I have reviewed the manuscript that presents the Circum-Arctic Sediment PROvenance Database (CASPROD). This databese combines four key provenance proxies: Sr–Nd isotopes, detrital zircon U–Pb ages, clay mineral assemblages, and detrital mineral proportions from 4308 sampling stations across the Arctic Ocean. By synthesizing data from 117 previously published studies and incorporating newly available datasets from previously underrepresented regions, the authors have developed an important community resource for Arctic sediment provenance research and paleoenvironmental reconstructions. The manuscript is well-written and scientifically rigorous. I believe it is suitable for publication in ESSD, after minor revisions.

1. DIVA is an appropriate method for spatial interpolation here, but I think the manuscript would be benefit from a brief discussion on the spatial uncertainty of the interpolated dataset. Regions such as parts of the Canada Basin and Canadian Arctic Archipelago, have sparse sampling, so their interpolated values might carry relatively high uncertainty. Pointing out these potential limitations would be important for anyone who intends to run quantitative analyses on this database.

2. The Arctic environment is changing rapidly, such as, intensified riverine discharge, sea-ice retreat, enhanced permafrost thaw... For this reason, surface sediments collected at different times might reflect partially different source configurations. I advise the authors to add a brief comment on the potential temporal heterogeneity within the compiled dataset, and how users might consider this when interpreting the data.

This manuscript presents the first circum-Arctic surface sediment provenance database (CASPROD), which systematically integrates multi-proxy datasets including Sr-Nd isotopes, detrital zircon U-Pb ages, clay mineral assemblages, and detrital mineral compositions from 4308 sampling stations. The dataset is rich in volume and broad in spatial coverage. The study has a clear objective and holds significant scientific significance for understanding sediment source-to-sink processes in the Arctic, as well as for reconstructing past ice-sheet dynamics, paleoceanographic circulation, and sea-ice variability. The database thus fills a critical gap caused by previously fragmented and non-standardized sediment provenance data in the Arctic region, and provides a reliable baseline for future paleoceanographic and paleoclimate research in the Arctic region. Given the scientific importance and the quality of the compiled dataset, I strongly recommend publication after minor revisions as outlined below.

• The current introduction focuses primarily on Sr-Nd isotopes, detrital zircon U-Pb ages, clay minerals, and detrital mineral compositions. However, in Arctic sediment provenance studies, iron oxide minerals have also been used to trace sediment sources and transport pathways, particularly for distinguishing ice-rafted debris and current-transported materials from different source regions. I suggest that the authors briefly mention other potential provenance indicators, e.g., iron oxides in the introduction. This would help to contextualize the chosen proxy system and further highlight the comprehensiveness and rationale of the approach adopted in this study.
• Section 3.2 provides a relatively detailed interpretation of the provenance implications of the dataset. For a data paper, this section could be shortened to focus more on the spatial patterns, major trends, and key findings revealed by the database. Overly extended discussion of individual proxy interpretations may be better placed in follow-up research papers. This adjustment would better highlight the contribution of the dataset itself and align with the conventions of data journals.
• Figure 1: this figure includes red and blue arrows indicating ocean circulation patterns, but these are not mentioned in the figure caption. Please add a clear description of these arrows in the caption and include the relevant literature sources.
• Figure 3: In figure 3, the depth legend appears to be incorrectly labeled. Ocean bathymetry values should be negative numbers. Please correct this.