Articles | Volume 17, issue 3
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1443-2024
© Author(s) 2024. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1443-2024
© Author(s) 2024. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Model evaluation paper
| 
16 Feb 2024
Model evaluation paper |
| 16 Feb 2024
| 16 Feb 2024
Benchmarking GOCART-2G in the Goddard Earth Observing System (GEOS)
Allison B. Collow
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Goddard Earth Sciences Technology and Research II (GESTAR II), University of Maryland Baltimore County, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
Global Modeling and Assimilation Office, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland, USA
Peter R. Colarco
Atmospheric Chemistry and Dynamics Lab, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland, USA
Arlindo M. da Silva
Global Modeling and Assimilation Office, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland, USA
Virginie Buchard
Goddard Earth Sciences Technology and Research II (GESTAR II), University of Maryland Baltimore County, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
Global Modeling and Assimilation Office, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland, USA
Huisheng Bian
Goddard Earth Sciences Technology and Research II (GESTAR II), University of Maryland Baltimore County, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
Atmospheric Chemistry and Dynamics Lab, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland, USA
Mian Chin
Atmospheric Chemistry and Dynamics Lab, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland, USA
Sampa Das
Atmospheric Chemistry and Dynamics Lab, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland, USA
Earth System Science Interdisciplinary Center (ESSIC), University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, USA
Ravi Govindaraju
Global Modeling and Assimilation Office, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland, USA
Science Systems and Applications, Inc., Lanham, Maryland, USA
Dongchul Kim
Goddard Earth Sciences Technology and Research II (GESTAR II), University of Maryland Baltimore County, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
Atmospheric Chemistry and Dynamics Lab, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland, USA
Valentina Aquila
Department of Environmental Science, American University, Washington, District of Columbia, USA
Related authors
Caterina Mogno, Peter R. Colarco, Allison B. Collow, Sampa Das, Sarah A. Strode, Vanessa Valenti, Michael E. Manyin, Qing Liang, Luke Oman, Stephen D. Steenrod, and K. Emma Knowland
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2354, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2354, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (ACP).
Short summary
Short summary
We investigated a climate model's ability to simulate atmospheric aerosols focusing on the relationship between mass and optical properties, by comparing predictions with observations. Our analysis revealed that model errors in aerosol scattering primarily stem from inaccurate particle mass concentrations and relative humidity, rather than flawed optical property assumptions in the model. These findings point out improvements for enhancing the accuracy for aerosols representation in our model.
Allison B. Marquardt Collow, Virginie Buchard, Peter R. Colarco, Arlindo M. da Silva, Ravi Govindaraju, Edward P. Nowottnick, Sharon Burton, Richard Ferrare, Chris Hostetler, and Luke Ziemba
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 16091–16109, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-16091-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-16091-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Biomass burning aerosol impacts aspects of the atmosphere and Earth system through radiative forcing, serving as cloud condensation nuclei, and air quality. Despite its importance, the representation of biomass burning aerosol is not always accurate in models. Field campaign observations from CAMP2Ex are used to evaluate the mass and extinction of aerosols in the GEOS model. Notable biases in the model illuminate areas of future development with GEOS and the underlying GOCART aerosol module.
Allison B. Marquardt Collow, Mark A. Miller, Lynne C. Trabachino, Michael P. Jensen, and Meng Wang
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 10073–10090, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-10073-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-10073-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Uncertainties in marine boundary layer clouds arise in the presence of biomass burning aerosol, as is the case over the southeast Atlantic Ocean. Heating due to this aerosol has the potential to alter the thermodynamic profile as the aerosol is transported across the Atlantic Ocean. Radiation transfer experiments indicate local shortwave aerosol heating is ~2–8 K d−1; however uncertainties in this quantity exist due to the single-scattering albedo and back trajectories of the aerosol plume.
Travis Toth, Gregory Schuster, Marian Clayton, Zhujun Li, David Painemal, Sharon Rodier, Jayanta Kar, Tyler Thorsen, Richard Ferrare, Mark Vaughan, Jason Tackett, Huisheng Bian, Mian Chin, Anne Garnier, Ellsworth Welton, Robert Ryan, Charles Trepte, and David Winker
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2832, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2832, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
NASA’s CALIPSO satellite mission observed aerosols (airborne particles) globally from 2006 to 2023. Its final data products update improves its aerosol optical parameters over oceans by adjusting for regional and seasonal differences in a new measurement-model synergistic approach. This results in a more realistic aerosol characterization, specifically near coastlines (where sea salt mixes with pollution), with potential impacts to future studies of science applications (e.g., climate effects).
Xiaohua Pan, Mian Chin, Ralph A. Kahn, Hitoshi Matsui, Toshihiko Takemura, Meiyun Lin, Yuanyu Xie, Dongchul Kim, and Maria Val Martin
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2603, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2603, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Wildfire smoke can travel thousands of kilometers, affecting air quality far from the fire itself. This study looks at how two key factors – how much smoke is emitted & how high it rises – affect how smoke spreads. Using data from a major 2008 Siberian wildfire, four computer models were tested. Results show that models often inject smoke too low & remove it too quickly, missing high-altitude smoke seen by satellites. Better estimates of smoke height are crucial to improve air quality forecasts.
Caterina Mogno, Peter R. Colarco, Allison B. Collow, Sampa Das, Sarah A. Strode, Vanessa Valenti, Michael E. Manyin, Qing Liang, Luke Oman, Stephen D. Steenrod, and K. Emma Knowland
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2354, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2354, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (ACP).
Short summary
Short summary
We investigated a climate model's ability to simulate atmospheric aerosols focusing on the relationship between mass and optical properties, by comparing predictions with observations. Our analysis revealed that model errors in aerosol scattering primarily stem from inaccurate particle mass concentrations and relative humidity, rather than flawed optical property assumptions in the model. These findings point out improvements for enhancing the accuracy for aerosols representation in our model.
Huanxin Zhang, Jun Wang, Nathan Janechek, Cui Ge, Meng Zhou, Lorena Castro García, Tong Sha, Yanyu Wang, Weizhi Deng, Zhixin Xue, Chengzhe Li, Lakhima Chutia, Yi Wang, Sebastian Val, James L. McDuffie, Sina Hasheminassab, Scott E. Gluck, David J. Diner, Peter R. Colarco, and Arlindo M. da Silva
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1360, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1360, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We present here the development of the Unified Inputs (of initial and boundary conditions) for WRF-Chem (UI-WRF-Chem) framework to support the Multi-Angle Imager for Aerosols (MAIA) satellite mission. Some of the major updates include improving dust size distribution in the chemical boundary conditions, updating land surface properties using timely satellite data and improvement of soil NOx emissions. We demonstrate subsequent model improvement over several of the MAIA target areas.
Claire M. Yu, Mian Chin, Qian Tan, Huisheng Bian, Peter R. Colarco, and Hongbin Yu
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1750, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1750, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The regional lockdowns, implemented over 2020-2022 to contain the rapid spread of COVID-19 disease, inadvertently created a natural laboratory for investigating the effect of reducing anthropogenic emissions on urban air quality in unprecedentedly large temporal and spatial scales. In this study, we analyzed multi-year surface PM2.5 data in 21 cities around the globe complemented by a set of global aerosol modeling experiments to assess the effect of the lockdown emission reductions on PM2.5.
Zhihong Zhuo, Xinyue Wang, Yunqian Zhu, Ewa M. Bednarz, Eric Fleming, Peter R. Colarco, Shingo Watanabe, David Plummer, Georgiy Stenchikov, William Randel, Adam Bourassa, Valentina Aquila, Takashi Sekiya, Mark R. Schoeberl, Simone Tilmes, Wandi Yu, Jun Zhang, Paul J. Kushner, and Francesco S. R. Pausata
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1505, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1505, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The 2022 Hunga eruption caused unprecedented stratospheric water injection, triggering unique atmospheric impacts. This study combines observations and model simulations, projecting a stratospheric water vapor anomaly lasting 4–7 years, with significant temperature variations and ozone depletion in the upper atmosphere lasting 7–10 years. These findings offer critical insights into the role of stratospheric water vapor in shaping climate and atmospheric chemistry.
Mingxuan Wu, Hailong Wang, Zheng Lu, Xiaohong Liu, Huisheng Bian, David Cohen, Yan Feng, Mian Chin, Didier A. Hauglustaine, Vlassis A. Karydis, Marianne T. Lund, Gunnar Myhre, Andrea Pozzer, Michael Schulz, Ragnhild B. Skeie, Alexandra P. Tsimpidi, Svetlana G. Tsyro, and Shaocheng Xie
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-235, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-235, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
A key challenge in simulating the lifecycle of nitrate aerosol in global climate models is to accurately represent mass size distribution of nitrate aerosol, which lacks sufficient observational constraints. We found that most climate models underestimate the mass fraction of fine-mode nitrate at surface in all regions. Our study highlights the importance of gas-aerosol partitioning parameterization and simulation of dust and sea salt in correctly simulating mass size distribution of nitrate.
