Articles | Volume 17, issue 2
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-795-2024
© 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-17-795-2024
© 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
| 
31 Jan 2024
Model evaluation paper |
| 31 Jan 2024
| 31 Jan 2024
The prototype NOAA Aerosol Reanalysis version 1.0: description of the modeling system and its evaluation
Joint Center for Satellite Data Assimilation, UCAR, Boulder, Colorado 80301, USA
Atmospheric Sciences Research Center, State University of New York at Albany, Albany, New York 12226, USA
Mariusz Pagowski
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, Colorado 80309, USA
Global Systems Laboratory, Oceanic and Atmospheric Research, NOAA, Boulder, Colorado 80305, USA
Arlindo da Silva
Global Modeling and Assimilation Office, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland 20771, USA
Cheng-Hsuan Lu
Joint Center for Satellite Data Assimilation, UCAR, Boulder, Colorado 80301, USA
Atmospheric Sciences Research Center, State University of New York at Albany, Albany, New York 12226, USA
Bo Huang
Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, Colorado 80309, USA
Global Systems Laboratory, Oceanic and Atmospheric Research, NOAA, Boulder, Colorado 80305, USA
Related authors
Dustin Francis Phillip Grogan, Cheng-Hsuan Lu, Shih-Wei Wei, and Sheng-Po Chen
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 2385–2398, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-2385-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-2385-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
This study shows that incorporating aerosols into satellite radiance calculations affects the representation of African easterly waves (AEWs), and their environment, over North Africa and the eastern Atlantic in a numerical weather model. These changes are driven by radiative effects of Saharan dust captured by the aerosol-affected radiances, which modify the initial fields and can improve the forecasting of AEWs.
Cheng-Hsuan Lu, Quanhua Liu, Shih-Wei Wei, Benjamin T. Johnson, Cheng Dang, Patrick G. Stegmann, Dustin Grogan, Guoqing Ge, Ming Hu, and Michael Lueken
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 1317–1329, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-1317-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-1317-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
This article is a technical note on the aerosol absorption and scattering calculations of the Community Radiative Transfer Model (CRTM) v2.2 and v2.3. It also provides guidance for prospective users of the CRTM aerosol option and Gridpoint Statistical Interpolation (GSI) aerosol-aware radiance assimilation. Scientific aspects of aerosol-affected BT in atmospheric data assimilation are also briefly discussed.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Samuel E. LeBlanc, Michal Segal-Rozenhaimer, Jens Redemann, Connor Flynn, Roy R. Johnson, Stephen E. Dunagan, Robert Dahlgren, Jhoon Kim, Myungje Choi, Arlindo da Silva, Patricia Castellanos, Qian Tan, Luke Ziemba, Kenneth Lee Thornhill, and Meloë Kacenelenbogen
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 11275–11304, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-11275-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-11275-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Airborne observations of atmospheric particles and pollution over Korea during a field campaign in May–June 2016 showed that the smallest atmospheric particles are present in the lowest 2 km of the atmosphere. The aerosol size is more spatially variable than optical thickness. We show this with remote sensing (4STAR), in situ (LARGE) observations, satellite measurements (GOCI), and modeled properties (MERRA-2), and it is contrary to the current understanding.
Sudip Chakraborty, Bin Guan, Duane E. Waliser, and Arlindo M. da Silva
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 8175–8195, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-8175-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-8175-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
This study explores extreme aerosol transport events by aerosol atmospheric rivers (AARs) and shows the characteristics of individual AARs such as length, width, length-to-width ratio, transport strength, and dominant transport direction, the seasonal variations, the relationship to the spatial distribution of surface emissions, the vertical profiles of wind, aerosol mixing ratio, and aerosol mass fluxes, and the major planetary-scale aerosol transport pathways.
Dustin Francis Phillip Grogan, Cheng-Hsuan Lu, Shih-Wei Wei, and Sheng-Po Chen
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 2385–2398, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-2385-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-2385-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
This study shows that incorporating aerosols into satellite radiance calculations affects the representation of African easterly waves (AEWs), and their environment, over North Africa and the eastern Atlantic in a numerical weather model. These changes are driven by radiative effects of Saharan dust captured by the aerosol-affected radiances, which modify the initial fields and can improve the forecasting of AEWs.
