<?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" article-type="research-article"><?xmltex \hack{\hyphenation{MOSAiC}}?>
  <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-21-13397-2021</article-id><title-group><article-title>Wildfire smoke, Arctic haze, and aerosol effects on mixed-phase <?xmltex \hack{\break}?>and cirrus clouds over the North Pole region during MOSAiC: <?xmltex \hack{\break}?>an introduction</article-title><alt-title>MOSAiC lidar observations</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{MOSAiC lidar observations}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{R.~Engelmann et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Engelmann</surname><given-names>Ronny</given-names></name>
          <email>ronny@tropos.de</email>
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4225-9961</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Ansmann</surname><given-names>Albert</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Ohneiser</surname><given-names>Kevin</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Griesche</surname><given-names>Hannes</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8696-7359</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Radenz</surname><given-names>Martin</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7771-033X</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Hofer</surname><given-names>Julian</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6657-4072</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Althausen</surname><given-names>Dietrich</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2785-0788</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2">
          <name><surname>Dahlke</surname><given-names>Sandro</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0395-9597</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2">
          <name><surname>Maturilli</surname><given-names>Marion</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6818-7383</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Veselovskii</surname><given-names>Igor</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Jimenez</surname><given-names>Cristofer</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2776-0339</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Wiesen</surname><given-names>Robert</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Baars</surname><given-names>Holger</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2316-8960</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Bühl</surname><given-names>Johannes</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0354-3487</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Gebauer</surname><given-names>Henriette</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Haarig</surname><given-names>Moritz</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5533-2112</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Seifert</surname><given-names>Patric</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5626-3761</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Wandinger</surname><given-names>Ulla</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3676-9121</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Macke</surname><given-names>Andreas</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2550-6641</ext-link></contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>Leibniz Institute for Tropospheric Research, Leipzig, Germany</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>Alfred Wegener Institute, Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research, Potsdam, Germany</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>3</label><institution>Prokhorov General Physics Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Ronny Engelmann (ronny@tropos.de)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>9</day><month>September</month><year>2021</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>21</volume>
      <issue>17</issue>
      <fpage>13397</fpage><lpage>13423</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>15</day><month>December</month><year>2020</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>29</day><month>December</month><year>2020</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>2</day><month>August</month><year>2021</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>4</day><month>August</month><year>2021</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2021 </copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2021</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="d1e264">An advanced multiwavelength polarization Raman lidar was operated aboard the icebreaker <italic>Polarstern</italic> during the MOSAiC (Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate) expedition to continuously monitor aerosol and cloud layers in the central Arctic up to 30 km height. The expedition lasted from September 2019 to October 2020 and measurements were mostly taken between 85 and 88.5<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N. The lidar was integrated into a complex remote-sensing infrastructure aboard the <italic>Polarstern</italic>.
In this article, novel lidar techniques, innovative concepts to study aerosol–cloud interaction in the Arctic, and unique MOSAiC findings will be presented.
The highlight of the lidar measurements was the detection of a 10 km deep wildfire smoke layer over the North Pole region between 7–8 km and 17–18 km height with an aerosol optical thickness (AOT) at 532 nm of around 0.1 (in October–November 2019) and 0.05 from December to March. The dual-wavelength Raman lidar technique allowed us to unambiguously identify smoke as the dominating aerosol type in the aerosol layer in the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere (UTLS). An additional contribution to the 532 nm AOT by volcanic sulfate aerosol (Raikoke eruption) was estimated to always be lower than 15 %. The optical and microphysical properties of the UTLS smoke layer are presented in an accompanying paper <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx106" id="paren.1"/>.
This smoke event offered the unique opportunity to study the influence of organic aerosol particles (serving as ice-nucleating particles, INPs) on cirrus formation in the upper troposphere. An example of a closure study is presented to explain our concept of investigating aerosol–cloud interaction in this field. The smoke particles were obviously able to control the evolution of the cirrus system and caused low ice crystal number concentration. After the discussion of two typical Arctic haze events, we present a case study of the evolution of a long-lasting mixed-phase cloud layer embedded in Arctic haze in the free troposphere. The recently introduced dual-field-of-view polarization lidar technique was applied, for the first time, to mixed-phase cloud observations in order to determine the microphysical properties of the water droplets. The mixed-phase cloud closure experiment (based on combined lidar and radar observations) indicated  that the observed aerosol levels controlled the number concentrations of nucleated droplets and ice crystals.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <label>1</label><title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e294">Rapid sea ice loss, unusual Arctic warming, and our incomplete knowledge about the complex processes controlling the Arctic climate motivated the MOSAiC (Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate) <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx97" id="paren.2"/> expedition, the largest Arctic research initiative in history.
On 20 September 2019, the German research icebreaker <italic>Polarstern</italic> <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx78" id="paren.3"/> left  Tromsø in <?pagebreak page13398?> northern Norway heading towards the central part of the Arctic and started drifting through the Arctic Ocean trapped in the ice at the beginning of October 2019. The goal of the MOSAiC expedition was to take the closest look ever at the Arctic as the epicenter of global warming and to gain fundamental insights that are key to better understand global climate change. Hundreds of researchers of more than 70 research institutions from 20 countries were involved in this exceptional expedition. The MOSAiC campaign brought a modern research icebreaker close to the North Pole for a full year, especially, for the first time, in polar winter. The mission was spearheaded by the Alfred Wegener Institute, Helmholtz Center for Polar and Marine Research (AWI).</p>
      <p id="d1e306">We continuously operated a state-of-the-art multiwavelength Raman lidar <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx42" id="paren.4"/> aboard the research vessel <italic>Polarstern</italic> side by side with the ARM (Atmospheric Radiation Measurement) mobile facility 1 (AMF-1) <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx8" id="paren.5"/> and collected tropospheric and stratospheric aerosol and cloud profile data throughout the expedition period from September 2019 to October 2020. Our role in the MOSAiC consortium was to provide a seasonally and height-resolved characterization of aerosols and clouds in the North Pole region from the surface up to 30 km height. Our specific focus was to explore the impact of aerosol particles on mixed-phase-cloud and cirrus evolution in the free troposphere up to tropopause level. Aerosol–cloud interaction, especially in the upper troposphere, is poorly understood. Advances in our understanding of the influence of pollution from local aerosol and that transported over long distances especially on ice formation processes is, however, of fundamental importance for an improved modeling of atmospheric and climate processes in the Arctic.  Clouds in general sensitively influence the  energy and water cycles; their accurate representation in models is thus critical for robust future climate projections.</p>
      <p id="d1e318">It is worth mentioning that <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx136" id="text.6"/> recently pointed out that the majority of our current knowledge about Arctic aerosols (including their impact on cloud evolution) comes from ground-based  in situ monitoring stations. However, as outlined in the review of <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx1" id="text.7"/> with the increasing number of aircraft observations and advanced satellite remote sensing, especially after the launch of the spaceborne CALIPSO (Cloud-Aerosol Lidar and Infrared Pathfinder Satellite Observation) lidar
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx34 bib1.bibx35 bib1.bibx38 bib1.bibx37 bib1.bibx139" id="paren.8"/>, it has become clear that this view of Arctic aerosol conditions is only valid for the lowest several hundreds of meters of the Arctic atmosphere and only holds for the summer season. Airborne in situ and CALIPSO lidar observations corroborate the idea that the Arctic free troposphere is significantly polluted during the late winter and early spring months.</p>
      <p id="d1e330">Our most impressive and outstanding observation during the entire MOSAiC expedition was the detection of a persistent, 10 km deep aerosol layer of aged wildfire smoke <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx106" id="paren.9"/>. We monitored this smoke layer in the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere (UTLS) from about 7–8 km up to 17–18 km height for more than 7 months from the beginning of the lidar observations in late September 2019 until May 2020.
The wildfire smoke layer most probably originated from severe and long-lasting fires in Siberia occurring in July and August 2019. Because of the large number of cirrus clouds, occurring in the persistent smoke layer, a favorable opportunity presented itself to investigate, for the first time, the role of aged smoke particles (mainly consisting of organic material) in heterogeneous ice formation processes and to contrast these findings with respective ones for the summer half year, when anthropogenic haze and mineral dust dominate and influence cirrus formation in the Arctic <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx50 bib1.bibx64 bib1.bibx65" id="paren.10"/>. Furthermore, a record-breaking reduction in the ozone concentration, mainly between 15 and 20 km height, was found over the Arctic in the spring of 2020 <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx31 bib1.bibx138 bib1.bibx60 bib1.bibx88" id="paren.11"/>. The ozone-depleted layer partly overlapped with the smoke layer so that the question arose to what extent the wildfire smoke particles contributed to the strong ozone depletion. More discussion is given by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx106" id="text.12"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e346">Our specific research goal is the study of aerosol–cloud interaction with the focus on ice formation in the middle and upper troposphere by means of active remote sensing  <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx20 bib1.bibx6 bib1.bibx114" id="paren.13"/>. In the framework of the MOSAiC expedition, we tested several new, recently introduced lidar techniques and new data analysis concepts to investigate the role of aerosol particles in cloud evolution processes. Two examples, a case study on the evolution of mixed-phase cloud in Arctic haze and a case study of the formation of ice clouds in wildfire smoke close to the tropopause, will be presented in this introductory paper. Compared to snapshot-like aircraft observations, active remote sensing allows us to continuously monitor aerosol–cloud interaction (like a running camera) and thus cloud evolution processes and also to sample hundreds of cloud layers and systems within a short time period.</p>
      <p id="d1e352">The article is organized as follows. After a brief description of the instrumentation and lidar products in Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S2"/>, key observations are highlighted. An overview of the smoke situation during the MOSAiC winter half year is given in Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S3.SS1"/>. An extended discussion can be found in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx106" id="text.14"/>. In Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S3.SS2"/>, we present two cases of Arctic haze observations performed in February and March 2020. Then we continue with two aerosol–cloud interaction studies.
In Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S3.SS3"/>, we start with a case of a shallow mixed-phase cloud system consisting of a liquid-water-dominated cloud top layer and an extended ice virga zone below the main cloud layer. We present a new lidar technique, the so-called dual-field-of-view (dual-FOV) polarization lidar technique <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx61 bib1.bibx62" id="paren.15"/> that allows us to retrieve the microphysical properties of the liquid-water droplets in the cloud top layer (including the cloud droplet number concentration,<?pagebreak page13399?> CDNC) and to combine these observations with lidar-derived estimates of cloud condensation nucleus concentrations (CCNCs) around and below the liquid-water cloud top layer. Furthermore, the lidar-based estimates of the ice-nucleating particle concentration (INPC) were compared with the ice crystal number concentration (ICNC) derived from combined lidar–radar observations <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx21" id="paren.16"/> in the framework of so-called cloud closure studies <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx89 bib1.bibx6" id="paren.17"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e376">In Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S3.SS4"/>, the impact of the wildfire smoke on cirrus evolution is finally illuminated. This effort can  be regarded as a pilot study. For the first time, we  explore to what extent wildfire smoke (organic aerosol particles) can influence or even control cirrus formation.
Organic particles are ubiquitous in the atmosphere around the world <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx120" id="paren.18"/>, and there is an urgent need to investigate their potential to serve as efficient ice-nucleating particles. MOSAiC provides unique observations to make substantial progress in this research field. The importance and relevance of such smoke–cirrus-interaction studies has significantly increased during the last 3–4 years with the increasing  number of major wildfire events in both the Northern Hemisphere and Southern Hemisphere <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx13 bib1.bibx105" id="paren.19"/>.
Section <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S4"/> finally provides some concluding remarks and an outlook.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 1</label><caption><p id="d1e391">Travel (black) and drifting (blue) route of the <italic>Polarstern</italic> from the beginning of October 2019 to the middle of May 2020. Each of the eight red circles marks the beginning of the next month. The map was produced with
“ggOceanMaps” <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx129" id="paren.20"/> by using  Sea Ice Index Version 3 data <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx43" id="paren.21"/>.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=227.622047pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/21/13397/2021/acp-21-13397-2021-f01.png"/>

      </fig>

<?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?><?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 2</label><caption><p id="d1e413"><bold>(a)</bold> The <italic>Polarstern</italic> drifting in the Arctic ice on 10 April 2020 and <bold>(b)</bold> measurement containers for in situ aerosol monitoring (the first two containers on the left side and the first container on the right side) and for remote sensing of aerosols and clouds. The OCEANET-Atmosphere container of TROPOS is the third one on the left side (with the bright spot on the roof caused by green laser light). The ARM mobile facility (AMF-1) is shown on the right side. The photographs were taken by Michael Gutsche (CC-BY 4.0), AWI.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=483.69685pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/21/13397/2021/acp-21-13397-2021-f02.jpg"/>

      </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <label>2</label><?xmltex \opttitle{\textit{Polarstern} cruise, lidar setup, and observational products}?><title><italic>Polarstern</italic> cruise, lidar setup, and observational products</title>
      <p id="d1e441">Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F1"/> shows the track of the drifting <italic>Polarstern</italic> from October 2019 to May 2020. Each of the eight red circles along the <italic>Polarstern</italic> track indicates the beginning of a new month. The highest northern latitude with 88.6<inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N was reached around 20 February 2020. The <italic>Polarstern</italic> was at latitudes <inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">85</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N from the beginning of October 2019 to the beginning of April 2020.
A photograph of the <italic>Polarstern</italic> in the ice- and snow-covered Arctic Ocean is shown in the left panel of  Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F2"/> together with a photograph of the main ship-based MOSAiC atmospheric measurement platforms aboard <italic>Polarstern</italic> (right panel in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F2"/>). Six containers for in situ aerosol monitoring  and for active remote sensing of aerosols and clouds with lidars and radars were deployed on the front deck of the research vessel. The ARM mobile facility AMF-1 on the right side consists of three portable shelters containing a baseline suite of instruments and communication and data systems.</p>
      <p id="d1e493">The OCEANET-Atmosphere container of the Leibniz Institute for Tropospheric Research (TROPOS), routinely operated aboard <italic>Polarstern</italic> since 2009 <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx67 bib1.bibx68 bib1.bibx19 bib1.bibx140 bib1.bibx14" id="paren.22"/> is the third one on the left side of the container spots. Besides continuous observations with our multiwavelength Raman lidar (installed inside the air-conditioned container with specially designed roof window for optimum laser-beam transmittance and sampling of backscattered photons), two microwave radiometers for water vapor and cloud liquid-water measurements (one by the University of Cologne), two photometers for aerosol optical thickness (AOT) observations (one by the University of Lille), and a two-dimensional disdrometer were operated for ice crystal morphological studies. The TROPOS equipment was already aboard <italic>Polarstern</italic> 2 years ago and involved in the Arctic field campaign PASCAL (Physical feedbacks of Arctic boundary layer, Sea ice, Cloud and AerosoL)
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx133 bib1.bibx51 bib1.bibx52" id="paren.23"/>.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <label>2.1</label><title>Lidar instrument and operational details</title>
      <p id="d1e515">Two advanced lidar instruments, the multiwavelength Raman lidar Polly (POrtabLe Lidar sYstem) <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx42" id="paren.24"/> and a high spectral-resolution lidar (HSRL) <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx41" id="paren.25"/>, were operated continuously aboard the drifting <italic>Polarstern</italic> during the MOSAiC expedition. These two lidars are complementary regarding their capabilities. While the multiwavelength Raman lidar delivered detailed spectrally resolved optical properties of the aerosol in the Arctic and retrieval products regarding microphysical and cloud-relevant aerosol properties from October to March, i.e., during nighttime conditions, the single-wavelength HSRL is of advantage during the summer half year (when Raman lidar observations are of limited use) and allows us to measure profiles of<?pagebreak page13400?> the climate-relevant particle extinction coefficient at 532 nm wavelength even during sunlight conditions. Both lidar systems are polarization lidars and thus permit detailed monitoring of cloud phase and thus of liquid-water, mixed-phase, and ice clouds and morphological features (sphericity) of aerosol particles.</p>
      <p id="d1e527">The MOSAiC expedition for the first time provided the unique opportunity to perform lidar observations north of 85<inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N over the entire winter half year 2019–2020. This part of the central Arctic is not covered by any other lidar measurement, neither by observations with the spaceborne  CALIPSO lidar (only up to 81.8<inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N) nor by measurements of the ground-based Arctic lidar network <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx104" id="paren.26"/>.
Thus, we add a new data set to the global aerosol database. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx37" id="text.27"/> were the first to run lidars (mounted on an ensemble of autonomous drifting buoys) in the central Arctic, even north of 82<inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, to perform year-round aerosol profiling, including the winter half year of 2015–2016. These measurements together with respective CALIPSO lidar observations are used in our contrasting analysis regarding the aerosol conditions during the MOSAiC year 2019–2020 and the year 2015–2016 characterized by unperturbed aerosol conditions <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx106" id="paren.28"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e567">The setup and basic technical details of the Polly instrument are given in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx42" id="text.29"/>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx57" id="text.30"/>, and <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx62" id="text.31"/>.
Polly belongs to the lidar network PollyNET <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx12" id="paren.32"/>, which is part of the European Aerosol Research Lidar Network (EARLINET) <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx107" id="paren.33"/> organized within the Aerosols, Clouds and Trace gases Research InfraStructure (ACTRIS) project <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx3" id="paren.34"/>.
The lidar transmits linearly polarized laser pulses at 355, 532, and 1064 nm with a pulse repetition rate of 20 Hz. All laser beams point to an off-zenith angle of 5<inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> to avoid a bias in the observations of the optical properties of mixed-phase and cirrus clouds caused by strong specular reflection by falling and then frequently horizontally aligned ice crystals <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx103 bib1.bibx102 bib1.bibx10" id="paren.35"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e601">The receiver unit consists of a near-range receiver part, optimized to provide aerosol and cloud optical properties from 120 m to several kilometers above the surface, and a far-range receiver part which permits accurate aerosol and cloud profiling from about 800 m to 30–40 km height. Thirteen receiver channels are available to collect the following lidar return signals:  elastically backscattered photons at the three laser wavelengths, the cross-polarized signal components at 355 and 532 nm at two different FOVs, the vibrational Raman signals of nitrogen at 387 and 607 nm, and those of water vapor at 407 nm. All signals are measured with photon-counting photomultipliers and stored with 30 s of resolution. We introduce “cross” and “co” to indicate the plane of polarization orthogonal and parallel to the plane of linear polarization of the transmitted laser pulses.</p>
      <p id="d1e605">The recently introduced and implemented dual-FOV polarization lidar option <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx61 bib1.bibx62" id="paren.36"/> permits the measurement of the cross and total (cross-polarized <inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>  co-polarized) signal components at 532 nm at two different FOVs.
The dual-FOV lidar technique enables us to determine multiple scattering by droplets in liquid-water-dominated cloud layers and to retrieve from this multiple scattering information cloud microphysical properties (e.g., effective droplet size and cloud extinction coefficient) <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx61" id="paren.37"/>. The method is based on the measurement of two volume linear depolarization ratios at two different FOVs. The depolarization ratio is defined as the ratio of the cross-polarized to the co-polarized backscatter coefficient.</p>
      <?pagebreak page13401?><p id="d1e621">The Polly instrument is designed for automated continuous profiling of aerosols and clouds and thus was running around the clock.  Well-defined breaks were necessary to exchange laser flash lamps, to run different calibration procedures, to check the  full setup, and to perform an overall alignment of the Polly instrument. Five TROPOS lidar scientists took care of the OCEANET instrumentation over the 1-year MOSAiC expedition period.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Table 1</label><caption><p id="d1e627">Overview of Polly observational products and characteristic (or typical) relative uncertainties in the  determined and retrieved properties. Particle backscatter coefficients are measured at 355, 532, and 1064 nm,
the other aerosol optical properties at 355 and 532 nm. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> denotes aerosol particle radius.  </p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="2">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Aerosol optical properties</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Uncertainty</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Backscatter coefficient <inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:mo>[</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Mm</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> sr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:mo>]</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Extinction coefficient  <inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:mo>[</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Mm</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:mo>]</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">20 %</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Lidar ratio <inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:mo>[</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>sr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:mo>]</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">25 %</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Depolarization ratio</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Aerosol microphysical properties</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Volume size distribution <inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:mo>[</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:mo>]</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">30</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Volume concentration <inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:mo>[</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:mo>]</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">25</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Mass concentration <inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:mo>[</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:mo>]</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">30</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Surface area concentration <inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:mo>[</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" 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><inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:mo>]</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">25</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Number concentration (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nm)  <inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mo>[</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cm</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:mo>]</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">50 %</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Number concentration (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">250</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nm)  <inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:mo>[</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cm</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:mo>]</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">25</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">CCN  concentration <inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:mo>[</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cm</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:mo>]</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Factor 1.5–2</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">INP concentration  <inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:mo>[</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>L<inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:mo>]</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Factor 3</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry namest="col1" nameend="col2">Droplet properties (liquid-water clouds) </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Droplet number concentration  <inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:mo>[</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cm</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:mo>]</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">50 %</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Droplet effective radius <inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:mo>[</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:mo>]</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">20 %</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Liquid-water content  <inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:mo>[</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" 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><inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:mo>]</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">25 %</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Cloud extinction coeff. (532 nm) <inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:mo>[</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Mm</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:mo>]</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">15 %</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry namest="col1" nameend="col2">Water vapor fields </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Water-vapor-to-dry-air mixing ratio  <inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:mo>[</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>g kg<inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" 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><inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:mo>]</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Relative humidity <inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:mo>[</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> %<inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:mo>]</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <label>2.2</label><title>Lidar products</title>
      <p id="d1e1406">The measurement and retrieval products obtained from the multiwavelength dual-FOV polarization and Raman lidar Polly are listed in Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T1"/>.
In addition, typical relative errors caused by signal noise and required input parameters in the data analysis are given in the table.
The basic data analysis procedure to obtain aerosol and cloud optical properties is described by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx11" id="text.38"/>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx12" id="text.39"/>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx57" id="text.40"/>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx54" id="text.41"/>, and <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx105 bib1.bibx106" id="text.42"/>.
Height profiles of the particle backscatter coefficient at the laser wavelengths, of the particle extinction coefficient at 355 and 532 nm, respective extinction-to-backscatter ratio (lidar ratio) at 355 and 532 nm, the particle linear depolarization ratio at 355 and 532 nm, and the mixing ratio of water vapor to dry air by using the Raman lidar return signals of water vapor and nitrogen <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx29" id="paren.43"/> can be determined.
The aerosol Raman lidar method was applied to determine the particle backscatter and extinction profiles <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx106" id="paren.44"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e1433">The particle linear depolarization ratio (PLDR) is obtained from the measured volume linear depolarization ratio (VDR, depolarization ratio influenced by Rayleigh and particle depolarization of backscattered laser light). The PLDR can be used to discriminate spherical aerosol particles such as haze particles and liquid droplets, producing a PLDR close to zero, from non-spherical particles such as dust particles or ice crystals, causing a PLDR around 0.3 and typically <inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at 532 nm, respectively.
In the case of Polly, the cross-polarized and total backscatter signals are measured. The specific approach to obtain the VDR from the Polly observations is described by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx42" id="text.45"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e1449">Although PollyNET delivers automatically calculated PLDR profiles, the lidar observations presented in this article and in the accompanying article of <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx106" id="text.46"/> were manually analyzed.
To keep the uncertainties in the derived aerosol quantities at an acceptably low level of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % for the backscatter coefficients and depolarization ratios and of the order of 20 %–25 % for the particle extinction coefficients and lidar ratios, large vertical signal smoothing and regression window lengths of 500 to 2500 m and signal averaging times from 30 min to more than 10 h had to be applied. Fortunately during the winter half year, the nighttime conditions allowed us to apply the Raman lidar methods around the clock. More details are given in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx106" id="text.47"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e1468">Auxiliary data are required in the lidar data analysis in the form of temperature and pressure profiles in order to calculate and correct for Rayleigh backscatter, extinction, and light-depolarization contributions to the measured lidar return signals. In the MOSAiC data analysis, we used the <italic>Polarstern</italic> radiosonde observations.
As an important contribution to MOSAiC, radiosondes were routinely launched every 6 h (at 05:00, 11:00, 17:00, and 23:00 UTC) throughout the entire MOSAiC period <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx91" id="paren.48"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e1478">The retrieval of aerosol microphysical properties such as particle volume, mass, and surface area concentration and estimates of cloud-relevant properties such as CCNC and INPC is performed by means of the POLIPHON (Polarization Lidar Photometer Networking) approach <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx86 bib1.bibx87 bib1.bibx89 bib1.bibx6 bib1.bibx7" id="paren.49"/>. Lidar input data sets are the height profiles of the 532 nm backscatter coefficient and the PLDR. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx58" id="text.50"/>, for example, show the full set of height-resolved POLIPHON aerosol products in the cases of an 18-month Polly campaign in Dushanbe, Tajikistan, for central Asian aerosol. Alternatively to the POLIPHON method, we applied the multiwavelength lidar inversion technique <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx98 bib1.bibx100 bib1.bibx127 bib1.bibx128" id="paren.51"/> to derive the<?pagebreak page13402?> microphysical properties of aerosol particles including the particle size distribution. The method of <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx127" id="text.52"/> is applied to MOSAiC smoke and Arctic haze observations to estimate layer mean microphysical properties in pronounced smoke and haze layers with sufficiently accurate backscatter coefficients at 355, 532, and 1064 nm and extinction coefficients at 355 and 532 nm.</p>
      <p id="d1e1493">Details of the analysis of the dual-FOV polarization lidar measurements can be found in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx61 bib1.bibx62" id="text.53"/>. The method allows us to retrieve the cloud extinction coefficient and the effective radius of the droplets at a height of 50–100 m above cloud base and, in the next step, to calculate the liquid-water content (LWC, function of cloud extinction coefficient and effective radius) and cloud droplet number concentration from LWC by assuming a gamma size distribution.</p>
      <p id="d1e1499">Relative-humidity fields are obtained from the mixing-ratio measurements <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx29" id="paren.54"/> (Raman lidar method) and temperature profiles measured with the <italic>Polarstern</italic> radiosondes. Quality checks of the continuously obtained water vapor fields were based on comparisons with the relative-humidity profiles obtained with radiosondes launched at 05:00, 11:00, 17:00, and 23:00 UTC.</p>
      <p id="d1e1508">A good knowledge of the tropopause height is important when profiling aerosol and cloud layers in the troposphere and stratosphere.
The tropopause was computed from the MOSAiC radiosonde temperature and pressure profiles <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx91" id="paren.55"/> by
using the approach of the Global Modeling and Assimilation Office (GMAO), Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland, USA  <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx49" id="paren.56"/>. In this approach, the tropopause height <inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>z</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">TP</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is found from the height profile of the difference <inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>z</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>log⁡</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>z</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.03</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, temperature <inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (in Kelvin), pressure <inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (hPa), and height <inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:mi>z</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (m). The tropopause pressure <inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>z</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">TP</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is defined as the pressure where the defined difference reaches its first minimum above the surface. If no clear minimum was found up to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>z</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">13</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m over <italic>Polarstern</italic>, a tropopause height <inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>z</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">TP</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was not assigned. The obtained tropopause heights agree well with the ones we obtained by applying the definition of the World Meteorological Organization <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx137" id="paren.57"/> to the radiosonde temperature profiles and considering refinements in the determination described by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx73" id="text.58"/>. In most cases, the GMAO approach delivered 20-80 m lower tropopause levels and produced fewer outliers.</p>
      <p id="d1e1646">The large spectrum of retrieved aerosol and cloud microphysical properties forced us to use any favorable opportunity for comparison with airborne in situ observations of these quantities in the framework of validation experiments in the past. These combined lidar and airborne in situ observations to characterize the quality of the retrieval products and to check the respective uncertainty ranges were usually available during large field campaigns.
Regarding the aerosol microphysical properties, the comparisons showed that particle number concentrations, surface area, and volume and mass concentrations can be obtained with an uncertainty of 25 %–50 % (see Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T1"/>) in cases with a clearly dominating aerosol type, e.g., in dense desert dust plumes or lofted wildfire smoke layers <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx130 bib1.bibx53 bib1.bibx85 bib1.bibx55" id="paren.59"/>.
The size distributions of aerosol particles can be precisely identified and estimated from multiwavelength lidar measurements in cases with a pronounced accumulation mode <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx99" id="paren.60"/> as it is the case for aged wildfire smoke and aged Arctic haze.</p>
      <p id="d1e1657">Validation studies are especially valuable to characterize the potential of lidar to estimate cloud-relevant aerosol parameters such as CCNC and INPC. Comparisons with airborne in situ measurements showed that CCNC can be obtained with an uncertainty of about 30 % (inversion of multiwavelength data) to  50 % (conversion of the 532 nm extinction coefficient) when the aerosol type (and thus the typical aerosol size distribution) is known and about a factor of 2 if the aerosol type is not well known or mixtures of different aerosol types prevail <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx39 bib1.bibx55 bib1.bibx48" id="paren.61"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e1664">In a few efforts, the potential of lidar to deliver trustworthy INPC profile information was investigated based on simultaneous airborne in situ and lidar observations <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx121 bib1.bibx89" id="paren.62"/>. These few attempts indicated that an INPC estimation is possible with an uncertainty within an order of magnitude. The large uncertainty is caused by the ice-nucleating particle (INP) parameterization used (taken from the literature) and not from the aerosol input parameters obtained from the lidar observations.
