Suggestions for revision or reasons for rejection

Dear Authors,

I appreciate the attempts to better clarify the method used. It has improved greatly from the initial manuscript. That said, there is still a fair way to go. Please take some time and rewrite the paper, with the assistance of the copy editor, to make it easier to read and understand. Clarity is a very important goal! The first MS made it almost impossible to understand how the work was completed, this new version has made big improvements, but there still is room for improvement.

Most of my earlier comments have been addressed to some extent which I appreciate.

Some specific points:

Intro: methane is also emitted from saturated soils where the water table is just below the soil surface - not just inundated areas.

Fig 2 : What are the units of the scale bar?

Fig 3 improved but still don't say what the size of the stars actually means! Put it in the caption, even if it is already in the main text. Don't make it so hard on your poor reader.

Fig 8 - units? All tables, figures, etc. always need some units to help the reader.