The manuscript requires editing by a professional editor or someone for whom English is a first language. In many sentences, especially in the introduction but also throughout the paper, the meaning of the authors is obscured by the unclear language. This editing can be provided by ACP and would benefit the manuscript significantly.
Specific comments:
Throughout the manuscript, the authors alternately use the terms fine, coarsely dispersed, and submicron to describe aerosol size bins. Typically, fine means diameter < 2.5 micron, whereas coarse means diameter > 2.5 microns. In Section 4.3 we learn that the authors define ‘fine’ to mean d <1.0 microns and ‘coarsely dispersed’ to mean between 1 and 10 microns. These definitions should be given earlier in the manuscript so that the reader is not confused.
Abstract
Second-to-last sentence in abstract is unclear. “The deposited ions account for from 11 to 24.5%, and trace elements account for 0.2-0.4%.” What do these percentages correspond to?
Introduction
The paragraph about methane, starting with ‘No less attention…” is out place in the manuscript and should be removed, as suggested by Reviewer 2, rather than just edited.
The second and third last paragraphs provide some references for past studies of Arctic aerosol, but do not provide any synthesis of the findings. Can the authors at least say briefly whether mass loadings or number concentrations seems consistent throughout the region, whether there are trends through time, whether there are strong seasonal cycles…?
Section 2
Please indicate in which years the measurements were made.
Equation 1 – please explain what each of the terms means
P 4, Lines 18, 24, 26 ‘After sorting out’ what does ‘sorting out’ mean? Were the data filtered on the basis of some quality control parameter? Please be clear.

Section 3.2
First sentence does not make sense.
Equations 3 and 4 – the individual terms in these equations have not been explained in sufficient detail.
Section 3.2.2
P 8, Line 8, Not sure what ‘roadstead of port’ means?
P 9, Lines 45-48 This sentence is very hard to follow
P 10, Lines 14-16 This sentence is very hard to follow
P 13, Lines 6-8 “The data, available to us, correspond to limited time frame of about 1 month; therefore, data shortage is the main reason for any future disagreement with experimental data.” I think this should be rephrased as “Because of the limited amount of data available for the regression analysis, the same fitting parameters may not be ideal for future measurements”
Section 5.3 and throughout manuscript – I discourage the authors from using the term ‘impurities’ since it implies that there was contamination or an artefact. I suggest using ‘gas phase species’ instead of ‘gaseous impurities’
Section 5.4 – Should be renamed ‘deposition’ instead of ‘flux’ because you are not accounting for the emissions of particle or gas phase species
Table 5 – why are there ‘÷’ signs in the table? I think they should just be dashes to indicate the range.