Cheng-Hsuan Lu, Quanhua Liu, Shih-Wei Wei, Benjamin T. Johnson, Cheng Dang, Patrick G. Stegmann, Dustin Grogan, Guoqing Ge, Ming Hu, and Michael Lueken
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 1317–1329, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-1317-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-1317-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
This article is a technical note on the aerosol absorption and scattering calculations of the Community Radiative Transfer Model (CRTM) v2.2 and v2.3. It also provides guidance for prospective users of the CRTM aerosol option and Gridpoint Statistical Interpolation (GSI) aerosol-aware radiance assimilation. Scientific aspects of aerosol-affected BT in atmospheric data assimilation are also briefly discussed.
Andrew O. Langford, Christoph J. Senff, Raul J. Alvarez II, Ken C. Aikin, Sunil Baidar, Timothy A. Bonin, W. Alan Brewer, Jerome Brioude, Steven S. Brown, Joel D. Burley, Dani J. Caputi, Stephen A. Conley, Patrick D. Cullis, Zachary C. J. Decker, Stéphanie Evan, Guillaume Kirgis, Meiyun Lin, Mariusz Pagowski, Jeff Peischl, Irina Petropavlovskikh, R. Bradley Pierce, Thomas B. Ryerson, Scott P. Sandberg, Chance W. Sterling, Ann M. Weickmann, and Li Zhang
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 1707–1737, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-1707-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-1707-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The Fires, Asian, and Stratospheric Transport–Las Vegas Ozone Study (FAST-LVOS) combined lidar, aircraft, and in situ measurements with global models to investigate the contributions of stratospheric intrusions, regional and Asian pollution, and wildfires to background ozone in the southwestern US during May and June 2017 and demonstrated that these processes contributed to background ozone levels that exceeded 70 % of the US National Ambient Air Quality Standard during the 6-week campaign.
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.
Galina Wind, Arlindo M. da Silva, Kerry G. Meyer, Steven Platnick, and Peter M. Norris
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 1–14, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-1-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-1-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
This is the third paper in series about the Multi-sensor Cloud and Aerosol Retrieval Simulator (MCARS). In this paper we use MCARS to create a set of constraints that might be used to assimilate a new above-cloud aerosol retrieval product developed for the MODIS instrument into a general circulation model. We executed the above-cloud aerosol retrieval over a series of synthetic MODIS granules and found the product to be of excellent quality.
Sarah J. Doherty, Pablo E. Saide, Paquita Zuidema, Yohei Shinozuka, Gonzalo A. Ferrada, Hamish Gordon, Marc Mallet, Kerry Meyer, David Painemal, Steven G. Howell, Steffen Freitag, Amie Dobracki, James R. Podolske, Sharon P. Burton, Richard A. Ferrare, Calvin Howes, Pierre Nabat, Gregory R. Carmichael, Arlindo da Silva, Kristina Pistone, Ian Chang, Lan Gao, Robert Wood, and Jens Redemann
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 1–46, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-1-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-1-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Between July and October, biomass burning smoke is advected over the southeastern Atlantic Ocean, leading to climate forcing. Model calculations of forcing by this plume vary significantly in both magnitude and sign. This paper compares aerosol and cloud properties observed during three NASA ORACLES field campaigns to the same in four models. It quantifies modeled biases in properties key to aerosol direct radiative forcing and evaluates how these biases propagate to biases in forcing.
