Dear Steve and co-authors,

Please forgive me for having taken a few more days than originally promised to finalize this review - staying away from the Central European heat wave up in the North was just too tempting...

I can see that you have carefully considered the reviews and revised your paper accordingly. The manuscript is now in excellent shape, ready to be published... except, for a few details I would very much like you to consider

Attached, please find a list of things you need to fix, and a list of comments you might want to think about...

All the best from Basel

Renée

Dear Steve and co-authors,

I just received your final version. Thank you very much. It looks great.

Only two more points:

When I asked you to "be a bit more specific as to how you define and determine "grain size" I was mainly interested in whether you used the mean or the mode or the RMS, and if you used 2D or 3D data. Could please clarify this? Also, please indicate how many grains you measured on average.

I take it that “Long and short axes of elongate grains were measured, and reported sizes for these grains are diameters of circles with the same area as an ellipse having the measured axes lengths.” means that you did this manually...? In this case, could you add "manually"? (If you had done the measurements using image analysis, you would have determined the equivalent diameter as 2·√(area/pi), wouldn't you)

I trust you will fix this without me having to review this again.

Thank you for contributing this paper!

Best wishes, Renée

Dear Authors,
Based on the Topical Editor's report, your manuscript is accepted for publication pending the corrections/revisions as requested by the TE.

Looking forward for receiving a suitable revised version soon,

Sincerely,

Federico Rossetti