In this manuscript, Marcela et al. manually curated a gene list related to key processes for understanding fish physiology, development and adaptation. This gene list comprises genes mainly from hormone signaling, various metabolic pathways, appetite regulation, digestion, gastrointestinal function, vision, ossification, osmoregulation, and pigmentation.
We are generally in favor of the publication of this resource in JEZB. After revision, the gene list from this study will serve as an invaluable resource for understanding teleost biology processes and pathways, but it still needs some improvements on the methodology description, gene orthology assignments, and comparison to KEGG/GO.
Major comments
1. The curation process mentioned in the method section is not transparent enough. Authors could add detailed methodology about the curation process, such as how many people were involved in the curation progress, how the literature was gathered during the curation process and whether there has been any cross-checking among curators on the results to make sure they are correct and reliable.

1. Authors provide several case studies to compare differences between the authors’ curated gene sets and related genes from GO/KEGG. However, case studies might not be enough for systematically understanding the advantages and disadvantages of the curated gene sets. Some practical suggestions are (1) Authors could provide some summary statistics of curated genes such as number of genes in each category, how many genes are critical indicators or regulators of the pathways, and compare these numbers to the ones from GO/KEGG. (2) For each category, authors could compare overlapping/difference of genes in curated gene list and GO/KEGG annotations as venn diagrams.

2. Besides comparing summary statistics, another meaningful thing to demonstrate the advantage of this curated gene set is to show how users can get a more comprehensive understanding of the eco-evo-devo process from these gene sets than genes from GO and KEGG from transcriptome studies. Authors could conduct gene set enrichment on this curated gene set and GO/KEGG simultaneously on the same ranked gene list from an -omic study of teleosts, then report the differences. Please also provide the notebook or code for the analysis.

3. Besides gene IDs of the false clownfish, authors should a list of zebrafish genes IDs in the Supp table as well as those of the other species (or at least one of the other species mentioned to illustrate the principle). Since zebrafish is the most highly curated representative species and has the richest gene annotations among teleosts. Providing zebrafish gene ID would be highly advantageous for researchers to lift genes over to other species.
4. A description on how the orthology of genes, especially of teleost genome duplication paralogs has been established. Zebrafish, an ostariophysean, and clownfish, a percomorph, are only distantly related and at this phylgenetic distance, it is often not trivial to establish orthologies. Were phylogenetic methods involved? And/or conserved syntenies? It might be worth consulting the Genomicus Genome Browser which has a fish-specific instance with orthology-corrected syntenies, and it also includes clownfish (Parey et al. 2023, Science).
   https://www.genomicus.bio.ens.psl.eu/genomicus-fish-04.02/cgi-bin/search.pl

Minor comments
1. Authors mentioned in line 163 that curated genes are weighted to highlight key genes that serve as critical indicators or regulators of specific pathways. But this key information is buried in the “functional role” description. Could authors add another column to indicate these key genes for an easier search?

1. The study by Lorin et al. 2018 on pigmentation pathway genes that is highlighted as an important case study exemplifying the principal approach that the current study followed was in itself derived from Braasch et al. 2009 (GBE) which should be cited as well then.

2. Please note that the established nomenclature for teleost genome duplication paralogs is ‘a’ and ‘b’ appendices, and not Greek letters. Please revise this accordingly.
   https://zfin.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/general/pages/1818394635/ZFIN+Zebrafish+Nomenclature+Conventions

3. It would be helpful to include a phylogeny of the species in Fig. 2 and provide information on which parts of the teleost phylogeny this combination of species actually covers.