the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
| 08 May 2026
The first regional‑scale multibeam echosounder bathymetric dataset of the Saudi Arabian Red Sea
Abstract. High-resolution bathymetry is a critical resource for marine research, underpinning seafloor characterisation, benthic habitat mapping, geomorphological analyses, and marine spatial planning. In the Red Sea, however, publicly accessible high-resolution bathymetric data remain extremely limited along the eastern margin. Existing regional products such as the General Bathymetric Chart of the Oceans (GEBCO) provide only coarse resolution coverage, and detailed surveys have historically been concentrated along the central axis rather than the Saudi Arabian shelf and slope. Here, we present a high-resolution bathymetric dataset acquired during the 2022 Red Sea Decade Expedition (RSDE) along the Saudi Arabian margin of the Red Sea. Multibeam echosounder surveys span approximately 860 km of coastline and extend from shallow coastal waters to deep-sea environments, covering depths from ~2 m to >2,460 m. Data were acquired using multiple platforms and processed through a standardised workflow to produce a unified digital bathymetric model. Grid resolutions are 5 m for the shallow-water data and 40 m for the deep-water data, covering a total of 49,418.7 km² of seafloor. This dataset provides unprecedented spatial coverage of the eastern Red Sea seafloor and represents a key resource for marine sciences and marine spatial planning in a region where available detailed bathymetry has historically been limited.
- Preprint
(1029 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 28 Jun 2026)
-
RC1: 'Comment on essd-2026-317', Anonymous Referee #1, 09 May 2026
reply
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Fabio Marchese, 18 May 2026
reply
We thank the Referee for the careful reading of the manuscript and the constructive comments. We address each point below.
Comment 1: The letters inside Figure 2 are barely seen. Apparently, the figure was obtained from a low-resolution chart. I recommend redrawing the figure.We thank the Referee for pointing this out. We will redraw Figure 2 at higher resolution, ensuring consistency in font size and label readability across all figures.
Comment 2: In line 122, the authors state that "After filtering processes, accepted soundings were gridded into 7 Digital Bathymetric Models (DBMs) (Figure 3)". However, Figure 3 does not present seven DBMs. Actually, there are four multibeam mosaics.
We thank the Referee for this comment. We clarify that Figure 3a displays the complete dataset, integrating all seven DBMs into a single overview map. Panels b through e show four selected examples of seafloor morphology, one per expedition Leg, chosen to illustrate the diversity of geomorphological settings captured by the survey. We recognise the potential ambiguity and will revise the figure caption and the corresponding text to make this distinction explicit.
Comment 3: It would be interesting to see more examples, each with at least a brief explanation of the features (channels, pockmarks, slumps, etc.).
We thank the Referee for this suggestion and agree it would strengthen the manuscript. We will expand Figure 3 with additional example panels, each accompanied by a brief description of the main geomorphological features visible, such as submarine channels, mass-wasting deposits, and other relevant morphologies identified across the dataset.
We are grateful to the Referee for the time dedicated to reviewing this manuscript and for the valuable comments, which we believe have contributed to improving the clarity and quality of the work.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2026-317-AC1
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Fabio Marchese, 18 May 2026
reply
-
CC1: 'Comment on essd-2026-317', Nico Augustin, 11 May 2026
reply
The dataset presented here is a truly valuable contribution, and I am very glad to see it released. The technical quality is excellent, and it should without doubt be published. It is a great addition to marine research, particularly in the Red Sea.
I only have a minor comment on the title: "The first regional-scale multibeam echosounder bathymetric dataset of the Saudi Arabian Red Sea.” Given the number of publicly available high-quality datasets that already cover parts of the Saudi margin, including several cited in the manuscript, this feels a bit of an overstatement. There is actually quite an impressive picture of existing multibeam coverage in Saudi waters, even if the very shallow coastal zone targeted here remains the genuinely novel part of this work.
I would simply suggest replacing "first" with "a new" or "a comprehensive", which would more accurately reflect the state of the field.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2026-317-CC1 -
AC2: 'Reply on CC1', Fabio Marchese, 18 May 2026
reply
We thank the Community Referee for the kind words and the positive assessment of the dataset and its scientific value. We address the comment on the title below.
