Response Time of Joule Heating Rate and Nitric Oxide Cooling Emission During Geomagnetic Storms: Correlated Ground‐Based and Satellite Observations

Tikemani Bag,Y. Ogawa

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1029/2023ja032072

2024-02-04

Journal of Geophysical Research Space Physics

Abstract:Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, Volume 129, Issue 2, February 2024.

astronomy & astrophysics

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Investigation of Thermospheric Response to Geomagnetic Storms Using GITM‐OVATION Prime and ‐FTA Model With Comparison to GOLD and SABER Observations

Atishnal Elvin Chand,George Bowden,Melrose Brown

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1029/2023ja031820

2024-10-23

Journal of Geophysical Research Space Physics

Abstract:Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, Volume 129, Issue 10, October 2024.

astronomy & astrophysics
Impact of Interplanetary Shock on Thermospheric Cooling Emission: A Case Study

Tikemani Bag,V. Sivakumar,Y. Ogawa

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1029/2024ja033176

2024-09-28

Journal of Geophysical Research Space Physics

Abstract:Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, Volume 129, Issue 10, October 2024.

astronomy & astrophysics
The Polarity Oscillations of the Equatorial Electrojet in Response to the Geomagnetic Storm on 1 December 2023

Kedeng Zhang,Hui Wang,Huimin Song

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1029/2024ja032978

2024-09-29

Journal of Geophysical Research Space Physics

Abstract:Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, Volume 129, Issue 10, October 2024.

astronomy & astrophysics
Ionospheric Responses To The June 2015 Geomagnetic Storm From Ground And Leo Gnss Observations

Chao Gao,Shuanggen Jin,Liangliang Yuan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12142200

IF: 5

2020-01-01

Remote Sensing

Abstract:Geomagnetic storms are extreme space weather events, which have considerable impacts on the ionosphere and power transmission systems. In this paper, the ionospheric responses to the geomagnetic storm on 22 June 2015, are analyzed from ground-based and satellite-based Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) observations as well as observational data of digital ionosondes, and the main physical mechanisms of the ionospheric disturbances observed during the geomagnetic storm are discussed. Salient positive and negative storms are observed from vertical total electron content (VTEC) based on ground-based GNSS observations at different stages of the storm. Combining topside observations of Low-Earth-Orbit (LEO) satellites (GRACE and MetOp satellites) with different orbital altitudes and corresponding ground-based observations, the ionospheric responses above and below the orbits are studied during the storm. To obtain VTEC from the slant TEC between Global Positioning System (GPS) and LEO satellites, we employ a multi-layer mapping function, which can effectively reduce the overall error caused by the single-layer geometric assumption where the horizontal gradient of the ionosphere is not considered. The results show that the topside observations of the GRACE satellite with a lower orbit can intuitively detect the impact caused by the fluctuation of the F2 peak height (hmF2). At the same time, the latitude range corresponding to the peak value of the up-looking VTEC on the event day becomes wider, which is the precursor of the Equatorial Ionization Anomaly (EIA). However, no obvious response is observed in the up-looking VTEC from MetOp satellites with higher orbits, which indicates that the VTEC responses to the geomagnetic storm mainly take place below the orbit of MetOp satellites.
Response of ICON/MIGHTI Measured Low‐Mid Latitude OI630.0 and OI557.7 nm Dayglow Emissions to the 27 August 2021 Geomagnetic Storm

Hong Gao,Jiyao Xu,Guang‐Ming Chen,Yajun Zhu,Maosheng He,Wei Yuan,Longchang Sun,Dan Li,Hongshan Liu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1029/2023ja032070

2024-01-06

Journal of Geophysical Research Space Physics

Abstract:Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, Volume 129, Issue 1, January 2024.

astronomy & astrophysics
Temporal Evolution of O+ Population in the Near‐Earth Plasma Sheet During Geomagnetic Storms as Observed by the Magnetospheric Multiscale Mission

