Thank you for your detailed responses to the referees. I have attached a marked-up of your response with a few points highlighted. In almost all of these, I am merely unclear as to the modifications made to the manuscript. I would be grateful if you could clarify all of the changes made for me. If you have any questions concerning my comments, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Thank you very much for your response. I am satisfied that your manuscript now addresses the issues raised by the referees. I have only two very minor wording issues concerning additions to the text (see below). Once completed, the manuscript can proceed to typesetting.

On page 17, I'd suggest rewording your addition to:

"The resolution dependency of SV was tested by conducting two additional runs similar to OLD and NEW except for a 1°×1°resolution (Fig. S4 in Supplement). These showed robust results for SV."

In the conclusions section, I'd suggest rewording your addition to:

"We are aware that most of these modifications are based on empirical bioclimatic constraints; if a more mechanistic understanding of mortality could be determined in the future, especially regarding physiological pathways in cold temperatures, these bioclimatic constraints might be replaced by physiological processes sufficient to enable the model to more realistically simulate vegetation distribution."