The Portofino Promontory: 200 Years of History of Marine Biology
, Federico Betti 1, Carlo Nike Bianchi 1,4, Valentina Cappanera 5, Mariachiara Chiantore 1,2,3, Nicola Corradi 1, Monica Montefalcone 1,2, Mauro Giorgio Mariotti 1,5, Carla Morri 1,4, Paolo Povero 1, Giulio Relini 1, Stefano Schiaparelli 1,3 and Marzia Bo 1,2,3Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsOverall comments：
This paper appears to focus on the extensive history of scientific research conducted in the Portofino Promontory, a prominent site in the Ligurian Sea. It provides a historical overview spanning over two centuries, highlighting the region's significance in the study of marine biological communities and their changes over time, particularly in response to climate change. It seems to provide a significantly comprehensive overview of the scientific exploration and conservation efforts in the Portofino Promontory, which is of a great interest for the scientific community.
Specific comments see the file.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
The English quality is fine.
Author Response
The Ref. 1 has not supplied any comment.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis is an exceptionally well written manuscript that I read with great interest. Its facts, organization, and treatment of subjects are more than adequate. I have only a few minor suggestions that I will mention here instead of providing a marked pdf.
1. There are many places where Genus and species names are not italicized. I tried to catch all instances, but this MS will benefit from proof reading. See lines: 434, 437,444,491, 497, 500, 587, 729, 733, 758, 765, 766, 859, 1514, 1940, 2012, 2030.
2. The section on Oceanography seems comparatively brief. Is there evidence of thermal stratification? Ocean acidification? Please supply references for lines 313 and 217 regarding temperatures.
3. line 367. Did diversity of plankton species change also?
4. line 474. Please supply the source(s) of the mucilage.
5. line 610. Did anchorage cause the increase in turbidity?
6. lines 656 and 661. Are these units correct? A few square meters of loss seems insignificant. Also, superscript on the 2 for m2
7. line 784. Regarding coraligenous reefs, are any of them rhodolith beds? It is difficult to know the way the description is written. If so, please identify as such.
8. Lines 834-835. The zones A,B, and C mean nothing unless a description of what they are is supplied. Please explain.
9. Line 894. Regarding mapping mobile seafloors. Was multibeam sonar used as well as sidescan?
10. Line 1030. It will be better to say the live white corals were indeed found rather than leaving that fact to be found in a figure legend.
11. Line 1184. Capitals H and R for Homonym Restaurant?
12. Line 1464. Again, these zones have no meaning with a description.
13. I am somewhat surprised that a section on Non-indigenous/invasive species is not included. Such section would round-out the thorough treatment of biota. Other than descriptions of changing Caulerpa and lines 2139-2143, there is no formal treatment.
14.line 2201. Table one is never referred to in the text paper. Please add a citation for it.
Author Response
This is an exceptionally well written manuscript that I read with great interest. Its facts, organization, and treatment of subjects are more than adequate. I have only a few minor suggestions that I will mention here instead of providing a marked pdf.
Thank a lot for the appreciation of our work.
- There are many places where Genus and species names are not italicized. I tried to catch all instances, but this MS will benefit from proof reading. See lines: 434, 437,444,491, 497, 500, 587, 729, 733, 758, 765, 766, 859, 1514, 1940, 2012, 2030.
Correct and carefully checked around the text
- The section on Oceanography seems comparatively brief. Is there evidence of thermal stratification? Ocean acidification? Please supply references for lines 313 and 217 regarding temperatures.
The section includes the oceanographic research made in the Portofino area. In any case a paragraph was added (see lines 2226-2227) and new figures were added in Fig. 26.
- line 367. Did diversity of plankton species change also?
Yes, the sentence was rephrased (see lines 374-377)
- line 474. Please supply the source(s) of the mucilage.
A sentence was added (see lines 501-502)
- line 610. Did anchorage cause the increase in turbidity?
No, the anchoring causes mechanical damages. The sentence was rephrased and clarified (see line 636)
- lines 656 and 661. Are these units correct? A few square meters of loss seems insignificant. Also, superscript on the 2 for m2
It is not insignificant. 3 m2 per linear meter of chain. In the bay hundreds m of chain was placed o the saebed. So 3m2 x 100 m x year = 3000 m2 in ten years
- line 784. Regarding coraligenous reefs, are any of them rhodolith beds? It is difficult to know the way the description is written. If so, please identify as such.
No, in the entire Ligurian sea rhodiolith beds are completely lacking
- Lines 834-835. The zones A,B, and C mean nothing unless a description of what they are is supplied. Please explain.
The sentences including the different level of protection in the MPA were rephrased and clarified all-round the text
- Line 894. Regarding mapping mobile seafloors. Was multibeam sonar used as well as sidescan?
IN different case study was used multibeam and/or sidescan
- Line 1030. It will be better to say the live white corals were indeed found rather than leaving that fact to be found in a figure legend.
But it is stated in the text (see line 1192-1193)
- Line 1184. Capitals H and R for Homonym Restaurant?
The name of the restaurant is Aurora. Homonym means that the transect and the restaurant have the same name
- Line 1464. Again, these zones have no meaning with a description.
Correct and rephrased
- I am somewhat surprised that a section on Non-indigenous/invasive species is not included. Such section would round-out the thorough treatment of biota. Other than descriptions of changing Caulerpaand lines 2139-2143, there is no formal treatment.
Incorrect, the second half of the paragraph Climate change is dedicated to the non indigenous species (lines 1190-2203). There is also a related figure 25
14.line 2201. Table one is never referred to in the text paper. Please add a citation for it.
Incorrect, in the Conclusions the table is regularly cited (see line 2247)