In this field, much more coordinated field activities are needed. One alternative approach is to compare the derived INP concentrations with the estimated ice crystal  number concentration from lidar–radar observations in so-called closure experiments. Good consistency in these closures indicates a high reliability of the selected INP parameterization <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx89 bib1.bibx6" id="paren.63"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e1673">All these uncertainties in the aerosol retrievals can be considerably larger if the aerosol fraction of interest contributes to a minor part to the observed aerosol amount, i.e., when, for example, the interesting mineral dust fraction in Arctic haze is of the order of 10 %. For this reason, accompanying airborne in situ observations are always useful to better characterize the uncertainty range of the aerosol and cloud products gained from active remote sensing.</p>
      <p id="d1e1676">Concerning microphysical properties of liquid-water cloud layers (CDNC)  and cirrus clouds (ICNC), validation studies based on aircraft–lidar comparisons are difficult because of the usually strong vertical and horizontal inhomogeneities in the cloud properties. Here, we make use of different, independent methods and techniques to derive estimates of CDNC and ICNC to check the quality of the retrievals <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx62" id="paren.64"><named-content content-type="pre">regarding CDNC, see, e.g.,</named-content></xref>. Product evaluation efforts have been reported by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx25" id="text.65"/> in the case of the retrieval of ice crystal microphysical properties from combined lidar–radar observations<?pagebreak page13403?> and were based on comparison with respective satellite retrievals or airborne in situ observations.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 3</label><caption><p id="d1e1689">Ice clouds, mixed-phase clouds, and aerosols monitored with Polly above the <italic>Polarstern</italic> from 2–11 December 2019. <bold>(a–d)</bold> Evolution of cirrus layers with strong virga embedded in wildfire smoke and Arctic haze, <bold>(e–f)</bold> development of a long-lasting mixed-phase altocumulus with shallow liquid-water layer at the top and ice virga below, and <bold>(g–h)</bold> Arctic haze (below 5 km height) and wildfire smoke (above 8 km) during clear-sky conditions.  The range-corrected 1064 nm signal (left panels, in arbitrary units, a.u., logarithmic scale, the given exponents indicate the signal range) and the 532 nm volume  linear depolarization ratio (VDR, right panels) are shown. Note that the color scales vary from panel to panel.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=369.885827pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/21/13397/2021/acp-21-13397-2021-f03.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <label>3</label><title>Observations</title>
      <p id="d1e1719">We begin with a series (snapshots) of typical aerosol and cloud scenes observed with our lidar during the winter months.  According to Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F1"/>, the <italic>Polarstern</italic> moved very slowly with the pack ice in December, January, and February and was mostly located between 86  and 88<inline-formula><mml:math id="M84" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N. The exceptionally strong polar vortex of 2019–2020 was well established during that time.
Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/> shows a 10 d measurement sequence (2–11 December 2019).
Complex features of aerosol layering, cirrus evolution (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/>a–d), and mixed-phase cloud life cycles (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/>e–f) were found. Clear, i.e., fog and cloud-free, periods occurred frequently as well and provided excellent conditions for a detailed characterization of Arctic haze and wildfire smoke.</p>
      <p id="d1e1743">The measured volume linear depolarization ratio (VDR) in the right panels of Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/> allows us to precisely distinguish cirrus from layered mixed-phase clouds as explained above. Ice crystals cause large depolarization ratios (green to red colors in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/>b, d, f), and, in contrast, liquid-water layers produce rather low depolarization ratios of around zero in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/>f. The increase in the depolarization values with increasing penetration of the laser beam into the water cloud layer is caused by multiple scattering by the cloud droplets. This aspect is explained in more detail in Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S3.SS3"/>.
The depolarization ratio of aerosol particles was found to be generally small (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/>h) in the free troposphere and stratosphere, which indicates spherical haze and smoke particles.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <label>3.1</label><title>Wildfire smoke layer in the UTLS regime</title>
      <p id="d1e1763">Extreme and long-lasting wildfires in central and eastern Siberia, in closest neighborhood to the Arctic region,
were most probably responsible for the UTLS smoke layer over the High Arctic in the winter half year of 2019–2020  <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx63 bib1.bibx106" id="paren.66"/>.
The main burning phase lasted from 19 July to 14 August 2019. In the absence of any pyrocumulonimbus (pyroCb) convection  <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx47" id="paren.67"/> and thus of a very efficient and fast process to transport smoke into the UTLS height range, we hypothesize that the smoke was lifted by the so-called self-lifting process <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx18" id="paren.68"/>. Details are given in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx106" id="text.69"/>. In self-lifting processes, strong absorption of solar radiation by the black-carbon-containing smoke heats the air in lofted smoke plumes. The buoyancy created then forces the smoke plumes to ascend up to the tropopause (at around 10 km) within about 3–5 d according to our simulation studies <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx106" id="paren.70"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e1781">Once in the UTLS height range, smoke particles become quickly distributed over large parts of the Northern Hemisphere within a few weeks, as observed and documented for the first time in 2001 <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx46" id="paren.71"/> and recently confirmed after the record-breaking Canadian fires in the summer of 2017 <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx71 bib1.bibx13" id="paren.72"/>. In the case of the strong Siberian fires, the smoke particles probably became quickly distributed over the entire Arctic region (as suggested by the satellite observations presented by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx63" id="altparen.73"/>) and then remained in the UTLS height range for months. The decay of smoke-related stratospheric perturbations usually takes more than a half year <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx13" id="paren.74"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e1796">Besides the strong and long-lasting fires in Siberia, the Raikoke volcano erupted in June 2019 <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx74 bib1.bibx125" id="paren.75"/>. The amount of the emitted SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M85" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> suggested that a stratospheric aerosol layer with a maximum 532 nm AOT of around 0.025 at latitudes <inline-formula><mml:math id="M86" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M87" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> would form. It was further expected that the AOT would decrease to values of 0.01 over the High Arctic in autumn 2019 and to 0.005 during the winter months, as discussed in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx106" id="text.76"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e1832">From the first days of the MOSAiC observations on, in late September 2019, we observed a pronounced and well-aged stratospheric aerosol layer with a backscatter maximum around or just above the tropopause, smooth internal structures, and clear wildfire smoke signatures. The 532 nm AOT was around 0.1 in autumn 2019 over the <italic>Polarstern</italic> and thus much higher than the expected sulfate AOT of 0.01. Further lidar observations at Leipzig (51.3<inline-formula><mml:math id="M88" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, 12.4<inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E), Germany, and Ny-Ålesund, Svalbard (78.9<inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, 11.9<inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E), Norway, indicated a strong increase in the stratospheric AOT in August 2019, probably as a result of the record-breaking Siberian fires and the spread of the smoke over large parts of the Northern Hemisphere.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 4</label><caption><p id="d1e1877">Profiles of optical properties (24 h mean values) of the wildfire smoke layer on 11 December 2019. Base and top heights of the smoke layer are indicated by black horizontal lines. <bold>(a)</bold> Particle backscatter coefficient at three wavelengths, <bold>(b)</bold> particle linear depolarization ratio at 355 and 532 nm, <bold>(c)</bold> smoke extinction coefficient at 355 and 532 nm, and <bold>(d)</bold> respective smoke extinction-to-backscatter ratio (lidar ratio) are shown. All basic lidar signal profiles were smoothed with vertical window lengths of 500 m (backscatter, depolarization) and 2000 m (extinction, lidar ratio). Error bars indicate the estimated uncertainties (1 standard deviation). More details are given in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx106" id="text.77"/>.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/21/13397/2021/acp-21-13397-2021-f04.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e1901">Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/> presents the optical properties of the smoke layer as measured on 11 December 2019 (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/>g and h).
The <italic>Polarstern</italic> was at 86.6<inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N and 120.7<inline-formula><mml:math id="M93" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E at 12:00 UTC. The lidar observations were averaged over the entire day; thus 24 h mean height profiles are shown. The UTLS aerosol layer extended from 8 to more than 18 km height. The internal vertical structures were rather smooth.
The layer base as indicated in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/> was determined by the altitude at which the 1064 nm backscatter coefficient started to increase with height. The smoke layer top was set to the height where the total-to-Rayleigh backscatter ratio at 1064 nm dropped below a value of 1.1.</p>
      <?pagebreak page13404?><p id="d1e1932">A clear and unambiguous optical fingerprint for the  presence and dominance of aged smoke particles (after long-range transport) is the unusual spectral dependence of the extinction-to-backscatter ratio <inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:mi>L</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>  (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/>d) together with a high 532 nm particle lidar ratio <inline-formula><mml:math id="M95" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">532</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> typically exceeding 70 sr.  <inline-formula><mml:math id="M96" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">532</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is much larger than the 355 nm lidar ratio <inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">355</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, typically by more than 20 sr <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx54 bib1.bibx106" id="paren.78"/>. Another smoke signature is the weak wavelength dependence of the particle extinction coefficient <inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, expressed in terms of the extinction-related Ångström exponent Å<inline-formula><mml:math id="M99" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">355</mml:mn><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">532</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>ln⁡</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">355</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">532</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi>ln⁡</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">532</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">355</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. For the extinction profiles in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/>c, Å<inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">355</mml:mn><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">532</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> is about 0.5. In the case of volcanic sulfate aerosol the Ångström exponent is typically clearly <inline-formula><mml:math id="M101" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Note that such an unambiguous identification of the wildfire smoke type is only possible with multiwavelength Raman lidars and high spectral-resolution lidars <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx100 bib1.bibx22" id="paren.79"/>, which allow us to determine the particle extinction coefficient at several wavelengths.</p>
      <p id="d1e2076">The particle depolarization ratios at 532 nm (around 1 %) and at 355 nm (1 %–2 %) in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/>b were very low. Such low values are indicative of  spherical particles. We hypothesize that the  comparably slow ascent (over several days) of the smoke particles up to the UTLS regime over Siberia in the summer of 2019 allowed the smoke particles to complete the aging process in the humid troposphere (with high levels of condensable gases). At the end of the particle aging process, the majority of the smoke particles showed a spherical core–shell structure and thus caused the low particle depolarization ratios. In contrast, in the case of pyroCb-related ascents (fast lifting within 30–90 min up to the tropopause) there is no time for particle aging. Then, the particles widely keep<?pagebreak page13405?> their original, non-spherical shapes and thus produce large depolarization ratios of about 20 % at 532 nm.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5"><?xmltex \currentcnt{5}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 5</label><caption><p id="d1e2083">Size distributions of the stratospheric smoke particles retrieved from the multiwavelength lidar observations on 5 d in October and November 2019. A narrow accumulation mode with particle sizes (diameters) from 400 to 1000 nm and a weak Aitken mode to the left are typical for aged wildfire smoke particles. </p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/21/13397/2021/acp-21-13397-2021-f05.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e2093">Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F5"/> presents several volume size distributions of the smoke particles. The volume size distributions were obtained from the Polly observation by applying the lidar inversion method to the layer mean three backscatter and two extinction coefficients <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx127" id="paren.80"/>.
As typical for aged wildfire smoke, a well-defined accumulation mode was found. A distinct coarse mode was absent.
The findings agree well with in situ observations of aged smoke transported over long distances <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx44 bib1.bibx110 bib1.bibx28" id="paren.81"/>.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F6"><?xmltex \currentcnt{6}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 6</label><caption><p id="d1e2106"><bold>(a)</bold> Overview of Polly observations of the UTLS smoke layer (colored bars from base to top, one bar per day) for the winter half year (October 2019 to April 2020). Observational gaps between bars are caused by opaque low-level clouds and fog. The colors in the bars provide information about the smoke particle extinction coefficient at 532 nm. The tropopause (black dots) separates the tropospheric from the stratospheric part of the smoke layer. Panel <bold>(b)</bold> shows 532 nm AOT of the smoke layer and estimated column mass concentration. <bold>(c)</bold> Smoke layer mean 532 nm particle extinction coefficient and estimated vertical mean particle mass concentration. The AOT and layer mean extinction values are computed from the profile of the backscatter coefficient multiplied by a 532 nm lidar ratio of 85 sr. AOT uncertainty is about 10 %–20 %. For comparison, background stratospheric extinction coefficients are expected to be of the order of 0.1–0.2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M102" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Mm</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> as observed over northern midlatitudes <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx13" id="paren.82"/>. More details are given in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx106" id="text.83"/>.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/21/13397/2021/acp-21-13397-2021-f06.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e2143">An overview of the smoke conditions during the MOSAiC winter half year (October to April) is presented in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F6"/>.
Most of the time, the smoke layer was observed between 7 and 17 km height with the backscatter maximum just above the tropopause. A trend of downward movement of the layer is not visible. The maximum extinction coefficients (532 nm)  decreased with time from values <inline-formula><mml:math id="M103" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M104" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Mm</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in October and November to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M105" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M106" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Mm</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in April 2020 (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F6"/>a).</p>
      <p id="d1e2199">The AOT in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F6"/>b was computed from the particle backscatter height profiles. The directly determined extinction profiles were too noisy, especially in the upper part of the smoke layer. The 532 nm backscatter coefficients were multiplied with the smoke mean lidar ratio of 85 sr (computed from all smoke observations measured during the winter half year) <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx106" id="paren.84"/>. Subsequently, we integrated the extinction values between the smoke layer base and top heights as given in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/> to obtain the AOT.
During the winter months, especially in January to February 2020, polar stratospheric clouds (PSCs) were frequently observed at the top and above the smoke layer, from 17 to 25 km height. We removed these PSC-affected parts from the height profiles of backscatter and extinction coefficients before we calculated the vertical column-integrated smoke optical properties. However, several weak PSCs developed within the smoke layer, and in this case, the backscatter and extinction contributions from these optically thin PSCs  were not removed. The PSC-related uncertainty in the 532 nm AOT was estimated to be of the order of 5 % <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx106" id="paren.85"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e2212">In terms of the 532 nm AOT in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F6"/>b, the perturbation decreased from 0.05–0.12 in October and November to values of 0.03–0.06 in December to the middle of March and<?pagebreak page13406?> dropped to 0.01–0.02 in April 2020. Almost constant AOT conditions were observed from 10 December to 10 March. During that time period the strong polar vortex was established, dominated the airflow, even below the vortex, and controlled the horizontal and vertical exchange of gases and particles. As mentioned by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx106" id="text.86"/>, from mid December 2019 to mid April 2020, the weather pattern was rather stable and meridional air-mass exchange was widely suppressed.
The vortex started to collapse around 20 April <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx82" id="paren.87"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e2224">The 532 nm AOT of the volcanic sulfate aerosol was estimated to be about 0.01 in October 2019 and 0.005 during the winter months January and February 2020. According to the estimations in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx106" id="text.88"/>, the Raikoke aerosol fraction was always lower than 15 %.</p>
      <p id="d1e2230">The layer mean 532 nm smoke extinction coefficients in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F6"/>c (obtained from the ratio of AOT divided by the layer geometrical depth in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F6"/>a) were on the order of 10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M107" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Mm</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in October, around 4–5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M108" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Mm</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> during the main winter months, and mostly <inline-formula><mml:math id="M109" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M110" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Mm</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at the end of the lifetime of the smoke layer.
From the measured layer mean extinction coefficients, mass concentrations of the smoke particles were derived <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx7" id="paren.89"/> and ranged from 0.4–2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M111" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> during the autumn and winter months.
Note that AOT values for a clean stratosphere are around 0.001–0.002 <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx118 bib1.bibx13" id="paren.90"/>, and minimum extinction coefficients are of the order of 0.1–0.2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M112" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Mm</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.
Minimum stratospheric mass concentrations (at midlatitudes) are close to 0.01–0.02 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M113" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx13" id="paren.91"/>.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F7"><?xmltex \currentcnt{7}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 7</label><caption><p id="d1e2354">Polar stratospheric cloud (PSC) from 17.5–22.5 km height on top of the smoke layer on 14 January 2020, 21:00-24:00 UTC. Three-hour mean particle backscatter coefficients and volume and particle linear depolarization ratio (PLDR) are shown. The optical properties are indicative of PSC Ib type. The 532 nm backscatter ratio (total-to-Rayleigh backscatter) peaks at 2.43 at 21.5 km height at about <inline-formula><mml:math id="M114" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">86</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M115" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C. PSC optical thickness was 0.0125 at 532 nm (computed from backscatter values multiplied by a lidar ratio of 50 sr) <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx72" id="paren.92"/>. Horizontal gray lines show different temperature levels.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=213.395669pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/21/13397/2021/acp-21-13397-2021-f07.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e2385">A PSC observation is shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F7"/> at the end of this section. According to the PSC classification scheme <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx2" id="paren.93"/>, we observed type Ib PSCs.  This type is made up of supercooled liquid ternary solutions that likely consist of H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M116" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M117" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, HNO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M118" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M119" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O. In contrast to type Ia and II PSC particles (crystals) the liquid droplets of PSC type Ib only slightly depolarize incoming laser light. The temperature at PSC base height showed values of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M120" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">78</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M121" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C, and at the backscatter maximum the MOSAiC radiosonde measured a temperature of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M122" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">86</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M123" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C. We observed a much lower number of PSCs over the North Pole region (86 to 88.6<inline-formula><mml:math id="M124" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N) than the CALIPSO lidar (60 to 81.8<inline-formula><mml:math id="M125" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N) during the main PSC period from January to March <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx23 bib1.bibx24" id="paren.94"/>.</p>
</sec>
<?pagebreak page13407?><sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <label>3.2</label><title>Arctic haze vertical structures</title>
      <p id="d1e2498">The original and primary goal of the shipborne MOSAiC lidar measurements was to provide, for the first time, a  height-resolved characterization of tropospheric aerosols and clouds over the North Pole region during the winter half year. Because of its importance for the climate and environmental conditions, Arctic haze  has been intensively  studied for more than 50 years <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx81 bib1.bibx135 bib1.bibx1" id="paren.95"/>. However, knowledge about the vertical layering structures of these aged haze aerosols and about the composition and microphysical properties is still limited and  mostly based on sporadic aircraft observations performed during field campaigns, preferably in spring <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx36 bib1.bibx113 bib1.bibx4" id="paren.96"/>. Furthermore, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx116" id="text.97"/> presented a ground-based multiwavelength polarization Raman lidar study on Arctic haze in terms of backscatter, depolarization, and lidar ratios. The situation has improved  since 2006 with the start of the CALIPSO mission <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx38 bib1.bibx37 bib1.bibx139" id="paren.98"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e2513">As summarized by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx135" id="text.99"/>, long-range transport of cold, polluted air masses from northern Eurasian source regions (mainly north of the Arctic front) prevails in winter and leads to the formation of Arctic haze with the highest mass concentrations in late winter and early spring. Such a low-level aerosol transport is missing in summer. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx123" id="text.100"/> pointed out that the winter transport of aerosols towards the High Arctic occurs at low heights. Long-transported aerosols may reach heights up to the middle troposphere (5–7 km height).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F8"><?xmltex \currentcnt{8}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 8</label><caption><p id="d1e2524">Arctic haze (below 8 km height) and wildfire smoke (above 8 km height) over the North Pole region in late winter on <bold>(a)</bold> 4 February 2020 and <bold>(b)</bold> 4 March 2020. PSC layers are present as well at 13.5 and 15 km height on 4 February (pronounced yellow layers). The range-corrected 1064 nm signal is shown in arbitrary units (a.u., logarithmic scale).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/21/13397/2021/acp-21-13397-2021-f08.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e2540">In Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F8"/>, we present two MOSAiC cases of Arctic haze observed on 4 February and 4 March 2020. The <italic>Polarstern</italic> was drifting with the ice at latitudes of 87.5<inline-formula><mml:math id="M126" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N (4 February) and 88.1<inline-formula><mml:math id="M127" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N (4 March). The most striking feature in both figures is that aerosol layers occurred almost everywhere within the troposphere and in the lower stratosphere. Remnants of PSCs were visible around 13.5–14 km height on 4 February 2020 (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F8"/>a). Temperatures were around <inline-formula><mml:math id="M128" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">76</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M129" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C at 13.5 km height and thus sufficiently low to allow the formation of type Ia PSC <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx2 bib1.bibx31" id="paren.101"/>.  Type Ia PSCs are thought to consist of
nitric acid trihydrate (NAT) crystals and produce significant depolarization of backscattered laser light.
Note that the <italic>Polarstern</italic> was fully below the strong polar vortex from the beginning of January to mid April 2020 <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx106" id="paren.102"/>.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F9"><?xmltex \currentcnt{9}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 9</label><caption><p id="d1e2599"><bold>(a)</bold> HYSPLIT 10 d ensemble backward trajectories arriving at the <italic>Polarstern</italic> on <bold>(a)</bold> 4 February 2020, 11:00 UTC arrival time, and on <bold>(b)</bold> 4 March 2020, 11:00 UTC arrival time <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx59 bib1.bibx122 bib1.bibx117" id="paren.103"/>. According to Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F8"/>, pronounced Arctic haze plumes were observed at the selected arrival heights of
5 km (4 February) and 4 km (4 March).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/21/13397/2021/acp-21-13397-2021-f09.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e2624">According to the backward trajectory analysis shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F9"/>, the aerosol pollution in the pronounced aerosol layers around 5 km (4 February, 11:00 UTC,  Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F8"/>a) and 4 km height (4 March, 11:00 UTC, Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F8"/>b) originated from central and western European regions (4 February) and from Russia and the Black Sea area (4 March). The height-resolved trajectory analysis indicated that most of the aerosol circled around in the Arctic (at latitudes <inline-formula><mml:math id="M130" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">70</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M131" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N) for several days  before crossing the <italic>Polarstern</italic>.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F10"><?xmltex \currentcnt{10}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 10</label><caption><p id="d1e2656">Arctic haze backscatter, extinction, and extinction-to-backscatter ratios (lidar ratios). Mean profiles for 4 February 2020, 06:00–17:37 UTC, and for 4 March 2020, 00:00–17:45 UTC, are shown. A composite of near-range  (dotted lines up to 2–3 km height) and far-range lidar observations (solid lines) is presented. Lidar signals are smoothed with vertical window lengths of 300 m (backscatter) and 900 m (extinction, lidar ratio). Error bars indicate the uncertainty (1 standard deviation) in the optical properties. The 532 nm AOT was 0.024 on 4 February (for heights up to 7 km) and 0.022 on 4 March (for heights up to 5 km).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/21/13397/2021/acp-21-13397-2021-f10.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e2665">In Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F10"/>, the optical properties of Arctic haze for the two cases are illustrated. The figure shows 12 h (4 February) and 18 h (4 March) mean height profiles of the basic lidar products (backscatter, extinction, extinction-to-backscatter ratio). The long signal averaging times were needed to keep the signal-to-noise-related uncertainty below 10 % (backscatter coefficient), 20 % (extinction coefficient), and 25 % (lidar ratio). In both cases, we found a near-surface layer of up to about 2.5 km height and a separate lofted aerosol layer of up to 5 and 7 km height.
A clear wavelength dependence of the backscatter and extinction coefficients was found on 4 March, as expected for fine-mode-dominated particles in the Arctic <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx113" id="paren.104"/> consisting of a mixture of anthropogenic haze and fire smoke <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx132" id="paren.105"/>. The Ångström exponent for the extinction coefficient was around 1.7 in the lofted layer above 3 km height, and the lidar ratios were high with values of up to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M132" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">15</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> sr. This is indicative of the presence of small, strongly light-absorbing particles.</p>
      <p id="d1e2689">On 4 February 2020 (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F10"/>a), the aerosol optical properties were less well defined, the extinction coefficients were almost equal at both wavelengths (355 and 532 nm), and the noisy lidar ratios at 532 nm were larger than at 355 nm in the lofted layer above 3 km height, which is typical for aged wildfire smoke as discussed in the foregoing section. The<?pagebreak page13408?> lidar ratios were lower than on 4 March; i.e., less absorbing particles were present. The volume depolarization ratios (not shown) were rather low in both cases and indicated the dominance of aerosol pollution.
The 532 nm AOT was close to 0.025 (4 February, for the lowest 7 km height) and 0.02 (4 March, for the lowest 5 km) and thus considerably lower than the UTLS smoke AOT of about 0.04–0.05. The uncertainty in the tropospheric AOT values is about  20 %.</p>
      <p id="d1e2694">The values for the 532 nm extinction coefficients of 2–8 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M133" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Mm</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the lower layer (up to 2.5 km height) and 1–7 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M134" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Mm</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the lofted layer above 3 km height are in good agreement with CALIPSO lidar observations <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx37 bib1.bibx139" id="paren.106"/>.
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx37" id="text.107"/> showed 14 d mean and layer mean values of 2–8 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M135" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Mm</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (0–2 km layer), 2–10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M136" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Mm</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (2–5 km), and 1–2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M137" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Mm</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (5–10 km layer) measured in the area from 5–25<inline-formula><mml:math id="M138" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E (north of Svalbard) and 80–82<inline-formula><mml:math id="M139" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N  in February and March 2015. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx139" id="text.108"/> analyzed 13 years of CALIPSO observations (June 2006 to December 2019) for the Arctic (entire area from 65 to 81.8<inline-formula><mml:math id="M140" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N) and found
winter mean extinction values of 2–4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M141" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Mm</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (2–6 km height) and around 2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M142" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Mm</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (6–10 km height).</p>
      <p id="d1e2833">Our findings are also in good agreement with the results previously published and obtained during major field activities such as POLARCAT-IPY (Polar Study using Aircraft, Remote Sensing, Surface Measurements, and Models, of Climate, Chemistry, Aerosols, and Transport, International Polar Year) <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx81" id="paren.109"/> as well as during ARCTAS (Arctic Research of the Composition of the Troposphere from Aircraft and Satellites) <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx132" id="paren.110"/>. Both campaigns took place in the spring of 2008. Arctic haze was mostly found up to 7 km height. The aerosol composition was analyzed in great detail based on aircraft observations.</p>
      <p id="d1e2842"><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx132" id="text.111"/> summarized and reviewed earlier Arctic observations and compared observations with model calculations and found that the ratio of black carbon (BC) to organic aerosol (OA) is high with values of 0.1–0.15 for aerosols advected from Russia. This aerosol is a mixture of anthropogenic haze (sulfate aerosol) and domestic, forest,<?pagebreak page13409?> and agricultural fire smoke (organic aerosol). Sulfate aerosol prevails in the near-surface air, whereas the OA fraction becomes comparably large in the free troposphere. Agricultural fires during spring (Europe, Asia) and flaring of natural gas (Russian oil industry) were found to be important sources for BC and OA particles. The fire smoke mixes with anthropogenic haze mainly from Asia during the long-range transport towards the central Arctic, beginning in late winter with peak occurrence in the spring season. Agricultural and forest fires produce <inline-formula><mml:math id="M143" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">BC</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">OA</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ratios of typically <inline-formula><mml:math id="M144" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, whereas anthropogenic haze may cause ratios <inline-formula><mml:math id="M145" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.15</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3">
  <label>3.3</label><title>Mixed-phase cloud evolution in Arctic haze</title>
      <p id="d1e2888">Two MOSAiC case studies of aerosol–cloud interaction are presented next. In this section, the evolution of a long-lasting mixed-phase altocumulus layer in Arctic haze within the lower free troposphere is discussed, and, in the next section, we present a cirrus development in the lower part of the UTLS wildfire smoke layer.</p>
      <p id="d1e2891">The mixed-phase cloud system was shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/>e and f. The cloud layer was observed for more than 7 h over the <italic>Polarstern</italic> on 10 December 2019.
The dark band in the depolarization ratio panel between 2–3 km height in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/>f indicates the liquid-water-dominated cloud top layer. The increase in the depolarization ratio above the dark zone at the liquid cloud base is caused by multiple scattering by cloud droplets.
