CMIP7 uses the Multi-Satellite Volcanic Sulfur Dioxide L4 Long-Term Global Database (MSVOLSO2L4; Carn, 2021), which is a comprehensive inventory of SO₂ emissions by volcanic eruptions in the satellite era. In this context, the satellite era began at the onset of NASA's Nimbus-7 Total Ozone Mapping Spectrometer (TOMS) mission in October 1978, when daily UV satellite measurements of volcanic SO₂ emissions first became available. Other satellite-based inventories exist (e.g. Carboni et al., 2016; Neely and Schmidt, 2016; Bingen et al., 2017; Schallock et al., 2023), but they do not cover the full satellite era (1978–present), and most of them are not extended as recent measurements become available. UV satellite observations are the primary source of SO₂ data for MSVOLSOL4, beginning with the TOMS missions (1978–2005; e.g. Fisher et al., 2019) and followed by the Ozone Monitoring Instrument (OMI; 2004–present; e.g. Li et al., 2017), the Ozone Mapping and Profiler Suite (OMPS; 2011–present; e.g. Li et al., 2024), and the Tropospheric Monitoring Instrument (TROPOMI; 2017–present; e.g. Theys et al., 2021). IR satellite measurements of SO₂ are also used for high-latitude volcanic eruptions during the winter months, when UV data are not available (e.g. Clarisse et al., 2012; Taylor et al., 2018). MSVOLSO2L4 provides an estimate of the SO₂ mass loading and injection altitude for all eruptions that emit SO₂ detectable by UV or IR satellites. Each entry includes the source volcano and location (latitude and longitude), the eruption date, and the Volcanic Explosivity Index (VEI; Newhall and Self, 1982). Eruptions are categorized as either “effusive” (where lava flow effusion is the dominant eruption style) or “explosive” (where injection of volcanic gas and ash clouds dominates). For each eruption, a single SO₂ injection altitude is provided and labeled as either “observed” or “estimated”. Observed injection altitudes are derived from a variety of sources including direct UV or IR satellite retrievals of SO₂ altitude, IR satellite measurements of cloud-top temperatures, volcanic ash advisories (VAAs), or aircraft pilot reports. In the absence of altitude observations (which is mainly an issue for older eruptions in the database) an estimated injection altitude is given, which by default is 5 km above the volcanic vent for effusive eruptions, and 10 km above the vent for explosive eruptions. Although SO₂ emissions are distributed over a range of altitudes in most volcanic eruptions, the single injection altitude in MSVOLSOL4 attempts to capture the dominant level of SO₂ injection (e.g., the umbrella cloud altitude for an explosive eruption).

Before implementation in CMIP7, the following pre-processing steps were applied:

We excluded effusive eruptions and explosive eruptions with a VEI strictly smaller than 3, as these eruptions were deemed to be unlikely to have resulted in upper-tropospheric or stratospheric injections.

Although the latest version of MSVOLSO2L4 documents eruptions up to 2025, we used eruptions up to 2023 in version 2.2.1 of the CMIP7 emission inventory. We acknowledge that by considering upper tropospheric volcanic injections, some of the aerosol-chemistry-climate models might double-count some of the tropospheric volcanic sulfur emissions if tropospheric volcanic emissions are specified separately in climate models. However, the tropospheric injections associated with our dataset are in the order of 0.1 Tg SO₂ yr⁻¹ , two orders of magnitude smaller than total tropospheric volcanic sulfur emissions (order 20 Tg SO₂ yr⁻¹, e.g. Carn et al., 2017) which are dominated by passive volcanic degassing. This double-counting is thus negligible.

Since the pioneering work introduced in the 1980s which used the content of sulfate in polar ice cores to reconstruct past volcanic activity and related changes of stratospheric aerosol burden (Hammer et al., 1980), several datasets have been compiled to quantify volcanic sulfate depositions across the polar ice sheets of Greenland and Antarctica (Crowley and Unterman, 2013; Gao et al., 2007; Robock and Free, 1995; Sigl et al., 2014). These ice-core arrays form the basis for reconstructions of stratospheric sulfur injections from volcanic eruptions back in time (Gao et al., 2008; Sigl et al., 2022; Toohey and Sigl, 2017). They include ice cores from sites of varying elevation and snow-accumulation rates, including different species (sulfate, sulfur), analyzed with different analytical instrumentation of varying precision. Site selection further dictates the susceptibility of the ice-core records towards postdepositional effects such as wind-drift, melting or diffusion and the relative importance of dry versus wet deposition of aerosols, all of which contribute to the overall uncertainty of the reconstruction (Gautier et al., 2016; Sigl et al., 2014) next to methodological choices regarding detection, quantification and calibration (Fuglestvedt et al., 2024; Gao et al., 2007; Toohey and Sigl, 2017).

Sigl et al. (2015) provided a chronological framework for ice-cores from Greenland and Antarctica based on annual-layer counting of multi-parameter high-resolution aerosol records from both polar ice sheets over the past 2500 years. Within the lattice of synchronized ice cores, a total of 283 volcanic eruption signals has been detected, 81 of which were detected simultaneously in both polar ice sheets, which has traditionally been interpreted as an indication of tropical volcanic eruptions. Between 1750 and 2010 CE, 38 volcanic eruptions have been detected in the ice-core records from NGRIP (Plummer et al., 2012), NEEM (Sigl et al., 2013) and within a multi-ice-core composite record across Antarctica (AVS-2k; Sigl et al., 2014) (Fig. 2). Pinatubo 1991 is the youngest detected eruption in the AVS-2k stack. With SO₂ emissions from industrial emissions strongly increasing over the 20th century (Hoesly et al., 2018), estimates of volcanic sulfate depositions are highly uncertain for Greenland ice cores from 1920 onwards, including volcanic eruptions such as Agung (1963) and Pinatubo (1991) which coincide with the peak of anthropogenic sulfate pollution over Greenland (Sigl et al., 2018, 2013) (Fig. 2). In CMIP7, we used the lower-bound value (50 % of the best-estimate value) for volcanic sulfate deposition over Greenland for all eruptions (N=9) in the 20th century of the Sigl et al. (2015) dataset. This choice ensured more consistency between CMIP6 and CMIP7 aerosol optical properties for periods where pyrheliometer measurements are used in CMIP6.

