Dear Dr. Fanin,
thank you for replying to the reviewer comments and the suggested improvements in your manuscript. Building on the reviewer comments I have additional remarks which need to be addressed in the final version of the manuscript, they are listed in the following:

1. Please analyse and explain by comparing their detection algorithm why GFC is detecting an increase in deforestation in dry years, but PRODES is not. This is important otherwise the reader is left with that annecdote without further added understanding.

2. When GFC detects forest cover loss due to deforestation AND degradation, you need to separate the two in your analysis in order to compare only deforested with burnt areas. The effects you find can also be a result of degradation influencing fire occurrence. Please revise your methods and results accordingly.

3. Please define if your definition of shrubland or savannahs includes managed pastures. A cross-comparison against TerraClass as suggested by reviewer 2 would be helpful. Could managed pastures influence the replacement of forest cover by this land-cover type. This would influence the interpretation of these findings as it makes a difference if these are managed pastures for cattle or abandoned grass- or shrublands that burn due to fuel built-up. The interpretation would differ a lot. Please add and revise accordingly.

4. The following sentence in the discussion is not backed-up by your results since you did not analyze degradation in your study: "Our study shows that, at least for the Brazilian Amazon, degradation and fire dynamics outside the tropical forest domain may be equally important in regulating atmospheric CO2 concentrations". Please revise accordingly.

5. The data uncertainty paragraph at the end of the discussion section, references the MODIS burned area product which accounts for small-scale fires (Randerson et al. 2012). Please add how the use of this product would influence your result and finding. Please explain as well why you did not consider using this product for your analysis.

6. In the conclusion section, the following sentence is not correct: "In other words, besides the well-documented decrease in deforestation rates we also showed that fire intensity in deforested area decreased 5 over our study period." Your study has analysed burnt area, but not fire intensity as defined, for example, by Byram et al. 1959. This needs to be corrected.

Best wishes,
Kirsten Thonicke.