Mariya Petrenko, Ralph Kahn, Mian Chin, Susanne E. Bauer, Tommi Bergman, Huisheng Bian, Gabriele Curci, Ben Johnson, Johannes W. Kaiser, Zak Kipling, Harri Kokkola, Xiaohong Liu, Keren Mezuman, Tero Mielonen, Gunnar Myhre, Xiaohua Pan, Anna Protonotariou, Samuel Remy, Ragnhild Bieltvedt Skeie, Philip Stier, Toshihiko Takemura, Kostas Tsigaridis, Hailong Wang, Duncan Watson-Parris, and Kai Zhang
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 1545–1567, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-1545-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-1545-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We compared smoke plume simulations from 11 global models to each other and to satellite smoke amount observations aimed at constraining smoke source strength. In regions where plumes are thick and background aerosol is low, models and satellites compare well. However, the input emission inventory tends to underestimate in many places, and particle property and loss rate assumptions vary enormously among models, causing uncertainties that require systematic in situ measurements to resolve.
Yunqian Zhu, Hideharu Akiyoshi, Valentina Aquila, Elisabeth Asher, Ewa M. Bednarz, Slimane Bekki, Christoph Brühl, Amy H. Butler, Parker Case, Simon Chabrillat, Gabriel Chiodo, Margot Clyne, Lola Falletti, Peter R. Colarco, Eric Fleming, Andrin Jörimann, Mahesh Kovilakam, Gerbrand Koren, Ales Kuchar, Nicolas Lebas, Qing Liang, Cheng-Cheng Liu, Graham Mann, Michael Manyin, Marion Marchand, Olaf Morgenstern, Paul Newman, Luke D. Oman, Freja F. Østerstrøm, Yifeng Peng, David Plummer, Ilaria Quaglia, William Randel, Samuel Rémy, Takashi Sekiya, Stephen Steenrod, Timofei Sukhodolov, Simone Tilmes, Kostas Tsigaridis, Rei Ueyama, Daniele Visioni, Xinyue Wang, Shingo Watanabe, Yousuke Yamashita, Pengfei Yu, Wandi Yu, Jun Zhang, and Zhihong Zhuo
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3412, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3412, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
To understand the climate impact of the 2022 Hunga volcanic eruption, we developed a climate model-observation comparison project. The paper describes the protocols and models that participate in the experiments. We designed several experiments to achieve our goal of this activity: 1. evaluate the climate model performance; 2. understand the Earth system responses to this eruption.
Myungje Choi, Alexei Lyapustin, Gregory L. Schuster, Sujung Go, Yujie Wang, Sergey Korkin, Ralph Kahn, Jeffrey S. Reid, Edward J. Hyer, Thomas F. Eck, Mian Chin, David J. Diner, Olga Kalashnikova, Oleg Dubovik, Jhoon Kim, and Hans Moosmüller
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 10543–10565, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-10543-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-10543-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This paper introduces a retrieval algorithm to estimate two key absorbing components in smoke (black carbon and brown carbon) using DSCOVR EPIC measurements. Our analysis reveals distinct smoke properties, including spectral absorption, layer height, and black carbon and brown carbon, over North America and central Africa. The retrieved smoke properties offer valuable observational constraints for modeling radiative forcing and informing health-related studies.
Peng Xian, Jeffrey S. Reid, Melanie Ades, Angela Benedetti, Peter R. Colarco, Arlindo da Silva, Tom F. Eck, Johannes Flemming, Edward J. Hyer, Zak Kipling, Samuel Rémy, Tsuyoshi Thomas Sekiyama, Taichu Tanaka, Keiya Yumimoto, and Jianglong Zhang
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 6385–6411, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-6385-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-6385-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The study compares and evaluates monthly AOD of four reanalyses (RA) and their consensus (i.e., ensemble mean). The basic verification characteristics of these RA versus both AERONET and MODIS retrievals are presented. The study discusses the strength of each RA and identifies regions where divergence and challenges are prominent. The RA consensus usually performs very well on a global scale in terms of how well it matches the observational data, making it a good choice for various applications.
Christina V. Brodowsky, Timofei Sukhodolov, Gabriel Chiodo, Valentina Aquila, Slimane Bekki, Sandip S. Dhomse, Michael Höpfner, Anton Laakso, Graham W. Mann, Ulrike Niemeier, Giovanni Pitari, Ilaria Quaglia, Eugene Rozanov, Anja Schmidt, Takashi Sekiya, Simone Tilmes, Claudia Timmreck, Sandro Vattioni, Daniele Visioni, Pengfei Yu, Yunqian Zhu, and Thomas Peter
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 5513–5548, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-5513-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-5513-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The aerosol layer is an essential part of the climate system. We characterize the sulfur budget in a volcanically quiescent (background) setting, with a special focus on the sulfate aerosol layer using, for the first time, a multi-model approach. The aim is to identify weak points in the representation of the atmospheric sulfur budget in an intercomparison of nine state-of-the-art coupled global circulation models.
Sampa Das, Peter R. Colarco, Huisheng Bian, and Santiago Gassó
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 4421–4449, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-4421-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-4421-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The smoke aerosols emitted from vegetation burning can alter the regional energy budget via multiple pathways. We utilized detailed observations from the NASA ORACLES airborne campaign based in Namibia during September 2016 to improve the representation of smoke aerosol properties and lifetimes in our GEOS Earth system model. The improved model simulations are for the first time able to capture the observed changes in the smoke absorption during long-range plume transport.
Adriana Rocha-Lima, Peter R. Colarco, Anton S. Darmenov, Edward P. Nowottnick, Arlindo M. da Silva, and Luke D. Oman
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 2443–2464, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-2443-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-2443-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Observations show an increasing aerosol optical depth trend in the Middle East between 2003–2012. We evaluate the NASA Goddard Earth Observing System (GEOS) model's ability to capture these trends and examine the meteorological and surface parameters driving dust emissions. Our results highlight the importance of data assimilation for long-term trends of atmospheric aerosols and support the hypothesis that vegetation cover loss may have contributed to increasing dust emissions in the period.
Huisheng Bian, Mian Chin, Peter R. Colarco, Eric C. Apel, Donald R. Blake, Karl Froyd, Rebecca S. Hornbrook, Jose Jimenez, Pedro Campuzano Jost, Michael Lawler, Mingxu Liu, Marianne Tronstad Lund, Hitoshi Matsui, Benjamin A. Nault, Joyce E. Penner, Andrew W. Rollins, Gregory Schill, Ragnhild B. Skeie, Hailong Wang, Lu Xu, Kai Zhang, and Jialei Zhu
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 1717–1741, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-1717-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-1717-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This work studies sulfur in the remote troposphere at global and seasonal scales using aircraft measurements and multi-model simulations. The goal is to understand the sulfur cycle over remote oceans, spread of model simulations, and observation–model discrepancies. Such an understanding and comparison with real observations are crucial to narrow down the uncertainties in model sulfur simulations and improve understanding of the sulfur cycle in atmospheric air quality, climate, and ecosystems.
Hamza Ahsan, Hailong Wang, Jingbo Wu, Mingxuan Wu, Steven J. Smith, Susanne Bauer, Harrison Suchyta, Dirk Olivié, Gunnar Myhre, Hitoshi Matsui, Huisheng Bian, Jean-François Lamarque, Ken Carslaw, Larry Horowitz, Leighton Regayre, Mian Chin, Michael Schulz, Ragnhild Bieltvedt Skeie, Toshihiko Takemura, and Vaishali Naik
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 14779–14799, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-14779-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-14779-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We examine the impact of the assumed effective height of SO2 injection, SO2 and BC emission seasonality, and the assumed fraction of SO2 emissions injected as SO4 on climate and chemistry model results. We find that the SO2 injection height has a large impact on surface SO2 concentrations and, in some models, radiative flux. These assumptions are a
hiddensource of inter-model variability and may be leading to bias in some climate model results.
Ian Chang, Lan Gao, Connor J. Flynn, Yohei Shinozuka, Sarah J. Doherty, Michael S. Diamond, Karla M. Longo, Gonzalo A. Ferrada, Gregory R. Carmichael, Patricia Castellanos, Arlindo M. da Silva, Pablo E. Saide, Calvin Howes, Zhixin Xue, Marc Mallet, Ravi Govindaraju, Qiaoqiao Wang, Yafang Cheng, Yan Feng, Sharon P. Burton, Richard A. Ferrare, Samuel E. LeBlanc, Meloë S. Kacenelenbogen, Kristina Pistone, Michal Segal-Rozenhaimer, Kerry G. Meyer, Ju-Mee Ryoo, Leonhard Pfister, Adeyemi A. Adebiyi, Robert Wood, Paquita Zuidema, Sundar A. Christopher, and Jens Redemann
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 4283–4309, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-4283-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-4283-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Abundant aerosols are present above low-level liquid clouds over the southeastern Atlantic during late austral spring. The model simulation differences in the proportion of aerosol residing in the planetary boundary layer and in the free troposphere can greatly affect the regional aerosol radiative effects. This study examines the aerosol loading and fractional aerosol loading in the free troposphere among various models and evaluates them against measurements from the NASA ORACLES campaign.
