<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" xml:lang="en" dtd-version="3.0">
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">ACP</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">ACP</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Atmos. Chem. Phys.</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">1680-7324</issn><publisher>
    <publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
    <publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
  </publisher></journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/acp-20-10845-2020</article-id><title-group><article-title>Aerosol solar radiative forcing near the Taklimakan Desert based on
radiative transfer and regional meteorological simulations during the Dust
Aerosol Observation-Kashi campaign</article-title><alt-title>Aerosol solar radiative forcing near the Taklimakan Desert</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{Aerosol solar radiative forcing near the Taklimakan Desert}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{L. Li et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Li</surname><given-names>Li</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Li</surname><given-names>Zhengqiang</given-names></name>
          <email>lizq@aircas.ac.cn</email>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2">
          <name><surname>Chang</surname><given-names>Wenyuan</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5440-5287</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Ou</surname><given-names>Yang</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Goloub</surname><given-names>Philippe</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff4">
          <name><surname>Li</surname><given-names>Chengzhe</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Li</surname><given-names>Kaitao</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2610-0064</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Hu</surname><given-names>Qiaoyun</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Wang</surname><given-names>Jianping</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff5">
          <name><surname>Wendisch</surname><given-names>Manfred</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4652-5561</ext-link></contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>Aerospace Information Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Sciences,
Beijing, China</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>Institute of Atmospheric Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences,
Beijing, China</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>3</label><institution>Laboratoire d'Optique Atmosphérique, Université de Lille
1/CNRS, Lille, France</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff4"><label>4</label><institution>Department of Chemical and Biochemical Engineering, University of
Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff5"><label>5</label><institution>Leipzig Institute for Meteorology, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Zhengqiang Li (lizq@aircas.ac.cn)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>18</day><month>September</month><year>2020</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>20</volume>
      <issue>18</issue>
      <fpage>10845</fpage><lpage>10864</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>21</day><month>January</month><year>2020</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>17</day><month>February</month><year>2020</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>17</day><month>July</month><year>2020</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>27</day><month>July</month><year>2020</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2020 </copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2020</copyright-year>
      <license license-type="open-access"><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ext-link></license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/.html">This article is available from https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract><title>Abstract</title>
    <p id="d1e190">The Taklimakan Desert is a main and continuous source of
Asian dust particles causing significant direct radiative effects, which are
commonly quantified by the aerosol solar radiative forcing (ASRF). To improve
the accuracy of estimates of dust ASRF, the Dust Aerosol Observation-Kashi
(DAO-K) campaign was carried out near the Taklimakan Desert in April 2019.
The objective of the DAO-K campaign is to provide crucial parameters needed
for the calculation of ASRF, such as dust optical and microphysical properties,
vertical distribution, and surface albedo. The ASRF was calculated using
radiative transfer (RT) simulations based on the observed aerosol
parameters, additionally considering the measured atmospheric profiles and
diurnal variations of surface albedo. As a result, daily average values of
ASRF of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">19</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at the top of the atmosphere and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">36</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at the bottom
of the atmosphere were derived from the simulations conducted during the DAO-K
campaign. Furthermore, the Weather Research and Forecasting model with
Chemistry (WRF-Chem), with assimilation of measurements of the aerosol
optical depth and particulate matter (PM) mass concentrations of particles
with aerodynamic diameter smaller than 2.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m (PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) and
10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m (PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>), is employed to estimate the dust ASRF for comparison. The
results of the ASRF simulations (RT and WRF-Chem) were evaluated using
ground-based downward solar irradiance measurements, which have
confirmed that the RT simulations are in good agreement with simultaneous
observations, whereas the WRF-Chem estimations reveal obvious discrepancies
with the solar irradiance measurements.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <label>1</label><title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e281">Atmospheric aerosol particles play a vital role in regional and global
climate changes, directly by modifying the radiative balance of the
Earth–atmosphere system, and indirectly by altering cloud radiative
properties, as well as cloud development and precipitation through acting as
cloud condensation nuclei (CCN) and/or ice-nucleating particles (INPs)
(Twomey, 1977; IPCC, 2007; Lenoble et al., 2013; Werner et al., 2014).
Mineral dust is the most abundant large aerosol type in the atmosphere
(Ansmann et al., 2011), which has a tremendous impact on the radiation
budget, not only through scattering process but also due to absorption of
solar (0.3–5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m), also called shortwave (SW), radiation
(Otto et al., 2007; García et al., 2012; Valenzuela et al., 2012;
Lenoble et al., 2013), with potential dynamic consequences (Wendisch et al.,
2008; Li et al., 2017). Atmospheric dust particles may also alter the cloud
properties by serving as CCN, giant CCN, and INPs (Yin et al., 2002; DeMott
et al., 2003; van den Heever et al., 2006). Numerous efforts have been
undertaken to investigate the solar radiative effects of mineral dust<?pagebreak page10846?> using
radiative transfer (RT) models (e.g., Santa Barbara DISORT Atmospheric
Radiative Transfer (SBDART), Fu-Liou RT model), or regional and global
meteorological and climate models (e.g., Weather Research and Forecasting
model with Chemistry (WRF-Chem), Regional Climate Model version 4 (RegCM4))
employing in situ and remote sensing observations in the simulations
(Huang et al., 2009, 2014; Sun et al., 2012; Chen et al., 2013, 2014, 2018;
Li et al., 2018). However, the quantification of the dust radiative effects
is still challenging due to the high aerosol variability in space and time,
and the complex light scattering properties of mineral dust. Moreover, the
dust radiative effects depend on the surface albedo over the desert and the
cloud layer in the vertical as well (Bierwirth et al., 2009; Waquet et al.,
2013; Xu et al., 2017).</p>
      <p id="d1e292">As one of the largest sandy deserts in the world, the Taklimakan Desert
located in the Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region of China is a main source
region of Asian dust (Huang et al., 2009). It influences not only
surrounding areas such as the Tibetan Plateau (Liu et al., 2008; Chen et
al., 2013; Yuan et al., 2019) but also wide regions in eastern Asia (Mikami
et al., 2006; Liu et al., 2011a; Yuan et al., 2019) and even North America
and Greenland through long-range transport across the Pacific Ocean (Bory
et al., 2003; Chen et al., 2017; Liu et al., 2019). Therefore, an accurate
assessment of the Taklimakan aerosol solar radiative forcing (ASRF, defined as
the difference of the net solar irradiances with and without aerosols
present) is important to evaluate regional and global climate changes.
However, the results of corresponding simulations of ASRF applying different
models with variable observation inputs vary widely in the open literature.
Huang et al. (2009) employed the Fu-Liou RT model to simulate the Taklimakan
ASRF during the dust episodes in the summer of 2006, and reported that the dust
particles result in average daily mean solar warming effect of 14 W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
at the top of the atmosphere (TOA), atmospheric warming effect of 79 W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>,
and a surface cooling effect of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">65</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. Sun et al. (2012) adopted
the RegCM4 simulations and reported both negative values of the ASRF (i.e.,
cooling effects) of dust particles at the TOA and bottom of the atmosphere (BOA)
with the strongest values (up to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">25</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>,
respectively) in spring between 2000 and 2009 in the Taklimakan Desert
region. Li et al. (2018) reported negative multi-year average values of the
aerosol solar radiative forcing of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">16</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at the TOA and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">18</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
at the BOA at the edge of the Taklimakan Desert, Kashi station,
based on the SBDART simulations. The simulated results of dust aerosol
radiative forcing have rarely been confirmed, especially in the Taklimakan
Desert (Xia et al., 2009). Occasionally, the performance of various
model-based ASRF estimates was evaluated against the observations of aerosol
optical depth (AOD), aerosol extinction profile, single scattering albedo
(SSA), and particle size distribution (Zhao et al., 2010; Chen et al., 2014).
Nevertheless, comparison of irradiance is indispensable to provide direct
evidence for corroborating the ASRF simulated results.</p>
      <p id="d1e418">The knowledge of the optical, physical, chemical, and radiative properties
of dust aerosol particles is crucial to derive the ASRF of dust particles. To
precisely measure these important dust properties over the Taklimakan
Desert, an intensive field campaign named Dust Aerosol Observation-Kashi
(DAO-K) was performed. One of the goals of the DAO-K field campaign is to
provide high-quality dataset on aerosol in this region to obtain accurate
assessment of the Taklimakan ASRF. In this paper, we focus on estimating direct
ASRF of the dust-dominated aerosol population using SBDART simulations with
appropriate ground-based and satellite measurements of aerosol parameters,
surface albedo, and atmospheric vertical profiles. The ASRF simulations are
comprehensively evaluated by comparison with the results of WRF-Chem
simulations, ground-based irradiance measurements, as well as the AErosol
RObotic NETwork (AERONET; <uri>http://aeronet.gsfc.nasa.gov</uri>, last access: July 2019) operational products
(Holben et al., 1998).</p>
      <p id="d1e424">Section 2 includes a brief introduction of the DAO-K field campaign and an
overview of the multi-source observations and data. Methods for estimating
ASRF by improving the inputs of atmospheric profiles and land surface albedo in
the RT simulation, and by employing data assimilation in the WRF-Chem
simulation, are described in Sect. 3. Section 4 presents the results of ASRF
simulated by the RT model during the field campaign and for some specific
cases. The influence of the atmosphere and surface conditions on the
results is discussed. The differences from the corresponding AERONET
operational products are also analyzed in this section. The comparison
between the RT and WRF-Chem model simulations is discussed in Sect. 5. Both of
the model simulations are evaluated based on the simultaneous irradiance
measurements. A summary and conclusions are given in Sect. 6.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <label>2</label><title>Dust Aerosol Observation-Kashi field campaign</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <label>2.1</label><title>Observation site</title>
      <p id="d1e442">The DAO-K field campaign with comprehensive
observations of physical, chemical, and optical properties of aerosol
particles, solar radiation, vertical structures of the atmosphere, and land
surface albedo in the Taklimakan Desert region was designed to provide
high-quality data for aerosol radiative forcing estimates. Kashi is located at
the edge of the Taklimakan Desert; it is surrounded by the Tianshan
Mountains in the north, the Pamir plateau in the west, and the Kunlun
Mountains in the south (Fig. 1). The DAO-K field campaign was conducted at
the Kashi campus of the Aerospace Information Research Institute, Chinese
Academy of Sciences (39.50<inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, 75.93<inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E; 1320 m above
mean sea level). The campus hosts a long-term observation station within<?pagebreak page10847?> the
Sun–sky radiometer Observation NETwork (SONET; <uri>http://www.sonet.ac.cn/index.php</uri>, last access: July 2019) (Li et al.,
2018). In addition to the Kashi station near the Taklimakan Desert, SONET
also maintains two dust aerosol observation stations (i.e., Zhangye and
Minqin stations) in the Gobi Desert, which is another important source of
Asian dust. Although some studies reported that the dust generated in
Taklimakan Desert exerts less influence on long-range downstream regions
due to the unique terrain and low-level background wind climatology compared
to those in Gobi Desert (Chen et al., 2017; Liu et al., 2019), the Taklimakan
Desert is a better representative for studying the effects of dust aerosol solar
radiative forcing on local regions rather than the Gobi Desert because of its huge
dust emission capability (Chen et al., 2017).</p>
      <p id="d1e466">Kashi represents a place heavily affected by dust aerosol particles. It is
influenced by local anthropogenic pollution and pollution transported from
surrounding arid and desert areas. According to the SONET long-term
measurements from 2013, the Kashi site is frequently affected by dust, where
the multi-year average AOD is up to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.56</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.18</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at 500 nm. Moreover, the
Ångström exponent (AE; 440–870 nm) and fine-mode
fraction (FMF; 500 nm) at Kashi are the lowest (with the multi-year average
values of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.54</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.27</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.40</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.14</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively; low values of
AE indicate the presence of large dust particles) among all 16 sites within
SONET around China (Li et al., 2018). In contrast, the multi-year average
AODs (500 nm) at Zhangye (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.28</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.11</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and Minqin (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.26</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.11</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) are
only half of that at Kashi or less; meanwhile, their average values of AE and
FMF are also greater than those at Kashi (Li et al., 2018). These data imply
that coarse particles are more dominant in the Taklimakan Desert in
comparison to the Gobi Desert. Every year, FMF reaches the lowest value, and
the volume particle size distribution presents a predominant coarse mode
from March to May at Kashi (Li et al., 2018), due to the frequent dust
invasions in spring. Chen et al. (2014) also reported that the dust
radiative forcing had relatively small interannual variation but a
distinct seasonal course with maximum values in late spring and early summer
during the period of 2007 to 2011 in the Taklimakan Desert. Sun et al. (2012)
found that the solar radiative heating peaks appear in April in
southern Xinjiang and in May for northern Xinjiang. Thus, the DAO-K
intensive field campaign was carried out in April 2019 and lasted for nearly
a month. During the campaign, several dust events were observed on the base
of a coordinated deployment of multiple in situ and remote sensing platforms
and state-of-the-art instruments based on passive and active detection
technologies.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Figure 1</label><caption><p id="d1e531">The location of the observation site (Kashi) of the DAO-K field
campaign.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/20/10845/2020/acp-20-10845-2020-f01.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><label>Figure 2</label><caption><p id="d1e543">Setup of experimental apparatus of the DAO-K field campaign <bold>(a)</bold> on
the roof and <bold>(b)</bold> indoors.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/20/10845/2020/acp-20-10845-2020-f02.jpg"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <label>2.2</label><title>Instrumentation</title>
      <?pagebreak page10848?><p id="d1e566">Columnar aerosol properties are essential parameters for quantifying
radiative forcing of atmospheric aerosol particles. However, high loading
and complex light scattering processes corresponding to diverse particle
shapes bring challenges to remote sensing of mineral dust in the atmosphere
(Dubovik et al., 2006; Bi et al., 2010; Li et al., 2019). Ground-based
detection by Sun–sky radiometer works out a solution by modeling dust
particles as randomly oriented spheroids in the retrieval framework (Dubovik
et al., 2006). From these activities, quality-assured databases of dust
aerosol properties became available based on both the AERONET and SONET
Sun–sky radiometer retrievals (Holben et al. 1998; Li et al., 2018). During
the DAO-K campaign, four Cimel Sun–sky radiometers, including a polarized
Sun–sky–Moon radiometer CE318-TP (no. 1150), two unpolarized Sun–sky–Moon
radiometers CE318-T (nos. 1098 and 1141), and a polarized Sun–sky
radiometer CE318-DP (no. 0971), were deployed at Kashi (Fig. 2a). CE318
nos. 1150 and 1141 were calibrated rigorously at the AERONET Izaña
Observatory with the accuracy of AOD about 0.25 %–0.5 %,
while AOD-related measurements and sky radiance measurements of CE318 nos. 1098
and 0971 were calibrated via the master instrument (no. 1150) by a
vicarious/transfer calibration method before the field campaign (Holben et
al., 1998; Li et al., 2008, 2018). The volume aerosol parameters of AOD, SSA, AE, and
asymmetry factor (i.e., <inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:mi>g</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) in four channels with center wavelengths of 440,
675, 870, and 1020 nm were retrieved following the SONET level-1.5 data criteria
(Li et al., 2018). Observations from the CE318 no. 1141 also joined in the
AERONET dataset. The consistency of the products following the AERONET and
SONET retrieval frameworks has been validated by Li et al. (2018). The
multi-wavelength properties of AOD, SSA, AE, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:mi>g</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> were applied in RT simulations. In
addition to Sun–sky radiometers, a METONE BAM-1020 continuous particulate
monitor was also deployed to measure PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> mass concentration (mg m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)
(Fig. 2a). The hourly PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> mass concentrations (mg m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)
were collected from the routine measurements of the ambient air quality
continuous automated monitoring system in Kashi operated by the China National
Environmental Monitoring Center. The aerosol parameters including AOD,
PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> mass concentrations were assimilated in the WRF-Chem model simulation in this study.</p>
      <p id="d1e644">Aerosol radiative effects also depend on the surface albedo and the vertical
structure of atmosphere (Wendisch et al., 2004). During the DAO-K campaign,
atmospheric profiles, including the vertical distributions of the
atmospheric pressure, temperature, and relative humidity, were collected
from sounding balloon measurements. The sounding balloons were operationally
launched twice a day around 00:00 and 12:00 UTC at the Kashi weather station
(39.46<inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, 75.98<inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E; 1291 m above mean sea level).
Normally, about 3000 individual measurements are recorded during one balloon
flight, which corresponds to a sampling frequency of 1 s (Guo et al.,
2016; Chen et al., 2019). The data quality was controlled following the
operational specifications for conventional upper-air meteorological
observations (China Meteorological Administration, 2010). The accuracy of
the temperature profile in the troposphere is within <inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.1 K (Zhang et
al., 2018; Guo et al, 2019). In addition to pressure, temperature, and
relative humidity profiles, ozone profiles obtained by the Ozone Monitoring
Instrument (OMI)/Aura satellite (Bhartia et al., 1996) were used as input
for the RT model. The satellite observations of the Moderate Resolution
Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) aboard Terra and Aqua were employed to collect the
surface reflection during the DAO-K campaign. The MODIS products of
shortwave bidirectional reflectance distribution function (BRDF) parameters,
black-sky albedo (BSA), and white-sky albedo (WSA) were adopted to derive
the surface albedo during daytime (Schaaf and Wang, 2015). A solar radiation
monitoring station, equipped with an EKO MS-57 pyrheliometer and two MS-80
pyranometers, was used for measuring the direct, diffuse, and total solar
irradiances (W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) in the range of 0.28–3.0 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m
(Fig. 2a). The pyrheliometer and pyranometers have been calibrated before
the campaign with uncertainties of 0.55 % and 0.66 %, respectively.
They satisfy the requirements of class A under ISO 9060:2018 with
response time of less than 0.2 and 0.4 s, separately. The fraction of
diffuse skylight radiation deduced from the diffuse and total irradiances
also gave a key weighting index to modulate the diurnal changes of the
surface albedo.</p>
      <p id="d1e692">Further instruments provided independent evidence of the existence of dust
and cloud layers during the observations. Multi-wavelength Mie–Raman
polarization lidar (LILAS) developed by the Laboratoire d'Optique
Atmosphérique, Université de Lille 1 (Fig. 2b), was equipped with
three elastic wavelengths (all linearly polarized) at 355, 532, and 1064 nm, and
three Raman wavelengths at 387, 530, and 408 nm, from which the vertical
distribution of multiple optical and physical properties of dust aerosol
particles can be obtained (Veselovskii et al., 2016, 2018; Hu et al., 2019).
The backscattering coefficient profile at 355 nm wavelength was applied in
this study to distinguish the two-layer structure of dust. The YNT all-sky
view camera ASC200 equipped with two wide-dynamic full-sky visible and
infrared imagers, recorded dynamic states of clouds during day and night
with 10 min (or less than 10 min) resolution. An overview of the instruments
and corresponding parameters employed in the study is listed in Table 1.
Considering different durations of various measurements, we calculated and
discussed the ASRF from 2 to 25 April 2019, when simultaneous measurements are available.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Table 1</label><caption><p id="d1e699">Overview of the parameters and instruments employed in the
radiative transfer and WRF-Chem model simulations and validation.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="4">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="justify" colwidth="2.5cm"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="justify" colwidth="4cm"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="justify" colwidth="5cm"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="left"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Application</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Parameter</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Instrument</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Time period of operation</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col2"><italic>Aerosol properties</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col4"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col2">Aerosol optical depth <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>Ångström exponent <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>Single scattering albedo <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>Asymmetry factor</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col3">Sun–sky radiometer</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col4">1–25 April 2019</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col2"><italic>Atmospheric profiles</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col4"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Radiative <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>transfer <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>simulation</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col2">Vertical distributions of <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>atmospheric pressure, <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>temperature, <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>relative humidity</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col3">Sounding balloon</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col4">1–30 April 2019</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col2">Ozone profile</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col3">OMI/Aura</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col4">1–30 April 2019</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col2"><italic>Land surface albedo</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col4"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col2">Shortwave BRDF parameters <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>Shortwave black-sky albedo <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>Shortwave white-sky albedo</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col3">MODIS Terra and Aqua</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col4">1–30 April 2019</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Diffuse solar irradiance <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>Total solar irradiance</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Pyranometers</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">2–28 April 2019</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">WRF-Chem</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col2">Aerosol optical depth</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col3">Sun–sky radiometer</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col4">1–25 April 2019</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">simulation</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col2">PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> mass concentration</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col3">Continuous particulate monitor</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col4">1–28 April 2019</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> mass concentration</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Ambient air quality continuous</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1–30 April 2019</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">automated monitoring system</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Evidence and <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>validation</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col2">Direct normal solar irradiance <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>Diffuse solar irradiance <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>Total solar irradiance</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col3">Pyrheliometer <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>Pyranometers</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col4">2–28 April 2019</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col2">Backscattering coefficient</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col3">LILAS</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col4">4–28 April 2019</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Full-sky visible image</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">All-sky view camera</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">2–27 April 2019</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

