Many thanks for your contribution to this SE Special Issue, I'm sure that your paper will be used as a reference point by many researchers working on various aspects of inversion tectonics. Practical aspects related to hydrocarbon exploration are equally important.

Dear William Bosworth and Gabor Tari,

Thank you for the revision of your manuscript. As you will see, i am asking for a further minor revision, which is based on a review by Jonas Kley, who is one of the editors of the Special Issue on Inversion Tectonics. I apologise that this review comes at this stage and not together with the other two previous reviews. However, seeing that the other two reviews were very brief indeed, i am of the opinion that the review by Jonas will benefit the manuscript. I do not judge the changes to be much work. If you have any questions regarding either the review or the editorial handling, then please just contact me at susanne.buiter@tag.rwth-aachen.de

With best wishes,
Susanne Buiter
Executive Editor Solid Earth

Review by Jonas Kley:

Please see also the attached pdf file which holds comments denoted with highlights

Dear authors,

I enjoyed reading your manuscript on inversion in the Western Desert and the Black Sea. I like your idea of comparing these relatively distant case studies but I feel that you could get more out of this comparison. As it stands, the paper still very clearly reveals its being assembled from two parts prepared separately.

One thing to start with would be a tectonic overview map in the style of Fig. 1, but showing both areas together. It is not just formal reasons why I propose this as I will explain below.

It seems to me that you treat the differences and similarities of both areas rather superficially. The concluding Fig. 13 takes more clues from the Western Desert example. For instance, the underfilled traps that seem to be a major problem in the Black Sea are not really addressed there. More generally, the two case studies look quite different to me in terms of structural style. The Western Desert exhibits classical inversion structures. The Black Sea example appears to be more complex. What is the relation between the Karkinit Trough and the Shtormovaya Graben? The L. Cretaceous to Eocene is much thicker in the trough than in the graben (why is it called a graben in the first place?): Were the two separated by a N-dipping normal fault? Where was the prominent pop-up located? In the depocenter or south of it? I got the impression that the main structure represents thrusting of the southern shoulder over the depocenter rather than typical inversion. It would be helpful if you could elaborate on this evolution and how it affected the hydrocarbon potential (if it did).

The discussion paragraph could be made more specific. If you think coeval inversion events in the two areas are causally linked, you should show how that could have worked. You say that it would be beneficial to better understand the duration of inversion phases, but do not discuss any implications of your case studies for this question. The idea that inversion is expressed as folding in a thicker post-rift sedimentary cover is intriguing, but what happens at deeper structural levels? Do you think fault reactivation is discouraged? Or will faults give way to folds upsection?

The statement in the conclusions that “the structure will be covered and healed by later syn-rift fill” only applies to the Western Desert (or other cases with multiple phases of extension).

It would also like to remark on a few terminology issues:

The terminology and concepts for stress and kinematics are often mixed up. For instance, in the caption of Fig. 2, inversion and rifting are called compressional and tensional events, and the figure says “tension” above the two columns for rifting. However, no tensional stresses are involved in normal faulting, and the blue arrows should not be pointing outward. It therefore makes no sense, either, to speak of a “compressional stress field” (e.g., l. 283, 305). Use “thrust faulting (or normal faulting, strike-slip faulting) stress regime” instead. There is no definition for a “most significant principal stress” (Fig. 2, caption). In the figure itself you might consider to replace “stress field” with “kinematics” and use “contraction” and “extension”. Then your arrows are fine, too.

It always makes me deeply unhappy when people use Stille´s names for tectonic events or phases. The “Late Cimmerian event” in Germany is the Late Jurassic to Early Cretaceous rifting phase that created the Lower Saxony Basin. Its definition stems from Stille´s misconception that all unconformities are due to folding/orogenesis. This led him to parallelize rifting in Germany with contraction in southeast Europe. I think most people agree today that the majority of tectonic events is not of global reach, even though the Santonian event seems to get close. An interesting question for your paper is therefore whether simultaneous inversion in the Western Desert and the western Black Sea is coincidental or does indeed reflect the same tectonic event. In the latter case it would be interesting to see the plate tectonic situation on a map, ideally for Late Jurassic time.

Be kind to your readers from outside the petroleum industry. Spell out mmbo, mmboe, bcf, multi-tcf etc. when you use them first. Explain or rephrase four-way dipping unfaulted closure, 3-way structural target etc. An isopach is a single contour line, use plural or “isopach map”.

Sorry for these comments coming so late (not through anybody´s fault in particular, though) and for dwelling so much on terminology, which I don´t find the most interesting topic, either. The most important thing in my eyes is to give your readers a better feel for the similarities and differences of your case regions.

Jonas Kley

Just few final touches are needed before publication of this very interesting paper:

1. add DOI where relevant

2. make some minor correction to some of the figures, see attached pdf for further details

regards,

Piotr

Dear authors,

We are pleased to accept your manuscript for publication in the special issue "Inversion tectonics – 30 years later" in Solid Earth, pending technical corrections as outlined by the Topical Editor.

Thank you for submitting your work with Solid Earth,
Susanne Buiter
Executive Editor