<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "https://jats.nlm.nih.gov/nlm-dtd/publishing/3.0/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">
  <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-25-4151-2025</article-id><title-group><article-title>Measurement report: Aircraft observations of aerosol and microphysical quantities of stratocumulus in autumn over Guangxi Province, China – daylight variation, vertical distribution, and aerosol–cloud interactions</article-title><alt-title>Aircraft observations of autumn stratocumulus microphysics in Guangxi, China</alt-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Liu</surname><given-names>Sihan</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Wang</surname><given-names>Honglei</given-names></name>
          <email>hongleiwang@nuist.edu.cn</email>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff2 aff3">
          <name><surname>Zhao</surname><given-names>Delong</given-names></name>
          <email>zhaodelong@bj.cma.gov.cn</email>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff4">
          <name><surname>Zhou</surname><given-names>Wei</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff4">
          <name><surname>Du</surname><given-names>Yuanmou</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff5">
          <name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>Zhengguo</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff5">
          <name><surname>Cheng</surname><given-names>Peng</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Zhao</surname><given-names>Tianliang</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Ke</surname><given-names>Yue</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Wu</surname><given-names>Zihao</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff4">
          <name><surname>Huang</surname><given-names>Mengyu</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5121-5499</ext-link></contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>China Meteorological Administration Aerosol-Cloud and Precipitation Key Laboratory, Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology, Nanjing 210044, China</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>Weather Modification Center, China Meteorological Administration (CMA), Beijing 100081, China</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>3</label><institution>Field Experiment Base of Cloud and Precipitation Research in North China, China Meteorological Administration, Beijing 101200, China</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff4"><label>4</label><institution>Beijing Weather Modification Center, Beijing 100089, China</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff5"><label>5</label><institution>Weather Modification Office of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, Nanning 530022, China</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Honglei Wang (hongleiwang@nuist.edu.cn) and Delong Zhao (zhaodelong@bj.cma.gov.cn)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>11</day><month>April</month><year>2025</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>25</volume>
      <issue>7</issue>
      <fpage>4151</fpage><lpage>4165</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>2</day><month>September</month><year>2024</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>30</day><month>September</month><year>2024</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>19</day><month>January</month><year>2025</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>8</day><month>February</month><year>2025</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2025 Sihan Liu et al.</copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2025</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/25/4151/2025/acp-25-4151-2025.html">This article is available from https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/25/4151/2025/acp-25-4151-2025.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/25/4151/2025/acp-25-4151-2025.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/25/4151/2025/acp-25-4151-2025.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract><title>Abstract</title>

      <p id="d2e202">Aerosols and clouds play essential roles in the global climate system, and aerosol–cloud interactions have a significant impact on the radiation balance, water cycle, and energy cycle of the Earth–atmosphere system. To understand the effect of aerosols on the vertical distribution of stratocumulus microphysical quantities in southwest China, we analyzed data from nine aircraft observations over Guangxi from 10 October to 3 November 2020. This analysis focused on the daylight variation characteristics and formation mechanisms of stratocumulus microphysical profiles, considering the influence of aerosol number concentration in relation to the source of air mass and individual cases. Aerosol number concentration (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and cloud droplet concentration (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) decreased gradually with an altitude increase below 1500 m and did not change with a height between 1500 and 3300 m. The temperature inversion layer at the top of the planetary boundary layer (PBL) hindered the increase in the cloud droplet particle size. The lower layer of the stratocumulus cloud in Guangxi mainly contained small-sized cloud droplets (effective diameter of a cloud droplet (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) <inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 15 <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>), and the middle and upper layers of cloud droplets were large-particle-size cloud droplets (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 20 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" 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>). The vertical distribution of cloud microphysical quantity had apparent daylight variation. When aerosols in the PBL were transported to the upper air (14:00 to 20:00 Beijing time, BJT), <inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the lower layer decreased, and the small-particle-size cloud droplets (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 20 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" 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>) in the middle layer and upper layer increased. Aerosols from the free atmosphere were transported into the PBL (10:00 to 13:00 BJT), providing an abundance of cloud condensation nuclei, which increased the number of small-particle-size cloud droplets in the lower layer of the cloud (near the top of the PBL). The characteristics of cloud microphysical quantities (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) were also affected by the source of air mass and the height of the PBL. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> were high under the influence of land air mass or aerosols within the PBL, and the cloud droplet number concentration spectrum was unimodal. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> were low under the influence of marine air mass or above the boundary layer, and the cloud droplet number concentration spectrum was bimodal. The relationship between stratocumulus and aerosol in this region is consistent with the Twomey effect. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> remain negatively correlated in different liquid water content ranges, and the FIE (aerosol first indirect effect) ranged from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.07 to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.58.</p>
  </abstract>
    
