Second Round of Evaluation Round 2: I have had the more critical remarks to the manuscript; however, I think that the presented data are useful and should be published.
I do not understand why Leptolyngbya and Chamaesiphon could be “closely related genera”. It is in contraversion to the whole up to date results and taxonomic classification. The authors really found the “close” relation just between these two genera? By way, they both are polyphyletic and will be surely divided in several different taxa after the following precise studies.