Dear Authors,

Thank you for your responses to the reviewers’ comments and the short comment.
Both reviewers find your study interesting but raised some important points. Overall, your suggestions to take the Referee’s comments into account appear reasonable to me at this stage and I would thus be happy to consider a revised version for publication in Climate of the Past. Nevertheless, some of your suggestions in your responses are quite short or not very explicit (such as ‘We include more references to existing research…’) so be sure that your modifications are substantial enough for fulfill the requirements. Both reviewers also suggest separating surface and bottom salinities to different figures. I understand that you do not want to have too many figures but one additional figure is probably reasonable while relying on changes at the typesetting stage may not be compatible with the printer constrains.

Sincerely,

Hugues Goosse

Dear Authors,

Thanks for the submission of the revised version of your manuscript. Based on the evaluation of one Referee of the first phase, I consider that you have addressed well the points raised. I am thus pleased to accept your paper for publication in Climate of the Past.

Best regards
Hugues Goosse