Xinxin Ye, Pargoal Arab, Ravan Ahmadov, Eric James, Georg A. Grell, Bradley Pierce, Aditya Kumar, Paul Makar, Jack Chen, Didier Davignon, Greg R. Carmichael, Gonzalo Ferrada, Jeff McQueen, Jianping Huang, Rajesh Kumar, Louisa Emmons, Farren L. Herron-Thorpe, Mark Parrington, Richard Engelen, Vincent-Henri Peuch, Arlindo da Silva, Amber Soja, Emily Gargulinski, Elizabeth Wiggins, Johnathan W. Hair, Marta Fenn, Taylor Shingler, Shobha Kondragunta, Alexei Lyapustin, Yujie Wang, Brent Holben, David M. Giles, and Pablo E. Saide
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 14427–14469, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-14427-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-14427-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Wildfire smoke has crucial impacts on air quality, while uncertainties in the numerical forecasts remain significant. We present an evaluation of 12 real-time forecasting systems. Comparison of predicted smoke emissions suggests a large spread in magnitudes, with temporal patterns deviating from satellite detections. The performance for AOD and surface PM2.5 and their discrepancies highlighted the role of accurately represented spatiotemporal emission profiles in improving smoke forecasts.
Kristina Pistone, Paquita Zuidema, Robert Wood, Michael Diamond, Arlindo M. da Silva, Gonzalo Ferrada, Pablo E. Saide, Rei Ueyama, Ju-Mee Ryoo, Leonhard Pfister, James Podolske, David Noone, Ryan Bennett, Eric Stith, Gregory Carmichael, Jens Redemann, Connor Flynn, Samuel LeBlanc, Michal Segal-Rozenhaimer, and Yohei Shinozuka
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 9643–9668, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-9643-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-9643-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Using aircraft-based measurements off the Atlantic coast of Africa, we found the springtime smoke plume was strongly correlated with the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere (more smoke indicated more humidity). We see the same general feature in satellite-assimilated and free-running models. Our analysis suggests this relationship is not caused by the burning but originates due to coincident continental meteorology plus fires. This air is transported over the ocean without further mixing.
Ying-Chieh Chen, Sheng-Hsiang Wang, Qilong Min, Sarah Lu, Pay-Liam Lin, Neng-Huei Lin, Kao-Shan Chung, and Everette Joseph
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 4487–4502, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-4487-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-4487-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
In this study, we integrate satellite and surface observations to statistically quantify aerosol impacts on low-level warm-cloud microphysics and drizzle over northern Taiwan. Our result provides observational evidence for aerosol indirect effects. The frequency of drizzle is reduced under polluted conditions. For light-precipitation events (≤ 1 mm h-1), however, higher aerosol concentrations drive raindrops toward smaller sizes and thus increase the appearance of the drizzle drops.
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.
Jens Redemann, Robert Wood, Paquita Zuidema, Sarah J. Doherty, Bernadette Luna, Samuel E. LeBlanc, Michael S. Diamond, Yohei Shinozuka, Ian Y. Chang, Rei Ueyama, Leonhard Pfister, Ju-Mee Ryoo, Amie N. Dobracki, Arlindo M. da Silva, Karla M. Longo, Meloë S. Kacenelenbogen, Connor J. Flynn, Kristina Pistone, Nichola M. Knox, Stuart J. Piketh, James M. Haywood, Paola Formenti, Marc Mallet, Philip Stier, Andrew S. Ackerman, Susanne E. Bauer, Ann M. Fridlind, Gregory R. Carmichael, Pablo E. Saide, Gonzalo A. Ferrada, Steven G. Howell, Steffen Freitag, Brian Cairns, Brent N. Holben, Kirk D. Knobelspiesse, Simone Tanelli, Tristan S. L'Ecuyer, Andrew M. Dzambo, Ousmane O. Sy, Greg M. McFarquhar, Michael R. Poellot, Siddhant Gupta, Joseph R. O'Brien, Athanasios Nenes, Mary Kacarab, Jenny P. S. Wong, Jennifer D. Small-Griswold, Kenneth L. Thornhill, David Noone, James R. Podolske, K. Sebastian Schmidt, Peter Pilewskie, Hong Chen, Sabrina P. Cochrane, Arthur J. Sedlacek, Timothy J. Lang, Eric Stith, Michal Segal-Rozenhaimer, Richard A. Ferrare, Sharon P. Burton, Chris A. Hostetler, David J. Diner, Felix C. Seidel, Steven E. Platnick, Jeffrey S. Myers, Kerry G. Meyer, Douglas A. Spangenberg, Hal Maring, and Lan Gao
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 1507–1563, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1507-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1507-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Southern Africa produces significant biomass burning emissions whose impacts on regional and global climate are poorly understood. ORACLES (ObseRvations of Aerosols above CLouds and their intEractionS) is a 5-year NASA investigation designed to study the key processes that determine these climate impacts. The main purpose of this paper is to familiarize the broader scientific community with the ORACLES project, the dataset it produced, and the most important initial findings.