<funding-group>
<award-group id="gs1">
<funding-source>National Natural Science Foundation of China</funding-source>
<award-id>42075084</award-id>
</award-group>
<award-group id="gs2">
<funding-source>National Key Research and Development Program of China</funding-source>
<award-id>2022YFC3701204</award-id>
</award-group>
</funding-group>
</article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <label>1</label><title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d2e436">Clouds are an essential component of the Earth–atmosphere system, covering over 67 % of the Earth's surface (King et al., 2013), with stratocumulus clouds covering approximately 20 % of the Earth's surface in the annual mean. Stratocumulus typically occupies the upper few hundred meters of the planetary boundary layer (PBL) (Wood, 2012). These clouds can absorb atmospheric longwave radiation and reflect solar shortwave radiation to influence the radiation budget of the Earth's atmospheric system (Pyrina et al., 2015; Ramanathan et al., 1989; Zelinka et al., 2014). Additionally, they participate in the global water cycle through precipitation processes (Betts, 2007; Rosenfeld et al., 2014). Cloud microphysical characteristics are closely related to the climate effect and precipitation formation of stratocumulus clouds. Differences in cloud water content, cloud droplet number concentration and cloud droplet size in different regions will produce different radiative forcing and precipitation (de Boer et al., 2008; Waliser et al., 2011; Yuan et al., 2008).</p>
      <p id="d2e439">Aerosols are an important source of cloud condensation nuclei (CCN), and thus, variations in aerosols can lead to significant changes in the microscopic characteristics of clouds (Chen et al., 2021; Dusek et al., 2006; Lance et al., 2004). Twomey (1977) suggested that, with the liquid water path (LWP) of clouds remaining constant, an increase in aerosol number concentration (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) would lead to an increase in cloud droplet number concentration (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and a decrease in cloud droplet size, thereby enhancing cloud albedo. Albrecht (1989) proposed that the decrease in cloud droplet particle size caused by the increase in aerosols would further inhibit the precipitation process of clouds and thus extend the lifetime of clouds.</p>
      <p id="d2e464">Currently, aircraft observation, ground-based remote sensing, and satellite remote sensing are the main observation methods used to study the interaction between aerosols and clouds. Many scholars have confirmed the Twomey effect (the first indirect effect of aerosols) through observational data (Ferek et al., 1998; Han et al., 1994; Kleinman et al., 2012; Koren et al., 2005). Based on radar observation data, Kim et al. (2003) found that the aerosol optical depth in Oklahoma presents a linear proportional relationship with LWP on a completely cloudy day with a single-layer cloud, and the effective radius of cloud droplets is negatively correlated with the surface aerosol light scattering coefficient. For a given LWP, cloud albedo and radiative forcing are very sensitive to the effective radius. Li et al. (2019), using aircraft observation data over the Loess Plateau, found a negative correlation between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in both vertical and horizontal directions. Under high aerosol loading (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> below the cloud base was 4573 cm<sup>−3</sup>), smaller cloud droplets with high <inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 157 cm<sup>−3</sup>) were observed, while few large cloud droplets (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 118 cm<sup>−3</sup>) were formed under low aerosol loading (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> below the cloud base was 982 cm<sup>−3</sup>). Cloud droplet number concentration was negatively correlated with cloud droplet diameter within a specific range of liquid water content (LWC). However, some scholars have also observed a positive correlation between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and the effective diameter of a cloud droplet (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) (Harikishan et al., 2016; Jose et al., 2020; Liu et al., 2020), referred to as the anti-Twomey effect.</p>
      <p id="d2e630">Aircraft observations with continuous vertical sampling are the most reliable source that can accurately characterize the vertical relationship between aerosol and cloud (Nakajima et al., 2005; Terai et al., 2014; Wehbe et al., 2021; Zaveri et al., 2022). McFarquhar et al. (2021) conducted aircraft observations in the Southern Ocean region. They found aerosols above clouds may originate from new particle formation and remote transport from continental air masses. This leads to variations in CCN and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> near cloud tops. During the Aerosol and Cloud Experiments in the Eastern North Atlantic (ACE-ENA) campaign, the probability of aerosol transport interacting with marine boundary layer clouds over the ENA during summer was approximately 62.5 % (Wang et al., 2020).</p>
      <p id="d2e645">Zhao et al. (2019) observed a stratus cloud (water cloud) in the Huanghua region of China by aircraft and found that in the PBL, the effective radius of cloud droplets and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> show a negative relationship, while they showed a clear positive relationship in the upper layer above the PBL with much less <inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. It also shows that the relationship between the effective radius of cloud droplets and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> changes from negative to positive when LWC increases. Lu et al. (2007) compared the microphysical quantities of stratocumulus clouds influenced by aircraft flight tracks and those in undisturbed regions and found that the effective radius of cloud droplets in the flight path region was smaller, the number concentration of cloud drops was lower, and the cloud LWC was larger, providing observational evidence for the first indirect effect of aerosols.</p>
      <p id="d2e681">The mechanism of interaction between aerosols and clouds still involves significant uncertainty, influenced by factors such as aerosol physicochemical properties, meteorological conditions, cloud types, and the relative positioning of aerosols and cloud layers (Almeida et al., 2014; Dusek et al., 2006; Wex et al., 2010; Zhang et al., 2011). Therefore, precise measurements of cloud microphysical properties are crucial as the first step in studying aerosol–cloud interactions. Multi-aircraft observations provide high-precision observational data, aiding in understanding the relationship between aerosols and cloud microphysical characteristics.</p>
      <p id="d2e684">Our study on the vertical distribution of aerosol in the Guangxi region found that the vertical profile of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in this region has prominent daylight variation characteristics under the influence of the PBL. In the morning, aerosols are mainly concentrated in the PBL. With the development of the PBL and the enhancement of turbulent activity, the aerosols near the ground are diluted in the afternoon, and aerosols can be transmitted to more than 2 km. At night, the rapid decline in the top of the PBL will increase <inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> near the surface. At the same time, some aerosols will stay above the top of the PBL, forming a high-concentration aerosol layer (Liu et al., 2024). Previous studies have shown that aerosols can affect cloud microphysical properties. When aerosol particles settle onto clouds or the cloud top is elevated, aerosols can alter the microphysical characteristics of clouds by being entrained into the cloud top (Lu et al., 2018; Painemal et al., 2014). This study used data from nine cloud-penetrating aircraft flights to investigate the vertical distribution and formation mechanisms of cloud microphysical properties in stratocumulus clouds over Guangxi. Additionally, we discussed the differences in the impact of aerosols from different sources on cloud microphysical properties. Our findings indicate that the interaction between aerosols and clouds in this region aligns with the Twomey effect. The ultimate goal is to provide observational constraints for the simulation of aerosol radiative forcing in global climate models.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <label>2</label><title>Data and methodology</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <label>2.1</label><title>Aircraft data and data processing</title>
      <p id="d2e724">The Beijing Weather Modification Office (BJWMO) provided the data for this study, and nine flights of stratocumulus clouds and aerosols over Guangxi were conducted using the King Air 350 ER turbo aircraft. The aircraft is equipped with the Aircraft Integrated Meteorological Measurement System (AIMMS-20; AvenTech Inc., Canada), which provides meteorological elements such as temperature (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) and relative humidity (RH) with a time resolution of 1 s. A passive cavity aerosol spectrometer probe (PCASP-100X, DMT Inc, USA) was installed to provide aerosol number concentrations in the optical particle size range of 0.11 to 3 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" 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 a time resolution of 1 s, particle size uncertainty of 20 %, and concentration uncertainty of 16 %. The Fast Cloud Droplet Probe (FCDP; SPEC Inc, USA) was used to observe the cloud droplet concentration, cloud particle concentration and cloud particle size distribution. Its principle is to detect particles with an optical diameter ranging from 2 to 50 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" 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> using forward scattering technology with a time resolution of 1 s. The particle number concentration measured by the FCDP in the size range of less than 3 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" 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> has significant uncertainty. In this study, the range of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is defined as 3–50 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are measured in volume units. All instruments were calibrated before observation. The detailed principles of the airborne instruments can be found in several studies (Collaud Coen et al., 2010; Strapp et al., 1992; Zhang et al., 2009).</p>
      <p id="d2e808">Detailed data of this aircraft observation activity, including observation date, time, cloud thickness, and microphysical quantities, are summarized in Table 1. Compared with aircraft observation data in other regions, the average LWC in Guangxi was higher, 5.33 times that in north China, and the average cloud droplet diameter was larger, 2.58 times that in north China (Zhao et al., 2011). Compared with the marine stratocumulus (Lu et al., 2011; Miles et al., 2000), the stratocumulus in Guangxi had higher cloud base height and greater cloud thickness. The cloud microphysical characteristics of the stratocumulus observed in this study are similar to those of previous observations. Compared with stratocumulus (non-precipitation warm cloud) over eastern China, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, LWC, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of stratocumulus in the Guangxi region were larger. According to previous studies (Liu et al., 2024), there were no special weather processes in the upper air and on the ground in Guangxi during the observation period, which ensured the quality of the data and the universality of the conclusions.</p>

<table-wrap id="Ch1.T1" specific-use="star"><label>Table 1</label><caption><p id="d2e836">Flight information for the measurement campaign (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, LWC, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values are averages <inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> the standard deviations).</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="7">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="center"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="center"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Date</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Take-off–landing time</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Cloud base–cloud top</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Inside-cloud <inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">LWC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">(yyyymmdd)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">(Beijing time)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">height (m)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">(cm<sup>−3</sup>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">(cm<sup>−3</sup>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">(g m<sup>−3</sup>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">(<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>)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">20201010</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">11:53–15:50</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1203–1652</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">355 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 157</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">586 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 328</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.45 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.30</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">12.25 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.92</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">20201011</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">14:26–17:53</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1261–1542</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">636 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 290</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">529 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 350</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.19 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.14</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">9.45 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.30</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">20201025</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">09:34–12:58</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1076–3298</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">9 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 31</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">38 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 35</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.18 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.15</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">26.96 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 9.80</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">20201026</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">09:53–13:29</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1367–3146</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 19</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">35 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 27</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.09</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">21.86 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 8.77</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">20201028</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">14:05–17:27</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1664–2729</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">239 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 229</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">354 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M84" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 502</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.45 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M85" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.43</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">16.90 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M86" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 9.54</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">20201029</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">10:05–13:33</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">516–3266</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1402 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M87" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 569</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">396 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M88" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 289</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.17 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.16</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">9.86 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2.54</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">20201101</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">18:17–22:06</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1661–2715</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">333 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 170</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">199 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 80</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.35 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M93" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.17</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">17.93 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 4.71</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">20201102</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">14:04–17:41</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">696–3145</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">177 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M95" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 174</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">136 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M96" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 97</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.22 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.15</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">17.45 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 3.51</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">20201103</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">14:17–17:28</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2021–2938</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">44 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M99" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 30</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">139 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 57</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.29 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M101" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">15.73 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M102" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 3.56</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p id="d2e1508">To ensure data quality, this study selected the data that met the following conditions and the flight macro record as the in-cloud data: <inline-formula><mml:math id="M103" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M104" display="inline"><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 10 cm<sup>−3</sup>, LWC <inline-formula><mml:math id="M106" display="inline"><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M107" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> g m<sup>−3</sup> (Gunthe et al., 2009; Zhang et al., 2011). The observation records show that the clouds during the observation period were stratocumulus clouds (non-precipitation warm clouds). Therefore, the aerosol and cloud microphysical data met the following conditions: observation height <inline-formula><mml:math id="M109" display="inline"><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 4000 m, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M110" display="inline"><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M111" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0 °C. The height of the PBL is determined by applying the gradient method to the vertical distribution of potential temperature (Kim et al., 2007; Su et al., 2017).</p>
      <p id="d2e1596">The microphysical quantities such as <inline-formula><mml:math id="M112" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, LWC, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M113" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are calculated from the cloud droplet spectrum data detected by the FCDP. The calculation formulas are as follows:

