The Bonikowo Reef occurs in the central part of the Zechstein Limestone Basin in western Poland and was growing on the topmost edges of tilted blocks and/or on the top of uplifted horsts of the Brandenburg-Wolsztyn-Pogorzela High. Its size is ca. 1.6 km2. The Bonikowo Reef shows the thickest reef section (90.5 m) recorded in the High. The Zechstein Limestone unit is represented mostly by limestones, often thoroughly recrystallized, although the macrotextures and biota of the boundstone are identi?able in most cases. The drillcore section is a mixture of boundstones (microbial and bryozoan), wackestones, packstones and grainstones, which often co-occur. The d13C and d18O values for both calcite (avg. 3.8 ± 0.8‰ and -3.4 ± 1.7‰, respectively) and dolomite (avg. 3.5 ± 0.7‰ and -5.2 ± 1.3‰, respectively) are transitional between the values previously reported for condensed sequences of the basinal facies and larger reef complexes. The biofacies of the Bonikowo Reef are very similar to those recognized in other reefs of the Brandenburg-Wolsztyn-Pogorzela High, which owe their origin to the destruction of bryozoan boundstones. The biota composition is typical and characteristic of other Zechstein Limestone reefs. However, the Bonikowo Reef demonstrates the importance of microbialites, laminar and nodose encrustations, in the growth and cohesion of the Zechstein Limestone reefs. Such encrustations abound within the Zechstein Limestone although, in many cases, the real nature of the encrustations is dif?cult to ascertain. These laminated encrustations show great similarity to Archaeolithoporella that is one of the most important Permian reef-building organisms. The encrustations considered to represent Archaeolithoporella were also previously recorded in the Zechstein Limestone of western Poland and in its stratigraphic equivalent, the Middle Magnesian Limestone of Northeast England. The lower part of the sequence shows great biofacies variability that re?ects common environmental changes. The major part of the section is represented by slope deposits

Our contribution about a newly recognized sedimentological feature, which we called tombolith, has raised some comments on the etymology of the term, the assumed lack of field data, the usage of a term that has a special meaning in stratigraphy, the origin of the seismic shocks that played a role, so-called basic tenets, the origin of soft-sediment deformation structures, and the role of liquefaction. We argue that most comments result from an insufficiently thorough reading of our text, whereas some other remarks concern aspects that we did not deal with. Finally, several remarks are based on outdated literature and from insufficient knowledge of the regional geology.