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.
Cited articles
Ackerman, A. S., Toon, O. B., Stevens, D. E., Heymsfield, A. J., Ramanathan, V., and Welton, E. J.: Reduction of Tropical Cloudiness by Soot, Science, 288, 1042–1047, 2000.
Albrecht, B.: Aerosols, Cloud Microphysics, and Fractional Cloud, Science, 245, 1227–1230, 1989.
Andreae, M. O. and Crutzen, P. J.: Atmospheric aerosols: biogeochemical sources and role in atmospheric chemistry, Science, 276, 1052–1058, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.276.5315.1052, 1997.
Bender, F. A. M., Frey, L., McCoy, D. T., Grosvenor, D. P., and Mohrmann, J. K.: Assessment of aerosol–cloud–radiation correlations in satellite observations, climate models and reanalysis, Clim. Dynam., 52, 4371–4392, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-018-4384-z, 2019.
Benedetti, A. and Vitart, F.: Can the direct effect of aerosols improve subseasonal predictability?, Mon. Weather Rev., 146, 3481–3498, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-17-0282.1, 2018.
Benedetti, A., Morcrette, J.-J., Boucher, O., Dethof, A., Engelen, R. J., Fisher, M., Flentje, H., Huneeus, N., Jones, L., Kaiser, J. W., Kinne, S., Mangold, A., Razinger, M., Simmons, A. J., and Suttie, M.: Aerosol analysis and forecast in the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts integrated forecast system: 2. Data assimilation, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 114, D13205, https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JD011115, 2009.
Bhattacharjee, P. S., Wang, J., Lu, C.-H., and Tallapragada, V.: The implementation of NEMS GFS Aerosol Component (NGAC) Version 2.0 for global multispecies forecasting at NOAA/NCEP – Part 2: Evaluation of aerosol optical thickness, Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 2333–2351, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-2333-2018, 2018.
Bishop, C. H., Etherton, B. J., and Majumdar, S. J.: Adaptive sampling with the ensemble transform Kalman filter. Part I: Theoretical aspects, Mon. Weather Rev., 129, 420–436, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(2001)129<0420:ASWTET>2.0.CO;2, 2001.
Bozzo, A., Remy, S., Benedetti, A., Flemming, J., Bechtold, P., Rodwell, M. J., and Morcrette, J.-J.: Implementation of a CAMS-based aerosol climatology, ECMWF Tech. Memo., 35 pp., https://doi.org/10.21957/84ya94mls, 2017.
Buchard, V., da Silva, A. M., Colarco, P. R., Darmenov, A., Randles, C. A., Govindaraju, R., Torres, O., Campbell, J., and Spurr, R.: Using the OMI aerosol index and absorption aerosol optical depth to evaluate the NASA MERRA Aerosol Reanalysis, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 5743–5760, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-5743-2015, 2015.
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.
Buehner, M.: Ensemble-derived stationary and flow-dependent background-error covariances: Evaluation in a quasi-operational NWP setting, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 131, 1013–1043, https://doi.org/10.1256/qj.04.15, 2005.
Cao, S., Zhang, S., Gao, C., Yan, Y., Bao, J., Su, L., Liu, M., Peng, N., and Liu, M.: A long-term analysis of atmospheric black carbon MERRA-2 concentration over China during 1980–2019, Atmos. Environ., 264, 118662, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2021.118662, 2021.
Castellanos, P. and da Silva, A.: Global Modeling and Assimilation Office The GEOS-5 Neural Network Retrieval (NNR) for AOD, 2017 AGU Fall Meeting, New Orleans, LA, H34F-03, https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20170012197 (last access: 22 January 2024), 2017.
