Dear Authors

thank you for your final responses to the reviews.

There are two major points of critique, one being the sampling scheme and the other the missing link between the observations of microbial community composition and the biogeochemical processes and GHG fluxes. While it looks as if you are able to address the critique on the sampling scheme and the Bayesian analysis by a more accurate and clear description, you seem to dismiss the idea of the two reviewers of better linking the processes to microbial community composition.

I would like to to make you aware of that both reviewers have expressed their dissatisfaction on the issue and it is finally their evaluation that I am bound to follow.

With this said, I am confident that you'll find a more positive way to respond to this issue raised by the two referees and, by that, making the work more concise, novel and increasing its scientific impact.

With kind regards,
Andreas Ibrom

Dear Authors,

I just received two unequivocal referee evaluations that recommend publishing the revised paper as is. Congratulations and thanks for your constructive handing of the open discussion and review process.

With kind regards,
Andreas Ibrom