Dear Dr. Browne,
thank you very much for submitting your study to the special issue of SHAPE in Climate of the Past Discussions and for responding to the reviewer’s comments in the interactive discussion phase.
Your response clearly describes how you intend to revise the manuscript addressing the comments and concerns raised by the reviewers.
I agree both with the reviewers and your response, so please prepare and submit a new version of your manuscript taken into account all your responses. I have one minor comment. For the definition of the LIA I would use the latest definition used in the paleo chapter of the IPCC AR5, which is 1450–1850 CE, and is hence mostly not covered by your record.

Best regards,
Maisa Rojas

Dear Dr. Browne,

Thank you for revising the manuscript according to the reviewer's suggestions. This version is quite close to the final version, however I would like you to clarify some issues with figure 4 that I has missed before.
Why do the Temperature and salinity and other variables don’t have error bars? What exactly does “dry” and “rainy” conditions mean? I would like to understand if these profiles are really representative of “dry” and “wet” conditions…. is it just 1 profile or an average of samples from various days?

In the text the reference to the “Landschützer” paper are misspelled.

With this clarification the paper can be published.

Sincerely,
Maisa Rojas