Dear authors,

the comments by the two referees were in general positive, although the most critical of them deserve your special attention while revising the paper. In your revised MS, please take all the necessary care in order to follow the reviewers guidelines.

looking forward reading a revised version of your MS

best regards
Gwenaël Abril

Dear authors
thank you for the revision of your MS. I think your paper can be published in Biogeosciences after you make some minor technical corrections listed below.

Thank you for submitting your work to Biogeosciences
best regards,
Gwenaël Abril



P1L15
« However, finding higher estimates for both the internal and the external sources of inorganic carbon in boreal lakes is important if the improved knowledge of the magnitude of CO2 evasion from lakes is included in future studies on lake carbon budgets. »

« finding higher estimate is important » do you mean that a CO2 source is actually missing ?


P2L2 remove “found to be”

P2L6 « but global quantitative estimates show significant variation », I have some doubt on the meaning of “variation” here. Do you mean that global estimates of lake CO2 emissions are uncertain?

“parameterized by wind speed” > “as a function of wind speed”?

P2L32“revised estimates of lacustrine CO2 emissions will require higher terrestrial ecosystem production to close the global carbon balance” not clear; do you mean if k is higher, more C from terrestrial systems would be necessary to balance the lake C budget? Why higher terrestrial ecosystem production and not lower soil respiration and/or enhance erosion?

P6L9: “k is parameterized by the total turbulent kinetic energy dissipation rate” I am not sure “parameterized by” is correct wording

P6L15 add few lines on the main conclusions of the intercomparison study

P7L10 “the conversion of DOC into an inorganic form” > “the conversion of DOC into DIC”

P11L5 not clear what you mean by “the parameters related to interactions between DO and CO2”

P12L14 “because of system malfunction” not clear, do you mean the CO2 sensors are not working?
P12L18 “Only the days with applicable corresponding water column CO2 concentration measurement data were included in the averaging.” What does “applicable” mean here, and what does “averaging” refer to? Average of what? please rephrase

L19 “the open water season averages of the measured near-surface (0.2 m) CO2 concentrations were…” awkward sentence, please rephrase

P20L6 “the different outcomes of the calibration processes can be considered equally applicable” it is hard to understand what you mean here, please explain