Review Reports
by
- Manuela Persia1,
- Emanuele Barca2,* and
- Roberto Greco1
- et al.
Reviewer 1: Anonymous Reviewer 2: Anonymous Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The quality of the article has been strongly improved compared to the first version.
Both formal aspects (English language, structure) and scientific content are now in a much better state and clearly justify a publication.
I have only one small correction: in line 137 ff., it should be m asl, not just asl. Meter is the unit, asl is the reference.
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors have answered all questions and suggestions. The revised manuscript is improved and more readable than the previous version.
Reviewer 3 Report
I appreciated the effort made by the authors to implement the proposed suggestions.