L. H. Regoli,M. Gkioulidou,S. Ohtani,S. Raptis,C. G. Mouikis,L. M. Kistler,I. J. Cohen,S. A. Fuselier

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1029/2023ja032203

2024-04-27

Journal of Geophysical Research Space Physics

Abstract:Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, Volume 129, Issue 5, May 2024.

astronomy & astrophysics
Extreme Responses of the Ionospheric Radial Currents to the Main Phase of the Super Geomagnetic Storm on 10 May 2024

Hao Xia,Hui Wang,Kedeng Zhang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1029/2024ja033126

2024-12-09

Journal of Geophysical Research Space Physics

Abstract:Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, Volume 129, Issue 12, December 2024.

astronomy & astrophysics
Wind and Temperature Effects on Thermosphere Mass Density Response to the November 2004 Geomagnetic Storm

Jiuhou Lei,J. P. Thayer,A. G. Burns,G. Lu,Yue Deng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1029/2009ja014754

2010-01-01

Journal of Geophysical Research

Abstract:A unique conjunction of the Thermosphere Ionosphere Mesosphere Energetics and Dynamics (TIMED) and the Challenging Minisatellite Payload (CHAMP) satellites provided simultaneous columnar neutral composition, ΣO/N 2 , and thermosphere density observations, enabling a novel study of thermospheric response to the 7–9 November 2004 geomagnetic storm. Both ΣO/N 2 and mass density showed profound response to this severe geomagnetic storm, but their latitudinal and temporal structures differed markedly. In particular, high‐latitude depletion and low‐latitude enhancement in ΣO/N 2 were observed throughout the storm period, especially during the main phase. In contrast, neutral density at 400 km altitude increased from pole to pole shortly after the storm, with strongest enhancement of order 200%–400% during the main phase. Comparisons of observed thermosphere response with simulations from the National Center for Atmospheric Research Thermosphere‐Ionosphere‐Electrodynamics General Circulation Model (TIEGCM) were carried out to interpret the observed contrasting characteristics of thermosphere composition and mass density in response to this geomagnetic storm. The TIEGCM simulations show that the contrasting characteristics occur not only in ΣO/N 2 and mass density at a constant altitude at 400 km, but also in O/N 2 and mass density on a constant‐pressure surface. At an altitude of 400 km (CHAMP altitude), storm‐time mass densities significantly increase due to an increase in scale height throughout the vertical column between the heat source and satellite altitude. For a given increase in scale height, the more scale height increments separating the heat source from the satellite altitude, the greater is the mass density response. It is shown that scale height change is caused partly by storm‐time neutral temperature enhancements due to heating and partly by changes in mean molecular weight due to winds. These findings indicate that wind effects can cause significant deviations from a mass density pattern resulting solely from neutral temperature changes by altering the mean molecular weight, particularly at high latitudes.
Investigating the 17 March 2013 Geomagnetic Storm Impacts on the Wholly Coupled Solar Wind‐Magnetosphere‐Ionosphere‐Thermosphere System‐Of‐Systems

Ildiko Horvath,Brian C. Lovell

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1029/2024ja032917

2024-08-30

Journal of Geophysical Research Space Physics

Abstract:Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, Volume 129, Issue 9, September 2024.

astronomy & astrophysics
Magnetospheric Time‐History in Storm‐Time Magnetic Flux Dynamics: A Global Simulation Campaign

T. Y. Atilaw,M. Akhavan‐Tafti,Q. Al Shidi,T. I. Pulkkinen,D. Fontaine,O. Le Contel,J. A. Slavin,G. Le,L.‐J. Chen,P. H. Reiff,S. W. Alqeeq

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1029/2023ja031997

2024-05-04

Journal of Geophysical Research Space Physics

Abstract:Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, Volume 129, Issue 5, May 2024.

astronomy & astrophysics
Response of NO 5.3 μm Emission to the Geomagnetic Storm on 24 April 2023