</sec>
</sec>
<?pagebreak page10849?><sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <label>3</label><title>Estimation of aerosol solar radiative forcing</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <label>3.1</label><title>Definition of aerosol solar radiative forcing</title>
      <p id="d1e1012">The direct solar radiative forcing of atmospheric aerosol particles is
calculated using the following equations (Babu et al., 2002; Adesina et al.,
2014; Esteve et al., 2014):

                <disp-formula specific-use="align" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M43" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E1"><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>1</mml:mtext></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:msub><mml:mtext>ASRF</mml:mtext><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">TOA</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mtext>net,TOA</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>a</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">net</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">TOA</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E2"><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>2</mml:mtext></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:msub><mml:mtext>ASRF</mml:mtext><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">BOA</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mtext>net,BOA</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>a</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">net</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">BOA</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E3"><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>3</mml:mtext></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:msub><mml:mtext>ASRF</mml:mtext><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ATM</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mtext>ASRF</mml:mtext><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">TOA</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mtext>ASRF</mml:mtext><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">BOA</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E4"><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>4</mml:mtext></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">net</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mo>↓</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>

            where ASRF<inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mtext>TOA</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, ASRF<inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mtext>BOA</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and ASRF<inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mtext>ATM</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> denote the direct aerosol solar
radiative forcing at the TOA, BOA, and in the atmosphere (ATM), respectively.
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">net</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">net</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> indicate the
net irradiances with and without aerosols, respectively. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mo>↓</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> separately represent the downward and upward irradiances.
All the above quantities are measured in physical units of W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. The
radiative forcing efficiency is defined as the rate at which the atmosphere
is forced per unit of aerosol optical depth at 550 nm (García et al.,
2008, 2012):
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E5" content-type="numbered"><label>5</label><mml:math id="M52" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>ASRFE</mml:mtext><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mtext>ASRF</mml:mtext><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">550</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where ASRFE (in W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">550</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) is the aerosol solar radiative
forcing efficiency at the TOA, BOA, or in ATM. Since the effects of aerosol
loading on radiative forcing have been eliminated, radiative forcing
efficiency has unique advantage on evaluation of the direct radiative
effects of different types of aerosols (García et al., 2008).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <label>3.2</label><title>Radiative transfer simulations</title>
      <p id="d1e1314">The focus of this study is to quantify the direct ASRF and ASRFE at the TOA, BOA, and
in ATM under cloud-free conditions using the SBDART model fed with
comprehensive ground-based and satellite observations collected during the
DAO-K campaign. SBDART is a radiative transfer software<?pagebreak page10850?> tool that has been
widely applied in atmospheric radiative energy balance studies (Ricchiazzi
et al., 1998; Li et al., 2018). The discrete ordinate method is adopted in
the code, which provides a numerically stable algorithm to solve the
equations of plane-parallel radiative transfer in a vertically inhomogeneous
atmosphere (Ricchiazzi et al.,1998). The simulations cover the same
wavelength range (i.e., 0.28–3.0 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m) as the
pyranometer for convenience of comparison. Simulations of the ASRF by the SBDART
model are susceptible to the input conditions including the aerosol
properties, atmosphere profiles, and land surface albedo. These input data
were specified based on the high-quality dataset obtained in the DAO-K
campaign.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2.SSS1">
  <label>3.2.1</label><title>Aerosol properties</title>
      <p id="d1e1332">The aerosol properties including AOD, SSA, AE, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:mi>g</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> were retrieved from the
radiometer observations at four bands with the central wavelengths at 440,
675, 870, and 1020 nm. They were applied in the instantaneous radiative
forcing and efficiency calculations at the corresponding observing time. The
aerosol properties in the SW range are obtained by interpolation and
extrapolation using parameters in the abovementioned four wavelength bands.
For daily mean ASRF simulation, the averaged aerosol parameters (i.e., AOD, SSA, AE, and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:mi>g</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) obtained from the daytime radiometer observations were used as
alternatives of the daily mean aerosol properties. The daily mean aerosol
radiative forcing and efficiency were calculated by taking the average of
the 24 instantaneous values on an hourly basis.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2.SSS2">
  <label>3.2.2</label><title>Atmospheric profiles</title>
      <p id="d1e1357">In addition to aerosol properties, atmospheric profiles of thermodynamic
properties are important for the ASRF calculations. The vertical distributions
of air pressure, temperature, water vapor, and ozone densities exert obvious
influence on the direct and diffuse solar irradiances at the BOA. The
pre-defined atmospheric profiles in the used RT model (e.g., tropical,
midlatitude summer, midlatitude winter, sub-arctic summer, sub-arctic
winter profiles) are different from Kashi local conditions. Therefore,
within the ASRF simulations, the pre-defined profiles have been replaced by the
actual measurements conducted during the DAO-K campaign. Vertical
distributions of the atmospheric pressure, temperature, and relative humidity
can be obtained by atmospheric sounding twice a day around 00:00 and
12:00 UTC at Kashi. The profiles of ozone density (in g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) were
deduced from the OMI/Aura OMO3PR product (in Dobson units; DU) (Bhartia et al., 1996). Two
atmospheric profiles were specified for each day. The profile closest to the
ASRF simulated moment was adopted for both of instantaneous and daily mean
aerosol radiative forcing estimates.<?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?></p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2.SSS3">
  <label>3.2.3</label><title>Surface albedo</title>
      <p id="d1e1381">Land surface albedo (LSA) is another key factor to influence the radiation
budget, mainly due to its significant impact on the SW upward irradiance
(Liang, 2004; Wendisch et al., 2004; Bierwirth et al., 2009; Tegen et al.,
2009; Jäkel et al., 2013; Stapf et al., 2019). Shortwave land surface
albedo <inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SW</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, also known as blue-sky albedo, can be
calculated from the black-sky albedo <inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SW</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">BSA</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
white-sky albedo <inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SW</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">WSA</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> weighted by the fraction
of diffuse skylight radiation (Schaaf et al., 2002; Wang et al., 2015):
              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E6" content-type="numbered"><label>6</label><mml:math id="M62" display="block"><mml:mtable columnspacing="1em" class="split" rowspacing="0.2ex" displaystyle="true" columnalign="right left"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SW</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">φ</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">diffuse</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SW</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SW</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">WSA</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">diffuse</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SW</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SW</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">BSA</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">φ</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
            where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">diffuse</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SW</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> denotes the fraction of diffuse radiation in
the solar spectral range. (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">φ</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)
specifies the incident solar geometry (i.e., solar zenith angle and solar
azimuthal angle).</p>
      <p id="d1e1576">The shortwave WSA and BSA are provided by the MODIS BRDF/albedo science data
product MCD43A3, which is produced daily using 16 d of MODIS Terra and Aqua
data. MCD43A3 only delivers the surface albedo products at local solar noon.
However, diurnal variations of LSA cannot be ignored, which has been
demonstrated by previous studies (Lewis and Barnsley, 1994; Lucht et al.,
2000; Wang et al., 2015). There will be an obvious bias in estimating daily
solar radiation when simply using the local noon value as a surrogate of
daily mean albedo (Wang et al., 2015). As for the weighting parameters of
the RossThickLiSparseReciprocal BRDF model (i.e., isotropic, volumetric, and
geometric), the changes within 16 d are subtle. Therefore, the daily
three model weighting parameters over the SW band afforded by the MODIS
product MCD43A1 are adopted to derived the WSA and BSA (the latter is as a
function of incident solar direction) at different ASRF simulated moments. The
fraction of diffuse radiation can be calculated by the ratio of diffuse
solar irradiance to total solar irradiance, which mainly depends on the
solar zenith angle, aerosol, and cloud conditions. The diffuse and total
irradiances measured by pyranometers with 1 min resolution are applied in
this study to calculate the fraction of diffuse radiation.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><label>Figure 3</label><caption><p id="d1e1581">Diurnal variations of blue-sky albedo and corresponding full-sky
visible images under different sky conditions at Kashi: <bold>(a)</bold> clear case,
<bold>(b)</bold> two-layer dust case, <bold>(c)</bold> clouds early/clearing late case, and <bold>(d)</bold> heavy dust
case.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/20/10845/2020/acp-20-10845-2020-f03.png"/>

