Dear Authors,

I feel that the topic is relevant to the discussions in the biogeochemical community, and therefore, I consider it worth publishing in BG.
However, I recognized that your responses to reviewers' comments were too poor to understand how you responded to the reviewer's questions and revised to address the problems. Some comments, especially by the reviewer #1, were ignored.
Would you please reply to all comments and suggestions, and explain how you revised at point by point of their comments ?

I am attaching the file provided by the reviewer #1 again, just in case you could not receive it. Its file name is "bgd-11-C2613-2014-supplement.pdf". Please make sure that this is the comments from the reviewer #1.

Sincerely,

Nobu Ohte,
Handling Editor

Dear Authors,

The manuscript was revised substantially according to the reviewers' and editor's comments. I feel that the quality of the manuscript reached to the acceptable level.

Sincerely,

Nobu Ohte,
Handling editor