The eVolv2k data product (Toohey and Sigl, 2017) includes estimates of the magnitudes and approximate source latitudes of major volcanic stratospheric sulfur injection from 500 BCE to 1900 CE. The products are based on ice cores from three sites in Greenland (NEEM, NGRIP and GISP2) and between 8 and 17 individual ice cores from Antarctica included in the AVS-2k composite over the Common Era (Sigl et al., 2014) (Fig. 2). Except for the addition of the GISP2 ice-core record (Zielinski, 1995) the underlying ice-core records are identical to those from Sigl et al. (2015).

For selected eruptions (14 between 1750–1900), emission locations and dates in eVolv2k were based on matching ice-core volcanic sulfate signals with historic eruptions included in the GVP database. Eruption dates for unidentified eruptions are based on ice-core chronologies for Greenland and Antarctica (Sigl et al., 2015) and represent the first year in which a sulfate anomaly was detected in the glacio-chemical records. Absolute age uncertainties in the ice-core records used in eVolv2k are believed to be on average better than ±2 years during the past 1500 years. Broad injection regions are estimated from the ice cores; signals occurring synchronously (given small possible dating uncertainties) in both Greenland and Antarctic composites are attributed to tropical (25° S–25° N) eruptions, while those with signals in only one hemisphere are assumed to be extratropical (90–25° S and 25–90° N) in origin. Stratospheric sulfate injections are estimated by linearly scaling the Greenland and Antarctic ice-sheet sulfate mass deposition (often referred to as “flux”) derived from the polar composites to hemispheric sulfur loadings, based on a technique pioneered by Gao et al. (2007). Uncertainties in VSSI are provided, based on both spread in the ice-core flux values and model-based estimates of the imperfect correlation between ice-sheet deposition and hemispheric loading (Toohey et al., 2013, see also Marshall et al., 2021; Fuglestvedt et al., 2024). For CMIP7, matches between ice-core sulfate deposition events and historical eruptions were all re-assessed (see Sect. 3). When specific eruptions date and latitude are provided in eVolv2k for events with a proposed match, we thus ignore these dates and latitudes and instead use the year and latitudinal band derived from ice cores in Toohey and Sigl (2017), before attribution to a historical eruption.

With a snow accumulation rate of >40 cm yr⁻¹ the D4 ice core from central Greenland provides high time-resolution information on past accumulation rates and atmospheric composition, including volcanic emissions and anthropogenic pollution between 1733 and 2002 CE (Banta and McConnell, 2007; McConnell and Edwards, 2008; McConnell et al., 2007). The ice core has been dated using multi-parameter annual-layer counting including hydrogen peroxide (H₂O₂) with minimum concentrations consistently occurring during midwinter with maximum dating uncertainties of ±1 year. A core segment of the core (D4i) was reanalyzed in 2014 at the Desert Research Institute to derive a timeseries of sulfur (and other impurity) concentrations with a nominal (i.e. assuming constant snow accumulation between the winter markers) monthly resolution between 1733–1906 CE (Fang et al., 2023; Rhodes et al., 2016). After subtracting a mean annual cycle (representative of marine and volcanic background sulfur emissions), Fang et al. (2023) compared excess sulfur concentrations against the timing of major volcanic eruptions (VEI ≥ 3) from the GVP database, revealing a close temporal correspondence of excess sulfur following several known explosive eruptions (VEI = 4), suggesting a volcanic source for the excess sulfur. Fang et al. (2023) have therefore adapted the detection thresholds and reconstructed a total of 35 additional volcanic eruptions between 1733 and 1895 CE using the D4i dataset (Fig. 2). These volcanic eruptions resulted in ice-core sulfate depositions in the range of 5 to 10 kg km⁻² which for attributed eruptions (e.g. Awu 1812, Suwanosejima 1813, Fuego 1857) equate to stratospheric sulfur injections between 0.5 and 1.5 Tg SO₂. These estimated values are in close agreement with typical sulfur injections obtained by satellites (Carn et al., 2016) for eruptions of comparable magnitudes (VEI = 4) such as Kasatochi 2008, Sarychev 2009 or Nabro 2011 (Fang et al., 2023). As with eVolv2k, multiple deposition events in D4i were matched in the source dataset paper (Fang et al., 2023) to specific historical eruptions. However, as with eVolv2k, we re-assessed all matches between ice core sulfate deposition events and historical eruptions (see Sect. 3). When matching deposition event to eruption, we thus use the ice-core-based eruption date and latitudinal band (one band encompassing the tropics and northern hemisphere for D4i) instead of latitudes and dates associated with a historical eruption matches proposed in Fang et al. (2023).

The Volcanoes of the World (VOTW) database of the Smithsonian Global Volcanism Program (GVP, 2025) is the reference volcanological database for the Holocene and is well-maintained by the Smithsonian Institution. We only use confirmed eruptions in this database with a VEI greater than 3 as smaller VEI values do not correspond to eruptions explosive enough to result in stratospheric injections. In addition to the confirmed nature of the eruption and the VEI, the eruption start date, end date and latitude from VOTW are used to inform the matching procedure to ice-core sulfate deposition peaks. We also used the volcano longitude and, when eruption-specific vent altitude could not be found in the literature, the reported vent altitude. Note that the VOTW database does not provide emitted SO₂ mass.

One of the most important limitations of VOTW, and indeed all geological and ice-core volcanic records, is eruption under-recording, with under-recording rates increasing back in time as well as for smaller VEIs (Fig. 3). Numerous eruptions are simply not known, and many eruptions have not been characterized sufficiently to attribute an accurate VEI (most often underestimated) (e.g. Brown et al., 2014; Rougier et al., 2016; Papale et al., 2022). These issues disproportionally affect regions in which volcanic deposits have been less systematically documented, or where deposits erode faster (e.g. in a wet tropical climate) (Rougier et al, 2016). Characterizing under-recording rates is important to assess the robustness of matches made in the CMIP7 dataset. We assume that global eruption rates are constant and that in the absence of eruption under-recording, the cumulative number of eruptions would thus follow a linear trend in time. For each VEI between 3 and 6, we perform a linear fit of the cumulative eruption number since 10 000 BCE for a period for which we are very confident that the global record is robust. Going forward in time from 10 000 BCE, we then find the first data point within the prediction interval of that fit (at the 95 % confidence level) and consider that there is significant under-recording before. For VEI 3 eruptions, we assume that the record is robust for the satellite era and thus use 1980–2022 for the linear fit. For other VEIs, we assume that there is no under-recording for the period for which we determined no under-recording for the VEI value immediately below. For example, for VEI 3, our procedure suggests no under-recording since 1951 (Fig. 3a), and we thus use 1951–2022 to constrain the linear fit for VEI 4 eruptions (Fig. 3b). Following this procedure, we find that significant under-recording occurs before 1951, 1853, 1450 and 2040 BCE for eruptions of VEI 3, 4, 5 and 6, respectively. Using each fit period, we also find return periods of 0.2, 1.7, 16 and 106 years for these respective VEIs. Both our suggested time threshold for significant under-recording and eruption return period are in good agreement with Papale (2018) for VEI 3–5, with older time threshold and lower eruption rate for VEI6, which are well recorded for the full Common Era anyway. Improved consistency with methods used in e.g. Papale (2018) or Rougier et al. (2016) to define the time threshold for significant under-recording should be considered in future dataset versions.

