Dear Jörg Schwinger,

I have now completed my reading of your revised manuscript in the light
of the reviewers comments. Thank you for the detailed consideration and
replies to the reviewers comments in the discussion, and also for the
clear and editor-friendly authors' response.

Both referees recommend acceptance after minor revisions. I see that
you have taken their comments and suggestions into account and that you
have made a largely adequate revision of the text. Since none of the two
reviewers asked to review the revised mansucript again, I have not sent
it out for another round of reviews but only reviewed your changes by
myself.


I am pleased to inform you that I can now accept your manuscript for
*publication subject to technical corrections*.


There are a few minor details that I would ask you to correct in the
text. Please find the list below. Line numbers refer to the manuscript
version without track changes (i.e., the standalone manuscript, not the
one in the author's response which is lacking line numbers).


Thank you for considering Geoscientific Model Development for the
publication of your model developments.


Best regards,

Guy Munhoven



Technical problems and typos to address:
---------------------------------------

p. 8, ll. 172-173: "To prevent excitation of numerical noise": I suggest
to replace "excitation" by "amplification"

p. 10, ll. 236-237: " ... the ratios of carbon to phosphorus and nitrogen to
phosphorus in organic matter are RC:P = 122 and RN:P = 16, respectively, and
RO2:P = 172 moles of O2 ..." [grammar and suppression of a few words]

p. 10, ll. 239-240: "by Smith" shoudl read "of Smith" or "from Smith"

p. 12, l. 281: "... export poductions depend on ..." [grammar]

p. 13, l. 302: "... DIC biases ..."

p. 14, l. 311: a few words to explain why 115 moles?

p. 20, ll. 511ff: as specified in the introduction to the standard definition
of Fortran 90 (ISO/IEC 1539 : 1991 (E)), names are spelled
"FORTRAN 77" and "Fortran 90" (yes, differently since the '90 standard)

p. 20, ll. 312-313: "... to conform to the Fortran 90 free source code format
certain model options, such as, for example, ...

p. 21, l. 534: there is no such thing as "psu". Salinity is a dimensionless quantity,
and as such does not have any "unit" (see, e.g., UNESCO Technical Paper
45 on The International System of Units (SI) in Oceanography).
Please discard and check troughout.

p. 23, ll. 571-572: "... but superimposed onto a negative trend of 8 Sv ..."

p. 23, l. 583: "... of the restoring salt flux ..."
p. 23, l. 588: "... that the AMOC strength ..."
p. 23, l. 591: "... overestimates the AMOC strength ..."
p. 23, l. 593: "... period from 2004 to 2012."

p. 25, l. 640: "Sectroradiometer" should read "Spectroradiometer"

p. 25, l. 642: "Carbon based Production Model"

p. 26, l. 663: "At low latitudes ..."

p. 33, l. 862: "... alkalinity at low latitudes ..."

p. 40, l. 1070: "whether one ... provides a more reliable ..." should read
"which one ... provides the most reliable ..."

p. 40, l. 1072 "... techniques such as that applied by ..." or
"... techniques such as those applied by ..."

p. 42, l. 1117: "... which one of the new ..."
p. 42, l. 1121: "...that the sinking speed ..."

p. 43, l. 1143: "... will also offers ..." should read
"... will also offer ..."

p. 44, l. 1170: "... shelf when the ..." should read
"... shelf where the ..."

p. 63, 3rd line of the caption: "retrivals" should read "retrievals"

Figures in general: please enlarge the graphics as much as possible. Some of
them are barely readable (e.g., Figs. 9, 10, 14, 15, 17 and others) in the
current manuscript version. Please check throughout.