          </fig>

      <p id="d1e1603">Figure 3 illustrates the diurnal variations of LSA and corresponding full-sky
visible images under four typical sky conditions at Kashi. For the
cloud-free and low aerosol loading conditions (identified as clear sky,
e.g., almost the whole day of 7 April 2019 and afternoon of 12 April 2019), LSA
changes distinctively for different time. High values of LSA are observed in
the early morning and the late afternoon. Meanwhile, the extreme value of
LSA in the morning (0.253) is greater than that in the afternoon (0.218),
which has been supported by some other field observations (Minnis et al.,
1997; Wang et al., 2015). The local noon albedo shows a very low value. The
daily mean albedo under the clear-sky condition (0.199) is significantly
greater than the local noon albedo (0.173). However, in dust-polluted
(almost the whole<?pagebreak page10851?> days of 9 and 25 April 2019) and cloudy (the morning of
12 April 2019) sky conditions, the changes of LSA are not as severe as in the
clear-sky conditions. Nevertheless, the local noon albedo still cannot
reflect the effects of aerosol and cloud variations on land surface albedo.
Thus, diurnal-changed LSA and the daily mean albedo were adopted in the
instantaneous and daily mean ASRF simulations, respectively. It is expected that
estimations of instantaneous and daily mean aerosol radiative forcing can be
improved by considering diurnal variations of LSA instead of local noon
albedo.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3">
  <label>3.3</label><title>WRF-Chem simulations</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3.SSS1">
  <label>3.3.1</label><title>Forecast model</title>
      <p id="d1e1622">WRF-Chem version 4.0 (Grell et al., 2005; Fast et al., 2006) was used to simulate the
ASRF at Kashi. The simulations were configured in a 9 km domain centered at the
Kashi site with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">45</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">45</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> grid points and 41 vertical levels that
extended from the surface to 50 hPa. The main physical options used for this
study included the Purdue–Lin microphysics scheme, the unified Noah land
surface model, the Yonsei University (YSU) scheme for planetary boundary
layer meteorological conditions, and the Rapid Radiative Transfer Model for
General Circulation Models (RRTMG) for solar and terrestrial radiation (Lin
et al., 1983; Mlawer et al., 1997; Chen and Dudhia, 2001; Hong et al., 2006;
Iacono et al., 2008). The Carbon Bond Mechanism (CBMZ) was used for the
gas-phase chemistry processes (Zaveri and Peters, 1999), which included
aqueous-phase chemistry. The aerosol chemistry was based on the Model for
Simulating Aerosol Interactions and Chemistry (MOSAIC; Zaveri et al., 2008)
with four size bins (0.039–0.156,
0.156–0.625, 0.625–2.5, and
5.0–10.0 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m dry diameters). The sum of aerosol mass
concentrations in the first three size bins constructs the concentration of
PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and the sum of the four size bins gives the concentration of
PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>. Aerosol types such as sulfate, methanesulfonate, nitrate, ammonium,
black carbon, primary organic carbon, sodium, calcium, chloride, carbonate,
aerosol liquid water, and other inorganic matter (e.g., trace metals and
silica) are involved in the simulation. Dust was simulated with the
Goddard Chemistry Aerosol Radiation and Transport (GOCART)
dust emission scheme (Ginoux et al., 2001). The dust particulates were
aggregated into the other inorganic matter component and were presented in
the calculation of aerosol optical properties with anthropogenic aerosols.</p>
      <p id="d1e1663">Aerosol particle optical properties were calculated as a function of
wavelength based on the Mie theory. The aerosol components within each size
bin are assumed to be internally mixed. The mixing refractive indices are
the volume–weight average in refractive indices of all aerosol components.
Aerosol extinction and scattering coefficients and the asymmetry factor for a
particulate per size bin are attained<?pagebreak page10852?> though searching a look-up Mie table
by Chebyshev polynomial interpolation with the desired mixing refractive
indices and wet particulate radius. The value of particulate extinction
coefficient multiplied with the particulate number concentration is volume
extinction coefficient which is then multiplied with the height of layer to
attain the layer AOD value. The sum of all layer AOD values over the four size
bins is the columnar total AOD and is used for calculating AOD increments in the
assimilation.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3.SSS2">
  <label>3.3.2</label><title>Assimilation system</title>
      <p id="d1e1674">The Gridpoint Statistical Interpolation (GSI) 3D-Var assimilation system
version 3.7 was applied to improve the simulated aerosols by assimilating
the aerosol measurements collected at Kashi during the DAO-K campaign (Wu et
al., 2002; Kleist et al., 2009). This GSI version has been modified to
assimilate the aerosol products (Liu et al., 2011b; Schwartz et al., 2012).
We assimilated our ground-based multi-wavelength AOD (440, 675, 870, 1020 nm)
and the surface-layer concentrations of PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> suited to the
MOSAIC aerosol module in WRF-Chem. We used the natural logarithm of
particulate number concentration per size bin as control variables. The
aerosol dry mass concentrations, particulate number concentrations, and
aerosol water content are converted into AOD per size bin using the WRF-Chem
aerosol optical routine. The adjoint observation operators for AOD and
particulate matter are given as

                  <disp-formula specific-use="align" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M72" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E7"><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>7</mml:mtext></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>ln⁡</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>ln⁡</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E8"><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>8</mml:mtext></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>ln⁡</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>ln⁡</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mi>c</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>c</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mi>c</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>

              where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is aerosol number concentration in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>th size bin, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>
and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:mi>c</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> are the observed AOD and particulate matter mass concentrations. As no
aerosol particle extinction coefficient assimilated in this experiment, we assume
the extinction coefficient per size bin is constant in grid at each model layer.
Innovation of number concentration due to AOD constraint is therefore a proportion
of change in model layer AOD to the observed columnar AOD, which is attained via
iteration to minimize the cost function. Innovation of number
concentration due to the constraints of PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> is associated
with the ratios (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) of mass concentrations to number concentrations in a
size bin estimated in the guess field, weighted by the proportion of the
size number concentration, changing in the iteration, to the total
particulate matter concentration.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3.SSS3">
  <label>3.3.3</label><title>Model setup</title>
      <p id="d1e1954">Initial and lateral boundary conditions for the meteorological fields in the
WRF-Chem simulations were generated from the National Centers for
Environmental Prediction (NCEP) Final Analysis (FNL) data using the Global
Forecast System (GFS) model at a horizontal resolution of 1<inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. The
boundary conditions were updated every 6 h and then interpolated
linearly in time by WRF-Chem. Anthropogenic emissions from the 2010 MIX
emission inventories (<uri>http://www.meicmodel.org/</uri>, last access: July 2019) containing the Multi-resolution
Emission Inventory of China (MEIC) were used in the simulations. The
biogenic emissions were estimated using the Model of Emissions of Gases and
Aerosols from Nature (MEGAN; Guenther et al., 2006). Two 1-month WRF-Chem
simulations were performed for April 2019, discarding a 1-week spin-up at
the beginning of each simulation. The first 1-month simulation was used
for modeling background error covariance. The second 1-month simulation
was assimilated the observations of PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and AOD with GSI at 00:00,
06:00, 12:00, and 18:00 UTC with the assimilation window of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>3 h
centered at the analysis time. The model was restarted from the meteorology
and chemistry at analysis time and ran to the next analysis time. For the
second one, each restart called the radiation routines twice which included
and excluded the aerosols, respectively, and the corresponding difference
between the two calls in irradiances is aerosol radiative forcing.</p>
      <p id="d1e1994">A general way to model background error covariance is the National
Meteorological Center (NMC) method that computes the statistical differences
between two forecasts with different leading lengths (e.g., 12 and 24 h, or
24 and 48 h) but valid at the same time (Parrish and Derber, 1992). However,
in some experiments, the WRF-Chem model underestimated aerosol
concentrations and hence likely lowered the error magnitudes. For this
reason, we assessed the standard deviations of the control variables over
the entire 1-month period at the four analysis hours (i.e., 00:00, 06:00,
12:00, and 18:00 UTC), respectively. Each standard deviation field was used
for modeling a background error covariance repeatedly applied in the
assimilation at the corresponding analysis hour. This approach represents
the strong fluctuations of control variables as weather evolution during
clear and dusty days. We expect fluctuations of aerosols over different
weather are larger than the uncertainties due to different leading forecast
lengths and may give a better input field for modeling background error
covariance. The observation errors for AOD and PM were 50 % of natural
logarithm of 0.01 and those errors of PM including measurement error and
representative error depending on the grid size and the PM concentrations
(Schwartz et al., 2012). The choice of 50 % was determined by trying
experimentally with different values, which can effectively assimilate
measurements and will not excessively damage the model results.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4">
  <label>4</label><title>Results of radiative transfer simulations</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1">
  <label>4.1</label><title>Aerosol solar radiative forcing and efficiency</title>
      <?pagebreak page10853?><p id="d1e2014">The time series of the measured values of AOD, AE, PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M84" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M85" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
mass concentrations collected during the DAO-K campaign are shown in Fig. 4. The
average value of AOD at 550 nm wavelength is 0.65 during the campaign.
According to AOD, five high aerosol loading episodes are identified:
09:26–12:15 UTC on 2 April 2019, 09:13 on 3 April 2019 until 05:11 UTC on
5 April 2019, 01:52 on 8 April 2019 until 04:20 UTC on 10 April 2019, 01:47 on 13 April 2019 until
12:32 UTC on 16 April 2019, and 01:30 on 24 April 2019 until 04:11 UTC on 25 April 2019. The highest
values of AOD at 550 nm (2.3) were observed from 24 to 25 April 2019 during
a severe dust storm event. From Fig. 4, a negative correlation between AOD and
AE becomes obvious. For the five high aerosol loading episodes, the AEs show
very low values, suggesting that the heavy aerosol outbreaks at Kashi were
dominated by dust particles. As a qualitative indicator of aerosol particle
size, the values of AE are always less than 1.0 during the DAO-K campaign,
illustrating the fact that aerosol particles around the Taklimakan Desert
are mainly dominated by coarse particles (even for clear situations). This
is consistent with the results obtained in a previous study (Fig. 4 in Li et
al., 2018). Comparatively high values of AE (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M86" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.4) are observed on
7, 12, 19, and 23 April 2019, implying relatively small particle enrichments
for these days. The time series of PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M87" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M88" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> mass concentrations
generally concur with that of AOD. However, for some days, such as 19 and
23 April 2019, relatively high PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> corresponding to low AOD has been
observed, indicating an enhanced influence of anthropogenic pollution. For
the measurements on 7 and 12 April 2019, high AE values corresponding to low
PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations could be down to the very low turbidity conditions.
It should be noted that the errors in computations of AE significantly
increase under low aerosol loading conditions (Kaskaoutis et al., 2007).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><label>Figure 4</label><caption><p id="d1e2081">Variations of aerosol optical depth (550 nm), Ångström
exponent (440–870 nm), and PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> mass
concentrations at the Kashi site during the DAO-K campaign.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/20/10845/2020/acp-20-10845-2020-f04.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e2108">Results of instantaneous ASRF and ASRFE during the DAO-K campaign are given
in Fig. 5. Both positive and negative values of ASRF, corresponding to warming and
cooling effects, respectively, can be found at top of the atmosphere (Fig. 5a).
However, aerosols have only warming effects in the atmosphere (Fig. 5c)
and cooling effects at the surface (Fig. 5e) during the DAO-K campaign.
ASRF values at the TOA and BOA exhibit obvious negative correlations with AOD.
Positive correlations are observed between ASRF within the atmospheric column
and AOD. From Fig. 5, it is evident that the dust aerosol has strong influence
on the solar radiation budget. For the five high aerosol loading episodes (Fig. 4),
the dust-dominant aerosol population exerts stronger cooling effects at the TOA and
BOA, and more significant warming effects in the atmosphere than
other low aerosol loading situations. Moreover, the cooling effects at the
BOA are more noticeable than at the TOA, with minimum values around <inline-formula><mml:math id="M93" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">217</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">119</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M95" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively.</p>
      <p id="d1e2144">When ASRF is normalized by aerosol optical depth at 550 nm wavelength, the
ASRFE is obtained. This quantity is mostly insensitive to the aerosol loading,
at least if a linear relation between ASRF and AOD is assumed. Nevertheless,
a weak negative correlation between ASRFE and AE can be observed at the BOA
(Fig. 5f). That means the ASRFE at the surface can roughly indicate the radiative forcing
effects of different types of aerosols (García et al., 2008).
A relatively large fraction of small particles associated with high AE has
stronger ASRFE for cooling the surface than other low AE situations. But for
TOA and ATM (Fig. 5b, d), there is no obvious correlation between ASRFE and AE.
Generally, the cooling effect of aerosols at Kashi is more efficient at the
BOA than that at the TOA. It is in accordance with the results of ASRF. In
comparison to ASRF, the variation of ASRFE is relatively moderate during the
campaign. The strongest cooling effects on the TOA and BOA all appear in the
episode of dust storm outbreak (i.e., 24 and 25 April 2019) (see Fig. 5a,
e). But large dust particles in this case do not show extreme radiative
forcing efficiency (Fig. 5b, f). Strong cooling efficiencies at the surface
during the DAO-K campaign occur in the very clear cases with high AE on 7 April 2019 (Fig. 5f).</p>
      <p id="d1e2147">During the DAO-K campaign, the average values of daily mean ASRF at Kashi are
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M96" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">19</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">13</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at the TOA and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">36</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">23</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M99" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at the
BOA, which are slightly stronger than the multi-year average values at this
site (i.e., <inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">16</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M101" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at the TOA and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M102" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">18</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M103" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at the BOA)
obtained by the previous study (Li et al., 2018). These results are
reasonable, since the campaign was performed in the dust-prone season and
higher aerosol loading situations have stronger ASRF effects as discussed above.
Likewise, the average values of daily mean ASRFE at the TOA and BOA during the
DAO-K campaign are <inline-formula><mml:math id="M104" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">27</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M105" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M106" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">550</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M107" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">55</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M108" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M109" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">550</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively, which are
more efficient than the corresponding multi-year average values
(i.e., <inline-formula><mml:math id="M110" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">21</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M111" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M112" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">550</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at the TOA and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M113" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">24</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M114" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M115" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">550</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
at the BOA) reported in the previous study (Li et al.,
2018).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{5}?><label>Figure 5</label><caption><p id="d1e2409">Instantaneous aerosol solar radiative forcing <bold>(a, c, e)</bold> and
efficiencies <bold>(b, d, f)</bold> at the Kashi site during the DAO-K campaign
(<bold>a, b</bold>: TOA; <bold>c, d</bold>: ATM; <bold>e, f</bold>: BOA).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=455.244094pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/20/10845/2020/acp-20-10845-2020-f05.png"/>

        </fig>

<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1.SSS1">
  <label>4.1.1</label><title>Clear-sky case</title>
      <p id="d1e2440">Instantaneous ASRF and ASRFE of the clear-sky case on 7 April 2019 are depicted in
Fig. 6. It was a typical<?pagebreak page10854?> cloud-free and low aerosol loading day at Kashi
with AOD at 550 nm less than 0.22 for the whole day. As discussed above, the
highest AE is observed on this day during the 1-month campaign (see Fig. 4).
Both cooling and warming effects of aerosols can be found at the top of
atmosphere. The cooling effects of ASRF are up to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M116" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">19</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M117" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at the TOA and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M118" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">48</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M119" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at the BOA, and the warming effect of ASRF is up to 50 W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M120" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
in the atmosphere. The corresponding extreme ASRFE values are <inline-formula><mml:math id="M121" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">126</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M122" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">236</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and
263 W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M123" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M124" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">550</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively. It is apparent that the
changes of ASRFE are more intense than the corresponding ASRF for the clear case.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F6" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{6}?><label>Figure 6</label><caption><p id="d1e2550">Instantaneous aerosol solar radiative forcing and efficiencies of
the clear-sky case on 7 April 2019 at the Kashi site: <bold>(a)</bold> TOA, <bold>(b)</bold> ATM, and <bold>(c)</bold> BOA.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/20/10845/2020/acp-20-10845-2020-f06.png"/>

