Dear authors,

The two referees confirmed the quality of work done on the identification of lower-order inositol phosphates. However, the second referee also underlined the highly technical nature of your manuscript rising questions about the relevance of your manuscript for readers of Biogeosciences. I also had this feeling on the first reading of your manuscript and, in the same time, I know the importance of describing the systems for being able to understand it later.
By reading your response to referee’s comments I felt you sincerely tried to understand the referee point of view and you will modify your manuscript accordingly. However, given that you referred many times to lines of a new manuscript you did not submit, I was not able to judge your suggestions of modifications.
I invite you to submit a new version of your manuscript that will be checked by former or new referees. However, I stress on the fact I will give a special attention to the efforts you will do to better explain the relevance of your descriptive work for understanding the P cycle and its consequences for ecosystem and agrosystem functioning.

Regards,


Sébastien

Dear authors,

As you will see the referee is satisfied by most your responses to referee's comments. However, for some comments, it was not always clear how you changed/improved your text. Could you make these minor corrections allowing me to take my decision?
Thanks
Sébastien

Your last responses clarified the points raised by the last referee. I am delighted to inform you that your manusicrpt is now ready for publication.
Regards,

Sébastien