<?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 \bartext{Research article}?>
  <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-22-9859-2022</article-id><title-group><article-title>Vertical structure of biomass burning aerosol transported over the southeast Atlantic Ocean</article-title><alt-title>Vertical structure of biomass burning aerosol</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{Vertical structure of biomass burning aerosol}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{H. Harshvardhan et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Harshvardhan</surname><given-names>Harshvardhan</given-names></name>
          <email>harshvar@purdue.edu </email>
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1629-9847</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2">
          <name><surname>Ferrare</surname><given-names>Richard</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2">
          <name><surname>Burton</surname><given-names>Sharon</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2">
          <name><surname>Hair</surname><given-names>Johnathan</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2">
          <name><surname>Hostetler</surname><given-names>Chris</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2">
          <name><surname>Harper</surname><given-names>David</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2">
          <name><surname>Cook</surname><given-names>Anthony</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Fenn</surname><given-names>Marta</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Scarino</surname><given-names>Amy Jo</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Chemyakin</surname><given-names>Eduard</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff4">
          <name><surname>Müller</surname><given-names>Detlef</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0203-7654</ext-link></contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences, Purdue University, <?xmltex \hack{\break}?>West Lafayette,
IN, United States</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA, United States</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>3</label><institution>Science Systems and Applications, Inc./NASA Langley Research Center,
Hampton, VA, United States</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff4"><label>4</label><institution>Department of Physics, Astronomy and Mathematics, University of Hertfordshire,<?xmltex \hack{\break}?> Hatfield,
Hertfordshire, United Kingdom</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Harshvardhan Harshvardhan (harshvar@purdue.edu)
</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>3</day><month>August</month><year>2022</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>22</volume>
      <issue>15</issue>
      <fpage>9859</fpage><lpage>9876</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>12</day><month>October</month><year>2021</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>16</day><month>December</month><year>2021</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>4</day><month>June</month><year>2022</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>7</day><month>July</month><year>2022</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2022 </copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2022</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="d1e198">Biomass burning in southwestern Africa produces smoke plumes that
are transported over the Atlantic Ocean and overlie vast regions of
stratocumulus clouds. This aerosol layer contributes to direct and indirect
radiative forcing of the atmosphere in this region particularly during the
months of August, September, and October. There was a multi-year
international campaign to study this aerosol and its interactions with
clouds. Here, we report on the evolution of aerosol distributions and
properties as measured by the airborne high spectral resolution lidar
(HSRL-2) during the ORACLES (Observations of Aerosols above Clouds and their
intEractionS) campaign in September 2016. The NASA Langley HSRL-2 instrument
was flown on the NASA ER-2 aircraft for several days in September 2016. Data
were aggregated at two pairs of 2<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2<inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> grid
boxes to examine the evolution of the vertical profile of aerosol properties
during transport over the ocean. Results showed that the structure of the
profile of aerosol extinction and microphysical properties is maintained
over a 1 to 2 d timescale. In the 3–5 km altitude range, 95 % of
the aerosol extinction was contributed by particles in the 0.05–0.50 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" 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> radius size range with the aerosol in this size range having an average
effective radius of 0.16 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" 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>. This indicates that there is essentially
no scavenging or dry deposition at these altitudes. Moreover, there is very
little day-to-day variation in these properties, such that time sampling as
happens in such campaigns may be representative of longer periods such as
monthly means. Below 3 km, there is considerable mixing with larger aerosol,
most likely continental source near land. Furthermore, these measurements
indicated that there was often a distinct gap between the bottom of the
aerosol layer and cloud tops at the selected locations as evidenced by a
layer of several hundred meters that contained relatively low aerosol
extinction values above the clouds.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <label>1</label><title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e255">Aerosols are often considered as the most confounding element in the climate
system when simulating parameters of the Earth's current climate. Their
interaction with clouds makes the problem extremely complicated. The general
topic of aerosol–cloud interaction has been of great interest in the
scientific community: to quote the report of the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC AR5), “clouds and aerosols continue to contribute the
largest uncertainty to estimates and interpretations of the  Earth's changing
energy budget” (Boucher et al., 2013).</p>
      <p id="d1e258">In the context of these interactions, the interplay of biomass burning (BB)
aerosol and the stratocumulus clouds in the southeast (SE) Atlantic is
unique and crucial to the estimates of the energy budget of the region. This
BB aerosol arises from the seasonal burning (July–October) of agricultural
residue in the southwestern African savanna and traverses large distances
westward over the SE Atlantic Ocean. Unlike the aerosol from industrial
activity and biofuels that intermingle with clouds in many regions
(Ramanathan et al., 2001; Mechoso et al., 2013), these optically thick BB
aerosol layers overlay vast stretches of marine stratus cloud in the SE
Atlantic (Chand et al., 2009; Wilcox, 2010; Adebiyi et al., 2020) where they
have a direct radiative effect. The BB aerosol can also act as nuclei for
cloud droplets and so cause a potentially significant cloud albedo effect.
Observations and modeling studies of such interactions in the southeast
Atlantic and southern Africa regions include Diamond et al. (2018), Kacarab
et al. (2020), Mallet et al. (2020), and Gupta et al. (2022). There is also
some evidence that aerosol can alter the thermodynamics of cloud formation
through semi-direct effects (Sakaeda et al., 2011). Studies using high
resolution limited area models have shown a variety of effects including
stratus to cumulus transition resulting from these interactions (Yamaguchi
et al., 2015; Gordon et al., 2018; Lu et al., 2018). The semi-direct effect
has also been shown to be important in a limited time run of a global model
(Das et al., 2020).</p>
      <p id="d1e261">During the course of its transport over the Atlantic basin, the dense BB
aerosol layer affects the underlying clouds and Earth's radiative balance in
multiple ways. It exerts a direct radiative forcing (DRF) by scattering and
absorbing solar radiation in the atmosphere; when clouds are present, these
aerosols absorb incoming solar radiation along with the radiation reflected
by the underlying cloud surface (Chand et al., 2009; Meyer et al., 2013;
Zhang et al., 2016). Simultaneously, depending on the relative vertical
location of the aerosol with respect to the cloud deck, the cloud cover
(fraction) or liquid water path may increase or decrease in response to
heating of surrounding air masses due to aerosol absorption and subsequent
changes in atmospheric stability: the semi-direct forcing (Sakaeda et al., 2011; Wilcox, 2012; Das et al., 2020). Observations at Ascension Island show
that daytime cloud cover and relative humidity are lower when there is more
smoke in the marine boundary layer (Zhang and Zuidema, 2019). Moreover, as
the marine boundary layer (MBL) deepens farther offshore and north of
5<inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S, subsiding aerosol particles become entrained into the
MBL and interact with the clouds as cloud condensation nuclei to affect
their microphysics (indirect forcing) (Costantino and Bréon, 2013; Painemal
et al., 2014).</p>
      <p id="d1e273">In the context of simulating the above alluded aerosol radiative effects, it
is vital that aerosol–cloud overlap characteristics are accurately
represented within the models. The quantification of these aerosol–cloud
overlap characteristics in the models is necessary for a variety of reasons.
For example, previous studies have found that the sign and magnitude of DRF
of absorbing aerosol above clouds (AAC) critically depends upon the
reflectance and coverage of the underlying cloud surfaces along with the
optical properties, composition, and size distribution of the overlying
aerosols (Keil and Haywood, 2003; Chand et al., 2009). Additionally, the
magnitude and sign of the aerosol semi-direct effects are quite sensitive to
the vertical distribution of aerosols especially with respect to the
vertical location of clouds (Penner et al., 2003; McFarquhar and Wang, 2006;
Koch and Del Genio, 2010).</p>
      <p id="d1e277">Here, we address the evolution of the vertical properties of BB aerosol as it
travels in the marine environment after leaving the African land mass.
Section 2 identifies the field campaign and specifies the geographic region
selected for the analysis and rationale for that choice. Section 3 describes
the attributes of the instrument and key parameters related to the aerosol
that can be extracted from the measurements. Section 4 presents the results, followed by a summary and conclusion in Sect. 5.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <label>2</label><title>Field campaigns</title>
      <p id="d1e288">The concerns mentioned above were the driving force behind plans for several
international multi-year field campaigns; ORACLES (Observations of Aerosols
above Clouds and their intEractionS, Redemann et al., 2021), CLARIFY-2017
(CLoud–Aerosol–Radiation Interactions and Forcing for Year 2017, Haywood et
al., 2021), and LASIC (Layered Atlantic Smoke Interactions with Clouds,
Zuidema et al., 2016, 2018). A key component of the September 2016 NASA
ORACLES Intensive Observation Period (IOP) was the vertical profiling of
aerosol properties measured by an airborne lidar, the NASA Langley High
Spectral Resolution Lidar-2, HSRL-2 (Burton et al., 2018), on board the NASA
ER-2, which was based in Walvis Bay, Namibia for operations during 2016,
the deployment covered in this study. In the following 2 years, the instrument was on board the P-3 flying out of São Tomé. The siting
and flight tracks chosen ensured adequate coverage of the seasonal BB
aerosol.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <label>2.1</label><title>Meteorology</title>
      <p id="d1e298">The September monthly mean meteorological situation is shown in Fig. 1 from Modern-Era Retrospective analysis for Research and
Applications, Version 2 (MERRA2) reanalysis (Buchard et al., 2017; Randles et al., 2017) along with locations of relevant sites. A thorough meteorological analysis for all
ORACLES deployments is provided in Ryoo et al. (2021). For the period under
consideration here, they found that the African Easterly Jet-South (AEJ-S),
fast-moving zonal easterlies centered on 650 hPa around 5–15<inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S,
was active and corresponded closely to the long-term climatology. Figure 2
shows 650 hPa winds from MERRA2 reanalysis at the beginning, at the end, and
on 2 intermediate days during which HSRL-2 measurements were made. ER-2
flight tracks during the September 2016 IOP are shown in Fig. 3. Note that
flights were primarily confined to within roughly 1000 km of the African
coast with only the 22 September flight venturing further. Flights such as
executed during the IOP are unable to follow air parcels in a Lagrangian
fashion to examine the evolution of smoke plumes. Here, we provide an
alternate framework by which to study evolving aerosol properties in an
average sense. In order to establish average characteristics of the BB smoke
plume as it travels over the ocean, we have chosen five grid boxes of
2<inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> latitude and longitude on a side at various distances from the source and aggregated observations. The choice of grid boxes was based on
the availability of data from the flights (Fig. 3) and the general direction
of transport of the smoke as evidenced by the wind fields in Fig. 2. The
grid boxes so chosen are marked on Figs. 2 and 3, and the rationale for the
choice is explained below.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 1</label><caption><p id="d1e321">MERRA2 monthly mean reanalysis of 900 and 650 hPa streamlines for
September 2016. Stations marked are Ascension Island (ASI), Lubango (LUB), a
long-term AERONET site at 2 km elevation, and Walvis Bay (WB) where ER-2
flights originated from during the September 2016 ORACLES IOP. Flights in
August 2017 and September/October 2018 originated from São Tomé
(ST).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=412.564961pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/9859/2022/acp-22-9859-2022-f01.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 2</label><caption><p id="d1e332">MERRA2 reanalysis of 650 hPa winds at 12:00 UTC on 12,
16, 20, and 24 September 2016. Grid boxes in the study are marked with letters.