          </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1.SSS2">
  <label>4.1.2</label><title>Heavy dust case</title>
      <p id="d1e2576">Figure 7 describes ASRF and ASRFE for a heavy dust storm episode on 25 April 2019 at
Kashi. Only few observations from 03:33 to 04:11 UTC were suitable for
retrieval in this day. Aerosol optical depth at 550 nm was up to 2.3 during
this observation period. In comparison to the clear case, dust particles
have stronger cooling effects at the TOA and BOA (ASRFs up to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M125" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">111</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M126" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">217</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M127" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>,
respectively), and stronger warming effect in ATM (ASRF up to 121 W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M128" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>).
However, we observe the extreme ASRFE values of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M129" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">51</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M130" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">99</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and 55 W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M131" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M132" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">550</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
at the TOA, BOA, and in ATM, respectively,
indicating that the radiative forcing of dust is less efficient than that of
the clear case. Moreover, the variations of ASRFE in the dust case are more
moderate than those of ASRF. These are striking differences from the clear-sky
case.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F7" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{7}?><label>Figure 7</label><caption><p id="d1e2674">As Fig. 6 but for the heavy dust case on 25 April 2019.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/20/10845/2020/acp-20-10845-2020-f07.png"/>

          </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1.SSS3">
  <label>4.1.3</label><title>Two-layer dust case</title>
      <p id="d1e2692">On 9 April 2019, one extra layer suspending above the planetary boundary
layer (PBL) was observed. Figure 8 illustrates the observations of LILAS on
8 April. Lidar observations on 9 April 2019 are not shown because the lidar
stopped working due to technical problems on the night of 8 April 2019.
According to the backscattering coefficient profiles at 355 nm, the lower
layer and upper layer can be clearly identified. Lidar measurements indicate
that aerosols in the layer above the PBL are probably dust particles because
the derived high depolarization ratios agree with the values for dust.
However,  we cannot draw unambiguous<?pagebreak page10855?> conclusions from lidar measurements about
the aerosol type in the PBL, because the incomplete overlap range of the
lidar system is up to 800–1000 m. From Fig. 4, high AOD
corresponding to low AE in the whole atmosphere and high PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M133" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and
PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M134" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations in the surface layer are exhibited from 8 to 9 April.
It also suggests the complex pollution by two-layer dust particles during
this pollution process. AOD at 550 nm on 9 April changes from 1.4 to 2.2 (Fig. 9).
Consistent with the above heavy dust case, only cooling effects can
be observed at the TOA and BOA, and only warming effect can be found in ATM
for this case. The two layers of dust particles result in a TOA cooling
effect up to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M135" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">102</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M136" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, BOA cooling effect of up to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M137" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">198</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M138" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>,
and atmosphere warming effect of up to 123 W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M139" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. The absolute values
of ASRF at the TOA and BOA in this case are all less than those in the heavy
dust case, suggesting the aerosols in the heavy dust case have more powerful
cooling effects. Nevertheless, the extreme values of ASRFE are <inline-formula><mml:math id="M140" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">62</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M141" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">105</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
and 58 W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M142" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M143" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">550</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at the TOA, BOA, and in ATM, respectively,
indicating that dust particles in the two-layer case have stronger radiative
forcing efficiencies than those in the heavy dust cases.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F8"><?xmltex \currentcnt{8}?><label>Figure 8</label><caption><p id="d1e2820">The backscattering coefficient profiles at 355 nm for the
two-layer dust case on the night of 8 April 2019.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/20/10845/2020/acp-20-10845-2020-f08.png"/>

          </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F9" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{9}?><label>Figure 9</label><caption><p id="d1e2831">As Fig. 6 but for the two-layer dust case on 9 April 2019.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/20/10845/2020/acp-20-10845-2020-f09.png"/>

          </fig>

</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS2">
  <label>4.2</label><title>Influence of the atmosphere and surface conditions</title>
      <?pagebreak page10856?><p id="d1e2849">Figure 10 describes the influence of atmospheric profile and land surface
albedo on the simulations of total irradiances and ASRF. The differences in the
results of total downward irradiance (TDI), total upward irradiance (TUI), and
ASRF at the TOA and BOA simulated with the pre-defined midlatitude winter profile
and user-specified profiles, and simulated with local noon surface albedo
and instantaneous surface albedo are given, respectively. According to Fig. 10a,
different settings of profiles have no influence on the TDI at the TOA.
For the TUI, the absolute differences are less than 9 W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M144" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. However, the
atmospheric profile has significant impacts on both the TDI and TUI at the
surface. The influence on TDI is generally stronger than which on TUI. The
maximum absolute difference is up to 138 W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M145" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (Fig. 10c). For ASRF at the
TOA, the effects of atmospheric profiles are less than 5 W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M146" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. However, the
serious influence of atmospheric profiles on ASRF can be up to 103 W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M147" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>  at the BOA (Fig. 10e).
The average effect of different profiles on ASRF is 0.8 W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M148" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at the
TOA, which is quite small in comparison with the average values of daily
ASRF (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M149" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">19</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M150" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>). However, the average difference of 13 W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M151" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
for ASRF affected by atmospheric profiles cannot be ignored relative to the
average ASRF (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M152" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">36</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M153" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) at the BOA. As a result, the cooling effects of
aerosol radiative forcing will be significantly underestimated at the BOA
simulated with the pre-defined midlatitude winter profile instead of the
user-specified Kashi atmospheric profiles.</p>
      <p id="d1e2969">Like atmospheric profile, different settings of LSA have also no influence
on TDI at the TOA (Fig. 10b). They have small effects on TDI at the BOA (absolute
difference less than 3 W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M154" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) but obvious impacts on TUI at the TOA and
BOA (absolute difference up to 22 W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M155" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) (Fig. 10b, d). From Fig. 3,
the local noon albedo is often less than the daily mean albedo. Especially
for a clear day, the minimum of LSA occurs around the local noon. Then, the
TUI at the TOA and BOA will generally be underestimated by using the local noon
albedo instead of instantaneous surface albedo in the simulations. But for
ASRF (Fig. 10f), two LSA settings lead to moderate impacts at the TOA and BOA
with average absolute differences of 1.8 and 1.7 W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M156" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively.
Therefore, simulations using the local noon albedo tend to overestimate the
cooling effects of the aerosol radiative forcing both at the TOA and BOA.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F10" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{10}?><label>Figure 10</label><caption><p id="d1e3010">Influence of atmospheric profile <bold>(a, c, e)</bold> and land surface
albedo <bold>(b, d, f)</bold> on total irradiances and ASRF. <bold>(a)</bold> Differences of total
downward and upward irradiances (TDI and TUI) at the TOA between simulations with
the pre-defined midlatitude winter profile and user-specified profiles;
<bold>(b)</bold> differences of TDI and TUI at the TOA between simulations with local noon surface
albedo and instantaneous surface albedo; panel <bold>(c)</bold> is the same as <bold>(a)</bold> but for BOA;
panel <bold>(d)</bold> is the same as <bold>(b)</bold> but for BOA; <bold>(e)</bold> differences of ASRF between simulations with the
pre-defined midlatitude winter profile and user-specified profiles at the
TOA and BOA; <bold>(f)</bold> differences of ASRF between simulations with local noon surface
albedo and instantaneous surface albedo at the TOA and BOA.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/20/10845/2020/acp-20-10845-2020-f10.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F11" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{11}?><label>Figure 11</label><caption><p id="d1e3053">Correlations of instantaneous ASRF between radiative transfer (RT)
model simulations in this study and the AERONET products during the DAO-K
campaign: <bold>(a)</bold> TOA and <bold>(b)</bold> BOA.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/20/10845/2020/acp-20-10845-2020-f11.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS3">
  <label>4.3</label><title>Difference from AERONET products</title>
      <p id="d1e3076">Aerosol radiative forcing at the TOA and BOA involves operational products
provided routinely by AERONET. Measurements of CE318 no. 1141 during the
DAO-K campaign have been processed by AERONET. Therefore, we can compare the
ASRF product from AERONET with our simulations. For AERONET, broadband upward
and downward irradiances in the SW range from 0.2 to 4.0 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M157" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m were
calculated by radiative transfer model with retrieved aerosol properties as
model inputs (<uri>http://aeronet.gsfc.nasa.gov</uri>, last access: July 2019). However, AERONET adopts
a different definition of ASRF, only taking the downward irradiance at the BOA
and the upward irradiance at the TOA into consideration (García et al.,
2012). The upward irradiances with and without aerosols in Eq. (2), along
with the downward irradiances with and without aerosols in Eq. (1), are not
taken into account. Omitting the downward irradiances will not make much
difference in ASRF at the TOA. But for ASRF at the BOA, it is predictable that
neglecting the upward irradiance will lead to an obvious difference. Some
existing studies have executed this kind of comparison (García et al.,
2008, 2012; Bi et al., 2014) and reported that AERONET
tends to overestimate aerosol ASRF at the BOA (García et al., 2012).</p>
      <p id="d1e3090">Figure 11 presents the correlations of instantaneous aerosol ASRF between the RT
model simulations and the AERONET products. It is obvious that there are
linear relationships between our RT simulations and the AERONET results with
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M158" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> up to 0.98 and 0.99 at the TOA and BOA, respectively. Two ASRF results
at the TOA show good consistency with a slope of 1.01, even though the
calculated SW ranges are not an exact match (i.e., 0.28–3.0 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M159" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m for this study and 0.2–4.0 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M160" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m for AERONET).
But, for BOA, the AERONET products are obviously stronger than the
corresponding RT model simulations (with a slope of 1.24), which agrees with
the conclusion of the previous study (García et al., 2012).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F12" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{12}?><label>Figure 12</label><caption><p id="d1e3122">Comparisons of the surface-layer PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M161" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <bold>(a, b)</bold> and PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M162" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <bold>(c, d)</bold>
concentrations and AOD at 675 nm <bold>(e, f)</bold> among the observations, the WRF-Chem
simulations with and without data assimilation (DA) in April 2019. The
observations have been interpolated to 00:00, 06:00, 12:00, and 18:00 UTC of each
day.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/20/10845/2020/acp-20-10845-2020-f12.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5">
  <label>5</label><title>Comparison with WRF-Chem simulations</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S5.SS1">
  <label>5.1</label><title>Comparison between radiative transfer and WRF-Chem simulations</title>
      <?pagebreak page10858?><p id="d1e3175">Figure 12 compares the assimilated aerosols to the observations. Evidently,
the assimilation greatly improves the particulate matter concentrations and
show reasonable variations in accordance with the dust episodes. However,
two disadvantages are noticeable. One is that the assimilation fails to reproduce
the extremely high PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M163" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M164" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> on 24–25 April 2019, because the
background error covariance is not specific for the
model error in the strong dust storm. A better model result for the specific
dust storm requires improving the model capability of simulating dust
emission and the transport of dust particulates besides data assimilation.
Another is the assimilated AOD indeed increases but not well approaches the
observations. The reason is that we only assimilated AOD by assuming the
invariable extinction coefficients. Hence, this low bias in AOD cannot be
eliminated by choosing a scaling factor smaller than 50 % in the
observation error for that it will damage the surface-layer particulate
results.</p>
      <p id="d1e3196">Figure 13 illustrates the results of daily mean ASRFs during DAO-K campaign
simulated by the SBDART and WRF-Chem models. The two results show similar
variation patterns. However, there are obvious differences between the
WRF-Chem results and the RT simulations in some dust-polluted cases (e.g.,
9, 24, and 25 April 2019). According to the RT simulations, the strongest
radiative forcing occurred on 25 April 2019. However, the most significant
ASRF of WRF-Chem simulation is found on 24 April 2019, followed by 25 April 2019.
As mentioned above, heavy dust storms broke out on these 2 d during the
DAO-K campaign. The percent differences are sometimes greater than 50 %
between the RT and WRF-Chem simulations. The significant differences between
the two kinds of simulated results should be further evaluated.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F13"><?xmltex \currentcnt{13}?><label>Figure 13</label><caption><p id="d1e3201">Comparisons of daily mean ASRF between the RT model calculations and
the WRF-Chem simulations during the DAO-K campaign: <bold>(a)</bold> TOA, <bold>(b)</bold> ATM, and <bold>(c)</bold> BOA.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/20/10845/2020/acp-20-10845-2020-f13.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5.SS2">
  <label>5.2</label><title>Validation by ground-based irradiance measurements</title>
      <p id="d1e3227">Figure 14 directly compares the RT and WRF-Chem simulated downward irradiances
at surface with the ground-based measurements under three different sky
conditions (i.e., clear case, heavy dust case, and two-layer dust case). The
RT simulations of total, direct, and diffuse downward irradiances in the
three situations agree well with high-precision measurements of
pyrheliometer and pyranometers. The percent differences of RT-simulated
total irradiance with respect to the measurements are only 0.03 % for the
clear case, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M165" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.67</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % for the heavy dust case, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M166" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.43</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % for the
two-layer dust case. Except for the heavy dust case, they are within the
pyranometer measurement uncertainties (0.66 %). As for the WRF-Chem
simulations, the total irradiances in the clear-sky case are consistent with
RT simulations and measurements (Fig. 14a). But for the direct irradiances,
there are obvious differences between the WRF-Chem simulations and the
corresponding measurements (Fig. 14b). Moreover, the<?pagebreak page10859?> WRF-Chem simulated
diffuse irradiances in the clear case (Fig. 14c), the total, direct, and
diffuse irradiances in the heavy dust and two-layer dust cases (Fig. 14d–i)
are significantly distinct from the measurements and
RT simulations.</p>
      <p id="d1e3250">One of the most noticeable features in the curves of WRF-Chem results is the
sudden jump around 06:00 UTC, which can be attributed to data assimilation
restarting at 06:00 UTC and running to the next analysis time (12:00 UTC). The
WRF-Chem results are greatly improved after 06:00 UTC in the dust-polluted
cases. It is evident that data assimilation can ameliorate the WRF-Chem
simulations in dust cases, but the correction effects are still limited. So,
the problems of the WRF-Chem simulation have not yet been fully resolved by
the assimilation of aerosol optical depth and particulate matter
concentrations. This conclusion is in accordance with Figs. 12 and 13. Our
measurements have proved that the simulations of RT model are reliable in
both of clear and high aerosol loading situations. The WRF-Chem model
performs better in clear-sky than in the dust-polluted conditions. There is
still room for improving the WRF-Chem simulation of dust aerosol radiative
forcing.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F14" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{14}?><label>Figure 14</label><caption><p id="d1e3255">Comparisons of total, direct, and diffuse downward irradiances at
the bottom of atmosphere for the clear-sky case <bold>(a–c)</bold>, the
heavy dust case <bold>(d–f)</bold>, and the two-layer dust case <bold>(g–i)</bold>
at the Kashi site (blue points: simulated by the RT model;
dashed red lines: simulated by the WRF-Chem model with data assimilation at 00:00
and 06:00 UTC;  solid gray lines: measured by pyrheliometer and pyranometers).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/20/10845/2020/acp-20-10845-2020-f14.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S6" sec-type="conclusions">
  <label>6</label><title>Summary and conclusions</title>
      <p id="d1e3282">Dust aerosol particles play an important role in local and global climate
changes by influencing the solar radiation budget through scattering and
absorbing processes, especially for the regions close to dust sources such as
deserts. The complicated scattering and absorption characteristics of dust
particles make it challenging to estimate their direct radiative forcing. To
overcome some of the issues with the quantification of the dust radiative
effects, the Dust Aerosol Observation-Kashi (DAO-K) campaign was designed
and performed near the Taklimakan Desert, which represents a substantial and
stable source of Asian dust aerosol particles. For almost 1 month,
comprehensive observations of aerosol properties (i.e., aerosol optical
depth, Ångström exponent, single scattering albedo, and asymmetry
factor), atmospheric profiles (including ozone measurements), and land
surface properties were obtained by a variety of state-of-the-art
ground-based and satellite instruments in the dust season, and were applied
to estimate the aerosol solar radiative forcing using the SBDART radiative
transfer model. In addition to high-quality datasets of volumetric aerosol
properties, satisfying the AERONET and SONET level-1.5 data criteria, the
daily specified atmospheric profiles and diurnal variations of surface
albedo were also considered in the calculations. The results simulated with
the SBDART model show that the average values of daily mean ASRF at Kashi are
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M167" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">19</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M168" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at the TOA and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M169" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">36</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M170" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at the BOA during the DAO-K
campaign. The dust-dominant aerosol particles have stronger cooling effects
at both the TOA and BOA, and more significant warming effects in the
atmosphere than other low aerosol loading situations. Nevertheless, the
radiative forcing efficiencies in dust-polluted cases are lower than
those in clear-sky conditions. The average influence of different profiles
on ASRF is small at the TOA (0.8 W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M171" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) but remarkable at the BOA
(13 W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M172" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>). The cooling effects of aerosol radiative forcing at the BOA are
significantly underestimated by simulations with the pre-defined midlatitude
winter profile instead of the user-specified profiles measured at Kashi
during the DAO-K campaign. Simulations using the local noon albedo tend to
overestimate the cooling effects of the aerosol radiative forcing both at
the TOA and BOA. Different land surface albedo settings (i.e., local noon
albedo or instantaneous albedo) lead to moderate impacts on ASRF with average
effects of 1.8 W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M173" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at the TOA and 1.7 W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M174" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at the BOA.</p>
      <p id="d1e3378">By assimilating the multi-wavelength columnar AOD and the surface-based
measurements of PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M175" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M176" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> mass concentrations, the aerosol
solar radiative forcing was also simulated for the time period of the DAO-K
field campaign using the WRF-Chem model. The downward solar
irradiance measurements at the surface were used as a reference in evaluating the RT and
WRF-Chem simulations. The direct, diffuse (and the sum of both) downward
irradiances simulated by the SBDART model in the clear-sky, heavy dust, and
two-layer dust conditions are all in sufficient agreement with ground-based
measurements. As for the WRF-Chem simulations, the total irradiances in the
clear-sky case are consistent with RT calculations and measurements. But<?pagebreak page10860?> the
direct, diffuse, and total irradiances simulated by WRF-Chem significantly
deviate from measurements in the dust-polluted situations. Based on these
findings, it is concluded that the SBDART model provides credible estimates
of dust particle solar radiative forcing if supplied with appropriate model
input data. Data assimilation can obviously improve the WRF-Chem
simulations in dust cases, but the correction effects are still limited.
Consideration of the actual measured atmospheric profiles and diurnal cycles of
land surface albedo has some potential to improve the RT simulations.
Optimizations of dust emission scheme, background error setting of dust
assimilation system, and dust parameterization including nonsphericity are
proposed as promising approaches to improve the WRF-Chem simulations of dust
radiative forcing. We would like to emphasize, however, that in this study
the comparisons are conducted at one site and in a limited time period.
Future research on this topic should include a systematic evaluation of RT
and WRF-Chem simulations on extended space scales and timescales.</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><notes notes-type="dataavailability"><title>Data availability</title>

