In situ constraints on the vertical distribution of global aerosol

Watson-Parris, Duncan; Schutgens, Nick; Reddington, Carly; Pringle, Kirsty J.; Liu, Dantong; Allan, James D.; Coe, Hugh; Carslaw, Ken S.; Stier, Philip

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-11765-2019

Articles | Volume 19, issue 18

https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-11765-2019

© Author(s) 2019. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-11765-2019

© Author(s) 2019. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Articles | Volume 19, issue 18

Research article

|

23 Sep 2019

Research article |

| 23 Sep 2019

In situ constraints on the vertical distribution of global aerosol

Duncan Watson-Parris, Nick Schutgens, Carly Reddington, Kirsty J. Pringle, Dantong Liu, James D. Allan, Hugh Coe, Ken S. Carslaw, and Philip Stier

Download

Final revised paper (published on 23 Sep 2019)
Preprint (discussion started on 07 Feb 2019)

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

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

- Printer-friendly version

- Supplement

RC1: 'Reviewer's Report', Anonymous Referee #1, 01 Mar 2019
- AC1: 'Response to reviewers', Duncan Watson-Parris, 21 Jun 2019
RC2: 'Review of Watson-Parris et al.', Anonymous Referee #2, 07 Mar 2019
RC3: 'Review', Anonymous Referee #3, 13 Mar 2019

Peer-review completion

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

AR by Duncan Watson-Parris on behalf of the Authors (08 Jul 2019) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Publish subject to minor revisions (review by editor) (18 Jul 2019) by Alma Hodzic

Thank you for addressing the reviewer's concerns. I have three additional remarks as listed below:

1) Please modify the sentence below to include "formation" and "of":
There are some processes which might be expected to affect these biases which are not represented in the model at all, such as prognostic in-cloud aerosol processing (Hoose et al. 2008) and interactive Secondary Organic Aerosol (SOA) formation (e.g. Heald et al. 2011). For example, the use of prescribed SOAs has been shown to result in a lower SOA burden compared to online calculation (Tegen et al. 2019).

2) Aerosol removal by photolysis can also have a large effect on the vertical distribution of organic aerosols, please mention this as another possible process that has not been investigated here (see Hodzic et al., 2015).
Hodzic, A., Madronich, S., Kasibhatla, P. S., Tyndall, G., Aumont, B., Jimenez, J. L., Lee-Taylor, J., and Orlando, J.: Organic photolysis reactions in tropospheric aerosols: effect on secondary organic aerosol formation and lifetime, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 9253-9269, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-9253-2015, 2015.

3) Please mention the ATOm (Atmospheric Tomography) field study (Wofsy et al., 2018), which targeted remote atmosphere and would be a valuable future evaluation in remote areas.
Wofsy, S.C., S. Afshar, H.M. Allen, E. Apel, E.C. Asher, B. Barletta, J. Bent, H. Bian, B.C. Biggs, D.R. Blake, N. Blake, I. Bourgeois, C.A. Brock, W.H. Brune, J.W. Budney, T.P. Bui, A. Butler, P. Campuzano-Jost, C.S. Chang, M. Chin, R. Commane, G. Correa, J.D. Crounse, P. D. Cullis, B.C. Daube, D.A. Day, J.M. Dean-Day, J.E. Dibb, J.P. DiGangi, G.S. Diskin, M. Dollner, J.W. Elkins, F. Erdesz, A.M. Fiore, C.M. Flynn, K. Froyd, D.W. Gesler, S.R. Hall, T.F. Hanisco, R.A. Hannun, A.J. Hills, E.J. Hintsa, A. Hoffman, R.S. Hornbrook, L.G. Huey, S. Hughes, J.L. Jimenez, B.J. Johnson, J.M. Katich, R.F. Keeling, M.J. Kim, A. Kupc, L.R. Lait, J.-F. Lamarque, J. Liu, K. McKain, R.J. Mclaughlin, S. Meinardi, D.O. Miller, S.A. Montzka, F.L. Moore, E.J. Morgan, D.M. Murphy, L.T. Murray, B.A. Nault, J.A. Neuman, P.A. Newman, J.M. Nicely, X. Pan, W. Paplawsky, J. Peischl, M.J. Prather, D.J. Price, E. Ray, J.M. Reeves, M. Richardson, A.W. Rollins, K.H. Rosenlof, T.B. Ryerson, E. Scheuer, G.P. Schill, J.C. Schroder, J.P. Schwarz, J.M. St.Clair, S.D. Steenrod, B.B. Stephens, S.A. Strode, C. Sweeney, D. Tanner, A.P. Teng, A.B. Thames, C.R. Thompson, K. Ullmann, P.R. Veres, N. Vieznor, N.L. Wagner, A. Watt, R. Weber, B. Weinzierl, P. Wennberg, C.J. Williamson, J.C. Wilson, G.M. Wolfe, C.T. Woods, and L.H. Zeng. 2018. ATom: Merged Atmospheric Chemistry, Trace Gases, and Aerosols. ORNL DAAC, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA. https://doi.org/10.3334/ORNLDAAC/1581.

Hide

AR by Duncan Watson-Parris on behalf of the Authors (21 Jul 2019) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Publish as is (26 Jul 2019) by Alma Hodzic

AR by Duncan Watson-Parris on behalf of the Authors (29 Jul 2019)

Short summary

The vertical distribution of aerosol in the atmosphere affects its ability to act as cloud condensation nuclei and changes the amount of sunlight it absorbs or reflects. Common global measurements of aerosol provide no information about this vertical distribution. Using a global collection of in situ aircraft measurements to compare with an aerosol–climate model (ECHAM-HAM), we explore the key processes controlling this distribution and find that wet removal plays a key role.