Cazorla, A., Bahadur, R., Suski, K. J., Cahill, J. F., Chand, D., Schmid, B., Ramanathan, V., and Prather, K. A.: Relating aerosol absorption due to soot, organic carbon, and dust to emission sources determined from in-situ chemical measurements, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 9337–9350, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-9337-2013, 2013.
Chen, Y., Mills, S., Street, J., Golan, D., Post, A., Jacobson, M., and Paytan, A.: Estimates of atmospheric dry deposition and associated input of nutrients to Gulf of Aqaba seawater, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 112, D04309, https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JD007858, 2007.
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.
Choi, Y., Chen, S. H., Huang, C. C., Earl, K., Chen, C. Y., Schwartz, C. S., and Matsui, T.: Evaluating the Impact of Assimilating Aerosol Optical Depth Observations on Dust Forecasts Over North Africa and the East Atlantic Using Different Data Assimilation Methods, J. Adv. Model Earth Sy., 12, e2019MS001890, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001890, 2020.
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.
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, 212 pp., https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20180005253 (last access: 21 January 2024), 2015.
Dong, X., Fu, J. S., Huang, K., Tong, D., and Zhuang, G.: Model development of dust emission and heterogeneous chemistry within the Community Multiscale Air Quality modeling system and its application over East Asia, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 8157–8180, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-8157-2016, 2016.
Fan, W., Chen, T., Zhu, Z., Zhang, H., Qiu, Y., and Yin, D.: A review of secondary organic aerosols formation focusing on organosulfates and organic nitrates, J. Hazard. Mater., 430, 128406, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2022.128406, 2022.
Flemming, J., Benedetti, A., Inness, A., Engelen, R. J., Jones, L., Huijnen, V., Remy, S., Parrington, M., Suttie, M., Bozzo, A., Peuch, V.-H., Akritidis, D., and Katragkou, E.: The CAMS interim Reanalysis of Carbon Monoxide, Ozone and Aerosol for 2003–2015, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 1945–1983, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-1945-2017, 2017.
Gelaro, R., McCarty, W., Suárez, 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., da Silva, A. M., Gu, W., Kim, G., 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.
Hamill, T. M. and Snyder, C.: A hybrid ensemble Kalman filter–3D variational analysis scheme, Mon. Weather Rev., 128, 2905–2919, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(2000)128<2905:AHEKFV>2.0.CO;2, 2000.
Hand, J. L., Prenni, A. J., Schichtel, B. A., Malm, W. C., and Chow, J. C.: Trends in remote PM2.5 residual mass across the United States: Implications for aerosol mass reconstruction in the IMPROVE network, Atmos. Environ., 203, 141–152, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2019.01.049, 2019.
Harris, L., Chen, X., Putman, W., Zhou, L., and Chen, J.-H.: A Scientific Description of the GFDL Finite-Volume Cubed-Sphere Dynamical Core, NOAA technical memorandum OAR GFDL, 2021-001, https://doi.org/10.25923/6nhs-5897, 2021.
Huang B., Pagowski, M., Trahan, S., Martin, C. R., Tangborn, A., Kongdragunta, S., and Kleist, D. T.: JEDI-Based Three-Dimensional Ensemble-Variational Data Assimilation System for Global Aerosol Forecasting at NCEP, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 15, e2022MS003232, https://doi.org/10.1029/2022MS003232, 2023.
Hunt, B. R., Kostelich, E. J., and Szunyogh, I.: Efficient data assimilation for spatiotemporal chaos: A local ensemble transform Kalman filter, Physica D, 230, 112–126, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physd.2006.11.008, 2007.
Inness, A., Baier, F., Benedetti, A., Bouarar, I., Chabrillat, S., Clark, H., Clerbaux, C., Coheur, P., Engelen, R. J., Errera, Q., Flemming, J., George, M., Granier, C., Hadji-Lazaro, J., Huijnen, V., Hurtmans, D., Jones, L., Kaiser, J. W., Kapsomenakis, J., Lefever, K., Leitão, J., Razinger, M., Richter, A., Schultz, M. G., Simmons, A. J., Suttie, M., Stein, O., Thépaut, J.-N., Thouret, V., Vrekoussis, M., Zerefos, C., and the MACC team: The MACC reanalysis: an 8 yr data set of atmospheric composition, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 4073–4109, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-4073-2013, 2013.
