Dear Author,

The discussion phase of your manuscript is now over and I encourage you to submit a version revised along the lines of your replies to the referees' comments. Please also consider the comments listed below.

Finally, Biogeosciences strongly promotes the full availability of the data sets reported in the papers that it publishes in order to facilitate future data comparison and compilation as well as meta-analysis. This can be achieved by uploading the data sets in an existing database and providing the link(s) in the paper. Alternatively, the data sets can be published, for free, alongside the paper as supplementary information. The ascii (or text) format is preferred for data and any format can be handled for movies, animations etc...

In your reply, please indicate where the readership could get the data.

Best regards,
Jean-Pierre Gattuso

---

- In your formal reply, please copy the referees comments and reply below each of them.
- Citations should be listed chronologically rather than alphabetically
- please improve the quality of Fig. 1. Add clarity also by adding Alaska and Canada in the inset map and the location iof the exchange pathways referred to in the text.
- 218: total alkalinity (A_T)
- 235: indicate to which constant the citations refer to.
- 317: typo, Schmidt
- Legend Fig. 4: I suuggest to use "cosed phase" rather than "Iced phase" for considstency with the text.
- Fig. 8: the gray line is hard to see
- Why to you compare daily pHT with instanatenous PAR rather than with daily PAR averages (Fig. 8)?
- 488: typo, sensor
- 578: typo, Amundsen
- 593: Biogeosciences recommends using molar units: express O2 in µmol l-1
- 637-638: "defined as waters north of 70 ˚N and 100 ˚W" North of 100 W?

Dear Author,

Thank you for submitting a revised version of your manuscript submitted to Biogeosciences. I am glad to accept it for publication provided that you add in line 880 the citation to the four datasets. This will make the task of readers easier, rather than searching the pdf for "LTER". Also, is it justified to provide that many significant figures on lines 726 and 727 ? You could probably drop at least one significant figure.

I look forward to seeing this paper published and thank you for considering Biogeosciences to publish these very interesting results.

Best regards,
Jean-Pierre Gattuso
BG Editor