Suggestions for revision or reasons for rejection

In the revised version of the manuscript, a good effort has been done to improve the quality of the paper. Most of the corrections suggested were properly addressed.
Before the acceptance of the paper, I recommend to address the following two minor points:

1) The altitudes detected from the lidar measurements (shown in Fig. 11) only in some cases correspond to the atmospheric boundary layer top. For numerous profiles (e.g. from 1200 JST of 20 March to 12 00 JST of 21 March), the method detects altitudes above 2 km that are not realistic boundary layer heights for this season. The algorithm applied to lidar measurements detects vertical gradients of aerosol backscattering, thus the top of aerosol layers that may not be the boundary layer top. A physical identification of the boundary layer top is done by recognizing the temperature inversion from radiosoundings as already shown in the figure. My recommendation is to screen out all heights detected from lidar data that do not correspond to the boundary layer height shown by the radiosoundings. Also, the difference between residual layer and mixing layer does not seem to be clear in the current paper. Radiosounding can tell the location of both as below the mixing layer the profile of potential temperature is neutral above an unstable layer near the surface and the residual layer corresponds to a neutral profile above a stable layer.

2) The lidar ratio for both dust and pollution aerosols is the same (50 sr). This is an approximation as shown by the authors themselves: dust seem to have lower lidar ratios than pollution aerosol. I recommend to include in the text of the manuscript the values given in the answers to the reviewers : "Their summaries are as follows:
Sakai et al.(2003): Asian dust 47±18 sr,
Cattrall et al.(2005): Dust (spheroids) 42±4 sr, SE AsiaPollution 58±10 sr,
Anderson et al.(2003): ACE-Asia Pollution
(Fine-dominated, submicron portion) 50±5 sr, Dust (Coarse-dominated, Dust-like chemistry, Supermicron portion) 46±8 sr." and then indicate that as a simplification, they use the same value for both species.