Dear Authors,
Following the general and specific comments of the two reviewers, a major revision of your manuscript is required to reconsider your study in SOIL. Please take all the comments of the reviewers carefully into account before resubmitting your paper.
Three aspects were underlined by both reviewers, which therefore should be especially handled with care. (i) You should be clearer regarding your assumptions and should discuss the consequences of these assumptions in more detail (especially regarding yield/biomass relations; constant agricultural management etc.). (ii) Both reviewers mentioned several times that your data utilized from Bakker et al. 2004 need to be described in more detail. (iii) There is a large number of formal errors in the manuscript which need to be removed.
Following reviewer #1, I also have some general doubts regarding the three relations given in Fig. 1, which are used to explain why erosion results in a yield decline (nutrient depletion, physical hindrance and water availability). I suggest, to discuss these reasons, but do not over interpret this as the data basis seemed to be quite weak.
Best regards,
Peter Fiener

Dear authors,
thank you for the detailed response to my last comments. I think the paper has substantially improved, and is now from my side ready to be published. There are only a small number of typos left to be correct.
Best regards
Peter Fiener

Dear Authors,

First of all, I would like to thank you for choosing SOIL as an outlet for your work! Also, thank you for working with the reviewers and editor on improving this manuscript. I am happy to accept this manuscript now, given that you indeed will take care of the typos that remain in the text.

best regards,
Jo