ear Dr Jentzen and co-authors,

I have read your replies to the two reviewers, as well as your updated manuscript. The most pressing comment of reviewer #1 was the presentation of the raw data: I agree with the authors that it does not improve the manuscript to include new figures showing these data. I think it is fit for publication in Biogeosciences, although I have a few minor issues that I came across upon reading your manuscript. I am looking forward to see a final version of your work!

Sincerely,

Lennart de Nooijer

page 1, line 36/37: even though it is shown for a species not studied by you, please include a reference to Kozdon et al. (2009; Chem Geol) as an example how life stage (encrustation) can influence oxygen isotopes.
page 2, line 7: ‘Russell’
page 2, line 34 and further: please use ‘rose Bengal’ instead of ‘Rose Bengal’. I assume the rB was dissolved in the ethanol: was the concentration of rB in the ethanol 2 g/L? or 4 g/L (and hence 2 g/L after mixing with 50% seawater?).
Figure 1: could you reverse the temperature scale bar? From the caption it is not (immediately) clear what the numbers at some stations refer to. Please include e.g. by referring to Table 1.
page 4, line 21: replace ‘and’ by ‘or’.
page 4, line 22: replace the second ‘and’ by ‘or’.
Figures 2 and 3: salinity has no unit.
page 5, line 20-22: this sentence appears superfluous to me: consider removing.
page 5, line 26 and elsewhere: salinity has no unit.
page 9, line 15: ‘Russell’
page 9, line 31: ‘calcifies’
page 11, line 23: I don’t need to be mentioned in the acknowledgements.

Dear Anna and co-authors,

thanks for making the changes. I think your manuscript is ready for publication in Biogeosciences.

Sincerely,

Lennart de Nooijer