Hongshan Liu,Hong Gao,Zheng Li,Jiyao Xu,Weihua Bai,Longchang Sun,Zhongmu Li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16193683

IF: 5

2024-10-02

Remote Sensing

Abstract:The response of NO emission at 5.3 μm in the thermosphere to the geomagnetic storm on 24 April 2023 is analyzed using TIMED/SABER observations and TIEGCM simulations. Both the observations and the simulations indicate a significant enhancement in NO emission during the storm. Observations show two peaks around 50°S/N in the altitude–latitude distribution of NO emission and its relative variation. Additionally, the peak emission and enhancement are stronger on the nightside compared with the dayside. The peak altitude in the Northern Hemisphere is approximately 2–10 km higher than in the Southern Hemisphere; meanwhile, the peak altitude on the dayside is approximately 2–8 km higher than that on the nightside. Simulations reveal three peaks around 50°S, the equator, and 65°N, with peak altitudes at higher latitudes being slightly lower than those observed. In general, the altitude–latitude distribution structure of the relative variation in simulated NO emission matches observations, with two peaks around 50°S/N. TIEGCM simulations suggest that the increase in NO density and temperature during a geomagnetic storm can lead to an increase in NO emission at most altitudes and latitudes. Furthermore, the significant enhancement around 50°S/N is mainly attributed to the changes in NO density.

environmental sciences,imaging science & photographic technology,remote sensing,geosciences, multidisciplinary
Rapid Geomagnetic Variations During High‐Speed Stream, Sheath and Magnetic Cloud‐Driven Geomagnetic Storms From 1996 to 2023

M. N. Pedersen,L. Juusola,H. Vanhamäki,A. T. Aikio,A. Viljanen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1029/2024ja032656

2024-10-14

Journal of Geophysical Research Space Physics

Abstract:Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, Volume 129, Issue 10, October 2024.

astronomy & astrophysics
Longitudinal Development of Cosmic Noise Absorption Based on Multipoint Observations at Subauroral Latitudes During Storm‐Time Substorms on 25–28 August 2018

Yuto Kato,Kazuo Shiokawa,Yoshimasa Tanaka,Mitsunori Ozaki,Akira Kadokura,Shin‐ichiro Oyama,Alexey Oinats,Martin Connors,Dmitry Baishev

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1029/2023ja031950

2024-01-02

Journal of Geophysical Research Space Physics

Abstract:Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, Volume 129, Issue 1, January 2024.

astronomy & astrophysics
Response of the Magnetic Field and Plasmas at the Geosynchronous Orbit to Interplanetary Shock

Chao Yue,QiuGang Zong,YongFu Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11434-009-0649-6

2009-01-01

Chinese Science Bulletin (Chinese Version)

Abstract:Interplanetary shock can greatly disturb the Earth’s magnetosphere and ionosphere, causing the temporal and spatial changes of the magnetic field and plasmas at the geosynchronous orbit. In this paper, we use the magnetic field data of GOES satellites from 1997 to 2007 and the plasma data of MPA on the LANL satellites from 1997 to 2004 to study the properties of magnetic field and plasma (0.03–45 keV) at the geosynchronous orbit (6.6 R E) within 3 hours before and after the arrival of shock front at the geosynchronous orbit through both case study and superposed epoch analysis. It is found that following the arrival of shock front at the geosynchronous orbit, the magnetic field magnitude, as well as GSM BZ component increases significantly on the dayside (8–16 LT), while the B Y component has almost no change before and after shock impacts. In response to the interplanetary shock, the proton becomes much denser with a peak number density of 1.2 cm−3, compared to the typical number density of 0.7 cm−3. The proton temperature increases sharply, predominantly on the dusk and night side. The electron, density increases dramatically on the night side with a peak number density of 2.0 cm−3. The inferred ionospheric O+ density after the interplanetary shock impact reaches the maximum value of 1.2 cm−3 on the dusk side and exhibits the clear dawn-dusk asymmetry. The peak of the anisotropy of proton’s temperature is located at the noon sector, and the anisotropy decreases towards the dawn and dusk side. The minimum of temperature anisotropy is on the night side. It is suggested that the electromagnetic ion cyclotron (EMIC) wave and whistler wave can be stimulated by the proton and electron temperature anisotropy respectively. The computed electromagnetic ion cyclotron wave (EMIC) intense on the day side (8–16 LT) with a frequency value of 0.8 Hz, and the wave intensity decreases towards the dawn and dusk side, the minimum value can be found on the night side. The computed electron whistler wave locates on the day side (8–16 LT) with a value of 2 kHz.
Geomagnetic Impact on Upper Atmospheric Nitric Oxide