</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=441.017717pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/9859/2022/acp-22-9859-2022-f02.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 3</label><caption><p id="d1e344">HSRL-2 science data flight tracks during the September 2016 IOP.
Letters refer to the grid boxes identified in Fig. 2 (© Google
Earth).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/9859/2022/acp-22-9859-2022-f03.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 4</label><caption><p id="d1e355">Frequency distribution of 48 h backward trajectories of air
parcels arriving at 3500 m above the centers of grid boxes A and C over the
time period of the campaign. Grid boxes B and D are upstream of grid boxes A
and C, respectively.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/9859/2022/acp-22-9859-2022-f04.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e364">Figure 4 shows 48 h backward trajectory frequency analyses at 3.5 km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> roughly
the central altitude of the plume using NOAA Hybrid Single-Particle Lagrangian Integrated
Trajectory (HYSPLIT) trajectory calculations (<uri>https://www.ready.noaa.gov/HYSPLIT_traj.php</uri>, last access: 18 September 2021)
which were carried out using archived Global Data Assimilation System (GDAS) 0.5<inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> meteorology (Stein et al., 2015). The frequency distribution is a 48 h history of the paths
taken by air parcels arriving at the grid boxes marked A and C at 3500 m
altitude. The time period of the frequency analyses covers the entire period
during which HSRL-2 measurements were made, 12–24 September 2016. The
selected grid box pairs indicate that Box A receives aerosol that has
earlier crossed Box B, and Box C is downwind of Box D; boxes B and D receive aerosol directly from BB sources on land. The grid box pairs A/B and C/D can
therefore provide information on the evolution of the microphysics and
vertical distribution of BB aerosol plumes after leaving the continent. This
strategy is similar to that used in comparisons of models with observations
for this campaign by Shinozuka et al. (2020), who also showed that observations made on the sampled days were representative of monthly means.
In addition to the four boxes strongly influenced by smoke, a southern box,
E, has been chosen to provide a control contrast to the other areas in that
it is influenced primarily by maritime air as seen from Figs. 1 and 2.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <label>2.2</label><title>ORACLES 2016 IOP</title>
      <p id="d1e394">The days during the campaign that were included in the averaging procedure
are shown in Table 1. Also included is the typical time of the day when the measurements were made, which is a
function of the flight pattern of the ER-2. The
number of lidar return profiles averaged for each grid box and statistics
related to the backward trajectories are also listed. These grid boxes
contained aircraft tracks on multiple days during which trajectory analysis
showed near-uniform wind direction between 2.5 and 4.5 km altitude
throughout the IOP. With the exception of the grid box centered at
22<inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S, 9<inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E, all indicate flow from the source
region of BB aerosol. Table 1 also lists the mean and standard deviation of
time duration in hours spent over water of air parcels arriving at 3500 m
altitude at the grid box during the averaging period. There is no entry for
Box E since arriving air had a maritime source and did not originate from
land. It must be stressed that the duration is not calculated from the
source region on land which is distributed over a large area of central
Africa (e.g., Fig. 9 of Redemann et al., 2021) and cannot be uniquely
identified with specific observations made over the ocean. The plume has
already been airborne over land for several hours (see Fig. 4) and aerosol
would have undergone transformations that occur at short timescales (Cappa
et al., 2020). The duration was calculated by running HYSPLIT backward
trajectories of air parcels arriving every six hours starting at 06:00 UTC on
the days of the first flight and ending at 18:00 UTC on the days of the last
flight of the averaging period, and is shown in some detail in Fig. 5 which
essentially reflects the profile of the prevailing wind speeds. The
inference is that BB smoke at 3500 m altitude arrives at A on average about
30 h after passing B and arrives at C 35 h after passing D. The change in
selected aerosol properties as measured by the HSRL-2 during this travel in
the marine environment provides information on the evolution of the plume
during this time period.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Table 1</label><caption><p id="d1e418">Averaging area, flight time periods, the duration over water and
number of HYSPLIT backward trajectories, and number of HSRL-2 profiles in
each grid box used in the study.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="6">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Box</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Averaging area</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Averaging days</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Time of</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Duration in hours</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Number of</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">day</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">over water at 3.5 km</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">profiles</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">A</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">11–9<inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S; 1<inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> W–1<inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">12 and 16 Sep</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">11:00 UTC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">44.3 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 7.0 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">19</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">50</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">B</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">10–8<inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S; 8–10<inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">12, 16, and 18 Sep</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">10:00 UTC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">14.9 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 4.5 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">27</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">56</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">C</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">16–14<inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S; 4–6<inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">12 and 16 Sep</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">13:00 UTC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">40.4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 7.2 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">19</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">51</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">D</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">14–12<inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S; 10–12<inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">18 and 24 Sep</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">09:00 UTC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">5.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2.0 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">27</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">46</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">E</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">23–21<inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S; 8–10<inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">20 and 22 Sep</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">14:00 UTC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">36</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5"><?xmltex \currentcnt{5}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 5</label><caption><p id="d1e773">Duration of time spent over water of air parcels arriving at grid
boxes marked on the figure. Solid lines are median values and the shaded
portion is the range of the 75th and 25th percentile. The number
of trajectories used for the calculation are in Table 1. Trajectory hours
are shown in reverse to correspond to the map in Fig. 4.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=199.169291pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/9859/2022/acp-22-9859-2022-f05.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <label>3</label><title>HSRL-2</title>
      <p id="d1e791">The NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC) HSRL-2 uses the HSRL technique to independently retrieve aerosol extinction and backscatter (Shipley et al., 1983; Grund and
Eloranta, 1991; She et al., 1992) without a priori assumptions on aerosol
type or extinction–to–backscatter ratio. By using the HSRL technique,
HSRL-2, like its predecessor HSRL-1 (Hair et al., 2008), provides accurate
backscatter profiles even in situations where the lidar beam is attenuated
by overlying cloud or aerosol as long as it is not completely attenuated.
The LaRC HSRL-2 employs the HSRL technique at 355 and 532 nm, and the
standard backscatter technique at 1064 nm. It also measures aerosol and
cloud depolarization at all three wavelengths. The HSRL-2 provides
vertically resolved measurements of the following extensive and intensive
aerosol parameters below the aircraft (approximate archival horizontal,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and vertical resolutions, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>z</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, are listed assuming ER-2
cruise speed).
<list list-type="bullet"><list-item>
      <p id="d1e816"><italic>Extensive parameters.</italic><fn id="Ch1.Footn1"><p id="d1e820">By the term <italic>extensive</italic>, we refer to optical parameters, such as
extinction, that are influenced by the amount (concentration) and type
(size, composition, shape) of aerosol/cloud particles. <italic>Intensive</italic> properties, on the
other hand, are those that depend only on the nature of the particles and
not on their quantity or concentration but rather depend only on aerosol
type (Anderson et al., 2003).</p></fn>  Backscatter coefficient, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>,
at 355, 532, and 1064 nm (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> km, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>z</mml:mi><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">15</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m); extinction coefficient, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, at 355 and 532 nm
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> km, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>z</mml:mi><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">300</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m); and
optical depth at 355 and 532 nm (integrating the profile of extinction). The
aerosol optical depth (AOD) is a critical quantity in discussions of the
influence of aerosol on climate (Boucher et al., 2013).</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e902"><italic>Intensive parameters.</italic> Extinction–to–backscatter ratio of aerosol, the lidar ratio,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, at 355 and 532 nm (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> km, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>z</mml:mi><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">300</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m);
depolarization, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi><mml:mo>⊥</mml:mo></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi><mml:mo>∥</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, at 355, 532, and
1064 nm (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> km, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>z</mml:mi><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">15</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m);
and aerosol backscatter wavelength dependence (i.e., Ångström
exponent for aerosol backscatter – directly related to the backscatter
color ratio) for two wavelength pairs (355–532 and 532–1064 nm, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> km, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>z</mml:mi><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">15</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m).</p></list-item></list>
The overall systematic error associated with the backscatter calibration is
estimated to be less than 5 % for the 355 and 532 nm channels and 20 %
for 1064 nm (Burton et al., 2015). Under typical conditions, the total
systematic error for extinction is estimated to be less than 0.01 km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" 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 532 nm. The random errors for all aerosol products are
typically less than 10 % for the backscatter and depolarization ratios
(Hair et al., 2008). Rogers et al. (2009) validated the HSRL extinction
coefficient profiles and found that the HSRL extinction profiles are within
the typical state-of-the-art systematic error at visible wavelengths (Schmid
et al., 2006). Since HSRL-2 includes the capability to measure backscatter
at three wavelengths and extinction at two wavelengths, “3<inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>2<inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>” microphysical retrieval algorithms (Müller et al.,
1999a, b; Veselovskii et al., 2002) are used to retrieve height-resolved
parameters such as aerosol effective radius and number, surface, and volume
concentrations (Müller et al., 2014; Sawamura et al., 2017). Here, we
restrict ourselves to the effective radius of the particles.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4">
  <label>4</label><title>Results</title>
      <p id="d1e1085">In this study of the vertically resolved evolving properties of BB aerosol,
we present key lidar measurements and microphysical results obtained by
performing the “3<inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>2<inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>” retrieval mentioned in Sect. 3.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1">
  <label>4.1</label><title>Lidar</title>
      <p id="d1e1112">Vertical profiles averaged over the times of overflight in 2<inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2<inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> latitude/longitude boxes shown in Fig. 3 on the days
given in Table 1 are for the following properties:<?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
<list list-type="order"><list-item>
      <p id="d1e1144">Aerosol extinction at 532 nm, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, determined by aerosol number concentration, microphysical properties, and relative humidity;</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e1159">Backscatter Ångström exponent between 1064 and 532 nm, an indication of particle size;</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e1163">Aerosol depolarization at 532 nm, a measure of particle asphericity; and
<?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?></p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e1168">The lidar ratio (ratio of aerosol extinction to backscatter) at 532 nm, a marker for aerosol
composition.</p></list-item></list>
Inspection of the wind field at 650 hPa in Fig. 2 and backward trajectory
frequency plots in Fig. 4 suggest that the grid boxes chosen fit naturally
into two pairs of tracks of the widespread BB aerosol field. The northern
pair, identified in Table 1 as A and B, centered around 10<inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S, is
in a faster zonal track whereas the grid boxes C and D are in a track
centered between 13–15<inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S that is slightly slower and has a
component from the north over a stretch of water (Fig. 2). The two pairs can
then provide information on the evolution of aerosol properties over a time
scale of 1 to 2 d. Figures 6–9 show the aerosol extinction,
backscatter Ångström exponent, aerosol depolarization, and lidar
ratio for the two pairs of grid boxes and Box E which is at the southern
edge of the region influenced by the BB aerosol. The results presented are
1 min averages of independent 10 s vertical profiles for backscatter
Ångström exponent and depolarization and 1 min averages for
extinction and lidar ratio profiles. From Table 1, the mean time elapsed
between B and A is 29.4 h and that between D and C is 34.9 h. It should be
pointed out that parameter values shown below the level of mean cloud top
are averages of lidar returns through breaks in the stratus deck and are not
relevant for this study. If we use the low cut-off of an extinction
coefficient of 15 Mm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" 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> to indicate an aerosol-free layer (Shinozuka et
al., 2020), then Fig. 6 indicates that the bulk of the smoke layers
encountered at these distances from land were separated from the cloud top,
a feature more prevalent during the 2016 IOP than in 2017 and 2018 (Redemann
et al., 2021).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F6" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{6}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 6</label><caption><p id="d1e1205">Average vertical profiles of the aerosol extinction coefficient at
532 nm in grid boxes A (upper left), B (upper right), C (middle left), D
(middle right), and E (lower left). The averaging area, dates of flights, and
total number of 1 min profiles are also shown. The dark line represents
the median value and gray shades contain the 25th to 75th
percentiles. Dashed line refers to the mean cloud top height.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=384.112205pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/9859/2022/acp-22-9859-2022-f06.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e1214">The northern plume is a column of aerosol of relatively constant extinction
from just above 2.5 to 5 km while the southern plume has a profile of
extinction that increases nearly linearly with height from a minimum near
the cloud top to a maximum at 5 km (Fig. 6). The vertical structure of the
aerosol profiles measured by HSRL-2 was compared to water vapor profiles
represented by the MERRA2 model. Pistone et al. (2021) explored the relationship between aerosols, CO, and water vapor as measured by ORACLES
airborne in situ measurements and represented by models including MERRA2.
