Reviewer name and names of any other individual's who aided in reviewer	Jianbo Jian
Do you understand and agree to our policy of having open and named reviews, and having your review included with the published papers. (If no, please inform the editor that you cannot review this manuscript.)	Yes
Is the language of sufficient quality?	Yes
Please add additional comments on language quality to clarify if needed
Are all data available and do they match the descriptions in the paper?	Yes
Additional Comments
Are the data and metadata consistent with relevant minimum information or reporting standards? See GigaDB checklists for examples <a href="http://gigadb.org/site/guide" target="_blank">http://gigadb.org/site/guide</a>	Yes
Additional Comments
Is the data acquisition clear, complete and methodologically sound?	Yes
Additional Comments
Is there sufficient detail in the methods and data-processing steps to allow reproduction?	No
Additional Comments	5、Gene prediction appears simple; more details are needed.
Is there sufficient data validation and statistical analyses of data quality?	Yes
Additional Comments
Is the validation suitable for this type of data?	Yes
Additional Comments
Is there sufficient information for others to reuse this dataset or integrate it with other data?	Yes
Additional Comments
Any Additional Overall Comments to the Author	The authors reported the genome of the coral model sea anemone Exaiptasia diaphana (Aiptasia) strain F003 using Oxford Nanopore Technologies (ONT). The sample F003 is significant. Nevertheless, the genome quality appears to not so well as the contig N50 is only 76.47 kb. I have the following questions. It is hoped that these comments will be beneficial for improving the manuscript. 1、Is the low Contig N50 due to insufficient ONT data or the ONT read lengths not long? 2、The scaffold N50 improved slightly from 76.47 kb to 77.93 kb. Scaffolding relied solely on large-insert-size or Hi-C data; ONT reads were used for assembly, and the same ONT data was reused for scaffolding—potentially introducing errors. 3、ONT data still has high error rates—does genome assembly include error correction? 4、We used TE Annotator (EDTA) v2.2.0 for repeat annotation. Since EDTA is commonly applied to plant genomes, could you clarify why this pipeline was selected? 5、Gene prediction appears simple; more details are needed.
Recommendation	Major Revision