Allison B. Marquardt Collow, Virginie Buchard, Peter R. Colarco, Arlindo M. da Silva, Ravi Govindaraju, Edward P. Nowottnick, Sharon Burton, Richard Ferrare, Chris Hostetler, and Luke Ziemba
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 16091–16109, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-16091-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-16091-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Biomass burning aerosol impacts aspects of the atmosphere and Earth system through radiative forcing, serving as cloud condensation nuclei, and air quality. Despite its importance, the representation of biomass burning aerosol is not always accurate in models. Field campaign observations from CAMP2Ex are used to evaluate the mass and extinction of aerosols in the GEOS model. Notable biases in the model illuminate areas of future development with GEOS and the underlying GOCART aerosol module.
Qirui Zhong, Nick Schutgens, Guido van der Werf, Twan van Noije, Kostas Tsigaridis, Susanne E. Bauer, Tero Mielonen, Alf Kirkevåg, Øyvind Seland, Harri Kokkola, Ramiro Checa-Garcia, David Neubauer, Zak Kipling, Hitoshi Matsui, Paul Ginoux, Toshihiko Takemura, Philippe Le Sager, Samuel Rémy, Huisheng Bian, Mian Chin, Kai Zhang, Jialei Zhu, Svetlana G. Tsyro, Gabriele Curci, Anna Protonotariou, Ben Johnson, Joyce E. Penner, Nicolas Bellouin, Ragnhild B. Skeie, and Gunnar Myhre
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 11009–11032, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-11009-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-11009-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Aerosol optical depth (AOD) errors for biomass burning aerosol (BBA) are evaluated in 18 global models against satellite datasets. Notwithstanding biases in satellite products, they allow model evaluations. We observe large and diverse model biases due to errors in BBA. Further interpretations of AOD diversities suggest large biases exist in key processes for BBA which require better constraining. These results can contribute to further model improvement and development.
Giorgio Doglioni, Valentina Aquila, Sampa Das, Peter R. Colarco, and Dino Zardi
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 11049–11064, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-11049-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-11049-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We use a global chemistry climate model to analyze the perturbations to the stratospheric dynamics caused by an injection of carbonaceous aerosol comparable to the one caused by a series of pyrocumulonimbi that formed over British Columbia, Canada on 13 August 2017. The injection of light-absorbing aerosol in an otherwise clean lower stratosphere causes the formation of long-lasting stratospheric anticyclones at the synoptic scale.
Peng Xian, Jianglong Zhang, Norm T. O'Neill, Travis D. Toth, Blake Sorenson, Peter R. Colarco, Zak Kipling, Edward J. Hyer, James R. Campbell, Jeffrey S. Reid, and Keyvan Ranjbar
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 9915–9947, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-9915-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-9915-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The study provides baseline Arctic spring and summertime aerosol optical depth climatology, trend, and extreme event statistics from 2003 to 2019 using a combination of aerosol reanalyses, remote sensing, and ground observations. Biomass burning smoke has an overwhelming contribution to black carbon (an efficient climate forcer) compared to anthropogenic sources. Burning's large interannual variability and increasing summer trend have important implications for the Arctic climate.
Sujung Go, Alexei Lyapustin, Gregory L. Schuster, Myungje Choi, Paul Ginoux, Mian Chin, Olga Kalashnikova, Oleg Dubovik, Jhoon Kim, Arlindo da Silva, Brent Holben, and Jeffrey S. Reid
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 1395–1423, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-1395-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-1395-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
This paper presents a retrieval algorithm of iron-oxide species (hematite, goethite) content in the atmosphere from DSCOVR EPIC observations. Our results display variations within the published range of hematite and goethite over the main dust-source regions but show significant seasonal and spatial variability. This implies a single-viewing satellite instrument with UV–visible channels may provide essential information on shortwave dust direct radiative effects for climate modeling.
Nick Gorkavyi, Nickolay Krotkov, Can Li, Leslie Lait, Peter Colarco, Simon Carn, Matthew DeLand, Paul Newman, Mark Schoeberl, Ghassan Taha, Omar Torres, Alexander Vasilkov, and Joanna Joiner
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 14, 7545–7563, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-7545-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-7545-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The 21 June 2019 eruption of the Raikoke volcano produced significant amounts of volcanic aerosols (sulfate and ash) and sulfur dioxide (SO2) gas that penetrated into the lower stratosphere. We showed that the amount of SO2 decreases with a characteristic period of 8–18 d and the peak of sulfate aerosol lags the initial peak of SO2 by 1.5 months. We also examined the dynamics of an unusual stratospheric coherent circular cloud of SO2 and aerosol observed from 18 July to 22 September 2019.
Maria Sand, Bjørn H. Samset, Gunnar Myhre, Jonas Gliß, Susanne E. Bauer, Huisheng Bian, Mian Chin, Ramiro Checa-Garcia, Paul Ginoux, Zak Kipling, Alf Kirkevåg, Harri Kokkola, Philippe Le Sager, Marianne T. Lund, Hitoshi Matsui, Twan van Noije, Dirk J. L. Olivié, Samuel Remy, Michael Schulz, Philip Stier, Camilla W. Stjern, Toshihiko Takemura, Kostas Tsigaridis, Svetlana G. Tsyro, and Duncan Watson-Parris
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 15929–15947, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-15929-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-15929-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Absorption of shortwave radiation by aerosols can modify precipitation and clouds but is poorly constrained in models. A total of 15 different aerosol models from AeroCom phase III have reported total aerosol absorption, and for the first time, 11 of these models have reported in a consistent experiment the contributions to absorption from black carbon, dust, and organic aerosol. Here, we document the model diversity in aerosol absorption.
Huisheng Bian, Eunjee Lee, Randal D. Koster, Donifan Barahona, Mian Chin, Peter R. Colarco, Anton Darmenov, Sarith Mahanama, Michael Manyin, Peter Norris, John Shilling, Hongbin Yu, and Fanwei Zeng
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 14177–14197, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-14177-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-14177-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The study using the NASA Earth system model shows ~2.6 % increase in burning season gross primary production and ~1.5 % increase in annual net primary production across the Amazon Basin during 2010–2016 due to the change in surface downward direct and diffuse photosynthetically active radiation by biomass burning aerosols. Such an aerosol effect is strongly dependent on the presence of clouds. The cloud fraction at which aerosols switch from stimulating to inhibiting plant growth occurs at ~0.8.
Hongbin Yu, Qian Tan, Lillian Zhou, Yaping Zhou, Huisheng Bian, Mian Chin, Claire L. Ryder, Robert C. Levy, Yaswant Pradhan, Yingxi Shi, Qianqian Song, Zhibo Zhang, Peter R. Colarco, Dongchul Kim, Lorraine A. Remer, Tianle Yuan, Olga Mayol-Bracero, and Brent N. Holben
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 12359–12383, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-12359-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-12359-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This study characterizes a historic African dust intrusion into the Caribbean Basin in June 2020 using satellites and NASA GEOS. Dust emissions in West Africa were large albeit not extreme. However, a unique synoptic system accumulated the dust near the coast for about 4 d before it was ventilated. Although GEOS reproduced satellite-observed plume tracks well, it substantially underestimated dust emissions and did not lift up dust high enough for ensuing long-range transport.
Sampa Das, Peter R. Colarco, Luke D. Oman, Ghassan Taha, and Omar Torres
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 12069–12090, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-12069-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-12069-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Interactions of extreme fires with weather systems can produce towering smoke plumes that inject aerosols at very high altitudes (> 10 km). Three such major injections, largest at the time in terms of emitted aerosol mass, took place over British Columbia, Canada, in August 2017. We model the transport and impacts of injected aerosols on the radiation balance of the atmosphere. Our model results match the satellite-observed plume transport and residence time at these high altitudes very closely.
Na Zhao, Xinyi Dong, Kan Huang, Joshua S. Fu, Marianne Tronstad Lund, Kengo Sudo, Daven Henze, Tom Kucsera, Yun Fat Lam, Mian Chin, and Simone Tilmes
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 8637–8654, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-8637-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-8637-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Black carbon acts as a strong climate forcer, especially in vulnerable pristine regions such as the Arctic. This work utilizes ensemble modeling results from the task force Hemispheric Transport of Air Pollution Phase 2 to investigate the responses of Arctic black carbon and surface temperature to various source emission reductions. East Asia contributed the most to Arctic black carbon. The response of Arctic temperature to black carbon was substantially more sensitive than the global average.