They found the MERRA2 water vapor profiles, like the measured water vapor
profiles, exhibited a linear relationship with CO and biomass burning plume
strength; they also found that smoky, humid air produced by daytime
convection over the continent advected over the ocean and into the ORACLES
study region. MERRA2 water vapor profiles produced at 3 h
increments and 72 pressure levels were interpolated to the times and
locations of the HSRL-2 profiles. Water vapor mixing ratio generally
decreased significantly just above the PBL then increased for altitudes
around 2 to 3 km before decreasing again. This behavior is generally
consistent with the relationship between water vapor and aerosol scattering
reported by Pistone et al. (2021).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F7" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{7}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 7</label><caption><p id="d1e1220">As in Fig. 6 but for the wavelength-dependent backscatter
Ångström exponent between 1064 and 532 nm.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=384.112205pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/9859/2022/acp-22-9859-2022-f07.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F8" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{8}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 8</label><caption><p id="d1e1231">As in Fig. 6 but for the aerosol depolarization at 532 nm.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=384.112205pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/9859/2022/acp-22-9859-2022-f08.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F9" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{9}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 9</label><caption><p id="d1e1242">As in Fig. 6 but for the lidar ratio at 532 nm.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=384.112205pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/9859/2022/acp-22-9859-2022-f09.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F10" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{10}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 10</label><caption><p id="d1e1253">Relative humidity (%) in grid boxes A (upper left), B (upper
right), C (middle left), D (middle right), and E (lower left) from MERRA2
reanalysis corresponding to the HSRL-2 profiles shown in Figs. 6–9. The dark
line represents the median value and gray shades contain the 25th to
75th percentiles. Dashed line refers to the mean cloud top height.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=384.112205pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/9859/2022/acp-22-9859-2022-f10.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e1263">Figure 10 shows the median, 25th, and 75th percentile relative
humidity (RH) profiles computed by interpolating the MERRA2 0.5<inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
3 h humidity profiles to the locations and times of the HSRL-2
measurements. The profiles typically show a more pronounced increase in RH
with altitude that more closely follows the HSRL-2 measurements of aerosol
extinction profiles, although the MERRA2 profiles typically begin decreasing
above 4 km whereas the airborne in situ RH measurements and HSRL-2 aerosol
extinction profiles begin decreasing above 5 km. Interestingly, during three
of the dates (12, 16, 22 September), considerable portions of the smoke layers
correspond to MERRA2 relative humidity above 60 %–70 %. This increase in RH
with altitude could help explain at least some of the increase in aerosol
extinction with height observed in the HSRL-2 profiles of the C/D Box pair.
Aerosol humidification often amplified the increase in aerosol extinction by
factors of 1.5 or more (Doherty et al., 2022).</p>
      <p id="d1e1275">The Ångström exponent (Fig. 7) and depolarization (Fig. 8) indicate
the presence of fine spherical particles at the top of the plume and
increasing sizes towards the bottom. The lidar ratio (Fig. 9) above 3 km for
the two pairs is between 70 and 80 sr, suggesting strong absorption
(Müller et al., 2019), but is considerably less and highly variable in
Box E and in the lower layers of the aerosol plume in Box D where the smoke
plume most likely has components of continental aerosol such as dust and
pollution typical of the nearby Namibian coast (Klopper et al., 2020). The
most striking feature of the results is the very small profile-to-profile
variability of the intensive lidar parameters in the upper 2 km of
the plume over the course of several days as evident from the range of
values in the 25–75 percentile shaded grey in Figs. 7–9. This suggests
strongly that the particles maintain their size, shape, and absorbing
properties over the first few days of transport over the ocean. This result
is of some importance for climate studies in which the radiative properties
of BB aerosol are input to the calculation of radiative forcing. Complex
chain aggregates as found near the source of fires (Pósfai et al., 2003;
China et al., 2013) are typically not represented in climate models.
However, if the aerosol is already spherical and maintains its size over the
time period of radiative interactions being studied, then core–shell models
of varying degrees of complexity could perhaps suffice (Zhang et al., 2020).
The lower portion of the plume containing larger BB aerosol particles is
subject to mixing with marine and continental particles from regions not
affected by biomass burning and is highly variable in nature. This would be
more difficult to model, but Fig. 6 shows that the aerosol extinction
coefficient decreases rapidly at lower levels so errors in representation
may be acceptable.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS2">
  <label>4.2</label><title>Microphysics</title>
      <p id="d1e1286">The lidar measurements are inverted to obtain information regarding particle
size. The inversion is performed on 1 min averages of six independent
10 s backscatter profiles and 1 min average extinction profiles.
Details of the inversion process are in Müller et al. (2019) and
references therein. The particle size distribution is represented using a
series of eight triangular basis functions that can represent both monomodal
and bimodal size distributions (Müller et al., 2019). Points to note are that the procedure
makes the following assumptions: the particles are spherical and homogeneous
having wavelength-independent complex index of refraction. The low
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">&lt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 5 %) values of depolarization through most of the plume, shown
in Fig. 8, suggest that the spherical assumption is justified. There is
most likely structure and inhomogeneity in the core of the particles but
current particle optical models are unable to incorporate these
complexities. Results from this inversion procedure have been compared to
coincident airborne in situ particle measurements. Müller et al. (2014)
present results from a campaign off the northeast coast of the US showing
that the inversion results agree with in situ measurements of effective
radius and also number, surface area, and volume concentration within error
bars. Sawamura et al. (2017) report on campaigns in the wintertime San
Joaquin Valley of California and summertime near Houston, TX. They found
high correlation and low bias in surface and volume concentration in situ
measurements relative to HSRL with the best agreement for submicron
fine-mode aerosol which is most relevant to the current study. Müller
et al. (2019) report retrievals and their uncertainty for 1 d in the
ORACLES campaign, 22 September 2016. Considering only optical data with
strong signal–to–noise ratio, they estimate retrieval errors are 25 % for
number concentration. The relative uncertainty in effective radius for parts
of the flight track where particle size was nearly constant was below 20 %.</p>
      <p id="d1e1296">In order to help separate particles that have BB source from coarser
particles of continental or marine origin, we specify a submicron fraction
(SMF) as the contribution to the extinction at 532 nm of particles in the
radius range 0.05–0.50 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" 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> (Anderson et al., 2005). Figure 11 shows
the profiles of SMF for the five grid boxes and, not surprisingly, the bulk
of the smoke plume especially between 3 and 5 km contains aerosol almost
entirely in the submicron range. Below 3 km, at locations both near and
further way from the coast, there is a marked increase in the fraction of
larger particles. The increase in depolarization (Fig. 8) at these lower
levels and a decrease in the lidar ratio (Fig. 9) suggest mixing with the
aforementioned non-BB aerosol particles. However, the sharp decrease in
extinction below 3 km (Fig. 6) indicates that their contribution to direct
radiative effects would be minimal. Finally, Fig. 12 shows the vertical
profile of the effective radius of the SMF aerosol population. The effective
radius is 0.16 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" 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> with little variation between 3 and 5 km. Of greater
significance is that it remains very similar between the pairs of grid boxes
along the transport trajectory of the smoke. The retrieved effective radius
is similar to the results presented by Müller et al. (2014) for a
mixture of urban aerosol and smoke. Their comparison with in situ
measurements showed a slight overestimate but within a standard deviation.
