different hardware or software mentioned in this Table.

Image:
The image quality is too poor, and some characters overlap together.