In the study by Anunciado et al., the authors explored the stability of two organosulfur compounds and two organosulfate compounds. In the experiment, the atomized solution was collected on PTFE filters, and the weight and Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy analysis at different time scales were carried out. Furthermore, the stability of four sulfur compounds and their changes over time were analyzed by ion chromatography and Inductively Coupled Plasma Optical Emission Spectroscopy (ICP-OES). It is reported that MS has the highest stability and can be determined using FT-IR, while 2-MTS is unstable and easily decomposed into other organosulfates or inorganic sulfates. However, the current form still has the following major problems that need to be paid attention to and solved. As a result, the manuscript required minor revision before it could be considered for acceptance by the AMT.

Major comments:

• The authors themselves are supposed to highlight the use of Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy to quantify organic sulfur compounds and organosulfates. However, there seems to be no quantitative information in the manuscript, so the author needs to explain this clearly in the manuscript. In other words, how can compounds be quantified by FT-IR?
• The particles generated by the atomization method lack basic characterization of the size of the particles themselves, and to what extent can they represent the ambient particle samples?
• In the later time scale, why does the mass of the filter decrease and then increase? The author may need to analyze and give some reasons and explanations from different aspects. On this long time scale, how were the collected filter samples preserved, were they dried, and the moisture absorption of the filter might have contributed to the increased mass.
• Why do the spectra curves coincide with the horizontal scale in all FT-IR spectra? It looks very ugly. Therefore, it is suggested that the author redraw the diagram so that the spectra is completely on the upper side of the axis. Also, the right panel coordinates in Figure 2 should start at 1500, not 500.
• What data did the author use to calculate the mass loss of 2-MTS, i.e., the amount of loss to generate different compounds? Is there any relevant literature? It is necessary for the author to explain this process clearly.
• The format of references is rough, and the names of quoted journals are either full name or abbreviated, which need to be carefully checked and unified.

Minor comments and suggestions:

• Page 7: “arctic region”→“Arctic region”
• Page 11: “cadmium telluride (MCT) detector” →“mercury cadmium telluride (MCT) detector”
• Page 14: A mistake (24 C˚C).
• Figure 7: The position of the first S-O-C is incorrectly marked
• Figure 9: The labeling range of CH₃ functional groups is too broad
• Page 28: “at3426 cm^-1”, the author should add a space

The authors investigate the retention and stability of a variety of organo-sulfur compounds on PTFE filters. The work is comprehensive, using several complementary techniques, and the conclusions are completely supported by the data. 

The paper would be improved by the addition of a figure that shows the structures of the materials investigated (and their degradation products) with the acronyms used, rather than just describing the molecules in the text. 

The details of the infrared measurements must be clarified. Are the filters measured in transmission or by attenuated total internal reflection (ATR) or by some other method? Are the spectra presented difference spectra (i.e. [PTFE + sample] - [PTFE])?

Overall, this is a very high quality paper. I recommend publication in Atmospheric Measurement Techniques  after minor revision.