4.7 Article

Energetic particle induced intra-seasonal variability of ozone inside the Antarctic polar vortex observed in satellite data

期刊

ATMOSPHERIC CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS
卷 15, 期 6, 页码 3327-3338

出版社

COPERNICUS GESELLSCHAFT MBH
DOI: 10.5194/acp-15-3327-2015

关键词

-

资金

  1. Helmholtz Association of German Research Centres (HGF) [VH-NG-624]
  2. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
  3. Karlsruhe Institute of Technology
  4. Swedish National Space Board (SNSB)
  5. Canadian Space Agency (CSA)
  6. National Technology Agency of Finland (Tekes)
  7. Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales (CNES) in France
  8. European Space Agency (ESA)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Measurements from 2002 to 2011 by three independent satellite instruments, namely MIPAS, SABER, and SMR on board the ENVISAT, TIMED, and Odin satellites are used to investigate the intra-seasonal variability of stratospheric and mesospheric O-3 volume mixing ratio (vmr) inside the Antarctic polar vortex due to solar and geomagnetic activity. In this study, we individually analysed the relative O-3 vmr variations between maximum and minimum conditions of a number of solar and geomagnetic indices (F10.7 cm solar radio flux, Ap index, >= 2 MeV electron flux). The indices are 26-day averages centred at 1 April, 1 May, and 1 June while O-3 is based on 26-day running means from 1 April to 1 November at altitudes from 20 to 70 km. During solar quiet time from 2005 to 2010, the composite of all three instruments reveals an apparent negative O-3 signal associated to the geomagnetic activity (Ap index) around 1 April, on average reaching amplitudes between -5 and -10% of the respective O-3 background. The O-3 response exceeds the significance level of 95% and propagates downwards throughout the polar winter from the stratopause down to similar to 25 km. These observed results are in good qualitative agreement with the O-3 vmr pattern simulated with a three-dimensional chemistry-transport model, which includes particle impact ionisation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据