This is an interesting and useful paper combining previously published workflows into a single pipeline for assessment of nodule distribution. This is an important area of research, with several deep-sea mining companies making quantitative assessments of nodule abundance to support resource characterisation. The paper is generally clear and will be improved by following the suggestions of both reviewers. I feel that two important comments from the reviewers will need to be addressed, specifically the measurement of uncertainty and the influence of spatial autocorrelation. Measuring uncertainty is important, both for the paper and for those using the techniques for resource evaluation. I would prefer that uncertainty is quantified for the maps produced, but at the very least the approaches for determining uncertainty should be discussed as should the primary areas of uncertainty in the data presented in the MS. To resolve the issue related to autocorrelation, adding discussion similar to that presented in the authors' comment may be sufficient to provide the information needed to evaluate the influence of autocorrelation.

Please remove the paragraph about box core sampling in the discussion (line 468-480). I feel that it is not particularly clear or helpful. In addition, while the recommendations may be appropriate here they will not be appropriate to generate a sampling plan to address other related questions. They are presented as a general recommendation that applies to all situations.