      <p id="d1e3403">The MODIS, OMI, and AERONET products can be accessed at
<uri>https://ladsweb.modaps.eosdis.nasa.gov/search/</uri> (last access: July 2019), <uri>https://disc.gsfc.nasa.gov/</uri> (last access: July 2019), and
<uri>https://aeronet.gsfc.nasa.gov/</uri> (last access: July 2019), respectively.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="authorcontribution"><title>Author contributions</title>

      <p id="d1e3418">ZL, PG, LL, KL, and JW designed the Dust Aerosol Observation-Kashi (DAO-K)
campaign. YO and CL conducted the measurements of the solar radiation
monitoring station and the all-sky view camera. YO collected and processed
the data of atmospheric profiles. QH performed the lidar observations. The
retrievals of aerosol properties were processed and provided by KL. The
WRF-Chem simulations and analysis were provided by WC. LL improved the
SBDART simulations and conducted data analysis and comparisons. LL and MW
prepared the paper with contributions from all authors.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests"><title>Competing interests</title>

      <p id="d1e3424">The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="sistatement"><title>Special issue statement</title>

      <?pagebreak page10861?><p id="d1e3430">This article is part of the special issue “Satellite and ground-based
remote sensing of aerosol optical, physical, and chemical properties over China”.
It is not associated with a conference.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e3436">The authors acknowledge the
MODIS, OMI, and AERONET groups for making the surface albedo, ozone profile, and
radiative forcing products available, respectively. We also thank the Kashi
regional meteorological bureau and the China National Environmental
Monitoring Center for providing the data of atmospheric sounding and
PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M177" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations of Kashi, respectively. The Anhui Yunnengtian
Intelligent Technology Co., Ltd., China, is acknowledged for providing the
all-sky view camera and technical support. The first author also wishes to
thank Haofei Wang, Thierry Podvin, Igor Veselovskiy, Jie Chen, and Ying
Zhang for participating in the measurements. We are grateful to the anonymous
reviewers whose valuable comments and suggestions have helped us to
improve the paper.</p></ack><notes notes-type="financialsupport"><title>Financial support</title>

      <p id="d1e3450">This research has been supported by the National Natural
Science Foundation of China (grant no. 41871271) and the National Key R&amp;D
Program of China (grant no. 2016YFE0201400).</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="reviewstatement"><title>Review statement</title>