Inness, A., Ades, M., Agustí-Panareda, A., Barré, J., Benedictow, A., Blechschmidt, A.-M., Dominguez, J. J., Engelen, R., Eskes, H., Flemming, J., Huijnen, V., Jones, L., Kipling, Z., Massart, S., Parrington, M., Peuch, V.-H., Razinger, M., Remy, S., Schulz, M., and Suttie, M.: The CAMS reanalysis of atmospheric composition, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 3515–3556, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-3515-2019, 2019.
Jones, A., Roberts, D. L., and Slingo, A.: A climate model study of indirect radiative forcing by anthropogenic sulphate aerosols, Nature, 370, 450–453, 1994.
Kaiser, J. W., Heil, A., Andreae, M. O., Benedetti, A., Chubarova, N., Jones, L., Morcrette, J.-J., Razinger, M., Schultz, M. G., Suttie, M., and van der Werf, G. R.: Biomass burning emissions estimated with a global fire assimilation system based on observed fire radiative power, Biogeosciences, 9, 527–554, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-9-527-2012, 2012.
Kalita, G., Kunchala, R. K., Fadnavis, S., and Kaskaoutis, D. G.: Long term variability of carbonaceous aerosols over Southeast Asia via reanalysis: Association with changes in vegetation cover and biomass burning, Atmos. Res., 245, 105064, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2020.105064, 2020.
Lahoz, W. A. and Schneider, P.: Data assimilation: Making sense of Earth Observation, Front. Environ. Sci., 2, 16, https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2014.00016, 2014.
Lin, S.: A “Vertically Lagrangian” Finite-Volume Dynamical Core for Global Models, Mon. Weather Rev., 132, 2293–2307, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(2004)132<2293:AVLFDC>2.0.CO;2, 2004.
Lohmann, U., Feichter, J., Penner, J., and Leaitch, R.: Indirect effect of sulfate and carbonaceous aerosols: A mechanistic treatment, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 105, 12193–12206, https://doi.org/10.1029/1999JD901199, 2000.
Lorenc, A. C.: Analysis methods for numerical weather prediction, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 112, 1177–1194, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.49711247414, 1986.
Lorenc, A. C.: The potential of the ensemble Kalman filter for NWP – a comparison with 4D-Var, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 129, 3183–3203, https://doi.org/10.1256/qj.02.132, 2003.
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.
Lynch, P., Reid, J. S., Westphal, D. L., Zhang, J., Hogan, T. F., Hyer, E. J., Curtis, C. A., Hegg, D. A., Shi, Y., Campbell, J. R., Rubin, J. I., Sessions, W. R., Turk, F. J., and Walker, A. L.: An 11-year global gridded aerosol optical thickness reanalysis (v1.0) for atmospheric and climate sciences, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 1489–1522, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-1489-2016, 2016.
Meng Z., Yang, P., Kattawar, G. W., Bi, L., Liou, K. N., and Laszlo, I.: Single-scattering properties of tri-axial ellipsoidal mineral dust aerosols: A database for application to radiative transfer calculations, J. Aerosol Sci., 41, 501–512, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaerosci.2010.02.008, 2010.
Mitchell Jr., J. M.: The Effect of Atmospheric Aerosols on Climate with Special Reference to Temperature near the Earth's Surface, J. Appl. Meteorol., 10, 703–714, 1971.
Mulcahy, J. P., Walters, D. N., Bellouin, N., and Milton, S. F.: Impacts of increasing the aerosol complexity in the Met Office global numerical weather prediction model, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 4749–4778, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-4749-2014, 2014.
Nowottnick, E. P., Colarco, P. R., Braun, S. A., Barahona, D. O., da Silva, A., Hlavka, D. L., McGill, M. J., and Spackman, J. R.: Dust Impacts on the 2012 Hurricane Nadine Track during the NASA HS3 Field Campaign, J. Atmos. Sci., 75, 2473–2489, https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS-D-17-0237.1, 2018.