For any pre-satellite eruption with a proposed historical eruption match, we conducted a literature review to constrain the eruption year, month, day, vent altitude and altitude of SO₂ injection. For satellite-era eruptions for which a default SO₂ injection altitude was used in MSVOLSO2L4, we also conducted a search for the altitude of SO₂ injection (all other parameters are systematically informed in MSVOLSO2L4). Firstly, for eruptions from 1900 onwards, we verified if the eruption was informed in the Independent Volcanic Eruption Source Parameter Archive (IVESPA, Aubry et al., 2021). IVESPA is a compilation of eruption source parameters conducted by a working group of the International Association of Volcanology and Chemistry of the Earth Interior (IAVCEI) using information from published literature. We prioritized using information from IVESPA because: (i) all information provided in the database originates from a comprehensive literature search; (ii) key source parameter values, including heights, were vetted independently by two members of the IVESPA working group; (iii) IVESPA distinguishes three types of height: the top and spreading heights of the tephra cloud, and the SO₂ injection height. If the eruption of interest is not informed in IVESPA, we started our parameter search from the GVP database (Global Volcanism Program, 2025). The volcano and eruption pages might contain general information about the eruption, including the eruption year, month, day, and vent altitude. Bulletin reports about the eruptive history of the volcano might refine this information and also provide data on eruptive plume heights. After collecting parameter values from the GVP pages, we searched for parameters using source references mentioned in the GVP database for each eruption, as well as references found through targeted Google Scholar searches using the volcano name and eruption year. We sometimes refined these searches with key words such as “height” or “isopleth” for eruptions with a large number of associated papers. Whenever parameters values found both in the peer-review literature and in the GVP database differed, we used information from the peer reviewed literature. Last, when finding eruptive plume height in the literature, we did our best to interpret whether the height corresponded to the observed SO₂ height (HSO2), to the observed spreading height of the ash cloud (Hspr), to the observed top height of the plume overshoot (Htop), or to the top height reconstructed from isopleth (Hiso), i.e. from the mapped distribution of clast size in the eruption deposit. Following Engwell et al. (2023), we then applied the following correction to obtain an estimate of the SO₂ injection height (HSO2): 1HSO2=1.28HsprHtop0.67Hiso, with all heights expressed a.v.l., not a.s.l.. These corrections were derived from well observed eruptions in the IVESPA database. Note that for most pre-satellite era eruptions, plume heights found in the literature are derived from isopleth maps. In the absence of correction, the SO₂ injection height would likely be overestimated by 49 % on average. The CMIP7 dataset (see Data Availability section) provides all parameters found through our literature search, as well as comments containing references used and explanations on the parameter values provided.

Pre-satellite era volcanic sulfur injections with no eruption match have no exact information on the eruption location. The dataset includes a flag indicating if a fill value was used for the longitude and latitude. For longitude, we assign a default value of 0° E for unidentified eruptions, and note that injection longitude has little influence on the stratospheric aerosol forcing generated by models (Toohey et al., 2011).

For eruptions with no match, the only information we can use to infer a latitude is the deposition asymmetry, which we here define following Toohey et al. (2016) as 2α=FNH-FSHFNH+FSH, where FNH and FSH are the sulfur flux recorded in Greenland and Antarctica, respectively. α has a value of 1 for pure Greenland deposition, -1 for pure Antarctica deposition, and varies linearly with the difference in polar deposition. Figure 4 shows the relationship between α and the eruption latitude (λ) for satellite-era eruptions, flag 3 and 4 eruptions from our emission dataset, and eruptions before 1750 which were geochemically matched to an ice-core sulfate deposition event. This relationship is well-captured (R2=0.75) by the linear fit: 3λ=7.2+48α. We thus use Eq. (3) to attribute a latitude to all eruptions for which it is unknown. The fit prediction uncertainty (at 95 % confidence level) is nearly constant with a value of 40°, which we use as an uncertainty on the value inferred from Eq. (3). We excluded the tropical northern hemisphere eruptions of El Chichón (1982, three phases) and Santa Maria (1902) before fitting. These eruptions are clear outliers with α=-1, but this is unsurprising as anthropogenic sulfate complicates the detection of volcanic sulfate deposition peaks in Greenland in the 20th century. Low-medium confidence (match flag 1–2) matches are all in good agreement with Eq. (3), providing circumstantial evidence to support the proposed matches.

We acknowledge that numerous other parameters such as injection height, season and mass also govern the value of α (Marshall et al., 2021). However, the influence of these other controls is reflected in the important prediction uncertainty of our proposed relationship between α and λ. Although Eq. (3) is simplistic, using a non-linear relationship between α and λ is not justified by the available data nor its uncertainty. Interactive stratospheric aerosol model simulations from Marshall et al. (2021) are also consistent with a linear relationship (Fig. 4) (λ=-9.9+55α, R2=0.79). Their use of polar eruption latitudes might explain the larger slope, and the far south intercept could be caused by strong stratospheric transport towards the Northern Hemisphere in the UM-UKCA model they use (e.g. Dhomse et al., 2020). Assessing the deposition asymmetry-eruption latitude relationship simulated by other models could give greater confidence in Eq. (3) whilst being a test of model skill at simulating stratospheric aerosol processes. Last, most ice-core datasets currently prescribe a tropical latitude (e.g. 0°) for eruptions for which |α|<1, and a mid-latitude (e.g. ±45°) otherwise (Toohey and Sigl., 2017; Sigl et al., 2022) based on seminal previous work (Lamb, 1970; Cole-Dai, 2010). Although such relationships are outside the prediction uncertainty of our fit only for |α|>≈0.7, they poorly capture the correlation between α and λ seen in observational datasets and simulations compared to Eq. (3), and they also result in relatively low latitude attribution for eruptions with very high deposition asymmetry. Following a similar rational, more recent studies have already reattributed approximated latitudes based on the bipolar depositions (Toohey et al., 2016; Pearson et al., 2022; Abbott et al., 2021; Lin et al., 2022; Verkerk et al., 2025).

