In general, the authors have addressed the reviewers' comments reasonably well. Figures and text are improved. I would like to make one more suggestion before the paper gets published:
The authors cited William et al. 2013 to support that “In this work, resolved MMDs at either sampling location were well within the efficient upper transmission limit for the vast majority of data (line 168-169)". However, in my view, Williams et al. (2013) over-interpreted Liu et al. (2007)'s results (page 3272) as 100% transmission efficiency between 90-700 nm Dva. Figure 11 in Liu et al. (2007) clearly shows that at 760 torr, the transmission efficiency falls below 60% above 500 nm Dva both for experimental and model results. As an important methodology paper, I suggest the authors to be more careful about the inherent AMS transmission problem and to avoid any possible misleading to non-senior AMS users. Readers should know this method may not work for all ambient cases. I therefore strongly suggest the authors to apply Liu et al's size-dependent transmission efficiency to their data and to see if there is any problem at such "given" transmission condition. One more supplementary figure and some discussion in the main text are expected in this case. |