Pagowski, M., Grell, G. A., McKeen, S. A., Peckham, S. E., and Devenyi, D.: Three-dimensional variational data assimilation of ozone and fine particulate matter observations: Some results using the Weather Research and Forecasting-Chemistry model and Grid-point Statistical Interpolation, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 136, 2013–2024, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.700, 2010.
Pagowski, M., Liu, Z., Grell, G. A., Hu, M., Lin, H.-C., and Schwartz, C. S.: Implementation of aerosol assimilation in Gridpoint Statistical Interpolation (v. 3.2) and WRF-Chem (v. 3.4.1), Geosci. Model Dev., 7, 1621–1627, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-7-1621-2014, 2014.
Palmer, T. N., Buizza, R., Doblas-Reyes, F., Jung, T., Leutbecher, M., Shutts, G. J., and Weisheimer, A.: Stochastic parametrization and model uncertainty, ECMWF Tech. Memo., 598, 44 pp., https://doi.org/10.21957/ps8gbwbdv, 2009.
Pan, X., Ichoku, C., Chin, M., Bian, H., Darmenov, A., Colarco, P., Ellison, L., Kucsera, T., da Silva, A., Wang, J., Oda, T., and Cui, G.: Six global biomass burning emission datasets: intercomparison and application in one global aerosol model, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 969–994, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-969-2020, 2020.
Pérez, C., Nickovic, S., Pejanovic, G., Baldasano, J. M., and Özsoy, E.: Interactive dust-radiation modeling: A step to improve weather forecasts, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 111, D16206, https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD006717, 2006.
Pöschl, U.: Atmospheric aerosols: Composition, transformation, climate and health effects, Angew. Chem. Int. Edit., 44, 7520–7540, https://doi.org/10.1002/anie.200501122, 2005.
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.
Rubin, J. I., Reid, J. S., Hansen, J. A., Anderson, J. L., Collins, N., Hoar, T. J., Hogan, T., Lynch, P., McLay, J., Reynolds, C. A., Sessions, W. R., Westphal, D. L., and Zhang, J.: Development of the Ensemble Navy Aerosol Analysis Prediction System (ENAAPS) and its application of the Data Assimilation Research Testbed (DART) in support of aerosol forecasting, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 3927–3951, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-3927-2016, 2016.
Saide, P. E., Carmichael, G. R., Liu, Z., Schwartz, C. S., Lin, H. C., da Silva, A. M., and Hyer, E.: Aerosol optical depth assimilation for a size-resolved sectional model: impacts of observationally constrained, multi-wavelength and fine mode retrievals on regional scale analyses and forecasts, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 10425–10444, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-10425-2013, 2013.
Schuster, G. L., Dubovik, O., and Holben, B. N.: Angstrom exponent and bimodal aerosol size distributions, J. Geophys. Res., 111, D07207, https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD006328, 2006.
Schwartz, C. S., Liu, Z., Lin, H. C., and Cetola, J. D.: Assimilating aerosol observations with a “hybrid” variational-ensemble data assimilation system, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 119, 4043–4069, https://doi.org/10.1002/2013JD020937, 2014.
Shao, Y., Wyrwoll, K., Chappell, A., Huang, J., Lin, Z., McTainsh, G. H., Mikami, M., Tanaka, T. Y., Wang, X., and Yoon, S.: Dust cycle: An emerging core theme in Earth system science, Aeolian Res., 2, 181–204, https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AEOLIA.2011.02.001, 2011.
Sinyuk, A., Holben, B. N., Eck, T. F., Giles, D. M., Slutsker, I., Korkin, S., Schafer, J. S., Smirnov, A., Sorokin, M., and Lyapustin, A.: The AERONET Version 3 aerosol retrieval algorithm, associated uncertainties and comparisons to Version 2, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 13, 3375–3411, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-3375-2020, 2020.
Tompkins, A. M., Cardinali, C., Morcrette, J. J., and Rodwell, M.: Influence of aerosol climatology on forecasts of the African Easterly Jet, Geophys. Res. Lett., 32, 1–4, https://doi.org/10.1029/2004GL022189, 2005.