L. Megner,K. Hendrickx,M. Stoltz

Abstract:Nitric oxide (NO), in the mesosphere-lower thermosphere, is produced at high latitudes by energetic particle precipitation (EPP). At times of higher geomagnetic activity, a stronger EPP occurs, and more NO is produced. NO can descend, inside the polar vortex in the winter polar area, to the stratosphere where it participates in ozone depletion processes which leads to a thinning of the ozone layers. Ozone absorbs UV-radiation, which makes it important to the heat budget in the stratosphere. Changes in the ozone volume alter the heat budget which in turn a ects the dynamics in the middle atmosphere. In the end of 2014 the sub-millimetre radiometer (SMR), on board the satellite Odin, measured the NO volume mixing ratio during two short periods with the objective to observe how NO density changes with enhanced geomagnetic activity. In this project, the retrieved SMR data is analyzed to investigate the NO response due to geomagnetic activity. The rst observed period had quiet geomagnetic conditions, while the second period started with active conditions. The NO densities in these periods were compared, and the second period showed larger densities, compared to the rst, especially at high latitudes in the Northern hemisphere. Enhanced densities were also found in the auroral region in the Southern hemisphere during the second period. The di erence between morning and evening densities was investigated. Larger morning densities were found at high altitudes in the northern auroral region, while in the equatorial, and southern mid-latitudes, larger evening densities were found, at the same altitudes. To investigate the direct response of NO due to geomagnetic activity a correlation and regression analysis was made between the NO density and two geomagnetic indices, the AEand Kp index, for di erent lags of the indices, and for di erent regions. This analysis showed a signi cant correlation for the southern auroral region during the second period, for a lag time of 14 hours. The AE index showed larger correlations compared to the Kp index and the regression analysis showed better results for a linear relation. Department of Meteorology Stockholm University

Geology,Environmental Science,Physics
Latitudinal Impacts of Joule Heating on the High‐Latitude Thermospheric Density Enhancement during Geomagnetic Storms

Xin Wang,Juan Miao,Xian Lu,Ercha Aa,Ji Liu,Yuxian Wang,Siqing Liu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JA028747

2021-06-18

Abstract:We investigate the thermosphere latitudinal response to Joule heating from 265 geomagnetic storms during the period of January 2002 to December 2008. The total mass density enhancements at 400 km are derived from Challenging Minisatellite Payload (CHAMP) and the Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) satellites with temporal and spatial coverage. We examine Joule heating and its influence on the thermospheric density using data from the Defense Meteorological Satellite Program (DMSP) spacecraft and Weimer-2001 electric potential model for storms. The results show that during geomagnetic storms, Joule heating can cause the thermospheric density to enhance in the higher-latitude areas. In addition, during weak and moderate geomagnetic storms, the difference in the latitude corresponding to strong Joule heating with the latitude where high-latitude thermospheric density enhances is only 0°-10° latitudes, while increases to 10°-15° for the intense storms. Besides, it is found that the peak density enhancement in LT is closer to peak Joule heating for more intense geomagnetic storms. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

astronomy & astrophysics
Nitric Oxide Response to the April 2010 Electron Precipitation Event: UsingWACCM andWACCM-DWith andWithout Medium-Energy Electrons

