Dear Benjamin Schulze and colleagues,
I have looked carefully at the referees' comments to your original submission and then at the changes you have made in response. I am happy that you have satisfied the requirements of the peer review and so I am pleased to accept your revised ms for publication in ACP, subject to the technical corrections below,
Sincerely,
Rob MacKenzie
(page numbers are those in the author’s response PDF)
P19, abstract: should be (8:00 – 20:00 LT), to be explicit.
P19, abstract: perhaps expand “suburban environment” to “suburban and peri-urban forest environments”?
P19, abstract: “relative to above the canopy” – add “in the model”.
P22, line 3: Matlab is the computing environment used, but a few more details are needed: which implicit Matlab subroutines were used, or was a bespoke ODE solver written? Delete “with numerical differentiation formulas”. If there is no inorganic chemistry in the model, you should state this here as well as in section 2.5.
Equations 1 and 3. Use the same symbol for the same quantity (G_i and M_{air}) and please disambiguate gamma_i (e.g., use a_i for activity).
P28, line 1. Please clarify “diel median values”. To me, this means that each inorganic parameter has a single value assigned to it, and these parameter values change once a day, but it could be taken to mean that you use an average diurnal cycle fitted to each parameter, and that seems to be the case given Fig S3. In either case, it should be stated when the parameter values are updated.
Figure S3: measured median values should also show percentiles (25th and 75th or 10 and 90th, whichever feels more appropriate).
P28: “throughout the diel period” – does this mean throughout the day, or thoughout the period used to derive the diurnal average?
P37, para 2: please add ‘in the model’ to ‘majority of total SOA’.