The retrieved and in situ results also show that the particle size is
uniform with altitude even when the number concentration drops by a factor
of 3. Another set of prior comparisons of HSRL-2 and in situ
measurements is provided in Sawamura et al. (2017). Here again the
effective radius of the submicron fraction of particles, 0.15 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" 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>, is
uniform with altitude and comparable though biased slightly low compared to
in situ observations.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F11" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{11}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 11</label><caption><p id="d1e1331">Average vertical profiles of the submicron fraction in grid boxes
A (upper left), B (upper right), C (middle left), D (middle right), and E
(lower left). The averaging area, dates of flights, and total number of
1 min profiles in the average are also shown. The dark line represents
the median value and gray shades contain the 25th to 75th
percentiles.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=384.112205pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/9859/2022/acp-22-9859-2022-f11.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F12" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{12}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 12</label><caption><p id="d1e1343">As in Fig. 11 but for the effective radius of the submicron
fraction.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=384.112205pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/9859/2022/acp-22-9859-2022-f12.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e1352">The effective radii of the SMF aerosol which typically vary between 0.15
to 0.20 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" 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>, are generally consistent with the sizes reported
previously for smoke aerosol in the ORACLES region. Haywood et al. (2021)
provide a composite of the aerosol sizes for biomass burning aerosol off the
South African coast. These size distributions, which were derived from
airborne in situ measurements (Haywood et al., 2003; Peers et al., 2019; Wu
et al., 2020), typically correspond to SMF aerosol effective radii between
0.14–0.17 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" 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> and were for the dry aerosol. Shinozuka et al. (2020)
reported on airborne aerosol sizes measured during ORACLES by an
Ultra-High Sensitivity Aerosol Spectrometer (UHSAS) deployed on the NASA P-3
aircraft. The UHSAS measured particles with dry diameters between 60 and
1000 nm. SMF aerosol effective radii derived from the UHSAS measurements of
volume mean diameter were generally around 0.09–0.10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" 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> for the dry
aerosol. Shinozuka et al. (2020) noted that the UHSAS measurements were
somewhat undersized and so were adjusted to account for this effect; this
adjustment improved scattering closure with coincident nephelometer
measurements. As discussed in Sect. 4.1, the RH on some days was above
60 %–70 % so that effective radii under ambient conditions could be expected
to be somewhat higher than for the dry aerosol. Using measurements from an
airborne Differential Aerosol Sizing and Hygroscopicity Spectrometer Probe
(DASH-SP), Shingler et al. (2016) quantified the size-resolved growth
factors for several aerosol types; they found that at RH <inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 70 %–80 %, particle diameters for biomass burning aerosols were about
15 %–20 % larger than for the dry aerosol. Xu et al. (2021) derived aerosol
properties during the 2016 ORACLES mission using an inversion algorithm that
combined HSRL-2 and Research Scanning Polarimeter (RSP) remote sensing
measurements. These retrieved aerosol properties were then compared with
those derived from the UHSAS measurements described by Shinozuka et al. (2020). For measurements acquired on 12 September 2016, the SMF aerosol
effective radius derived from the remote sensing measurements was generally
between 0.12–0.15 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" 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> and was only slightly (0.012 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" 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>) higher
than the effective radii for the (dry) SMF aerosol derived from the UHSAS
measurements. This suggests that some of this difference is associated with
differences in RH between the remote sensing retrievals and the in situ
measurements.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5" sec-type="conclusions">
  <label>5</label><title>Conclusions</title>
      <p id="d1e1423">The results of the aggregated HSRL-2 profiles during the 2016 ORACLES IOP
presented here show two main findings. These are however limited to a brief
period in the transport of BB smoke from continental Africa over marine
clouds in the Atlantic Ocean. This is a limitation of the 2016 campaign
because the flight tracks remained within 1000 km of the coast. For the
period of 1 to 2 d after crossing the land–ocean boundary, the
fraction of all particles that are in the submicron range in the main smoke
plume between 3 and 5 km is around 95 %. The effective radius of the
submicron particles in this altitude interval is 0.16 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" 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> and
essentially constant with altitude. The particle size is comparable to
measured particle sizes in previous campaigns that sampled aerosol that was
a mixture of urban haze and smoke (Müller et al., 2014; Sawamura et al.,
2017). Moreover, the shape of the median vertical profile of extinction does
not change during the first 2 d of transport over water suggesting the
absence of dry deposition and wet scavenging. The low (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">&lt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.05)
depolarization ratio of the submicron particles signifies that they are well
coated and the assumption of sphericity in the inversion procedure and
models that estimate the radiative effects of aerosol is justified. The BB
aerosol mixed with continental and marine aerosol at the base of the plume but
during the September 2016 IOP this layer of mixed aerosol tended to have
very low extinction coefficients suggesting low abundance, and there was
often a distinct gap between the plume and the cloud tops.</p>
      <p id="d1e1443">The HSRL-2 instrument was also deployed in the 2017 and 2018 ORACLES
campaigns but was deployed on the NASA P-3 which often flew at low altitude
to acquire in situ measurements of aerosols and clouds. Consequently, the
HSRL-2 was not able to make continuous measurements of the BB aerosol plumes
in a manner similar as when deployed on the ER-2. However, there are
segments of the track that can provide similar information to the data
obtained in the 2016 campaign but for a different time period. Moreover,
some flight tracks extended much further from land (Doherty et al., 2022).
Analysis of the later campaigns will provide information on the physical
evolution of aerosol that has aged for a longer period than is covered in
this study.</p>
</sec>

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

      <p id="d1e1450">HSRL-2 optical data and retrieved inversion data are available at the NASA
archive site <uri>https://espoarchive.nasa.gov/archive/browse/oracles/id8/ER2</uri> (last access: 22 April 2017) and all ORACLES data
are accessible via the digital object identifier (DOI) provided under ORACLES Science Team (2020) reference
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5067/Suborbital/ORACLES/ER2/2016_V2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5067/Suborbital/ORACLES/ER2/2016_V2</ext-link>.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="authorcontribution"><title>Author contributions</title>

      <p id="d1e1462">HH performed smoke backward trajectories and analyses related to HSRL-2 products and wrote most of the paper.
JH, CH, DH, AC developed the instrument. DH, AC operated the instrument. RF, SB developed plans for deploying
the instrument and performed analyses of HSRL-2 data products. RF produced sections of the paper and produced
HSRL-2 graphics. MF, AJS produced HSRL-2 data products. EC and DM developed and implemented
multiwavelength lidar retrievals.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests"><title>Competing interests</title>

      <p id="d1e1468">The contact author has declared that none of the authors has any competing interests.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="disclaimer"><title>Disclaimer</title>

      <p id="d1e1474">Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e1480">The lead author would like to thank NASA Langley Research Center for hosting him during a
sabbatical when this study was initiated. We wish to thank the NASA ER-2 pilots and ground crew for their
extensive support during ORACLES. The authors gratefully acknowledge the NOAA Air Resources Laboratory (ARL) for the provision of the HYSPLIT transport and dispersion model and READY website (<uri>https://www.ready.noaa.gov</uri>, last access: 18 September 2021) used in this publication.</p></ack><notes notes-type="financialsupport"><title>Financial support</title>

      <p id="d1e1488">HSRL-2 participation in ORACLES was supported by NASA through the Earth Venture
Suborbital-2 (EVS-2) program (grant no. 13-EVS2-13-0028). Funding for this work was also provided by NASA
through the Radiation Sciences Program.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="reviewstatement"><title>Review statement</title>

      <p id="d1e1494">This paper was edited by Nikos Hatzianastassiou and reviewed by two anonymous referees.</p>
  </notes><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Adebiyi, A. A., Zuidema, P., Chang, I., Burton, S. P., and Cairns, B.: Mid-level clouds are frequent above the southeast Atlantic stratocumulus clouds, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 11025–11043, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-11025-2020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-20-11025-2020</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Anderson, T. L., Charlson, R. J., Winker, D. M., Ogren, J. A., and
Holmén, K.: Mesoscale variations of tropospheric aerosols, J. Atmos.
Sci., 60, 119–136, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Anderson, T. L., Wu, Y., Chu, D. A., Schmid, B., Redemann, J., and Dubovik,
O.: Testing the MODIS satellite retrieval of aerosol fine-mode fraction, J.
