Dear Dr. Morishita,

Many thanks for your revised manuscript. Whereas I am satisfied that you have addressed many comments from the reviewers, one significant question raised by Reviewer 2 remains: how is it possible that a basalt that originates from a relatively shallow DMM-EM1 source carries two distinct types of mantle xenoliths, including one derived from subcontinental lithospheric mantle? What does this imply about the tectonic setting and evolution? In response, you write that ‘Peridotite xenoliths in the SSM basalt are not directly related to its petrogenesis’; this may be so, but it does not provide an answer to the question that the reviewer has raised. This is especially pertinent given that you state in the (revised) introduction that one of the aims is ‘to evaluate the significance of these xenoliths’.

In response to Reviewer 1’s worry that the isotopic data may be compromised by alteration, I welcome the addition of the data on leached vs unleached samples. You comment that ‘although these isotopic compositions are slightly different, alteration has not significantly affected the isotopic data’. Please elaborate on this statement: it would appear that the Sr isotopes, in particular, show offsets between the leached and unleached samples that are consistent with an alteration contribution to the unleached measurements.

Finally, it would appear that the Ar/Ar data are not reported: could you please add a table with these data?

Best regards,

Johan Lissenberg

Topical Editor

Dear Dr. Morishita,

Thank you for submitting your revised manuscript. I am satisfied that you have addressed the issues that I raised in my previous message, and will recommend publication. I do request that you fix the spelling error that appears in Fig. 10; it reads 'affecdted' rather than 'affected'.

Best regards,

Johan Lissenberg

Thank for submitting your work to Solid Earth. I am happy to accept the paper pending the minor technical correction requested by the topical editor.
J Gottsmann--Executive Editor SE