Let $m=\left\lceil\frac{M}{2}\right\rceil$ and $n=\left\lceil\frac{N}{2}\right\rceil$. We claim that the minimal $Q$ is $m+n$. For the construction, start with $m$ detectors covering $[i, i+m-1] \times[1, N]$ for $1 \leq i \leq m$. For every pair of rows, there is a detector that covers one row but not the other, hence this determines the row of the treasure. Similarly, placing $n$ detectors covering $[1, M] \times[i, i+n-1]$ for $1 \leq i \leq n$ determines the column, and thus the location of the treasure.

For the bound, we require the following lemma.
Lemma. A $1 \times k$ island requires at least $\left\lceil\frac{k}{2}\right\rceil$ detectors.
Proof. Consider the $k-1$ lines separating the cells. If one of these lines is not covered by any detector, then these cells are indistinguishable. Similarly, if neither of the vertical lines at the ends are covered, then the first and last cells are indistinguishable. In particular, at least $k$ vertical lines need to be covered by the detectors. A detector covers 2 vertical lines, giving the result.

In general, consider the first row. Since the cells are distinguishable, by the lemma there must be at least $n$ detectors that intersect it non-trivially (as in, cover between 1 and $N-1$ of the cells). The analogous result holds for the last row and the first/last columns, giving $2 m+2 n$ detectors, where a detector may be counted multiple times.

If a detector intersected at least three of these sets, say it intersected the first row and the first and last columns. Therefore it covers the entire width of the island, and does not actually distinguish any cells in the first row, contradiction.

Therefore each detector contributes to at most 2 of the above $2 m+2 n$ detectors, giving the final lower bound of $\frac{2 m+2 n}{2}=m+n$ detectors required, as desired.