Dear Dr. Wen and Co-Workers,

thank you for submitting your responses to BG.

All three referees appreciated the study and believe it would make an important contribution to increase our understanding of methane emissions from fens. However, all referees expressed reservations with respect to some of the interpretations made from the data and suggested major revisions. For the revision of the manuscript I therefore strongly advise you to highlight the limitations of your approaches and adapt your interpretations accordingly.

Some detailed comments:
- I agree with the referees that "emissions" in the title is irritating without emission data but I understand such data are now available and will be added to the revised manuscript, which I think will make a great contribution to the study.
- I sensed that some referees had issues with the term "rewetted", since no data from the dry situation are available for comparison. I think you can move forward with this term, but I strongly advise you to highlight the limitations of your interpretations (see also my comment above).
- I sympathize with the recommendation of Referee #2 that it might be better to present the molecular data after the geochemistry has been introduced. It is a classical organization in many studies for good reasons, because it is easier to understand who is present, after we already learned how the habitat looks like. I believe it is worth a try to change the order.

After you uploaded the revised manuscript it will be send out for a second review. Please be aware that chances for publication in Biogeosciences are low should the overall recommendation after the second review again be "major revisions".

Please feel free to contact me should you have any questions.
With kind regards
Tina Treude
BG Associate Editor

Dear Dr. Wen and Co-workers,
the referees are very please with your revision. There are just a few minor points left that if improved would enhance the clarify of the manuscript. Please submit a revised manuscript with your changes highlighted and a response to the referees' comments.
With kind regards
Tina Treude