                <disp-formula specific-use="gather" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M114" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E1"><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>1</mml:mtext></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∑</mml:mo><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E2"><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>2</mml:mtext></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:mtext>LWC</mml:mtext><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∑</mml:mo><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msubsup><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ρ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E3"><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>3</mml:mtext></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∑</mml:mo><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∑</mml:mo><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>

            In the formulas, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M115" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the cloud number concentration for each bin, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M116" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the median particle size for each bin, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M117" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ρ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the density of water.</p>
      <p id="d2e1774">The relative heights of the cloud are defined as <inline-formula><mml:math id="M118" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Z</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>:
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E4" content-type="numbered"><label>4</label><mml:math id="M119" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Z</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>Z</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>Z</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">base</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Z</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">top</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>Z</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">base</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          In the formula, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M120" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Z</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">base</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the height of the cloud base, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M121" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Z</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">top</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the height of the cloud top. The cloud heights have been normalized by setting the cloud base as 0 and the cloud top as 1.</p>
      <p id="d2e1850">Similar to previous studies, the first indirect effect (FIE) of aerosol or Twomey effect of aerosols and clouds is defined as
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E5" content-type="numbered"><label>5</label><mml:math id="M122" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>FIE</mml:mtext><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>ln⁡</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>ln⁡</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">LWC</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          In the formula, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M123" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> represents the physical quantity of aerosols, which can be quantified using aerosol optical depth (Feingold et al., 2001), aerosol extinction coefficient (Feingold et al., 2003), cloud condensation nuclei concentration, and aerosol number concentration (Che et al., 2021; Zhao et al., 2012, 2018). The FIE value may vary with the variables representing the aerosol amount.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <label>2.2</label><title>Reanalysis data</title>
      <p id="d2e1905">The vertical pressure velocity (Pa s<sup>−1</sup>) was obtained from MERRA2, with a spatial resolution of 0.625° <inline-formula><mml:math id="M125" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.5° and 42 layers and a temporal resolution of 3 h. The data from the first to the 23rd layers, corresponding to pressure altitudes from 1000 to 200 hPa, were selected, covering the maximum altitude of aircraft observations. An average calculation was performed to obtain the vertical pressure velocity for the Guangxi region from 08:00 to 20:00 BJT during the observation period, reflecting the temporal variation characteristics of vertical airflow above the region. This dataset has been used in several studies (Ge et al., 2021; Kennedy et al., 2001; Painemal et al., 2021).</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <label>3</label><title>Results and discussion</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <label>3.1</label><title>Vertical distribution characteristics of cloud microphysical quantities</title>
      <p id="d2e1943">Based on the criteria of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M126" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M127" display="inline"><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 10 cm<sup>−3</sup> and LWC <inline-formula><mml:math id="M129" display="inline"><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M130" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> g m<sup>−3</sup>, aerosol, cloud droplet, and meteorological data were distinguished between inside and outside the cloud. The vertical averages were calculated at 10 m height intervals, resulting in the vertical distributions of physical quantities from nine observation flights, covering a height range of 0–4000 m and ensuring consistent vertical resolution for each physical quantity. Subsequently, the average vertical distribution of physical quantities from the nine observation flights was calculated, leading to the vertical distribution diagrams of each physical quantity during the observation period, as shown in Fig. 1. The average vertical profiles of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M132" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (interstitial aerosol, aerosol particles too small to activate to cloud droplets), <inline-formula><mml:math id="M133" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (outside cloud) (Fig. 1a), cloud microphysical quantities (Fig. 1b), and meteorological elements (Fig. 1c–d) during the observation period were obtained. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M134" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (interstitial aerosol) decreased gradually with height and was affected by aerosols in the atmospheric environment. Below 1500 m, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M135" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> first decreased and then stabilized with increasing height, following a trend similar to that of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M136" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. This indicates that the number of cloud condensation nuclei capable of activating cloud droplets diminishes as altitude increases. Compared to the upper atmosphere (above 1500 m), there were more cloud condensation nuclei in the lower atmosphere, resulting in an average <inline-formula><mml:math id="M137" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> value of 407 cm<sup>−3</sup>. Between 1500 and 3300 m, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M139" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> showed little variation with height, remaining concentrated around 100 cm<sup>−3</sup> at each altitude (Fig. 1a). The low <inline-formula><mml:math id="M141" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> observed at certain altitudes may be due to the observation area being close to the edge of the cloud.</p>

      <fig id="Ch1.F1"><label>Figure 1</label><caption><p id="d2e2125">Average vertical profiles of cloud interstitial aerosol concentration, outside aerosol number concentration, and cloud droplet concentration <bold>(a)</bold>; LWC and effective diameter of cloud droplet <bold>(b)</bold>; temperature inside and outside cloud <bold>(c)</bold>; and relative humidity inside and outside cloud <bold>(d)</bold> during the observation period.</p></caption>
          <graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/25/4151/2025/acp-25-4151-2025-f01.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d2e2146">With the increase in height, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M142" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> first increased and then remained unchanged and then increased (Fig. 1b). A large number of cloud droplets competed for water vapor below 1500 m, which is not conducive to the growth of cloud droplets, so the average <inline-formula><mml:math id="M143" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was only 11.21 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M144" 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>. In Guangxi, the top of the PBL during autumn ranges from 1000 to 1500 m (Fig. 1c), where temperature inversion layers occur. This temperature structure increases the stability of the air, suppressing the formation of vertical airflow and hindering the growth of cloud droplets. Above 1500 m, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M145" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was lower than the near ground, and the lower atmospheric temperature was conducive to increasing cloud droplet particle size. The average value of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M146" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> reached 22.78 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M147" 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>. The value of LWC was independent of height, with an average value of 0.22 g m<sup>−3</sup> in Guangxi (Fig. 1b). RH was consistently above 60 %, making it likely for the air to reach saturation and lead to cloud formation.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <label>3.2</label><title>Time variation of the vertical distribution of cloud microphysical quantities</title>
      <p id="d2e2234">To understand the time variation of the vertical distribution of cloud microphysical quantities, the data were classified. Vertical profiles of interstitial aerosol (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M149" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), <inline-formula><mml:math id="M150" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> outside the cloud (Fig. 2), cloud microphysical quantities (Fig. 3), and meteorological elements inside and outside the cloud (Fig. 4) were obtained at 10 times from 10:00 to 18:00 and at 20:00 BJT. The data collected inside the cloud were original, while the average values outside the cloud were calculated at 10 m intervals.</p>

      <fig id="Ch1.F2" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 2</label><caption><p id="d2e2261">Vertical profiles of cloud interstitial aerosol concentration, outside aerosol number concentration, and cloud droplet concentration at different times (BJT): <bold>(a)</bold> 10:00, <bold>(b)</bold> 11:00, <bold>(c)</bold> 12:00, <bold>(d)</bold> 13:00, <bold>(e)</bold> 14:00, <bold>(f)</bold> 15:00, <bold>(g)</bold> 16:00, <bold>(h)</bold> 17:00, <bold>(i)</bold> 18:00, and <bold>(j)</bold> 20:00. The dashed black line represents the height of the PBL.</p></caption>
          <graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/25/4151/2025/acp-25-4151-2025-f02.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d2e2301">At 10:00 BJT, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M151" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> below 900 m was less than 100 cm<sup>−3</sup>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M153" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the PBL was high (Fig. 2a). Although there were sufficient aerosols that can be activated into cloud condensation nuclei, RH <inline-formula><mml:math id="M154" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 60 %, and the atmospheric temperature was high, which was not conducive to the activation of small-size aerosol particles (Fig. 3a). At the same time, LWC was low, and it was difficult for the condensed cloud droplets to grow; the average <inline-formula><mml:math id="M155" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was only 8.01 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M156" 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> (Fig. 3a). Between 900 and 1500 m, there were not only sufficient cloud condensation nuclei but also sufficient water vapor and temperature conditions, which are conducive to the formation of cloud droplets. The average <inline-formula><mml:math id="M157" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M158" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> increased to 430 cm<sup>−3</sup> and 11.15 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M160" 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>. Above 1500 m, although the water vapor condition was sufficient (LWC <inline-formula><mml:math id="M161" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.16 g m<sup>−3</sup>), the cloud condensation nuclei were few, resulting in an average <inline-formula><mml:math id="M163" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> value of only 35 cm<sup>−3</sup>. However, sufficient LWC was conducive to the growth of cloud droplets, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M165" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was significantly higher than clouds below 1500 m, with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M166" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ranging from 13.82 to 37.26 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M167" 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>. At 1500 m, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M168" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (interstitial aerosol) was 34 cm<sup>−3</sup>, increasing to 134 cm<sup>−3</sup> at 1600 m. RH remained nearly constant in this range, while LWC rose from 0.16 to 0.19 g m<sup>−3</sup>, promoting the hygroscopic growth of aerosols. However, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M172" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> did not show a significant increase. Thus, the temperature inversion layer (Fig. 4a) within the cloud may contribute to the rise in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M173" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (interstitial aerosol). This increase suggests more aerosols are inactive or unable to activate within the cloud. These aerosols may result from mixing warm air from outside the cloud at the cloud base (Lu et al., 2011). Furthermore, the temperature inversion layer may hinder vertical airflow within the cloud, suppressing cloud droplet growth.</p>