Last, for D4i, Eq. (3) can not be used for event with no historical eruption match because the deposition asymmetry factor cannot be quantified. For these eruptions, we thus use an eruption latitude of 30° N which results in approximately 65 % of the sulfur injected in the northern hemisphere and 35 % in the tropics, with this partitioning matching the probabilites that an eruption depositing sulfate in Greenland is northern hemisphere extratropical vs. tropical (Fang et al., 2023).

Pre-satellite era volcanic sulfur injections with no eruption match or with poorly documented eruption match might not have exact information on the eruption date. If no eruption year is known, we assume that the eruption occurred in the year when volcanic sulfate deposition started in the ice cores. We follow the convention adopted in Toohey and Sigl (2017) and Sigl et al. (2022) and assume a default value of January when the eruption month is unknown, and first day of the month when the eruption day is unknown. For D4i events with no attributed eruption or unknown eruption date, the month was aimed to be set to the month when deposition was recorded as the measurements have resolution on the order of month. However, a code typo resulted in these unknown eruption dates to be set to 1 December. This error, which was not corrected for CMIP7 Fast Track because it was detected too late, affects 13 eruptions injecting 1.6–6.5 Tg SO₂ between 1750 and 1849, as well as eruptions in 1868 (2.9 Tg SO₂, deposition starts in May 1868), 1885 (4.2 Tg SO₂, deposition starts in July 1885) and 1894 (1.9 Tg SO₂, deposition starts in April 1894). Overall, for the 1850–2021 period, default eruption dates do not affect generated aerosol optical properties, except for three 1.9–4.2 Tg SO₂ D4i-derived eruptions in December 1868, December 1885 and December 1894 which are likely ∼1 year too late. However, for the 1750–1849 period, the default eruption date affects 16 eruptions, with the 1 December date for the 13 D4i-derived events occurring 11 months later than intended (1 December instead of 1 January) and thus likely having dates ∼1 year too late compared to actual eruptions. Note that the ice-core age uncertainties since 1750 CE can be up to ±1 year (see Sects. 2.2–4 for details). Our dataset includes a flag indicating if a fill value was used for the month and day. No uncertainty is included on the eruption date as part of the dataset.

The SO₂ injection height is unknown for numerous eruptions in our dataset including: (i) ice-core sulfate peaks with no eruption match; (ii) ice-core sulfate peaks with an eruption match for which the plume height has not been characterized; (iii) satellite-era eruptions for which no height observations are available. For the latter, Carn (2021) uses 10 km and 5 km a.v.l. for explosive and effusive eruptions in MSVOLSO2L4. Instead of using this convention, we treat in a consistent way all eruptions with unknown heights. Figure 5 shows how the SO₂ injection height (HSO2, in km a.v.l.) relates to the mass of SO₂ (MSO2, in Tg of SO₂) the only parameter reliably known for all eruptions in our dataset. The relationship between two parameters is reasonably characterized (R2=0.43) by a power-law model: 4HSO2=17.3×MSO20.12. A power-law relationship between SO₂ height and mass is expected. The mass of SO₂ is equal to the mass eruption rate of tephra, multiplied by eruption duration and sulfur content (kg S kg⁻¹ tephra). The mass eruption rate is in turn a power-law function of plume height (e.g. Wilson et al., 1978; Mastin et al., 2009; Engwell, et al., 2023), with this relationship modulated by e.g. atmospheric and vent conditions (e.g. Woodhouse et al., 2013). The large spread in Fig. 5 is thus likely simply explained by variability of eruption duration, sulfur content, syneruptive atmospheric conditions and other factors affecting the height-mass eruption rate relationship. The fact that the exponent of 0.12 is much smaller than values expected from analytical modelling of idealized buoyant plumes rising in absent or strong wind field (0.25–0.33, Morton et al., 1956; Hewett et al., 1971) might be caused by interdependence between the SO₂ mass and the sulfur content, and/or eruption duration, and/or the tephra to SO₂ height ratio. For well observed eruptions in the IVESPA database, Engwell et al. (2023) find that the SO₂ height relates to the mass eruption rate of tephra raised by an exponent 0.169, a value already lower than the expected theoretical range giving confidence in the empirical value used in Eq. (4).

Given the above considerations, we use Eq. (4) to attribute a SO₂ injection height in km a.v.l. when it is unknown. To obtain a height in km a.s.l., the vent altitude is added when known. When unknown (i.e., pre-satellite era eruption with no historical eruption match), we assume a vent altitude of 2.15 km, the mean across all the volcanoes in the CMIP7 dataset. The prediction uncertainty associated with Eq. (4) is asymmetric and a complex function of the SO₂ mass, but we find that a relative uncertainty of 66 % on height captures 95 % of the data for eruptions injecting more than 0.1 Tg SO₂. We thus prescribe a 66 % uncertainty for all heights a.v.l. inferred from Eq. (4). If the vent altitude is known, we neglect the associated uncertainty whereas if it is unknown, we assume a 100 % uncertainty when the vent altitude is unknown and prescribed to 2.15 km. This uncertainty captures 95 % of the known vent altitudes in our dataset. For known eruption heights (i.e. those not inferred from Eq. 4), we arbitrarily set relative uncertainties of 50 % and 38 % on the height a.v.l. of pre-satellite and satellite-era eruptions, respectively. The latter two uncertainty levels represent our expert guess and require further investigation. Last, for eruptions for which the source dataset is the GVP database, no SO₂ mass is constrained and Eq. (4) can thus not be applied prior to assigning a SO₂ mass. Consequently, we arbitrarily assigned heights near the tropopause for VEI 4 eruptions with no constrained SO₂ mass, namely 16 km a.s.l. for tropical eruptions and 11 km a.s.l. for extratropical eruptions. We assigned a height of 18 km a.s.l. to VEI 5 eruptions with no constrained SO₂ mass.