Comment: The title feels a bit of an overstatement [...] I would simply suggest replacing "first" with "a new" or "a comprehensive".
We thank the Community Referee for this thoughtful observation. We acknowledge that several high-quality multibeam datasets exist for the deeper parts of the Saudi margin, all of which are cited in the manuscript. However, we would like to clarify that the intended meaning of "first" refers specifically to the regional-scale coverage achieved within a single, dedicated expedition, rather than through the cumulative result of multiple independent campaigns. Furthermore, as the Referee notes, the shallow coastal zone targeted here represents novel coverage. We will carefully consider this comment in the context of the full discussion and will revise the title accordingly if needed.
We are grateful to the Community Referee for the time dedicated to evaluating this manuscript and for the constructive input.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2026-317-AC2
-
AC2: 'Reply on CC1', Fabio Marchese, 18 May 2026
reply
-
CC2: 'Comment on essd-2026-317', Lukasz Janowski, 18 May 2026
reply
This manuscript introduces a high-quality and highly valuable bathymetric dataset of the Saudi Arabian part of the Red Sea, obtained during the Red Sea Decade Expedition in 2022. It greatly increases the resolution and geographical coverage of seafloor morphometry in a region which traditionally lacked such information, especially concerning the continental margin and shelf.
The methodology is sound, well described, clear, and well-aligned with current practices and established quality criteria (standardised processing pipeline; internal consistency validation in line with IHO S-44 guidelines).
Of great importance is the fact that the manuscript clearly demonstrates the need for high-resolution MBES surveys to become an integral part of any marine science project due to its applicability in geomorphology, habitat mapping and spatial planning. Moreover, this dataset is highly relevant for international efforts to generate a global high-resolution bathymetry dataset such as Seabed 2030.
Thus, I believe that this paper represents a solid manuscript, which can be easily considered for publication after making minor changes in the text and the bibliography.While the manuscript places the presented research in the Red Sea context, its potential global dimension can be better addressed through adding references to other recently published datasets of the same kind, especially those obtained from well-known European basins. I suggest to include the following:
- High-resolution MBES surveys of Napoli Bay (Italy);
- MBES and other remote sensing datasets from Puck Bay (Baltic Sea, Poland);
- Regional high-resolution MBES surveys of the Southern Baltic SeaThese regions represent areas where recently high-resolution MBES surveys became increasingly common for various environmental purposes (geomorphology, habitat mapping, underwater heritage investigation etc.). Such additions will:
- Placed the current dataset in a broader context of globally increasing availability of high-resolution MBES surveys,
- Strengthen the message about the similarities of approaches for such surveys in different parts of the world,
- Highlight the importance of such surveys in the context of Seabed 2030.In addition, this is relevant since global bathymetric products (such as GEBCO) lack the needed resolution for many scientific applications.
While this paper implicitly relates to global seabed mapping goals, explicit references to them would make the study even more interesting for the reader. Adding references to Seabed 2030 would increase the relevance and importance of the paper, since it relates to a widely recognized and important effort. Thus, it is strongly recommended to add at least the following to the manuscript:
- A small summary statement in the Conclusion section that would put the paper into a wider context of global bathymetry;
- Small addition to the Introduction section contrasting regional and global bathymetry datasets.The manuscript represents a high-quality paper with a very valuable dataset that should become part of marine scientific projects worldwide.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2026-317-CC2
Data sets
The high‑resolution bathymetric dataset of the Saudi Arabian Red Sea margin from the 2022 Red Sea Decade Expedition (1.0) F. Marchese et al. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19065211
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 47 | 9 | 4 | 60 | 0 | 1 |
- HTML: 47
- PDF: 9
- XML: 4
- Total: 60
- BibTeX: 0
- EndNote: 1
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
I finished my evaluation of the manuscript entitled “The first regional‑scale multibeam echosounder bathymetric dataset of the Saudi Arabian Red Sea”, in which Marchese and co-authors present the first results of a partial coverage multibeam project in the Red Sea.
I have only three comments:
I consider that the work is suitable for publication after these small corrections.