Favorable conditions with cloud top temperatures around <inline-formula><mml:math id="M146" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">28.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M147" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C at 2.6 km height (at 03:00 UTC) were given for heterogeneous ice formation via immersion freezing, i.e., ice nucleation on INPs immersed in the water droplets <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx69" id="paren.112"/>. After nucleation in the cloud top layer, ice crystals grow fast to sizes of 50–100 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M148" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> within minutes <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx15" id="paren.113"/> and immediately start to fall out. As visible in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/>e and f, the crystals formed long virga below the shallow altocumulus layer. The ice crystals partly evaporated on the way down but partly reached the ground as precipitation. The liquid-water-dominated cloud top layer was not depleted at any time during the 7 h period.</p>
      <p id="d1e2939">About 40 long-lasting mixed-phase cloud events (ice-precipitating shallow altocumulus decks) with durations from 4–30 h were observed from October 2019 to March 2020. Because of their sensitive influence on radiative transfer and the water cycle, they have been the focus of research for more than 15 years <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx126 bib1.bibx92 bib1.bibx96 bib1.bibx108 bib1.bibx84 bib1.bibx5 bib1.bibx40" id="paren.114"/>. However, because of the complexity of influencing meteorological and aerosol aspects, there are still many open questions concerning their long lifetime, especially of the longevity of liquid-water layers and thus of water droplets in the presence of ice crystals. MOSAiC contributes to this research field by means of combined lidar and radar observation.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F11"><?xmltex \currentcnt{11}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 11</label><caption><p id="d1e2948"><bold>(a)</bold> Effective radius of cloud droplets, <bold>(b)</bold> cloud droplet number concentration, and <bold>(c)</bold> 532 nm cloud  extinction coefficient (single-scattering) at 75 m above cloud base of the altocumulus layer in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/>e and f. The effective radius can be interpreted as the characteristic droplet radius.   Error bars indicate the uncertainty. The cloud properties were retrieved by means of the recently introduced dual-FOV polarization lidar technique.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/21/13397/2021/acp-21-13397-2021-f11.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e2967">We applied our recently developed dual-FOV polarization lidar method <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx61 bib1.bibx62" id="paren.115"/> to derive the microphysical properties of liquid-water droplets in the cloud top layer. The results are shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F11"/>. The dual-FOV lidar technique was originally designed for pure liquid-water cloud observations but can be applied to mixed-phase clouds as long as backscattering by ice crystals is negligible compared to droplet backscattering in the cloud top layer. This condition holds here with ice crystal backscatter coefficients of 5–10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M149" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Mm</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sr</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the virga (not shown) and thus probably also in the cloud top layer with droplet backscatter coefficients of the order of 700 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M150" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Mm</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sr</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (not shown). In the case of crystal-to-droplet backscattering of 0.01, the contribution of ice crystals to the observed multiple scattering features, from which the microphysical properties of the droplets are retrieved, can be ignored.
Note that the method delivers the time series of droplet effective radius, CDNC, and cloud extinction coefficients in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F11"/> for the height of 75 m above cloud base. Thus, the properties of freshly formed droplets are mainly observed.</p>
      <p id="d1e3023">As can be seen, the retrieved CDNC values were around 20 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M151" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cm</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the beginning and around 100 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M152" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cm</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>  in the cloud base region later on.  With increasing CDNC the effective radius (a characteristic droplet size) decreased  and vice versa as expected when assuming a constant water vapor reservoir for droplet nucleation. The cloud extinction coefficient showed typical values from 10–20 km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M153" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in the first half of the cloud lifetime.
Uncertainties in the lidar products are indicated by error bars (1 standard deviation) and are of the order of 20 %–25 % (cloud extinction coefficient, droplet effective radius) and 50 % (CDNC).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F12"><?xmltex \currentcnt{12}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 12</label><caption><p id="d1e3068">HYSPLIT 10 d ensemble backward trajectories arriving at 2 km height above the <italic>Polarstern</italic> (black star) on 10 December 2019, 03:00 UTC. Thin and thick symbols indicate 6 and 24 h time steps, respectively.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=227.622047pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/21/13397/2021/acp-21-13397-2021-f12.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F13"><?xmltex \currentcnt{13}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 13</label><caption><p id="d1e3082">Aerosol observation on 10 December 2019, 02:15–02:45 UTC, just before the altocumulus layer was detected over the lidar station (see Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/>e). The profile of the 532 nm extinction coefficient <inline-formula><mml:math id="M154" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is estimated from the backscatter coefficient profile (assuming a lidar ratio of 30 sr obtained from the Raman lidar observations). The estimated CCN concentration (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M155" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for a water supersaturation of 0.2 %) is obtained from the multiwavelength lidar data analysis (inversion technique, see text for more details). The thin red dotted lines show the assumed uncertainty range of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M156" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">30</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %.
Cloud base and top heights of the altocumulus layer at 03:30 UTC are indicated by horizontal lines.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=113.811024pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/21/13397/2021/acp-21-13397-2021-f13.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?pagebreak page13410?><p id="d1e3122">In the next step, we wanted to know how many cloud condensation nuclei (CCN) were available.
According to the HYSPLIT backward trajectories in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F12"/>, the altocumulus layer developed in aged Arctic haze, originating from northern parts of Europe. In order to estimate the CCN concentration (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M157" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F13"/>) just below the altocumulus layer, the lidar observations in clear skies (before 03:00 UTC) were analyzed. The result is shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F13"/>. In this specific measurement, we used the multiwavelength Raman lidar technique and applied the lidar inversion method (see Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S2.SS2"/>) <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx127" id="paren.116"/> to a set of three backscatter and two extinction coefficients. Here, the data analysis was based on the mean backscatter and extinction values (for the height range from 1500–2000 m height). The goal was to obtain (a) a value for the mean aerosol particle number concentration <inline-formula><mml:math id="M158" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (particles with radius <inline-formula><mml:math id="M159" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nm) and (b) a ratio of  <inline-formula><mml:math id="M160" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to the 532 nm backscatter coefficient. We assumed that the obtained <inline-formula><mml:math id="M161" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> value is a good estimate for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M162" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (for a supersaturation level of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M163" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %) <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx86" id="paren.117"/>. By using the obtained ratio of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M164" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to the 532 nm backscatter coefficient, the entire profile of the 532 nm particle backscatter coefficient was converted into a <inline-formula><mml:math id="M165" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> profile as shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F13"/>. The profile of the 532 nm particle extinction coefficient shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F13"/> was obtained by multiplying the backscatter coefficients with a lidar ratio of 30 sr as obtained from the backscatter and extinction Raman lidar observations. The dashed <inline-formula><mml:math id="M166" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> curves indicate an uncertainty of 30 % in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M167" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M168" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> estimation. The uncertainty of 30 % is much lower than indicated in Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T1"/>. The uncertainty in the Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T1"/> holds in the case of the simpler conversion method <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx86" id="paren.118"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e3288">Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F13"/> shows that the estimated <inline-formula><mml:math id="M169" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values of 25–55 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M170" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cm</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> around 2500 m height were in the same range as the numbers of the retrieved CDNC (10–40 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M171" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cm</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F11"/>b) in the beginning of the cloud evolution. The actual updraft characteristics at cloud base determine the actual supersaturation levels. Strong updrafts may produce water supersaturation levels exceeding 0.5 %. Then the CCNC values are 50 %–100 % larger than our estimates in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F13"/> as discussed in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx86" id="text.119"/>. All in all, we can conclude that the lidar observations provide a clear link between low aerosol particle concentration and therefore low CDNC in the mixed-phase cloud top layer. The aerosol conditions controlled the microphysical properties in the liquid-water-dominated cloud top layer.</p>
      <p id="d1e3340">In order to better understand the entire role of aerosol particles in the evolution of mixed-phase clouds, we also estimated the ICNC in the virga from combined lidar–radar observations <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx21" id="paren.120"/> and the INPC for the cloud top temperature of  <inline-formula><mml:math id="M172" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">28.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M173" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C from the 532 nm extinction coefficient in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F13"/> <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx86" id="paren.121"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e3370">Without going into too much detail, weakly enhanced PLDR values above 2 km height indicated a minor contribution of mineral dust particles (about 5 %) to the overall Arctic haze backscatter coefficient. This finding is in good agreement with studies of <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx37" id="text.122"/> and <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx139" id="text.123"/>, who analyzed spaceborne and ground-based lidar observations in combination with backward trajectory analysis and concluded that mineral dust typically contributes to the continental aerosol mixtures in the lower and middle free troposphere in the Arctic that were transported over long<?pagebreak page13411?> distances.
Dust is the most favorable although not the only relevant INP type in the case of immersion freezing at temperatures  <inline-formula><mml:math id="M174" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">30</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M175" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C during the winter half year when biogenic and biological components are absent <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx32 bib1.bibx33 bib1.bibx69 bib1.bibx70 bib1.bibx119" id="paren.124"/>.
We used the INP parameterization scheme of <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx33" id="text.125"/> to estimate the dust INP concentration for immersion freezing. Here, the particle number concentration <inline-formula><mml:math id="M176" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">250</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of dust particles with diameters <inline-formula><mml:math id="M177" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">500</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nm is an input parameter and obtained from the respective lidar observation of the dust-related 532 nm backscatter coefficient <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx86" id="paren.126"/>. The retrieval finally  yielded INPC estimates in the range from 0.1–0.5 L<inline-formula><mml:math id="M178" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for the altocumulus top temperature of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M179" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">28.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M180" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C. Uncertainties in the INPC estimates are of the order of a factor of 3 (i.e., within an order of magnitude). The main uncertainty source is the INP parameterization and not the retrieval of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M181" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">250</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values.</p>
      <p id="d1e3474">To obtain also an estimate for ICNC, we used the lidar observations of the 532 nm extinction coefficient in the first strong ice virga zone (04:00–05:00 UTC) below the liquid-water cloud layer together with radar reflectivity (8 mm wavelength) and Doppler information on the ice crystal fall speed spectrum in the virga from the AMF-1 KAZR (Ka-band zenith-pointing radar) <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx9" id="paren.127"/>. These observations were compared with comprehensive model simulations of the lidar and radar observations as a function of ice crystal number concentration, size distribution, and shape <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx21" id="paren.128"/>. The match between simulations and observations provide the range of retrieved ICNC values. In the case of the mixed-phase cloud we obtain 0.1–1.0 ice crystals per liter within the virga. Again, the retrieval uncertainty allows us to provide the order of magnitude of ICNC only.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F14" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{14}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 14</label><caption><p id="d1e3486">Mixed-phase cloud closure study. <bold>(a, c)</bold> Profiles of temperature and relative humidity (over water) measured with four MOSAiC radiosondes launched at 23:00 UTC (9 December), 05:00, 11:00, and 17:00 UTC (10 December). <bold>(b)</bold> The 1064 nm range-corrected signal showing the mixed-phase cloud layer between 2 and 2.6 km height with ice virga below the main cloud layer, and <bold>(d)</bold> height–time display of Raman lidar observations of relative humidity. In <bold>(b)</bold>, cloud-droplet number concentration (CDNC) as obtained from the dual-FOV lidar observations (during the 03:15–05:00 UTC time period), CCN and INP concentrations (CCNC, INPC) estimated from the lidar observations at 2.5 km height (CCNC) and at 2.6 km height (INPC, for the given cloud top temperature of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M182" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">28.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M183" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C) in clear sky (02:15–02:45 UTC, i.e., before the cloud layer appeared), and ice crystal number concentration (ICNC, 04:00–05:00 UTC mean value) as estimated from combined lidar–radar observations are given as numbers. In <bold>(b)</bold>, the 1064 nm signal is biased in the near range (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M184" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m), especially during the strong virga backscattering periods.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/21/13397/2021/acp-21-13397-2021-f14.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e3540">Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F14"/> summarizes our data analysis efforts and highlights the overall potential of our advanced aerosol/cloud lidar to contribute to cloud research. Since radiosondes were launched every 6 h (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F14"/>a and c) over the entire MOSAiC year, excellent conditions for a detailed lidar-based aerosol and cloud monitoring (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F14"/>b), including a coherent monitoring of the relative-humidity field (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F14"/>b), were given during the MOSAiC winter half year.</p>
      <p id="d1e3551">The temperature and relative-humidity (RH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M185" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) profiles measured with four radiosondes before, during, and after the cloud event indicate that the liquid-water-dominated cloud top layer was never thicker than a few 100 m. The cloud system developed in a warm and moist air mass and vanished when the moist air mass was replaced by very dry air (see 17:00 UTC radiosonde RH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M186" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> profile in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F14"/>c). A strong drop in the relative humidity at all heights occurred around 15:00 UTC according to the lidar observations in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F14"/>d.
The relative humidity (from lidar) is obtained from the Raman lidar observation of the specific humidity (water-vapor-to-dry-air mixing ratio) and radiosonde temperature profiles permitting the computation of the respective water-saturation-related specific humidity levels <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx29" id="paren.129"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e3579">As mentioned above, favorable conditions for ice nucleation (via immersion freezing on dust particles) were given at cloud top temperatures of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M187" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">28.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M188" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C in the beginning of the cloud lifetime and at around <inline-formula><mml:math id="M189" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">25</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M190" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C later on. Strong ice crystal evaporation in the virga zone caused the strong moistening of the air mass below the main altocumulus deck after 03:00 UTC and also caused reduced crystal evaporation later on so that ice crystals could partly reach the ground as precipitation.</p>
      <p id="d1e3620">All estimated  values for CCNC, CDNC, INPC, and ICNC are included in the lidar panel in  Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F14"/>b. We can summarize our observations as follows:
during the early altocumulus development, the estimated CCNC values outside of the cloud were in a similar range to the estimated CDNC levels within the cloud as was also the case for the estimated INPC and ICNC levels. Thus, our data suggest that the estimated cloud active particle levels could
be high enough to control the case-study cloud at given favorable moisture conditions and in the absence of other processes that might influence CDNC and ICNC levels (e.g., secondary ice formation, crystal-crystal collision and aggregation processes, or droplet collision and coagulation events). This hypothesis would be in line with numerous other Arctic studies that have previously observed this phenomenon <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx92" id="paren.130"><named-content content-type="pre">e.g.,</named-content></xref>. However, higher-resolution in-cloud microphysical data are required to verify this lidar-based hypothesis.</p>
      <p id="d1e3630">It is worth mentioning that the estimated INP concentrations of 0.1–0.5 L<inline-formula><mml:math id="M191" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F14"/>b are also in line with previous Arctic in situ observations at similar temperatures. The measured INP values ranged from 0.001 to around 2.5 L<inline-formula><mml:math id="M192" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for temperatures from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M193" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">25</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to about <inline-formula><mml:math id="M194" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">28</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M195" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx90 bib1.bibx27 bib1.bibx134 bib1.bibx56" id="paren.131"/>.
As part of the MOSAiC data analysis, we plan to analyze many winter as well as summer altocumulus events and thus cloud formation under contrasting aerosol conditions to obtain an improved view of the role of aged aerosol pollution that has been transported over long distances in the evolution of mixed-phase clouds in the High Arctic.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS4">
  <label>3.4</label><title>Cirrus evolution in wildfire smoke</title>
      <p id="d1e3700">According to a study of <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx16" id="text.132"/>, Arctic ice clouds tend to form almost exclusively by heterogeneous ice nucleation with a contribution of only 10 % by homogeneous freezing. MOSAiC now offers an excellent opportunity to investigate the potential impact of aged wildfire smoke particles on cirrus formation. More than 50 cirrus systems developed in the upper troposphere in a smoke-influenced environment during the winter half year. The importance of such a smoke impact study arises from the fact that OA, besides dust and marine particles, is ubiquitous in the atmosphere  <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx120" id="paren.133"/>. However, in contrast to dust and marine particles the INP potential of OA is not well understood.<?pagebreak page13412?> Scarce field data are the main reason for the lack of clarity and knowledge.</p>
      <p id="d1e3709">Because of the complex chemical, microphysical, and morphological properties of aged fire smoke particles, which can occur as glassy, semi-liquid, and liquid aerosol particles, the development of smoke INP parameterization schemes is a crucial task. Smoke particles from forest fires are largely composed of organic material (organic carbon, OC) and, to a minor part, of BC. The BC mass fraction is typically <inline-formula><mml:math id="M196" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx28 bib1.bibx141" id="paren.134"/>. Biomass burning aerosol also consists of humic like substances (HULISs) which represent large macromolecules.
The particles and released vapors within biomass burning plumes undergo chemical and physical aging processes during long-range transport such as coagulation, condensation, and heterogeneous reactions, resulting in changes in their morphological characteristics (size, shape, and internal structure) and mixing state.</p>
      <p id="d1e3725">Our knowledge on the potential of smoke particles to serve as INP is mainly based on laboratory and field studies of the ice nucleation potential of fresh smoke (with a focus on black carbon or soot particles) <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx109 bib1.bibx124 bib1.bibx112 bib1.bibx93 bib1.bibx83 bib1.bibx70 bib1.bibx119" id="paren.135"/>. However, aged smoke in the upper troposphere (at cirrus level, several days, weeks, or months after emission) has fundamentally different properties to the ones of wildfire particles emitted just a few minutes to hours ago <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx115 bib1.bibx44 bib1.bibx28" id="paren.136"/>. As <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx26" id="text.137"/> pointed out, freshly emitted soot or BC particles are typically hydrophobic, lacy fractal-like aggregates. During transport, lacy soot undergoes compaction upon humidification. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx120" id="text.138"/> mention that, during the aging process, the particles can also accumulate secondary sulfate mass from condensation of gaseous sulfuric acid that is present in the background atmosphere.</p>
      <?pagebreak page13413?><p id="d1e3740">In this section, we present a MOSAiC cirrus case study to illuminate, for the first time, the potential of aged wildfire smoke to influence ice formation in the upper troposphere. An overview of organic particles, their complex properties, and ice-nucleating efficacy is given in the review article of <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx77" id="text.139"/>.
It is assumed that aged smoke particles show an almost perfect spherical core–shell structure
and that the ability of smoke particles to serve as INP mainly  depends on the organic material (OM) in the shell of the coated smoke (or soot) particles. At low temperatures, e.g., in the UTLS region, where the atmospheric temperature can be as low as 180 K, it is conceivable that the particles are in a glassy state.
Aerosol particles serving as INPs usually provide an insoluble, solid surface that can facilitate the freezing of water <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx77" id="paren.140"/>. Deposition ice nucleation is defined as ice formation occurring on the INP surface by water vapor deposition from the supersaturated gas phase. When the supercooled smoke particle takes up water or its shell deliquesces, immersion freezing can proceed, where the INP immersed in an aqueous solution can initiate freezing <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx77 bib1.bibx17" id="paren.141"/>. If the smoke particle becomes completely liquid (and no insoluble part within the particle is left), homogeneous freezing will take place at temperatures below 235 K <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx79" id="paren.142"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e3756">Our MOSAiC observation was performed on 6 December 2019. As shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/>c and d, a long-lasting cirrus event was monitored. The full cirrus lifetime was about 36 h. Large virga of falling ice crystals permanently removed ice crystals from the cloud top region where they were nucleated. The cirrus system developed in the lower part of the UTLS smoke layer. The bow-like feature of the lower boundary of the extended virga zone  was caused by a high-pressure ridge (with dome-like temporal evolution of the influenced height range). The ridge crossed the <italic>Polarstern</italic> during this day and was characterized by a warmer and very dry air mass in the lowest few kilometers of the troposphere. Ice crystals falling into this dry air mass immediately evaporated.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F15"><?xmltex \currentcnt{15}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 15</label><caption><p id="d1e3766"><bold>(a)</bold> Temporally averaged (mean) cirrus extinction coefficient <inline-formula><mml:math id="M197" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (532 nm) for two observational periods from 06:00–12:00 UTC (red) and from 12:30–13:30 UTC (blue, see Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/>c), <bold>(b)</bold> profiles of temperature <inline-formula><mml:math id="M198" display="inline"><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and relative humidity RH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M199" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (over water) observed with radiosondes launched at 05:00, 11:00, and 17:00 UTC on 6 December 2019, and <bold>(c)</bold> water activation criterion <inline-formula><mml:math id="M200" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and ice supersaturation <inline-formula><mml:math id="M201" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> computed from the temperature and water vapor observations shown in <bold>(b)</bold>. The water activation criterion <inline-formula><mml:math id="M202" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the difference between the observed RH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M203" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (in decimal numbers) and the ice-saturation-related RH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M204" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> value (for the observed temperature). In <bold>(c)</bold>, different temperature levels are indicated by thin horizontal lines and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M205" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values of 0.2, 0.25, and 0.29, required to initiate ice nucleation, are shown as vertical line segments.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/21/13397/2021/acp-21-13397-2021-f15.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e3884">Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F15"/> shows the mean cirrus layer structures measured from 06:00–12:00 UTC and in the early afternoon (12:30–13:30 UTC) together with the meteorological conditions in terms of air temperature, relative humidity, and ice supersaturation measured with three MOSAiC radiosondes at about 05:30, 12:30, and 17:30 UTC (30 min after launch). Very constant meteorological conditions were found from about 4 km up to cirrus top at 8–9.5 km height. Temperatures were below <inline-formula><mml:math id="M206" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">40</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M207" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C at heights <inline-formula><mml:math id="M208" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> km so that the development  of high-altitude liquid-water layers was impossible. Clear ice supersaturation conditions (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M209" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) were present in the upper part of the cirrus system.</p>
      <p id="d1e3933">It is worth mentioning that equilibrium in ice supersaturation conditions as observed in the extended virga zone over the whole day (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F15"/>c) is a sign of a low crystal number concentration (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M210" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">35</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> L<inline-formula><mml:math id="M211" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx101" id="paren.143"/>. Such a low amount of ice crystals is not able to quench the supersaturation, which is in turn indicative of heterogeneous ice nucleation. Homogeneous freezing would produce crystal concentrations of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M212" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">500</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> L<inline-formula><mml:math id="M213" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> so that equilibrium at ice saturation level would occur within a short time period. Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F15"/> is further discussed below.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F16"><?xmltex \currentcnt{16}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 16</label><caption><p id="d1e3990">HYSPLIT 10 d backward trajectories arriving at 8, 8.5, and 9 km height above the <italic>Polarstern</italic> (black star) on 6 December 2019, 06:00 UTC. Thin and thick symbols indicate 6 and 24 h time steps, respectively.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=199.169291pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/21/13397/2021/acp-21-13397-2021-f16.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?pagebreak page13414?><p id="d1e4003">The HYSPLIT backward trajectories in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F16"/> indicate that the humid air mass, in which the cirrus started to form, originated from the remote northern Pacific. The air mass ascended to upper-tropospheric heights  8–10 d before reaching the <italic>Polarstern</italic> at 86<inline-formula><mml:math id="M214" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N and 122<inline-formula><mml:math id="M215" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E. During the last 5 d of travel the humid and probably unpolluted Pacific air mass had the chance to mix with wildfire smoke (entrained from above). We hypothesize that these smoke particles then served as ice nuclei in the cirrus formation process. Remaining marine particles may have served as INPs as well but are usually regarded as inefficient INPs <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx94" id="paren.144"/>.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F17"><?xmltex \currentcnt{17}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 17</label><caption><p id="d1e4034"><bold>(a)</bold> Mean cirrus extinction coefficient <inline-formula><mml:math id="M216" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (532 nm) for the cirrus segment measured on 6 December 2019, 12:30–13:30 UTC. <bold>(b)</bold> Estimated smoke particle number concentration <inline-formula><mml:math id="M217" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">250</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for large particles with diameters <inline-formula><mml:math id="M218" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">500</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nm and particle surface area concentration <inline-formula><mml:math id="M219" display="inline"><mml:mi>s</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> retrieved from the lidar observations for the cloud-free days of 2 and 7 December (green, olive) and for 6 December (in blue, above the cirrus), and <bold>(c)</bold> estimated ranges of INP number concentrations <inline-formula><mml:math id="M220" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">INP</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">I</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (for immersion freezing, blue) and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M221" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">INP</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">D</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (for deposition nucleation, in pink). <inline-formula><mml:math id="M222" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ranged from 0.225 to 0.25; correspondingly the ice supersaturation <inline-formula><mml:math id="M223" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ranged from 1.37–1.41 (at 7.5 km height, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M224" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">55.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M225" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C) and from 1.4 to 1.44 (at 9.25 km height, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M226" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">64</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M227" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C). The particle surface area concentration was set to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M228" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M229" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M230" 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> and the updraft time period to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M231" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">600</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> s in the smoke INP computations with Eqs. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E1"/>) and (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E2"/>).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/21/13397/2021/acp-21-13397-2021-f17.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F18"><?xmltex \currentcnt{18}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 18</label><caption><p id="d1e4236"><bold>(a)</bold> Temporally averaged (mean) cirrus extinction coefficient <inline-formula><mml:math id="M232" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (532 nm) for two cirrus periods from 06:00–12:00 UTC (red) and from 12:30–13:30 UTC (blue) on 6 December 2019. <bold>(b)</bold> Predicted ice crystal nucleation rate, i.e., <inline-formula><mml:math id="M233" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">INP</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">I</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M234" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> s  in Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E1"/>) (horizontal bars), and estimated ice crystal nucleation rates (vertical lines) obtained from the lidar–radar observations in the virga zone for the 06:00–12:00 UTC (red) and 12:30–13:30 UTC (blue) time periods. The thin dotted lines show the uncertainty (factor of 3) in the lidar–radar retrievals.  </p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=199.169291pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/21/13397/2021/acp-21-13397-2021-f18.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e4289">The data analysis with respect to ice nucleation on smoke particles is explained in Figs. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F17"/> and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F18"/>. We applied the water-activity-based immersion freezing model (ABIFM) that allows predicting of immersion freezing under cirrus conditions <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx75" id="paren.145"/>.
The following equation is used to compute the number concentration of smoke INP for the immersion freezing mode <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx75" id="paren.146"/>:
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E1" content-type="numbered"><label>1</label><mml:math id="M235" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">INP</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">I</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>J</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">het</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">I</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          with the surface area concentration <inline-formula><mml:math id="M236" display="inline"><mml:mi>s</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> of the smoke particles in cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M237" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M238" 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>,
the ice crystal nucleation rate coefficient <inline-formula><mml:math id="M239" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>J</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">het</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">I</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (in cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M240" 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> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M241" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>), and the time period <inline-formula><mml:math id="M242" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (in seconds) for which constant or almost constant ice supersaturation conditions are assumed. This can be the time period of a short updraft event (of a few minutes, 120–300 s) or the duration of the lifting period of a gravity wave  of typically <inline-formula><mml:math id="M243" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">600</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">200</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> s <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx66" id="paren.147"/>.
The ice nucleation rate coefficient <inline-formula><mml:math id="M244" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>J</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">het</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">I</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is a function of the organic material in the (liquid) shell of the smoke particle and the water-activity criterion <inline-formula><mml:math id="M245" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>  <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx79" id="paren.148"/>.
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M246" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F15"/>c, describes the difference between the ice melting conditions and the observed freezing conditions as a function of temperature and humidity as measured with the radiosonde.
In the computation, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M247" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is obtained from the difference between the actually occurring RH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M248" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (over water) and the ice-saturation-related  RH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M249" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sat</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> value for the observed (actually occurring) temperature (with RH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M250" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and RH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M251" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sat</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in decimal numbers). <inline-formula><mml:math id="M252" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> must reach values of 0.2–0.27 or even 0.29 to initiate significant ice nucleation (see vertical lines in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F15"/>c).
Homogeneous ice nucleation is characterized by <inline-formula><mml:math id="M253" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.313</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx76" id="paren.149"/>. As can be seen, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M254" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> takes values of 0.1–0.2 according to the radiosonde observations. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M255" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values  of 0.22–0.29 are only reached here during vertical motion of air parcels.</p>
      <p id="d1e4603">For a demonstration of our method, we chose to apply the ABIFM for leonardite (a standard humic-acid surrogate material) to represent the amorphous organic coating of smoke particles. An alternative natural organic substance would be Pahokee peat <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx75" id="paren.150"/>. Leonardite, an oxidation product of lignite, is a humic-acid-containing soft waxy particle (mineraloid), black or brown in color, and soluble in alkaline solutions. Both substances (leonardite or Pahokee peat) served  as surrogates for HULISs in extended immersion freezing laboratory studies.</p>
      <?pagebreak page13415?><p id="d1e4610">Similarly, we calculate the INP number concentration for the deposition ice nucleation (DIN) mode <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx131" id="paren.151"/>:
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E2" content-type="numbered"><label>2</label><mml:math id="M256" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">INP</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">D</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>J</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">het</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">D</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          The ice nucleation rate coefficient <inline-formula><mml:math id="M257" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>J</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">het</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">D</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> requires information on temperature <inline-formula><mml:math id="M258" display="inline"><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and ice supersaturation <inline-formula><mml:math id="M259" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, also shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F15"/>c, and parameters describing the ice nucleation potential of the organic material. Also in the case of DIN, laboratory results for leonardite were used <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx131" id="paren.152"/>.
A more detailed description of smoke INP computation may be found in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx7" id="text.153"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e4696">Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F17"/>  provides an overview of all retrieval products necessary to evaluate the potential of smoke particles to serve as INP. From the aerosol lidar observations (backscattering in cloud-free conditions) we obtain estimates for the particle surface area concentration <inline-formula><mml:math id="M260" display="inline"><mml:mi>s</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx7" id="paren.154"/>. We show the aerosol conditions at different days in  Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F17"/>b (before, during, and after the cirrus event) and used the respective lidar backscatter profiles to estimate the surface area concentration of the smoke particles. It can be concluded that the smoke surface area concentration was in the range of 0.05–0.15 cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M261" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M262" 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>  during the  formation of ice crystals at 7–7.5 km and at 9.0–9.5 km in the case of the cirrus layer in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F17"/>a.
In Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F17"/>b, the estimated number concentration of large smoke particles <inline-formula><mml:math id="M263" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">250</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (with radius <inline-formula><mml:math id="M264" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">250</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nm, lower axis) is also shown. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M265" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">250</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> may be interpreted as the overall reservoir of potential smoke INPs. It is assumed that larger particles provide better ice nucleation conditions than smaller  particles. The uncertainty in the aerosol estimates is about 20 %–25 % (Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T1"/>).</p>
      <p id="d1e4774">Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F17"/>c shows the results of the INPC calculations with Eqs. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E1"/>) and (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E2"/>). The range of immersion freezing INPC (i.e., the length of the respective two horizontal bars in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F17"/>c) is obtained by computing  <inline-formula><mml:math id="M266" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">INP</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">I</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> with Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E1"/>) for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M267" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of 0.225 and  0.25. The particle surface area concentration of 0.05 cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M268" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M269" 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> is used in these computations and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M270" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is set to 600 s.
In the case of the deposition nucleation INPC, the shown INPC range (length of each bar) is obtained by computing <inline-formula><mml:math id="M271" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">INP</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">D</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> with Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E2"/>) for the corresponding ice supersaturation values <inline-formula><mml:math id="M272" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> from 1.37–1.41 (7–7.5 km height, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M273" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">55.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M274" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C) and from 1.41–1.44 (9–9.5 km height, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M275" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">64</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M276" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C). As can be seen, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M277" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">INP</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">I</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ranged from 1–63 L<inline-formula><mml:math id="M278" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at both heights (for the same  <inline-formula><mml:math id="M279" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> range), and for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M280" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">INP</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">D</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, we obtained values from 0.4–3 L<inline-formula><mml:math id="M281" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at 7–7.5 km height and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M282" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.01</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> L<inline-formula><mml:math id="M283" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at 9–9.5 km height. The uncertainty in these estimates is unspecified. This is the first attempt to estimate aged smoke INP under realistic atmospheric conditions with parameterizations developed under laboratory conditions.</p>
      <p id="d1e5009">In the final step, we compare the immersion freezing INPC values in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F17"/>c, which can also be interpreted as predicted ice crystal numbers, with estimated ice crystal numbers derived from combined lidar–radar observations.
The lidar–radar ICNC retrieval was already explained in Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S3.SS3"/>. In this MOSAiC cirrus closure study, we used the strong and most accurate observations of radar reflectivity in the lower part of the virga zones from 4–7 km height.
Since Eqs. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E1"/>) and (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E2"/>) primarily deliver ice crystal nucleation rates (for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M284" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> s), we compare nucleation rate values in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F18"/>b. As pointed out by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx21" id="text.155"/>, the ice crystal downward flux (in m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M285" 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> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M286" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) is the most direct result of lidar–radar retrievals because besides radar reflectivity, the falling velocity is also measured with the Doppler radar. And this crystal flux rate can be interpreted as the ice nucleation rate as long as crystal–crystal collision and aggregation processes do not change the ice crystal number concentration too much, on the way from the cloud top region (ice nucleation region) to the lower part of the virga zones. However, this assumption may be strongly violated as <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx95" id="text.156"/> concluded from CALIPSO lidar observations. They found that the ice crystal number concentration in the virga may be lower by a factor of 3–5 compared to the ICNC values at cloud top. On the other hand, the crystal nucleation rates we discuss below were quite low so that the aggregation effect may have been small (of the order of a factor of 2 or less for this Arctic ice cloud system).
Other ICNC-influencing effects, e.g., secondary ice formation can be ignored in the case of cold cirrus clouds <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx45 bib1.bibx80" id="paren.157"/>.
The low lidar–radar-estimated ICNC values of 40–70 m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M287" 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> or 0.04–0.07 L<inline-formula><mml:math id="M288" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (mean values for the virga between 4–6 km height for the period from 06:00–12:00 UTC, not shown here) and about 150 m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M289" 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> or 0.15 L<inline-formula><mml:math id="M290" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> higher up (based on less accurate radar reflectivity measured at 6–7 km height) corroborate the idea that the aggregation-related uncertainty in our lidar–radar estimate of the ice crystal nucleation rate at cloud top may have been low. For the time period from 12:00–14:00 UTC, the lidar–radar retrieval yielded  ICNC values of 80–500 m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M291" 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> or 0.08–0.5 L<inline-formula><mml:math id="M292" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>in the virga layer from 4–6 km height and about 800 m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M293" 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> at 7 km height.</p>
      <p id="d1e5156">In our  cirrus closure experiment, the goal is now to check how well the two numbers of the predicted and the estimated ice crystal nucleation rates are in agreement. The question behind this is as follows: can the smoke INP parameterizations reproduce these values given by the lidar–radar observations so that we can conclude that smoke particles most likely controlled the evolution of the cirrus deck and the virga and respective ice crystal microphysical properties? In the case of a successful closure experiment, we may even conclude that the applied INP parameterization is appropriate to be used in models to predict the smoke impact on cirrus formation.</p>
      <p id="d1e5159">As shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F18"/>b, the lidar–radar retrieval yielded ice crystal nucleation rates of 10–200 m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M294" 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> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M295" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>  and 50–1000 m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M296" 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> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M297" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (derived from the crystal flux observations between 4 and 6 km height) for the cirrus period from 06:00–12:00 UTC and 12:00–14:00 UTC, respectively.
The prediction (based on INP retrieval with Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E1"/>) for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M298" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> s) reveals  1–100 m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M299" 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> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M300" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at cirrus top layer level. This can be regarded as a reasonable agreement keeping in mind that the particle surface area concentrations may have been underestimated, stronger updrafts may have occurred causing significantly higher <inline-formula><mml:math id="M301" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values than 0.25 (at a value of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M302" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.27</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> we obtain an order of magnitude higher nucleation rates), or leonardite is not representing well the organic material in the liquid shell of the smoke particles. With Pahokee peat<?pagebreak page13416?> parameters we obtain a factor of 3 higher ice crystal nucleation rates (or INPC values).</p>
      <p id="d1e5284">To sum up, heterogeneous ice nucleation is a complex process, especially in the case of organic aerosol particles. However, the successful closure, indicated by a reasonable match between the predicted ice crystal nucleation rate (from the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M303" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">INP</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">I</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> computation) and the estimated ice crystal nucleation rate (from lidar–radar observations) shows that the wildfire smoke was probably able to trigger cirrus formation (before the ice supersaturation onset for homogeneous freezing was reached) and to control the further evolution of the ice cloud system. The facts that (a) the radiosondes showed permanent ice supersaturation conditions in the virga over the day (a sign of low ICNC values in the virga) and (b) that the lidar–radar retrievals pointed to rather low ice crystal nucleation rates are independent indications that the heterogeneous ice formation was most probably responsible for the observed cirrus evolution or at least controlled the microphysical properties on 6 December 2019.
It is clear that many more closure studies are needed to obtain a statistically trustworthy view on smoke and the role in cirrus ice nucleation. The respective extended data analysis will be part of our MOSAiC data analysis.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4" sec-type="conclusions">
  <label>4</label><title>Conclusion and outlook</title>
      <p id="d1e5312">The goal of this introductory article was to present some highlights and key findings of the MOSAiC winter half year and also to provide an overview of the capabilities of modern lidar methods to contribute to Arctic research in the field of aerosols, clouds, and aerosol–cloud interaction. Continuous observations were performed mostly at latitudes <inline-formula><mml:math id="M304" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">85</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M305" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N during the MOSAiC months from September 2019 to May 2020.</p>
      <p id="d1e5333">The highlight of our observations was the detection of the long-lasting UTLS wildfire smoke layer which was present over the North Pole region for more than 7 months. A detailed analysis of the smoke properties and the potential impact on the record-breaking ozone reduction can be found in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx106" id="text.158"/>. Besides the smoke, we presented 2 d with typical Arctic haze layering features and properties. The results agree well with foregoing studies  performed in the framework of POLARCAT-IPY and ARCTAS.</p>
      <p id="d1e5339">Our research focus is on aerosol–cloud interaction, especially on ice nucleation in mixed-phase clouds and cirrus in the middle and upper troposphere.
We developed new techniques, data analysis concepts, and closure experiments and applied them for the first time to Arctic cloud studies. These successful closure experiments (demonstrated in two case studies) corroborate that aerosol particles are able to control cloud evolution and cloud microphysical properties.</p>
      <p id="d1e5342">As a future work, we will analyze the 1-year MOSAiC data set to characterize the annual cycle of aerosol and cloud conditions and will contrast winter with summer conditions especially regarding aerosol–cloud interaction at cirrus level.
Aerosol conditions during winter and early spring are very different from the ones during the summer and early autumn season and thus the impact of aerosol particles on mixed-phase cloud and cirrus evolution should be different as well.</p>
      <p id="d1e5346">Such large campaigns as the MOSAiC expedition offer the unique opportunity to introduce and apply new techniques and concepts of data analysis  methods and integrate them into the existing instrumentation infrastructures and routine monitoring and observational data processing.  However, to better characterize the uncertainties in our estimated and retrieved aerosol and cloud products and to narrow the uncertainty ranges, field campaigns with frequent overflights of remote-sensing stations by aircraft measuring cloud-relevant aerosol properties as well as cloud microphysical properties in situ are required in the framework of validation efforts. Such comprehensive aircraft remote-sensing field campaigns are also needed to improve our knowledge on the basic features of the complex processes of aerosol–cloud interactions.</p>
      <p id="d1e5349">Because of the importance of the Arctic in the climate system it would be desirable to establish at least one supersite in the High Arctic for remote-sensing and in situ observations (with balloon, unmanned aerial vehicles, aircraft) of aerosol and cloud properties in the lower, middle, and upper free troposphere and the lower stratosphere. This station should perform year-round measurements to document the fast changes in the atmospheric and environmental conditions in the Arctic, to better understand the role of aerosols in cloud formation and ozone depletion processes, and also to validate established and new remote-sensing-based retrieval methods.</p>
</sec>

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

      <p id="d1e5357">Polly lidar observations (level 0 data, measured signals) are in the PollyNET database <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx111" id="paren.159"/> with  quick looks at <uri>http://picasso.tropos.de</uri> (last access: 15 July 2021). All the analysis
products are available at TROPOS upon request (polly@tropos.de). The AMF-1 cloud radar data are provided by the ARM MOSAiC user facility <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx9" id="paren.160"/>.
In addition, all MOSAiC consortium members have early access to the data via the MOSAiC Central Storage (MCS) system before the data become publicly released on 1 January 2023. The radiosonde data are available at <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1594/PANGAEA.928656" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1594/PANGAEA.928656</ext-link> <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx91" id="paren.161"/>.
PANGAEA is the primary long-term archive for the MOSAiC data set. KAZR data are available via the ARM data archive (<uri>https://adc.arm.gov/discovery/</uri>, last access: 15 July 2021).</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="authorcontribution"><title>Author contributions</title>

      <p id="d1e5382">The paper was written by RE and AA with contributions (data analysis) from KO, HB, CJ, JB, HeG, MH, SD, MM, IV, and PS.
The co-authors HaG, MR, JH, and DA as well as RE took care of the lidar observations aboard <italic>Polarstern</italic> during the MOSAiC year.
CJ and RW implemented and tested the new dual-FOV polarization lidar channels.
UW and AM were involved in the data interpretation and discussions of the observations.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests"><title>Competing interests</title>

      <?pagebreak page13417?><p id="d1e5391">The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.</p>
  </notes><?xmltex \hack{\vspace*{-2mm}}?><notes notes-type="disclaimer"><title>Disclaimer</title>

      <p id="d1e5398">Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.</p>
  </notes><?xmltex \hack{\vspace*{-2mm}}?><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e5405">We are grateful to the MOSAiC teams and the <italic>Polarstern</italic> crew for their perfect logistical support.
Cloud radar data were provided by the US Department of Energy's Atmospheric Radiation Measurement Program. We further thank the entire radiosonde team, especially AWI, DWD, ARM, Jürgen (Egon) Graeser, and all volunteers for their enormous efforts of producing the exemplary and uninterrupted 6-hourly data set in the full MOSAiC year.</p></ack><?xmltex \hack{\vspace*{-2mm}}?><notes notes-type="financialsupport"><title>Financial support</title>

      <p id="d1e5414">The data were produced as part of the international Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of the Arctic Climate (MOSAiC)
with the tag MOSAiC20192020 and project ID AWI_PS122_00.
This project has also received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program ACTRIS-2 Integrating Activities (H2020-INFRAIA-2014–2015, grant no. 654109).
We gratefully acknowledge the funding by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation) – project no. 268020496 – TRR 172, within the Transregional Collaborative Research Center “ArctiC Amplification: Climate Relevant Atmospheric and SurfaCe Processes, and Feedback Mechanisms (AC)3”.
The development of the lidar inversion algorithm used to analyze Polly data was supported by the Russian
Science Foundation (project no. 16-17-10241).</p>
  </notes><?xmltex \hack{\vspace*{-2mm}}?><notes notes-type="reviewstatement"><title>Review statement</title>

      <p id="d1e5421">This paper was edited by Geraint Vaughan and reviewed by Eleni Marinou and one anonymous referee.</p>
  </notes><?xmltex \hack{\vspace*{-2mm}}?><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bibx1"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Abbatt et al.(2019)}?><label>Abbatt et al.(2019)</label><?label Abbatt2019?><mixed-citation>Abbatt, J. P. D., Leaitch, W. R., Aliabadi, A. A., Bertram, A. K., Blanchet, J.-P., Boivin-Rioux, A., Bozem, H., Burkart, J., Chang, R. Y. W., Charette, J., Chaubey, J. P., Christensen, R. J., Cirisan, A., Collins, D. B., Croft, B., Dionne, J., Evans, G. J., Fletcher, C. G., Galí, M., Ghahremaninezhad, R., Girard, E., Gong, W., Gosselin, M., Gourdal, M., Hanna, S. J., Hayashida, H., Herber, A. B., Hesaraki, S., Hoor, P., Huang, L., Hussherr, R., Irish, V. E., Keita, S. A., Kodros, J. K., Köllner, F., Kolonjari, F., Kunkel, D., Ladino, L. A., Law, K., Levasseur, M., Libois, Q., Liggio, J., Lizotte, M., Macdonald, K. M., Mahmood, R., Martin, R. V., Mason, R. H., Miller, L. A., Moravek, A., Mortenson, E., Mungall, E. L., Murphy, J. G., Namazi, M., Norman, A.-L., O'Neill, N. T., Pierce, J. R., Russell, L. M., Schneider, J., Schulz, H., Sharma, S., Si, M., Staebler, R. M., Steiner, N. S., Thomas, J. L., von Salzen, K., Wentzell, J. J. B., Willis, M. D., Wentworth, G. R., Xu, J.-W., and Yakobi-Hancock, J. D.: Overview paper: New insights into aerosol and climate in the Arctic, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 2527–2560, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-2527-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-19-2527-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx2"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Achtert and Tesche(2014)}?><label>Achtert and Tesche(2014)</label><?label Achterttesche2014?><mixed-citation>Achtert, P. and Tesche, M.: Assessing lidar‐based classification schemes for polar stratospheric clouds based on 16 years of measurements at Esrange, Sweden, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 119, 1386–1405, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2013JD020355" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2013JD020355</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx3"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{ACTRIS(2020)}?><label>ACTRIS(2020)</label><?label ACTRIS2020?><mixed-citation>ACTRIS: Aerosols, Clouds and Trace gases Research InfraStructure home page, avaialble at <uri>https://www.actris.eu/</uri>, last access: 20 October 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx4"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Ancellet et al.(2014)}?><label>Ancellet et al.(2014)</label><?label Ancellet2014?><mixed-citation>Ancellet, G., Pelon, J., Blanchard, Y., Quennehen, B., Bazureau, A., Law, K. S., and Schwarzenboeck, A.: Transport of aerosol to the Arctic: analysis of CALIOP and French aircraft data during the spring 2008 POLARCAT campaign, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 8235–8254, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-8235-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-14-8235-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx5"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Andronache(2018)}?><label>Andronache(2018)</label><?label Andronache2018?><mixed-citation>
Andronache, C. (Ed.): Mixed-Phase Clouds, Elsevier, 1 Edn., the Netherlands, UK, USA, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx6"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Ansmann et al.(2019)}?><label>Ansmann et al.(2019)</label><?label Ansmann2019?><mixed-citation>Ansmann, A., Mamouri, R.-E., Bühl, J., Seifert, P., Engelmann, R., Hofer, J., Nisantzi, A., Atkinson, J. D., Kanji, Z. A., Sierau, B., Vrekoussis, M., and Sciare, J.: Ice-nucleating particle versus ice crystal number concentration in altocumulus and cirrus layers embedded in Saharan dust:a closure study, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 15087–15115, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-15087-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-19-15087-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx7"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Ansmann et al.(2021)}?><label>Ansmann et al.(2021)</label><?label Ansmann2020?><mixed-citation>Ansmann, A., Ohneiser, K., Mamouri, R.-E., Knopf, D. A., Veselovskii, I., Baars, H., Engelmann, R., Foth, A., Jimenez, C., Seifert, P., and Barja, B.: Tropospheric and stratospheric wildfire smoke profiling with lidar: mass, surface area, CCN, and INP retrieval, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 9779–9807, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-9779-2021" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-21-9779-2021</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx8"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{ARM(2020)}?><label>ARM(2020)</label><?label ARM2020?><mixed-citation>ARM: Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) mobile facility homepage, available at <uri>https://www.arm.gov/capabilities/observatories/amf</uri>, last access: 20 October 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx9"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{ARM-MOSAiC(2021)}?><label>ARM-MOSAiC(2021)</label><?label ARM-MOSAiC2020?><mixed-citation>ARM-MOSAiC: Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) user facility, 2019, updated hourly, Ka ARM Zenith Radar (KAZRCFRGE), 2019-10-11 to 2020-09-20, ARM Mobile Facility (MOS) MOSAIC (Drifting Obs – Study of Arctic Climate), AMF2 (M1), compiled by: Lindenmaier, I., Nelson, D., Isom, B., Hardin, J., Matthews, A., Wendler, T., and Castro, V., ARM Data Center, available at: <uri>https://adc.arm.gov/discovery/</uri>,  last access: 15 July 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx10"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Avery et al.(2020)}?><label>Avery et al.(2020)</label><?label Avery2020?><mixed-citation>Avery, M. A., Ryan, R. A., Getzewich, B. J., Vaughan, M. A., Winker, D. M., Hu, Y., Garnier, A., Pelon, J., and Verhappen, C. A.: CALIOP V4 cloud thermodynamic phase assignment and the impact of near-nadir viewing angles, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 13, 4539–4563, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-4539-2020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-13-4539-2020</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx11"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Baars et~al.(2012)}?><label>Baars et al.(2012)</label><?label Baars2012?><mixed-citation>Baars, H., Ansmann, A., Althausen, D.,  Engelmann, R.,  Heese, B., Müller, D., Artaxo, P., Paixao, M., Pauliquevis, T., and Souza, R.:
Aerosol profiling with lidar in the Amazon Basin during the wet and dry season,
J. Geophys. Res., 117, D21201, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JD018338" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2012JD018338</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page13418?><ref id="bib1.bibx12"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Baars et al.(2016)}?><label>Baars et al.(2016)</label><?label Baars2016?><mixed-citation>Baars, H., Kanitz, T., Engelmann, R., Althausen, D., Heese, B., Komppula, M., Preißler, J., Tesche, M., Ansmann, A., Wandinger, U., Lim, J.-H., Ahn, J. Y., Stachlewska, I. S., Amiridis, V., Marinou, E., Seifert, P., Hofer, J., Skupin, A., Schneider, F., Bohlmann, S., Foth, A., Bley, S., Pfüller, A., Giannakaki, E., Lihavainen, H., Viisanen, Y., Hooda, R. K., Pereira, S. N., Bortoli, D., Wagner, F., Mattis, I., Janicka, L., Markowicz, K. M., Achtert, P., Artaxo, P., Pauliquevis, T., Souza, R. A. F., Sharma, V. P., van Zyl, P. G., Beukes, J. P., Sun, J., Rohwer, E. G., Deng, R., Mamouri, R.-E., and Zamorano, F.: An overview of the first decade of Polly<inline-formula><mml:math id="M306" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NET</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>: an emerging network of automated Raman-polarization lidars for continuous aerosol profiling, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 5111–5137, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-5111-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-16-5111-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx13"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Baars et~al.(2019)}?><label>Baars et al.(2019)</label><?label Baars2019?><mixed-citation>Baars, H., Ansmann, A., Ohneiser, K., Haarig, M., Engelmann, R., Althausen, D., Hanssen, I., Gausa, M., Pietruczuk, A., Szkop, A., Stachlewska, I. S., Wang, D., Reichardt, J., Skupin, A., Mattis, I., Trickl, T., Vogelmann, H., Navas-Guzmán, F., Haefele, A., Acheson, K., Ruth, A. A., Tatarov, B., Müller, D., Hu, Q., Podvin, T., Goloub, P., Veselovskii, I., Pietras, C., Haeffelin, M., Fréville, P., Sicard, M., Comerón, A., Fernández García, A. J., Molero Menéndez, F., Córdoba-Jabonero, C., Guerrero-Rascado, J. L., Alados-Arboledas, L., Bortoli, D., Costa, M. J., Dionisi, D., Liberti, G. L., Wang, X., Sannino, A., Papagiannopoulos, N., Boselli, A., Mona, L., D'Amico, G., Romano, S., Perrone, M. R., Belegante, L., Nicolae, D., Grigorov, I., Gialitaki, A., Amiridis, V., Soupiona, O., Papayannis, A., Mamouri, R.-E., Nisantzi, A., Heese, B., Hofer, J., Schechner, Y. Y., Wandinger, U., and Pappalardo, G.: The unprecedented 2017–2018 stratospheric smoke event: decay phase and aerosol properties observed with the EARLINET, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 15183–15198, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-15183-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-19-15183-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx14"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Baars et~al.(2020)}?><label>Baars et al.(2020)</label><?label Baars2020?><mixed-citation>Baars, H., Herzog, A., Heese, B., Ohneiser, K., Hanbuch, K., Hofer, J., Yin, Z., Engelmann, R., and Wandinger, U.: Validation of Aeolus wind products above the Atlantic Ocean, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 13, 6007–6024, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-6007-2020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-13-6007-2020</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx15"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Bailey and Hallett(2012)}?><label>Bailey and Hallett(2012)</label><?label Baileyhallett2012?><mixed-citation>Bailey, M., and Hallett, J.:
Ice Crystal Linear Growth Rates from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M307" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">20</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M308" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M309" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">70</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M310" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C: Confirmation from Wave Cloud Studies,
J. Atmos. Sci., 69, 390–402, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS-D-11-035.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JAS-D-11-035.1</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx16"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Barahona et~al.(2017)}?><label>Barahona et al.(2017)</label><?label Barahona2017?><mixed-citation>Barahona, D., Molod, A., and Kalesse, H.: Direct estimation of the global distribution of vertical velocity within cirrus clouds, Sci. Rep.-UK, 7, 6840, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-07038-6" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41598-017-07038-6</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx17"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Berkemeier et~al.(2014)}?><label>Berkemeier et al.(2014)</label><?label Berkemeier2014?><mixed-citation>Berkemeier, T., Shiraiwa, M., Pöschl, U., and Koop, T.: Competition between water uptake and ice nucleation by glassy organic aerosol particles, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 12513–12531, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-12513-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-14-12513-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx18"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Boers et~al.(2010)}?><label>Boers et al.(2010)</label><?label Boers2010?><mixed-citation>Boers, R., de Laat, A. T., Stein Zweers, D. C., and  Dirksen, R. J.:
Lifting potential of solar-heated aerosol layers,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 37, L24802, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GL045171" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2010GL045171</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx19"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Bohlmann et al.(2018)}?><label>Bohlmann et al.(2018)</label><?label Bohlmann2018?><mixed-citation>Bohlmann, S., Baars, H., Radenz, M., Engelmann, R., and Macke, A.: Ship-borne aerosol profiling with lidar over the Atlantic Ocean: from pure marine conditions to complex dust–smoke mixtures, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 9661–9679, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-9661-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-18-9661-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx20"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{B\"{u}hl et al.(2016)}?><label>Bühl et al.(2016)</label><?label Buehl2016?><mixed-citation>Bühl, J., Seifert, P., Myagkov, A., and Ansmann, A.: Measuring ice- and liquid-water properties in mixed-phase cloud layers at the Leipzig Cloudnet station, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 10609–10620, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-10609-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-16-10609-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx21"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{B\"{u}hl et al.(2019)}?><label>Bühl et al.(2019)</label><?label Buehl2019?><mixed-citation>Bühl, J., Seifert, P., Radenz, M., Baars, H., and Ansmann, A.: Ice crystal number concentration from lidar, cloud radar and radar wind profiler measurements, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 12, 6601–6617, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-12-6601-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-12-6601-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx22"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Burton et~al.(2015)}?><label>Burton et al.(2015)</label><?label Burton2015?><mixed-citation>Burton, S. P., Hair, J. W., Kahnert, M., Ferrare, R. A., Hostetler, C. A., Cook, A. L., Harper, D. B., Berkoff, T. A., Seaman, S. T., Collins, J. E., Fenn, M. A., and Rogers, R. R.: Observations of the spectral dependence of linear particle depolarization ratio of aerosols using NASA Langley airborne High Spectral Resolution Lidar, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 13453–13473, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-13453-2015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-15-13453-2015</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx23"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{CALIPSO(2020a)}?><label>CALIPSO(2020a)</label><?label CALIPSO2020a?><mixed-citation>CALIPSO: Cloud–Aerosol Lidar and Infrared Pathfinder Satellite Observation Lidar Level 2 data, height-time displays of attenuated backscatter, available at: <uri>https://www-calipso.larc.nasa.gov/products/lidar/browse_images/std_v4_index.php</uri>,
last access: 20 October 2020a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx24"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{CALIPSO(2020b)}?><label>CALIPSO(2020b)</label><?label CALIPSO2020b?><mixed-citation>CALIPSO: Cloud–Aerosol Lidar and Infrared Pathfinder Satellite Observation Lidar Level 2 data, particle backscatter profiles, available at: <uri>https://search.earthdata.nasa.gov/search?fp=CALIPSO&amp;fi=CALIOP</uri>,