For the VEI 4–5 eruptions for which the source dataset is the GVP database, we need to attribute a SO₂ mass. For the four VEI 5 eruptions not matched to an ice-core signal, we assume an SO₂ mass of 2.78 Tg SO₂ which is equal to the mean mass of four VEI 5 eruptions with a known mass in the dataset (range 0.2–7 Tg SO₂). For the 64 VEI 4 eruptions not matched to an ice-core signal, we considered using the mean mass of VEI 4 eruptions for the satellite era (0.26 Tg SO₂). However, the SO₂ mass of VEI 4 eruptions is highly variable, between 0.003 and 2 Tg SO₂. Furthermore, for such small eruptions, there is little confidence that SO₂ was actually injected into the stratosphere, in particular if the VEI was overestimated. Consequently, we choose a default SO₂ mass enabling to match: (i) the time-averaged volcanic SAOD associated with small-to-moderate magnitude eruptions in the pre-satellite era; and (ii) the satellite-observed time-averaged volcanic SAOD over 1998–2023, during which only eruptions of VEI ≤ 5 occurred and with a SO₂ mass ≤ 2 Tg SO₂. The 1998–2023 mean global mean 525 nm SAOD anomaly, calculated as deviation from the minimum, is 0.003 (Fig. 6a) and is assumed to be a good estimate of the long term time-averaged SAOD anomaly associated with small-to-moderate magnitude eruptions injecting ≤3 Tg SO₂. To match this value over the historical pre-satellite era (1850–1978), we run the EVA_H v2 model (Aubry et al., 2026a) used to produce the pre-satellite stratospheric aerosol optical properties using only small-magnitude eruptions. We ran the model 10 times using default SO₂ masses for GVP-derived VEI 4 eruptions ranging from 0.02 to 0.5 Tg SO₂ (Fig. 6b). We find that a mass of 0.08 Tg SO₂ enables to match the 0.003 1998–2023 global mean SAOD anomaly, and thus choose this mass as the default SO₂ mass for GVP-derived VEI 4 eruptions. By equating the pre-satellite SAOD anomaly from relatively small eruptions to the observed 1998–2023 anomaly characterized by the occurrence of small eruptions only, we aim to minimize bias in mean forcing from small-to-moderate magnitude eruptions between the pre- and satellite era datasets. We acknowledge this approach is subject to high uncertainties. For example, 1998–2023 might not be a sufficiently long period to quantify the true value of small-to-moderate magnitude eruptions, and SAOD is also influenced by pyrocumulonimbus events (e.g. Kloss et al., 2019; Peterson et al., 2025). We also expect the emissions and forcing associated with GVP-derived VEI 4 and 5 eruptions to be highly variable.

Table 3 summarizes all parameters provided in the CMIP7 upper tropospheric-stratospheric volcanic sulfur emission dataset. Two datasets were provided to the modelling community: a netcdf file stored on the Earth System Grid Federation containing key variables required for aerosol models, marked with an asterisk in Table 3, and a spreadsheet containing all Table 3 parameters (see data availibility section). Altogether, these parameters document the data sources and dataset creation process in detail to maximize transparency and facilitate future updates and improvements. All scripts used to produce our emission (and stratospheric aerosol optical property) dataset are publicly available (see code availability statement).

Figure 7 shows the CMIP7 emission dataset, with Table 4 summarizing key metrics. The most prominent eruptions of the dataset, e.g. the 10 Laki eruptive phases in 1783–1784, an unidentified eruption in 1809, and Tambora in 1815, all happen before 1850 and thus will not affect historical climate simulations run by most models (Dunne et al., 2025) nor the pre-industrial control climatology of stratospheric aerosol optical properties (Aubry et al., 2026a). Over 1850–2021, the most prominent eruptions are an unidentified eruption in the early 1860s attributed to the 1861 eruption of Kie Besi in CMIP7, the 1883 eruption of Krakatau, the 1912 eruption of Katmai, the 1963 eruption of Agung, the 1982 eruption of El Chichón and the 1991 eruption of Mt. Pinatubo. Over 1750–2023, the dataset contains 463 eruptions (7.69 yr⁻¹) injecting 428.2 Tg SO₂ (1.56 Tg SO₂ yr⁻¹). Although most of these injections are stratospheric, some are upper-tropospheric and will not affect the CMIP7 stratospheric aerosol optical properties dataset (Aubry et al., 2026a) because the reduced complexity aerosol model (EVA_H v2) used for CMIP7 does not account for potential transport from the troposphere to the stratosphere, or volcanic cloud self-lofting. Figure 7 qualitatively shows that small-to-moderate magnitude eruptions are under-recorded before the satellite era in our dataset, despite our best efforts to include them using the D4i and GVP datasets. Over their respective periods, the D4i dataset contributes an average of 0.36 Tg SO₂ yr⁻¹, the GVP dataset 0.07 Tg SO₂ yr⁻¹, and the eVolv2k and Sigl et al. (2015) datasets (which mostly capture large-magnitude eruptions) 1.27 Tg SO₂ yr⁻¹. Averaged between 1850 (the start year of CMIP7 historical experiments) and 1978 (the last year before use of satellite data), a period for which CMIP7 stratospheric aerosol optical properties are derived from the CMIP7 emission dataset, the CMIP7 global mean SAOD at 550 nm is 0.0135 (Aubry et al., 2026a). Volcanic SO₂ emissions contribute 0.0098 (73 %) of this SAOD (Table 4), and the non-volcanic background contributes 0.0037 (27 %) of it. For the volcanically-driven mean SAOD, 0.0006 (6 %) is contributed by GVP-derived eruptions, 0.0025 (26 %) by D4i-derived eruptions, and 0.0066 (68 %) by eruptions derived from eVolv2k and Sigl et al. (2015) (Table 1).

We do not provide eruption duration nor the exact horizontal or vertical distribution of the SO₂ cloud because it is unconstrained for most eruptions. We thus make recommendations for these parameters hereafter and strongly encourage modelling groups to explicitly document how they specify them when implementing our dataset, regardless of whether or not they follow our recommendations.

We recommend an injection duration of 24 h for all eruptions. Durations on the order of hours-days are typical for explosive eruptions, e.g. the median and average duration of eruptions documented in the IVESPA database are 4 and 45 h, respectively. Furthermore, in MSVOLSO2L4, emissions for eruptions with durations longer than one day (e.g. Eyjafjallajökull 2010) are provided daily, consistent with a 24-h duration. Last, a 24-h duration is standard practice in the interactive stratospheric aerosol community (e.g. VolMIP Tambora experiment, Clyne et al., 2021) and this recommendation thus promotes consistency with existing model experiments.

