Chronology of Four Climbing Dune Outcrops on the Atlantic Coast of Galicia (NW Spain) Linked to the Sea Level Fall during the MIS6 and MIS4 Isotopic Stages
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR AUTHORS
The present work is very interesting, is very well structured and assessed the chronology and evolutional model of four climbing-dunes outcrops on the Atlantic coast of Galicia in Spain. The article is very well developed and the results are in line perfectly with the conclusions. I would like to congratulate the authors for presenting such a well-organized and good work.
I give my suggestions for improving the manuscript, which should be done before publication of the paper.
- Introduction
- The introduction is very well structured, clear and correct.
- Is defended with sufficient bibliographical citations.
- The location map in Figure 1 is very appropriate, clear and good.
- Figure 2 is fine.
- Study area
- The study area part is very well explained and the Figure 3 is adequate.
- Objectives
- The objectives are very well defined and explained.
- Materials and Methods
- The methodology is explained in great detail and combined with the necessary bibliographical citations.
- Results and discussion
- The results are presented in a clear and well-argued.
- Tables and figures are well presented.
- Late-Pleistocene climbing-dunes: paleoclimatic considerations and sea-level.
- The model for the evolution of Galician dunes is well supported by the data presented by the authors. It is a logical and appropriate evolutionary model.
- The map in Figure 5 expresses perfectly the information the authors want to present. The only suggestion is to add the name of the dune outcrops to the map to make it easier for the reader.
- Name “Figure 5” is repeated twice. Figure "180 ky Global climatic record and formation age of the coastal climbing dunes 305 dated by pIR-IRSL" must be figure 6
- Figure 6* is adequate and expresses very well the age and physical characteristics (global sea level and global temperature variation) of geomorphological deposit formation in the Quaternary.
- Conclusions
- Are appropriate.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
- Point one: Add the name of dune outcrops in figure 5.
- Response point one: Thank you very much. The names of the outcrops have been included in this figure.
- Point two: Name Figure 5 is repeated twice; must be Figure 6.
- Response point two: Thank you very much. Name of Figure 6 has been corrected.
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Authors, I've reviewed your manuscript with a great pleasure. This is highly-interesting and innovative contribution, which extends our knowledge of the complexity of stratigraphy of the Quaternary rocky shores. Importantly, the both state-of-the-art field and laboratory investigations are used. The paper is well-written, excellently illustrated, and adequately referenced. Indeed, this research deserves being communicated to the international research community. I strongly recommend its publication in "JMSE" and see only a few minor points for changes.
- As this paper focuses on stratigraphy, I encourage you to use some newest stratigraphical terminology offered in the fresh version of the chronostratigraphical scale developed by the International Commission on Stratigraphy (particularly, look at the names of the Holocene stages). For materials, see here: stratigraphy.org
- Section 3 can be merged with Introduction, and the latter can start with telling about the general importance of this research direction on the international scale.
- Section 5 can be titled as only "Results", and Section 6 deserves to be titled as "Discussion".
- You use time units called as either ka or ky. I recommend to be consistent and choose only one. To me, ka would be the best choice.
- Your writing is clear, but I advise to check it once again to avoid minor failures. For instance, Lines 17-18: "present Holocene" -> "Holocene", Fig. 1: peninsule -> peninsula, etc.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