      <p id="d1e3456">This paper was edited by Jianping Huang and reviewed by two anonymous referees.</p>
  </notes><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Adesina, A. J., Kumar, K. R., Sivakumar, V., and Griffith, D.: Direct
radiative forcing of urban aerosols over Pretoria (25.75<inline-formula><mml:math id="M178" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S,
28.28<inline-formula><mml:math id="M179" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E) using AERONET Sunphotometer data: first scientific
results and environmental impact, J. Environ. Sci.,
26, 2459–2474, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jes.2014.04.006" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.jes.2014.04.006</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Ansmann, A., Petzold, A., Kandler, K., Tegen, I., Wendisch, M., Müller,
D., Weinzierl, B., Müller, T., and Heintzenberg, J.: Saharan Mineral
Dust Experiments SAMUM-1 and SAMUM-2: What have we learned? Tellus B, 63,
403–429, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0889.2011.00555.x" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/j.1600-0889.2011.00555.x</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Babu, S. S., Satheesh, S. K., and Moorthy, K. K.: Aerosol radiative forcing
due to enhanced black carbon at an urban site in India, Geophys. Res. Lett.,
29, 27–21, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002GL015826" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2002GL015826</ext-link>, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bhartia, P. K., Mcpeters, R. D., Mateer, C. L., Flynn, L. E., and
Wellemeyer, C. G.: Algorithm for the estimation of vertical ozone profiles
from the backscattered ultraviolet technique, J. Geophys. Res., 101,
18793–18806, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/96JD01165" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/96JD01165</ext-link>, 1996.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bi, J., Huang, J., Hu, Z., Holben, B. N., and Guo, Z.: Investigating the
aerosol optical and radiative characteristics of heavy haze episodes in
Beijing during January of 2013, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 119, 9884–9900,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JD021757" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2014JD021757</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bi, L., Yang, P., Kattawar, G. W., and Kahn, R.: Modeling optical properties
of mineral aerosol particles by using nonsymmetric hexahedra, Appl. Optics,
49, 334–342, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1364/AO.49.000334" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1364/AO.49.000334</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bierwirth, E., Wendisch, M., Ehrlich, A., Heese, B., Tesche, M., Althausen,
D., Schladitz, A., Müller, D., Otto, S., Trautmann, T., Dinter, T., von
Hoyningen-Huene, W., and Kahn, R.: Spectral surface albedo over Morocco and
its impact on radiative forcing of Saharan dust, Tellus B, 61, 252–269, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0889.2008.00395.x" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/j.1600-0889.2008.00395.x</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bory, A. J., Biscaye, P. E., and Grousset, F. E.: Two distinct seasonal
Asian source regions for mineral dust deposited in Greenland (NorthGRIP),
Geophys. Res. Lett., 30, 1167, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002GL016446" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2002GL016446</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Chen, F., and Dudhia, J.: Coupling an advanced land surface–hydrology model
with the Penn State–NCAR MM5 modeling system. Part I: Model implementation
and sensitivity, Mon. Wea. Rev., 129, 569–585,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(2001)129" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/1520-0493(2001)129</ext-link>,0569: CAALSH.2.0.CO;2, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Chen, S., Huang, J., Zhao, C., Qian, Y., Leung, L. R., and Yang, B.:
Modeling the transport and radiative forcing of Taklimakan dust over the
Tibetan Plateau: A case study in the summer of 2006, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 118, 797–812, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50122" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/jgrd.50122</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Chen, S., Zhao, C., Qian, Y., Leung, L. R., Huang, J., Huang, Z., Bi, J.,
Zhang, Y., Shi, J., Yang, L., Li, D., and Li, J.: Regional modeling of dust
mass balance and radiative forcing over East Asia using WRF-Chem, Aeolian
Research, 15, 15–30, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aeolia.2014.02.001" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.aeolia.2014.02.001</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Chen, S., Huang, J., Li, J., Jia, R., Jiang, N., Kang, L., Ma, X., and Xie,
T.: Comparison of dust emissions, transport, and deposition between the
Taklimakan Desert and Gobi Desert from 2007 to 2011, Science China Earth
Sciences, 60, 1338–1355, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11430-016-9051-0" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s11430-016-9051-0</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Chen, S., Yuan, T., Zhang, X., Zhang, G., Feng, T., Zhao, D., Zang, Z.,
Liao, S., Ma, X., Jiang, N., Zhang, J., Yang, F., and Lu, H.: Dust modeling
over East Asia during the summer of 2010 using the WRF-Chem model, J. Quant.
Spectrosc. Ra., 213, 1–12,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jqsrt.2018.04.013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.jqsrt.2018.04.013</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Chen, X., Guo, J., Yin, J., Zhang, Y., Miao, Y., Yun, Y., Liu, L., Li, J.,
Xu, H., Hu, K., and Zhai, P.: Tropopause trend across China from 1979 to
2016: A revisit with updated radiosonde measurements, Int. J. Climatol., 39, 1117–1127, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.5866" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/joc.5866</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
China Meteorological Administration: Operational specifications for
conventional upper-air meteorological observations, China Meteorological
Press, Beijing, China, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>DeMott, P. J., Sassen, K., Poellot, M. R., Baumgardner, D., Rogers, D. C.,
Brooks, S. D., Prenni, A. J., and Kreidenweis, S. M.: African dust aerosols
as atmospheric ice nuclei, Geophys. Res. Lett., 30, 1732,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2003GL017410" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2003GL017410</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Dubovik, O., Sinyuk, A., Lapyonok, T., Holben, B. N., Mishchenko, M., Yang,
P., Eck, T. F., Volten, H., Munõz, O., Veihelmann, B., van der Zande, W.
J., Leon, J. F., Sorokin, M., and Slutsker, I.: Application of spheroid
models to account for aerosol particle nonsphericity in remote sensing of
desert dust, J. Geophys. Res., 111, D11208, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD006619" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2005JD006619</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Esteve, A. R., Estelles, V., Utrillas, M. P., and Martinezlozano, J. A.:
Analysis of the aerosol radiative forcing over a Mediterranean urban coastal
site, Atmos. Res., 137, 195–204, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2013.10.009" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosres.2013.10.009</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page10862?><ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Fast, J. D., Gustafson Jr., W. I., Easter, R. C., Zaveri, R. A., Barnard, J.
C., Chapman, E. G., Grell, G. A., and Peckham, S. E.: Evolution of ozone,
particulates, and aerosol direct radiative forcing in the vicinity of
Houston using a fully coupled meteorology–chemistry–aerosol model, J.
Geophys. Res., 111, D21305, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD006721" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2005JD006721</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>García, O. E., Díaz, A. M., Expósito, F. J., Díaz, J. P.,
Dubovik, O., Dubuisson, P., Roger, J. C., Eck, T. F., Sinyuk, A., Derimian,
Y., Dutton, E. G., Schafer, J. S., Holben, B. N., and García, C. A.:
Validation of AERONET estimates of atmospheric solar fluxes and aerosol
radiative forcing by ground-based broadband measurements, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 113, 6089–6098, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JD010211" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2008JD010211</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>García, O. E., Díaz, J. P., Expósito, F. J., Díaz, A. M., Dubovik, O., Derimian, Y., Dubuisson, P., and Roger, J.-C.: Shortwave radiative forcing and efficiency of key aerosol types using AERONET data, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 5129–5145, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-5129-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-12-5129-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Ginoux, P., Chin, M., Tegen, I., Prospero, J. M., Holben, B., Dubovik, O.,
and Lin, S. J.: Sources and distributions of dust aerosols simulated with
the GOCART model, J. Geophys. Res., 106, 20255–20273, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Grell, G. A., Peckham, S. E., Schmitz, R., McKeen, S. A., Frost, G.,
Skamarock, W. C., and Eder, B.: Fully coupled “online” chemistry within
the WRF model, Atmos. Environ., 39, 6957– 6975,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2005.04.027" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2005.04.027</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Guenther, A., Karl, T., Harley, P., Wiedinmyer, C., Palmer, P. I., and Geron, C.: Estimates of global terrestrial isoprene emissions using MEGAN (Model of Emissions of Gases and Aerosols from Nature), Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6, 3181–3210, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-3181-2006" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-6-3181-2006</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Guo, J., Miao, Y., Zhang, Y., Liu, H., Li, Z., Zhang, W., He, J., Lou, M., Yan, Y., Bian, L., and Zhai, P.: The climatology of planetary boundary layer height in China derived from radiosonde and reanalysis data, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 13309–13319, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-13309-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-16-13309-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Guo, J., Li, Y., Cohen, J. B., Li, J., Chen, D., Xu, H., Liu, L., Yin, J.,
Hu, K., and Zhai, P.: Shift in the temporal trend of boundary layer height
in china using long-term (1979–2016) radiosonde data, Geophys. Res. Lett., 46, 6080–6089, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL082666" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2019GL082666</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Holben, B. N., Eck, T. F., Slutsker, I., Tanré, D., Buis, J. P., Setzer,
A., Vermote, E., Reagan, J. A., Kaufman, Y. J., Nakajima, T., Lavenu, F.,
Jankowiak, I., and Smirnov, A.: AERONET – A Federated Instrument Network and
Data Archive for Aerosol Characterization, Remote Sens. Environ., 66, 1–16,
1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hong, S. Y., Noh, Y., and Dudhia, J.: A new vertical diffusion package with
an explicit treatment of entrainment processes, Mon. Weather Rev., 134,
2318–2341, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR3199.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/MWR3199.1</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hu, Q., Goloub, P., Veselovskii, I., Bravo-Aranda, J.-A., Popovici, I. E., Podvin, T., Haeffelin, M., Lopatin, A., Dubovik, O., Pietras, C., Huang, X., Torres, B., and Chen, C.: Long-range-transported Canadian smoke plumes in the lower stratosphere over northern France, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 1173–1193, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-1173-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-19-1173-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Huang, J., Fu, Q., Su, J., Tang, Q., Minnis, P., Hu, Y., Yi, Y., and Zhao, Q.: Taklimakan dust aerosol radiative heating derived from CALIPSO observations using the Fu-Liou radiation model with CERES constraints, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 9, 4011–4021, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-4011-2009" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-9-4011-2009</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Huang, J., Wang, T., Wang, W., Li, Z., and Yan, H.: Climate effects of dust
aerosols over East Asian arid and semiarid regions, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos.,
119, 11398–11416, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JD021796" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2014JD021796</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Iacono, M. J., Delamere, J. S., Mlawer, E. J., Shephard, M. W., Clough, S.
A., and Collins, W. D.: Radiative forcing by long- lived greenhouse gases:
Calculations with the AER radiative transfer models, J. Geophys. Res., 113,
D13103, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/</ext-link> 2008JD009944, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC): Climate change 2007: the
physical science basis, Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth
Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, New York, USA,
2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Jäkel, E., Wendisch, M., and Mayer, B.: Influence of spatial heterogeneity of local surface albedo on the area-averaged surface albedo retrieved from airborne irradiance measurements, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 6, 527–537, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-6-527-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-6-527-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Kaskaoutis, D. G., Kambezidis, H. D., Hatzianastassiou, N., Kosmopoulos, P. G., and Badarinath, K. V. S.: Aerosol climatology: dependence of the Angstrom exponent on wavelength over four AERONET sites, Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., 7, 7347–7397, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acpd-7-7347-2007" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acpd-7-7347-2007</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Kleist, D. T., Parish, D. F., Derber, J. C., Treadon, R., Wu, W. S., and
Lord, S.: Introduction of the GSI into the NCEP global data assimilation
system, Weather Forecast., 24, 1691–1705, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lenoble, J., Remer, L., and Tanré, D.: Aerosol Remote Sensing, Springer
Berlin Heidelberg, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-17725-5" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/978-3-642-17725-5</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Lewis, P. and Barnsley, M. J.: Influence of the sky radiance distribution on
various formulations of the earth surface albedo, Proc. Conf. Phys. Meas.
Sign. Remote Sen. Val d'Isere, France, 707–715, 1994.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Li, L., Li, Z., Dubovik, O., Zheng, X., Li, Z., Ma, J., and Wendisch, M.:
Effects of the shape distribution of aerosol particles on their volumetric
scattering properties and the radiative transfer through the atmosphere that
includes polarization, Appl. Opt., 58, 1475–1484,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1364/AO.58.001475" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1364/AO.58.001475</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Li, R., Dong, X., Guo, J., Fu, Y., Zhao, C., Wang, Y., and Min, Q.: The
implications of dust ice nuclei effect on cloud top temperature in a complex
mesoscale convective system, Sci. Rep., 7, 13826,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-12681-0" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41598-017-12681-0</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Li, Z., Blarel, L., Podvin, T., Goloub, P., Buis, J. P., and Morel, J. P.:
Transferring the calibration of direct solar irradiance to diffuse-sky
radiance measurements for CIMEL Sun-sky radiometers, Appl. Opt., 47,
1368–1377, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1364/AO.47.001368" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1364/AO.47.001368</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Li, Z. Q., Xu, H., Li, K. T., Li, D. H., Xie, Y. S., Li, L., Zhang, Y., Gu,
X. F., Zhao, W., Tian, Q. J., Deng, R. R., Su, X. L., Huang, B., Qiao, Y.
L., Cui, W. Y., Hu, Y., Gong, C. L., Wang, Y. Q., Wang, X. F., Wang, J. P.,
Du, W. B., Pan, Z. Q., Li, Z. Z., and Bu, D.: Comprehensive Study of
Optical, Physical, Chemical, and Radiative Properties of Total Columnar
Atmospheric Aerosols over China: An Overview of Sun-Sky Radiometer
Observation Network (SONET) Measurements, B. Am.
Meteorol. Soc., 99, 739–755, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-17-0133.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/BAMS-D-17-0133.1</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page10863?><ref id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Liang, S.: Quantitative Remote Sensing of Land Surfaces, John Wiley,
Hoboken, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lin, Y. L., Farley, R. D., and Orville, H. D.: Bulk parameterization of the
snow field in a cloud model, J. Climate Appl. Meteor., 22, 1065–1092,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0450(1983)022" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/1520-0450(1983)022</ext-link>,1065: BPOTSF.2.0.CO;2, 1983.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Liu, L., Guo, J., Gong, H., Li, Z., Chen, W., Wu, R., Wang, L., Xu, H., Li,
J., Chen, D., and Zhai, P.: Contrasting Influence of Gobi and Taklimakan
Deserts on the Dust Aerosols in Western North America, Geophys. Res. Lett., 46, 9064–9071, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL083508" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2019GL083508</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Liu, J., Zheng, Y., Li, Z., Flynn, C., Welton, E. J., and Cribb, M.:
Transport, vertical structure and radiative properties of dust events in
southeast China determined from ground and space sensors, Atmos. Environ., 45, 6469–6480, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.04.031" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.04.031</ext-link>, 2011a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Liu, Z., Liu, D., Huang, J., Vaughan, M., Uno, I., Sugimoto, N., Kittaka, C., Trepte, C., Wang, Z., Hostetler, C., and Winker, D.: Airborne dust distributions over the Tibetan Plateau and surrounding areas derived from the first year of CALIPSO lidar observations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 8, 5045–5060, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-8-5045-2008" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-8-5045-2008</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Liu, Z., Liu, Q., Lin, H. C., Schwartz, C. S., Lee, Y. H., and Wang, T.:
Three-dimensional variational assimilation of MODIS aerosol optical depth:
implementation and application to a dust storm over East Asia, J. Geophys.
Res., 116, D23206, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD016159" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2011JD016159</ext-link>, 2011b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Lucht, W., Schaaf, C. B., and Strahler, A. H.: An algorithm for the
retrieval of albedo from space using semiempirical BRDF models, IEEE T.
Geosci. Remote Sens., 38, 977–998, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Mikami, M., Shi, G., Uno, I., Yabuki, S., Iwasaka, Y., Yasui, M., Aoki, T.,
Tanaka, T.Y., Kurosaki, Y., Masuda, K., Uchiyama, A., Matsuki, A., Sakai,
T., Takemi, T., Nakawo, M., Seino, N., Ishizuka, M., Satake, S., Fujita, K.,
Hara, Y., Kai, K., Kanayama, S., Hayashi, M., Du, M., Kanai, Y., Yamada, Y.,
Zhang, X.Y., Shen, Z., Zhou, H., Abe, O., Nagai, T., Tsutsumi, Y., Chiba,
M., and Suzuki, J.: Aeolian dust experiment on climate impact: An overview
of Japan-China joint project ADEC, Global Planet. Change, 52, 142–172,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2006.03.001" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.gloplacha.2006.03.001</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Minnis, P., Mayor, S., Smith, W. L., and Young, D. F.: Asymmetry in the
diurnal variation of surface albedo, IEEE T. Geosci. Remote Sens., 35,
879–891, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1109/36.602530" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1109/36.602530</ext-link>, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Mlawer, E. J., Taubman, S. J., Brown, P. D., Iacono, M. J., and Clough, S.
A.: Radiative transfer for inhomogeneous atmospheres: RRTM, a validated
correlated-k model for the longwave, J. Geophys. Res., 102, 16663–16682,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/97JD00237" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/97JD00237</ext-link>, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Otto, S., de Reus, M., Trautmann, T., Thomas, A., Wendisch, M., and Borrmann, S.: Atmospheric radiative effects of an in situ measured Saharan dust plume and the role of large particles, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 4887–4903, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-4887-2007" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-7-4887-2007</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Parrish, D. F. and Derber, J. C.: The National Meteorological Center's
spectral statistical interpolation analysis system, Mon. Weather Rev., 120,
1747–1763, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(1992)120&lt;1747:TNMCSS&gt;2.0.CO;2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/1520-0493(1992)120&lt;1747:TNMCSS&gt;2.0.CO;2</ext-link>, 1992.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Ricchiazzi, P., Yang, S., Gautier, C., and Sowle, D.: SBDART: A Research and
Teaching Software Tool for Plane-Parallel Radiative Transfer in the Earth's
Atmosphere, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 79, 2101–2114,
1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Schaaf, C. B., Gao, F., Strahler, A. H., Lucht, W., Li, X., Tsang, T.,
Strugnell, N. C., Zhang, X., Jin, Y., Muller, J. P., Lewis, P., Barnsley,
M., Hobson, P., Disney, M., Roberts, G., Dunderdale, M., Doll, C.,
d'Entremont, R. P., Hu, B., Liang, S., Privette, J. L., and Roy, D.: First
operational BRDF, albedo nadir reflectance products from MODIS, Remote Sens.