For the horizontal injection structure, we recommend injection in the model grid cell containing the volcano latitude and longitude. This strategy is again standard practice in the community (e.g. Clyne et al., 2021 for VolMIP Tambora experiment; Quaglia et al., 2023 for ISA-MIP HErSEA experiments), promoting consistency between model experiments. Schallock et al. (2023) have prescribed a 3-dimensional (including horizontal) structure of SO₂ injection consistent with satellite observations in simulations with the EMAC model, which could improve constraints on initial injection but is challenging to apply to pre-satellite era eruptions. Future work could use umbrella spreading models (e.g. Millward et al., 2023; Prata et al., 2025) to prescribe a horizontal injection extent consistent with spreading processes not accounted for in interactive stratospheric aerosol models.

Last, beyond the bulk injection height, the vertical structure of the SO₂ injection is unconstrained for the vast majority of eruptions in our dataset, including for the satellite era. There is also no standard community practice to prescribe these emissions. Simulations with a 3-dimensional volcanic plume model for a wide range of eruption and atmospheric conditions suggest that the vertical profile of horizontal mass flux of gas and fine ash into the umbrella cloud (F) is well approximated by the following Gaussian profile (Aubry et al., 2019): 5Fz=Fmax×e-z-HSO2-z00.108×HSO22 where z is the altitude a.s.l., Fmax the maximum flux value, z0 the vent altitude, and HSO2 is the plume height (here taken as SO₂ height) a.v.l. We thus used 0.108⋅HSO2 to define our injection depth (Sect 4.3), and recommend that modelling groups use this Gaussian profile to specify the vertical SO₂ injection profile (Fig. 8). Should other profiles be specified, we recommend that the profile is always centered on the SO₂ injection altitude (a.s.l.) provided in our dataset, and that most of the SO₂ is injected over a vertical extent of 4 times the depth provided. For example, for a “top hat” profile with a constant flux between two altitudes, we would recommend the lower altitude is HSO2-2x depth, and the upper altitude HSO2+2x depth, with HSO2 here expressed a.v.l. Corresponding top-hat profiles are shown in Fig. 8. We acknowledge that real-word SO₂ clouds would thin as they spread, and that Eq. (5) best describes the injection profile within proximity of the volcano. However, given large uncertainties on reported injection height and the unsteady nature of most eruptions with variable plume height, we think it is preferable to overestimate rather than underestimate the injection depth used in aerosol models. Note that we expect that for some eruptions, part or most of the SO₂ mass might be injected into the model troposphere when using the profile from Fig. 8 with provided emission height.

In choosing source datasets used for CMIP7, we aimed to use products that were most up to date, widely accepted by the volcano-climate community, and documented in peer-reviewed publications. However, alternative source datasets exist. To assess uncertainties in the CMIP7 dataset, we compare it (Fig. 9) to IVI2 (Gao et al., 2008), which is one of the most widely used ice-core inventory along with eVolv2k, and VolcanEESM (Neely and Schmidt, 2016), which is one of the only inventories covering both the pre-satellite and satellite eras. A detailed comparison of IVI2 and eVolv2k, extending beyond the CMIP7 period, is also provided in Toohey and Sigl (2017).

For the pre-satellite era, there are around twice as many more years with volcanic injections in the CMIP7 dataset compared to any of the other two inventories. This reflects our efforts to reduce the pre-satellite bias in small-to-moderate magnitude eruptions by using the D4i and GVP datasets in combination with more widely used ice-core records. Even for the satellite era, 7 years have volcanic injections in the CMIP7 dataset (i.e. MSVOLSO2L4), but not in the VolcanEESM dataset. These differences might be partially due to different filtering of low-mid tropospheric eruptions, but the MSVOLSO2L4 dataset also contains more eruptions. Both for the satellite and pre-satellite era, yearly volcanic SO₂ injections are characterized by some discrepancies between datasets, although most of them are within uncertainties. Notable exceptions are year 1831, marked by the Zavaritskii eruption (Hutchison et al., 2025), with total SO₂ injections of 25.9 Tg SO₂ in CMIP7, vs. 17.9 Tg SO₂ in VolcanEESM and 8.3 Tg SO₂ in IVI2 (in which the distinct 1831 sulfate deposition, see Fig. 1, was not resolved in Antarctica). The 1861 injection, the largest historical (1850–) injection for which no eruption is robustly identified, ranges from 2.1 Tg SO₂ in IVI2 to 9.8 Tg SO₂ in VolcanEESM, with 9.1 Tg SO₂ for CMIP7. IVI2 has a lower value because no sulfate was detected in Greenland in contrast to the ice cores used in CMIP7 (see Fig. 1). 1861 is one of the few eruptions for which the prescribed aerosol optical properties for CMIP6 were, as for CMIP7, derived from emissions using a stratospheric aerosol model (Luo, 2018). CMIP6 used the IVI2 inventory for emissions (Arfeuille et al., 2014), explaining the much stronger forcing for that eruption in CMIP7 (Aubry et al., 2026a). For year 1883 associated with the Krakatau eruption, IVI2, VolcanEESM and CMIP7 respectively estimate 10.7, 16.9 and 18.8 Tg SO₂. Overall, the IVI2 inventory thus has much smaller masses in years with important discrepancies (partly explained by more conservative detection thresholds as described for the above examples). Notable exceptions exist, e.g. 1902 (Santa Maria eruption) for which both CMIP7 and IVI2 have emissions around 2 Tg SO₂, whereas VolcanEESM reports 5 Tg SO₂. Although satellite-era uncertainties on erupted SO₂ mass are important, they are much smaller than the pre-satellite uncertainties. Both VolcanEESM and CMIP7 report total masses around 19.5 Tg SO₂ for 1991 associated with the eruptions of Pinatubo and Cerro Hudson, with IVI2 only reporting 14.7 Tg SO₂. IVI2 derived this estimate from ice-core only, making it more uncertain although the more recent ice-core based estimate of 21.3 Tg SO₂ using Sigl et al. (2015) is consistent with satellite-derived estimates. Recent years marked by small-to-moderate eruptions have typical differences of 20 %–30 % between VolcanEESM and CMIP7, e.g. VolcanEESM reports 2 Tg SO₂ injection for 2011, marked by the Nabro eruption, vs. 2.5 Tg SO₂ in CMIP7.

