Dear Dr Quirk,

First of all, my apologies for the delay in reaching a final decision on your manuscript I was waiting on the assessment of our original referees for an independent opinion regarding your revisions of the manuscript. I’m glad to say that I agree with the referee’s opinion, which is fully supportive of publication of your manuscript in the revised form. I have only one minor request, which I hope you can accommodate: In the abstract and in the introduction (line 158), you refer to “ingrowth” as if this is a plant physiological trait in itself. However, I would consider this a technique to assess root productivity and turnover, and think that this phrasing may confuse someone not familiar with the mesh bag ingrowth methodology. I suggest replacing “root ingrowth” in these instances by “root production” or simply “root growth”. This also applies to the discussion, where I think that “root productivity” is a better term than “root ingrowth”, as you discuss plant function and processes in saltmarshes in general, rather than in your mesh bags.

I hope you’re happy with the suggested change in terminology, and look forward to receiving a final version of the manuscript before final acceptance.

With best regards,
Jens-Arne Subke

Dear Dr Quirk,

Many thanks for accommodating my request regarding the terminology for ingrowth/productivity, and for returning the manuscript quickly. I am now satisfied with all revisions and happy to accept the manuscript for publication.

Best regards,
Jens-Arne Subke