      <fig id="Ch1.F3" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 3</label><caption><p id="d2e2559">Vertical profiles of liquid water content and effective diameter of cloud droplets at different times (BJT): <bold>(a)</bold> 10:00, <bold>(b)</bold> 11:00, <bold>(c)</bold> 12:00, <bold>(d)</bold> 13:00, <bold>(e)</bold> 14:00, <bold>(f)</bold> 15:00, <bold>(g)</bold> 16:00, <bold>(h)</bold> 17:00, <bold>(i)</bold> 18:00, and <bold>(j)</bold> 20:00. The dashed black line represents the height of the PBL).</p></caption>
          <graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/25/4151/2025/acp-25-4151-2025-f03.png"/>

        </fig>

      <fig id="Ch1.F4" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 4</label><caption><p id="d2e2601">Vertical profiles of temperature inside and outside the cloud, relative humidity inside and outside the cloud at different times (BJT): <bold>(a)</bold> 10:00, <bold>(b)</bold> 11:00, <bold>(c)</bold> 12:00, <bold>(d)</bold> 13:00, <bold>(e)</bold> 14:00, <bold>(f)</bold> 15:00, <bold>(g)</bold> 16:00, <bold>(h)</bold> 17:00, <bold>(i)</bold> 18:00, and <bold>(j)</bold> 20:00. The dashed black line represents the height of the PBL.</p></caption>
          <graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/25/4151/2025/acp-25-4151-2025-f04.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d2e2641">At 11:00 BJT, aerosols were transported by updrafts (Fig. 5a) to around 1500 m (near the top of the PBL) and activated into cloud condensation nuclei. Below 1500 m, the average <inline-formula><mml:math id="M174" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> value was 102 cm<sup>−3</sup> (Fig. 2b), while the average LWC value was only 0.03 g m<sup>−3</sup> (Fig. 3b). Cloud droplets were competing for water vapor. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M177" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> value was only 8.20 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M178" 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>, similar to the cloud microphysical characteristics near the PBL at 10:00. Between 1500 and 3150 m, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M179" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was less than 10 cm<sup>−3</sup>, indicating insufficient CCN, and the average <inline-formula><mml:math id="M181" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was only 29 cm<sup>−3</sup>. Compared to 10:00 BJT, the LWC was higher (mean 0.19 g m<sup>−3</sup>), resulting in a larger <inline-formula><mml:math id="M184" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the upper part of the cloud, with an average of 28.95 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M185" 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>.</p>

      <fig id="Ch1.F5" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 5</label><caption><p id="d2e2783">Latitudinal profiles of vertical pressure velocity at different times in Guangxi. The solid black line is the latitude range observed by aircraft, where a positive value shows the downdraft, and a negative value shows the updraft: <bold>(a)</bold> 11:00, <bold>(b)</bold> 14:00, <bold>(c)</bold> 17:00, and <bold>(d)</bold> 20:00 BJT.</p></caption>
          <graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/25/4151/2025/acp-25-4151-2025-f05.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d2e2804">At 12:00 BJT, the height of the PBL top rose to 1000 m; the near-surface aerosol was transported to 1200–1500 m (Fig. 2c; the mean value of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M186" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> outside the cloud was 578 cm<sup>−3</sup>); the mean value of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M188" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> reached 399 cm<sup>−3</sup>; and the mean value of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M190" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was only 9.41 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M191" 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> (Fig. 3c), higher than at 11:00 BJT. Stratocumulus clouds above 1800 m had low <inline-formula><mml:math id="M192" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (mean 35 cm<sup>−3</sup>) and large <inline-formula><mml:math id="M194" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (mean 26.14 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M195" 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>).</p>
      <p id="d2e2920">At 13:00 BJT, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M196" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ranged from 13 to 2052 cm<sup>−3</sup> below 1200 m (Fig. 2d), which may be attributed to the uneven development of clouds within the detection range. The increase in solar radiation leads to high near-surface temperatures (Fig. 4d, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M198" display="inline"><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M199" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 25 °C), which enhances turbulent activity within the PBL and is favorable for cloud droplet formation. Therefore, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M200" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at 13:00 BJT was larger than that at 10:00 BJT, and many cloud droplets hindered their particle size growth, with an average <inline-formula><mml:math id="M201" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> value of 9.23 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M202" 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> (Fig. 3d). From 1200 to 1500 m, the mean values of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M203" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M204" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> were 155 cm<sup>−3</sup> and 12.29 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M206" 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>. At this height, a strong temperature inversion layer appeared (Fig. 4d), and cloud droplet evaporation activity was enhanced (Li et al., 2003), resulting in a higher <inline-formula><mml:math id="M207" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (interstitial aerosol) than <inline-formula><mml:math id="M208" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (outside cloud). For stratocumulus clouds above 1500 m, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M209" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> varied little with height, and the average <inline-formula><mml:math id="M210" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was 21.45 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M211" 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>.</p>
      <p id="d2e3092">At 14:00 BJT, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M212" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> range below 1500 m was 11 to 1109 cm<sup>−3</sup> (Fig. 2e), with the highest PBL top height at 1500 m, which diluted the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M214" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (out of the cloud) within the PBL, resulting in a decrease in the maximum <inline-formula><mml:math id="M215" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M216" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M217" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1109 cm<sup>−3</sup>). The average LWC was 0.29 g m<sup>−3</sup> (Fig. 3e), higher than at 13:00 BJT, providing moisture conditions for cloud droplet growth, while the upward airflow was strong (Fig. 5b). Consequently, the average <inline-formula><mml:math id="M220" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was  13.75 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M221" 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>. A temperature inversion layer was present at 2500 m (Fig. 4e), hindering aerosol diffusion and enhancing the evaporation of cloud droplets near the cloud top, leading to a peak in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M222" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (interstitial aerosol) at that height.</p>
      <p id="d2e3215">At 15:00 BJT, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M223" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M224" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (interstitial aerosol) between 1600 and 2000 m were higher than those at 14:00 BJT with average values of 720 and 249 cm<sup>−3</sup> (Fig. 2f). Due to the increase in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M226" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, the average <inline-formula><mml:math id="M227" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was only 13.72 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M228" 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> (Fig. 3f). The increase in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M229" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (outside cloud) above 2000 m provided CCN, resulting in an average <inline-formula><mml:math id="M230" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of 146 cm<sup>−3</sup>. Although the moisture conditions were sufficient, with an average LWC of 0.23 g m<sup>−3</sup>, which was higher than the 0.05 g m<sup>−3</sup> recorded at 14:00 BJT (Fig. 3f), and RH was 52 % (Fig. 4f), the average <inline-formula><mml:math id="M234" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> decreased to 16.73 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M235" 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 decrease was due to the competition for moisture among cloud droplets, which led to an increase in small-particle-size cloud droplets.</p>
      <p id="d2e3365">At 16:00 BJT, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M236" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M237" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (interstitial aerosol) below 2000 m were relatively large, 458 and 468 cm<sup>−3</sup>, respectively (Fig. 2g). The temperature inversion layer at the top of the PBL hinders the condensation growth of cloud droplets. The average <inline-formula><mml:math id="M239" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was only 11.00 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M240" 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> (Fig. 3g). Similar to the observations at 15:00 BJT, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M241" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (outside cloud) and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M242" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (interstitial aerosol) near 3000 m were higher. The low temperature (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M243" display="inline"><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M244" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 7.75 °C) and high humidity (RH <inline-formula><mml:math id="M245" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 70 %) of the cloud environment (Fig. 4g) were conducive to the activation of aerosol. The maximum value of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M246" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> reached 395 cm<sup>−3</sup>. However, the average of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M248" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was only 17.13 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M249" 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> due to water vapor contention between cloud droplets.</p>
      <p id="d2e3512">At 17:00 BJT, the height of the PBL decreased to 730 m. Aerosols were transported above the PBL (Fig. 2h), providing CCN above 2000 m. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M250" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> remained constant with an average of 134 cm<sup>−3</sup> (Fig. 2h), while <inline-formula><mml:math id="M252" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> averaged 17.12 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M253" 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> (Fig. 3h). Under the cooling of the atmosphere and the cooling of the cloud tops at sunset, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M254" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> near the cloud tops was greater than 30 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M255" 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>. The temperature inversion layer of 1600–2000 m (Fig. 4h) enhanced cloud droplet growth and hindered aerosol diffusion, causing the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M256" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (interstitial aerosol) to be higher than the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M257" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> outside cloud.</p>
      <p id="d2e3603">At 18:00 BJT, the height of the PBL decreased to 500 m, resulting in the accumulation of aerosols between 900 and 1400 m (Fig. 2i), which led to the formation of small-particle-size cloud droplets, with an average <inline-formula><mml:math id="M258" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of 273 cm<sup>−3</sup> and an average <inline-formula><mml:math id="M260" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of 16.67 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M261" 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> (Fig. 3i). Similar to the observations at 17:00 BJT, the atmospheric temperature above 1400 m was high (Fig. 4i), and cloud droplet evaporation caused <inline-formula><mml:math id="M262" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (interstitial aerosol) to be close to or greater than <inline-formula><mml:math id="M263" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (outside cloud).</p>
      <p id="d2e3674">At 20:00 BJT, there were upward flows between 1000 and 1500 m (Fig. 5d). The abundance of CCN and low temperature (Fig. 4j) promoted the formation and growth of cloud droplets. The average <inline-formula><mml:math id="M264" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was 194 cm<sup>−3</sup> (Fig. 2j), higher than the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M266" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> observed from 10:00 to 13:00 BJT. LWC and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M267" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> gradually increased with height (Fig. 3j). LWC rose from 0.02 to 0.64 g m<sup>−3</sup>. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M269" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> increased from 7.52 to 29.59 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M270" 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>.</p>
      <p id="d2e3756">The cloud height is normalized, and the relative height of the cloud is set as <inline-formula><mml:math id="M271" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Z</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (0 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M272" display="inline"><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M273" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Z</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M274" display="inline"><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1). <inline-formula><mml:math id="M275" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Z</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M276" display="inline"><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.33 is the lower cloud layer, 0.33 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M277" display="inline"><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M278" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Z</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M279" display="inline"><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.67 is the middle cloud layer, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M280" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Z</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M281" display="inline"><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.67 is the upper cloud layer. The concentration spectra of cloud interstitial aerosol numbers (Fig. 6a–c) and cloud droplet numbers (Fig. 6d–f) at different locations at different times were obtained.</p>