Estimation of stratospheric sulfate injection from ice-core sulfate mass deposition is subject to large uncertainty (Gao et al., 2007; Toohey and Sigl, 2017; Fuglestvedt et al., 2024). First, transfer functions are used to convert ice-sheet mean (i.e. averaged over an ice-core array) deposition estimates to total stratospheric sulfate loadings. Such transfer functions have been developed using climate-aerosol model simulations (e.g. Gao et al., 2007) or the distribution of fission products in Greenland from thermonuclear testing used as an analogue for stratospheric injection in the Northern Hemisphere extra-tropics (Clausen and Hammer, 1988). Currently, two separate functions are used, one for tropical eruptions and one for extratropical eruptions. Sensitivity studies with the Community Earth System Model (CESM) Whole Atmosphere Community Climate Model version 6 (WACCM6) suggested that current transfer function may be biased by up to 20 % and be strongly sensitive to atmospheric variability and eruption parameters (Fuglestvedt et al., 2024). Second, ice-core datasets used in CMIP7 assume that the sulfate deposited in ice-core is entirely sourced from the stratosphere, even though tropospheric transport to ice-core locations is possible for extra-tropical eruptions. Recent high-resolution measurement of sulfur isotopic composition (i.e. ³³S, ³⁴S) in Greenland ice cores for key explosive volcanic eruptions demonstrated that the fraction of stratospheric sulfur to the total deposited sulfur varied between ca. 60 % for eruptions in Alaska and 100 % for eruptions located in the tropics (Burke et al., 2019, 2023; Pearson et al., 2022). Correcting for the non-stratospheric component within the ice-core records reduced the estimates of sulfur injection for the respective eruptions (Burke et al., 2023). However, high-resolution sulfur isotope analyses of ice cores have only been applied to a small number of historical eruptions (Baroni et al., 2007; Burke et al., 2019; Hutchison et al., 2025). For the 20th century, a third major source of uncertainty is discriminating between volcanic and anthropogenic sources of sulfate, especially for Greenland ice-cores. Novel approaches are urgently needed to better quantify anthropogenic sulfate depositions over Greenland, including distinct source tracers of anthropogenic pollution in the ice cores, isotopic constraints (e.g. ³⁴S, ¹⁵NO₃), to discriminate natural and anthropogenic emissions, or by developing historical sulfate emissions based on inverse modeling of ice-core records (Eckhardt et al., 2023; Geng et al., 2014; Jongebloed et al., 2023; Moseid et al., 2022). The golden era of ice core drilling was in the 1990s, which means that sample density and spatial representation are rapidly declining in the past 30 years (see e.g. Gao et al., 2008; Sigl et al., 2014). Updating records at former drill sites (e.g. GISP2, NEEM, NGRIP) and analyzing sulfate to capture the last 30 years is key to close this data gap and improve calibration of ice-core records with instrumental data. Diagnostic tracers for the presence of tephra are now available (Plunkett et al., 2023), and methods have improved to geochemically characterize small ash shards typical for most eruptions (Innes et al., 2025; Iverson et al., 2017; Narcisi et al., 2019). These techniques should be employed (in tandem with sulfur isotopes) to target volcanic eruptions in the historic period that are currently highly uncertain e.g. unidentified eruptions in 1761, 1809, 1861.

In addition to the above key source of uncertainties which affect the estimation of SO₂ mass for eruptions detected in ice-cores, another crucial source of uncertainty is the detection of these eruptions itself. Figure 10b shows the mean SO₂ flux associated with eruptions of different SO₂ mass. For small-to-moderate magnitude eruptions (<3 Tg SO₂) with short return period, we would expect the distributions for the satellite era (after 1979) and pre-satellite era to be the same if there was no major change to eruption frequency-magnitude distribution through time, and if the CMIP7 dataset was unbiased. Yet, the emissions associated with eruptions <1 Tg SO₂ are one order of magnitude smaller pre-satellite era, which we interpret to be a consequence of difficulties in detecting small eruptions in ice-cores. The emissions associated with eruptions 1–3 Tg SO₂ are twice as large in the pre-satellite era than for the satellite era. Although with only 5 such eruptions (6 if combining individual Nabro 2011 phases), the satellite record might be too short (45 years) to accurately estimate the long-term mean emissions of 1–3 Tg SO₂ eruptions, this discrepancy could be explained by an overestimation of the stratospheric SO₂ mass associated with eruptions in the D4i inventory. 37 % of the 1–3 Tg SO₂ 1750–1978 eruptions originate from D4i in CMIP7, but the Greenland-only, single-core nature of this source dataset might make it more likely to record deposition of sulfate of tropospheric origin. These biases have important consequences for stratospheric aerosol optical properties (Fig. 10c). The CMIP7 dataset was designed so that the mean 1850–1978 SAOD anomaly associated with small-to-moderate magnitude eruptions is equal to the 1998–2023 SAOD anomaly, assuming that this period is long enough to capture the long-term SAOD distribution associated with small-to-moderate magnitude eruptions. However, Fig. 10c shows that the pre-satellite era is likely characterized by too many months having <10-4 SAOD anomalies, a consequence of the lack of small-to-moderate magnitude eruptions (Fig. 10b), and too many months with >10-2 SAOD anomalies, which might be a consequence of the overestimation of the stratospheric SO₂ injections for eruptions injecting 1–3 Tg SO₂ (Fig. 10b). The under-recording of small-to-moderate magnitude eruptions in ice-core is particularly prominent for tropical eruptions (average emissions ≈3 times smaller pre-satellite era relative to satellite era) and extra-tropical southern hemisphere eruptions (average emissions one order of magnitude smaller pre-satellite era relative to satellite era) (Fig. 10a). In addition to biases associated with frequency-magnitude distribution, the CMIP7 emission and aerosol optical property dataset are also subject to spatial biases pre-satellite era, for small-to-moderate magnitude eruptions. Well synchronized, high-elevation, and high snow accumulation ice-core records would be helpful to improve the detection of small-to-moderate magnitude eruptions in Antarctica and future updates should focus on the inclusion of ice-core records from such sites (e.g. Thomas et al., 2023; Pasteris et al., 2014; Dixon et al., 2004) ideally paired with cryptotephra and sulfur isotope analyses (Gautier et al., 2019; Piva et al., 2023). Last, future studies should quantify the radiative forcing and climate impacts associated with differing small-moderate magnitude eruption representation between CMIP6 and CMIP7 (v2.2.1), and between CMIP7 (v2.2.1) and future dataset versions with further reduction of biases discussed in this section.