Geophys. Res., 110, D18204, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD005978" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2005JD005978</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Boucher, O., Randall, D., Artaxo, P., Bretherton, C., Feingold, G., Forster,
P., Kerminen, V.-M. Kondo, Y., Liao, H., Lohmann, U., Rasch, P., Satheesh,
S. K., Sherwood, S., Stevens B., and Zhang, X. Y.: Clouds and Aerosols, in:
Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working
Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change, edited by: Stocker, T. F., Qin, D., Plattner, G.-K., Tignor, M., Allen,
S. K., Boschung, J., Nauels, A., Xia, Y., Bex V., and Midgley, P. M., Cambridge University Press,  571–657,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1017/CBO9781107415324.016</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Buchard, V., Randles, C. A., da Silva, A. M., Darmenov, A., Colarco, P. R.,
Govindaraju, R., Ferrare, R. A., Hair, J., Beyersdorf, A. J. Ziemba L. D.,
and Yu, H.: The MERRA-2 aerosol reanalysis, 1980 onwards Part II: Evaluation
and case studies, J. Climate, 30, 6851–6871, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0613.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0613.1</ext-link>,
2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><?label 1?><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.bib7"><label>7</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Burton, S. P., Hostetler, C. A., Cook, A. L., Hair, J. W., Seaman, S.,
Scola, S., Harper, D. B., Smith, J. A., Fenn, M. A., Ferrare, R. A., Saide,
P. E., Chemyakin, E. V., and Müller, D.: Calibration of a high spectral
resolution lidar using a Michelson interferometer with data examples from
ORACLES, Appl. Optics, 57, 6061–6075, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Cappa, C. D., Lim, C. Y., Hagan, D. H., Coggon, M., Koss, A., Sekimoto, K., de Gouw, J., Onasch, T. B., Warneke, C., and Kroll, J. H.: Biomass-burning-derived particles from a wide variety of fuels – Part 2: Effects of photochemical aging on particle optical and chemical properties, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 8511–8532, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-8511-2020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-20-8511-2020</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Chand, D., Wood, R., Anderson, T. L., Satheesh, S. K., and Charlson, R. J.:
Satellite-derived direct radiative effect of aerosols dependent on cloud
cover, Nat. Geosci., 2, 181–184, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/Ngeo437" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/Ngeo437</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>China, S., Mazzoleni, C., Gorkowski, K., Aiken, A. C., and Dubey, M. K.:
Morphology and mixing state of individual freshly emitted wildfire
carbonaceous particles, Nat. Commun., 4, 2122 <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms3122" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/ncomms3122</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Costantino, L. and Bréon, F.-M.: Aerosol indirect effect on warm clouds over South-East Atlantic, from co-located MODIS and CALIPSO observations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 69–88, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-69-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-13-69-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Das, S., Harshvardhan, H., and Colarco, P. R.: The influence of elevated
smoke layers on stratocumulus clouds over the SE Atlantic in the NASA
Goddard Earth Observing System (GEOS) Model,  J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 125,
e2019JD031209, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JD031209" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2019JD031209</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Diamond, M. S., Dobracki, A., Freitag, S., Small Griswold, J. D., Heikkila, A., Howell, S. G., Kacarab, M. E., Podolske, J. R., Saide, P. E., and Wood, R.: Time-dependent entrainment of smoke presents an observational challenge for assessing aerosol–cloud interactions over the southeast Atlantic Ocean, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 14623–14636, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-14623-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-18-14623-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Doherty, S. J., Saide, P. E., Zuidema, P., Shinozuka, Y., Ferrada, G. A., Gordon, H., Mallet, M., Meyer, K., Painemal, D., Howell, S. G., Freitag, S., Dobracki, A., Podolske, J. R., Burton, S. P., Ferrare, R. A., Howes, C., Nabat, P., Carmichael, G. R., da Silva, A., Pistone, K., Chang, I., Gao, L., Wood, R., and Redemann, J.: Modeled and observed properties related to the direct aerosol radiative effect of biomass burning aerosol over the southeastern Atlantic, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 1–46, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-1-2022" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-22-1-2022</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Gordon, H., Field, P. R., Abel, S. J., Dalvi, M., Grosvenor, D. P., Hill, A. A., Johnson, B. T., Miltenberger, A. K., Yoshioka, M., and Carslaw, K. S.: Large simulated radiative effects of smoke in the south-east Atlantic, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 15261–15289, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-15261-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-18-15261-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Grund, C. J., and Eloranta, E. W.: University of Wisconsin high spectral
resolution lidar, Opt. Eng., 30, 6–12, 1991.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Gupta, S., McFarquhar, G. M., O'Brien, J. R., Poellot, M. R., Delene, D. J., Miller, R. M., and Small Griswold, J. D.: Factors affecting precipitation formation and precipitation susceptibility of marine stratocumulus with variable above- and below-cloud aerosol concentrations over the Southeast Atlantic, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 2769–2793, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-2769-2022" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-22-2769-2022</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hair, J. W., Hostetler, C. A., Cook, A. L., Harper, D. B., Ferrare, R. A.,
Mack, T. L., Welch, W., Izquierdo, L. R., Hovis, F. E.: Airborne High
Spectral Resolution Lidar for profiling aerosol optical properties, Appl.
Optics, 47, 6734–6752, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1364/AO.47.006734" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1364/AO.47.006734</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Haywood, J. M., Osborne, S. R., Francis, P. N., Keil, A., Formenti, P.,
Andreae, M. O., and Kaye, P. H.: The mean physical and optical properties of
regional haze dominated by biomass burning aerosol measured from the C-130
aircraft during SAFARI 2000, J. Geophys. Res., 108, 8473,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002226" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2002JD002226</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Haywood, J. M., Abel, S. J., Barrett, P. A., Bellouin, N., Blyth, A., Bower, K. N., Brooks, M., Carslaw, K., Che, H., Coe, H., Cotterell, M. I., Crawford, I., Cui, Z., Davies, N., Dingley, B., Field, P., Formenti, P., Gordon, H., de Graaf, M., Herbert, R., Johnson, B., Jones, A. C., Langridge, J. M., Malavelle, F., Partridge, D. G., Peers, F., Redemann, J., Stier, P., Szpek, K., Taylor, J. W., Watson-Parris, D., Wood, R., Wu, H., and Zuidema, P.: The CLoud–Aerosol–Radiation Interaction and Forcing: Year 2017 (CLARIFY-2017) measurement campaign, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 1049–1084, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1049-2021" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-21-1049-2021</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Kacarab, M., Thornhill, K. L., Dobracki, A., Howell, S. G., O'Brien, J. R., Freitag, S., Poellot, M. R., Wood, R., Zuidema, P., Redemann, J., and Nenes, A.: Biomass burning aerosol as a modulator of the droplet number in the southeast Atlantic region, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 3029–3040, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-3029-2020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-20-3029-2020</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Keil, A. and Haywood, J. M.: Solar radiative forcing by biomass burning
aerosol particles during SAFARI 2000: A case study based on measured aerosol
and cloud properties, J.   Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 108, 8467,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002315" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2002JD002315</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Klopper, D., Formenti, P., Namwoonde, A., Cazaunau, M., Chevaillier, S., Feron, A., Gaimoz, C., Hease, P., Lahmidi, F., Mirande-Bret, C., Triquet, S., Zeng, Z., and Piketh, S. J.: Chemical composition and source apportionment of atmospheric aerosols on the Namibian coast, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 15811–15833, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-15811-2020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-20-15811-2020</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Koch, D. and Del Genio, A. D.: Black carbon semi-direct effects on cloud cover: review and synthesis, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 7685–7696, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-7685-2010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-10-7685-2010</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lu, Z., Liu, X., Zhang, Z., Zhao, C., Meyer, K., Rajapakshe, C., Wu, C.,
Yang, Z., and Penner, J.: Biomass smoke from southern Africa can
significantly enhance the brightness of stratocumulus over the southeastern
Atlantic Ocean, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 115, 2924–2929,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1713703115" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1073/pnas.1713703115</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Mallet, M., Solmon, F., Nabat, P., Elguindi, N., Waquet, F., Bouniol, D., Sayer, A. M., Meyer, K., Roehrig, R., Michou, M., Zuidema, P., Flamant, C., Redemann, J., and Formenti, P.: Direct and semi-direct radiative forcing of biomass-burning aerosols over the southeast Atlantic (SEA) and its sensitivity to absorbing properties: a regional climate modeling study, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 13191–13216, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-13191-2020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-20-13191-2020</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>McFarquhar, G. M. and Wang, H.: Effects of aerosols on trade wind cumuli
over the Indian Ocean: Model simulations, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 132,
821–843, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1256/qj.04.179" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1256/qj.04.179</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Mechoso, C. R., Wood, R., Weller, R., Bretherton, C. S., Clarke, A. D., Coe,
H., Fairall, C., Farrar, J. T., Feingold, G., Garreaud, R., Grados, C.,
McWilliams, J., de Szoeke, S. P., Yuter, S. E., and Zuidema, Z.:
Ocean–cloud–atmosphere–land interactions in the Southeastern Pacific: The
VOCALS program, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 95, 357–375,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-11-00246.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/BAMS-D-11-00246.1</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Meyer, K., Platnick, S., Oreopoulos, L., and Lee, D.: Estimating the direct
radiative effect of absorbing aerosols overlying marine boundary layer
clouds in the southeast Atlantic using MODIS and CALIOP, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 118, 4801–4815, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50449" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/jgrd.50449</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><?label 1?><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, 1999a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Müller, D., Wandinger, U., and Ansmann, A.: Microphysical particle
parameters from extinction and backscatter lidar data by inversion with
regularization: simulation, Appl. Optics, 38, 2358–2368, 1999b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><?label 1?><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>
      <ref id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Müller, D., Chemyakin, E., Kolgotin, A., Ferrare, R. A., Hostetler, C.
A., and Romanov, A.: Automated, unsupervised, inversion of multiwavelength
lidar data with TiARA: assessment of retrieval performance of microphysical
parameters using simulated data, Appl. Optics, 58, 4981–5007,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1364/AO.58.004981" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1364/AO.58.004981</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>ORACLES Science Team: Suite of Aerosol, Cloud, and Radiation Data Acquired Aboard ER2 During ORACLES
2016, Version 2, NASA Ames Earth Science Project Office [data set],
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5067/Suborbital/ORACLES/ER2/2016_V2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5067/Suborbital/ORACLES/ER2/2016_V2</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Painemal, D., Kato, S., and Minnis, P. : Boundary layer regulation in the
southeast Atlantic cloud microphysics during the biomass burning season as
seen by the A-train satellite constellation, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos.,
119, 11288–211302, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JD022182" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2014JD022182</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Peers, F., Francis, P., Fox, C., Abel, S. J., Szpek, K., Cotterell, M. I., Davies, N. W., Langridge, J. M., Meyer, K. G., Platnick, S. E., and Haywood, J. M.: Observation of absorbing aerosols above clouds over the south-east Atlantic Ocean from the geostationary satellite SEVIRI – Part 1: Method description and sensitivity, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 9595–9611, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-9595-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-19-9595-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Penner, J. E., Zhang, S. Y., and Chuang, C. C.: Soot and smoke aerosol may
not warm climate, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 108, 4657,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD003409" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2003JD003409</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Pistone, K., Zuidema, P., Wood, R., Diamond, M., da Silva, A. M., Ferrada, G., Saide, P. E., Ueyama, R., Ryoo, J.-M., Pfister, L., Podolske, J., Noone, D., Bennett, R., Stith, E., Carmichael, G., Redemann, J., Flynn, C., LeBlanc, S., Segal-Rozenhaimer, M., and Shinozuka, Y.: Exploring the elevated water vapor signal associated with the free tropospheric biomass burning plume over the southeast Atlantic Ocean, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 9643–9668, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-9643-2021" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-21-9643-2021</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Pósfai, M., Simonics, R., Li, J., Hobbs, P. V., and Buseck, P. R.:
Individual aerosol particles from biomass burning in southern Africa: 1.
Compositions and size distributions of carbonaceous particles, J. Geophys.
Res., 108, 8483, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002291" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2002JD002291</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Ramanathan, V., Crutzen, P. J., Kiehl, J. T., and Rosenfeld, D.: Aerosols,
climate, and the hydrological cycle, Science, 294, 2119–2124,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1064034" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1126/science.1064034</ext-link>, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Randles, C. A., daSilva, A. M., Buchard, V., Colarco, P. R., Darmenov, A.,
Govindaraju, P., Smirnov, A., Holben, B., Ferrare, R. A., Hair, J.,
Shinozuka, Y., and Flynn, C. J.: The MERRA-2 aerosol reanalysis, 1980
onward. Part I: System description and data assimilation evaluation, J.
