Dear Authors,

Thank you for submitting your revised manuscript to Ocean Science. The review has already been completed. The reviewer recommends major revisions before accepting the manuscript for a publication in Ocean Science.

Please, consider the Reviewer's comments carefully.

Best regards,
Joanna Staneva

Dear Authors,

Thank you for submitting the revised version of your manuscript.

I recommend accepting your manuscript for a publication in Ocean Science, subject to minor revisions. Please, consider the revisions suggested by the Reviewer and listed bellow.

Best regards,
Joanna Staneva

1. In Abstract (line 22), the authors suggest that 'the previous sediment resuspension events may influence the increase of suspended sediment in later on events'. This is absolutely correct but does not make any sense. Please state precisely and consolidate whether the influence on the increase of SSC is positive or negative. In other words, will the previous resuspension enhance or suppress the increase of the subsequent resuspension?

2. Line 133, ... are described in detail in what?

3. Line 142: please explain what do 'x' and 'y' indicate? Longitudinal and lateral?

4. Line 172: add "," after 'Bay'

5. Section 'Conclusions' is quite loose. It reads more like a part of the Abstract. Please indicate clearly how do the seiching activity and wind-wave interaction affect the variability of the bottom sediment resuspension and the distributions of near-bottom turbidity? How does the previous resuspension affect the subsequent resuspension events? Be more consolidate in the conclusion.

Suggestions for revision or reasons for rejection (will be published if the paper is accepted for final publication)
1. In Abstract (line 22), the authors suggest that 'the previous sediment resuspension events may influence the increase of suspended sediment in later on events'. This is absolutely correct but does not make any sense. Please state precisely and consolidate whether the influence on the increase of SSC is positive or negative. In other words, will the previous resuspension enhance or suppress the increase of the subsequent resuspension? Be more consolidate in the conclusion.

2. Line 133, ... are described in detail in what?

3. Line 142: please explain what do 'x' and 'y' indicate? Longitudinal and lateral?

4. Line 172: add "," after 'Bay'

5. Section 'Conclusions' is quite loose. It reads more like a part of the Abstract. Please indicate clearly how do the seiching activity and wind-wave interaction affect the variability of the bottom sediment resuspension and the distributions of near-bottom turbidity? How does the previous resuspension affect the subsequent resuspension events?