Jasper F. Kok, Adeyemi A. Adebiyi, Samuel Albani, Yves Balkanski, Ramiro Checa-Garcia, Mian Chin, Peter R. Colarco, Douglas S. Hamilton, Yue Huang, Akinori Ito, Martina Klose, Danny M. Leung, Longlei Li, Natalie M. Mahowald, Ron L. Miller, Vincenzo Obiso, Carlos Pérez García-Pando, Adriana Rocha-Lima, Jessica S. Wan, and Chloe A. Whicker
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 8127–8167, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-8127-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-8127-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Desert dust interacts with virtually every component of the Earth system, including the climate system. We develop a new methodology to represent the global dust cycle that integrates observational constraints on the properties and abundance of desert dust with global atmospheric model simulations. We show that the resulting representation of the global dust cycle is more accurate than what can be obtained from a large number of current climate global atmospheric models.
Jasper F. Kok, Adeyemi A. Adebiyi, Samuel Albani, Yves Balkanski, Ramiro Checa-Garcia, Mian Chin, Peter R. Colarco, Douglas S. Hamilton, Yue Huang, Akinori Ito, Martina Klose, Longlei Li, Natalie M. Mahowald, Ron L. Miller, Vincenzo Obiso, Carlos Pérez García-Pando, Adriana Rocha-Lima, and Jessica S. Wan
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 8169–8193, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-8169-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-8169-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The many impacts of dust on the Earth system depend on dust mineralogy, which varies between dust source regions. We constrain the contribution of the world’s main dust source regions by integrating dust observations with global model simulations. We find that Asian dust contributes more and that North African dust contributes less than models account for. We obtain a dataset of each source region’s contribution to the dust cycle that can be used to constrain dust impacts on the Earth system.
Katherine H. Breen, Donifan Barahona, Tianle Yuan, Huisheng Bian, and Scott C. James
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 7749–7771, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-7749-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-7749-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Increases in atmospheric aerosols affect the scattering and absorption of solar radiation by altering the macrophysical and microphysical processes of clouds. We analyzed aerosol–cloud interactions in response to degassing events from the Kilauea volcano in 2008 and 2018 by comparing satellite and simulated cloud properties. Results showed a threshold response to overcome meteorological effects that is largely controlled by aerosol concentration, composition, plume height, and ENSO state.
Youhua Tang, Huisheng Bian, Zhining Tao, Luke D. Oman, Daniel Tong, Pius Lee, Patrick C. Campbell, Barry Baker, Cheng-Hsuan Lu, Li Pan, Jun Wang, Jeffery McQueen, and Ivanka Stajner
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 2527–2550, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-2527-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-2527-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Chemical lateral boundary condition (CLBC) impact is essential for regional air quality prediction during intrusion events. We present a model mapping Goddard Earth Observing System (GEOS) to Community Multi-scale Air Quality (CMAQ) CB05–AERO6 (Carbon Bond 5; version 6 of the aerosol module) species. Influence depends on distance from the inflow boundary and species and their regional characteristics. We use aerosol optical thickness to derive CLBCs, achieving reasonable prediction.
Jonas Gliß, Augustin Mortier, Michael Schulz, Elisabeth Andrews, Yves Balkanski, Susanne E. Bauer, Anna M. K. Benedictow, Huisheng Bian, Ramiro Checa-Garcia, Mian Chin, Paul Ginoux, Jan J. Griesfeller, Andreas Heckel, Zak Kipling, Alf Kirkevåg, Harri Kokkola, Paolo Laj, Philippe Le Sager, Marianne Tronstad Lund, Cathrine Lund Myhre, Hitoshi Matsui, Gunnar Myhre, David Neubauer, Twan van Noije, Peter North, Dirk J. L. Olivié, Samuel Rémy, Larisa Sogacheva, Toshihiko Takemura, Kostas Tsigaridis, and Svetlana G. Tsyro
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 87–128, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-87-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-87-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Simulated aerosol optical properties as well as the aerosol life cycle are investigated for 14 global models participating in the AeroCom initiative. Considerable diversity is found in the simulated aerosol species emissions and lifetimes, also resulting in a large diversity in the simulated aerosol mass, composition, and optical properties. A comparison with observations suggests that, on average, current models underestimate the direct effect of aerosol on the atmosphere radiation budget.
Jianglong Zhang, Robert J. D. Spurr, Jeffrey S. Reid, Peng Xian, Peter R. Colarco, James R. Campbell, Edward J. Hyer, and Nancy L. Baker
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 27–42, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-27-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-27-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
A first-of-its-kind scheme has been developed for assimilating Ozone Monitoring Instrument (OMI) aerosol index (AI) measurements into the Naval Aerosol Analysis and Predictive System. Improvements in model simulations demonstrate the utility of OMI AI data assimilation for improving the accuracy of aerosol model analysis over cloudy regions and bright surfaces. This study can be considered one of the first attempts at direct radiance assimilation in the UV spectrum for aerosol analyses.
Peng Xian, Philip J. Klotzbach, Jason P. Dunion, Matthew A. Janiga, Jeffrey S. Reid, Peter R. Colarco, and Zak Kipling
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 15357–15378, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-15357-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-15357-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Using dust AOD (DAOD) data from three aerosol reanalyses, we explored the correlative relationships between DAOD and multiple indices representing seasonal Atlantic TC activities. A robust negative correlation with Caribbean DAOD and Atlantic TC activity was found. We documented for the first time the regional differences of this relationship for over the Caribbean and the tropical North Atlantic. We also evaluated the impacts of potential confounding climate factors in this relationship.
Augustin Mortier, Jonas Gliß, Michael Schulz, Wenche Aas, Elisabeth Andrews, Huisheng Bian, Mian Chin, Paul Ginoux, Jenny Hand, Brent Holben, Hua Zhang, Zak Kipling, Alf Kirkevåg, Paolo Laj, Thibault Lurton, Gunnar Myhre, David Neubauer, Dirk Olivié, Knut von Salzen, Ragnhild Bieltvedt Skeie, Toshihiko Takemura, and Simone Tilmes
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 13355–13378, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-13355-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-13355-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
We present a multiparameter analysis of the aerosol trends over the last 2 decades in the different regions of the world. In most of the regions, ground-based observations show a decrease in aerosol content in both the total atmospheric column and at the surface. The use of climate models, assessed against these observations, reveals however an increase in the total aerosol load, which is not seen with the sole use of observation due to partial coverage in space and time.
Yohei Shinozuka, Pablo E. Saide, Gonzalo A. Ferrada, Sharon P. Burton, Richard Ferrare, Sarah J. Doherty, Hamish Gordon, Karla Longo, Marc Mallet, Yan Feng, Qiaoqiao Wang, Yafang Cheng, Amie Dobracki, Steffen Freitag, Steven G. Howell, Samuel LeBlanc, Connor Flynn, Michal Segal-Rosenhaimer, Kristina Pistone, James R. Podolske, Eric J. Stith, Joseph Ryan Bennett, Gregory R. Carmichael, Arlindo da Silva, Ravi Govindaraju, Ruby Leung, Yang Zhang, Leonhard Pfister, Ju-Mee Ryoo, Jens Redemann, Robert Wood, and Paquita Zuidema
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 11491–11526, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-11491-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-11491-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
In the southeast Atlantic, well-defined smoke plumes from Africa advect over marine boundary layer cloud decks; both are most extensive around September, when most of the smoke resides in the free troposphere. A framework is put forth for evaluating the performance of a range of global and regional atmospheric composition models against observations made during the NASA ORACLES (ObseRvations of Aerosols above CLouds and their intEractionS) airborne mission in September 2016.
María A. Burgos, Elisabeth Andrews, Gloria Titos, Angela Benedetti, Huisheng Bian, Virginie Buchard, Gabriele Curci, Zak Kipling, Alf Kirkevåg, Harri Kokkola, Anton Laakso, Julie Letertre-Danczak, Marianne T. Lund, Hitoshi Matsui, Gunnar Myhre, Cynthia Randles, Michael Schulz, Twan van Noije, Kai Zhang, Lucas Alados-Arboledas, Urs Baltensperger, Anne Jefferson, James Sherman, Junying Sun, Ernest Weingartner, and Paul Zieger
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 10231–10258, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-10231-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-10231-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
We investigate how well models represent the enhancement in scattering coefficients due to particle water uptake, and perform an evaluation of several implementation schemes used in ten Earth system models. Our results show the importance of the parameterization of hygroscopicity and model chemistry as drivers of some of the observed diversity amongst model estimates. The definition of dry conditions and the phenomena taking place in this relative humidity range also impact the model evaluation.
