Dear authors,

thank you very much for your thorough answers to the referee’s comments and the related manuscript revision.

I have a final major comment and request for change related to the term “ice multiplication” you used in the revised and new test added to sections B1 and B2. The term ice multiplication is used for secondary ice formation, where one ice crystal induced the formation of a certain number of new ice crystals, and the ratio between the two ice crystal number concentrations (ICNC) is then called the multiplication factor. However, in sections B1 and B2 you are referring, as far as I understand, to the cumulative INP number concentration INPC, and by that the ICNC formed by primary ice formation, to be higher at lower temperature (please also avoid the terms warmer and colder temperatures). Using the term ice multiplication for this difference in ICNC is not correct and misleading in my mind. Please use a different term like ice crystal enhancement or INP enhancement or ICNC enhancement.

And when referring to Fig. 10 here please also mention that the calculation of these enhancement factors are based on an extrapolation of the fit line to the INP data to lower temperatures, which may induce and additional source of uncertainty.

Please also double-check editorial guidelines for a number of expressions in brackets or equations you used for indicating a range of values for temperature or INP number concentration (e.g. lines 354, 373, 557, or 569 of manuscript version 3). Also check for the correct use of units in these expressions.

With best regards,
Ottmar Möhler
Editor

Dear authors,
thank your for revising the manuscript, I am happy to accept the current version as is.
Best regards,
Ottmar Möhler
Editor