Climate, 30, 6823–6850, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0609.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0609.1</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Redemann, J., Wood, R., Zuidema, P., Doherty, S. J., Luna, B., LeBlanc, S. E., Diamond, M. S., Shinozuka, Y., Chang, I. Y., Ueyama, R., Pfister, L., Ryoo, J.-M., Dobracki, A. N., da Silva, A. M., Longo, K. M., Kacenelenbogen, M. S., Flynn, C. J., Pistone, K., Knox, N. M., Piketh, S. J., Haywood, J. M., Formenti, P., Mallet, M., Stier, P., Ackerman, A. S., Bauer, S. E., Fridlind, A. M., Carmichael, G. R., Saide, P. E., Ferrada, G. A., Howell, S. G., Freitag, S., Cairns, B., Holben, B. N., Knobelspiesse, K. D., Tanelli, S., L'Ecuyer, T. S., Dzambo, A. M., Sy, O. O., McFarquhar, G. M., Poellot, M. R., Gupta, S., O'Brien, J. R., Nenes, A., Kacarab, M., Wong, J. P. S., Small-Griswold, J. D., Thornhill, K. L., Noone, D., Podolske, J. R., Schmidt, K. S., Pilewskie, P., Chen, H., Cochrane, S. P., Sedlacek, A. J., Lang, T. J., Stith, E., Segal-Rozenhaimer, M., Ferrare, R. A., Burton, S. P., Hostetler, C. A., Diner, D. J., Seidel, F. C., Platnick, S. E., Myers, J. S., Meyer, K. G., Spangenberg, D. A., Maring, H., and Gao, L.: An overview of the ORACLES (ObseRvations of Aerosols above CLouds and their intEractionS) project: aerosol–cloud–radiation interactions in the southeast Atlantic basin, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 1507–1563, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1507-2021" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-21-1507-2021</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Rogers, R. R., Hair, J. W., Hostetler, C. A., Ferrare, R. A., Obland, M. D., Cook, A. L., Harper, D. B., Burton, S. P., Shinozuka, Y., McNaughton, C. S., Clarke, A. D., Redemann, J., Russell, P. B., Livingston, J. M., and Kleinman, L. I.: NASA LaRC airborne high spectral resolution lidar aerosol measurements during MILAGRO: observations and validation, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 9, 4811–4826, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-4811-2009" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-9-4811-2009</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Ryoo, J.-M., Pfister, L., Ueyama, R., Zuidema, P., Wood, R., Chang, I., and Redemann, J.: A meteorological overview of the ORACLES (ObseRvations of Aerosols above CLouds and their intEractionS) campaign over the southeastern Atlantic during 2016–2018: Part 1 – Climatology, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 16689–16707, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-16689-2021" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-21-16689-2021</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Sakaeda, N., Wood, R., and Rasch, P. J.: Direct and semidirect aerosol
effects of southern African biomass burning aerosol, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 116, D12205, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JD015540" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2010JD015540</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Sawamura, P., Moore, R. H., Burton, S. P., Chemyakin, E., Müller, D., Kolgotin, A., Ferrare, R. A., Hostetler, C. A., Ziemba, L. D., Beyersdorf, A. J., and Anderson, B. E.: HSRL-2 aerosol optical measurements and microphysical retrievals vs. airborne in situ measurements during DISCOVER-AQ 2013: an intercomparison study, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 7229–7243, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-7229-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-17-7229-2017</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Schmid, B., Ferrare, R. A., Flynn, C., Elleman, R., Covert, D., Strawa, A.,
Welton, E., Turner, D., Jonsson, H., Redemann, J., Eilers, J., Ricci, K.,
Hallar, A. G., Clayton, M., Michalsky, J., Smirnov, A., Holben, B., and
Barnard, J.: How well do state-of-the-art techniques measuring the vertical
profile of tropospheric aerosol extinction compare?, J. Geophys. Res., 111,
D05S07, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD005837" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2005JD005837</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>She, C. Y., Alvarez II, R. J., Caldwell, L. M., and Krueger, D. A.:
High-spectral-resolution Rayleigh-Mie lidar measurement of aerosol and
atmospheric profiles, Opt. Lett., 17, 541–543, 1992.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Shingler, T., Crosbie, E., Ortega, A., Shiraiwa, M., Zuend, A., Beyersdorf,
A., Ziemba, L., Anderson, B., Thornhill, L., Perring, A. E., Schwarz, J. P.,
Campazano-Jost, P., Day, D. A., Jimenez, J. L., Hair, J. W., Mikoviny, T.,
Wisthaler, A., and Sorooshian, A.: Airborne characterization of
subsaturated aerosol hygroscopicity and dry refractive index from the
surface to 6.5 km during the SEAC<inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>RS campaign, J. Geophys. Res., 121,
4188–4210, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD024498" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2015JD024498</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Shinozuka, Y., Saide, P. E., Ferrada, G. A., Burton, S. P., Ferrare, R., Doherty, S. J., Gordon, H., Longo, K., Mallet, M., Feng, Y., Wang, Q., Cheng, Y., Dobracki, A., Freitag, S., Howell, S. G., LeBlanc, S., Flynn, C., Segal-Rosenhaimer, M., Pistone, K., Podolske, J. R., Stith, E. J., Bennett, J. R., Carmichael, G. R., da Silva, A., Govindaraju, R., Leung, R., Zhang, Y., Pfister, L., Ryoo, J.-M., Redemann, J., Wood, R., and Zuidema, P.: Modeling the smoky troposphere of the southeast Atlantic: a comparison to ORACLES airborne observations from September of 2016, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 11491–11526, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-11491-2020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-20-11491-2020</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Shipley, S. T., Tracy, D. H., Eloranta, E. W., Tauger, J. T., Stroga, J. T.,
Roesler, F. L., and Weinman, J. A.: High spectral resolution lidar to
measure optical scattering properties of atmospheric aerosols. 1. Theory and
instrumentation, Appl. Optics, 22, 3716–3724, 1983.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><?label 1?><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>
      <ref id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Veselovskii, I., Kolgotin, A., Grazianov, V.,  Müller, D., Wandinger, U.,
and Whiteman, D. N.: Inversion with regularization for the retrieval of
tropospheric aerosol parameters from multi-wavelength lidar sounding, Appl.
Optics, 41, 3685–3699, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wilcox, E. M.: Stratocumulus cloud thickening beneath layers of absorbing smoke aerosol, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 11769–11777, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-11769-2010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-10-11769-2010</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wilcox, E. M.: Direct and semi-direct radiative forcing of smoke aerosols over clouds, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 139–149, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-139-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-12-139-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wu, H., Taylor, J. W., Szpek, K., Langridge, J. M., Williams, P. I., Flynn, M., Allan, J. D., Abel, S. J., Pitt, J., Cotterell, M. I., Fox, C., Davies, N. W., Haywood, J., and Coe, H.: Vertical variability of the properties of highly aged biomass burning aerosol transported over the southeast Atlantic during CLARIFY-2017, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 12697–12719, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-12697-2020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-20-12697-2020</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Xu, F., Gao, L, Redemann, J., Flynn C. J., Espinosa, W. R., da Silva, A. M.,
Stamnes, S., Burton, S. P., Liu, X., Ferrare, R., Cairns, B., and Dubovik, O.:
A Combined Lidar-Polarimeter Inversion Approach for Aerosol Remote Sensing
Over Ocean, Front. Remote Sens., 2, 620871, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3389/frsen.2021.620871" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3389/frsen.2021.620871</ext-link>,
2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Yamaguchi, T., Feingold, G., Kazil, J., and McComiskey, A.: Stratocumulus to
cumulus transition in the presence of elevated smoke layers, Geophys. Res.
Lett., 42, 10478–10485, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zhang, J. and Zuidema, P.: The diurnal cycle of the smoky marine boundary layer observed during August in the remote southeast Atlantic, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 14493–14516, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-14493-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-19-14493-2019</ext-link>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zhang, X., Mao, M., Yin, Y., and Tang, S.: The absorption Ångstrom exponent of black carbon with brown coatings: effects of aerosol microphysics and parameterization, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 9701–9711, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-9701-2020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-20-9701-2020</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zhang, Z., Meyer, K., Yu, H., Platnick, S., Colarco, P., Liu, Z., and Oreopoulos, L.: Shortwave direct radiative effects of above-cloud aerosols over global oceans derived from 8 years of CALIOP and MODIS observations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 2877–2900, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-2877-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-16-2877-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zuidema, P., Redemann, J., Haywood, J., Wood, R., Piketh, S., Hipondoka, M.,
and Formenti, P.: Smoke and clouds above the southeast Atlantic, B. Am.
Meteorol. Soc., 97, 1131–1135, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-15-00082.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/BAMS-D-15-00082.1</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib63"><label>63</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zuidema, P., Sedlacek III, A. J. Flynn, C., Springston, S., Delgadillo, R.,
Zhang, J., Aiken, A. C., Koontz, A., and Muradyan, P.: The Ascension Island
boundary layer in the remote Southeast Atlantic is often smoky, Geophys.
Res. Lett., 45, 4456–4465, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL076926" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2017GL076926</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Vertical structure of biomass burning aerosol transported over the southeast Atlantic Ocean</article-title-html>
<abstract-html/>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>Adebiyi, A. A., Zuidema, P., Chang, I., Burton, S. P., and Cairns, B.: Mid-level clouds are frequent above the southeast Atlantic stratocumulus clouds, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 11025–11043, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-11025-2020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-11025-2020</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
Anderson, T. L., Charlson, R. J., Winker, D. M., Ogren, J. A., and
Holmén, K.: Mesoscale variations of tropospheric aerosols, J. Atmos.
Sci., 60, 119–136, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>Anderson, T. L., Wu, Y., Chu, D. A., Schmid, B., Redemann, J., and Dubovik,
O.: Testing the MODIS satellite retrieval of aerosol fine-mode fraction, J.