Samantha J. Kramer, Claudia Alvarez, Anne E. Barkley, Peter R. Colarco, Lillian Custals, Rodrigo Delgadillo, Cassandra J. Gaston, Ravi Govindaraju, and Paquita Zuidema
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 10047–10062, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-10047-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-10047-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Comparisons of sea salt and size-resolved dust mass concentration measurements over southeast Florida to those from the MERRA-2/GEOS-5 FP aerosol reanalysis show the reanalysis depicts excessive sea salt and puts too much dust in larger intermediate sizes than do the measurements. The vertical distribution of the dust mass is approximately correct. The incorrect reanalysis aerosol speciation and dust sizes have implications for the modeling of their transport, deposition, and radiative impact.
Allison B. Marquardt Collow, Mark A. Miller, Lynne C. Trabachino, Michael P. Jensen, and Meng Wang
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 10073–10090, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-10073-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-10073-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Uncertainties in marine boundary layer clouds arise in the presence of biomass burning aerosol, as is the case over the southeast Atlantic Ocean. Heating due to this aerosol has the potential to alter the thermodynamic profile as the aerosol is transported across the Atlantic Ocean. Radiation transfer experiments indicate local shortwave aerosol heating is ~2–8 K d−1; however uncertainties in this quantity exist due to the single-scattering albedo and back trajectories of the aerosol plume.
Cited articles
Balkanski, Y. J., Jacob, D. J., Gardner, G. M., Graustein, W. C., and Turekian, K. K.: Transport and residence times of tropospheric aerosols inferred from a global three-dimensional simulation of 210Pb, J. Geophys. Res., 98, 20573, https://doi.org/10.1029/93JD02456, 1993.
Bian, H., Chin, M., Hauglustaine, D. A., Schulz, M., Myhre, G., Bauer, S. E., Lund, M. T., Karydis, V. A., Kucsera, T. L., Pan, X., Pozzer, A., Skeie, R. B., Steenrod, S. D., Sudo, K., Tsigaridis, K., Tsimpidi, A. P., and Tsyro, S. G.: Investigation of global particulate nitrate from the AeroCom phase III experiment, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 12911–12940, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-12911-2017, 2017.
Bouwman, A. F., Lee, D. S., Asman, W. A. H., Dentener, F. J., Van Der Hoek, K. W., and Olivier, J. G. J.: A global high-resolution emission inventory for ammonia, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 11, 561–587, https://doi.org/10.1029/97GB02266, 1997.
Bozzo, A., Benedetti, A., Flemming, J., Kipling, Z., and Rémy, S.: An aerosol climatology for global models based on the tropospheric aerosol scheme in the Integrated Forecasting System of ECMWF, Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 1007–1034, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-1007-2020, 2020.
Buchard, V., Da Silva, A. M., Randles, C. A., Colarco, P., Ferrare, R., Hair, J., Hostetler, C., Tackett, J and Winker, D.: Evaluation of the surface PM2.5 in Version 1 of the NASA MERRA Aerosol Reanalysis over the United States, Atmos. Environ., 125, 100–111, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2015.11.004, 2016.
Buchard, V., Randles, C. A., da Silva, A. M., Darmenov, A., Colarco, P. R., Govindaraju, R., Ferrare, R., Hair, J., Beyersdorf, A. J., Ziemba, L. D., and Yu, H.: The MERRA-2 Aerosol Reanalysis, 1980 Onward. Part II: Evaluation and Case Studies, J. Climate, 30, 6851–6872, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0613.1, 2017.
Burgos, M. A., Andrews, E., Titos, G., Benedetti, A., Bian, H., Buchard, V., Curci, G., Kipling, Z., Kirkevåg, A., Kokkola, H., Laakso, A., Letertre-Danczak, J., Lund, M. T., Matsui, H., Myhre, G., Randles, C., Schulz, M., van Noije, T., Zhang, K., Alados-Arboledas, L., Baltensperger, U., Jefferson, A., Sherman, J., Sun, J., Weingartner, E., and Zieger, P.: A global model–measurement evaluation of particle light scattering coefficients at elevated relative humidity, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 10231–10258, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-10231-2020, 2020.
Carn, S. A., Fioletov, V. E., McLinden, C. A., Li, C., and Krotkov, N. A.: A decade of global volcanic SO2 emissions measured from space, Sci. Rep., 7, 44095, https://doi.org/10.1038/srep44095, 2017.
Case, P., Colarco, P. R., Toon, B., Aquila, V., and Keller, C. A.: Interactive stratospheric aerosol microphysics-chemistry simulations of the 1991 Pinatubo volcanic aerosols with newly coupled sectional aerosol and stratosphere-troposphere chemistry modules in the NASA GEOS Chemistry-Climate Model (CCM), J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 15, e2022MS003147, https://doi.org/10.1029/2022MS003147, 2023.
Chakraborty, S., Guan, B., Waliser, D. E., and da Silva, A. M.: Aerosol atmospheric rivers: climatology, event characteristics, and detection algorithm sensitivities, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 8175–8195, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-8175-2022, 2022.
Chin, M., Rood, R. B., Lin, S.-J., Müller, J.-F., and Thompson, A. M.: Atmospheric sulfur cycle simulated in the global model GOCART: Model description and global properties, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 105, 24671–24687, https://doi.org/10.1029/2000JD900384, 2000.
Chin, M., Ginoux, P., Kinne, S., Torres, O., Holben, B. N., Duncan, B. N., Martin, R. V., Logan, J. A., Higurashi, A., and Nakajima, T.: Tropospheric aerosol optical thickness from the GOCART model and comparisons with satellite and sun photometer measurements, J. Atmos. Sci., 59, 461–483, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(2002)059<0461:taotft>2.0.co;2, 2002.
Chin, M., Chu, A., Levy, R., Remer, L., Kaufman, Y., Holben, B., Eck, T., Ginoux, P., and Gao, Q.: Aerosol distribution in the Northern Hemisphere during ACE-Asia: Results from global model, satellite observations, and Sun photometer measurements, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 109, 1–15, https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JD004829, 2004.
Clough, S. A., Shephard, M. W., Mlawer, E. J., Delamere, J. S., Iacono, M. J., Cady-Pereira, K., Boukabara, S., and Brown, P. D.: Atmospheric radiative transfer modeling: a summary of the AER codes, J. Quant. Spectrosc. Ra., 91, 233–244, 2005.
Colarco, P., Da Silva, A., Chin, M., and Diehl, T.: Online simulations of global aerosol distributions in the NASA GEOS-4 model and comparisons to satellite and ground-based aerosol optical depth, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 115, D14207, https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JD012820, 2010.
Colarco, P. R., Nowottnick, E. P., Randles, C. A., Yi, B., Yang, P., Kim, K.-M., Smith, J. A., and Bardeen, C. G.: Impact of radiatively interactive dust aerosols in the NASA GEOS-5 climate model: Sensitivity to dust particle shape and refractive index, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 119, 753–786, https://doi.org/10.1002/2013JD020046, 2014.
Colarco, P. R., Gassó, S., Ahn, C., Buchard, V., da Silva, A. M., and Torres, O.: Simulation of the Ozone Monitoring Instrument aerosol index using the NASA Goddard Earth Observing System aerosol reanalysis products, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 10, 4121–4134, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-10-4121-2017, 2017.
Collow, A., Buchard, V., Chin, M., Colarco, P., Darmenov, A., and da Silva, A.: Supplemental Documentation for GEOS Aerosol Products, GMAO Office Note No. 22 (Version 1.0), 8 pp., https://gmao.gsfc.nasa.gov/pubs/docs/Collow1463.pdf (last access: 9 March 2023), 2023a.
Collow, A., Colarco, P., da Silva, A., Buchard, V., Bian, H., Chin, M., Das, S., Govindaraju, R., Kim, D., and Aquila, V.: Data for “Benchmarking GOCART-2G in the Goddard Earth Observing System (GEOS)” (Version 1), Zenodo [data set], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8212822, 2023b.
Collow, A. B. M., Buchard, V., Colarco, P. R., da Silva, A. M., Govindaraju, R., Nowottnick, E. P., Burton, S., Ferrare, R., Hostetler, C., and Ziemba, L.: An evaluation of biomass burning aerosol mass, extinction, and size distribution in GEOS using observations from CAMP2Ex, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 16091–16109, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-16091-2022, 2022.
Darmenov, A. and da Silva, A.: The quick fire emissions dataset (QFED) – Documentation of versions 2.1, 2.2 and 2.4. NASA//TM-2015-104606, Vol. 38, NASA Global Modeling and Assimilation Office, 183 pp., https://gmao.gsfc.nasa.gov/pubs/docs/Darmenov796.pdf (last access: 2 August 2022), 2015.
