Dear authors,

The new draft has adequately addressed most of the concerns of the referees. In particular, the manuscript now includes a section dedicated to comparisons with other models, clearly lists the main aims of the paper, and has improved focus. The paper can be published after attention to the following comments.

1. Referee 2 requested a clear statement of, “why [the reader] should care about this specific model.” The Introduction explains that global trends in the land carbon budget and BVOC emissions are difficult to quantify and explain because of the lack of observations, and then states that models, which are evaluated with observations, are useful tools to study these trends. The subsequent paragraph says the YIBs is such a model, briefly describes how the YIBs functions, and then states the YIBs is well validated with data. What is missing is a clear statement of what specifically about the YIBs (as opposed to other approaches), makes it a uniquely ideal tool.

2. Section 4.2 would benefit from a brief introduction explaining the purpose of this model comparison discussion and also a summary of the key points. Doing this will better “put the YIBs results in the context of other models or previous works,” as requested by Referee 2.

Best,
Sally Pusede