Dear Dr. Kim,
I have now read your revised manuscript as well as the responses to the reviewers’ comments and remarks. Overall, I am satisfied with the way you responded to these comments and I find the manuscript much improved as compared to its initial version. I would be happy to accept your manuscript, subject to few minor revisions.
(1) You now cite in your introduction a recent paper in discussion in Biogeosciences by Dutkiewicz et al., in which the authors have assessed the bio-optical feedback (including the effect of CDM) in an ocean-only model. I would suggest to compare your results to those of Dutkiewicz et al. in your conclusion / discussion section.
(2) In the revised version of your manuscript, you now have 19 figures for a text of 18 pages (in the discussion format – would be much less in the final format). I would suggest that you try to reduce the number of figures – some may be combined; some others may be omitted, as they do not bring much more information to what you already state in the text (for instance Fig 15, Fig 18.).
I hope you’ll be able to take these comments on board. Again, thanks for submitting your best work to Biogeoscienes,
Sincerely yours,
Laurent Bopp