Aerosol characterization at the Saharan AERONET site Tamanrasset

Guirado, C.; Cuevas, E.; Cachorro, V. E.; Toledano, C.; Alonso-Pérez, S.; Bustos, J. J.; Basart, S.; Romero, P. M.; Camino, C.; Mimouni, M.; Zeudmi, L.; Goloub, P.; Baldasano, J. M.; de Frutos, A. M.

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-11753-2014

Articles | Volume 14, issue 21

https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-11753-2014

© Author(s) 2014. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-11753-2014

© Author(s) 2014. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

Articles | Volume 14, issue 21

Research article

|

11 Nov 2014

Research article |

| 11 Nov 2014

Aerosol characterization at the Saharan AERONET site Tamanrasset

C. Guirado, E. Cuevas, V. E. Cachorro, C. Toledano, S. Alonso-Pérez, J. J. Bustos, S. Basart, P. M. Romero, C. Camino, M. Mimouni, L. Zeudmi, P. Goloub, J. M. Baldasano, and A. M. de Frutos

Download

Final revised paper (published on 11 Nov 2014)
Preprint (discussion started on 24 Jun 2014)

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment

- Printer-friendly version

- Supplement

SC C4106: 'Comments on Guirado et al., 2014', John Marsham, 25 Jun 2014
- AC C4134: 'Response to John Marsham's Short Comment', Carmen Guirado, 26 Jun 2014
- AC C4986: 'Second response to John Marsham's Short Comment', Carmen Guirado, 16 Jul 2014
- AC C6378: 'Third response to John Marsham's Short Comment', Carmen Guirado, 01 Sep 2014
RC C5038: 'General comments on Guirado et al.', Anonymous Referee #1, 17 Jul 2014
- AC C5651: 'Response to Anonymous Referee #1', Carmen Guirado, 06 Aug 2014
RC C5185: 'General comments', Anonymous Referee #2, 22 Jul 2014
- AC C5652: 'Response to Anonymous Referee #2', Carmen Guirado, 06 Aug 2014

Peer-review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision

AR by Carmen Guirado-Fuentes on behalf of the Authors (01 Sep 2014) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (02 Sep 2014) by William Lahoz (deceased)

RR by Anonymous Referee #1 (11 Sep 2014)

RR by Anonymous Referee #2 (23 Sep 2014)

ED: Publish subject to technical corrections (25 Sep 2014) by William Lahoz (deceased)

Please address the following points before submitting the final version to ACP:

Overall:

You mix UK and US spellings (see some examples below). Please make an effort to be consistent with your spelling.

P. 2

L. 3: Suggest include latitude/longitude/m asl of Tamanrasett – do this in the main manuscript as well. Introduce acronym for AERONET. Introduce acronyms when first used, both in the abstract and in the main manuscript.

L. 4: “…the level 1.5…”.

L. 13: Suggest “…from the industrial areas in Libya and Algeria.”

L. 27: analysis -> analyses.

L 30: I suggest remove “some”.

P. 4

L. 2: “…at the Tamanrasett…”.

L. 23: “…by the MISR…”.

P. 5

L. 16: are - > have been.

P. 6

L. 1-2: Do you mean “…spectrally dependent, with higher errors in the UV…”?

L. 3: The term “around +- 10%” is confusing. Do you mean the error (bias) is at most 10%, but can have either sign?

L. 7-8: “…Dubovik et al. (2002) provide a detailed description of…”.

L. 11: “At present…”

L. 15: addressed -> discussed.

L. 18: “…such as Tamanrasett..”.

L. 19: “…dust storms can quickly contaminate the optics, deteriorating…”.

L. 24: dirtiness -> dirt (and P. 7, L. 2).

L. 27: achieved -> achieve.

L. 30: This explanation should be included when KCICLO is first introduced.

P. 7

L. 6: “…it varies…”.

L. 9: “…corresponds to a correct…”.

L. 24: “The KCICLO…”.

L. 30-31: “…, i.e., two…lens contamination (amount of dirt and…”.

L. 32: I think you mean “Part of the original…”.

P. 8

L. 10: closer -> closest.

L. 11: “The AOD measurement…”. Please check throughout the text whether to include “the” or not.

L. 25: “…based on a…”.

L. 27: is -> was.

P. 9

L. 7: have been -> are.

L. 10: Suggest omit “it”.

L. 22: “…from the NASA…”.

L. 27: “The Concentrated…”.

P. 10

L. 6: “…, respectively…”.

L. 14: “…of the kth…”.

L. 21: Is n_sub_ij in Eq. (2) the same as n_sub_ijk in Eq. (1)?

P. 11

L. 4: long -> longitude; lat -> latitude.

L. 10: “…the CWT analysis…”.

L. 22: Characterization of what?

L. 25: “…the KCICLO…”.

L. 26: “…, respectively…”.

P. 12

L. 3: Introduce acronym for STD.

L. 5: Not sure what you mean by the word “alternately” in the context of the sentence. Could you rephrase?

P. 13

L. 11: driving -> driven.

L. 12-13: Rephrase – I do not understand what you mean.

L. 18: “…the dry…”.

L. 19, 20: “…centred at 0.1…”.

P. 14

L. 10-11: The uncertainty discussed is a bias, correct? If so, please specify.

L. 25: “…of the one-particle mode…”.

L. 27: corresponds -> correspond.

L. 29-30: Make sure it is written as “-0.3”.

P. 15

L. 10: showed -> seen.

L. 11: What was compared?

L. 15: “The fine model…as the coarse mode…”.

L. 23: “…of the coarse…”.

L. 26: Do you mean “related” instead of “distributed”?

P. 16

L. 6: “…the coarse mode…shows…”.

L. 24: absorption of what?

L. 25: “The imaginary part of the refractive…and the asymmetry…”.

L. 27-28: “…the imaginary part…the asymmetry…”.

L. 29: Agree with what? Are representative of dust dominant conditions? It is
not clear to me – please rephrase.

L. 30: “…the asymmetry…”.

P. 17

L. 1: I think you mean “…found for the general aerosol properties…”. If not, please rephrase.

L. 2: “…the real…the refractive…”.

L. 11: have -> has.

L. 13: observing -> with.

L. 17: “..the Izaña…”.

L. 22: “…, e.g., …”.

L. 24: “…the Tamanrasett…”.

P. 18

L. 1: “…a threshold…”.

L. 2: that -> those.

L. 7: “…the surface…”.

L. 10: “…the Jakob…”.

L. 15: Do you need “clear”?

L. 17: “…the free…”.

L. 18: Do you need “rather”?

P. 19

L. 6: inexistent -> nonexistent.

L. 9: Do you need “In fact”?

L. 12: Do you need “clearly”?

L. 17: “…the Hoggar…”.

L. 29: “…the Central…”.

P. 20

L. 1: Please clarify: Is the performance of the models as poor as that of the HYSPLIT back-trajectory, or is the performance of the latter better?

L. 4: What is “that”?

L. 9: Center -> Centers.

L. 12: Omit “at”; “…model layers in the vertical.”

L. 13: “…et al. (2011)…”; “The NMMB/BSC-Dust…”.

L. 15: Omit “part”.

L. 16: to capture -> of capturing.

L. 19: What is “RGB”?

L. 22: “…from the IFS-Cy31r…”.

L. 26: “Once we have identified and…”.

L. 29: “…the MODIS…”.

P. 21

L. 6: “…south of Tamanrasett…”.

L. 9: “…getting to Tamanrasett…”.

L. 11: probably -> likely.

L. 13: Do you mean “…east and south of Tamanrasett…”?

L. 18: “Evidence … has been…”.

L. 22: “…, i.e., …”.

L. 25: to -> at.

L. 28: mixture -> mixing.

L. 29: “…the Izaña…”.

P. 22

L. 1: in -> from.

L. 2: of -> in.

L. 9: “…i.e., …”.

L. 28: Elsewhere you write “analyzed”. Please be consistent with your spelling.

P. 23

L. 1: “…the August…”.

L. 32: Total what?

P. 24

L. 4, 5: in -> at.

L. 8-9: Sentence a bit difficult to follow. Perhaps split clauses with commas?

L. 10: “…of the one-particle…”.

L. 11, 14: “…, i.e., …”.

L. 22: “…a minor…”.

L. 26: “Evidence…has been…”.

P. 36

Table 1: If the std is also dimensionless (I presume it is), please flag.

P. 37

Table 2: Is it R squared? If so, please use the superscript symbol.

P. 41

Table 6: Identify the real and imaginary parts of the refractive index without resort to abbreviations.

P. 42

L. 3: “…shown… the KCICLO…”.

L. 4: I note you use the UK spelling of “colour”, whereas elsewhere you use the US spelling of “analyze” and of “meter”. Please be consistent with your spelling style.

P. 43

L. 7-8: “…Each data set is…with their linear…”.

P. 44

L. 5: “…the standard…”.

P. 52

Fig. 11: Identify the colours/line styles in the caption.

P. 53

L. 5: How many previous days? Or is it the previous day to the maximum of AOD? It is not clear what you mean – please clarify.

P. 54

Fig. 13: Do you need permission to display this Google Earth map?

Hide

AR by Carmen Guirado-Fuentes on behalf of the Authors (01 Oct 2014) Author's response Manuscript

Short summary

Tamanrasset, in the heart of the Sahara, is a key site for aerosol research. The analysis of more than 2 years (2006-2009) of AERONET and KCICLO-corrected sun photometer measurements shows that atmospheric aerosols at Tamanrasset are modulated by the Convective Boundary Layer leading to pure Saharan dust conditions (April-September) and very clear sky conditions (November-February). Dust potential sources and anthropogenic fine aerosols arriving at Tamanrasset are also identified.