Environ., 83, 135–148, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Schaaf, C. and Wang, Z.: MCD43A1 MODIS/Terra<inline-formula><mml:math id="M180" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>Aqua BRDF/Albedo Model
Parameters Daily L3 Global – 500m V006, NASA EOSDIS Land Processes DAAC,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5067/MODIS/MCD43A1.006" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5067/MODIS/MCD43A1.006</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Schwartz, C. S., Liu, Z., Lin, H. C., and McKeen, S. A.: Simultaneous
three-dimensional variational assimilation of surface fine particulate
matter and MODIS aerosol optical depth, J. Geophys. Res., 117, D13202,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD017383" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2011JD017383</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Stapf, J., Ehrlich, A., Jäkel, E., Lüpkes, C., and Wendisch, M.: Reassessment of the common concept to derive the surface cloud radiative forcing in the Arctic: Consideration of surface albedo – cloud interactions, Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2019-534" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-2019-534</ext-link>, in review, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Sun, H., Pan, Z., and Liu, X.: Numerical simulation of spatial-temporal
distribution of dust aerosol and its direct radiative effects on East Asian
climate, J. Geophys. Res., 117, D13206, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD017219" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2011JD017219</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Tegen, I., Bierwirth, E., Heinold, B., Helmert, J., and Wendisch, M.: The
effect of measured surface albedo on modeled Saharan dust radiative forcing,
J. Geophys. Res., 115, D24312, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JD013764" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2009JD013764</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Twomey, S.: The Influence of Pollution on the Shortwave Albedo of Clouds, J.
Atmos. Sci., 34, 1149–1152, 1977.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib63"><label>63</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Valenzuela, A., Olmo, F. J., Lyamani, H., Antón, M., Quirantes, A., and Alados-Arboledas, L.: Aerosol radiative forcing during African desert dust events (2005–2010) over Southeastern Spain, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 10331–10351, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-10331-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-12-10331-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib64"><label>64</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>van den Heever, S. C., Carrió, G. G., Cotton, W. R., DeMott, P. J., and
Prenni, A. J.: Impacts of Nucleating Aerosol on Florida Storms. Part I:
Mesoscale Simulations, J. Atmos. Sci., 63, 1752–1775,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS3713.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JAS3713.1</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib65"><label>65</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Veselovskii, I., Goloub, P., Podvin, T., Bovchaliuk, V., Derimian, Y., Augustin, P., Fourmentin, M., Tanre, D., Korenskiy, M., Whiteman, D. N., Diallo, A., Ndiaye, T., Kolgotin, A., and Dubovik, O.: Retrieval of optical and physical properties of African dust from multiwavelength Raman lidar measurements during the SHADOW campaign in Senegal, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 7013–7028, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-7013-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-16-7013-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib66"><label>66</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Veselovskii, I., Goloub, P., Podvin, T., Tanre, D., da Silva, A., Colarco, P., Castellanos, P., Korenskiy, M., Hu, Q., Whiteman, D. N., Pérez-Ramírez, D., Augustin, P., Fourmentin, M., and Kolgotin, A.: Characterization of smoke and dust episode over West Africa: comparison of MERRA-2 modeling with multiwavelength Mie–Raman lidar observations, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 11, 949–969, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-949-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-11-949-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib67"><label>67</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wang, D., Liang, S., He, T., Yu, Y., Schaaf, C., and Wang, Z.: Estimating
daily mean land surface albedo fro<?pagebreak page10864?>m MODIS data, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos.,
120, 4825–4841, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD023178" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2015JD023178</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib68"><label>68</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Waquet, F., Peers, F., Ducos, F., Goloub, P., Platnick, S., Riedi, J.,
Tanré, D., and Thieuleux, F.: Global analysis of aerosol properties
above clouds, Geophys. Res. Lett., 40, 5809–5814,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2013GL057482" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2013GL057482</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib69"><label>69</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wendisch, M., Pilewskie, P., Jäkel, E., Schmidt, S., Pommier, J.,
Howard, S., Jonsson, H. H., Guan, H., Schröder, M., and Mayer, B.:
Airborne measurements of areal spectral surface albedo over different sea
and land surfaces, J. Geophys. Res., 109, D08203, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD004392" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2003JD004392</ext-link>,
2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib70"><label>70</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wendisch, M., Hellmuth, O., Ansmann, A., Heintzenberg, J., Engelmann, R.,
Althausen, D., Eichler, H., Müller, D., Hu, M., Zhang, Y., and Mao, J.:
Radiative and dynamic effects of absorbing aerosol particles over the Pearl
River Delta, China, Atmos. Environ., 42, 6405–6416,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.02.033" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.02.033</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib71"><label>71</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Werner, F., Ditas, F., Siebert, H., Simmel, M., Wehner, B., Pilewskie, P.,
Schmeissner, T., Shaw, R. A., Hartmann, S., Wex, H., Roberts, G. C., and
Wendisch, M.: Twomey effect observed from collocated microphysical and
remote sensing measurements over shallow cumulus, J. Geophys. Res., 119,
1534–1545, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2013JD020131" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2013JD020131</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib72"><label>72</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wu, W. S., Purser, R. J., and Parrish, D. F.: Three-dimensional variational
analysis with spatially inhomogeneous covariances, Mon. Weather Rev., 130,
2905–2916, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(2002)130&lt;2905:TDVAWS&gt;2.0.CO;2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/1520-0493(2002)130&lt;2905:TDVAWS&gt;2.0.CO;2</ext-link>, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib73"><label>73</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Xia, X. and Zong, X.: Shortwave versus longwave direct radiative forcing by
Taklimakan dust aerosols, Geophys. Res. Lett., 36, L07803,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GL037237" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2009GL037237</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib74"><label>74</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Xu, H., Guo, J., Wang, Y., Zhao, C., Zhang, Z., Min, M., Miao, Y., Liu, H.,
He, J., Zhou, S., and Zhai, P: Warming effect of dust aerosols modulated by
overlapping clouds below, Atmos. Environ., 166, 393-402,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2017.07.036" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2017.07.036</ext-link>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib75"><label>75</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Yin, Y., Wurzler, S., Levin, Z., and Reisin, T. G.: Interactions of mineral
dust particles and clouds: Effects on precipitation and cloud optical
properties, J. Geophys. Res., 107, 4724, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JD001544" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2001JD001544</ext-link>,
2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib76"><label>76</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Yuan, T., Chen, S., Huang, J., Wu, D., Lu, H., Zhang, G., Ma, X., Chen, Z.,
Luo, Y., and Ma, X.: Influence of Dynamic and Thermal Forcing on the
Meridional Transport of Taklimakan Desert Dust in Spring and Summer, J. Climate, 32, 749–767, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-18-0361.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JCLI-D-18-0361.1</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib77"><label>77</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zaveri, R. A. and Peters, L. K.: A new lumped structure photochemical
mechanism for large-scale applications, J. Geophys. Res., 104,
30387–30415, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/1999JD900876" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/1999JD900876</ext-link>, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib78"><label>78</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zaveri, R. A., Easter, R. C., Fast, J. D., and Peters, L. K.: Model for
Simulating Aerosol Interactions and Chemistry (MOSAIC), J. Geophys. Res.,
113, D13204, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD008782" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2007JD008782</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib79"><label>79</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zhang, W., Guo, J., Miao, Y., Liu, H., Song, Y., Fang, Z., He, J., Luo, M.,
Yan, Y., Li, Y., and Zhai, P.: On the summertime planetary boundary layer
with different thermodynamic stability in china: a radiosonde perspective,
J. Climate, 31, 1451–1465, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0231.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0231.1</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib80"><label>80</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zhao, C., Liu, X., Leung, L. R., Johnson, B., McFarlane, S. A., Gustafson Jr., W. I., Fast, J. D., and Easter, R.: The spatial distribution of mineral dust and its shortwave radiative forcing over North Africa: modeling sensitivities to dust emissions and aerosol size treatments, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 8821–8838, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-8821-2010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-10-8821-2010</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Aerosol solar radiative forcing near the Taklimakan Desert based on radiative transfer and regional meteorological simulations during the Dust Aerosol Observation-Kashi campaign</article-title-html>
<abstract-html><p>The Taklimakan Desert is a main and continuous source of
Asian dust particles causing significant direct radiative effects, which are
commonly quantified by the aerosol solar radiative forcing (ASRF). To improve
the accuracy of estimates of dust ASRF, the Dust Aerosol Observation-Kashi
(DAO-K) campaign was carried out near the Taklimakan Desert in April 2019.
The objective of the DAO-K campaign is to provide crucial parameters needed
for the calculation of ASRF, such as dust optical and microphysical properties,
vertical distribution, and surface albedo. The ASRF was calculated using
radiative transfer (RT) simulations based on the observed aerosol
parameters, additionally considering the measured atmospheric profiles and
diurnal variations of surface albedo. As a result, daily average values of
ASRF of −19&thinsp;W&thinsp;m<sup>−2</sup> at the top of the atmosphere and −36&thinsp;W&thinsp;m<sup>−2</sup> at the bottom
of the atmosphere were derived from the simulations conducted during the DAO-K
campaign. Furthermore, the Weather Research and Forecasting model with
Chemistry (WRF-Chem), with assimilation of measurements of the aerosol
optical depth and particulate matter (PM) mass concentrations of particles
with aerodynamic diameter smaller than 2.5&thinsp;µm (PM<sub>2.5</sub>) and
10&thinsp;µm (PM<sub>10</sub>), is employed to estimate the dust ASRF for comparison. The
results of the ASRF simulations (RT and WRF-Chem) were evaluated using
ground-based downward solar irradiance measurements, which have
confirmed that the RT simulations are in good agreement with simultaneous
observations, whereas the WRF-Chem estimations reveal obvious discrepancies
with the solar irradiance measurements.</p></abstract-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
Adesina, A. J., Kumar, K. R., Sivakumar, V., and Griffith, D.: Direct
radiative forcing of urban aerosols over Pretoria (25.75°&thinsp;S,
28.28°&thinsp;E) using AERONET Sunphotometer data: first scientific
results and environmental impact, J. Environ. Sci.,
26, 2459–2474, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jes.2014.04.006" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jes.2014.04.006</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
Ansmann, A., Petzold, A., Kandler, K., Tegen, I., Wendisch, M., Müller,
D., Weinzierl, B., Müller, T., and Heintzenberg, J.: Saharan Mineral
Dust Experiments SAMUM-1 and SAMUM-2: What have we learned? Tellus B, 63,
403–429, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0889.2011.00555.x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0889.2011.00555.x</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
Babu, S. S., Satheesh, S. K., and Moorthy, K. K.: Aerosol radiative forcing
due to enhanced black carbon at an urban site in India, Geophys. Res. Lett.,
29, 27–21, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002GL015826" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2002GL015826</a>, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
Bhartia, P. K., Mcpeters, R. D., Mateer, C. L., Flynn, L. E., and
Wellemeyer, C. G.: Algorithm for the estimation of vertical ozone profiles
from the backscattered ultraviolet technique, J. Geophys. Res., 101,
18793–18806, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/96JD01165" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/96JD01165</a>, 1996.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
Bi, J., Huang, J., Hu, Z., Holben, B. N., and Guo, Z.: Investigating the
aerosol optical and radiative characteristics of heavy haze episodes in
Beijing during January of 2013, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 119, 9884–9900,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JD021757" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JD021757</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
Bi, L., Yang, P., Kattawar, G. W., and Kahn, R.: Modeling optical properties
of mineral aerosol particles by using nonsymmetric hexahedra, Appl. Optics,
49, 334–342, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1364/AO.49.000334" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1364/AO.49.000334</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
Bierwirth, E., Wendisch, M., Ehrlich, A., Heese, B., Tesche, M., Althausen,
D., Schladitz, A., Müller, D., Otto, S., Trautmann, T., Dinter, T., von
Hoyningen-Huene, W., and Kahn, R.: Spectral surface albedo over Morocco and
its impact on radiative forcing of Saharan dust, Tellus B, 61, 252–269, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0889.2008.00395.x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0889.2008.00395.x</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
Bory, A. J., Biscaye, P. E., and Grousset, F. E.: Two distinct seasonal
Asian source regions for mineral dust deposited in Greenland (NorthGRIP),
Geophys. Res. Lett., 30, 1167, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002GL016446" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2002GL016446</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
Chen, F., and Dudhia, J.: Coupling an advanced land surface–hydrology model
with the Penn State–NCAR MM5 modeling system. Part I: Model implementation
and sensitivity, Mon. Wea. Rev., 129, 569–585,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(2001)129" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(2001)129</a>,0569: CAALSH.2.0.CO;2, 2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
Chen, S., Huang, J., Zhao, C., Qian, Y., Leung, L. R., and Yang, B.:
Modeling the transport and radiative forcing of Taklimakan dust over the
Tibetan Plateau: A case study in the summer of 2006, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 118, 797–812, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50122" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50122</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
Chen, S., Zhao, C., Qian, Y., Leung, L. R., Huang, J., Huang, Z., Bi, J.,
Zhang, Y., Shi, J., Yang, L., Li, D., and Li, J.: Regional modeling of dust
mass balance and radiative forcing over East Asia using WRF-Chem, Aeolian
Research, 15, 15–30, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aeolia.2014.02.001" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aeolia.2014.02.001</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
Chen, S., Huang, J., Li, J., Jia, R., Jiang, N., Kang, L., Ma, X., and Xie,
T.: Comparison of dust emissions, transport, and deposition between the
Taklimakan Desert and Gobi Desert from 2007 to 2011, Science China Earth
Sciences, 60, 1338–1355, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11430-016-9051-0" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s11430-016-9051-0</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
Chen, S., Yuan, T., Zhang, X., Zhang, G., Feng, T., Zhao, D., Zang, Z.,
Liao, S., Ma, X., Jiang, N., Zhang, J., Yang, F., and Lu, H.: Dust modeling
over East Asia during the summer of 2010 using the WRF-Chem model, J. Quant.
Spectrosc. Ra., 213, 1–12,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jqsrt.2018.04.013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jqsrt.2018.04.013</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
Chen, X., Guo, J., Yin, J., Zhang, Y., Miao, Y., Yun, Y., Liu, L., Li, J.,
Xu, H., Hu, K., and Zhai, P.: Tropopause trend across China from 1979 to
2016: A revisit with updated radiosonde measurements, Int. J. Climatol., 39, 1117–1127, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.5866" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.5866</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
China Meteorological Administration: Operational specifications for
conventional upper-air meteorological observations, China Meteorological
Press, Beijing, China, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
DeMott, P. J., Sassen, K., Poellot, M. R., Baumgardner, D., Rogers, D. C.,
Brooks, S. D., Prenni, A. J., and Kreidenweis, S. M.: African dust aerosols
as atmospheric ice nuclei, Geophys. Res. Lett., 30, 1732,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2003GL017410" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2003GL017410</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
Dubovik, O., Sinyuk, A., Lapyonok, T., Holben, B. N., Mishchenko, M., Yang,
P., Eck, T. F., Volten, H., Munõz, O., Veihelmann, B., van der Zande, W.
J., Leon, J. F., Sorokin, M., and Slutsker, I.: Application of spheroid
models to account for aerosol particle nonsphericity in remote sensing of
desert dust, J. Geophys. Res., 111, D11208, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD006619" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD006619</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
Esteve, A. R., Estelles, V., Utrillas, M. P., and Martinezlozano, J. A.:
Analysis of the aerosol radiative forcing over a Mediterranean urban coastal
site, Atmos. Res., 137, 195–204, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2013.10.009" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2013.10.009</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
Fast, J. D., Gustafson Jr., W. I., Easter, R. C., Zaveri, R. A., Barnard, J.
C., Chapman, E. G., Grell, G. A., and Peckham, S. E.: Evolution of ozone,
particulates, and aerosol direct radiative forcing in the vicinity of
Houston using a fully coupled meteorology–chemistry–aerosol model, J.
Geophys. Res., 111, D21305, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD006721" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD006721</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
García, O. E., Díaz, A. M., Expósito, F. J., Díaz, J. P.,
Dubovik, O., Dubuisson, P., Roger, J. C., Eck, T. F., Sinyuk, A., Derimian,
Y., Dutton, E. G., Schafer, J. S., Holben, B. N., and García, C. A.:
Validation of AERONET estimates of atmospheric solar fluxes and aerosol
radiative forcing by ground-based broadband measurements, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 113, 6089–6098, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JD010211" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JD010211</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
García, O. E., Díaz, J. P., Expósito, F. J., Díaz, A. M., Dubovik, O., Derimian, Y., Dubuisson, P., and Roger, J.-C.: Shortwave radiative forcing and efficiency of key aerosol types using AERONET data, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 5129–5145, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-5129-2012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-5129-2012</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
Ginoux, P., Chin, M., Tegen, I., Prospero, J. M., Holben, B., Dubovik, O.,
and Lin, S. J.: Sources and distributions of dust aerosols simulated with
the GOCART model, J. Geophys. Res., 106, 20255–20273, 2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
Grell, G. A., Peckham, S. E., Schmitz, R., McKeen, S. A., Frost, G.,
Skamarock, W. C., and Eder, B.: Fully coupled “online” chemistry within
the WRF model, Atmos. Environ., 39, 6957– 6975,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2005.04.027" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2005.04.027</a>, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
Guenther, A., Karl, T., Harley, P., Wiedinmyer, C., Palmer, P. I., and Geron, C.: Estimates of global terrestrial isoprene emissions using MEGAN (Model of Emissions of Gases and Aerosols from Nature), Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6, 3181–3210, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-3181-2006" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-3181-2006</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