      <fig id="Ch1.F6" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 6</label><caption><p id="d2e3859">Cloud interstitial aerosol number concentration spectrum and cloud droplet number concentration spectrum. Panels <bold>(a)</bold>–<bold>(c)</bold> show the aerosol spectrum of lower cloud, middle cloud, and upper cloud, and panels <bold>(d)</bold>–<bold>(f)</bold> show the cloud droplet spectrum of lower cloud, middle cloud, and upper cloud, respectively.</p></caption>
          <graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/25/4151/2025/acp-25-4151-2025-f06.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d2e3880">From 10:00 to 13:00 BJT, the interstitial aerosol particle size in the cloud's lower layer was concentrated below 0.4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M282" 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>. In comparison, the cloud droplet diameter was primarily concentrated below 20 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M283" 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 few large-particle-size cloud droplets (Fig. 6a, d). In the middle cloud layer, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M284" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> across all particle size ranges had decreased to below 1000 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M285" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cm</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M286" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for particles smaller than 20 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M287" 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> has decreased, while <inline-formula><mml:math id="M288" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for particles larger than 20 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M289" 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> exceeded 0.1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M290" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cm</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (Fig. 6b, e). <inline-formula><mml:math id="M291" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the upper cloud layer was minimal compared to the middle and lower layers. Sufficient water vapor (LWC <inline-formula><mml:math id="M292" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.14 g m<sup>−3</sup>, Fig. 3a–c) and low temperature (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M294" display="inline"><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M295" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 11.72 °C, Fig. 4a–c) promote the growth of cloud droplets, resulting in fewer <inline-formula><mml:math id="M296" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for particles larger than 20 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M297" 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> in the upper layer (Fig. 6c, f) compared to the middle layer.</p>
      <p id="d2e4073">From 14:00 to 16:00 BJT, aerosols diffused upward with the increase in the PBL, leading to a decrease in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M298" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the cloud's lower layer (Fig. 6a, d). The upward transport of aerosols caused the upper-level <inline-formula><mml:math id="M299" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of the cloud to be higher than that observed from 10:00 to 13:00 BJT. This change increased the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M300" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of droplets with diameters greater than 20 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M301" 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> (Fig. 6b–c, e–f). Newly formed cloud droplets competed for water vapor. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M302" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of droplets larger than 30 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M303" 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> decreased, while <inline-formula><mml:math id="M304" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of smaller droplets increased.</p>
      <p id="d2e4153">From 17:00 to 20:00 BJT, the height of the PBL decreased. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M305" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> increased, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M306" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of large droplets decreased. Aerosols retained at the top of the PBL provided CCN for the cloud's middle and upper layers (Fig. 6b–c, e–f). During this period, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M307" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was higher than observed from 10:00 to 13:00 BJT. The increase in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M308" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> may be attributed to the rise in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M309" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of droplets smaller than 20 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M310" 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>.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3">
  <label>3.3</label><title>Verification of the Twomey effect</title>
      <p id="d2e4230">Previous studies have shown two sources of aerosols in Guangxi, namely the land and the ocean, where air masses from land will bring higher aerosol particle number concentrations (Liu et al., 2024). According to the classification of air mass sources, the frequency distributions of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M311" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (interstitial aerosol), <inline-formula><mml:math id="M312" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, LWC, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M313" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> under the influence of land and ocean air masses were obtained (Fig. 7).</p>

      <fig id="Ch1.F7" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 7</label><caption><p id="d2e4268">The distributions of cloud interstitial aerosol number concentration <bold>(a, e)</bold>, cloud droplet number concentration <bold>(b, f)</bold>, LWC <bold>(c, g)</bold>, and cloud droplet effective diameter <bold>(d, h)</bold> under different air mass sources. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M314" display="inline"><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> axis represents the number of samples.</p></caption>
          <graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/25/4151/2025/acp-25-4151-2025-f07.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d2e4296">Under the influence of land air mass, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M315" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (interstitial aerosol) was less than 500 cm<sup>−3</sup>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M317" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was high. The frequency distribution of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M318" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was unimodal, mainly concentrated in the range of 16–18 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M319" 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> (Fig. 7a). Under the influence of ocean air mass, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M320" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (interstitial aerosol) was mainly less than 20 cm<sup>−3</sup>. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M322" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was primarily distributed in the range of 10 to 50 cm<sup>−3</sup>. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M324" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was significantly higher than that under the influence of land air mass. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M325" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> presented a bimodal distribution with peak values of 17.75 and 34.25 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M326" 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> (Fig. 7b).</p>
      <p id="d2e4435">In addition to the influence of the air mass source, the vertical distribution of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M327" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is also affected by PBL. We selected two aircraft observation data on 29 October and 2 November to analyze the influence of the PBL on the cloud microphysical quantities. The observed cloud base height was lower than the heights of the PBL, and the cloud top height was <inline-formula><mml:math id="M328" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1500 m. The clouds crossed the top of the PBL, and the cloud thickness was similar (about 2500 m).</p>
      <p id="d2e4456">According to the vertical profiles of the aerosol number concentration spectrum (Fig. 8a–b), there were significant differences between the two <inline-formula><mml:math id="M329" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> profiles. In the height affected by the PBL (below 1500 m), aerosol pollution occurred on 29 October (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M330" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M331" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1000 cm<sup>−3</sup>), and the atmosphere was clean on 2 November (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M333" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M334" display="inline"><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 600 cm<sup>−3</sup>). In the upper atmosphere (above 1500 m), aerosol pollution (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M336" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M337" display="inline"><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 200 cm<sup>−3</sup>) occurred on 2 November compared to 29 October (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M339" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M340" display="inline"><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 100 cm<sup>−3</sup>).</p>

