Dear authors,
thanks for preparing a revised version of your manuscript addressing reviewers' comments. The new version addresses these comments well, but there still remains a few places where grammar still needs to be improved. I marked in the attached document places where grammar should be revised.
More importantly, I encountered a problem in the interpretation of the correlations of the posterior parameter values. These correlations are an indication of problems of poor-identifiability of the model with respect to the available information for parameterization. I discuss this problem in a previous paper (Sierra et al. 2015, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2015.08.012). Please see the references I mention in this publication where the problem is discussed in more detail, and make changes to the interpretation of your correlations. You interpret them as complex connections among process, but this interpretation is wrong. Fortunately, your correlations are not so high, so the identifiability problem is not severe, but the issue needs to be discussed nevertheless.
Regards,
Carlos A. Sierra

Dear authors,
The new version of the manuscript addresses well my previous comments. It is now accepted for publication.
Carlos A. Sierra