Articles | Volume 24, issue 10
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-6385-2024
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-6385-2024
Research article
 | 
31 May 2024
Research article |  | 31 May 2024

Intercomparison of aerosol optical depths from four reanalyses and their multi-reanalysis consensus

Peng Xian, Jeffrey S. Reid, Melanie Ades, Angela Benedetti, Peter R. Colarco, Arlindo da Silva, Tom F. Eck, Johannes Flemming, Edward J. Hyer, Zak Kipling, Samuel Rémy, Tsuyoshi Thomas Sekiyama, Taichu Tanaka, Keiya Yumimoto, and Jianglong Zhang

Related authors

Differences in aerosol and cloud properties along the central California coast when winds change from northerly to southerly
Kira Zeider, Grace Betito, Anthony Bucholtz, Peng Xian, Annette Walker, and Armin Sorooshian
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 9059–9083, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-9059-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-9059-2024, 2024
Short summary
Black carbon concentrations and modeled smoke deposition fluxes to the bare-ice dark zone of the Greenland Ice Sheet
Alia L. Khan, Peng Xian, and Joshua P. Schwarz
The Cryosphere, 17, 2909–2918, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-17-2909-2023,https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-17-2909-2023, 2023
Short summary
Ozone Monitoring Instrument (OMI) UV aerosol index data analysis over the Arctic region for future data assimilation and climate forcing applications
Blake T. Sorenson, Jianglong Zhang, Jeffrey S. Reid, Peng Xian, and Shawn L. Jaker
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 7161–7175, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-7161-2023,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-7161-2023, 2023
Short summary
A global evaluation of daily to seasonal aerosol and water vapor relationships using a combination of AERONET and NAAPS reanalysis data
Juli I. Rubin, Jeffrey S. Reid, Peng Xian, Christopher M. Selman, and Thomas F. Eck
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 4059–4090, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-4059-2023,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-4059-2023, 2023
Short summary
Assessment of NAAPS-RA performance in Maritime Southeast Asia during CAMP2Ex
Eva-Lou Edwards, Jeffrey S. Reid, Peng Xian, Sharon P. Burton, Anthony L. Cook, Ewan C. Crosbie, Marta A. Fenn, Richard A. Ferrare, Sean W. Freeman, John W. Hair, David B. Harper, Chris A. Hostetler, Claire E. Robinson, Amy Jo Scarino, Michael A. Shook, G. Alexander Sokolowsky, Susan C. van den Heever, Edward L. Winstead, Sarah Woods, Luke D. Ziemba, and Armin Sorooshian
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 12961–12983, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-12961-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-12961-2022, 2022
Short summary

Related subject area

Subject: Aerosols | Research Activity: Atmospheric Modelling and Data Analysis | Altitude Range: Troposphere | Science Focus: Physics (physical properties and processes)
Warming effects of reduced sulfur emissions from shipping
Masaru Yoshioka, Daniel P. Grosvenor, Ben B. B. Booth, Colin P. Morice, and Ken S. Carslaw
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 13681–13692, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-13681-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-13681-2024, 2024
Short summary
The key role of atmospheric absorption in the Asian summer monsoon response to dust emissions in CMIP6 models
Alcide Zhao, Laura J. Wilcox, and Claire L. Ryder
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 13385–13402, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-13385-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-13385-2024, 2024
Short summary
Multi-model effective radiative forcing of the 2020 sulfur cap for shipping
Ragnhild Bieltvedt Skeie, Rachael Byrom, Øivind Hodnebrog, Caroline Jouan, and Gunnar Myhre
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 13361–13370, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-13361-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-13361-2024, 2024
Short summary
Representation of iron aerosol size distributions of anthropogenic emissions is critical in evaluating atmospheric soluble iron input to the ocean
Mingxu Liu, Hitoshi Matsui, Douglas S. Hamilton, Sagar D. Rathod, Kara D. Lamb, and Natalie M. Mahowald
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 13115–13127, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-13115-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-13115-2024, 2024
Short summary
Revealing dominant patterns of aerosol regimes in the lower troposphere and their evolution from preindustrial times to the future in global climate model simulations
Jingmin Li, Mattia Righi, Johannes Hendricks, Christof G. Beer, Ulrike Burkhardt, and Anja Schmidt
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 12727–12747, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-12727-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-12727-2024, 2024
Short summary

Cited articles

Atwood, S. A., Reid, J. S., Kreidenweis, S. M., Blake, D. R., Jonsson, H. H., Lagrosas, N. D., Xian, P., Reid, E. A., Sessions, W. R., and Simpas, J. B.: Size-resolved aerosol and cloud condensation nuclei (CCN) properties in the remote marine South China Sea – Part 1: Observations and source classification, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 1105–1123, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-1105-2017, 2017. 
Buchard, V., da Silva, A. M., Colarco, P. R., Darmenov, A., Randles, C. A., Govindaraju, R., Torres, O., Campbell, J., and Spurr, R.: Using the OMI aerosol index and absorption aerosol optical depth to evaluate the NASA MERRA Aerosol Reanalysis, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 5743–5760, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-5743-2015, 2015. 
Buchard, V., Randles, C. A., da Silva, A. M., Darmenov, A., Colarco, P. R., Govindaraju, R., Ferrare, R., Hair, J., Beyersdorf, A. J., Ziemba, L. D., and Yu, H.: The MERRA-2 Aerosol Reanalysis, 1980 Onward. Part II: Evaluation and Case Studies, J. Climate, 30, 6851–6872, https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli-d-16-0613.1, 2017. 
Chin, M., Ginoux, P., Kinne, S., Torres, O., Holben, B. N., Duncan, B. N., Martin, R. V., Logan, J. A., Higurashi, A., and Nakajima, T.: Tropospheric aerosol optical thickness from the GOCART model and comparisons with satellite and sun photometer measurements, J. Atmos. Sci., 59, 461–483, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(2002)059<0461:TAOTFT>2.0.CO;2, 2002. 
Colarco, P., da Silva, A., Chin, M., and Diehl, T.: Online simulations of global aerosol istributions in the NASA GEOS-4 model and comparisons to satellite and groundbased aerosol optical depth, J. Geophys. Res., 115, D14207, https://doi.org/10.1029/2009jd012820, 2010. 
Download
Short summary
The study compares and evaluates monthly AOD of four reanalyses (RA) and their consensus (i.e., ensemble mean). The basic verification characteristics of these RA versus both AERONET and MODIS retrievals are presented. The study discusses the strength of each RA and identifies regions where divergence and challenges are prominent. The RA consensus usually performs very well on a global scale in terms of how well it matches the observational data, making it a good choice for various applications.
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint