Hygroscopic growth study in the framework of EARLINET during the SLOPE I campaign: synergy of remote sensing and in situ instrumentation

Bedoya-Velásquez, Andrés Esteban; Navas-Guzmán, Francisco; Granados-Muñoz, María José; Titos, Gloria; Román, Roberto; Casquero-Vera, Juan Andrés; Ortiz-Amezcua, Pablo; Benavent-Oltra, Jose Antonio; de Arruda Moreira, Gregori; Montilla-Rosero, Elena; Hoyos, Carlos David; Artiñano, Begoña; Coz, Esther; Olmo-Reyes, Francisco José; Alados-Arboledas, Lucas; Guerrero-Rascado, Juan Luis

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-7001-2018

Articles | Volume 18, issue 10

https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-7001-2018

© Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Special issue:

EARLINET aerosol profiling: contributions to atmospheric and...

https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-7001-2018

© Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Articles | Volume 18, issue 10

Research article

|

18 May 2018

Research article |

| 18 May 2018

Hygroscopic growth study in the framework of EARLINET during the SLOPE I campaign: synergy of remote sensing and in situ instrumentation

Andrés Esteban Bedoya-Velásquez, Francisco Navas-Guzmán, María José Granados-Muñoz, Gloria Titos, Roberto Román, Juan Andrés Casquero-Vera, Pablo Ortiz-Amezcua, Jose Antonio Benavent-Oltra, Gregori de Arruda Moreira, Elena Montilla-Rosero, Carlos David Hoyos, Begoña Artiñano, Esther Coz, Francisco José Olmo-Reyes, Lucas Alados-Arboledas, and Juan Luis Guerrero-Rascado

Download

Final revised paper (published on 18 May 2018)
Preprint (discussion started on 21 Dec 2017)

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

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

- Printer-friendly version

- Supplement

RC1: 'Review of the manuscript "Hygroscopic growth study in the framework of EARLINET during the SLOPE I campaign: synergy of remote sensing and in-situ instrumentation" by Bedoya-Velásquez et al.', Anonymous Referee #2, 05 Jan 2018
- AC1: 'Answers to Referee # 2', Andres Esteban Bedoya-Velasquez, 27 Mar 2018
RC2: 'Referee comment to Bedoya et al, 2018', Anonymous Referee #1, 09 Feb 2018
- AC2: 'Answeer to referee #1', Andres Esteban Bedoya-Velasquez, 28 Mar 2018

Peer-review completion

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

AR by Andres Esteban Bedoya-Velasquez on behalf of the Authors (28 Mar 2018) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (28 Mar 2018) by Matthias Tesche

RR by Anonymous Referee #2 (10 Apr 2018)

Suggestions for revision or reasons for rejection

In my opinion the manuscript has profited substantially from the review comments and will be ready for submission after minor revisions.
The two main points that have to be changed are:

1) I noticed that not all the new references were actually included in the bibliography. An example is Rosati et al., 2015 and Sorooshian et al., 2008. Please check all references and their spellings.
2) Please re-read carefully through the manuscript and revise the English grammar mistakes (some examples are stated below).

Specific comments:
Abstract, line 26: change “this study focuses on the study of..” by “this study focuses on the ..”
Page 2, line 1: add an “s” to “particle”
Page 2, line 4: the sentence on the γ-parameters is grammatically not correct. Please re-write and correct also the 2 other instances in the paper where similar sentences are written (e.g. page 15 line3, and conclusion)
Page 2, line 14: write “aerosols” instead of “the aerosol”
Page 3, line 4: change to “enhanced RH”
Page 3, line 10: change “subject of particles losses” to “subject to particle losses”
Page 3, line 13: “this aim has also been studied by” is not correct, replace by something like “furthermore..”
Page 3, line 19: change “have been performed..” to “with Automatic Lidar and Ceilometer (ALC) to investigate hygroscopicity and fog, mostly…”
Page 3, line 21-22: change “we are adding” to “describe” and “ground city station” to “urban city station”
Page 3, line 23: the lidar overlap is mentioned here the first time although the description is only presented later on. Maybe it is not necessary to talk about it here.
Page 5, line 18-19: please re-write this sentence.
Page 14, line 14: change “composition” to “combination”
Page 14, line 17: delete “over”

Hide

RR by Anonymous Referee #1 (15 Apr 2018)

ED: Publish subject to minor revisions (review by editor) (16 Apr 2018) by Matthias Tesche

AR by Andres Esteban Bedoya-Velasquez on behalf of the Authors (24 Apr 2018) Manuscript

ED: Publish as is (25 Apr 2018) by Matthias Tesche

AR by Andres Esteban Bedoya-Velasquez on behalf of the Authors (25 Apr 2018)

Short summary

This study focuses on the analysis of aerosol hygroscopic growth during the SLOPE I campaign combining active and passive remote sensors at ACTRIS Granada station and in situ instrumentation at a mountain station (Sierra Nevada station, SNS). The results showed good agreement on gamma parameters by using remote sensing with respect to those calculated using Mie theory at SNS, with relative differences lower than 9 % at 532 nm and 11 % at 355 nm.