Average rating: | Rated 3.5 of 5. |
Level of importance: | Rated 3 of 5. |
Level of validity: | Rated 3 of 5. |
Level of completeness: | Rated 5 of 5. |
Level of comprehensibility: | Rated 3 of 5. |
Competing interests: | None |
The authors have amended the manuscript making changes that I suggested on the marked version thet I returned with my first review. In line 395 a minor error remains: unconformities is mis-spelt.
Otherwise, the paper is little changed from the first version and I therefore see no reason to change the review that I posted for the first version.