last access: 20 October 2020b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx25"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Casenave et al.(2019)}?><label>Casenave et al.(2019)</label><?label Casenave2019?><mixed-citation>Cazenave, Q., Ceccaldi, M., Delanoë, J., Pelon, J., Groß, S., and Heymsfield, A.: Evolution of DARDAR-CLOUD ice cloud retrievals: new parameters and impacts on the retrieved microphysical properties, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 12, 2819–2835, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-12-2819-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-12-2819-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx26"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{China et~al.(2015)}?><label>China et al.(2015)</label><?label China2015?><mixed-citation>China, S., Scarnato, B., Owen, R. C., Zhang, B., Ampadu, M. T., Kumar, S., Dzepina, K., Dziobak, M. P.,
Fialho, P., Perlinger, J. A., Hueber, J., Helmig, D., Mazzoleni, L. R., and Mazzoleni, C.:
Morphology and mixing state of aged soot particles at a remote marine free troposphere site: Implications for optical properties,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 42, 1243–1250, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2014GL062404" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2014GL062404</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx27"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Creamean et al.(2019)}?><label>Creamean et al.(2019)</label><?label Creamean2019?><mixed-citation>Creamean, J. M., Cross, J. N., Pickart, R., McRaven, L., Lin, P., Pacini, A., Hanlon, R., Schmale, D. G., Ceniceros, J., Aydell, T., Colombi, N., Bolger, E., and DeMott, P. J.: Ice nucleating particles carried from below a phytoplankton bloom to the Arctic atmosphere, Geophys. Res. Lett., 46, 8572–8581, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL083039" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2019GL083039</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx28"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Dahlk\"{o}tter et al.(2014)}?><label>Dahlkötter et al.(2014)</label><?label Dahlkoetter2014?><mixed-citation>Dahlkötter, F., Gysel, M., Sauer, D., Minikin, A., Baumann, R., Seifert, P., Ansmann, A., Fromm, M., Voigt, C., and Weinzierl, B.: The Pagami Creek smoke plume after long-range transport to the upper troposphere over Europe – aerosol properties and black carbon mixing state, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 6111–6137, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-6111-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-14-6111-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx29"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Dai et al.(2018)}?><label>Dai et al.(2018)</label><?label Dai2018?><mixed-citation>Dai, G., Althausen, D., Hofer, J., Engelmann, R., Seifert, P., Bühl, J., Mamouri, R.-E., Wu, S., and Ansmann, A.: Calibration of Raman lidar water vapor profiles by means of AERONET photometer observations and GDAS meteorological data, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 11, 2735–2748, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-2735-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-11-2735-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx30"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{de Laat et al.(2012)}?><label>de Laat et al.(2012)</label><?label Delaat2012?><mixed-citation>de Laat, A. T. J., Stein Zweers, D. C., Boers, R., and Tuinder, O. N. E.:
A solar escalator: Observational evidence of the self-lifting of smoke and aerosols by absorption of solar radiation in the February 2009 Australian Black Saturday plume,
J. Geophys. Res., 117, D04204, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD017016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2011JD017016</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx31"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{DeLand et al.(2020)}?><label>DeLand et al.(2020)</label><?label Deland2020?><mixed-citation>DeLand, M. T., Bhartia, P. K., Kramarova, N., and Chen, Z.:
OMPS LP observations of PSC variability during the NH 2019-2020 season,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 47, e2020GL090216, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL090216" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2020GL090216</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx32"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{DeMott et al.(2010)}?><label>DeMott et al.(2010)</label><?label Demott2010?><mixed-citation>DeMott, P. J., Prenni, A. J., Liu, X., Kreidenweis, S. M., Petters, M. D., Twohy, C. H.,  Richardson, M. S., Eidhammer,  T., and Rogers, D. C.:
Predicting global atmospheric ice nuclei distributions and their impacts on climate,
P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 107, 11217–11222, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0910818107" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1073/pnas.0910818107</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx33"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{DeMott et~al.(2015)}?><label>DeMott et al.(2015)</label><?label Demott2015?><mixed-citation>DeMott, P. J., Prenni, A. J., McMeeking, G. R., Sullivan, R. C., Petters, M. D., Tobo, Y., Niemand, M., Möhler, O., Snider, J. R., Wang, Z., and Kreidenweis, S. M.: Integrating laboratory and field data to q<?pagebreak page13419?>uantify the immersion freezing ice nucleation activity of mineral dust particles, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 393–409, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-393-2015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-15-393-2015</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx34"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Devasthale et al.(2011a)}?><label>Devasthale et al.(2011a)</label><?label Devasthale2011a?><mixed-citation>Devasthale, A., Tjernström, M., Karlsson, K.-G., Thomas, M. A., Jones, C., Sedlar, J., and Omar, A. H.: The vertical distribution of thin features over the Arctic analysed from CALIPSO observations, Tellus B, 63, 77–85, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0889.2010.00516.x" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/j.1600-0889.2010.00516.x</ext-link>, 2011a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx35"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Devasthale et al.(2011b)}?><label>Devasthale et al.(2011b)</label><?label Devasthale2011b?><mixed-citation>Devasthale, A., Tjernström, M., and Omar, A. H.: The vertical distribution of thin features over the Arctic analysed from CALIPSO observations – Part II: Aerosols, Tellus B, 63, 86–95, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0889.2010.00517.x" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/j.1600-0889.2010.00517.x</ext-link>, 2011b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx36"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{de Villiers et al.(2010)}?><label>de Villiers et al.(2010)</label><?label Devilliers2010?><mixed-citation>de Villiers, R. A., Ancellet, G., Pelon, J., Quennehen, B., Schwarzenboeck, A., Gayet, J. F., and Law, K. S.: Airborne measurements of aerosol optical properties related to early spring transport of mid-latitude sources into the Arctic, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 5011–5030, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-5011-2010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-10-5011-2010</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx37"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Di Biagio et al.(2018)}?><label>Di Biagio et al.(2018)</label><?label Dibiagio2018?><mixed-citation>Di Biagio, C., Pelon, J., Ancellet, G., Bazureau, A., and Mariage, V.: Sources, load, vertical distribution, and fate of wintertime aerosols north of Svalbard from combined V4 CALIOP data, ground‐based IAOOS lidar observations and trajectory analysis, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 123, 1363–1383, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JD027530" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2017JD027530</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx38"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Di Pierro et al.(2013)}?><label>Di Pierro et al.(2013)</label><?label Dipierro2013?><mixed-citation>Di Pierro, M., Jaeglé, L., Eloranta, E. W., and Sharma, S.: Spatial and seasonal distribution of Arctic aerosols observed by the CALIOP satellite instrument (2006–2012), Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 7075–7095, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-7075-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-13-7075-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx39"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{D\"{u}sing et al.(2018)}?><label>Düsing et al.(2018)</label><?label Duesing2018?><mixed-citation>Düsing, S., Wehner, B., Seifert, P., Ansmann, A., Baars, H., Ditas, F., Henning, S., Ma, N., Poulain, L., Siebert, H., Wiedensohler, A., and Macke, A.: Helicopter-borne observations of the continental background aerosol in combination with remote sensing and ground-based measurements, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 1263–1290, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-1263-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-18-1263-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx40"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Eirund et al.(2019)}?><label>Eirund et al.(2019)</label><?label Eirund2019?><mixed-citation>Eirund, G. K., Possner, A., and Lohmann, U.: Response of Arctic mixed-phase clouds to aerosol perturbations under different surface forcings, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 9847–9864, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-9847-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-19-9847-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx41"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Eloranta(2005)}?><label>Eloranta(2005)</label><?label Eloranta2005?><mixed-citation>
Eloranta, E.:
High Spectral Resolution Lidar, in: LIDAR – Range–resolved optical remote sensing of the atmosphere, edited by: Weitkamp,
C., Springer, New York, ISBN 0-387-40075-3, 143–163, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx42"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Engelmann et al.(2016)}?><label>Engelmann et al.(2016)</label><?label Engelmann2016?><mixed-citation>Engelmann, R., Kanitz, T., Baars, H., Heese, B., Althausen, D., Skupin, A., Wandinger, U., Komppula, M., Stachlewska, I. S., Amiridis, V., Marinou, E., Mattis, I., Linné, H., and Ansmann, A.: The automated multiwavelength Raman polarization and water-vapor lidar PollyXT: the neXT generation, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 9, 1767–1784, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-9-1767-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-9-1767-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx43"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Fetterer et al.(2020)}?><label>Fetterer et al.(2020)</label><?label Fetterer2020?><mixed-citation>Fetterer, F., Knowles, K.,  Meier, W. N.,  Savoie, M.,  and Windnagel, A. K.: Sea Ice Index, Version 3, 2017, Monthly Sea Ice Extent, Boulder, Colorado USA, NSIDC: National Snow and Ice Data Center, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.7265/N5K072F8" ext-link-type="DOI">10.7265/N5K072F8</ext-link>, last access: 15 July 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx44"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Fiebig et al.(2003)}?><label>Fiebig et al.(2003)</label><?label Fiebig2003?><mixed-citation>Fiebig, M., Stohl, A., Wendisch, M., Eckhardt, S., and Petzold, A.: Dependence of solar radiative forcing of forest fire aerosol on ageing and state of mixture, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 3, 881–891, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-3-881-2003" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-3-881-2003</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx45"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Field et~al.(2006)}?><label>Field et al.(2006)</label><?label Field2006?><mixed-citation>Field, P. R., Heymsfield, A. J., and Bansemer, A.: A Test of Ice Self-Collection Kernels Using Aircraft Data,
J. Atmos. Sci., 63, 651–666, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS3653.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JAS3653.1</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx46"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Fromm et al.(2008)}?><label>Fromm et al.(2008)</label><?label Fromm2008?><mixed-citation>Fromm, M., Shettle, E. P., Fricke, K. H., Ritter, C., Trickl, T.,  Giehl, H.,  Gerding, M.,  Barnes, J. E., O'Neill, M., Massie, S. T., Blum, U.,  McDermid, I. S.,  Leblanc, T., and Deshler, T.:
Stratospheric impact of the Chisholm pyrocumulonimbus eruption: 2. Vertical profile perspective,
J. Geophys. Res., 113, D08203, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD009147" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2007JD009147</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx47"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Fromm et al.(2010)}?><label>Fromm et al.(2010)</label><?label Fromm2010?><mixed-citation>Fromm, M., Lindsey, D. T., Servranckx, R., Yue, G., Trickl, T., Sica, R., Doucet, P., and Godin-Beekmann, S. E.:
The untold story of pyrocumulonimbus,
B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 91, 1193–1209, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/2010bams3004.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/2010bams3004.1</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx48"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Georgoulias et al.(2020)}?><label>Georgoulias et al.(2020)</label><?label Georgoulias2020?><mixed-citation>Georgoulias, A. K., Marinou, E., Tsekeri, A., Proestakis, E., Akritidis, D., Alexandri, G., Zanis, P., Balis, D., Marenco, F., Tesche, M., and Amiridis, V.: A first case study of CCN concentrations from spaceborne lidar observations, Remote Sens., 12, 1557, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12101557" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3390/rs12101557</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx49"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{GMAO(2021)}?><label>GMAO(2021)</label><?label GMAO2021?><mixed-citation>GMAO: Tropopause definition (page 52), Global Modeling and Assimilation Office, Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland, available at: <uri>https://gmao.gsfc.nasa.gov/GMAO_products/documents/GEOS-5.2.0_File_Specification.pdf</uri>, last access: 19 February 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx50"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Grenier et al.(2009)}?><label>Grenier et al.(2009)</label><?label Grenier2009?><mixed-citation>Grenier, P., Blanchet, J. P., and  Munoz-Alpizar, R.: Study  of polar thin ice clouds and aerosols seen by CloudSat and CALIPSO during  mid-winter 2007, J. Geophys. Res., 114, D09201, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JD010927" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2008JD010927</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx51"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Griesche et al.(2020)}?><label>Griesche et al.(2020)</label><?label Griesche2020a?><mixed-citation>Griesche, H. J., Seifert, P., Ansmann, A., Baars, H., Barrientos Velasco, C., Bühl, J., Engelmann, R., Radenz, M., Zhenping, Y., and Macke, A.: Application of the shipborne remote sensing supersite OCEANET for profiling of Arctic aerosols and clouds during Polarstern cruise PS106, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 13, 5335–5358, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-5335-2020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-13-5335-2020</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx52"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Griesche et al.(2021)}?><label>Griesche et al.(2021)</label><?label Griesche2020b?><mixed-citation>Griesche, H. J., Ohneiser, K., Seifert, P., Radenz, M., Engelmann, R., and Ansmann, A.: Contrasting ice formation in Arctic clouds: surface-coupled vs. surface-decoupled clouds, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 10357–10374, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-10357-2021" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-21-10357-2021</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx53"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Gro{\ss} et al.(2016)}?><label>Groß et al.(2016)</label><?label Gross2016?><mixed-citation>Groß, S., Gasteiger, J., Freudenthaler, V., Müller, T., Sauer, D., Toledano, C., and Ansmann, A.: Saharan dust contribution to the Caribbean summertime boundary layer – a lidar study during SALTRACE, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 11535–11546, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-11535-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-16-11535-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx54"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Haarig et~al.(2018)}?><label>Haarig et al.(2018)</label><?label Haarig2018?><mixed-citation>Haarig, M., Ansmann, A., Baars, H., Jimenez, C., Veselovskii, I., Engelmann, R., and Althausen, D.: Depolarization and lidar ratios at 355, 532, and 1064 nm and microphysical properties of aged tropospheric and stratospheric Canadian wildfire smoke, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 11847–11861, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-11847-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-18-11847-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx55"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Haarig et~al.(2019)}?><label>Haarig et al.(2019)</label><?label Haarig2019?><mixed-citation>Haarig, M., Walser, A., Ansmann, A., Dollner, M., Althausen, D., Sauer, D., Farrell, D., and Weinzierl, B.: Profiles of cloud condensation nuclei, dust mass concentration, and ice-nucleating-particle-relevant aerosol properties in the Saharan Air Layer over Barbados from polarization lidar and airborne in situ measurements, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 13773–13788, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-13773-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-19-13773-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx56"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Hartmann et al.(2020)}?><label>Hartmann et al.(2020)</label><?label Hartmann2020?><mixed-citation>Hartmann, M., Adachi, K., Eppers, O., Haas, C., Herber, A., Holzinger, R., Hünerbein, A., Jäkel, E., Jentzsch, C., van Pinxte<?pagebreak page13420?>ren, M., Wex, H., Willmes, S., and Stratmann, F.: Wintertime airborne measurements of ice nucleating particles in the High Arctic: a hint to a marine, biogenic source for icenucleating particles, Geophys. Res. Lett., 47,  e2020GL087770, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL087770" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2020GL087770</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx57"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Hofer et al.(2017)}?><label>Hofer et al.(2017)</label><?label Hofer2017?><mixed-citation>Hofer, J., Althausen, D., Abdullaev, S. F., Makhmudov, A. N., Nazarov, B. I., Schettler, G., Engelmann, R., Baars, H., Fomba, K. W., Müller, K., Heinold, B., Kandler, K., and Ansmann, A.: Long-term profiling of mineral dust and pollution aerosol with multiwavelength polarization Raman lidar at the Central Asian site of Dushanbe, Tajikistan: case studies, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 14559–14577, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-14559-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-17-14559-2017</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx58"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Hofer et al.(2020)}?><label>Hofer et al.(2020)</label><?label Hofer2020?><mixed-citation>Hofer, J., Ansmann, A., Althausen, D., Engelmann, R., Baars, H., Abdullaev, S. F., and Makhmudov, A. N.: Long-term profiling of aerosol light extinction, particle mass, cloud condensation nuclei, and ice-nucleating particle concentration over Dushanbe, Tajikistan, in Central Asia, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 4695–4711, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-4695-2020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-20-4695-2020</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx59"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{HYSPLIT(2020)}?><label>HYSPLIT(2020)</label><?label HYSPLIT2020?><mixed-citation>HYSPLIT: HYbrid Single-Particle Lagrangian Integrated Trajectory model, backward trajectory calculation tool,
available at: <uri>http://ready.arl.noaa.gov/HYSPLIT_traj.php</uri>, last
access: 20 October 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx60"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Innes et~al.(2020)}?><label>Innes et al.(2020)</label><?label Innes2020?><mixed-citation>Inness, A., Chabrillat, S., Flemming, J., Huijnen, V., Langenrock, B., Nicolas, J.,
Polichtchouk, I., and Razingeret, M.:
Exceptionally low Arctic stratospheric ozone in spring 2020 as seen in the CAMS reanalysis,
J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 125, e2020JD033563, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JD033563" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2020JD033563</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx61"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Jimenez et~al.(2020a)}?><label>Jimenez et al.(2020a)</label><?label Jimenez2020a?><mixed-citation>Jimenez, C., Ansmann, A., Engelmann, R., Donovan, D., Malinka, A., Schmidt, J., Seifert, P., and Wandinger, U.: The dual-field-of-view polarization lidar technique: a new concept in monitoring aerosol effects in liquid-water clouds – theoretical framework, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 15247–15263, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-15247-2020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-20-15247-2020</ext-link>, 2020a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx62"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Jimenez et~al.(2020b)}?><label>Jimenez et al.(2020b)</label><?label Jimenez2020b?><mixed-citation>Jimenez, C., Ansmann, A., Engelmann, R., Donovan, D., Malinka, A., Seifert, P., Wiesen, R., Radenz, M., Yin, Z., Bühl, J., Schmidt, J., Barja, B., and Wandinger, U.: The dual-field-of-view polarization lidar technique: a new concept in monitoring aerosol effects in liquid-water clouds – case studies, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 15265–15284, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-15265-2020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-20-15265-2020</ext-link>, 2020b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx63"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Johnson et al.(2021)}?><label>Johnson et al.(2021)</label><?label Johnson2021?><mixed-citation>Johnson, M. S., Strawbridge, K., Knowland, K. E., Keller, C., and Travis, M.:
Long-range transport of Siberian biomass burning emissions to North America during FIREX-AQ,
Atmos. Environ., 252, 118241, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2021.118241" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2021.118241</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx64"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Jouan et al.(2012)}?><label>Jouan et al.(2012)</label><?label Jouan2012?><mixed-citation>Jouan, C., Girard, E., Pelon, J., Gultepe, I.,  Delanoë, J., and Blanchet, J. P.:
Characterization of Arctic ice cloud properties  observed during ISDAC,
J. Geophys. Res., 117,  D23207, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JD017889" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2012JD017889</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx65"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Jouan et al.(2014)}?><label>Jouan et al.(2014)</label><?label Jouan2014?><mixed-citation>Jouan, C., Pelon, J., Girard, E., Ancellet, G., Blanchet, J. P., and Delanoë, J.: On the relationship between Arctic ice clouds and polluted air masses over the North Slope of Alaska in April 2008, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 1205–1224, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-1205-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-14-1205-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx66"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Kalesse and Kollias(2013)}?><label>Kalesse and Kollias(2013)</label><?label Kalessekollias2013?><mixed-citation>Kalesse, H. and Kollias, P.: Climatology of high cloud dynamics using profiling ARM Doppler radar observations, J. Climate, 26, 6340–6359, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00695.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00695.1</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx67"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Kanitz et~al.(2011)}?><label>Kanitz et al.(2011)</label><?label Kanitz2011?><mixed-citation>Kanitz, T., Seifert, P., Ansmann, A., Engelmann, R.,  Althausen, D.,  Casiccia, C.,  and  Rohwer, E. G.:
Contrasting the impact of aerosols at northern and southern midlatitudes on heterogeneous ice formation,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 38, L17802, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011GL048532" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2011GL048532</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx68"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Kanitz et~al.(2013)}?><label>Kanitz et al.(2013)</label><?label Kanitz2013?><mixed-citation>Kanitz, T., Ansmann, A., Engelmann, R., and Althausen, D.:
North-south cross sections of the vertical aerosol distribution over the Atlantic Ocean from multiwavelength Raman/polarization lidar during <italic>Polarstern</italic> cruises,
J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 118, 2643–2655, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50273" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/jgrd.50273</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx69"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Kanji et~al.(2017)}?><label>Kanji et al.(2017)</label><?label Kanji2017?><mixed-citation>Kanji, Z. A., Ladino, L. A., Wex, H., Boose, Y., Burkert-Kohn, M., Cziczo, D. J., and Krämer, M.:
Chapter 1: Overview of ice nucleating particles,
Meteor Monogr., Am. Meteorol. Soc., 58, 1.1–1.33, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/amsmonographs-d-16-0006.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/amsmonographs-d-16-0006.1</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx70"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Kanji et~al.(2020)}?><label>Kanji et al.(2020)</label><?label Kanji2020?><mixed-citation>Kanji, Z. A., Welti, A., Corbin, J. C., and Mensah, A. A.:
Black carbon particles do not matter for immersion mode ice nucleation,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 46, e2019GL086764, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL086764" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2019GL086764</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx71"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Khaykin et~al.(2018)}?><label>Khaykin et al.(2018)</label><?label Khaykin2018?><mixed-citation>Khaykin, S. M., Godin-Beekmann, S., Hauchecorne, A., Pelon, J., Ravetta, F., and Keckut, P.:
Stratospheric smoke with unprecedentedly high backscatter observed by lidars above southern France,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 45, 1639–1646, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL076763" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2017GL076763</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx72"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Kim et al.(2018)}?><label>Kim et al.(2018)</label><?label Kim2018?><mixed-citation>Kim, M.-H., Omar, A. H., Tackett, J. L., Vaughan, M. A., Winker, D. M., Trepte, C. R., Hu, Y., Liu, Z., Poole, L. R., Pitts, M. C., Kar, J., and Magill, B. E.: The CALIPSO version 4 automated aerosol classification and lidar ratio selection algorithm, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 11, 6107–6135, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-6107-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-11-6107-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx73"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Klehr(2012)}?><label>Klehr(2012)</label><?label Klehr2012?><mixed-citation>Klehr, D.: Charakterisierung der Tropopause über Ny-Alesund, Spitzbergen, Bachelor thesis, University Potsdam, available at: <uri>http://hdl.handle.net/10013/epic.43630</uri> (last access: 20 April 2021), 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx74"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Kloss et~al.(2021)}?><label>Kloss et al.(2021)</label><?label Kloss2021?><mixed-citation>Kloss, C., Berthet, G., Sellitto, P., Ploeger, F., Taha, G., Tidiga, M., Eremenko, M., Bossolasco, A., Jégou, F., Renard, J.-B., and Legras, B.: Stratospheric aerosol layer perturbation caused by the 2019 Raikoke and Ulawun eruptions and their radiative forcing, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 535–560, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-535-2021" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-21-535-2021</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx75"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Knopf and Alpert(2013)}?><label>Knopf and Alpert(2013)</label><?label Knopfalpert2013?><mixed-citation>Knopf,  D.  A.  and  Alpert,  P.  A.:  A  water  activity  based  modelof  heterogeneous  ice  nucleation  kinetics  for  freezing  of  waterand  aqueous  solution  droplets,  Farad.  Discuss.,  165,  513–534, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1039/c3fd00035d" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1039/c3fd00035d</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx76"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Knopf and Rigg(2011)}?><label>Knopf and Rigg(2011)</label><?label Knopfrigg2011?><mixed-citation>Knopf, D. A. and Rigg, Y. J.:
Homogeneous ice nucleation from aqueous inorganic/organic particles representative of biomass burning: Water activity, freezing temperatures, nucleation rates,
J. Phys. Chem. A,  115, 762–773, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1021/jp109171g" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1021/jp109171g</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx77"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Knopf et~al.(2018)}?><label>Knopf et al.(2018)</label><?label Knopf2018?><mixed-citation>Knopf, D. A., Alpert, P. A., and Wang, B.:, The role of organic aerosol in atmospheric ice nucleation: a review,
ACS Earth and Space Chemistry, 2, 168–202, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1021/acsearthspacechem.7b00120" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1021/acsearthspacechem.7b00120</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx78"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Knust(2017)}?><label>Knust(2017)</label><?label Knust2017?><mixed-citation>Knust, R.: Polar Research and Supply Vessel <italic>Polarstern</italic> operated by the Alfred-Wegener-Institute, Journal of large-scale research
facilities, 3, A119, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.17815/jlsrf-3-163" ext-link-type="DOI">10.17815/jlsrf-3-163</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx79"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Koop et~al.(2000)}?><label>Koop et al.(2000)</label><?label Koop2000?><mixed-citation>Koop, T., Luo, B. P., Tsias, A., and Peter, T.: Water activity as the determinant  for  homogeneous
ice  nucleation  in  aqueous  solutions,
Nature, 406, 611–614, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/35020537" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/35020537</ext-link>, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page13421?><ref id="bib1.bibx80"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Korolev and Leisner(2020)}?><label>Korolev and Leisner(2020)</label><?label Korolevleisner2020?><mixed-citation>Korolev, A. and Leisner, T.: Review of experimental studies of secondary ice production, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 11767–11797, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-11767-2020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-20-11767-2020</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx81"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Law et al.(2014)}?><label>Law et al.(2014)</label><?label Law2014?><mixed-citation>Law, K. S., Stohl, A., Quinn, P. K., Brock, C. A., Burkhart, J. F., Paris, J.-D., Ancellet, G., Singh, H. B.,
Roiger, A., Schlager, H., Dibb, J., Jacob, D. J., Arnold, S. R., Pelon, J., and Thomas, J. L.:
Arctic Air Pollution: New Insights from POLARCAT-IPY,
B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 95, 1873–1895, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-13-00017.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/BAMS-D-13-00017.1</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx82"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Lawrence et al.(2020)}?><label>Lawrence et al.(2020)</label><?label Lawrence2020?><mixed-citation>Lawrence, Z. D., Perlwitz, J., Butler, A. H., Manney, G. L., Newman, P. A., Lee, S. H., and Nash, E. R.:
The Remarkably Strong Arctic Stratospheric Polar Vortex of Winter 2020: Links to Record‐Breaking Arctic Oscillation and Ozone Loss. J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 125, e2020JD033271, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JD033271" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2020JD033271</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx83"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Levin et al.(2016)}?><label>Levin et al.(2016)</label><?label Levin2016?><mixed-citation>Levin, E. J. T., McMeeking, G. R., DeMott, P. J., McCluskey, C. S., Carrico, C. M., Nakao, S., Jayarathne, T., Stone, E. A., Stockwell, C. E., Yokelson, R. J., and Kreidenweis, S. M.:
Ice-nucleating particle emissions from biomass combustion and the potential importance of soot aerosol,
