After careful reading of the reviewers' comments and the responses of the authors, I suggest revision of the manuscript according the the reviewers' suggestions, which I found all appropriate, justified and helpful for improving the quality of the manuscript. The resubmission has to be accompanied by a point-by-point response, which should be written more clearly arranged to simplify the process of assessment whether all comments have been addresses appropriately.

The authors did not upload a version with tracked changes. There is a file that carries the name "Author's tracked changes", but it is identical with the revised version without tracked changes. Also the "Author's response" file is incomplete. It only contains the answers to the short comment SC1. For a functional and efficient review process, the authors have to provide a file with tracked changes and a COMPLETE and well-arranged, point-by-point author's response file including ALL reviewer comments and suggestions, which enables the reviewers and the editors to assess the changes made within a finite period of time.

After having received the feedback of the two reviewers who already reviewed the original version of the paper, and after having assessed the revised version myself, I can recommend publication in BG after technical corrections. For this, please see the comments of reviewer #2.