Exploring Growth Patterns of Maurolicus muelleri across Three Northeast Atlantic Regions
, Naroa Aldanondo 1, Alina M. Wieczorek 2, Thibault Cariou 3, Guillermo Boyra 1, Eduardo Grimaldo 4,5, Webjørn Melle 6 and Thor Klevjer 6,†Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe manuscript contributes information concerning the basic ecological parameters of three stocks of a single fish species. New data were provided, which were generated based on a well-tested methodology. A plethora of parameters were studied, admitting safe conclusions. Statistical treatment is adequate, and the citations used are appropriate. The text shows a well-performed study in general; nevertheless, minor language issues have to be taken into account, in order to be ready for publishing. Please see further comments included in the attached file.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Some sentences are unclear, it is better to be re-formulated. Some texts have to be relocated to other chapters. Minor errors were established, which have to be eliminated. In general, the language level is good.
Author Response
"Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe manuscript used sufficient samples and correct statistical analysis methods to prove the growth pattern and the causes of resource distribution of M. muelleri in three Northeast Atlantic regions. The authors combined many previously published results to provide evidence for study of M. muelleri. Their results provide new evidence of the biological diversity of this population. However, the manuscript needs major revisions before it could be accepted for publication.
Comment 1：In the Title, the Latin name of species should not use the abbreviated but the full form.
Comment 2: In the “2.2 laboratory procedures”, the TL, SL, TW of the M. muelleri were measured. But lack the figure of the M. muelleri specimen, it should be added.
Comment 3: Why the authors used the right sagitta not the left sagitta to analyze? Compared each other by the statistical method?
Comment 4: Line 195- Please ensure uniform format of references (Grimaldo et al., 2020).
Comment 5: Figure 3 just show the three curves of total weight with length from different areas, but lack of the correlation analysis of three curves.
Comment 6: Figure 9 should also be embellished. I think using different graphics to represent different ages is more conducive from readers' viewing.
Comment 7: There are some errors of writing and references format. Please check carefully. line 37, 41….250… 339, 340, 346, 387…….
Comment 8: Why the manuscript file and the supplementary file are the same file？
Comments on the Quality of English Languagenot have
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe manuscript fishes-3049749 “Exploring Growth Patterns of M. muelleri Across Three Northeast Atlantic Regions” aims to estimate age-based demographic parameters of M. muelleri in the NEA waters.
The paper is easy to follow and has no substantive questions.
I would like to see the importance of the work clarified. Why is it important to study this species? How can the results of the work be applied in the future? How does the work answer a scientific problem?
Otherwise, I think the paper is good.
There are few comments on the manuscript.
I wish the authors all the best.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
