Dear Authors:
Thank you for your careful consideration and responses to the referee’s comments. Following your attention to the minor edits below, I accept this for publication.

Page 3 line 14-15: I find this sentence difficult to read since the part about “just organic compounds” requires some assumptions regarding MAC(aerosol) that are explained afterwards. Revising this sentence would improve the readability of the manuscript.

Page 3 lines 23-24: I find these two sentences hard to interpret because the ratios are first given as BC/OA then switched to OC/EC. I suggest keeping the ratios consistent (i.e. switch the second to EC/OC). Additionally, since two references are cited, clarifying which study "In that particular study," is in reference to will increase readability.

Page 8 line 20: I believe you are missing a reference to the angithi stove in the sentence “The Chulha stove produced meals for people or animal fodder, respectively.”

Page 9 line 12/Figure 3: The section and table numbers need to be updated to be consistent in the text and the figure. For instance, the table containing the Brushwood/chulha peaks is Table S4.1. There may be other inconsistencies as well.

I suggest considering combining sections 3.5.1 and 3.5.2 into just section 3.5. The heading titles used for 3.5.1 and 3.5.2 are confusing for me and 3.5.1 is very short.

Figures 4 & 9: The lines outlining some of the subpanels are distracting. Please remove.

Figure 5: The colors of lines are hard to distinguish

Supplement:
Page 4 line 3: Should this reference Figure S2.1 not S3.1?

Section S4: Please revise the section heading since Table S4.1 includes brushwood.