Guo, J., Miao, Y., Zhang, Y., Liu, H., Li, Z., Zhang, W., He, J., Lou, M., Yan, Y., Bian, L., and Zhai, P.: The climatology of planetary boundary layer height in China derived from radiosonde and reanalysis data, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 13309–13319, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-13309-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-13309-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
Guo, J., Li, Y., Cohen, J. B., Li, J., Chen, D., Xu, H., Liu, L., Yin, J.,
Hu, K., and Zhai, P.: Shift in the temporal trend of boundary layer height
in china using long-term (1979–2016) radiosonde data, Geophys. Res. Lett., 46, 6080–6089, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL082666" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL082666</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>
Holben, B. N., Eck, T. F., Slutsker, I., Tanré, D., Buis, J. P., Setzer,
A., Vermote, E., Reagan, J. A., Kaufman, Y. J., Nakajima, T., Lavenu, F.,
Jankowiak, I., and Smirnov, A.: AERONET – A Federated Instrument Network and
Data Archive for Aerosol Characterization, Remote Sens. Environ., 66, 1–16,
1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
Hong, S. Y., Noh, Y., and Dudhia, J.: A new vertical diffusion package with
an explicit treatment of entrainment processes, Mon. Weather Rev., 134,
2318–2341, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR3199.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR3199.1</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
Hu, Q., Goloub, P., Veselovskii, I., Bravo-Aranda, J.-A., Popovici, I. E., Podvin, T., Haeffelin, M., Lopatin, A., Dubovik, O., Pietras, C., Huang, X., Torres, B., and Chen, C.: Long-range-transported Canadian smoke plumes in the lower stratosphere over northern France, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 1173–1193, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-1173-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-1173-2019</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>
Huang, J., Fu, Q., Su, J., Tang, Q., Minnis, P., Hu, Y., Yi, Y., and Zhao, Q.: Taklimakan dust aerosol radiative heating derived from CALIPSO observations using the Fu-Liou radiation model with CERES constraints, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 9, 4011–4021, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-4011-2009" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-4011-2009</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
Huang, J., Wang, T., Wang, W., Li, Z., and Yan, H.: Climate effects of dust
aerosols over East Asian arid and semiarid regions, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos.,
119, 11398–11416, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JD021796" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JD021796</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
Iacono, M. J., Delamere, J. S., Mlawer, E. J., Shephard, M. W., Clough, S.
A., and Collins, W. D.: Radiative forcing by long- lived greenhouse gases:
Calculations with the AER radiative transfer models, J. Geophys. Res., 113,
D13103, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/</a> 2008JD009944, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC): Climate change 2007: the
physical science basis, Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth
Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, New York, USA,
2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
Jäkel, E., Wendisch, M., and Mayer, B.: Influence of spatial heterogeneity of local surface albedo on the area-averaged surface albedo retrieved from airborne irradiance measurements, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 6, 527–537, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-6-527-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-6-527-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
Kaskaoutis, D. G., Kambezidis, H. D., Hatzianastassiou, N., Kosmopoulos, P. G., and Badarinath, K. V. S.: Aerosol climatology: dependence of the Angstrom exponent on wavelength over four AERONET sites, Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., 7, 7347–7397, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acpd-7-7347-2007" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acpd-7-7347-2007</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>
Kleist, D. T., Parish, D. F., Derber, J. C., Treadon, R., Wu, W. S., and
Lord, S.: Introduction of the GSI into the NCEP global data assimilation
system, Weather Forecast., 24, 1691–1705, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
Lenoble, J., Remer, L., and Tanré, D.: Aerosol Remote Sensing, Springer
Berlin Heidelberg, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-17725-5" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-17725-5</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>
Lewis, P. and Barnsley, M. J.: Influence of the sky radiance distribution on
various formulations of the earth surface albedo, Proc. Conf. Phys. Meas.
Sign. Remote Sen. Val d'Isere, France, 707–715, 1994.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>
Li, L., Li, Z., Dubovik, O., Zheng, X., Li, Z., Ma, J., and Wendisch, M.:
Effects of the shape distribution of aerosol particles on their volumetric
scattering properties and the radiative transfer through the atmosphere that
includes polarization, Appl. Opt., 58, 1475–1484,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1364/AO.58.001475" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1364/AO.58.001475</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>
Li, R., Dong, X., Guo, J., Fu, Y., Zhao, C., Wang, Y., and Min, Q.: The
implications of dust ice nuclei effect on cloud top temperature in a complex
mesoscale convective system, Sci. Rep., 7, 13826,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-12681-0" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-12681-0</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>
Li, Z., Blarel, L., Podvin, T., Goloub, P., Buis, J. P., and Morel, J. P.:
Transferring the calibration of direct solar irradiance to diffuse-sky
radiance measurements for CIMEL Sun-sky radiometers, Appl. Opt., 47,
1368–1377, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1364/AO.47.001368" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1364/AO.47.001368</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>
Li, Z. Q., Xu, H., Li, K. T., Li, D. H., Xie, Y. S., Li, L., Zhang, Y., Gu,
X. F., Zhao, W., Tian, Q. J., Deng, R. R., Su, X. L., Huang, B., Qiao, Y.
L., Cui, W. Y., Hu, Y., Gong, C. L., Wang, Y. Q., Wang, X. F., Wang, J. P.,
Du, W. B., Pan, Z. Q., Li, Z. Z., and Bu, D.: Comprehensive Study of
Optical, Physical, Chemical, and Radiative Properties of Total Columnar
Atmospheric Aerosols over China: An Overview of Sun-Sky Radiometer
Observation Network (SONET) Measurements, B. Am.
Meteorol. Soc., 99, 739–755, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-17-0133.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-17-0133.1</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>
Liang, S.: Quantitative Remote Sensing of Land Surfaces, John Wiley,
Hoboken, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>
Lin, Y. L., Farley, R. D., and Orville, H. D.: Bulk parameterization of the
snow field in a cloud model, J. Climate Appl. Meteor., 22, 1065–1092,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0450(1983)022" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0450(1983)022</a>,1065: BPOTSF.2.0.CO;2, 1983.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>
Liu, L., Guo, J., Gong, H., Li, Z., Chen, W., Wu, R., Wang, L., Xu, H., Li,
J., Chen, D., and Zhai, P.: Contrasting Influence of Gobi and Taklimakan
Deserts on the Dust Aerosols in Western North America, Geophys. Res. Lett., 46, 9064–9071, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL083508" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL083508</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>
Liu, J., Zheng, Y., Li, Z., Flynn, C., Welton, E. J., and Cribb, M.:
Transport, vertical structure and radiative properties of dust events in
southeast China determined from ground and space sensors, Atmos. Environ., 45, 6469–6480, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.04.031" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.04.031</a>, 2011a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>
Liu, Z., Liu, D., Huang, J., Vaughan, M., Uno, I., Sugimoto, N., Kittaka, C., Trepte, C., Wang, Z., Hostetler, C., and Winker, D.: Airborne dust distributions over the Tibetan Plateau and surrounding areas derived from the first year of CALIPSO lidar observations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 8, 5045–5060, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-8-5045-2008" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-8-5045-2008</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>
Liu, Z., Liu, Q., Lin, H. C., Schwartz, C. S., Lee, Y. H., and Wang, T.:
Three-dimensional variational assimilation of MODIS aerosol optical depth:
implementation and application to a dust storm over East Asia, J. Geophys.
Res., 116, D23206, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD016159" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD016159</a>, 2011b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>
Lucht, W., Schaaf, C. B., and Strahler, A. H.: An algorithm for the
retrieval of albedo from space using semiempirical BRDF models, IEEE T.
Geosci. Remote Sens., 38, 977–998, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>
Mikami, M., Shi, G., Uno, I., Yabuki, S., Iwasaka, Y., Yasui, M., Aoki, T.,
Tanaka, T.Y., Kurosaki, Y., Masuda, K., Uchiyama, A., Matsuki, A., Sakai,
T., Takemi, T., Nakawo, M., Seino, N., Ishizuka, M., Satake, S., Fujita, K.,
Hara, Y., Kai, K., Kanayama, S., Hayashi, M., Du, M., Kanai, Y., Yamada, Y.,
Zhang, X.Y., Shen, Z., Zhou, H., Abe, O., Nagai, T., Tsutsumi, Y., Chiba,
M., and Suzuki, J.: Aeolian dust experiment on climate impact: An overview
of Japan-China joint project ADEC, Global Planet. Change, 52, 142–172,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2006.03.001" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2006.03.001</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation>
Minnis, P., Mayor, S., Smith, W. L., and Young, D. F.: Asymmetry in the
diurnal variation of surface albedo, IEEE T. Geosci. Remote Sens., 35,
879–891, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1109/36.602530" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1109/36.602530</a>, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation>
Mlawer, E. J., Taubman, S. J., Brown, P. D., Iacono, M. J., and Clough, S.
A.: Radiative transfer for inhomogeneous atmospheres: RRTM, a validated
correlated-k model for the longwave, J. Geophys. Res., 102, 16663–16682,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/97JD00237" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/97JD00237</a>, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation>
Otto, S., de Reus, M., Trautmann, T., Thomas, A., Wendisch, M., and Borrmann, S.: Atmospheric radiative effects of an in situ measured Saharan dust plume and the role of large particles, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 4887–4903, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-4887-2007" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-4887-2007</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation>
Parrish, D. F. and Derber, J. C.: The National Meteorological Center's
spectral statistical interpolation analysis system, Mon. Weather Rev., 120,
1747–1763, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(1992)120&lt;1747:TNMCSS&gt;2.0.CO;2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(1992)120&lt;1747:TNMCSS&gt;2.0.CO;2</a>, 1992.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation>
Ricchiazzi, P., Yang, S., Gautier, C., and Sowle, D.: SBDART: A Research and
Teaching Software Tool for Plane-Parallel Radiative Transfer in the Earth's
Atmosphere, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 79, 2101–2114,
1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><mixed-citation>
Schaaf, C. B., Gao, F., Strahler, A. H., Lucht, W., Li, X., Tsang, T.,
Strugnell, N. C., Zhang, X., Jin, Y., Muller, J. P., Lewis, P., Barnsley,
M., Hobson, P., Disney, M., Roberts, G., Dunderdale, M., Doll, C.,
d'Entremont, R. P., Hu, B., Liang, S., Privette, J. L., and Roy, D.: First
operational BRDF, albedo nadir reflectance products from MODIS, Remote Sens.
Environ., 83, 135–148, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><mixed-citation>
Schaaf, C. and Wang, Z.: MCD43A1 MODIS/Terra+Aqua BRDF/Albedo Model
Parameters Daily L3 Global – 500m V006, NASA EOSDIS Land Processes DAAC,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5067/MODIS/MCD43A1.006" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5067/MODIS/MCD43A1.006</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><mixed-citation>
Schwartz, C. S., Liu, Z., Lin, H. C., and McKeen, S. A.: Simultaneous
three-dimensional variational assimilation of surface fine particulate
matter and MODIS aerosol optical depth, J. Geophys. Res., 117, D13202,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD017383" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD017383</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><mixed-citation>
Stapf, J., Ehrlich, A., Jäkel, E., Lüpkes, C., and Wendisch, M.: Reassessment of the common concept to derive the surface cloud radiative forcing in the Arctic: Consideration of surface albedo – cloud interactions, Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2019-534" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2019-534</a>, in review, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><mixed-citation>
Sun, H., Pan, Z., and Liu, X.: Numerical simulation of spatial-temporal
distribution of dust aerosol and its direct radiative effects on East Asian
climate, J. Geophys. Res., 117, D13206, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD017219" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD017219</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><mixed-citation>
Tegen, I., Bierwirth, E., Heinold, B., Helmert, J., and Wendisch, M.: The
effect of measured surface albedo on modeled Saharan dust radiative forcing,
J. Geophys. Res., 115, D24312, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JD013764" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JD013764</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><mixed-citation>
Twomey, S.: The Influence of Pollution on the Shortwave Albedo of Clouds, J.
Atmos. Sci., 34, 1149–1152, 1977.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib63"><label>63</label><mixed-citation>
Valenzuela, A., Olmo, F. J., Lyamani, H., Antón, M., Quirantes, A., and Alados-Arboledas, L.: Aerosol radiative forcing during African desert dust events (2005–2010) over Southeastern Spain, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 10331–10351, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-10331-2012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-10331-2012</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib64"><label>64</label><mixed-citation>
van den Heever, S. C., Carrió, G. G., Cotton, W. R., DeMott, P. J., and
Prenni, A. J.: Impacts of Nucleating Aerosol on Florida Storms. Part I:
Mesoscale Simulations, J. Atmos. Sci., 63, 1752–1775,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS3713.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS3713.1</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib65"><label>65</label><mixed-citation>
Veselovskii, I., Goloub, P., Podvin, T., Bovchaliuk, V., Derimian, Y., Augustin, P., Fourmentin, M., Tanre, D., Korenskiy, M., Whiteman, D. N., Diallo, A., Ndiaye, T., Kolgotin, A., and Dubovik, O.: Retrieval of optical and physical properties of African dust from multiwavelength Raman lidar measurements during the SHADOW campaign in Senegal, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 7013–7028, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-7013-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-7013-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib66"><label>66</label><mixed-citation>
Veselovskii, I., Goloub, P., Podvin, T., Tanre, D., da Silva, A., Colarco, P., Castellanos, P., Korenskiy, M., Hu, Q., Whiteman, D. N., Pérez-Ramírez, D., Augustin, P., Fourmentin, M., and Kolgotin, A.: Characterization of smoke and dust episode over West Africa: comparison of MERRA-2 modeling with multiwavelength Mie–Raman lidar observations, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 11, 949–969, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-949-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-949-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib67"><label>67</label><mixed-citation>
Wang, D., Liang, S., He, T., Yu, Y., Schaaf, C., and Wang, Z.: Estimating
daily mean land surface albedo from MODIS data, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos.,
120, 4825–4841, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD023178" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD023178</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib68"><label>68</label><mixed-citation>
Waquet, F., Peers, F., Ducos, F., Goloub, P., Platnick, S., Riedi, J.,
Tanré, D., and Thieuleux, F.: Global analysis of aerosol properties
above clouds, Geophys. Res. Lett., 40, 5809–5814,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2013GL057482" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2013GL057482</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib69"><label>69</label><mixed-citation>
Wendisch, M., Pilewskie, P., Jäkel, E., Schmidt, S., Pommier, J.,
Howard, S., Jonsson, H. H., Guan, H., Schröder, M., and Mayer, B.:
Airborne measurements of areal spectral surface albedo over different sea
and land surfaces, J. Geophys. Res., 109, D08203, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD004392" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD004392</a>,
2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib70"><label>70</label><mixed-citation>
Wendisch, M., Hellmuth, O., Ansmann, A., Heintzenberg, J., Engelmann, R.,
Althausen, D., Eichler, H., Müller, D., Hu, M., Zhang, Y., and Mao, J.:
Radiative and dynamic effects of absorbing aerosol particles over the Pearl
River Delta, China, Atmos. Environ., 42, 6405–6416,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.02.033" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.02.033</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib71"><label>71</label><mixed-citation>
Werner, F., Ditas, F., Siebert, H., Simmel, M., Wehner, B., Pilewskie, P.,
Schmeissner, T., Shaw, R. A., Hartmann, S., Wex, H., Roberts, G. C., and
Wendisch, M.: Twomey effect observed from collocated microphysical and
remote sensing measurements over shallow cumulus, J. Geophys. Res., 119,
1534–1545, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2013JD020131" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2013JD020131</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib72"><label>72</label><mixed-citation>
Wu, W. S., Purser, R. J., and Parrish, D. F.: Three-dimensional variational
analysis with spatially inhomogeneous covariances, Mon. Weather Rev., 130,
2905–2916, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(2002)130&lt;2905:TDVAWS&gt;2.0.CO;2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(2002)130&lt;2905:TDVAWS&gt;2.0.CO;2</a>, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib73"><label>73</label><mixed-citation>
Xia, X. and Zong, X.: Shortwave versus longwave direct radiative forcing by
Taklimakan dust aerosols, Geophys. Res. Lett., 36, L07803,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GL037237" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GL037237</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib74"><label>74</label><mixed-citation>
Xu, H., Guo, J., Wang, Y., Zhao, C., Zhang, Z., Min, M., Miao, Y., Liu, H.,
He, J., Zhou, S., and Zhai, P: Warming effect of dust aerosols modulated by
overlapping clouds below, Atmos. Environ., 166, 393-402,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2017.07.036" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2017.07.036</a>, 2017.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib75"><label>75</label><mixed-citation>
Yin, Y., Wurzler, S., Levin, Z., and Reisin, T. G.: Interactions of mineral
dust particles and clouds: Effects on precipitation and cloud optical
properties, J. Geophys. Res., 107, 4724, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JD001544" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JD001544</a>,
2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib76"><label>76</label><mixed-citation>
Yuan, T., Chen, S., Huang, J., Wu, D., Lu, H., Zhang, G., Ma, X., Chen, Z.,
Luo, Y., and Ma, X.: Influence of Dynamic and Thermal Forcing on the
Meridional Transport of Taklimakan Desert Dust in Spring and Summer, J. Climate, 32, 749–767, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-18-0361.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-18-0361.1</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib77"><label>77</label><mixed-citation>
Zaveri, R. A. and Peters, L. K.: A new lumped structure photochemical
mechanism for large-scale applications, J. Geophys. Res., 104,
30387–30415, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/1999JD900876" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/1999JD900876</a>, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib78"><label>78</label><mixed-citation>
Zaveri, R. A., Easter, R. C., Fast, J. D., and Peters, L. K.: Model for
Simulating Aerosol Interactions and Chemistry (MOSAIC), J. Geophys. Res.,
113, D13204, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD008782" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD008782</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib79"><label>79</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, W., Guo, J., Miao, Y., Liu, H., Song, Y., Fang, Z., He, J., Luo, M.,
Yan, Y., Li, Y., and Zhai, P.: On the summertime planetary boundary layer
with different thermodynamic stability in china: a radiosonde perspective,
J. Climate, 31, 1451–1465, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0231.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0231.1</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib80"><label>80</label><mixed-citation>
Zhao, C., Liu, X., Leung, L. R., Johnson, B., McFarlane, S. A., Gustafson Jr., W. I., Fast, J. D., and Easter, R.: The spatial distribution of mineral dust and its shortwave radiative forcing over North Africa: modeling sensitivities to dust emissions and aerosol size treatments, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 8821–8838, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-8821-2010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-8821-2010</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
