Editorial comments for MS “Zooplankton diel vertical migration in the Corsica Channel (north-western Mediterranean Sea) detected by a moored ADCP” by Guerra et al

Authors have carefully corrected the MS according to requests by two reviewers. After checking the answers to the reviewers comments, evaluating the changes carried out, and reading the current MS, it is concluded that still some minor changes are required before MS is recommended to be published.

The changes requested are listed below:

Page 1 Line 11. should read “zooplankton” instead of “zooplanktonic organisms”

P1L20 remove extra parenthesis “( , …”

In abstract you refer to “primary production estimated with satellite data”, and continue stating at P1L20 “…with primary production peaks preceding…”. But in reality you do not provide any primary production estimates. Most likely you mean “ …phytoplankton biomass peaks preceding…”. Correct these sentences accordingly, remove references to primary production, unless you can show the data, and refer to phytoplankton biomass. Applies also to P9 L19

P2L10-11: Fractal sentence, please rewrite e.g. “DVM is found within practically all taxonomic zooplankton groups and it is generally assumed that there must be a common reason for such behavior”

P3L7: Provide a scientific reference instead of the one from instrument manufacturer

P5 L17: I’m not a specialist regarding the MED water masses, but it sounds strange to state that IW (found at 150-450 m depths) is the “warmest” water mass of MED.

P6 L7: provide information on ADCP manufacturer

P6 L19: Should read “ADCP settings”

P6 L 24: Give a unit for R (m?)

P6 L27: Give a unit for B (m?)

P7 L1: Give a unit for H (m?)

P8 L6: Should read “…Wetlabs fluorescence sensor …”

P13 L30 Onwards and Figure 5: Isn’t it a bit strange that differences between observed peak frequencies are exactly – strictly exactly – the same (1.157 * 10^-5 Hz). Please check if there is an artefact in your analyses which creates such harmony.

P15 L30: It is clear that primary production – C-fixation by phytoplankton – is the reason for phytoplankton blooms. Therefore, though you have not estimated primary nor secondary production as such, much of the reasoning in caption 4.4. is valid. In P15L30, however, you make very specific statement “the peaks in primary production precede the peaks in secondary production by about three and a half weeks”, which is not backed up by data, you have not measured production but biomass. Biomass is not equal to production. Thus modify accordingly.

P15 L32: As above

P16 L2: As above

P16 L21: As above


Figure 2. Be consistent in the labels for chlorophyll fluorescence between figures 2d and 2g and figure caption. Fluorescence is a proxy for the concentration, thus 2g is not showing “concentrations”.

Figure 3. The black lines for sunset and sunrise are hardly visible, could you increase the linewidth

Figure 7. Explain briefly in figure caption how Chla estimate was obtained.

Thank you for a revised version, all questions answered.