Reviewer name and names of any other individual's who aided in reviewer	Qiye Li
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?	No
Additional Comments	The available of all raw sequencing data generated in this study are not stated. And it would be appreciated if the authors could provide a table summarizing all the sequencing data generated in this study.
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	Could you also provide the gender information for woy03?
Is there sufficient detail in the methods and data-processing steps to allow reproduction?	No
Additional Comments	L145-146: It is unclear how the authors determined full-length protein-coding genes by BLAST against the Swiss-Prot non-redundant database. It would be appreciated if the authors could provide more details here. L183: The authors indicated that 15,904 of the 24,655 protein-coding genes were supported by mRNA evidence and 1,309 by protein evidence. Does the mRNA evidence come from the RNA-seq data? Where does the protein evidence come from?
Is there sufficient data validation and statistical analyses of data quality?	No
Additional Comments	L233: Contaminating sequences in the reference genome are noteworthy, as the DNA for genome sequencing was extracted from wild animals that were dead before sampling. However, I would say high mapping rates did not necessarily represent low contaminating DNA, as the contaminating DNA (e.g. from bacteria), if exists in your dataset, might have been assembled as part of the woylie reference genome. It is unclear if the authors have submitted the genome to NCBI. If so, I think they should have got a report about contamination from NCBI. It would be appreciated if the authors could provide some more statistics for protein-coding genes (e.g. Mean gene size, Mean exon number per gene, Mean exon length and Mean intron length) and compare these metrics to other marsupials. This will be helpful to judge the quality of the gene models.
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
Recommendation	Minor Revision