Das, S., Harshvardhan, H., Bian, H., Chin, M., Curci, G., Protonotariou, A.P., Mielonen, T., Zhang, K., Wang, H., and Liu, X.: Biomass burning aerosol transport and vertical distribution over the South African-Atlantic region, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 122, 6391–6415, https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD026421, 2017.
Das, S., Colarco, P. R., Oman, L. D., Taha, G., and Torres, O.: The long-term transport and radiative impacts of the 2017 British Columbia pyrocumulonimbus smoke aerosols in the stratosphere, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 12069–12090, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-12069-2021, 2021.
European Monitoring and Evaluation Programme: https://ebas-data.nilu.no/, last access: 13 February 2024.
Federal Land Manager Environmental Database: IMPROVE Aerosol, Federal Land Manager Environmental Database [data set], https://views.cira.colostate.edu/fed/Express/ImproveData.aspx, last access: 13 February 2024.
Feng, L., Smith, S. J., Braun, C., Crippa, M., Gidden, M. J., Hoesly, R., Klimont, Z., van Marle, M., van den Berg, M., and van der Werf, G. R.: The generation of gridded emissions data for CMIP6, Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 461–482, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-461-2020, 2020.
Fuchs, N. A.: The mechanics of aerosols, edited by: Davies, C. N., London, Pergamon Press, 408, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 91, 249–249, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.49709138822, 1965.
Gelaro, R., McCarty, W., Suarez, M. J., Todling, R., Molod, A., Takacs, L., Randles, C. A., Darmenov, A., Bosilovich, M. G., Reichle, R., Wargan, K., Coy, L., Cullather, R., Draper, C., Akella, S., Buchard, V., Conaty, A., Silva, A. M. da, Gu, W., Kim, G.-K., Koster, R., Lucchesi, R., Merkova, D., Nielsen, J. E., Partyka, G., Pawson, S., Putman, W., Rienecker, M., Schubert, S. D., Sienkiewicz, M., and Zhao, B.: The Modern-Era Retrospective Analysis for Research and Applications, Version 2 (MERRA-2), J. Climate, 30, 5419–5454, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0758.1, 2017.
Giles, D. M., Sinyuk, A., Sorokin, M. G., Schafer, J. S., Smirnov, A., Slutsker, I., Eck, T. F., Holben, B. N., Lewis, J. R., Campbell, J. R., Welton, E. J., Korkin, S. V., and Lyapustin, A. I.: Advancements in the Aerosol Robotic Network (AERONET) Version 3 database – automated near-real-time quality control algorithm with improved cloud screening for Sun photometer aerosol optical depth (AOD) measurements, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 12, 169–209, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-12-169-2019, 2019.
Giorgi, F. and Chameides, L. W.: Rainout lifetimes of highly soluble aerosols and gases as inferred from simulations with a general circulation model, J. Geophys. Res., 91, 14367–14376, 1986.
Ginoux, P., Chin, M., Tegen, I., Prospero, J. M., Holben, B., Dubovik, O., and Lin, S.-J.: Sources and distributions of dust aerosols simulated with the GOCART model, J. Geophys. Res., 106, 20255–20273, https://doi.org/10.1029/2000JD000053, 2001.
Gliß, J., Mortier, A., Schulz, M., Andrews, E., Balkanski, Y., Bauer, S. E., Benedictow, A. M. K., Bian, H., Checa-Garcia, R., Chin, M., Ginoux, P., Griesfeller, J. J., Heckel, A., Kipling, Z., Kirkevåg, A., Kokkola, H., Laj, P., Le Sager, P., Lund, M. T., Lund Myhre, C., Matsui, H., Myhre, G., Neubauer, D., van Noije, T., North, P., Olivié, D. J. L., Rémy, S., Sogacheva, L., Takemura, T., Tsigaridis, K., and Tsyro, S. G.: AeroCom phase III multi-model evaluation of the aerosol life cycle and optical properties using ground- and space-based remote sensing as well as surface in situ observations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 87–128, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-87-2021, 2021.
Global Modeling and Assimilation Office: GEOSgcm (10.23.0), Zenodo [code], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8059710, 2023.
Gong, S. L.: A parameterization of sea-salt aerosol source function for sub- and super-micron particles, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 17, 1097, https://doi.org/10.1029/2003GB002079, 2003.
Grell, G. A. and Freitas, S. R.: A scale and aerosol aware stochastic convective parameterization for weather and air quality modeling, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 5233–5250, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-5233-2014, 2014.
Hand, J. L., Copeland, S. A., Day, D. R., Dillner, A. M., Indresand, H., Malm, W. C., McDade, C. E., Moore, C. T., Pitchford, M. L., Schichtel, B. A., and Watson, J. G.: Spatial and Seasonal Patterns and Temporal Variability of Haze and its Constituents in the United States Report V, http://vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Cover_TOC.pdf (last access: 24 August 2022), 2011.
Hess, M., Koepke, P., and Schult, I.: Optical properties of aerosols and clouds: The software package OPAC, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 79, 831–844, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0477(1998)079<0831:OPOAAC>2.0.CO;2, 1998.
Hodzic, A., Campuzano-Jost, P., Bian, H., Chin, M., Colarco, P. R., Day, D. A., Froyd, K. D., Heinold, B., Jo, D. S., Katich, J. M., Kodros, J. K., Nault, B. A., Pierce, J. R., Ray, E., Schacht, J., Schill, G. P., Schroder, J. C., Schwarz, J. P., Sueper, D. T., Tegen, I., Tilmes, S., Tsigaridis, K., Yu, P., and Jimenez, J. L.: Characterization of organic aerosol across the global remote troposphere: a comparison of ATom measurements and global chemistry models, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 4607–4635, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-4607-2020, 2020.
Hoesly, R. M., Smith, S. J., Feng, L., Klimont, Z., Janssens-Maenhout, G., Pitkanen, T., Seibert, J. J., Vu, L., Andres, R. J., Bolt, R. M., Bond, T. C., Dawidowski, L., Kholod, N., Kurokawa, J.-I., Li, M., Liu, L., Lu, Z., Moura, M. C. P., O'Rourke, P. R., and Zhang, Q.: Historical (1750–2014) anthropogenic emissions of reactive gases and aerosols from the Community Emissions Data System (CEDS), Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 369–408, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-369-2018, 2018.
Holben, B. N., Eck, T. F., Slutsker, I., Tanre, D., Buis, J. P., Setzer, A., Vermote, E., Reagan, J. A., Kaufman, Y., Nakajima, T., Lavenue, F., Jankowiak, I., and Smirnov, A.: AERONET – A federated instrument network and data archive for aerosol characterization, Remote Sens. Environ., 66, 1–16, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0034-4257(98)00031-5, 1998.
Iacono, M. J., Delamere, J. S., Mlawer, E. J., Shephard, M. W., Clough, S. A., and Collins, W. D.: Radiative forcing by long-lived greenhouse gases: Calculations with the AER radiative transfer models, J. Geophys. Res., 113, D13103, https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JD009944, 2008.
Jaeglé, L., Quinn, P. K., Bates, T. S., Alexander, B., and Lin, J.-T.: Global distribution of sea salt aerosols: new constraints from in situ and remote sensing observations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 3137–3157, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-3137-2011, 2011.
Kemppinen, O., Colarco, P. R., and Castellanos, P.: GEOS aerosol optical table calculation package GEOSmie, NASA Technical Report Series on Global Modeling and Data Assimilation, Volume 63, https://gmao.gsfc.nasa.gov/pubs/docs/Kemppinen1447.pdf (last access: 13 January 2023), 2022.
Kim, D., Chin, M., Yu, H., Diehl, T., Tan, Q., Kahn, R. A., Tsigaridis, K., Bauer, S. E., Takemura, T., Pozzoli, L., Bellouin, N., Schulz, M., Peyridieu, S., Chédin, A., and Koffi, B.: Sources, sinks, and transatlantic transport of North African dust aerosol: A multimodel analysis and comparison with remote sensing data, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 119, 6259–6277, https://doi.org/10.1002/2013JD021099, 2014.
Kim, D., Chin, M., Yu, H., Pan, X., Bian, H., Tan, Q., Kahn, R. A., Tsigaridis, K., Bauer, S. E., Takemura, T., Pozzoli, L., Bellouin, N., and Schulz, M.: Asian and Trans-Pacific Dust: A Multimodel and Multiremote Sensing Observation Analysis, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 124, 13534–13559, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JD030822, 2019.
Kim, D., Chin, M., Cruz, C. A., Tong, D., and Yu, H.: Spring dust in western North America and its interannual variability – Understanding the role of local and transported dust, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 126, e2021JD035383, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021JD035383, 2021.