      <fig id="Ch1.F8" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 8</label><caption><p id="d2e4594">Vertical profiles of aerosol number concentration spectra <bold>(a, b)</bold> and cloud droplet number concentration spectra <bold>(c, d)</bold> on 29 October and 2 November.</p></caption>
          <graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/25/4151/2025/acp-25-4151-2025-f08.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d2e4609">On 29 October, the aerosol pollution in the PBL was severe (Fig. 9a, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M342" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M343" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1331 cm<sup>−3</sup>). The aerosol number concentration spectrum exhibited a bimodal distribution, with peak diameters of 0.14 and 0.22 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M345" 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> (Fig. 8a). The atmosphere contained sufficient CCN, resulting in a large <inline-formula><mml:math id="M346" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (Fig. 9a, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M347" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M348" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 460 cm<sup>−3</sup>). As shown in the cloud droplet number concentration spectrum (Fig. 8c), most cloud droplets were concentrated in the size range of 3–24 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M350" 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> (Fig. 8c). <inline-formula><mml:math id="M351" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was 9.69 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M352" 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> (Fig. 9e), primarily because many cloud droplets competed for water vapor, making it difficult for them to grow into larger droplets. A strong inversion layer at 1500 m (Fig. 9c) hindered the upward transport of aerosols. Consequently, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M353" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> above 1500 m was low, leading to a reduced <inline-formula><mml:math id="M354" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, with an average of only 35 cm<sup>−3</sup>. Figure 8c showed that cloud droplet sizes within the PBL primarily range from 8 to 21 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M356" 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>. In contrast, above the PBL, cloud droplet sizes are mainly distributed below 8 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M357" 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 above 21 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M358" 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 an average effective diameter (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M359" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) of 25.28 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M360" 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> (Fig. 9e). These large-particle-size cloud droplets likely originated from the collision and growth of droplets within the 8.0 to 21 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M361" 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> range.</p>

      <fig id="Ch1.F9"><label>Figure 9</label><caption><p id="d2e4824">Vertical profiles of outside aerosol concentration, cloud  interstitial aerosol concentration, and cloud droplet concentration <bold>(a, b)</bold>; temperature inside and outside the cloud and relative humidity inside and outside the cloud <bold>(c, d)</bold>; and LWC and effective droplet diameters <bold>(e, f)</bold> on 29 October and 2 November. The dashed black line represents the height of the PBL.</p></caption>
          <graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/25/4151/2025/acp-25-4151-2025-f09.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d2e4843">On 2 November, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M362" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the PBL (Fig. 9b, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M363" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M364" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 405 cm<sup>−3</sup>) was slightly higher than <inline-formula><mml:math id="M366" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the upper air (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M367" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M368" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 220 cm<sup>−3</sup>). The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M370" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the PBL (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M371" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M372" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 243 cm<sup>−3</sup>) was higher than that above the PBL (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M374" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M375" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 124 cm<sup>−3</sup>). The concentration spectra of cloud droplet numbers exhibited a bimodal distribution (Fig. 8d). The presence of a large number of small cloud droplets in the PBL hinders the growth of larger droplets, resulting in a lower number of large cloud droplets (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M377" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M378" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 18 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M379" 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>) in the PBL compared to the upper air. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M380" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the PBL (Fig. 9f, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M381" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M382" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 12.89 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M383" 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>) was lower than in the upper air (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M384" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M385" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 17.94 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M386" 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>). The inversion layer (Fig. 9d, about 750 m in thickness) above the top of the PBL enhanced the evaporation activity of cloud droplets, leading to a lower <inline-formula><mml:math id="M387" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at this height compared to other heights and a higher <inline-formula><mml:math id="M388" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (interstitial aerosol) than that observed at other heights.</p>
      <p id="d2e5120">To understand whether the relationship between aerosol and cloud in Guangxi is consistent with the Twomey effect, we classified the in-cloud data below 1000 m on 29 October and 2 November. We calculated the FIE index of LWC in different ranges (Fig. 10). The equation within each panel of Fig. 10 represents a fitted curve for the data, indicating the relationship between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M389" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M390" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The relationship between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M391" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M392" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> can be expressed as <inline-formula><mml:math id="M393" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M394" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M395" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">FIE</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The results showed that <inline-formula><mml:math id="M396" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M397" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> were always negatively correlated, regardless of low LWC conditions or high LWC conditions. Therefore, the relationship between aerosol and stratocumulus in Guangxi is consistent with the Twomey effect, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M398" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> decreases with the increase in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M399" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>

      <fig id="Ch1.F10" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 10</label><caption><p id="d2e5245">Correlation between aerosol number concentration and effective droplet diameter in the range of 0–0.05, 0.05–0.10, 0.10–0.15, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M400" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.15 g m<sup>−3</sup> LWC. Panels <bold>(a)</bold>–<bold>(d)</bold> show data from 29 October, and panels <bold>(e)</bold>–<bold>(f)</bold> show data from 2 November. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M402" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the correlation coefficient. The significance level <inline-formula><mml:math id="M403" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> was set at 0.05, and the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M404" display="inline"><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> value <inline-formula><mml:math id="M405" display="inline"><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.05 was obtained.</p></caption>
          <graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/25/4151/2025/acp-25-4151-2025-f10.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4" sec-type="conclusions">
  <label>4</label><title>Conclusion</title>
      <p id="d2e5327">This study provides the vertical profiles of stratocumulus microphysical quantities, the number concentration spectrum, and meteorological parameters over Guangxi in autumn using the aircraft observation data of nine flights. The daylight variation of cloud microphysical characteristics at different altitudes is described, and the effects of air mass source on cloud microphysical quantities are discussed. The results are as follows: <list list-type="custom"><list-item><label>1.</label>
      <p id="d2e5332">Below 1500 m in Guangxi, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M406" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M407" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> gradually decreased with the increase in altitude. Aerosols were mainly concentrated under the PBL. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M408" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was large, with an average of 407 cm<sup>−3</sup>. Between 1500 and 3300 m, the value of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M410" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> remained low, with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M411" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> staying below 200 cm<sup>−3</sup> and not changing with height. With the increase in height, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M413" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> first increased and then remained constant and finally increased again. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M414" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at the cloud top was 2.75 times that at the cloud base. The inversion layer at the top of the PBL hindered the increase in the cloud droplet particle size. Compared with other regions in China, LWC was high, with an average value of 0.22 g m<sup>−3</sup>, and LWC variation was independent of height.</p></list-item><list-item><label>2.</label>
      <p id="d2e5450">The vertical distribution of microphysical quantities of stratocumulus in autumn in this region had noticeable daylight variation, mainly influenced by the daylight variation of the vertical distribution of aerosols. From 10:00 to 13:00 BJT, aerosols were primarily concentrated at low altitudes, which led to smaller-particle-size cloud droplets in the lower cloud layer (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M416" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M417" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 313 cm<sup>−3</sup>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M419" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M420" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 10.78 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M421" 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>). From 14:00 to 16:00 BJT, due to the combined effects of the lifting of the top of the PBL and updrafts, the low-level aerosols were diluted, leading to a decrease in the number of cloud droplets in the lower layer (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M422" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M423" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 184 cm<sup>−3</sup>). From 17:00 to 20:00 BJT, the descending motion and downdrafts of the PBL increased the number of small cloud droplets in the lower layer (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M425" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M426" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 12.15 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M427" 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>). From 10:00 to 13:00 BJT, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M428" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the middle and upper clouds was low, while the particle size was large. From 14:00 to 20:00 BJT, the upward transport of aerosols near the surface and the formation of a high concentration aerosol layer (600–1300 m) increased the number of small-particle-size cloud droplets in the middle and upper clouds.</p></list-item><list-item><label>3.</label>
      <p id="d2e5583">The air mass source and PBL influenced the distribution characteristics of cloud microphysical quantities by influencing <inline-formula><mml:math id="M429" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M430" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> under the influence of the land air mass was 5.06 times that of the ocean air mass, while <inline-formula><mml:math id="M431" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> under the influence was 1.62 times that of the land air mass. When there was a high number concentration of aerosols below PBL, the cloud droplet number concentration spectrum was unimodal, and the cloud droplet size was concentrated below 20 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M432" 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>. Above the PBL, the cloud droplet number concentration spectrum was bimodal, and the number of large-particle-size cloud droplets (cloud droplet diameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M433" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 30 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M434" 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>) was more than that in the PBL. The relationship between aerosol and cloud in the Guangxi region was consistent with the Twomey effect. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M435" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M436" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> were negatively correlated in different LWC ranges, and the FIE ranged from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M437" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.07 to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M438" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.58.</p></list-item></list> In conclusion, our findings highlight the significant influence of aerosol concentrations and air mass origins on the microphysical properties of stratocumulus clouds over Guangxi. The observed daylight and vertical variations in cloud microphysics underscore the complexity of aerosol–cloud interactions in this region. Future research should cover a comprehensive time frame, including nighttime observations, to provide a complete vertical structure of these clouds, the effects of different aerosol types, and their impact on regional climate patterns.</p>
</sec>