Christine Smith-Johnsen,Daniel R. Marsh,Yvan Orsolini,Hilde Nesse Tyssøy,Koen Hendrickx,Marit Irene Sandanger,Linn-Kristine Glesnes Ødegaard,Frode Stordal

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1029/2018JA025418

2018-07-31

Abstract:Energetic electrons from the magnetosphere deposit their energy in the atmosphere and lead to production of nitric oxide (NO) in the mesosphere and lower thermosphere. We study the atmospheric NO response to a geomagnetic storm in April 2010 with WACCM (Whole Atmosphere Community Climate Model). Modeled NO is compared to observations by Solar Occultation For Ice Experiment/Aeronomy of Ice in the Mesosphere at 72-82$^{\circ}$S latitudes. We investigate the modeled NOs sensitivity to changes in energy and chemistry. The electron energy model input is either a parameterization of auroral electrons or a full range energy spectrum (1-750 keV) from National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration/Polar Orbiting Environmental Satellites and European Organisation for the Exploitation of Meteorological Satellites/Meteorological Operational satellites. To study the importance of ion chemistry for the production of NO, WACCM-D, which has more complex ion chemistry, is used. Both standard WACCM and WACCM-D underestimate the storm time NO increase in the main production region (90-110 km), using both electron energy inputs. At and below 80 km, including medium-energy electrons ($>$30 keV) is important both for NO directly produced at this altitude region and for NO transported from other regions (indirect effect). By using WACCM-D the direct NO production is improved, while the indirect effects on NO suffer from the downward propagating deficiency above. In conclusion, both a full range energy spectrum and ion chemistry is needed throughout the mesosphere and lower thermosphere region to increase the direct and indirect contribution from electrons on NO.

Space Physics
The Responses of Ionospheric Topside Diffusive Fluxes to Two Geomagnetic Storms in October 2002

Guang-Ming Chen,Jiyao Xu,Wenbin Wang,Jiuhou Lei,Shun-Rong Zhang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/2014ja020013

2014-01-01

Journal of Geophysical Research Space Physics

Abstract:O+ field-aligned ambipolar diffusive velocities V-d and fluxes Phi(d) in the topside ionosphere have been calculated from the observed profiles of electron density, ion, and electron temperatures during a 30 day incoherent scatter radar experiment conducted at Millstone Hill (288.5 degrees E, 42.6 degrees N) from 4 October to 4 November 2002. Two geomagnetic storms took place during this period. During the negative phases (depleted electron densities) of these two storms, the magnitudes of the daytime upward V-d and Phi(d) were less than their averaged quiet time values. Whereas at nighttime, the downward V-d and Phi(d) were sometimes larger than the averaged quiet time values. The variations in diffusive velocity and flux during the storm main and recovery phases were caused by changes in the ionospheric scale height or the shapes of ionospheric density profiles. The negative storm effect further reduced daytime diffusive flux. During these two storms, positive ionosphere phases (enhanced electron densities) were also observed. The diffusive velocity was much smaller during the period of positive storm effect, which led to a smaller diffusive flux than the quiet time one, although electron density was higher. It appears that storm time variations in diffusive velocity were more the results of storm time changes in the plasma vertical profile, rather than the cause of these plasma density changes.
Satellite and Ground-Based Magnetic Field Observations Related to Volcanic Eruptions

Konrad Schwingenschuh,Werner Magnes,Xuhui Shen,Jindong Wang,Bingjun Cheng,Andreas Pollinger,Christian Hagen,Roland Lammegger,Michaela Ellmeier,Christoph Schirninger,Hans-Ulrich Eichelberger,Bernhard Mandl,Mohammed Y. Boudjada,Bruno P. Besser,Alexander A. Rozhnoi,Tielong Zhang,Magda Delva,Irmgard Jernej,Özer Aydogar,Roman Leonhardt

