Dear Dr. Liang:

Thank you for submitting this paper to Biogeosciences. I have read the reviews and rebuttal and believe that you will be able to present a revised paper that might eventually be published in Biogeosciences. I therefore invite you to submit a revised version incorporating the changes mentioned in your rebuttal. Your revised manuscript will likely be evaluated again by (one of) the referees.

With best regards,

Jack Middelburg, Associate Editor

Dear Dr. Jurikova:

Thank you for submitting this paper to Biogeosciences. Your paper has been evaluated again by one of the referees and he suggested acceptance as it is . However, he did not enter it into the editorial system and I was only informed yesterday that there was a miscommunication between the referee and the editorial office. This being said, I have read the rebuttal and revised version and I am happy to inform you that your paper is now accepted for publication in Biogeosciences. However, while reading the manuscript I identified quite some issues that need (technical) correction:

p.1
L. 15: Lakes an reservoirs
L. 19: .. gross production), NP (net production…
L. 20: deleted measured
L. 20 depth and season, with..
L. 23: however, it….
L. 26: with a GP….. ratio of 0.6….
L. 27: do you mean: were scarce, higher than…
p.2
L. 5: ecosystem metabolic
p. 3
L. 19: reservoir
l. 24: stream basin, a branch..
p. 4
L. 3: activities are prohibited
L. 11: conditions.
p. 5
L. 5 delete conservative
L. 22 explain PBI to the reader
p. 7
L. 6: to prevent any isotopic alteration
Mahata et al. 2013, 2016 are not in the reference list! Check your reference list all through.
p. 10
L. 14, below or in, what do you mean here?
L. 26 seasonality is consistent with the small overall variation….. and also with the long residence of water in the reservoir.
p. 11-14:
Sequence of figure. Figure 5 is now cited before fig. 4. Please re-number figures in sequence of first citation. Accordingly, number 4 should become 5 and vice versa.
P. 13: Fig. 7 is cited on page 6, yet figure 6 has not yet been cited.
p. 15
L. 15-18 are unclear, please reformulate.
L. 28: of the latter is inferior
P. 16
L. 26: While a non-steady state model
p. 17
L. 7 are associated with each.
l. 14: should this not be figure 7 instead of 6?
p. 18
L. 5 our data are too limited
L. 27: any other approach
L. 29 well-characterised


I am looking forward seeing your paper in final form in print.

With best regards,

Jack Middelburg, Associate editor

Dear Dr. Jurikova:

Following offline (outside editorial system) discussions we had about the need for further corrections, I invite you to upload the corrected manuscript and a short authors' response in which you outline the actions taken (basically the message you sent earlier). These will then be stored in the archive.

With best regards,

Jack Middelburg

Dear Dr. Liang:

I have read your corrected version and the accompanying letter and I agree that these changes have improved your manuscript. I am happy to inform you that manuscript is now ready for final printing.
Thank you for submitting to Biogeosciences,

With best regards, Jack Middelburg