 Dear Dr. Inoue,
Please revise the manuscript, addressing all the Reviewer comments.
Best regards,
Kumiko |
Suggestions for revision or reasons for rejection | I am pleased to see that the author had made substantial changes so that the interesting results are more accessible.
There is only one major concern that I still have and that is the accumulation record….The authors argue that that is out the scope for this paper. However, I still think that this is a determining factor for changes at a coastal site were all the deposition can be assumed to be wet deposition so therefore showing the record in Figure 2 would be appropriate.
In addition, I noticed that the accumulation value on p. 6 line 12. is somewhat different from the one in Table 1. Please also use the same unit. | | |
|
1. As R1 commented, I also believe that an accumulation record would add to the manuscript, however I would leave it to the authors to decide.
2. R1 pointed out that the accumulation value on p. 5 line 12 (1,312 kg/m2yr, Roberts et al., 2013) was somewhat different from the one in Table 1 (1.35 mIE/yr). I think this is fine, because they are the results from two different studies. But I agree with R1 that the units should be the same.
3. Fig. 1. The full map in the lower right corner is not large enough that one can see the area marked with red. Please consider making the small map of all Antarctica bigger and make red boundary thicker. Also the red star with the position of the ice core is very small. Please make it larger.
4. Ion data which are not discussed in the text. Section 2.3 states the measurement of K, Mg and Ca. But neither of K and Ca are stated in the text thereafter. Please remove them from Section 2.3 or explain them in the text. As for Mg, the data are shown in Figs. 4 and 5, but not discussed in the text. Please remove the Mg data from Figs. 4 and 5, or discuss about Mg in the text. If the authors decide to remove Mg from Section2.3, Fig. 4 and Fig. 5, please remove it from P. 13, L. 10 as well.
5. P. 4, L. 25. Pro-gram’s. Is this correct? Or do you mean Program’s?
6. P. 5, L. 1-L. 2 and L. 24-L. 26. Please state exactly which volcanic makers were used. Please also mark them in Fig. 4.
7. P. 5, L. 33. “e.g. Na…… has a summer peak”. This needs references.
8. P. 6, L. 6-L.8. Please state how the months were defined.
9. P. 6. Line 18 states that “the Na winter peak during regime A is not present in regime B”, whilst Line 32 states that “Na and SO4 both show seasonality with a winter peak in Regimes A and B.” Please slightly modify these sentences to avoid contradiction.
10. References missing DOIs
- Comiso, J.: Bootstrap Sea Ice Concentrations from Nimbus-7 SMMR and DMSP SSM/I-SSMIS. Version 2. Five pixels between Mill Island and Bowman Island, 1979 - 2009. Boulder, Colorad USA: NASA DAAC at the National Snow and Ice Data Center, 2000, updated 2014.
- Curran, M. A. J. and Palmer, 2001. Curran et al., 1998.
- Ferrier et al., 1995.
- Mulvaney, R. and Wolff, E. W., 1994.
11. Books should be more precisely referenced, eg. chapters or pages:
- Paterson, W. S. B.: The physics of glaciers, Pergamon, UK, 3rd edn., 1994.
- Barlow, R. J.: Statistics: a guide to the use of statistical methods in the physical sciences, vol. 29, John Wiley & Sons, 1989.
12. P. 2, L.21 and P. 16, L.1. Wagenbach et al., 1998a. This should be Wagenbach et al., 1998, because there is no Wagenbach et al., 1998b.
13. Supplement 1, L. 6. Fig. 7 should be Fig. S7.
14. Supplementary Figs and Tables. Should be numbered as Fig. S# and Table S#. |
IF 3.543
CiteScore
SNIP 1.095
SJR 2.904
h5-index 37
- Printer-friendly version 
- Supplement