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

      <p id="d2e5689">All the aircraft data presented in this article can be accessed through <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13719678" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5281/zenodo.13719678</ext-link> (Wang, 2024). MERRA-2 data are available at <uri>https://disc.gsfc.nasa.gov/daac-bin/FTPSubset2.pl</uri> (Bosilovich et al., 2015).</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="authorcontribution"><title>Author contributions</title>

      <p id="d2e5701">SL, HW, DZ, and MH designed this study. WZ, YD, ZZ, and PC implemented the experiment and sample analysis. SL analyzed the data and wrote the paper. HW, DZ, and TZ were responsible for funding acquisition and writing (review and editing). YK and ZW was responsible for data curation. All co-authors proofread and commented on the paper.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests"><title>Competing interests</title>

      <p id="d2e5707">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="d2e5713">Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this paper. While Copernicus Publications makes every effort to include appropriate place names, the final responsibility lies with the authors.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d2e5719">The authors are grateful for the assistance of colleagues for sample collection. We would like to thank the GMAO for MERRA-2 data (<uri>https://disc.gsfc.nasa.gov/datasets?keywords=MERRA-2</uri>, last access: 30 June 2024).</p></ack><notes notes-type="financialsupport"><title>Financial support</title>

      <p id="d2e5727">This research has been supported by the National Key Research and Development Program of China (grant no. 2022YFC3701204), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant nos. 42075084 and 42475207), the Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province (grant no. BK20231300), and the Beijing Municipal Science and Technology Commission (grant no. Z221100005222016).</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="reviewstatement"><title>Review statement</title>