Kok, J. F., Adebiyi, A. A., Albani, S., Balkanski, Y., Checa-Garcia, R., Chin, M., Colarco, P. R., Hamilton, D. S., Huang, Y., Ito, A., Klose, M., Leung, D. M., Li, L., Mahowald, N. M., Miller, R. L., Obiso, V., Pérez García-Pando, C., Rocha-Lima, A., Wan, J. S., and Whicker, C. A.: Improved representation of the global dust cycle using observational constraints on dust properties and abundance, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 8127–8167, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-8127-2021, 2021.
Kramer, S. J., Alvarez, C., Barkley, A. E., Colarco, P. R., Custals, L., Delgadillo, R., Gaston, C. J., Govindaraju, R., and Zuidema, P.: Apparent dust size discrepancy in aerosol reanalysis in north African dust after long-range transport, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 10047–10062, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-10047-2020, 2020.
Lana, A., Bell, T. G., Simó, R., Vallina, S. M., Ballabrera-Poy, J., Kettle, A. J., Dachs, J., Bopp, L., Saltzman, E. S., Stefels, J., Johnson, J. E., and Liss, P. S.: An updated climatology of surface dimethlysulfide concentrations and emission fluxes in the global ocean, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 25, GB1004 https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GB003850, 2011.
Levy, R., Hsu, C., et al.: MODIS Atmosphere L2 Aerosol Product, NASA MODIS Adaptive Processing System, Goddard Space Flight Center [data set], USA, https://doi.org/10.5067/MODIS/MOD04_L2.006, 2015a.
Levy, R., Hsu, C., et al.: MODIS Atmosphere L2 Aerosol Product, NASA MODIS Adaptive Processing System, Goddard Space Flight Center [data set], USA, https://doi.org/10.5067/MODIS/MYD04_L2.061, 2015b.
Levy, R. C., Mattoo, S., Sawyer, V., Shi, Y., Colarco, P. R., Lyapustin, A. I., Wang, Y., and Remer, L. A.: Exploring systematic offsets between aerosol products from the two MODIS sensors, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 11, 4073–4092, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-4073-2018, 2018.
Liss, P. S. and Merlivat, L.: Air-sea gas exchange rates: Introduction and synthesis, in: The Role of Air-Sea Exchange in Geochemical Cyclig, edited by: Buat-Menard, P., Dreidel, Norwell, Mass., 113–127, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-4738-2_5, 1986.
Liu, H., Jacob, D., Bey, I., and Yantosca, R.: Constraints from Pb-210 and Be-7 on wet deposition and transport in a global three-dimensional chemical tracer model driven by assimilated meteorological fields, J. Geophys. Res., 106, 12109–12128, https://doi.org/10.1029/2000JD900839, 2001.
Lock, A. P., Brown, A. R., Bush, M. R., Martin, G. M., and Smith, R. N. B.: A New Boundary Layer Mixing Scheme. Part I: Scheme Description and Single-Column Model Tests, Mon. Weather Rev., 128, 3187–3199, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(2000)128<3187:ANBLMS>2.0.CO;2, 2000.
Louis, J. F.: A parametric model of vertical eddy fluxes in the atmosphere, Bound.-Lay. Meteorol., 17, 187–202, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00117978, 1979.
Lu, C.-H., da Silva, A., Wang, J., Moorthi, S., Chin, M., Colarco, P., Tang, Y., Bhattacharjee, P. S., Chen, S.-P., Chuang, H.-Y., Juang, H.-M. H., McQueen, J., and Iredell, M.: The implementation of NEMS GFS Aerosol Component (NGAC) Version 1.0 for global dust forecasting at NOAA/NCEP, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 1905–1919, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-1905-2016, 2016.
Lucchesi, R.: File Specification for GEOS FP. GMAO Office Note No. 4 (Version 1.2), 61 pp, http://gmao.gsfc.nasa.gov/pubs/office_notes (last access: 9 March 2023), 2018.
Maria, S. F., Russell, L. M., Gilles, M. K., and Myneni, S. C. B.: Organic aerosol growth mechanisms and their climate-forcing implications, Science, 306, 1921–1924, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1103491, 2004.
McDuffie, E. E., Smith, S. J., O'Rourke, P., Tibrewal, K., Venkataraman, C., Marais, E. A., Zheng, B., Crippa, M., Brauer, M., and Martin, R. V.: A global anthropogenic emission inventory of atmospheric pollutants from sector- and fuel-specific sources (1970–2017): an application of the Community Emissions Data System (CEDS), Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 12, 3413–3442, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-3413-2020, 2020.
Molod, A., Hackert, E., Vikhliaev, Y., Zhao, B., Barahona, D., Vernieres, G., Borovikov, A., Kovach, R. M., Marshak, J., Schubert, S., Li, Z., Lim, Y.-K., Andrews, L. C., Cullather, R., Koster, R., Achuthavarier, D., Carton, J., Coy, L., Friere, J. L. M., Longo, K. M., Nakada, K., and Pawson, S.: GEOS-S2S Version 2: The GMAO High-Resolution Coupled Model and Assimilation System for Seasonal Prediction, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 125, e2019JD031767, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JD031767, 2020.
NASA/LARC/SD/ASDC: CALIPSO Lidar Level 1.5 Profile, V1-00, NASA Langley Atmospheric Science Data Center DAAC [data set], https://doi.org/10.5067/CALIOP/CALIPSO/LID_L15-STANDARD-V1-00, 2019.
Nielsen, J., Pawson, S., Molod, A., Auer, B., da Silva, A., Douglass, A., Duncan, B., Liang, Q., Manyin, M., Oman, L., Putman, W., Strahan, S., and Wargan, K.: Chemical Mechanisms and Their Applications in the Goddard Earth Observing System (GEOS) Earth System Model, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 9, 3019–3044, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017MS001011, 2017.
O'Rourke, P., Smith, S. J., Mott, A. R., Ahsan, H., McDuffie, E. E., Crippa, M., Klimont, Z., McDonald, B., Wang, S., Nicholson, M. B., Hoesly, R. M., and Feng, L.: CEDS v_2021_04_21 Gridded emissions data, Zenodo [data set], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4741285, 2021.
Provençal, S., Buchard, V., da Silva, A. M., Leduc, R., and Barrette, N.: Evaluation of PM surface concentrations simulated by Version 1 of NASA's MERRA Aerosol Reanalysis over Europe, Atmos. Pollut. Res., 8, 374–382, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apr.2016.10.009, 2017.
Randles, C. A., da Silva, A. M., Buchard, V., Darmenov, A., Colarco, P. R., Aquila, V., Bian, H., Nowottnick, E. P., Pan, X., Smirnov, A., Yu, H., and Govindaraju, R.: The MERRA-2 Aerosol Assimilation NASA Technical Report Series on Global Modeling and Data Assimilation, NASA/TM-2016-104606, Vol. 45, 143 pp., https://gmao.gsfc.nasa.gov/pubs/docs/Randles887.pdf (last access: 7 March 2023), 2016.
Randles, C. A., da Silva, A. M., Buchard, V., Colarco, P. R., Darmenov, A., Govindaraju, R., Smirnov, A., Holben, B., Ferrare, R., Hair, J., Shinozuka, Y., and Flynn, C. J.: The MERRA-2 Aerosol Reanalysis, 1980 Onward. Part I: System Description and Data Assimilation Evaluation, J. Climate, 30, 6823–6850, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0609.1, 2017.
Remer, L. A., Levy, R. C., Mattoo, S., Tanré, D., Gupta, P., Shi, Y., Sawyer, V., Munchak, L. A., Zhou, Y., Kim, M., Ichoku, C., Patadia, F., Li, R.-R., Gassó, S., Kleidman, R. G., and Holben, B. N.: The Dark Target Algorithm for Observing the Global Aerosol System: Past, Present, and Future, Remote Sens., 12, 2900, https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12182900, 2020.
Rémy, S., Kipling, Z., Flemming, J., Boucher, O., Nabat, P., Michou, M., Bozzo, A., Ades, M., Huijnen, V., Benedetti, A., Engelen, R., Peuch, V.-H., and Morcrette, J.-J.: Description and evaluation of the tropospheric aerosol scheme in the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) Integrated Forecasting System (IFS-AER, cycle 45R1), Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 4627–4659, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-4627-2019, 2019.
Reynolds, R. W., Rayner, N. A., Smith, T. M., Stokes, D. C., and Wang, W.: An Improved In Situ and Satellite SST Analysis for Climate, J. Climate, 15, 1609–1625, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(2002)015<1609:AIISAS>2.0.CO;2, 2002.
Saxena, P., Hudischewskyj, A. B., Seigneur, C., and Seinfeld, J. H.: A comparative study of equilibrium approaches to the chemical characterization of secondary aerosols, Atmos. Environ., 20, 1471–1483, https://doi.org/10.1016/0004-6981(86)90019-3, 1986.