J. Geophys. Res., 121, 5888–5903, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD024879" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2016JD024879</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx84"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Loewe et al.(2017)}?><label>Loewe et al.(2017)</label><?label Loewe2017?><mixed-citation>Loewe, K., Ekman, A. M. L., Paukert, M., Sedlar, J., Tjernström, M., and Hoose, C.: Modelling micro- and macrophysical contributors to the dissipation of an Arctic mixed-phase cloud during the Arctic Summer Cloud Ocean Study (ASCOS), Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 6693–6704, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-6693-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-17-6693-2017</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx85"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Mamali et al.(2018)}?><label>Mamali et al.(2018)</label><?label Mamali2018?><mixed-citation>Mamali, D., Marinou, E., Sciare, J., Pikridas, M., Kokkalis, P., Kottas, M., Binietoglou, I., Tsekeri, A., Keleshis, C., Engelmann, R., Baars, H., Ansmann, A., Amiridis, V., Russchenberg, H., and Biskos, G.: Vertical profiles of aerosol mass concentration derived by unmanned airborne in situ and remote sensing instruments during dust events, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 11, 2897–2910, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-2897-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-11-2897-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx86"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Mamouri and Ansmann(2016)}?><label>Mamouri and Ansmann(2016)</label><?label Mamouriansmann2016?><mixed-citation>Mamouri, R.-E. and Ansmann, A.: Potential of polarization lidar to provide profiles of CCN- and INP-relevant aerosol parameters, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 5905–5931, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-5905-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-16-5905-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx87"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Mamouri and Ansmann(2017)}?><label>Mamouri and Ansmann(2017)</label><?label Mamouriansmann2017?><mixed-citation>Mamouri, R.-E. and Ansmann, A.: Potential of polarization/Raman lidar to separate fine dust, coarse dust, maritime, and anthropogenic aerosol profiles, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 10, 3403–3427, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-10-3403-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-10-3403-2017</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx88"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Manney et al.(2020)}?><label>Manney et al.(2020)</label><?label Manney2020?><mixed-citation>Manney, G. L., Livesey, N. J., Santee, M. L., Froidevaux, L., Lambert, A., Lawrence, Z. D., Millán, L. F., Neu, J. L., Read, W. G., Schwartz, M. J., and Fuller, R. A.: Record‐low Arctic stratospheric ozone in 2020: MLS observations of chemical processes and comparisons with previous extreme winters. Geophys. Res. Lett., 47, e2020GL089063, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL089063" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2020GL089063</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx89"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Marinou et al.(2019)}?><label>Marinou et al.(2019)</label><?label Marinou2019?><mixed-citation>Marinou, E., Tesche, M., Nenes, A., Ansmann, A., Schrod, J., Mamali, D., Tsekeri, A., Pikridas, M., Baars, H., Engelmann, R., Voudouri, K.-A., Solomos, S., Sciare, J., Groß, S., Ewald, F., and Amiridis, V.: Retrieval of ice-nucleating particle concentrations from lidar observations and comparison with UAV in situ measurements, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 11315–11342, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-11315-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-19-11315-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx90"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Mason et al.(2016)}?><label>Mason et al.(2016)</label><?label Mason2016?><mixed-citation>Mason, R. H., Si, M., Chou, C., Irish, V. E., Dickie, R., Elizondo, P., Wong, R., Brintnell, M., Elsasser, M., Lassar, W. M., Pierce, K. M., Leaitch, W. R., MacDonald, A. M., Platt, A., Toom-Sauntry, D., Sarda-Estève, R., Schiller, C. L., Suski, K. J., Hill, T. C. J., Abbatt, J. P. D., Huffman, J. A., DeMott, P. J., and Bertram, A. K.: Size-resolved measurements of ice-nucleating particles at six locations in North America and one in Europe, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 1637–1651, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-1637-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-16-1637-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx91"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Maturilli et al.(2021)}?><label>Maturilli et al.(2021)</label><?label Maturilli2021?><mixed-citation>Maturilli, M., Holdridge, D. J., Dahlke, S., Graeser, J., Sommerfeld, A., Jaiser, R., Deckelmann, H., and Schulz, A.,: Initial radiosonde data from 2019-10 to 2020-09 during project MOSAiC, Alfred Wegener Institute, Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research, Bremerhaven, PANGAEA [data set], <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1594/PANGAEA.928656" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1594/PANGAEA.928656</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx92"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Mauritsen et al.(2011)}?><label>Mauritsen et al.(2011)</label><?label Mauritsen2011?><mixed-citation>Mauritsen, T., Sedlar, J., Tjernström, M., Leck, C., Martin, M., Shupe, M., Sjogren, S., Sierau, B., Persson, P. O. G., Brooks, I. M., and Swietlicki, E.: An Arctic CCN-limited cloud-aerosol regime, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 165–173, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-165-2011" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-11-165-2011</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx93"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{McCluskey et al.(2014)}?><label>McCluskey et al.(2014)</label><?label McCluskey2014?><mixed-citation>McCluskey, C. S., DeMott, P. J., Prenni, A. J., Levin, E. J. T., McMeeking, G. R., Sullivan, A. P., Hill, T. C. J., Nakao, S., Carrico, C. M., and Kreidenweis, S. M.:
Characteristics of atmospheric ice nucleating particles associated with biomass burning in the US: Prescribed burns and wildfire,
J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 119, 10458–10470, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JD021980" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2014JD021980</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx94"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{McCluskey et al.(2018)}?><label>McCluskey et al.(2018)</label><?label McCluskey2018?><mixed-citation>McCluskey, C. S., Ovadnevaite, J., Rinaldi, M., Atkinson, J., Belosi, F., Ceburnis, D., Marullo, S., Hill, T. C. J., Lohmann, U., Kanji, Z. A., O'Dowd, C., Kreidenweis, S. M., and  DeMott, P. J.:
Marine  and  terrestrial  organic  ice-nucleating  particles in  pristine  marine  to  continentally  influenced  Northeast  Atlantic  air  masses,
J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos.,  123,  6196–6212, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2017JD028033" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2017JD028033</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx95"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Mitchell et al.(2018)}?><label>Mitchell et al.(2018)</label><?label Mitchell2018?><mixed-citation>Mitchell, D. L., Garnier, A., Pelon, J., and Erfani, E.: CALIPSO (IIR–CALIOP) retrievals of cirrus cloud ice-particle concentrations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 17325–17354, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-17325-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-18-17325-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx96"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Morrison et~al.(2012)}?><label>Morrison et al.(2012)</label><?label Morrison2012?><mixed-citation>
Morrison,  H.,  De  Boer,  G.,  Feingold,  G.,  Harrington,  J.,  Shupe,M. D., and Sulia, K.:
Resilience of persistent Arctic mixed-phase clouds, Nat. Geosci., 5, 11–17, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx97"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{MOSAiC(2020)}?><label>MOSAiC(2020)</label><?label MOSAiC2020?><mixed-citation>MOSAiC: MOSAiC homepage, available at: <uri>https://mosaic-expedition.org/</uri>, last access: 20 October 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx98"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{M\"{u}ller et al.(1999)}?><label>Müller et al.(1999)</label><?label Mueller1999?><mixed-citation>
Müller, D., Wandinger, U., and Ansmann, A.:
Microphysical particle parameters from extinction and backscatter lidar data by inversion with regularization: Theory,
Appl. Optics, 38, 2346–2357, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx99"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{M\"{u}ller et al.(2004)}?><label>Müller et al.(2004)</label><?label Mueller2004?><mixed-citation>Müller, D., Mattis, I., Ansmann, A., Wehner, B., Althausen, D., Wandinger, U., and Dubovik, O.: Closure study on optical and microphysical properties of a mixed urban and Arctic haze air mass observed with Raman lidar and Sun photometer, J. Geophys. Res., 109, D13206, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD004200" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2003JD004200</ext-link>, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx100"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{M\"{u}ller et al.(2014)}?><label>Müller et al.(2014)</label><?label Mueller2014?><mixed-citation>Müller, D., Hostetler, C. A., Ferrare, R. A., Burton, S. P., Chemyakin, E., Kolgotin, A., Hair, J. W., Cook, A. L., Harper, D. B., Rogers, R. R., Hare, R. W., Cleckner, C. S., Obland, M. D., Tomlinson, J., Berg, L. K., and Schmid, B.: Airborne Multiwavelength High Spectral Resolution Lidar (HSRL-2) observations during TCAP 2012: vertical profiles of optical and microphysical properties of a smoke/urban haze plume over the northeastern coast of the US, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 7, 3487–3496, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-7-3487-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-7-3487-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page13422?><ref id="bib1.bibx101"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Murray et al.(2010)}?><label>Murray et al.(2010)</label><?label Murray2010?><mixed-citation>Murray, B. J., Wilson, T. W., Dobbie, S., Cui, Z., Al-Jumur, S. M. R. K.,  Möhler, O., Schnaiter, M., Wagner, R.,
Benz, S., Niemand, M., Saathoff, H., Ebert, V., Wagner, S.,  and Kärcher, B.:
Heterogeneous nucleation of ice particles on glassy aerosols under cirrus conditions,
Nat. Geosci., 3, 233–237, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo817" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/ngeo817</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx102"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Noel and Chepfer(2010)}?><label>Noel and Chepfer(2010)</label><?label Noelchepfer2010?><mixed-citation>Noel, V. and Chepfer, H.: A global view of horizontally oriented crystals  in  ice  clouds  from  Cloud-Aerosol  Lidar  and  Infrared Pathfinder Satellite Observation (CALIPSO), J. Geophys. Res., 115, D00H23, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JD012365" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2009JD012365</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx103"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Noel and Sassen(2005)}?><label>Noel and Sassen(2005)</label><?label Noelsassen2005?><mixed-citation>
Noel, V. and Sassen, K.: Study of planar ice crystal orientations in ice clouds from scanning polarization lidar observations,
J. Appl.Meteorol., 44, 653–664, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx104"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Nott and Duck(2011)}?><label>Nott and Duck(2011)</label><?label Nottduck2011?><mixed-citation>Nott, G. J. and Duck, T. J.: Lidar studies of the polar troposphere. Met. Apps, 18, 383–405, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/met.289" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/met.289</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx105"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Ohneiser et~al.(2020)}?><label>Ohneiser et al.(2020)</label><?label Ohneiser2020?><mixed-citation>Ohneiser, K., Ansmann, A., Baars, H., Seifert, P., Barja, B., Jimenez, C., Radenz, M., Teisseire, A., Floutsi, A., Haarig, M., Foth, A., Chudnovsky, A., Engelmann, R., Zamorano, F., Bühl, J., and Wandinger, U.: Smoke of extreme Australian bushfires observed in the stratosphere over Punta Arenas, Chile, in January 2020: optical thickness, lidar ratios, and depolarization ratios at 355 and 532 nm, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 8003–8015, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-8003-2020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-20-8003-2020</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx106"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Ohneiser et~al.(2021)}?><label>Ohneiser et al.(2021)</label><?label Ohneiser2021?><mixed-citation>Ohneiser, K., Ansmann, A., Engelmann, R., Ritter, C., Chudnovsky, A., Veselovskii, I., Baars, H., Gebauer, H., Griesche, H., Radenz, M., Hofer, J., Althausen, D., Dahlke, S., and Maturilli, M.: Siberian fire smoke in the High-Arctic winter stratosphere observed during MOSAiC 2019–2020, Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss. [preprint], <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2021-117" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-2021-117</ext-link>, in review, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx107"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Pappalardo et~al.(2014)}?><label>Pappalardo et al.(2014)</label><?label Pappalardo2014?><mixed-citation>Pappalardo, G., Amodeo, A., Apituley, A., Comeron, A., Freudenthaler, V., Linné, H., Ansmann, A., Bösenberg, J., D'Amico, G., Mattis, I., Mona, L., Wandinger, U., Amiridis, V., Alados-Arboledas, L., Nicolae, D., and Wiegner, M.: EARLINET: towards an advanced sustainable European aerosol lidar network, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 7, 2389–2409, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-7-2389-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-7-2389-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx108"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Paukert and Hoose(2014)}?><label>Paukert and Hoose(2014)</label><?label Paukerthoose2014?><mixed-citation>
Paukert,  M.  and  Hoose,  C.:
Modeling  immersion  freezing  with aerosol-dependent prognostic ice nuclei in Arctic mixed-phaseclouds,
J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 119, 9073–9092, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx109"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Petters et al.(2009)}?><label>Petters et al.(2009)</label><?label Petters2009?><mixed-citation>Petters, M. D., Parsons, M. T., Prenni, A. J., DeMott, P. J., Kreidenweis, S. M., Carrico, C. M., Sullivan, A. P., McMeeking, G. R., Levin, E., Wold, C. E., Collett Jr., J. L., and Moosmüller, H.:
Ice nuclei emissions from biomass burning,
J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 114, D07209, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JD011532" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2008JD011532</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx110"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Petzold et al.(2007)}?><label>Petzold et al.(2007)</label><?label Petzold2007?><mixed-citation>Petzold, A., Weinzierl, B., Huntrieser, H., Stohl, A., Real, E., Cozic, J., Fiebig, M., Hendricks, J., Lauer, A., Law, K., Roiger, A., Schlager, H., and Weingartner, E.: Perturbation of the European free troposphere aerosol by North American forest fire plumes during the ICARTT-ITOP experiment in summer 2004, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 5105–5127, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-5105-2007" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-7-5105-2007</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx111"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{PollyNET(2020)}?><label>PollyNET(2020)</label><?label PollyNET2020?><mixed-citation>PollyNet: PollyNET lidar data base, available at: <uri>http://polly.tropos.de/</uri>, last access: 20 October 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx112"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Prenni et al.(2012)}?><label>Prenni et al.(2012)</label><?label Prenni2012?><mixed-citation>Prenni, A. J., DeMott, P. J., Sullivan, A. P., Sullivan, R. C., Kreidenweis, S. M., and Rogers, D. C.: Biomass burning as a potential source for atmospheric ice nuclei: Western wildfires and prescribed burns,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 39, L11805, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL051915" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2012GL051915</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx113"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Quennehen et al.(2012)}?><label>Quennehen et al.(2012)</label><?label Quennehen2012?><mixed-citation>Quennehen, B., Schwarzenboeck, A., Matsuki, A., Burkhart, J. F., Stohl, A., Ancellet, G., and Law, K. S.: Anthropogenic and forest fire pollution aerosol transported to the Arctic: observations from the POLARCAT-France spring campaign, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 6437–6454, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-6437-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-12-6437-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx114"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Radenz et~al.(2021)}?><label>Radenz et al.(2021)</label><?label Radenz2021?><mixed-citation>Radenz, M., Bühl, J., Seifert, P., Baars, H., Engelmann, R., Barja González, B., Mamouri, R.-E., Zamorano, F., and Ansmann, A.: Hemispheric contrasts in ice formation in stratiform mixed-phase clouds: Disentangling the role of aerosol and dynamics with ground-based remote sensing, Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss. [preprint], <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2021-360" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-2021-360</ext-link>, in review, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx115"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Reid and Hobbs(1998)}?><label>Reid and Hobbs(1998)</label><?label Reidhobbs1998?><mixed-citation>Reid, J. S. and Hobbs, P. V.: Physical and optical properties of young smoke from individual biomass fires in Brazil, J. Geophys. Res., 103, 32013–32030, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/98JD00159" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/98JD00159</ext-link>, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx116"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Ritter et~al.(2016)}?><label>Ritter et al.(2016)</label><?label Ritter2016?><mixed-citation>Ritter, C., Neuber, R., Schulz, A., Markowicz, K., Stachlewska, I., Lisok, J., Makuch, P., Pakszys, P., Markuszewski, P., Rozwadowska,
A., Petelski, T., Zielinski, T., Becagli, S., Traversi, R., Udisti, R., and Gausa, M.: 2014 iAREA campaign on aerosol in Spitsbergen
– Part 2: Optical properties from Raman-lidar and in-situ observations at Ny-Ålesund,
Atmos. Environ., 141, 1–19, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2016.05.053" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2016.05.053</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx117"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Rolph et al.(2017)}?><label>Rolph et al.(2017)</label><?label Rolph2017?><mixed-citation>Rolph, G., Stein, A., and Stunder, B.: Real-time Environmental Applications and Display sYstem: READY, Environ. Model. Softw., 95, 210–228, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2017.06.025" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.envsoft.2017.06.025</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx118"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Sakai et al.(2016)}?><label>Sakai et al.(2016)</label><?label Sakai2016?><mixed-citation>Sakai, T., Uchino, O., Nagai, T., Liley, B., Morino, I., and Fujimoto, T.:
Long‐term variation of stratospheric aerosols observed with lidars over Tsukuba, Japan, from 1982 and Lauder, New Zealand, from 1992 to 2015, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 121, 10283–10293, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD025132" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2016JD025132</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx119"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Schill et al.(2020a)}?><label>Schill et al.(2020a)</label><?label Schill2020a?><mixed-citation>Schill, G. P., DeMott, P. J., Emerson, E. W., Rauker, A. M. C.,  Kodros, J. K.,  Suski, K. J.,  Hill, T. C. J.,
Levin, E. J. T., Pierce, J. R., Farmer, D. K., and Kreidenweis, S. M.:
The contribution of black carbon to global ice nucleating particle concentrations relevant to mixed-phase clouds,
P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 117, 22705–22711, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2001674117" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1073/pnas.2001674117</ext-link>, 2020a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx120"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Schill et al.(2020b)}?><label>Schill et al.(2020b)</label><?label Schill2020b?><mixed-citation>Schill,  G. P., Froyd, K. D., Bian, H., Kupc, A., Williamson, C., Brock, C. A., Ray, E., Hornbrook, R. S., Hills, A. J., Apel, E. C., Chin, M.,
Colarco, P. R., and Murphy, D. M.:
Widespread biomass burning smoke throughout the remote troposphere,
Nat. Geosci., 13, 422–427, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-020-0586-1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41561-020-0586-1</ext-link>, 2020b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx121"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Schrod et al.(2017)}?><label>Schrod et al.(2017)</label><?label Schrod2017?><mixed-citation>Schrod, J., Weber, D., Drücke, J., Keleshis, C., Pikridas, M., Ebert, M., Cvetković, B., Nickovic, S., Marinou, E., Baars, H., Ansmann, A., Vrekoussis, M., Mihalopoulos, N., Sciare, J., Curtius, J., and Bingemer, H. G.: Ice nucleating particles over the Eastern Mediterranean measured by unmanned aircraft systems, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 4817–4835, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-4817-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-17-4817-2017</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx122"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Stein et al.(2015)}?><label>Stein et al.(2015)</label><?label Stein2015?><mixed-citation>Stein, A. F., Draxler, R. R, Rolph, G. D., Stunder, B. J. B., Cohen, M. D., and Ngan, F.: NOAA's HYSPLIT atmospheric transport and dispersion modeling system,
B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 96, 2059–2077, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-14-00110.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/BAMS-D-14-00110.1</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page13423?><ref id="bib1.bibx123"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Stohl(2006)}?><label>Stohl(2006)</label><?label Stohl2006?><mixed-citation>Stohl, A.: Characteristics of atmospheric transport into the Arctic troposphere, J. Geophys. Res., 111, D11306, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD006888" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2005JD006888</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx124"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Twohy et al.(2010)}?><label>Twohy et al.(2010)</label><?label Twohy2010?><mixed-citation>Twohy, C. H., DeMott, P. J., Pratt, K. A., Subramanian, R., Kok, G. L., Murphy, S. M., Lersch, T., Heymsfield, A. J., Wang, Z., Prather, K. A., and Seinfeld, J. H.: Relationships of biomass‐burning aerosols to ice in orographic wave clouds, J. Atmos. Sci., 67, 2437–2450, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/2010JAS3310.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/2010JAS3310.1</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx125"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Vaughan et al.(2021)}?><label>Vaughan et al.(2021)</label><?label Vaughan2021?><mixed-citation>Vaughan, G., Wareing, D., and Ricketts, H.: Measurement Report: Lidar measurements of stratospheric aerosol following the 2019 Raikoke and Ulawun volcanic eruptions, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 5597–5604, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-5597-2021" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-21-5597-2021</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx126"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Verlinde et al.(2007)}?><label>Verlinde et al.(2007)</label><?label Verlinde2007?><mixed-citation>
Verlinde, J., Harrington, J. Y., McFarquhar, G. M., Yannuzzi, V. T., Avramov, A., Greenberg, S., Johnson, N., Zhang, G., Poellot, M. R.,  Mather,  J.  H.,  Turner,  D.  D.,  Eloranta,  E.  W.,  Zak,  B.  D., Prenni, A. J., Daniel, J. S., Kok, G. L., Tobin, D. C., Holz, R., Sassen, K., Spangenberg, D., Minnis, P., Tooman, T. P., Ivey, M. D., Richardson, S. J., Bahrmann, C. P., Shupe, M., DeMott, P. J., Heymsfield, A. J., and Schofield, R.: The mixed-phase Arctic cloud experiment, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 88, 205–221, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx127"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Veselovskii et al.(2002)}?><label>Veselovskii et al.(2002)</label><?label Veselovskii2002?><mixed-citation>Veselovskii I., Kolgotin, A., Griaznov, V., Müller, D., Wandinger, U., and Whiteman, D.:
Inversion with regularization for the retrieval of tropospheric aerosol parameters from multi-wavelength lidar sounding,
Appl. Optics, 41, 3685–3699, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1364/AO.41.003685" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1364/AO.41.003685</ext-link>, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx128"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Veselovskii et al.(2012)}?><label>Veselovskii et al.(2012)</label><?label Veselovskii2012?><mixed-citation>Veselovskii, I., Dubovik, O., Kolgotin, A., Korenskiy, M., Whiteman, D. N., Allakhverdiev, K., and Huseyinoglu, F.: Linear estimation of particle bulk parameters from multi-wavelength lidar measurements, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 5, 1135–1145, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-5-1135-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-5-1135-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx129"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Vihtakari(2020)}?><label>Vihtakari(2020)</label><?label Vihtakari2020?><mixed-citation>Vihtakari, M.: ggOceanMaps: Plot data on oceanographic maps using “ggplot2”, available at: <uri>https://github.com/MikkoVihtakari/ggOceanMaps</uri>, last access: 15 November 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx130"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Wandinger et al.(2002)}?><label>Wandinger et al.(2002)</label><?label Wandinger2002?><mixed-citation>Wandinger, U., Müller, D., Böckmann, C., Althausen, D., Matthias, V., Bösenberg, J., Weiß, V., Fiebig, M., Wendisch, M., Stohl, A., and Ansmann, A.: Optical and microphysical characterization of biomass-burning and industrial-pollution aerosols from  multiwavelength lidar and aircraft measurements, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 107, 7–20, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2000JD000202" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2000JD000202</ext-link>, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx131"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Wang and Knopf(2011)}?><label>Wang and Knopf(2011)</label><?label Wangknopf2011?><mixed-citation>Wang, B. and Knopf, D. A.: Heterogeneous ice nucleation
on particles composed of humic‐like substances impacted by O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M311" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>,
J. Geophys. Res., 116, D03205, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JD014964" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2010JD014964</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx132"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Wang et al.(2011)}?><label>Wang et al.(2011)</label><?label Wang2011?><mixed-citation>Wang, Q., Jacob, D. J., Fisher, J. A., Mao, J., Leibensperger, E. M., Carouge, C. C., Le Sager, P., Kondo, Y., Jimenez, J. L., Cubison, M. J., and Doherty, S. J.: Sources of carbonaceous aerosols and deposited black carbon in the Arctic in winter-spring: implications for radiative forcing, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 12453–12473, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-12453-2011" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-11-12453-2011</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx133"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Wendisch et al.(2019)}?><label>Wendisch et al.(2019)</label><?label Wendisch2019?><mixed-citation>Wendisch,  M.,  Macke,  A.,  Ehrlich,  A.,  Lüpkes,  C.,  Mech,  M.,Chechin, D., Dethloff, K., Velasco, C. B., Bozem, H., Brückner, M., Clemen, H.-C., Crewell, S., Donth, T., Dupuy, R., Ebell, K., Egerer, U., Engelmann, R., Engler, C., Eppers, O., Gehrmann,M., Gong, X., Gottschalk, M., Gourbeyre, C., Griesche, H., Hartmann, J., Hartmann, M., Heinold, B., Herber, A., Herrmann, H.,Heygster, G., Hoor, P., Jafariserajehlou, S., Jäkel, E., Järvinen, E., Jourdan, O., Kästner, U., Kecorius, S., Knudsen, E. M., Köllner, F., Kretzschmar, J., Lelli, L., Leroy, D., Maturilli, M., Mei, L., Mertes, S., Mioche, G., Neuber, R., Nicolaus, M., Nomokonova, T., Notholt, J., Palm, M., van Pinxteren, M., Quaas, J., Richter, P., Ruiz-Donoso, E., Schäfer, M., Schmieder, K., Schnaiter, M., Schneider,  J.,  Schwarzenböck,  A.,  Seifert, P.,  Shupe,  M.  D., Siebert, H., Spreen, G., Stapf, J., Stratmann, F., Vogl, T., Welti, A., Wex, H., Wiedensohler, A., Zanatta, M., and Zeppenfeld, S.: The Arctic cloud puzzle: using ACLOUD/PASCAL multiplatform observations to unravel the role of clouds and aerosol particles in Arctic amplification, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 100, 841–871, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-18-0072.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/BAMS-D-18-0072.1</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx134"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Wex et al.(2019)}?><label>Wex et al.(2019)</label><?label Wex2019?><mixed-citation>Wex, H., Huang, L., Zhang, W., Hung, H., Traversi, R., Becagli, S., Sheesley, R. J., Moffett, C. E., Barrett, T. E., Bossi, R., Skov, H., Hünerbein, A., Lubitz, J., Löffler, M., Linke, O., Hartmann, M., Herenz, P., and Stratmann, F.: Annual variability of ice-nucleating particle concentrations at different Arctic locations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 5293–5311, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-5293-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-19-5293-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx135"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Willis et al.(2018)}?><label>Willis et al.(2018)</label><?label Willis2018?><mixed-citation>Willis, M. D., Leaitch, W. R., and Abbatt, J. P.:
Processes controlling the composition and abundance of Arctic aerosol, Rev. Geophys., 56, 621–671, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2018RG000602" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2018RG000602</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx136"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Willis et al.(2019)}?><label>Willis et al.(2019)</label><?label Willis2019?><mixed-citation>Willis, M. D., Bozem, H., Kunkel, D., Lee, A. K. Y., Schulz, H., Burkart, J., Aliabadi, A. A., Herber, A. B., Leaitch, W. R., and Abbatt, J. P. D.: Aircraft-based measurements of High Arctic springtime aerosol show evidence for vertically varying sources, transport and composition, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 57–76, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-57-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-19-57-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx137"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{WMO(1992)}?><label>WMO(1992)</label><?label WMO1992?><mixed-citation>
WMO: World Meteorological Organisation, International Meteorological Vocabulary, No. 182, ISBN 92-63-02182-1, 1992.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx138"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Wohltmann et al.(2020)}?><label>Wohltmann et al.(2020)</label><?label Wohltmann2020?><mixed-citation>Wohltmann, I., von der Gathen, P., Lehmann, R., Maturilli, M., Deckelmann, H., Manney, G. L., Davies, J., Tarasick, D., Jepsen, N., Kivi, R., Lyall, N., and Rex, M.:
Near‐complete local reduction of Arctic stratospheric ozone by severe chemical loss in spring 2020, Geophys. Res. Lett., 47, e2020GL089547, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL089547" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2020GL089547</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx139"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Yang et al.(2021)}?><label>Yang et al.(2021)</label><?label Yang2021?><mixed-citation>Yang, Y., Zhao, C., Wang, Q., Cong, Z., Yang, X., and Fan, H.: Aerosol characteristics at the three poles of the Earth as characterized by Cloud–Aerosol Lidar and Infrared Pathfinder Satellite Observations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 4849–4868, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-4849-2021" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-21-4849-2021</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx140"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Yin et al.(2019)}?><label>Yin et al.(2019)</label><?label Yin2019?><mixed-citation>Yin, Z., Ansmann, A., Baars, H., Seifert, P., Engelmann, R., Radenz, M., Jimenez, C., Herzog, A., Ohneiser, K., Hanbuch, K., Blarel, L., Goloub, P., Dubois, G., Victori, S., and Maupin, F.: Aerosol measurements with a shipborne Sun–sky–lunar photometer and collocated multiwavelength Raman polarization lidar over the Atlantic Ocean, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 12, 5685–5698, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-12-5685-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-12-5685-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx141"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{Yu et al.(2019)}?><label>Yu et al.(2019)</label><?label Yu2019?><mixed-citation>Yu, P., Toon, O. B.,  Bardeen, C. G., Zhu, Y.,
Rosenlof, K. H., Portmann, R. W., Thornberry, T. D.,  Gao, R.-S.,
Davis, S. M., Wolf, E. T., de Gouw, J., Peterson, D. A., Fromm, M. D., and  Robock, A.:
Black carbon lofts wildfire smoke high into the stratosphere to form a persistent plume,
Science, 365, 587–590,  <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aax1748" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1126/science.aax1748</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Wildfire smoke, Arctic haze, and aerosol effects on mixed-phase and cirrus clouds over the North Pole region during MOSAiC: an introduction</article-title-html>
<abstract-html><p>An advanced multiwavelength polarization Raman lidar was operated aboard the icebreaker <i>Polarstern</i> during the MOSAiC (Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate) expedition to continuously monitor aerosol and cloud layers in the central Arctic up to 30&thinsp;km height. The expedition lasted from September 2019 to October 2020 and measurements were mostly taken between 85 and 88.5°&thinsp;N. The lidar was integrated into a complex remote-sensing infrastructure aboard the <i>Polarstern</i>.
In this article, novel lidar techniques, innovative concepts to study aerosol–cloud interaction in the Arctic, and unique MOSAiC findings will be presented.
The highlight of the lidar measurements was the detection of a 10&thinsp;km deep wildfire smoke layer over the North Pole region between 7–8&thinsp;km and 17–18&thinsp;km height with an aerosol optical thickness (AOT) at 532&thinsp;nm of around 0.1 (in October–November 2019) and 0.05 from December to March. The dual-wavelength Raman lidar technique allowed us to unambiguously identify smoke as the dominating aerosol type in the aerosol layer in the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere (UTLS). An additional contribution to the 532&thinsp;nm AOT by volcanic sulfate aerosol (Raikoke eruption) was estimated to always be lower than 15&thinsp;%. The optical and microphysical properties of the UTLS smoke layer are presented in an accompanying paper (Ohneiser et al., 2021).