Tsikerdekis, A., Schutgens, N. A. J., and Hasekamp, O. P.: Assimilating aerosol optical properties related to size and absorption from POLDER/PARASOL with an ensemble data assimilation system, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 2637–2674, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-2637-2021, 2021.
Twomey, S.: Pollution and the Planetary Albedo, Atmos. Environ., 8, 1251–1256, 1974.
Twomey, S.: The Influence of Pollution on the Shortwave Albedo, J. Atmos. Sci., 34, 1149–1152, 1977.
Wang, J., Bhattacharjee, P. S., Tallapragada, V., Lu, C.-H., Kondragunta, S., da Silva, A., Zhang, X., Chen, S.-P., Wei, S.-W., Darmenov, A. S., McQueen, J., Lee, P., Koner, P., and Harris, A.: The implementation of NEMS GFS Aerosol Component (NGAC) Version 2.0 for global multispecies forecasting at NOAA/NCEP – Part 1: Model descriptions, Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 2315–2332, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-2315-2018, 2018.
Wei, S.-W., Pagowski, M., da Silva, A., Lu, C.-H. (Sarah), and Huang, B.: pNARA v1.0 system (GEFS-Aerosols and JEDI), Zenodo [code], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8226055, 2023a.
Wei, S.-W., Pagowski, M., da Silva, A., Lu, C.-H. (Sarah), and Huang, B.: Sample data for the evaluation of pNARA v1.0, Zenodo [data set], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8222945, 2023b.
Wei, S.-W., Pagowski, M., da Silva, A., Lu, C.-H. (Sarah), and Huang, B.: Observation data for pNARA v1.0, Zenodo [data set], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8226441, 2023c.
Wiscombe, W. J.: Improved Mie scattering algorithms, Appl. Optics, 19, 1505–1509, 1980.
Xian, P., Zhang, J., O'Neill, N. T., Toth, T. D., Sorenson, B., Colarco, P. R., Kipling, Z., Hyer, E. J., Campbell, J. R., Reid, J. S., and Ranjbar, K.: Arctic spring and summertime aerosol optical depth baseline from long-term observations and model reanalyses – Part 1: Climatology and trend, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 9915–9947, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-9915-2022, 2022.
Yukimoto, S., Adachi, Y., Hosaka, M., Sakami, T., Yoshimura, H., Hirabara, M., Tanaka, T. Y., Shindo, E., Tsujino, H., and Deushi, M.: A new global climate model of the Meteorological Research Institute: MRI-CGCM3: -Model description and basic performance, J. Meteor. Soc. Jpn., 90, 23–64, https://doi.org/10.2151/jmsj.2012-A02, 2012.
Yumimoto, K., Tanaka, T. Y., Oshima, N., and Maki, T.: JRAero: the Japanese Reanalysis for Aerosol v1.0, Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 3225–3253, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-3225-2017, 2017.
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.
Zhang, X., Kondragunta, S., da Silva, A., Lu, S., Ding, H., Li, F., and Zhu, Y.: The Blended Global Biomass Burning Emissions Product from MODIS and VIIRS Observations (GBBEPx), NESDIS ATBD, 30 pp., 2019.
Zhou, M., Wang, J., Chen, X., Xu, X., Colarco, P. R., Miller, S. D., Reid, J. S., Kondragunta, S., Giles, D. M., and Holben, B.: Nighttime smoke aerosol optical depth over U.S. rural areas: First retrieval from VIIRS moonlight observations, Remote Sens. Environ., 267, 112717, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2021.112717, 2021.
Short summary
This study describes the modeling system and the evaluation results for the first prototype version of a global aerosol reanalysis product at NOAA, prototype NOAA Aerosol ReAnalysis version 1.0 (pNARA v1.0). We evaluated pNARA v1.0 against independent datasets and compared it with other reanalyses. We identified deficiencies in the system (both in the forecast model and in the data assimilation system) and the uncertainties that exist in our reanalysis.
This study describes the modeling system and the evaluation results for the first prototype...
