deletions | additions       diff --git a/section_Line_by_Line_comments__.tex b/section_Line_by_Line_comments__.tex  index 18b33d5..766d962 100644  --- a/section_Line_by_Line_comments__.tex  +++ b/section_Line_by_Line_comments__.tex 
...
\item[P4014, L29] I suggest putting the KM5c subclause in brackets with a reference to maintain the flow of the sentence.  item[P4015, L9] Please refer to figure 3 somewhere. This seems the most appropriate place.  \item[P4015, L15] Please my comment on the topography above. This sentence is insufficient to justify the new boundary conditions by itself.  \item[P4015, L17] Surely altering the Clarify whether  Bering Strait is a change in the Land-Sea mask. If modelling groups have the ability needs  todo this change (and in my experience making new land is more awkward than new ocean), then shouldn't they  be doing the other experiment. Incidentally, I would anticipate that this change is important for the AMOC, so worth including. changed or not here.  \item[P4017, L23] It isn't clear to me Explain  how the ice sheets ice-sheet  and topography areseparated in the factorisation approach. I think you need to provide guidance here. Does imposing ice-sheets also contain the topographic element associated with the ice-sheet or does that count in the topography? At its simplistic this could be ice-sheets could be thought of as white mountains, so the `i' component only relates to the land surface specification. That doesn't make much sense intuitively. The problem is however much more complicated than that, as you've taken account of the glacial isostatic adjustment in the your topographic reconstruction. At this point, I'm not sure it's that important (it would need  to be discussed seriously in decomposed for  the factorisation results). Here you do need to provide practical guidance to allow the runs to be performed. simulations.  \item[P4018, L3] Is `predict' the best choice of word here?  \item[P4019, L18] I was unsure why you have selected this river routing approach? In CESM this specification may require much more effort than formally deriving the new river routes from the Pliocene topography. Perhaps you could provide some justification for this choice.  \item[P4020-1] See comment on simulations above