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu2020-8882

2020-01-01

Abstract:In this study we investigate volcanic eruption phenomena related to ionospheric disturbances, e.g. Heki (2006) used total electron content (TEC) measurements for this task. In particular, a model is developed how discharge phenomena (e.g. Houghton etal, 2013) can produce magnetic field variations at SWARM and CSES satellite orbits, i.e. altitudes of ~500 km in the F-region. Several coupling mechanism between lithosphere, atmosphere, and ionosphere are discussed by Simões etal (2012).Experimental evidence is based on magnetic field observations aboard CSES mission in the time frame July 2018 to January 2019. The theoretical considerations include the source mechanism, propagation path, and the signal strength at low earth orbit satellite altitude.Ref:(1) Heki, K., Explosion energy of the 2004 eruption of the Asama Volcano, central Japan, inferred from ionospheric disturbances, GRL, 33, L14303, 2006. doi:10.1029/2006GL026249(2) Houghton, I. M. P., K. L. Aplin, and K. A. Nicoll, Triboelectric Charging of Volcanic Ash from the 2011 Grı́msvötn Eruption, PRL, 111, 118501, 2013. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.111.118501 arXiv:1304.1784(3) Simões F., R. Pfaff, J.-J. Berthelier, J. Klenzing, A Review of Low Frequency Electromagnetic Wave Phenomena Related to Tropospheric-Ionospheric Coupling Mechanisms, SSR, 168:551–593, 2012. doi:10.1007/s11214-011-9854-0

Response Time of Joule Heating Rate and Nitric Oxide Cooling Emission During Geomagnetic Storms: Correlated Ground‐Based and Satellite Observations

Investigation of Thermospheric Response to Geomagnetic Storms Using GITM‐OVATION Prime and ‐FTA Model With Comparison to GOLD and SABER Observations

Impact of Interplanetary Shock on Thermospheric Cooling Emission: A Case Study

The Polarity Oscillations of the Equatorial Electrojet in Response to the Geomagnetic Storm on 1 December 2023

Ionospheric Responses To The June 2015 Geomagnetic Storm From Ground And Leo Gnss Observations

Response of ICON/MIGHTI Measured Low‐Mid Latitude OI630.0 and OI557.7 nm Dayglow Emissions to the 27 August 2021 Geomagnetic Storm

Temporal Evolution of O+ Population in the Near‐Earth Plasma Sheet During Geomagnetic Storms as Observed by the Magnetospheric Multiscale Mission

Extreme Responses of the Ionospheric Radial Currents to the Main Phase of the Super Geomagnetic Storm on 10 May 2024

Wind and Temperature Effects on Thermosphere Mass Density Response to the November 2004 Geomagnetic Storm

Investigating the 17 March 2013 Geomagnetic Storm Impacts on the Wholly Coupled Solar Wind‐Magnetosphere‐Ionosphere‐Thermosphere System‐Of‐Systems

Magnetospheric Time‐History in Storm‐Time Magnetic Flux Dynamics: A Global Simulation Campaign

Response of NO 5.3 μm Emission to the Geomagnetic Storm on 24 April 2023

Rapid Geomagnetic Variations During High‐Speed Stream, Sheath and Magnetic Cloud‐Driven Geomagnetic Storms From 1996 to 2023

Longitudinal Development of Cosmic Noise Absorption Based on Multipoint Observations at Subauroral Latitudes During Storm‐Time Substorms on 25–28 August 2018

Response of the Magnetic Field and Plasmas at the Geosynchronous Orbit to Interplanetary Shock

Geomagnetic Impact on Upper Atmospheric Nitric Oxide

Latitudinal Impacts of Joule Heating on the High‐Latitude Thermospheric Density Enhancement during Geomagnetic Storms

Nitric Oxide Response to the April 2010 Electron Precipitation Event: UsingWACCM andWACCM-DWith andWithout Medium-Energy Electrons

The Responses of Ionospheric Topside Diffusive Fluxes to Two Geomagnetic Storms in October 2002

Satellite and Ground-Based Magnetic Field Observations Related to Volcanic Eruptions