Thanks for your comments, very much. As the reviewer said, the difference in the cavitation erosion resistance of the samples in the artificial seawater relies on not only the mechanical erosion but also electrochemical corrosion. Various annealing temperatures are critical for the microstructure and mechanical properties of passive films, thus also have a great influence on the corrosion resistance of the coatings. With the elevated annealed temperature, the passive film is thicker and more uniform. The Rf and Rct of the samples increase gradually from SRT to S1000. It reveals that a more effectively protective film generates on the surface of S1000 during annealing treatment. In other words, the corrosion resistance of the coating improves with the elevated annealed temperature. Li et al. [1] reported that the passivation of the surface of materials was conducive to the improvement of cavitation erosion performance. That is, the cavitation erosion resistance of the samples would improve along with the increase of its corrosion resistance. However, there is a synergistic effect among corrosion resistance and mechanical properties as well as micro-structure in the cavitation erosion of the martials. What’s more, the cavitation damage on the coating surface is severe and quick relatively, the spalling of splats and ductile fracture of the coating are the major factors of material damage. Therefore, mechanical properties and micro-structure of the coating surface play a large role in material loss during cavitation erosion. When the coating annealed at 1000 ℃, the fast growth rate and expansion in volume of NiCr2O4 spinel could cause the local stress to increase rapidly. Thus, the oxidative scale on the surface of S1000 easily cracks and peels off under the action of external forces. Simultaneously, the coating would be more susceptible to intergranular fracture as a result of the increase of brittleness. Therefore, the cavitation erosion resistance of S800 is better than that of S1000.