Geophys. Res., 110, D18204, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD005978" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD005978</a>, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>Boucher, O., Randall, D., Artaxo, P., Bretherton, C., Feingold, G., Forster,
P., Kerminen, V.-M. Kondo, Y., Liao, H., Lohmann, U., Rasch, P., Satheesh,
S. K., Sherwood, S., Stevens B., and Zhang, X. Y.: Clouds and Aerosols, in:
Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working
Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change, edited by: Stocker, T. F., Qin, D., Plattner, G.-K., Tignor, M., Allen,
S. K., Boschung, J., Nauels, A., Xia, Y., Bex V., and Midgley, P. M., Cambridge University Press,  571–657,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.016</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>Buchard, V., Randles, C. A., da Silva, A. M., Darmenov, A., Colarco, P. R.,
Govindaraju, R., Ferrare, R. A., Hair, J., Beyersdorf, A. J. Ziemba L. D.,
and Yu, H.: The MERRA-2 aerosol reanalysis, 1980 onwards Part II: Evaluation
and case studies, J. Climate, 30, 6851–6871, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0613.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0613.1</a>,
2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</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.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>Burton, S. P., Hostetler, C. A., Cook, A. L., Hair, J. W., Seaman, S.,
Scola, S., Harper, D. B., Smith, J. A., Fenn, M. A., Ferrare, R. A., Saide,
P. E., Chemyakin, E. V., and Müller, D.: Calibration of a high spectral
resolution lidar using a Michelson interferometer with data examples from
ORACLES, Appl. Optics, 57, 6061–6075, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>Cappa, C. D., Lim, C. Y., Hagan, D. H., Coggon, M., Koss, A., Sekimoto, K., de Gouw, J., Onasch, T. B., Warneke, C., and Kroll, J. H.: Biomass-burning-derived particles from a wide variety of fuels – Part 2: Effects of photochemical aging on particle optical and chemical properties, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 8511–8532, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-8511-2020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-8511-2020</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>Chand, D., Wood, R., Anderson, T. L., Satheesh, S. K., and Charlson, R. J.:
Satellite-derived direct radiative effect of aerosols dependent on cloud
cover, Nat. Geosci., 2, 181–184, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/Ngeo437" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/Ngeo437</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>China, S., Mazzoleni, C., Gorkowski, K., Aiken, A. C., and Dubey, M. K.:
Morphology and mixing state of individual freshly emitted wildfire
carbonaceous particles, Nat. Commun., 4, 2122 <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms3122" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms3122</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>Costantino, L. and Bréon, F.-M.: Aerosol indirect effect on warm clouds over South-East Atlantic, from co-located MODIS and CALIPSO observations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 69–88, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-69-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-69-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>Das, S., Harshvardhan, H., and Colarco, P. R.: The influence of elevated
smoke layers on stratocumulus clouds over the SE Atlantic in the NASA
Goddard Earth Observing System (GEOS) Model,  J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 125,
e2019JD031209, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JD031209" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JD031209</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>Diamond, M. S., Dobracki, A., Freitag, S., Small Griswold, J. D., Heikkila, A., Howell, S. G., Kacarab, M. E., Podolske, J. R., Saide, P. E., and Wood, R.: Time-dependent entrainment of smoke presents an observational challenge for assessing aerosol–cloud interactions over the southeast Atlantic Ocean, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 14623–14636, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-14623-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-14623-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>Doherty, S. J., Saide, P. E., Zuidema, P., Shinozuka, Y., Ferrada, G. A., Gordon, H., Mallet, M., Meyer, K., Painemal, D., Howell, S. G., Freitag, S., Dobracki, A., Podolske, J. R., Burton, S. P., Ferrare, R. A., Howes, C., Nabat, P., Carmichael, G. R., da Silva, A., Pistone, K., Chang, I., Gao, L., Wood, R., and Redemann, J.: Modeled and observed properties related to the direct aerosol radiative effect of biomass burning aerosol over the southeastern Atlantic, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 1–46, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-1-2022" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-1-2022</a>, 2022.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation> Gordon, H., Field, P. R., Abel, S. J., Dalvi, M., Grosvenor, D. P., Hill, A. A., Johnson, B. T., Miltenberger, A. K., Yoshioka, M., and Carslaw, K. S.: Large simulated radiative effects of smoke in the south-east Atlantic, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 15261–15289, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-15261-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-15261-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>Grund, C. J., and Eloranta, E. W.: University of Wisconsin high spectral
resolution lidar, Opt. Eng., 30, 6–12, 1991.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>Gupta, S., McFarquhar, G. M., O'Brien, J. R., Poellot, M. R., Delene, D. J., Miller, R. M., and Small Griswold, J. D.: Factors affecting precipitation formation and precipitation susceptibility of marine stratocumulus with variable above- and below-cloud aerosol concentrations over the Southeast Atlantic, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 2769–2793, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-2769-2022" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-2769-2022</a>, 2022.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>Hair, J. W., Hostetler, C. A., Cook, A. L., Harper, D. B., Ferrare, R. A.,
Mack, T. L., Welch, W., Izquierdo, L. R., Hovis, F. E.: Airborne High
Spectral Resolution Lidar for profiling aerosol optical properties, Appl.
Optics, 47, 6734–6752, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1364/AO.47.006734" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1364/AO.47.006734</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>Haywood, J. M., Osborne, S. R., Francis, P. N., Keil, A., Formenti, P.,
Andreae, M. O., and Kaye, P. H.: The mean physical and optical properties of
regional haze dominated by biomass burning aerosol measured from the C-130
aircraft during SAFARI 2000, J. Geophys. Res., 108, 8473,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002226" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002226</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>Haywood, J. M., Abel, S. J., Barrett, P. A., Bellouin, N., Blyth, A., Bower, K. N., Brooks, M., Carslaw, K., Che, H., Coe, H., Cotterell, M. I., Crawford, I., Cui, Z., Davies, N., Dingley, B., Field, P., Formenti, P., Gordon, H., de Graaf, M., Herbert, R., Johnson, B., Jones, A. C., Langridge, J. M., Malavelle, F., Partridge, D. G., Peers, F., Redemann, J., Stier, P., Szpek, K., Taylor, J. W., Watson-Parris, D., Wood, R., Wu, H., and Zuidema, P.: The CLoud–Aerosol–Radiation Interaction and Forcing: Year 2017 (CLARIFY-2017) measurement campaign, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 1049–1084, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1049-2021" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1049-2021</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
Kacarab, M., Thornhill, K. L., Dobracki, A., Howell, S. G., O'Brien, J. R., Freitag, S., Poellot, M. R., Wood, R., Zuidema, P., Redemann, J., and Nenes, A.: Biomass burning aerosol as a modulator of the droplet number in the southeast Atlantic region, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 3029–3040, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-3029-2020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-3029-2020</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>Keil, A. and Haywood, J. M.: Solar radiative forcing by biomass burning
aerosol particles during SAFARI 2000: A case study based on measured aerosol
and cloud properties, J.   Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 108, 8467,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002315" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002315</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>Klopper, D., Formenti, P., Namwoonde, A., Cazaunau, M., Chevaillier, S., Feron, A., Gaimoz, C., Hease, P., Lahmidi, F., Mirande-Bret, C., Triquet, S., Zeng, Z., and Piketh, S. J.: Chemical composition and source apportionment of atmospheric aerosols on the Namibian coast, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 15811–15833, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-15811-2020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-15811-2020</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>Koch, D. and Del Genio, A. D.: Black carbon semi-direct effects on cloud cover: review and synthesis, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 7685–7696, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-7685-2010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-7685-2010</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>Lu, Z., Liu, X., Zhang, Z., Zhao, C., Meyer, K., Rajapakshe, C., Wu, C.,
Yang, Z., and Penner, J.: Biomass smoke from southern Africa can
significantly enhance the brightness of stratocumulus over the southeastern
Atlantic Ocean, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 115, 2924–2929,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1713703115" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1713703115</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>Mallet, M., Solmon, F., Nabat, P., Elguindi, N., Waquet, F., Bouniol, D., Sayer, A. M., Meyer, K., Roehrig, R., Michou, M., Zuidema, P., Flamant, C., Redemann, J., and Formenti, P.: Direct and semi-direct radiative forcing of biomass-burning aerosols over the southeast Atlantic (SEA) and its sensitivity to absorbing properties: a regional climate modeling study, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 13191–13216, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-13191-2020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-13191-2020</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>McFarquhar, G. M. and Wang, H.: Effects of aerosols on trade wind cumuli
over the Indian Ocean: Model simulations, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 132,
821–843, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1256/qj.04.179" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1256/qj.04.179</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>Mechoso, C. R., Wood, R., Weller, R., Bretherton, C. S., Clarke, A. D., Coe,
H., Fairall, C., Farrar, J. T., Feingold, G., Garreaud, R., Grados, C.,
McWilliams, J., de Szoeke, S. P., Yuter, S. E., and Zuidema, Z.:
Ocean–cloud–atmosphere–land interactions in the Southeastern Pacific: The
VOCALS program, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 95, 357–375,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-11-00246.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-11-00246.1</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>Meyer, K., Platnick, S., Oreopoulos, L., and Lee, D.: Estimating the direct
radiative effect of absorbing aerosols overlying marine boundary layer
clouds in the southeast Atlantic using MODIS and CALIOP, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 118, 4801–4815, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50449" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50449</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</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, 1999a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>Müller, D., Wandinger, U., and Ansmann, A.: Microphysical particle
parameters from extinction and backscatter lidar data by inversion with
regularization: simulation, Appl. Optics, 38, 2358–2368, 1999b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</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.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>Müller, D., Chemyakin, E., Kolgotin, A., Ferrare, R. A., Hostetler, C.
A., and Romanov, A.: Automated, unsupervised, inversion of multiwavelength
lidar data with TiARA: assessment of retrieval performance of microphysical
parameters using simulated data, Appl. Optics, 58, 4981–5007,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1364/AO.58.004981" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1364/AO.58.004981</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
ORACLES Science Team: Suite of Aerosol, Cloud, and Radiation Data Acquired Aboard ER2 During ORACLES
2016, Version 2, NASA Ames Earth Science Project Office [data set],
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5067/Suborbital/ORACLES/ER2/2016_V2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5067/Suborbital/ORACLES/ER2/2016_V2</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>Painemal, D., Kato, S., and Minnis, P. : Boundary layer regulation in the
southeast Atlantic cloud microphysics during the biomass burning season as
seen by the A-train satellite constellation, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos.,
119, 11288–211302, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JD022182" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JD022182</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>Peers, F., Francis, P., Fox, C., Abel, S. J., Szpek, K., Cotterell, M. I., Davies, N. W., Langridge, J. M., Meyer, K. G., Platnick, S. E., and Haywood, J. M.: Observation of absorbing aerosols above clouds over the south-east Atlantic Ocean from the geostationary satellite SEVIRI – Part 1: Method description and sensitivity, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 9595–9611, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-9595-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-9595-2019</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>Penner, J. E., Zhang, S. Y., and Chuang, C. C.: Soot and smoke aerosol may
not warm climate, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 108, 4657,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD003409" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD003409</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>
Pistone, K., Zuidema, P., Wood, R., Diamond, M., da Silva, A. M., Ferrada, G., Saide, P. E., Ueyama, R., Ryoo, J.-M., Pfister, L., Podolske, J., Noone, D., Bennett, R., Stith, E., Carmichael, G., Redemann, J., Flynn, C., LeBlanc, S., Segal-Rozenhaimer, M., and Shinozuka, Y.: Exploring the elevated water vapor signal associated with the free tropospheric biomass burning plume over the southeast Atlantic Ocean, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 9643–9668, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-9643-2021" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-9643-2021</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>Pósfai, M., Simonics, R., Li, J., Hobbs, P. V., and Buseck, P. R.:
Individual aerosol particles from biomass burning in southern Africa: 1.