This smoke event offered the unique opportunity to study the influence of organic aerosol particles (serving as ice-nucleating particles, INPs) on cirrus formation in the upper troposphere. An example of a closure study is presented to explain our concept of investigating aerosol–cloud interaction in this field. The smoke particles were obviously able to control the evolution of the cirrus system and caused low ice crystal number concentration. After the discussion of two typical Arctic haze events, we present a case study of the evolution of a long-lasting mixed-phase cloud layer embedded in Arctic haze in the free troposphere. The recently introduced dual-field-of-view polarization lidar technique was applied, for the first time, to mixed-phase cloud observations in order to determine the microphysical properties of the water droplets. The mixed-phase cloud closure experiment (based on combined lidar and radar observations) indicated  that the observed aerosol levels controlled the number concentrations of nucleated droplets and ice crystals.</p></abstract-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>Abbatt et al.(2019)</label><mixed-citation>
Abbatt, J. P. D., Leaitch, W. R., Aliabadi, A. A., Bertram, A. K., Blanchet, J.-P., Boivin-Rioux, A., Bozem, H., Burkart, J., Chang, R. Y. W., Charette, J., Chaubey, J. P., Christensen, R. J., Cirisan, A., Collins, D. B., Croft, B., Dionne, J., Evans, G. J., Fletcher, C. G., Galí, M., Ghahremaninezhad, R., Girard, E., Gong, W., Gosselin, M., Gourdal, M., Hanna, S. J., Hayashida, H., Herber, A. B., Hesaraki, S., Hoor, P., Huang, L., Hussherr, R., Irish, V. E., Keita, S. A., Kodros, J. K., Köllner, F., Kolonjari, F., Kunkel, D., Ladino, L. A., Law, K., Levasseur, M., Libois, Q., Liggio, J., Lizotte, M., Macdonald, K. M., Mahmood, R., Martin, R. V., Mason, R. H., Miller, L. A., Moravek, A., Mortenson, E., Mungall, E. L., Murphy, J. G., Namazi, M., Norman, A.-L., O'Neill, N. T., Pierce, J. R., Russell, L. M., Schneider, J., Schulz, H., Sharma, S., Si, M., Staebler, R. M., Steiner, N. S., Thomas, J. L., von Salzen, K., Wentzell, J. J. B., Willis, M. D., Wentworth, G. R., Xu, J.-W., and Yakobi-Hancock, J. D.: Overview paper: New insights into aerosol and climate in the Arctic, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 2527–2560, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-2527-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-2527-2019</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>Achtert and Tesche(2014)</label><mixed-citation>
Achtert, P. and Tesche, M.: Assessing lidar‐based classification schemes for polar stratospheric clouds based on 16 years of measurements at Esrange, Sweden, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 119, 1386–1405, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2013JD020355" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2013JD020355</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>ACTRIS(2020)</label><mixed-citation>
ACTRIS: Aerosols, Clouds and Trace gases Research InfraStructure home page, avaialble at <a href="https://www.actris.eu/" target="_blank"/>, last access: 20 October 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>Ancellet et al.(2014)</label><mixed-citation>
Ancellet, G., Pelon, J., Blanchard, Y., Quennehen, B., Bazureau, A., Law, K. S., and Schwarzenboeck, A.: Transport of aerosol to the Arctic: analysis of CALIOP and French aircraft data during the spring 2008 POLARCAT campaign, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 8235–8254, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-8235-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-8235-2014</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>Andronache(2018)</label><mixed-citation>
Andronache, C. (Ed.): Mixed-Phase Clouds, Elsevier, 1 Edn., the Netherlands, UK, USA, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>Ansmann et al.(2019)</label><mixed-citation>
Ansmann, A., Mamouri, R.-E., Bühl, J., Seifert, P., Engelmann, R., Hofer, J., Nisantzi, A., Atkinson, J. D., Kanji, Z. A., Sierau, B., Vrekoussis, M., and Sciare, J.: Ice-nucleating particle versus ice crystal number concentration in altocumulus and cirrus layers embedded in Saharan dust:a closure study, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 15087–15115, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-15087-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-15087-2019</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>Ansmann et al.(2021)</label><mixed-citation>
Ansmann, A., Ohneiser, K., Mamouri, R.-E., Knopf, D. A., Veselovskii, I., Baars, H., Engelmann, R., Foth, A., Jimenez, C., Seifert, P., and Barja, B.: Tropospheric and stratospheric wildfire smoke profiling with lidar: mass, surface area, CCN, and INP retrieval, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 9779–9807, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-9779-2021" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-9779-2021</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>ARM(2020)</label><mixed-citation>
ARM: Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) mobile facility homepage, available at <a href="https://www.arm.gov/capabilities/observatories/amf" target="_blank"/>, last access: 20 October 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>ARM-MOSAiC(2021)</label><mixed-citation>
ARM-MOSAiC: Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) user facility, 2019, updated hourly, Ka ARM Zenith Radar (KAZRCFRGE), 2019-10-11 to 2020-09-20, ARM Mobile Facility (MOS) MOSAIC (Drifting Obs – Study of Arctic Climate), AMF2 (M1), compiled by: Lindenmaier, I., Nelson, D., Isom, B., Hardin, J., Matthews, A., Wendler, T., and Castro, V., ARM Data Center, available at: <a href="https://adc.arm.gov/discovery/" target="_blank"/>,  last access: 15 July 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>Avery et al.(2020)</label><mixed-citation>
Avery, M. A., Ryan, R. A., Getzewich, B. J., Vaughan, M. A., Winker, D. M., Hu, Y., Garnier, A., Pelon, J., and Verhappen, C. A.: CALIOP V4 cloud thermodynamic phase assignment and the impact of near-nadir viewing angles, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 13, 4539–4563, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-4539-2020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-4539-2020</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>Baars et al.(2012)</label><mixed-citation>
Baars, H., Ansmann, A., Althausen, D.,  Engelmann, R.,  Heese, B., Müller, D., Artaxo, P., Paixao, M., Pauliquevis, T., and Souza, R.:
Aerosol profiling with lidar in the Amazon Basin during the wet and dry season,
J. Geophys. Res., 117, D21201, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JD018338" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JD018338</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>Baars et al.(2016)</label><mixed-citation>
Baars, H., Kanitz, T., Engelmann, R., Althausen, D., Heese, B., Komppula, M., Preißler, J., Tesche, M., Ansmann, A., Wandinger, U., Lim, J.-H., Ahn, J. Y., Stachlewska, I. S., Amiridis, V., Marinou, E., Seifert, P., Hofer, J., Skupin, A., Schneider, F., Bohlmann, S., Foth, A., Bley, S., Pfüller, A., Giannakaki, E., Lihavainen, H., Viisanen, Y., Hooda, R. K., Pereira, S. N., Bortoli, D., Wagner, F., Mattis, I., Janicka, L., Markowicz, K. M., Achtert, P., Artaxo, P., Pauliquevis, T., Souza, R. A. F., Sharma, V. P., van Zyl, P. G., Beukes, J. P., Sun, J., Rohwer, E. G., Deng, R., Mamouri, R.-E., and Zamorano, F.: An overview of the first decade of Polly<sup>NET</sup>: an emerging network of automated Raman-polarization lidars for continuous aerosol profiling, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 5111–5137, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-5111-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-5111-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>Baars et al.(2019)</label><mixed-citation>
Baars, H., Ansmann, A., Ohneiser, K., Haarig, M., Engelmann, R., Althausen, D., Hanssen, I., Gausa, M., Pietruczuk, A., Szkop, A., Stachlewska, I. S., Wang, D., Reichardt, J., Skupin, A., Mattis, I., Trickl, T., Vogelmann, H., Navas-Guzmán, F., Haefele, A., Acheson, K., Ruth, A. A., Tatarov, B., Müller, D., Hu, Q., Podvin, T., Goloub, P., Veselovskii, I., Pietras, C., Haeffelin, M., Fréville, P., Sicard, M., Comerón, A., Fernández García, A. J., Molero Menéndez, F., Córdoba-Jabonero, C., Guerrero-Rascado, J. L., Alados-Arboledas, L., Bortoli, D., Costa, M. J., Dionisi, D., Liberti, G. L., Wang, X., Sannino, A., Papagiannopoulos, N., Boselli, A., Mona, L., D'Amico, G., Romano, S., Perrone, M. R., Belegante, L., Nicolae, D., Grigorov, I., Gialitaki, A., Amiridis, V., Soupiona, O., Papayannis, A., Mamouri, R.-E., Nisantzi, A., Heese, B., Hofer, J., Schechner, Y. Y., Wandinger, U., and Pappalardo, G.: The unprecedented 2017–2018 stratospheric smoke event: decay phase and aerosol properties observed with the EARLINET, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 15183–15198, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-15183-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-15183-2019</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>Baars et al.(2020)</label><mixed-citation>
Baars, H., Herzog, A., Heese, B., Ohneiser, K., Hanbuch, K., Hofer, J., Yin, Z., Engelmann, R., and Wandinger, U.: Validation of Aeolus wind products above the Atlantic Ocean, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 13, 6007–6024, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-6007-2020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-6007-2020</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>Bailey and Hallett(2012)</label><mixed-citation>
Bailey, M., and Hallett, J.:
Ice Crystal Linear Growth Rates from −20° to −70&thinsp;°C: Confirmation from Wave Cloud Studies,
J. Atmos. Sci., 69, 390–402, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS-D-11-035.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS-D-11-035.1</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>Barahona et al.(2017)</label><mixed-citation>
Barahona, D., Molod, A., and Kalesse, H.: Direct estimation of the global distribution of vertical velocity within cirrus clouds, Sci. Rep.-UK, 7, 6840, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-07038-6" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-07038-6</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>Berkemeier et al.(2014)</label><mixed-citation>
Berkemeier, T., Shiraiwa, M., Pöschl, U., and Koop, T.: Competition between water uptake and ice nucleation by glassy organic aerosol particles, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 12513–12531, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-12513-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-12513-2014</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>Boers et al.(2010)</label><mixed-citation>
Boers, R., de Laat, A. T., Stein Zweers, D. C., and  Dirksen, R. J.:
Lifting potential of solar-heated aerosol layers,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 37, L24802, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GL045171" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GL045171</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>Bohlmann et al.(2018)</label><mixed-citation>
Bohlmann, S., Baars, H., Radenz, M., Engelmann, R., and Macke, A.: Ship-borne aerosol profiling with lidar over the Atlantic Ocean: from pure marine conditions to complex dust–smoke mixtures, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 9661–9679, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-9661-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-9661-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>Bühl et al.(2016)</label><mixed-citation>
Bühl, J., Seifert, P., Myagkov, A., and Ansmann, A.: Measuring ice- and liquid-water properties in mixed-phase cloud layers at the Leipzig Cloudnet station, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 10609–10620, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-10609-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-10609-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>Bühl et al.(2019)</label><mixed-citation>
Bühl, J., Seifert, P., Radenz, M., Baars, H., and Ansmann, A.: Ice crystal number concentration from lidar, cloud radar and radar wind profiler measurements, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 12, 6601–6617, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-12-6601-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-12-6601-2019</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>Burton et al.(2015)</label><mixed-citation>
Burton, S. P., Hair, J. W., Kahnert, M., Ferrare, R. A., Hostetler, C. A., Cook, A. L., Harper, D. B., Berkoff, T. A., Seaman, S. T., Collins, J. E., Fenn, M. A., and Rogers, R. R.: Observations of the spectral dependence of linear particle depolarization ratio of aerosols using NASA Langley airborne High Spectral Resolution Lidar, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 13453–13473, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-13453-2015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-13453-2015</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>CALIPSO(2020a)</label><mixed-citation>
CALIPSO: Cloud–Aerosol Lidar and Infrared Pathfinder Satellite Observation Lidar Level 2 data, height-time displays of attenuated backscatter, available at: <a href="https://www-calipso.larc.nasa.gov/products/lidar/browse_images/std_v4_index.php" target="_blank"/>,
last access: 20 October 2020a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>CALIPSO(2020b)</label><mixed-citation>
CALIPSO: Cloud–Aerosol Lidar and Infrared Pathfinder Satellite Observation Lidar Level 2 data, particle backscatter profiles, available at: <a href="https://search.earthdata.nasa.gov/search?fp=CALIPSO&amp;fi=CALIOP" target="_blank"/>,
last access: 20 October 2020b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>Casenave et al.(2019)</label><mixed-citation>
Cazenave, Q., Ceccaldi, M., Delanoë, J., Pelon, J., Groß, S., and Heymsfield, A.: Evolution of DARDAR-CLOUD ice cloud retrievals: new parameters and impacts on the retrieved microphysical properties, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 12, 2819–2835, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-12-2819-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-12-2819-2019</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>China et al.(2015)</label><mixed-citation>
China, S., Scarnato, B., Owen, R. C., Zhang, B., Ampadu, M. T., Kumar, S., Dzepina, K., Dziobak, M. P.,
Fialho, P., Perlinger, J. A., Hueber, J., Helmig, D., Mazzoleni, L. R., and Mazzoleni, C.:
Morphology and mixing state of aged soot particles at a remote marine free troposphere site: Implications for optical properties,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 42, 1243–1250, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2014GL062404" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2014GL062404</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>Creamean et al.(2019)</label><mixed-citation>
Creamean, J. M., Cross, J. N., Pickart, R., McRaven, L., Lin, P., Pacini, A., Hanlon, R., Schmale, D. G., Ceniceros, J., Aydell, T., Colombi, N., Bolger, E., and DeMott, P. J.: Ice nucleating particles carried from below a phytoplankton bloom to the Arctic atmosphere, Geophys. Res. Lett., 46, 8572–8581, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL083039" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL083039</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>Dahlkötter et al.(2014)</label><mixed-citation>
Dahlkötter, F., Gysel, M., Sauer, D., Minikin, A., Baumann, R., Seifert, P., Ansmann, A., Fromm, M., Voigt, C., and Weinzierl, B.: The Pagami Creek smoke plume after long-range transport to the upper troposphere over Europe – aerosol properties and black carbon mixing state, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 6111–6137, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-6111-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-6111-2014</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>Dai et al.(2018)</label><mixed-citation>
Dai, G., Althausen, D., Hofer, J., Engelmann, R., Seifert, P., Bühl, J., Mamouri, R.-E., Wu, S., and Ansmann, A.: Calibration of Raman lidar water vapor profiles by means of AERONET photometer observations and GDAS meteorological data, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 11, 2735–2748, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-2735-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-2735-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>de Laat et al.(2012)</label><mixed-citation>
de Laat, A. T. J., Stein Zweers, D. C., Boers, R., and Tuinder, O. N. E.:
A solar escalator: Observational evidence of the self-lifting of smoke and aerosols by absorption of solar radiation in the February 2009 Australian Black Saturday plume,
J. Geophys. Res., 117, D04204, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD017016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD017016</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>DeLand et al.(2020)</label><mixed-citation>
DeLand, M. T., Bhartia, P. K., Kramarova, N., and Chen, Z.:
OMPS LP observations of PSC variability during the NH 2019-2020 season,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 47, e2020GL090216, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL090216" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL090216</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>DeMott et al.(2010)</label><mixed-citation>
DeMott, P. J., Prenni, A. J., Liu, X., Kreidenweis, S. M., Petters, M. D., Twohy, C. H.,  Richardson, M. S., Eidhammer,  T., and Rogers, D. C.:
Predicting global atmospheric ice nuclei distributions and their impacts on climate,
P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 107, 11217–11222, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0910818107" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0910818107</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>DeMott et al.(2015)</label><mixed-citation>
DeMott, P. J., Prenni, A. J., McMeeking, G. R., Sullivan, R. C., Petters, M. D., Tobo, Y., Niemand, M., Möhler, O., Snider, J. R., Wang, Z., and Kreidenweis, S. M.: Integrating laboratory and field data to quantify the immersion freezing ice nucleation activity of mineral dust particles, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 393–409, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-393-2015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-393-2015</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>Devasthale et al.(2011a)</label><mixed-citation>
Devasthale, A., Tjernström, M., Karlsson, K.-G., Thomas, M. A., Jones, C., Sedlar, J., and Omar, A. H.: The vertical distribution of thin features over the Arctic analysed from CALIPSO observations, Tellus B, 63, 77–85, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0889.2010.00516.x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0889.2010.00516.x</a>, 2011a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>Devasthale et al.(2011b)</label><mixed-citation>
Devasthale, A., Tjernström, M., and Omar, A. H.: The vertical distribution of thin features over the Arctic analysed from CALIPSO observations – Part II: Aerosols, Tellus B, 63, 86–95, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0889.2010.00517.x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0889.2010.00517.x</a>, 2011b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>de Villiers et al.(2010)</label><mixed-citation>
de Villiers, R. A., Ancellet, G., Pelon, J., Quennehen, B., Schwarzenboeck, A., Gayet, J. F., and Law, K. S.: Airborne measurements of aerosol optical properties related to early spring transport of mid-latitude sources into the Arctic, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 5011–5030, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-5011-2010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-5011-2010</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>Di Biagio et al.(2018)</label><mixed-citation>
Di Biagio, C., Pelon, J., Ancellet, G., Bazureau, A., and Mariage, V.: Sources, load, vertical distribution, and fate of wintertime aerosols north of Svalbard from combined V4 CALIOP data, ground‐based IAOOS lidar observations and trajectory analysis, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 123, 1363–1383, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JD027530" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JD027530</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>Di Pierro et al.(2013)</label><mixed-citation>
Di Pierro, M., Jaeglé, L., Eloranta, E. W., and Sharma, S.: Spatial and seasonal distribution of Arctic aerosols observed by the CALIOP satellite instrument (2006–2012), Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 7075–7095, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-7075-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-7075-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>Düsing et al.(2018)</label><mixed-citation>
Düsing, S., Wehner, B., Seifert, P., Ansmann, A., Baars, H., Ditas, F., Henning, S., Ma, N., Poulain, L., Siebert, H., Wiedensohler, A., and Macke, A.: Helicopter-borne observations of the continental background aerosol in combination with remote sensing and ground-based measurements, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 1263–1290, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-1263-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-1263-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>Eirund et al.(2019)</label><mixed-citation>
Eirund, G. K., Possner, A., and Lohmann, U.: Response of Arctic mixed-phase clouds to aerosol perturbations under different surface forcings, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 9847–9864, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-9847-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-9847-2019</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>Eloranta(2005)</label><mixed-citation>
Eloranta, E.:
High Spectral Resolution Lidar, in: LIDAR – Range–resolved optical remote sensing of the atmosphere, edited by: Weitkamp,
C., Springer, New York, ISBN 0-387-40075-3, 143–163, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>Engelmann et al.(2016)</label><mixed-citation>
Engelmann, R., Kanitz, T., Baars, H., Heese, B., Althausen, D., Skupin, A., Wandinger, U., Komppula, M., Stachlewska, I. S., Amiridis, V., Marinou, E., Mattis, I., Linné, H., and Ansmann, A.: The automated multiwavelength Raman polarization and water-vapor lidar PollyXT: the neXT generation, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 9, 1767–1784, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-9-1767-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-9-1767-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>Fetterer et al.(2020)</label><mixed-citation>
Fetterer, F., Knowles, K.,  Meier, W. N.,  Savoie, M.,  and Windnagel, A. K.: Sea Ice Index, Version 3, 2017, Monthly Sea Ice Extent, Boulder, Colorado USA, NSIDC: National Snow and Ice Data Center, <a href="https://doi.org/10.7265/N5K072F8" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.7265/N5K072F8</a>, last access: 15 July 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>Fiebig et al.(2003)</label><mixed-citation>
Fiebig, M., Stohl, A., Wendisch, M., Eckhardt, S., and Petzold, A.: Dependence of solar radiative forcing of forest fire aerosol on ageing and state of mixture, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 3, 881–891, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-3-881-2003" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-3-881-2003</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>Field et al.(2006)</label><mixed-citation>
Field, P. R., Heymsfield, A. J., and Bansemer, A.: A Test of Ice Self-Collection Kernels Using Aircraft Data,
J. Atmos. Sci., 63, 651–666, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS3653.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS3653.1</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib46"><label>Fromm et al.(2008)</label><mixed-citation>
Fromm, M., Shettle, E. P., Fricke, K. H., Ritter, C., Trickl, T.,  Giehl, H.,  Gerding, M.,  Barnes, J. E., O'Neill, M., Massie, S. T., Blum, U.,  McDermid, I. S.,  Leblanc, T., and Deshler, T.:
Stratospheric impact of the Chisholm pyrocumulonimbus eruption: 2. Vertical profile perspective,
J. Geophys. Res., 113, D08203, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD009147" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD009147</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib47"><label>Fromm et al.(2010)</label><mixed-citation>
Fromm, M., Lindsey, D. T., Servranckx, R., Yue, G., Trickl, T., Sica, R., Doucet, P., and Godin-Beekmann, S. E.:
The untold story of pyrocumulonimbus,
B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 91, 1193–1209, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/2010bams3004.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/2010bams3004.1</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib48"><label>Georgoulias et al.(2020)</label><mixed-citation>
Georgoulias, A. K., Marinou, E., Tsekeri, A., Proestakis, E., Akritidis, D., Alexandri, G., Zanis, P., Balis, D., Marenco, F., Tesche, M., and Amiridis, V.: A first case study of CCN concentrations from spaceborne lidar observations, Remote Sens., 12, 1557, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12101557" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12101557</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib49"><label>GMAO(2021)</label><mixed-citation>
GMAO: Tropopause definition (page 52), Global Modeling and Assimilation Office, Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland, available at: <a href="https://gmao.gsfc.nasa.gov/GMAO_products/documents/GEOS-5.2.0_File_Specification.pdf" target="_blank"/>, last access: 19 February 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib50"><label>Grenier et al.(2009)</label><mixed-citation>
Grenier, P., Blanchet, J. P., and  Munoz-Alpizar, R.: Study  of polar thin ice clouds and aerosols seen by CloudSat and CALIPSO during  mid-winter 2007, J. Geophys. Res., 114, D09201, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JD010927" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JD010927</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib51"><label>Griesche et al.(2020)</label><mixed-citation>
Griesche, H. J., Seifert, P., Ansmann, A., Baars, H., Barrientos Velasco, C., Bühl, J., Engelmann, R., Radenz, M., Zhenping, Y., and Macke, A.: Application of the shipborne remote sensing supersite OCEANET for profiling of Arctic aerosols and clouds during Polarstern cruise PS106, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 13, 5335–5358, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-5335-2020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-5335-2020</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib52"><label>Griesche et al.(2021)</label><mixed-citation>
Griesche, H. J., Ohneiser, K., Seifert, P., Radenz, M., Engelmann, R., and Ansmann, A.: Contrasting ice formation in Arctic clouds: surface-coupled vs. surface-decoupled clouds, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 10357–10374, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-10357-2021" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-10357-2021</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib53"><label>Groß et al.(2016)</label><mixed-citation>
Groß, S., Gasteiger, J., Freudenthaler, V., Müller, T., Sauer, D., Toledano, C., and Ansmann, A.: Saharan dust contribution to the Caribbean summertime boundary layer – a lidar study during SALTRACE, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 11535–11546, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-11535-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-11535-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib54"><label>Haarig et al.(2018)</label><mixed-citation>
Haarig, M., Ansmann, A., Baars, H., Jimenez, C., Veselovskii, I., Engelmann, R., and Althausen, D.: Depolarization and lidar ratios at 355, 532, and 1064&thinsp;nm and microphysical properties of aged tropospheric and stratospheric Canadian wildfire smoke, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 11847–11861, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-11847-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-11847-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib55"><label>Haarig et al.(2019)</label><mixed-citation>
Haarig, M., Walser, A., Ansmann, A., Dollner, M., Althausen, D., Sauer, D., Farrell, D., and Weinzierl, B.: Profiles of cloud condensation nuclei, dust mass concentration, and ice-nucleating-particle-relevant aerosol properties in the Saharan Air Layer over Barbados from polarization lidar and airborne in situ measurements, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 13773–13788, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-13773-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-13773-2019</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib56"><label>Hartmann et al.(2020)</label><mixed-citation>
Hartmann, M., Adachi, K., Eppers, O., Haas, C., Herber, A., Holzinger, R., Hünerbein, A., Jäkel, E., Jentzsch, C., van Pinxteren, M., Wex, H., Willmes, S., and Stratmann, F.: Wintertime airborne measurements of ice nucleating particles in the High Arctic: a hint to a marine, biogenic source for icenucleating particles, Geophys. Res. Lett., 47,  e2020GL087770, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL087770" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL087770</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib57"><label>Hofer et al.(2017)</label><mixed-citation>
Hofer, J., Althausen, D., Abdullaev, S. F., Makhmudov, A. N., Nazarov, B. I., Schettler, G., Engelmann, R., Baars, H., Fomba, K. W., Müller, K., Heinold, B., Kandler, K., and Ansmann, A.: Long-term profiling of mineral dust and pollution aerosol with multiwavelength polarization Raman lidar at the Central Asian site of Dushanbe, Tajikistan: case studies, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 14559–14577, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-14559-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-14559-2017</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib58"><label>Hofer et al.(2020)</label><mixed-citation>
Hofer, J., Ansmann, A., Althausen, D., Engelmann, R., Baars, H., Abdullaev, S. F., and Makhmudov, A. N.: Long-term profiling of aerosol light extinction, particle mass, cloud condensation nuclei, and ice-nucleating particle concentration over Dushanbe, Tajikistan, in Central Asia, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 4695–4711, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-4695-2020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-4695-2020</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib59"><label>HYSPLIT(2020)</label><mixed-citation>
HYSPLIT: HYbrid Single-Particle Lagrangian Integrated Trajectory model, backward trajectory calculation tool,
available at: <a href="http://ready.arl.noaa.gov/HYSPLIT_traj.php" target="_blank"/>, last
access: 20 October 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib60"><label>Innes et al.(2020)</label><mixed-citation>
Inness, A., Chabrillat, S., Flemming, J., Huijnen, V., Langenrock, B., Nicolas, J.,
Polichtchouk, I., and Razingeret, M.:
Exceptionally low Arctic stratospheric ozone in spring 2020 as seen in the CAMS reanalysis,
J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 125, e2020JD033563, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JD033563" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JD033563</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib61"><label>Jimenez et al.(2020a)</label><mixed-citation>
Jimenez, C., Ansmann, A., Engelmann, R., Donovan, D., Malinka, A., Schmidt, J., Seifert, P., and Wandinger, U.: The dual-field-of-view polarization lidar technique: a new concept in monitoring aerosol effects in liquid-water clouds – theoretical framework, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 15247–15263, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-15247-2020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-15247-2020</a>, 2020a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib62"><label>Jimenez et al.(2020b)</label><mixed-citation>
Jimenez, C., Ansmann, A., Engelmann, R., Donovan, D., Malinka, A., Seifert, P., Wiesen, R., Radenz, M., Yin, Z., Bühl, J., Schmidt, J., Barja, B., and Wandinger, U.: The dual-field-of-view polarization lidar technique: a new concept in monitoring aerosol effects in liquid-water clouds – case studies, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 15265–15284, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-15265-2020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-15265-2020</a>, 2020b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib63"><label>Johnson et al.(2021)</label><mixed-citation>
Johnson, M. S., Strawbridge, K., Knowland, K. E., Keller, C., and Travis, M.:
Long-range transport of Siberian biomass burning emissions to North America during FIREX-AQ,
Atmos. Environ., 252, 118241, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2021.118241" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2021.118241</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib64"><label>Jouan et al.(2012)</label><mixed-citation>
Jouan, C., Girard, E., Pelon, J., Gultepe, I.,  Delanoë, J., and Blanchet, J. P.:
Characterization of Arctic ice cloud properties  observed during ISDAC,
J. Geophys. Res., 117,  D23207, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JD017889" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JD017889</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib65"><label>Jouan et al.(2014)</label><mixed-citation>
Jouan, C., Pelon, J., Girard, E., Ancellet, G., Blanchet, J. P., and Delanoë, J.: On the relationship between Arctic ice clouds and polluted air masses over the North Slope of Alaska in April 2008, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 1205–1224, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-1205-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-1205-2014</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib66"><label>Kalesse and Kollias(2013)</label><mixed-citation>
Kalesse, H. and Kollias, P.: Climatology of high cloud dynamics using profiling ARM Doppler radar observations, J. Climate, 26, 6340–6359, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00695.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00695.1</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib67"><label>Kanitz et al.(2011)</label><mixed-citation>
Kanitz, T., Seifert, P., Ansmann, A., Engelmann, R.,  Althausen, D.,  Casiccia, C.,  and  Rohwer, E. G.:
Contrasting the impact of aerosols at northern and southern midlatitudes on heterogeneous ice formation,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 38, L17802, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011GL048532" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2011GL048532</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib68"><label>Kanitz et al.(2013)</label><mixed-citation>
Kanitz, T., Ansmann, A., Engelmann, R., and Althausen, D.:
North-south cross sections of the vertical aerosol distribution over the Atlantic Ocean from multiwavelength Raman/polarization lidar during <i>Polarstern</i> cruises,
J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 118, 2643–2655, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50273" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50273</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib69"><label>Kanji et al.(2017)</label><mixed-citation>
Kanji, Z. A., Ladino, L. A., Wex, H., Boose, Y., Burkert-Kohn, M., Cziczo, D. J., and Krämer, M.:
Chapter 1: Overview of ice nucleating particles,
Meteor Monogr., Am. Meteorol. Soc., 58, 1.1–1.33, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/amsmonographs-d-16-0006.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/amsmonographs-d-16-0006.1</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib70"><label>Kanji et al.(2020)</label><mixed-citation>
Kanji, Z. A., Welti, A., Corbin, J. C., and Mensah, A. A.:
Black carbon particles do not matter for immersion mode ice nucleation,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 46, e2019GL086764, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL086764" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL086764</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib71"><label>Khaykin et al.(2018)</label><mixed-citation>
Khaykin, S. M., Godin-Beekmann, S., Hauchecorne, A., Pelon, J., Ravetta, F., and Keckut, P.:
Stratospheric smoke with unprecedentedly high backscatter observed by lidars above southern France,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 45, 1639–1646, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL076763" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL076763</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib72"><label>Kim et al.(2018)</label><mixed-citation>
Kim, M.-H., Omar, A. H., Tackett, J. L., Vaughan, M. A., Winker, D. M., Trepte, C. R., Hu, Y., Liu, Z., Poole, L. R., Pitts, M. C., Kar, J., and Magill, B. E.: The CALIPSO version 4 automated aerosol classification and lidar ratio selection algorithm, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 11, 6107–6135, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-6107-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-6107-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib73"><label>Klehr(2012)</label><mixed-citation>
Klehr, D.: Charakterisierung der Tropopause über Ny-Alesund, Spitzbergen, Bachelor thesis, University Potsdam, available at: <a href="http://hdl.handle.net/10013/epic.43630" target="_blank"/> (last access: 20 April 2021), 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib74"><label>Kloss et al.(2021)</label><mixed-citation>
Kloss, C., Berthet, G., Sellitto, P., Ploeger, F., Taha, G., Tidiga, M., Eremenko, M., Bossolasco, A., Jégou, F., Renard, J.-B., and Legras, B.: Stratospheric aerosol layer perturbation caused by the 2019 Raikoke and Ulawun eruptions and their radiative forcing, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 535–560, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-535-2021" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-535-2021</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib75"><label>Knopf and Alpert(2013)</label><mixed-citation>
Knopf,  D.  A.  and  Alpert,  P.  A.:  A  water  activity  based  modelof  heterogeneous  ice  nucleation  kinetics  for  freezing  of  waterand  aqueous  solution  droplets,  Farad.  Discuss.,  165,  513–534, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1039/c3fd00035d" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1039/c3fd00035d</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib76"><label>Knopf and Rigg(2011)</label><mixed-citation>
Knopf, D. A. and Rigg, Y. J.:
Homogeneous ice nucleation from aqueous inorganic/organic particles representative of biomass burning: Water activity, freezing temperatures, nucleation rates,
J. Phys. Chem. A,  115, 762–773, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1021/jp109171g" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1021/jp109171g</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib77"><label>Knopf et al.(2018)</label><mixed-citation>
Knopf, D. A., Alpert, P. A., and Wang, B.:, The role of organic aerosol in atmospheric ice nucleation: a review,
ACS Earth and Space Chemistry, 2, 168–202, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1021/acsearthspacechem.7b00120" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1021/acsearthspacechem.7b00120</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib78"><label>Knust(2017)</label><mixed-citation>
Knust, R.: Polar Research and Supply Vessel <i>Polarstern</i> operated by the Alfred-Wegener-Institute, Journal of large-scale research
facilities, 3, A119, <a href="https://doi.org/10.17815/jlsrf-3-163" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.17815/jlsrf-3-163</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib79"><label>Koop et al.(2000)</label><mixed-citation>
Koop, T., Luo, B. P., Tsias, A., and Peter, T.: Water activity as the determinant  for  homogeneous
ice  nucleation  in  aqueous  solutions,
Nature, 406, 611–614, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/35020537" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/35020537</a>, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib80"><label>Korolev and Leisner(2020)</label><mixed-citation>
Korolev, A. and Leisner, T.: Review of experimental studies of secondary ice production, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 11767–11797, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-11767-2020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-11767-2020</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib81"><label>Law et al.(2014)</label><mixed-citation>
Law, K. S., Stohl, A., Quinn, P. K., Brock, C. A., Burkhart, J. F., Paris, J.-D., Ancellet, G., Singh, H. B.,
Roiger, A., Schlager, H., Dibb, J., Jacob, D. J., Arnold, S. R., Pelon, J., and Thomas, J. L.:
Arctic Air Pollution: New Insights from POLARCAT-IPY,
B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 95, 1873–1895, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-13-00017.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-13-00017.1</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib82"><label>Lawrence et al.(2020)</label><mixed-citation>
Lawrence, Z. D., Perlwitz, J., Butler, A. H., Manney, G. L., Newman, P. A., Lee, S. H., and Nash, E. R.:
The Remarkably Strong Arctic Stratospheric Polar Vortex of Winter 2020: Links to Record‐Breaking Arctic Oscillation and Ozone Loss. J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 125, e2020JD033271, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JD033271" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JD033271</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib83"><label>Levin et al.(2016)</label><mixed-citation>
Levin, E. J. T., McMeeking, G. R., DeMott, P. J., McCluskey, C. S., Carrico, C. M., Nakao, S., Jayarathne, T., Stone, E. A., Stockwell, C. E., Yokelson, R. J., and Kreidenweis, S. M.:
Ice-nucleating particle emissions from biomass combustion and the potential importance of soot aerosol,
J. Geophys. Res., 121, 5888–5903, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD024879" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD024879</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib84"><label>Loewe et al.(2017)</label><mixed-citation>
Loewe, K., Ekman, A. M. L., Paukert, M., Sedlar, J., Tjernström, M., and Hoose, C.: Modelling micro- and macrophysical contributors to the dissipation of an Arctic mixed-phase cloud during the Arctic Summer Cloud Ocean Study (ASCOS), Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 6693–6704, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-6693-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-6693-2017</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib85"><label>Mamali et al.(2018)</label><mixed-citation>
Mamali, D., Marinou, E., Sciare, J., Pikridas, M., Kokkalis, P., Kottas, M., Binietoglou, I., Tsekeri, A., Keleshis, C., Engelmann, R., Baars, H., Ansmann, A., Amiridis, V., Russchenberg, H., and Biskos, G.: Vertical profiles of aerosol mass concentration derived by unmanned airborne in situ and remote sensing instruments during dust events, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 11, 2897–2910, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-2897-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-2897-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib86"><label>Mamouri and Ansmann(2016)</label><mixed-citation>
Mamouri, R.-E. and Ansmann, A.: Potential of polarization lidar to provide profiles of CCN- and INP-relevant aerosol parameters, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 5905–5931, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-5905-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-5905-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib87"><label>Mamouri and Ansmann(2017)</label><mixed-citation>
Mamouri, R.-E. and Ansmann, A.: Potential of polarization/Raman lidar to separate fine dust, coarse dust, maritime, and anthropogenic aerosol profiles, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 10, 3403–3427, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-10-3403-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-10-3403-2017</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib88"><label>Manney et al.(2020)</label><mixed-citation>
Manney, G. L., Livesey, N. J., Santee, M. L., Froidevaux, L., Lambert, A., Lawrence, Z. D., Millán, L. F., Neu, J. L., Read, W. G., Schwartz, M. J., and Fuller, R. A.: Record‐low Arctic stratospheric ozone in 2020: MLS observations of chemical processes and comparisons with previous extreme winters. Geophys. Res. Lett., 47, e2020GL089063, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL089063" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL089063</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib89"><label>Marinou et al.(2019)</label><mixed-citation>
Marinou, E., Tesche, M., Nenes, A., Ansmann, A., Schrod, J., Mamali, D., Tsekeri, A., Pikridas, M., Baars, H., Engelmann, R., Voudouri, K.-A., Solomos, S., Sciare, J., Groß, S., Ewald, F., and Amiridis, V.: Retrieval of ice-nucleating particle concentrations from lidar observations and comparison with UAV in situ measurements, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 11315–11342, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-11315-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-11315-2019</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib90"><label>Mason et al.(2016)</label><mixed-citation>
Mason, R. H., Si, M., Chou, C., Irish, V. E., Dickie, R., Elizondo, P., Wong, R., Brintnell, M., Elsasser, M., Lassar, W. M., Pierce, K. M., Leaitch, W. R., MacDonald, A. M., Platt, A., Toom-Sauntry, D., Sarda-Estève, R., Schiller, C. L., Suski, K. J., Hill, T. C. J., Abbatt, J. P. D., Huffman, J. A., DeMott, P. J., and Bertram, A. K.: Size-resolved measurements of ice-nucleating particles at six locations in North America and one in Europe, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 1637–1651, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-1637-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-1637-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib91"><label>Maturilli et al.(2021)</label><mixed-citation>
Maturilli, M., Holdridge, D. J., Dahlke, S., Graeser, J., Sommerfeld, A., Jaiser, R., Deckelmann, H., and Schulz, A.,: Initial radiosonde data from 2019-10 to 2020-09 during project MOSAiC, Alfred Wegener Institute, Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research, Bremerhaven, PANGAEA [data set], <a href="https://doi.org/10.1594/PANGAEA.928656" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1594/PANGAEA.928656</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib92"><label>Mauritsen et al.(2011)</label><mixed-citation>
Mauritsen, T., Sedlar, J., Tjernström, M., Leck, C., Martin, M., Shupe, M., Sjogren, S., Sierau, B., Persson, P. O. G., Brooks, I. M., and Swietlicki, E.: An Arctic CCN-limited cloud-aerosol regime, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 165–173, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-165-2011" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-165-2011</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib93"><label>McCluskey et al.(2014)</label><mixed-citation>
McCluskey, C. S., DeMott, P. J., Prenni, A. J., Levin, E. J. T., McMeeking, G. R., Sullivan, A. P., Hill, T. C. J., Nakao, S., Carrico, C. M., and Kreidenweis, S. M.:
Characteristics of atmospheric ice nucleating particles associated with biomass burning in the US: Prescribed burns and wildfire,
J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 119, 10458–10470, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JD021980" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JD021980</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib94"><label>McCluskey et al.(2018)</label><mixed-citation>
McCluskey, C. S., Ovadnevaite, J., Rinaldi, M., Atkinson, J., Belosi, F., Ceburnis, D., Marullo, S., Hill, T. C. J., Lohmann, U., Kanji, Z. A., O'Dowd, C., Kreidenweis, S. M., and  DeMott, P. J.:
Marine  and  terrestrial  organic  ice-nucleating  particles in  pristine  marine  to  continentally  influenced  Northeast  Atlantic  air  masses,
J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos.,  123,  6196–6212, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2017JD028033" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2017JD028033</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib95"><label>Mitchell et al.(2018)</label><mixed-citation>
Mitchell, D. L., Garnier, A., Pelon, J., and Erfani, E.: CALIPSO (IIR–CALIOP) retrievals of cirrus cloud ice-particle concentrations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 17325–17354, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-17325-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-17325-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib96"><label>Morrison et al.(2012)</label><mixed-citation>
Morrison,  H.,  De  Boer,  G.,  Feingold,  G.,  Harrington,  J.,  Shupe,M. D., and Sulia, K.:
Resilience of persistent Arctic mixed-phase clouds, Nat. Geosci., 5, 11–17, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib97"><label>MOSAiC(2020)</label><mixed-citation>
MOSAiC: MOSAiC homepage, available at: <a href="https://mosaic-expedition.org/" target="_blank"/>, last access: 20 October 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib98"><label>Müller et al.(1999)</label><mixed-citation>
Müller, D., Wandinger, U., and Ansmann, A.:
Microphysical particle parameters from extinction and backscatter lidar data by inversion with regularization: Theory,
Appl. Optics, 38, 2346–2357, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib99"><label>Müller et al.(2004)</label><mixed-citation>
Müller, D., Mattis, I., Ansmann, A., Wehner, B., Althausen, D., Wandinger, U., and Dubovik, O.: Closure study on optical and microphysical properties of a mixed urban and Arctic haze air mass observed with Raman lidar and Sun photometer, J. Geophys. Res., 109, D13206, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD004200" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD004200</a>, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib100"><label>Müller et al.(2014)</label><mixed-citation>
Müller, D., Hostetler, C. A., Ferrare, R. A., Burton, S. P., Chemyakin, E., Kolgotin, A., Hair, J. W., Cook, A. L., Harper, D. B., Rogers, R. R., Hare, R. W., Cleckner, C. S., Obland, M. D., Tomlinson, J., Berg, L. K., and Schmid, B.: Airborne Multiwavelength High Spectral Resolution Lidar (HSRL-2) observations during TCAP 2012: vertical profiles of optical and microphysical properties of a smoke/urban haze plume over the northeastern coast of the US, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 7, 3487–3496, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-7-3487-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-7-3487-2014</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib101"><label>Murray et al.(2010)</label><mixed-citation>
Murray, B. J., Wilson, T. W., Dobbie, S., Cui, Z., Al-Jumur, S. M. R. K.,  Möhler, O., Schnaiter, M., Wagner, R.,
Benz, S., Niemand, M., Saathoff, H., Ebert, V., Wagner, S.,  and Kärcher, B.:
Heterogeneous nucleation of ice particles on glassy aerosols under cirrus conditions,
Nat. Geosci., 3, 233–237, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo817" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo817</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib102"><label>Noel and Chepfer(2010)</label><mixed-citation>
Noel, V. and Chepfer, H.: A global view of horizontally oriented crystals  in  ice  clouds  from  Cloud-Aerosol  Lidar  and  Infrared Pathfinder Satellite Observation (CALIPSO), J. Geophys. Res., 115, D00H23, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JD012365" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JD012365</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib103"><label>Noel and Sassen(2005)</label><mixed-citation>
Noel, V. and Sassen, K.: Study of planar ice crystal orientations in ice clouds from scanning polarization lidar observations,
J. Appl.Meteorol., 44, 653–664, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib104"><label>Nott and Duck(2011)</label><mixed-citation>
Nott, G. J. and Duck, T. J.: Lidar studies of the polar troposphere. Met. Apps, 18, 383–405, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/met.289" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/met.289</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib105"><label>Ohneiser et al.(2020)</label><mixed-citation>
Ohneiser, K., Ansmann, A., Baars, H., Seifert, P., Barja, B., Jimenez, C., Radenz, M., Teisseire, A., Floutsi, A., Haarig, M., Foth, A., Chudnovsky, A., Engelmann, R., Zamorano, F., Bühl, J., and Wandinger, U.: Smoke of extreme Australian bushfires observed in the stratosphere over Punta Arenas, Chile, in January 2020: optical thickness, lidar ratios, and depolarization ratios at 355 and 532&thinsp;nm, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 8003–8015, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-8003-2020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-8003-2020</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib106"><label>Ohneiser et al.(2021)</label><mixed-citation>
Ohneiser, K., Ansmann, A., Engelmann, R., Ritter, C., Chudnovsky, A., Veselovskii, I., Baars, H., Gebauer, H., Griesche, H., Radenz, M., Hofer, J., Althausen, D., Dahlke, S., and Maturilli, M.: Siberian fire smoke in the High-Arctic winter stratosphere observed during MOSAiC 2019–2020, Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss. [preprint], <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2021-117" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2021-117</a>, in review, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib107"><label>Pappalardo et al.(2014)</label><mixed-citation>
Pappalardo, G., Amodeo, A., Apituley, A., Comeron, A., Freudenthaler, V., Linné, H., Ansmann, A., Bösenberg, J., D'Amico, G., Mattis, I., Mona, L., Wandinger, U., Amiridis, V., Alados-Arboledas, L., Nicolae, D., and Wiegner, M.: EARLINET: towards an advanced sustainable European aerosol lidar network, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 7, 2389–2409, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-7-2389-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-7-2389-2014</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib108"><label>Paukert and Hoose(2014)</label><mixed-citation>
Paukert,  M.  and  Hoose,  C.:
Modeling  immersion  freezing  with aerosol-dependent prognostic ice nuclei in Arctic mixed-phaseclouds,
J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 119, 9073–9092, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib109"><label>Petters et al.(2009)</label><mixed-citation>
Petters, M. D., Parsons, M. T., Prenni, A. J., DeMott, P. J., Kreidenweis, S. M., Carrico, C. M., Sullivan, A. P., McMeeking, G. R., Levin, E., Wold, C. E., Collett Jr., J. L., and Moosmüller, H.:
Ice nuclei emissions from biomass burning,
J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 114, D07209, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JD011532" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JD011532</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib110"><label>Petzold et al.(2007)</label><mixed-citation>
Petzold, A., Weinzierl, B., Huntrieser, H., Stohl, A., Real, E., Cozic, J., Fiebig, M., Hendricks, J., Lauer, A., Law, K., Roiger, A., Schlager, H., and Weingartner, E.: Perturbation of the European free troposphere aerosol by North American forest fire plumes during the ICARTT-ITOP experiment in summer 2004, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 5105–5127, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-5105-2007" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-5105-2007</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib111"><label>PollyNET(2020)</label><mixed-citation>
PollyNet: PollyNET lidar data base, available at: <a href="http://polly.tropos.de/" target="_blank"/>, last access: 20 October 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib112"><label>Prenni et al.(2012)</label><mixed-citation>
Prenni, A. J., DeMott, P. J., Sullivan, A. P., Sullivan, R. C., Kreidenweis, S. M., and Rogers, D. C.: Biomass burning as a potential source for atmospheric ice nuclei: Western wildfires and prescribed burns,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 39, L11805, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL051915" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL051915</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib113"><label>Quennehen et al.(2012)</label><mixed-citation>
Quennehen, B., Schwarzenboeck, A., Matsuki, A., Burkhart, J. F., Stohl, A., Ancellet, G., and Law, K. S.: Anthropogenic and forest fire pollution aerosol transported to the Arctic: observations from the POLARCAT-France spring campaign, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 6437–6454, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-6437-2012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-6437-2012</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib114"><label>Radenz et al.(2021)</label><mixed-citation>
Radenz, M., Bühl, J., Seifert, P., Baars, H., Engelmann, R., Barja González, B., Mamouri, R.-E., Zamorano, F., and Ansmann, A.: Hemispheric contrasts in ice formation in stratiform mixed-phase clouds: Disentangling the role of aerosol and dynamics with ground-based remote sensing, Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss. [preprint], <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2021-360" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2021-360</a>, in review, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib115"><label>Reid and Hobbs(1998)</label><mixed-citation>
Reid, J. S. and Hobbs, P. V.: Physical and optical properties of young smoke from individual biomass fires in Brazil, J. Geophys. Res., 103, 32013–32030, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/98JD00159" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/98JD00159</a>, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib116"><label>Ritter et al.(2016)</label><mixed-citation>
Ritter, C., Neuber, R., Schulz, A., Markowicz, K., Stachlewska, I., Lisok, J., Makuch, P., Pakszys, P., Markuszewski, P., Rozwadowska,
A., Petelski, T., Zielinski, T., Becagli, S., Traversi, R., Udisti, R., and Gausa, M.: 2014 iAREA campaign on aerosol in Spitsbergen
– Part 2: Optical properties from Raman-lidar and in-situ observations at Ny-Ålesund,
Atmos. Environ., 141, 1–19, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2016.05.053" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2016.05.053</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib117"><label>Rolph et al.(2017)</label><mixed-citation>
Rolph, G., Stein, A., and Stunder, B.: Real-time Environmental Applications and Display sYstem: READY, Environ. Model. Softw., 95, 210–228, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2017.06.025" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2017.06.025</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib118"><label>Sakai et al.(2016)</label><mixed-citation>
Sakai, T., Uchino, O., Nagai, T., Liley, B., Morino, I., and Fujimoto, T.:
Long‐term variation of stratospheric aerosols observed with lidars over Tsukuba, Japan, from 1982 and Lauder, New Zealand, from 1992 to 2015, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 121, 10283–10293, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD025132" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD025132</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib119"><label>Schill et al.(2020a)</label><mixed-citation>
Schill, G. P., DeMott, P. J., Emerson, E. W., Rauker, A. M. C.,  Kodros, J. K.,  Suski, K. J.,  Hill, T. C. J.,
Levin, E. J. T., Pierce, J. R., Farmer, D. K., and Kreidenweis, S. M.:
The contribution of black carbon to global ice nucleating particle concentrations relevant to mixed-phase clouds,
P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 117, 22705–22711, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2001674117" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2001674117</a>, 2020a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib120"><label>Schill et al.(2020b)</label><mixed-citation>
Schill,  G. P., Froyd, K. D., Bian, H., Kupc, A., Williamson, C., Brock, C. A., Ray, E., Hornbrook, R. S., Hills, A. J., Apel, E. C., Chin, M.,
Colarco, P. R., and Murphy, D. M.:
Widespread biomass burning smoke throughout the remote troposphere,
Nat. Geosci., 13, 422–427, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-020-0586-1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-020-0586-1</a>, 2020b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib121"><label>Schrod et al.(2017)</label><mixed-citation>
Schrod, J., Weber, D., Drücke, J., Keleshis, C., Pikridas, M., Ebert, M., Cvetković, B., Nickovic, S., Marinou, E., Baars, H., Ansmann, A., Vrekoussis, M., Mihalopoulos, N., Sciare, J., Curtius, J., and Bingemer, H. G.: Ice nucleating particles over the Eastern Mediterranean measured by unmanned aircraft systems, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 4817–4835, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-4817-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-4817-2017</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib122"><label>Stein et al.(2015)</label><mixed-citation>
Stein, A. F., Draxler, R. R, Rolph, G. D., Stunder, B. J. B., Cohen, M. D., and Ngan, F.: NOAA's HYSPLIT atmospheric transport and dispersion modeling system,
B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 96, 2059–2077, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-14-00110.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-14-00110.1</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib123"><label>Stohl(2006)</label><mixed-citation>
Stohl, A.: Characteristics of atmospheric transport into the Arctic troposphere, J. Geophys. Res., 111, D11306, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD006888" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD006888</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib124"><label>Twohy et al.(2010)</label><mixed-citation>
Twohy, C. H., DeMott, P. J., Pratt, K. A., Subramanian, R., Kok, G. L., Murphy, S. M., Lersch, T., Heymsfield, A. J., Wang, Z., Prather, K. A., and Seinfeld, J. H.: Relationships of biomass‐burning aerosols to ice in orographic wave clouds, J. Atmos. Sci., 67, 2437–2450, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/2010JAS3310.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/2010JAS3310.1</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib125"><label>Vaughan et al.(2021)</label><mixed-citation>
Vaughan, G., Wareing, D., and Ricketts, H.: Measurement Report: Lidar measurements of stratospheric aerosol following the 2019 Raikoke and Ulawun volcanic eruptions, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 5597–5604, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-5597-2021" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-5597-2021</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib126"><label>Verlinde et al.(2007)</label><mixed-citation>
Verlinde, J., Harrington, J. Y., McFarquhar, G. M., Yannuzzi, V. T., Avramov, A., Greenberg, S., Johnson, N., Zhang, G., Poellot, M. R.,  Mather,  J.  H.,  Turner,  D.  D.,  Eloranta,  E.  W.,  Zak,  B.  D., Prenni, A. J., Daniel, J. S., Kok, G. L., Tobin, D. C., Holz, R., Sassen, K., Spangenberg, D., Minnis, P., Tooman, T. P., Ivey, M. D., Richardson, S. J., Bahrmann, C. P., Shupe, M., DeMott, P. J., Heymsfield, A. J., and Schofield, R.: The mixed-phase Arctic cloud experiment, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 88, 205–221, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib127"><label>Veselovskii et al.(2002)</label><mixed-citation>
Veselovskii I., Kolgotin, A., Griaznov, V., Müller, D., Wandinger, U., and Whiteman, D.:
Inversion with regularization for the retrieval of tropospheric aerosol parameters from multi-wavelength lidar sounding,
Appl. Optics, 41, 3685–3699, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1364/AO.41.003685" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1364/AO.41.003685</a>, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib128"><label>Veselovskii et al.(2012)</label><mixed-citation>
Veselovskii, I., Dubovik, O., Kolgotin, A., Korenskiy, M., Whiteman, D. N., Allakhverdiev, K., and Huseyinoglu, F.: Linear estimation of particle bulk parameters from multi-wavelength lidar measurements, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 5, 1135–1145, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-5-1135-2012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-5-1135-2012</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib129"><label>Vihtakari(2020)</label><mixed-citation>
Vihtakari, M.: ggOceanMaps: Plot data on oceanographic maps using “ggplot2”, available at: <a href="https://github.com/MikkoVihtakari/ggOceanMaps" target="_blank"/>, last access: 15 November 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib130"><label>Wandinger et al.(2002)</label><mixed-citation>
Wandinger, U., Müller, D., Böckmann, C., Althausen, D., Matthias, V., Bösenberg, J., Weiß, V., Fiebig, M., Wendisch, M., Stohl, A., and Ansmann, A.: Optical and microphysical characterization of biomass-burning and industrial-pollution aerosols from  multiwavelength lidar and aircraft measurements, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 107, 7–20, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2000JD000202" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2000JD000202</a>, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib131"><label>Wang and Knopf(2011)</label><mixed-citation>
Wang, B. and Knopf, D. A.: Heterogeneous ice nucleation
on particles composed of humic‐like substances impacted by O<sub>3</sub>,
J. Geophys. Res., 116, D03205, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JD014964" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JD014964</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib132"><label>Wang et al.(2011)</label><mixed-citation>
Wang, Q., Jacob, D. J., Fisher, J. A., Mao, J., Leibensperger, E. M., Carouge, C. C., Le Sager, P., Kondo, Y., Jimenez, J. L., Cubison, M. J., and Doherty, S. J.: Sources of carbonaceous aerosols and deposited black carbon in the Arctic in winter-spring: implications for radiative forcing, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 12453–12473, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-12453-2011" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-12453-2011</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib133"><label>Wendisch et al.(2019)</label><mixed-citation>
Wendisch,  M.,  Macke,  A.,  Ehrlich,  A.,  Lüpkes,  C.,  Mech,  M.,Chechin, D., Dethloff, K., Velasco, C. B., Bozem, H., Brückner, M., Clemen, H.-C., Crewell, S., Donth, T., Dupuy, R., Ebell, K., Egerer, U., Engelmann, R., Engler, C., Eppers, O., Gehrmann,M., Gong, X., Gottschalk, M., Gourbeyre, C., Griesche, H., Hartmann, J., Hartmann, M., Heinold, B., Herber, A., Herrmann, H.,Heygster, G., Hoor, P., Jafariserajehlou, S., Jäkel, E., Järvinen, E., Jourdan, O., Kästner, U., Kecorius, S., Knudsen, E. M., Köllner, F., Kretzschmar, J., Lelli, L., Leroy, D., Maturilli, M., Mei, L., Mertes, S., Mioche, G., Neuber, R., Nicolaus, M., Nomokonova, T., Notholt, J., Palm, M., van Pinxteren, M., Quaas, J., Richter, P., Ruiz-Donoso, E., Schäfer, M., Schmieder, K., Schnaiter, M., Schneider,  J.,  Schwarzenböck,  A.,  Seifert, P.,  Shupe,  M.  D., Siebert, H., Spreen, G., Stapf, J., Stratmann, F., Vogl, T., Welti, A., Wex, H., Wiedensohler, A., Zanatta, M., and Zeppenfeld, S.: The Arctic cloud puzzle: using ACLOUD/PASCAL multiplatform observations to unravel the role of clouds and aerosol particles in Arctic amplification, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 100, 841–871, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-18-0072.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-18-0072.1</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib134"><label>Wex et al.(2019)</label><mixed-citation>
Wex, H., Huang, L., Zhang, W., Hung, H., Traversi, R., Becagli, S., Sheesley, R. J., Moffett, C. E., Barrett, T. E., Bossi, R., Skov, H., Hünerbein, A., Lubitz, J., Löffler, M., Linke, O., Hartmann, M., Herenz, P., and Stratmann, F.: Annual variability of ice-nucleating particle concentrations at different Arctic locations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 5293–5311, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-5293-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-5293-2019</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib135"><label>Willis et al.(2018)</label><mixed-citation>
Willis, M. D., Leaitch, W. R., and Abbatt, J. P.:
Processes controlling the composition and abundance of Arctic aerosol, Rev. Geophys., 56, 621–671, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2018RG000602" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2018RG000602</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib136"><label>Willis et al.(2019)</label><mixed-citation>
Willis, M. D., Bozem, H., Kunkel, D., Lee, A. K. Y., Schulz, H., Burkart, J., Aliabadi, A. A., Herber, A. B., Leaitch, W. R., and Abbatt, J. P. D.: Aircraft-based measurements of High Arctic springtime aerosol show evidence for vertically varying sources, transport and composition, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 57–76, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-57-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-57-2019</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib137"><label>WMO(1992)</label><mixed-citation>
WMO: World Meteorological Organisation, International Meteorological Vocabulary, No. 182, ISBN 92-63-02182-1, 1992.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib138"><label>Wohltmann et al.(2020)</label><mixed-citation>
Wohltmann, I., von der Gathen, P., Lehmann, R., Maturilli, M., Deckelmann, H., Manney, G. L., Davies, J., Tarasick, D., Jepsen, N., Kivi, R., Lyall, N., and Rex, M.:
Near‐complete local reduction of Arctic stratospheric ozone by severe chemical loss in spring 2020, Geophys. Res. Lett., 47, e2020GL089547, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL089547" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL089547</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib139"><label>Yang et al.(2021)</label><mixed-citation>
Yang, Y., Zhao, C., Wang, Q., Cong, Z., Yang, X., and Fan, H.: Aerosol characteristics at the three poles of the Earth as characterized by Cloud–Aerosol Lidar and Infrared Pathfinder Satellite Observations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 4849–4868, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-4849-2021" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-4849-2021</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib140"><label>Yin et al.(2019)</label><mixed-citation>
Yin, Z., Ansmann, A., Baars, H., Seifert, P., Engelmann, R., Radenz, M., Jimenez, C., Herzog, A., Ohneiser, K., Hanbuch, K., Blarel, L., Goloub, P., Dubois, G., Victori, S., and Maupin, F.: Aerosol measurements with a shipborne Sun–sky–lunar photometer and collocated multiwavelength Raman polarization lidar over the Atlantic Ocean, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 12, 5685–5698, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-12-5685-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-12-5685-2019</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib141"><label>Yu et al.(2019)</label><mixed-citation>
Yu, P., Toon, O. B.,  Bardeen, C. G., Zhu, Y.,
Rosenlof, K. H., Portmann, R. W., Thornberry, T. D.,  Gao, R.-S.,
Davis, S. M., Wolf, E. T., de Gouw, J., Peterson, D. A., Fromm, M. D., and  Robock, A.:
Black carbon lofts wildfire smoke high into the stratosphere to form a persistent plume,
Science, 365, 587–590,  <a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aax1748" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aax1748</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