Although uncertainties and future improvements in ice-core derived volcanic SO₂ injection mass and their attribution to specific historical eruptions are the most important for our dataset, numerous other sources of uncertainty exist. For the pre-satellite era, for identified eruptions, detailed volcanological studies are key to reconstruct eruption source parameters including the eruption sequence and potential occurrence of multiple events (i.e., eruptive phases) injecting sulfur in the stratosphere or upper troposphere, the(ir) precise timing and the(ir) associated injection height. When the top or spreading height of the ash plume is reconstructed from deposit, large uncertainties affect both the height estimate itself (e.g. Rossi et al., 2019) and their conversion to the SO₂ injection height (Engwell et al., 2023; Eq. 1). For unidentified eruptions and for the numerous eruptions of VEI 3–5 with limited published information on eruption source parameters, we made ad-hoc assumptions for these key emission parameters including eruption timing, injection height, and sometimes latitude. Although we proposed new empirical relationships to assign missing injections heights (Fig. 5) and latitudes (Fig. 4), these are subject to high uncertainties. Future work should refine these relationships and complement them with additional constraints, e.g. from sulfur isotope for injection height. Last, although satellite-era eruptions are by far the best constrained in terms of height and mass, with no uncertainty on location and timing, they are also subject to some uncertainties (Fig. 9 and, e.g., Timmreck et al., 2018; Vernier et al., 2024). The creation of an uncertainty product for the CMIP7 volcanic emission inventory will be key to documenting these uncertainties in detail and quantifying how they propagate to aerosol optical properties, including uncertainties on volcanic injection mass (Sects. 3 and 4.5), latitude (Sect. 4.2) and height (Sect. 4.4).

Volcanic eruptions emit other forcing agents than sulfur, including halogens (e.g., Cl, Br, I), water vapor and ash. These are not constrained in our dataset, but these co-emissions have a direct radiative forcing effect (e.g. Vernier et al., 2016) and can influence the life cycle and transport of volcanic sulfur species (e.g. Zhu et al., 2020; Staunton-Sykes et al., 2021; Wells et al., 2023) and thus volcanic sulfate aerosol forcing. Stratospheric halogen emissions play a crucial role in stratospheric ozone depletion impacting atmospheric chemistry (e.g. Solomon et al., 2016; Brenna et al., 2019). Volcanic eruptions can emit large amounts of halogens but most are scavenged in the plume by water and ice so that the quantities directly injected into the stratosphere are often poorly constrained (Tabazadeh and Turco, 1993; Textor et al., 2003). The ice-core community is widely measuring most of these species in cores (Cl, F, Br, tephra) and use them for source attribution (e.g. McConnell et al., 2017; Gabriel et al., 2024) but quantifying the stratospheric emissions of these compounds remains challenging given their high reactivity in the atmosphere and snowpack (Zhai et al., 2023). Last, the Hunga Tonga 2022 eruption unravelled how different the composition, life cycle and forcing of volcanic clouds associated with shallow submarine eruptions can be (APARC, 2025; Colombier et al., 2025). This eruption injected only 0.5–1 Tg SO₂ (Carn et al., 2022), but 146 Tg of water vapor (Millán et al., 2022) into the stratosphere. The injected water accelerated and enhanced sulfate aerosol growth, resulting in a disproportionate aerosol forcing compared to any eruption previously observed by satellite (Sellitto et al., 2022). The stratospheric water vapor also resulted in a positive top-of-the-atmosphere radiative forcing which partially offset the negative aerosol forcing (APARC, 2025). In addition to volcanic forcing agents co-emitted with sulfur, the CMIP7 emission dataset also does not compile source of non-volcanic aerosols. New stratospheric aerosol sources are emerging as a consequence of human activities including pyrocumulonimbus produced by increasingly intense wildfires (e.g. Peterson et al., 2025; Murphy et al., 2025), and aerosol associated with the space industry including rocket launches and spacecraft debris (Brown et al., 2024; Murphy et al., 2023). Developing emission datasets for both non-sulfur volcanic aerosols (precursors) and non-volcanic aerosols (precursors) and incorporating them into the CMIP7 emission dataset is a key future direction.

Naik et al. (2025) highlight the importance of the operationalization of the production of CMIP forcing datasets, i.e. the extension (and, if needed, updating) of these datasets on an annual basis instead of on the CMIP-cycle (≈7 years). For the extension of the volcanic emission dataset, i.e. an extension in time with no major change in methodology and no change to the period covered by the previous version, we are currently reliant on continued extensions of the MSVOLSO2L4 dataset. These extensions are reliant on the continued availability of operational SO₂ products from nadir-viewing, hyperspectral UV and IR sensors on polar-orbiting US (NASA/NOAA), European (ESA/Copernicus) or other satellites. Currently, we expect the UV OMPS and TROPOMI instruments (and the follow-on Copernicus Sentinel-5 mission) to continue operations through the next decade and beyond. New Chinese satellite missions are also beginning to provide volcanic SO₂ measurements (e.g. Zeng et al., 2025). Emission datasets produced by other groups (e.g. Carboni et al., 2016) could be utilised should the NASA-supported MSVOLSO2L4 be discontinued, but would be subject to the same requirements highlighted above in terms of availibility of satellite products, as well as continued funding for the team(s) curating these datasets.

Although dataset extension is the key concern for the operationalization of CMIP forcing production, the volcanic SO₂ emission dataset is particularly uncertain pre-satellite era, as evident from differences between CMIP6 and CMIP7 stratospheric aerosol optical properties (Aubry et al., 2026a). Regular updating of the dataset as new knowledge becomes available is thus important. This requires support to improvements to ice-core datasets discussed in Sect. 4.2, as well as to the widespread volcanology and tephra research on which our dataset is reliant, such as the Smithsonian GVP database (Global Volcanism Program, 2025), studies linking specific historical eruptions to ice-core sulfate deposition (e.g. Hutchison et al., 2025), and studies quantifying eruption source parameters of historical eruptions (e.g. Self and Rampino, 2012) and associated databases (e.g. IVESPA, Aubry et al., 2021). To facilitate the use of published data in the CMIP7 emission dataset and beyond, relevant published data should ideally: (i) have an associated peer-reviewed publication; (ii) include units of parameters, with plume heights a.v.l. vs. a.s.l. or sulfur masses in Tg SO₂ vs. Tg H₂SO₄ vs Tg SO₄ typically requiring clarification; (iii) where possible, document uncertainties including clear confidence level and what source of uncertainties where accounted for; (iv) where updating an existing dataset, keep format as consistent as possible with predecessor version to minimize work associated with using a new version; and (v) make source data open-access. For the latter point, original ice-core datasets from Greenland retrieved in the 1990s and 2000s (extensively used e.g. by Gao et al, 2008; Crowley and Unterman, 2013) are not publicly available. These data from Greenland should be published with all available metadata and supporting datasets that allows to update chronologies (i.e. depth, age, density), in a similar way as it was done for the ice-core records in Antarctica (Thomas et al., 2023).