Sayer, A. M., Hsu, N. C., Lee, J., Kim, W. V., and Dutcher, S. T.: Validation, Stability, and Consistency of MODIS Collection 6.1 and VIIRS Version 1 Deep Blue Aerosol Data Over Land, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 124, 4658–4688, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018JD029598, 2019.
Schwartz, M. J., Pumphrey, H. C., Santee, M. L., Manney, G. L., Lambert, A., Livesey, N. J., Millán, L., Neu, J. L., Read, W. J., and Werner, F.: Australian New Year's PyroCb impact on Stratospheric Composition, Geophys. Res. Lett., 47, e2020GL090831, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL090831, 2020.
Shang, X., Lipponen, A., Filioglou, M., Sundström, A.-M., Parrington, M., Buchard, V., Darmenov, A. S., Welton, E. J., Marinou, E., Amiridis, V., Sicard, M., Rodríguez-Gómez, A., Komppula, M., and Mielonen, T.: Monitoring biomass burning aerosol transport using CALIOP observations and reanalysis models: a Canadian wildfire event in 2019, EGUsphere [preprint], https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1945, 2023.
Soulie, A., Granier, C., Darras, S., Zilbermann, N., Doumbia, T., Guevara, M., Jalkanen, J.-P., Keita, S., Liousse, C., Crippa, M., Guizzardi, D., Hoesly, R., and Smith, S.: Global Anthropogenic Emissions (CAMS-GLOB-ANT) for the Copernicus Atmosphere Monitoring Service Simulations of Air Quality Forecasts and Reanalyses, Earth Syst. Sci. Data Discuss. [preprint], https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2023-306, in review, 2023.
Strode, S. A., Ziemke, J. R., Oman, L. D., Lamsal, L. N., Olsen, M. A., and Liu, J.: Global changes in the diurnal cycle of surface ozone, Atmos. Environ., 199, 323–333, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2018.11.028, 2019.
Taha, G., Loughman, R., Zhu, T., Thomason, L., Kar, J., Rieger, L., and Bourassa, A.: OMPS LP Version 2.0 multi-wavelength aerosol extinction coefficient retrieval algorithm, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 14, 1015–1036, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-1015-2021, 2021.
Tegen, I. and Lacis, A. A.: Modeling of particle size distribution and its influence on the radiative properties of mineral dust aerosol, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 101, 19237–19244, https://doi.org/10.1029/95jd03610, 1996.
Textor, C., Schulz, M., Guibert, S., Kinne, S., Balkanski, Y., Bauer, S., Berntsen, T., Berglen, T., Boucher, O., Chin, M., Dentener, F., Diehl, T., Easter, R., Feichter, H., Fillmore, D., Ghan, S., Ginoux, P., Gong, S., Grini, A., Hendricks, J., Horowitz, L., Huang, P., Isaksen, I., Iversen, I., Kloster, S., Koch, D., Kirkevåg, A., Kristjansson, J. E., Krol, M., Lauer, A., Lamarque, J. F., Liu, X., Montanaro, V., Myhre, G., Penner, J., Pitari, G., Reddy, S., Seland, Ø., Stier, P., Takemura, T., and Tie, X.: Analysis and quantification of the diversities of aerosol life cycles within AeroCom, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6, 1777–1813, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-1777-2006, 2006.
Torres, O., Bhartia, P. K., Taha, G., Jethva, H., Das, S., Colarco, P., Krotkov, N., Omar, A., and Ahn, C.: Stratospheric Injection of Massive Smoke Plume From Canadian Boreal Fires in 2017 as Seen by DSCOVR-EPIC, CALIOP, and OMPS-LP Observations, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 125, D032579, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JD032579, 2020.
Tsigaridis, K., Daskalakis, N., Kanakidou, M., Adams, P. J., Artaxo, P., Bahadur, R., Balkanski, Y., Bauer, S. E., Bellouin, N., Benedetti, A., Bergman, T., Berntsen, T. K., Beukes, J. P., Bian, H., Carslaw, K. S., Chin, M., Curci, G., Diehl, T., Easter, R. C., Ghan, S. J., Gong, S. L., Hodzic, A., Hoyle, C. R., Iversen, T., Jathar, S., Jimenez, J. L., Kaiser, J. W., Kirkevåg, A., Koch, D., Kokkola, H., Lee, Y. H., Lin, G., Liu, X., Luo, G., Ma, X., Mann, G. W., Mihalopoulos, N., Morcrette, J.-J., Müller, J.-F., Myhre, G., Myriokefalitakis, S., Ng, N. L., O'Donnell, D., Penner, J. E., Pozzoli, L., Pringle, K. J., Russell, L. M., Schulz, M., Sciare, J., Seland, Ø., Shindell, D. T., Sillman, S., Skeie, R. B., Spracklen, D., Stavrakou, T., Steenrod, S. D., Takemura, T., Tiitta, P., Tilmes, S., Tost, H., van Noije, T., van Zyl, P. G., von Salzen, K., Yu, F., Wang, Z., Wang, Z., Zaveri, R. A., Zhang, H., Zhang, K., Zhang, Q., and Zhang, X.: The AeroCom evaluation and intercomparison of organic aerosol in global models, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 10845–10895, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-10845-2014, 2014.
Wesely, M. L.: Parameterization of Surface Resistances to Gaseous Dry Deposition in Regional-Scale Numerical-Models, Atmos. Environ., 23, 1293–1304, https://doi.org/10.1016/0004-6981(89)90153-4, 1989.
Winker, D. M., Hunt, W. H., and McGill, M. J.: Initial performance assessment of CALIOP, Geophys. Res. Lett., 34, L19803, https://doi.org/10.1029/2007GL030135, 2007.
Winker, D. M., Vaughan, M. A., Omar, A., Hu, Y., Powell, K. A., Liu, Z., Hunt, W. H., and Young, S. A.: Overview of the CALIPSO mission and CALIOP data processing algorithms, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 26, 2310–2323, https://doi.org/10.1175/2009JTECHA1281., 2009.
Xian, P., Reid, J. S., Hyer, E. J., Sampson, C. R., Rubin, J. I., Ades, M., Asencio, N., Basart, S., Benedetti, A., Bhattacharjee, P. S., Brooks, M. E., Colarco, P. R., da Silva, A. M., Eck, T. F., Guth, J., Jorba, O., Kouznetsov, R., Kipling, Z., Sofiev, M., Perez Garcia-Pando, C., Pradhan, Y., Tanaka, T., Wang, J., Westphal, D. L., Yumimoto, K., and Zhang, J.: Current state of the global operational aerosol multi-model ensemble: An update from the International Cooperative for Aerosol Prediction (ICAP), Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 145, 176–209, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.3497, 2019.
Yu, H., Tan, Q., Zhou, L., Zhou, Y., Bian, H., Chin, M., Ryder, C. L., Levy, R. C., Pradhan, Y., Shi, Y., Song, Q., Zhang, Z., Colarco, P. R., Kim, D., Remer, L. A., Yuan, T., Mayol-Bracero, O., and Holben, B. N.: Observation and modeling of the historic “Godzilla” African dust intrusion into the Caribbean Basin and the southern US in June 2020, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 12359–12383, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-12359-2021, 2021.
Zhang, L., Montuoro, R., McKeen, S. A., Baker, B., Bhattacharjee, P. S., Grell, G. A., Henderson, J., Pan, L., Frost, G. J., McQueen, J., Saylor, R., Li, H., Ahmadov, R., Wang, J., Stajner, I., Kondragunta, S., Zhang, X., and Li, F.: Development and evaluation of the Aerosol Forecast Member in the National Center for Environment Prediction (NCEP)'s Global Ensemble Forecast System (GEFS-Aerosols v1), Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 5337–5369, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-5337-2022, 2022.
Zhong, Q., Schutgens, N., van der Werf, G. R., Bauer, S. E., Tsigaridis, K., Mielonen, T., Checa-Garcia, R., Neubauer, D., Kipling, Z., Kirkevag, A., Olivie., D. J. L., Kokkola, H., Matsui, H., Ginoux, P., Takemura, T., Le Sager, P., Remy, S., Bian, H., and Chin, M.: Using modelled relationships and satellite observations to attribute modelled aerosol biases over biomass burning regions, Nat. Commun., 13, 5914, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-33680-4, 2022.
Short summary
The GOCART aerosol module within the Goddard Earth Observing System recently underwent a major refactoring and update to the representation of physical processes. Code changes that were included in GOCART Second Generation (GOCART-2G) are documented, and we establish a benchmark simulation that is to be used for future development of the system. The 4-year benchmark simulation was evaluated using in situ and spaceborne measurements to develop a baseline and prioritize future development.
The GOCART aerosol module within the Goddard Earth Observing System recently underwent a major...
