Dear Dr. Duteil,
I have read the answers that you have provided to the comments of both reviewers. Based on that, I encourage you to submit a revised version of your work that takes into account the modifications mentioned in your answers. In particular, please clarify and explain the differences of your findings with those of Deutsch et al., 2011.

Many thanks in advance for your efforts,

Kind regards,

Marilaure Grégoire, associate editor.

Dear Dr. Duteil,
Both reviewers have found that you have successfully tackled their comments. Based on that and on my reading of your revised version, I am pleased to accept your manuscript for publication in Biogeosciences provided that you consider the minor comments here below.
Thank you so much for having submitted your work to Biogeosciences,
Kind regards,
Marilaure Grégoire,
Minor comments:
Page 1, line11: expand and not expend
Lines 40-42: Please reformulate making clear that these are the questions that you will address in this paper. For instance, in the present work, we aim to determine whether the shift from …..
Lines 46-60: This part is really difficult to follow, especially for non-expert of the Eastern Pacific circulation and thermocline variability. I would suggest that you make it more pedagogical. For instance, a figure summarizing the main mechanisms at play would be really helpful.

Dear Dr. Duteil,
I have read the last revised version of your work and based on that I am pleased to accept your paper for publication in Biogeosciences.

Thank you for your efforts in taking into account the comments of the two reviewers and my suggestions.

Kind regards,

Marilaure Grégoire