Compositions and size distributions of carbonaceous particles, J. Geophys.
Res., 108, 8483, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002291" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002291</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>Ramanathan, V., Crutzen, P. J., Kiehl, J. T., and Rosenfeld, D.: Aerosols,
climate, and the hydrological cycle, Science, 294, 2119–2124,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1064034" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1064034</a>, 2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>Randles, C. A., daSilva, A. M., Buchard, V., Colarco, P. R., Darmenov, A.,
Govindaraju, P., Smirnov, A., Holben, B., Ferrare, R. A., Hair, J.,
Shinozuka, Y., and Flynn, C. J.: The MERRA-2 aerosol reanalysis, 1980
onward. Part I: System description and data assimilation evaluation, J.
Climate, 30, 6823–6850, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0609.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0609.1</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>Redemann, J., Wood, R., Zuidema, P., Doherty, S. J., Luna, B., LeBlanc, S. E., Diamond, M. S., Shinozuka, Y., Chang, I. Y., Ueyama, R., Pfister, L., Ryoo, J.-M., Dobracki, A. N., da Silva, A. M., Longo, K. M., Kacenelenbogen, M. S., Flynn, C. J., Pistone, K., Knox, N. M., Piketh, S. J., Haywood, J. M., Formenti, P., Mallet, M., Stier, P., Ackerman, A. S., Bauer, S. E., Fridlind, A. M., Carmichael, G. R., Saide, P. E., Ferrada, G. A., Howell, S. G., Freitag, S., Cairns, B., Holben, B. N., Knobelspiesse, K. D., Tanelli, S., L'Ecuyer, T. S., Dzambo, A. M., Sy, O. O., McFarquhar, G. M., Poellot, M. R., Gupta, S., O'Brien, J. R., Nenes, A., Kacarab, M., Wong, J. P. S., Small-Griswold, J. D., Thornhill, K. L., Noone, D., Podolske, J. R., Schmidt, K. S., Pilewskie, P., Chen, H., Cochrane, S. P., Sedlacek, A. J., Lang, T. J., Stith, E., Segal-Rozenhaimer, M., Ferrare, R. A., Burton, S. P., Hostetler, C. A., Diner, D. J., Seidel, F. C., Platnick, S. E., Myers, J. S., Meyer, K. G., Spangenberg, D. A., Maring, H., and Gao, L.: An overview of the ORACLES (ObseRvations of Aerosols above CLouds and their intEractionS) project: aerosol–cloud–radiation interactions in the southeast Atlantic basin, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 1507–1563, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1507-2021" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1507-2021</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>Rogers, R. R., Hair, J. W., Hostetler, C. A., Ferrare, R. A., Obland, M. D., Cook, A. L., Harper, D. B., Burton, S. P., Shinozuka, Y., McNaughton, C. S., Clarke, A. D., Redemann, J., Russell, P. B., Livingston, J. M., and Kleinman, L. I.: NASA LaRC airborne high spectral resolution lidar aerosol measurements during MILAGRO: observations and validation, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 9, 4811–4826, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-4811-2009" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-4811-2009</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>Ryoo, J.-M., Pfister, L., Ueyama, R., Zuidema, P., Wood, R., Chang, I., and Redemann, J.: A meteorological overview of the ORACLES (ObseRvations of Aerosols above CLouds and their intEractionS) campaign over the southeastern Atlantic during 2016–2018: Part 1 – Climatology, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 16689–16707, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-16689-2021" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-16689-2021</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>Sakaeda, N., Wood, R., and Rasch, P. J.: Direct and semidirect aerosol
effects of southern African biomass burning aerosol, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 116, D12205, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JD015540" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JD015540</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>Sawamura, P., Moore, R. H., Burton, S. P., Chemyakin, E., Müller, D., Kolgotin, A., Ferrare, R. A., Hostetler, C. A., Ziemba, L. D., Beyersdorf, A. J., and Anderson, B. E.: HSRL-2 aerosol optical measurements and microphysical retrievals vs. airborne in situ measurements during DISCOVER-AQ 2013: an intercomparison study, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 7229–7243, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-7229-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-7229-2017</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>Schmid, B., Ferrare, R. A., Flynn, C., Elleman, R., Covert, D., Strawa, A.,
Welton, E., Turner, D., Jonsson, H., Redemann, J., Eilers, J., Ricci, K.,
Hallar, A. G., Clayton, M., Michalsky, J., Smirnov, A., Holben, B., and
Barnard, J.: How well do state-of-the-art techniques measuring the vertical
profile of tropospheric aerosol extinction compare?, J. Geophys. Res., 111,
D05S07, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD005837" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD005837</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>She, C. Y., Alvarez II, R. J., Caldwell, L. M., and Krueger, D. A.:
High-spectral-resolution Rayleigh-Mie lidar measurement of aerosol and
atmospheric profiles, Opt. Lett., 17, 541–543, 1992.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>Shingler, T., Crosbie, E., Ortega, A., Shiraiwa, M., Zuend, A., Beyersdorf,
A., Ziemba, L., Anderson, B., Thornhill, L., Perring, A. E., Schwarz, J. P.,
Campazano-Jost, P., Day, D. A., Jimenez, J. L., Hair, J. W., Mikoviny, T.,
Wisthaler, A., and Sorooshian, A.: Airborne characterization of
subsaturated aerosol hygroscopicity and dry refractive index from the
surface to 6.5&thinsp;km during the SEAC<sup>4</sup>RS campaign, J. Geophys. Res., 121,
4188–4210, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD024498" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD024498</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>
Shinozuka, Y., Saide, P. E., Ferrada, G. A., Burton, S. P., Ferrare, R., Doherty, S. J., Gordon, H., Longo, K., Mallet, M., Feng, Y., Wang, Q., Cheng, Y., Dobracki, A., Freitag, S., Howell, S. G., LeBlanc, S., Flynn, C., Segal-Rosenhaimer, M., Pistone, K., Podolske, J. R., Stith, E. J., Bennett, J. R., Carmichael, G. R., da Silva, A., Govindaraju, R., Leung, R., Zhang, Y., Pfister, L., Ryoo, J.-M., Redemann, J., Wood, R., and Zuidema, P.: Modeling the smoky troposphere of the southeast Atlantic: a comparison to ORACLES airborne observations from September of 2016, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 11491–11526, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-11491-2020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-11491-2020</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation>Shipley, S. T., Tracy, D. H., Eloranta, E. W., Tauger, J. T., Stroga, J. T.,
Roesler, F. L., and Weinman, J. A.: High spectral resolution lidar to
measure optical scattering properties of atmospheric aerosols. 1. Theory and
instrumentation, Appl. Optics, 22, 3716–3724, 1983.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</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.bib53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation>Veselovskii, I., Kolgotin, A., Grazianov, V.,  Müller, D., Wandinger, U.,
and Whiteman, D. N.: Inversion with regularization for the retrieval of
tropospheric aerosol parameters from multi-wavelength lidar sounding, Appl.
Optics, 41, 3685–3699, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation>Wilcox, E. M.: Stratocumulus cloud thickening beneath layers of absorbing smoke aerosol, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 11769–11777, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-11769-2010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-11769-2010</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation>Wilcox, E. M.: Direct and semi-direct radiative forcing of smoke aerosols over clouds, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 139–149, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-139-2012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-139-2012</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><mixed-citation>Wu, H., Taylor, J. W., Szpek, K., Langridge, J. M., Williams, P. I., Flynn, M., Allan, J. D., Abel, S. J., Pitt, J., Cotterell, M. I., Fox, C., Davies, N. W., Haywood, J., and Coe, H.: Vertical variability of the properties of highly aged biomass burning aerosol transported over the southeast Atlantic during CLARIFY-2017, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 12697–12719, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-12697-2020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-12697-2020</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><mixed-citation>Xu, F., Gao, L, Redemann, J., Flynn C. J., Espinosa, W. R., da Silva, A. M.,
Stamnes, S., Burton, S. P., Liu, X., Ferrare, R., Cairns, B., and Dubovik, O.:
A Combined Lidar-Polarimeter Inversion Approach for Aerosol Remote Sensing
Over Ocean, Front. Remote Sens., 2, 620871, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3389/frsen.2021.620871" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3389/frsen.2021.620871</a>,
2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><mixed-citation>Yamaguchi, T., Feingold, G., Kazil, J., and McComiskey, A.: Stratocumulus to
cumulus transition in the presence of elevated smoke layers, Geophys. Res.
Lett., 42, 10478–10485, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><mixed-citation>Zhang, J. and Zuidema, P.: The diurnal cycle of the smoky marine boundary layer observed during August in the remote southeast Atlantic, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 14493–14516, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-14493-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-14493-2019</a>, 2019.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><mixed-citation>Zhang, X., Mao, M., Yin, Y., and Tang, S.: The absorption Ångstrom exponent of black carbon with brown coatings: effects of aerosol microphysics and parameterization, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 9701–9711, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-9701-2020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-9701-2020</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><mixed-citation>Zhang, Z., Meyer, K., Yu, H., Platnick, S., Colarco, P., Liu, Z., and Oreopoulos, L.: Shortwave direct radiative effects of above-cloud aerosols over global oceans derived from 8 years of CALIOP and MODIS observations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 2877–2900, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-2877-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-2877-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><mixed-citation>Zuidema, P., Redemann, J., Haywood, J., Wood, R., Piketh, S., Hipondoka, M.,
and Formenti, P.: Smoke and clouds above the southeast Atlantic, B. Am.
Meteorol. Soc., 97, 1131–1135, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-15-00082.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-15-00082.1</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib63"><label>63</label><mixed-citation>Zuidema, P., Sedlacek III, A. J. Flynn, C., Springston, S., Delgadillo, R.,
Zhang, J., Aiken, A. C., Koontz, A., and Muradyan, P.: The Ascension Island
boundary layer in the remote Southeast Atlantic is often smoky, Geophys.
Res. Lett., 45, 4456–4465, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL076926" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL076926</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
