Dear Dr. Deyong Wen,

Thanks for the detailed reply and changes to the manuscript.
I am happy to accept your paper subject to two minor corrections.
You have replied to two points of reviewer #1 in your response, however i could not find an adequate adaptation and discussion of these points in the manuscript. Could you please add these. The reviewer pointed out that a coupling to vegetation properties is required instead. I think the reviewer made a strong point here, which has to be discussed in the manuscript.

The reviewer statements I am referring to are:

"I doubt whether the bi-directional approach as proposed by Zhang et al. (2010) is the appropriate way to model spatial variations in bi-directional ammonia exchange with the surface. In my opinion, it is wrong to couple the soil emission potential to land-use categories as it is a soil property and not a vegetation property. Therefore, it’s not strange that results of the bi-directional dry deposition scheme are not convincingly better than
the results of the uni-directional deposition schemes."

" p 6081 l 6: What is meant with improved representation "here? Improved compared to what? And why?"

Best,
Volker Grewe