      <p id="d2e5733">This paper was edited by Sergio Rodríguez and reviewed by two anonymous referees.</p>
  </notes><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>Albrecht, B. A.: Aerosols, cloud microphysics, and fractional cloudiness, Science, 245, 1227–1230, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.245.4923.1227" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1126/science.245.4923.1227</ext-link>, 1989.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>Almeida, G. P., Brito, J., Morales, C. A., Andrade, M. F., and Artaxo, P.: Measured and modelled cloud condensation nuclei (CCN) concentration in São Paulo, Brazil: the importance of aerosol size-resolved chemical composition on CCN concentration prediction, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 7559–7572, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-7559-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-14-7559-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>Betts, A. K.: Coupling of water vapor convergence, clouds, precipitation, and land-surface processes, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 112, D10108, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JD008191" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2006JD008191</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>Bosilovich, M. G., Akella, S., Coy, L., Cullather, R., Draper, C., Gelaro, R., Kovach, R., Liu, Q., Molod, A., Norris, P., Wargan, K., Chao, W., Reichle, R., Takacs, L., Vikhliaev, Y., Bloom, S., Collow, A., Firth, S., Labow, G., Partyka, G., Pawson, S., Reale, O., Schubert, S. D., Suarez, M., and Global Modeling and Assimilation Office (GMAO): MERRA-2, Goddard Earth Sciences Data and Information Services Center (GES DISC), Greenbelt, MD, USA, <uri>https://disc.gsfc.nasa.gov/daac-bin/FTPSubset2.pl</uri> (last access: 7 January 2024), 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>Che, Y., Zhang, J., Fang, C., Zhou, X., Xue, W., Hu, X., Duan, J., Li, W., Gao, Y., Lu, G., Zhao, D., and Zhao, C.: Aerosol and cloud properties over a coastal area from aircraft observations in Zhejiang, China, Atmos. Environ., 267, 118771, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2021.118771" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2021.118771</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>Chen, Y.-C., Wang, S.-H., Min, Q., Lu, S., Lin, P.-L., Lin, N.-H., Chung, K.-S., and Joseph, E.: Aerosol impacts on warm-cloud microphysics and drizzle in a moderately polluted environment, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 4487–4502, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-4487-2021" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-21-4487-2021</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>Collaud Coen, M., Weingartner, E., Apituley, A., Ceburnis, D., Fierz-Schmidhauser, R., Flentje, H., Henzing, J. S., Jennings, S. G., Moerman, M., Petzold, A., Schmid, O., and Baltensperger, U.: Minimizing light absorption measurement artifacts of the Aethalometer: evaluation of five correction algorithms, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 3, 457–474, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-3-457-2010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-3-457-2010</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>de Boer, G., Tripoli, G. J., and Eloranta, E. W.: Preliminary comparison of CloudSAT-derived microphysical quantities with ground-based measurements for mixed-phase cloud research in the Arctic, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 113, D00A06, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JD010029" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2008JD010029</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>Dusek, U., Frank, G. P., Hildebrandt, L., Curtius, J., Schneider, J., Walter, S., Chand, D., Drewnick, F., Hings, S., Jung, D., Borrmann, S., and Andreae, M. O.: Size matters more than chemistry for cloud-nucleating ability of aerosol particles, Science, 312, 1375–1378, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1125261" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1126/science.1125261</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>Feingold, G., Remer, L. A., Ramaprasad, J., and Kaufman, Y. J.: Analysis of smoke impact on clouds in Brazilian biomass burning regions: An extension of Twomey's approach, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 106, 22907–22922, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JD000732" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2001JD000732</ext-link>, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>Feingold, G., Eberhard, W. L., Veron, D. E., and Previdi, M.: First measurements of the Twomey indirect effect using ground-based remote sensors, Geophys. Res. Lett., 30, 1287, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002GL016633" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2002GL016633</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>Ferek, R. J., Hegg, D. A., Hobbs, P. V., Durkee, P., and Nielsen, K.: Measurements of ship-induced tracks in clouds off the Washington coast, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 103, 23199–23206, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/98JD02121" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/98JD02121</ext-link>, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>Ge, J., Wang, Z., Wang, C., Yang, X., Dong, Z., and Wang, M.: Diurnal variations of global clouds observed from the CATS spaceborne lidar and their links to large-scale meteorological factors, Clim. Dynam., 57, 2637–2651, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-021-05829-2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s00382-021-05829-2</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>Gunthe, S. S., King, S. M., Rose, D., Chen, Q., Roldin, P., Farmer, D. K., Jimenez, J. L., Artaxo, P., Andreae, M. O., Martin, S. T., and Pöschl, U.: Cloud condensation nuclei in pristine tropical rainforest air of Amazonia: size-resolved measurements and modeling of atmospheric aerosol composition and CCN activity, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 9, 7551–7575, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-7551-2009" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-9-7551-2009</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>Han, Q., Rossow, W. B., and Lacis, A. A.: Near-global survey of effective droplet radii in liquid water clouds using ISCCP data, J. Climate., 7, 465–497, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(1994)007&lt;0465:NGSOED&gt;2.0.CO;2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/1520-0442(1994)007&lt;0465:NGSOED&gt;2.0.CO;2</ext-link>, 1994.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>Harikishan, G., Padmakumari, B., Maheskumar, R. S., Pandithurai, G., and Min, Q. L.: Aerosol indirect effects from ground-based retrievals over the rain shadow region in Indian subcontinent, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 121, 2369–2382, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD024577" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2015JD024577</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>Jose, S., Nair, V. S., and Babu, S. S.: Anthropogenic emissions from South Asia reverses the aerosol indirect effect over the northern Indian Ocean, Sci. Rep., 10, 18360, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-74897-x" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41598-020-74897-x</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>Kennedy, A. D., Dong, X., Xi, B., Xie, S., Zhang, Y., and Chen, J.: A comparison of MERRA and NARR reanalyses with the DOE ARM SGP data, J. Climate, 24, 4541–4557, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/2011JCLI3978.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/2011JCLI3978.1</ext-link>, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>Kim, B. G., Schwartz, S. E., Miller, M. A., and Min, Q.: Effective radius of cloud droplets by ground-based remote sensing: Relationship to aerosol, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 108, 4740, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD003721" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2003JD003721</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>Kim, S. W., Yoon, S. C., Won, J. G., and Choi, S. C.: Ground-based remote sensing measurements of aerosol and ozone in an urban area: A case study of mixing height evolution and its effect on ground-level ozone concentrations, Atmos. Environ., 41, 7069–7081, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2007.04.063" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2007.04.063</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>King, M. D., Platnick, S., Menzel, W. P., Ackerman, S. A., and Hubanks, P. A.: Spatial and temporal distribution of clouds observed by MODIS onboard the Terra and Aqua satellites, IEEE T. Geosci. Remote, 51, 3826–3852, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2012.2227333" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1109/TGRS.2012.2227333</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>Kleinman, L. I., Daum, P. H., Lee, Y.-N., Lewis, E. R., Sedlacek III, A. J., Senum, G. I., Springston, S. R., Wang, J., Hubbe, J., Jayne, J., Min, Q., Yum, S. S., and Allen, G.: Aerosol concentration and size distribution measured below, in, and above cloud from the DOE G-1 during VOCALS-REx, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 207–223, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-207-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-12-207-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>Koren, I., Kaufman, Y. J., Rosenfeld, D., Remer, L. A., and Rudich, Y.: Aerosol invigoration and restructuring of Atlantic convective clouds, Geophys. Res. Lett., 32, 14828, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2005GL023187" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2005GL023187</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>Lance, S., Nenes, A., and Rissman, T. A.: Chemical and dynamical effects on cloud droplet number: Implications for estimates of the aerosol indirect effect, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 109, D22208, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JD004596" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2004JD004596</ext-link>, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>Li, J., Li, P., Ren, G., Yuan, L., Li, Y., and Yang, J.: Aircraft measurements of aerosol distribution, warm cloud microphysical properties, and their relationship over the Eastern Loess Plateau in China, Tellus B, 71, 1663994, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/16000889.2019.1663994" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1080/16000889.2019.1663994</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>Li, Z., Li, R., and Li, B.: Analyses on Vertical Microphysical Characteristics of Autumn Stratiform Cloud in Lanzhou Region, Plateau Meteorology, 22, 583–589, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3321/j.issn:1000-0534.2003.06.008" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3321/j.issn:1000-0534.2003.06.008</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>Liu, S., Wang, H., Zhao, D., Ke, Y., Wu, Z., Shen, L., and Zhao, T.: Aircraft observations of aerosols and BC in autumn over Guangxi Province, China: Diurnal variation, vertical distribution and source appointment, Sci. Total. Environ., 906, 167550, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.167550" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.167550</ext-link>, 2024.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>Liu, T., Liu, Q., Chen, Y., Wang, W., Zhang, H., Li, D., and Sheng, J.: Effect of aerosols on the macro-and micro-physical properties of warm clouds in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region, Sci. Total. Environ., 720, 137618, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.137618" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.137618</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>Lu, C., Liu, Y., and Niu, S.: Examination of turbulent entrainment-mixing mechanisms using a combined approach, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 116, D20207, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD015944" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2011JD015944</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>Lu, M. L., Conant, W. C., Jonsson, H. H., Varutbangkul, V., Flagan, R. C., and Seinfeld, J. H.: The marine stratus/stratocumulus experiment (MASE): Aerosol-cloud relationships in marine stratocumulus, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 112, D10209, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JD007985" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2006JD007985</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>Lu, Z., Liu, X., Zhang, Z., Zhao, C., Meyer, K., Rajapakshe, C., Wu, C., Yang, Z., and Penner, J. E.: 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.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>McFarquhar, G. M., Bretherton, C. S., Marchand, R., Protat, A., DeMott, P. J., Alexander, S. P., Roberts, G. C., Twohy, C. H., Toohey, D., Siems, S., Huang, Y., Wood, R., Rauber, R. M., Lasher-Trapp, S., Jensen, J., Stith, J. L., Mace, J., Um, J. U., Järvinen, E., Schnaiter, M., Gettelman, A., Sanchez, K. J., McCluskey, C. S., Russell, L. M., McCoy, I. L., Atlas, R. L., Bardeen, C. G., Moore, K. A., Hill, T. C. J., Humphries, R. S., Keywood, M. D., Ristovski, Z., Cravigan, L., Schofield, R., Fairall, C., Mallet, M. D., Kreidenweis, S. M., Rainwater, B., Alessandro, J. D., Wang, Y., Wu, W., Saliba, G., Levin, E. T., Ding, S., Lang, F, Truong, S. H., Wolff, C., Haggerty, J., Harvey, M. J., Klekociuk, A. R., and McDonald, A.: Observations of clouds, aerosols, precipitation, and surface radiation over the Southern Ocean: An overview of CAPRICORN, MARCUS, MICRE, and SOCRATES, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 102, E894–E928, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-20-0132.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/BAMS-D-20-0132.1</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>Miles, N. L., Verlinde, J., and Clothiaux, E. E.: Cloud droplet size distributions in low-level stratiform clouds, J. Atmos. Sci., 57, 295–311, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(2000)057&lt;0295:CDSDIL&gt;2.0.CO;2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/1520-0469(2000)057&lt;0295:CDSDIL&gt;2.0.CO;2</ext-link>, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>Nakajima, T. Y., Uchiyama, A., Takamura, T., Tsujioka, N., Takemura, T., and Nakajima, T.: Comparisons of warm cloud properties obtained from satellite, ground, and aircraft measurements during APEX intensive observation period in 2000 and 2001, J. Meteorol. Soc. Jpn., Ser. II, 83, 1085–1095, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.2151/jmsj.83.1085" ext-link-type="DOI">10.2151/jmsj.83.1085</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>Painemal, D., Corral, A. F., Sorooshian, A., Brunke, M. A., Chellappan, S., Afzali Gorooh, V., Ham, S. H., O'Neill, L., Smith Jr., W. L., Tselioudis, G., Wang, H., Zeng, X., and Zuidema, P.: An overview of atmospheric features over the Western North Atlantic Ocean and North American East Coast-Part 2: Circulation, boundary layer, and clouds, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 126, e2020JD033423, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JD033423" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2020JD033423</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</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, <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.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>Pyrina, M., Hatzianastassiou, N., Matsoukas, C., Fotiadi, A., Papadimas, C. D., Pavlakis, K. G., and Vardavas, I.: Cloud effects on the solar and thermal radiation budgets of the Mediterranean basin, Atmos. Res., 152, 14–28, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2013.11.009" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosres.2013.11.009</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>Ramanathan, V. L. R. D., Cess, R. D., Harrison, E. F., Minnis, P., Barkstrom, B. R., Ahmad, E., and Hartmann, D.: Cloud-radiative forcing and climate: Results from the Earth Radiation Budget Experiment, Science, 243, 57–63, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.243.4887.57" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1126/science.243.4887.57</ext-link>, 1989.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>Rosenfeld, D., Andreae, M. O., Asmi, A., Chin, M., de Leeuw, G., Donovan, D. P., Kahn, R., Kinne, S., Kivekäs, N., Kulmala, M., Lau, W., Schmidt, K. S., Suni, T, Wagner, T., Wild, M., and Quaas, J.: Global observations of aerosol-cloud-precipitation-climate interactions, Rev. Geophys., 52, 750–808, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2013RG000441" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2013RG000441</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>Strapp, J. W., Leaitch, W., and Liu, P.: Hydrated and dried aerosol-size-distribution measurements from the particle measuring systems FSSP-300 probe and the deiced PCASP-100X probe, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 9, 548–555, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0426(1992)009&lt;0548:HADASD&gt;2.0.CO;2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/1520-0426(1992)009&lt;0548:HADASD&gt;2.0.CO;2</ext-link>, 1992.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>Su, T., Li, J., Li, C., Xiang, P., Lau, A. K. H., Guo, J., Yang, D., and Miao, Y.: An intercomparison of long-term planetary boundary layer heights retrieved from CALIPSO, ground-based lidar, and radiosonde measurements over Hong Kong, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 122, 3929–3943, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD025937" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2016JD025937</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>Terai, C. R., Bretherton, C. S., Wood, R., and Painter, G.: Aircraft observations of aerosol, cloud, precipitation, and boundary layer properties in pockets of open cells over the southeast Pacific, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 8071–8088, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-8071-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-14-8071-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>Twomey, S.: The influence of pollution on the shortwave albedo of clouds, J. Atmos. Sci., 34, 1149–1152,  <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1977)034&lt;1149:TIOPOT&gt;2.0.CO;2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/1520-0469(1977)034&lt;1149:TIOPOT&gt;2.0.CO;2</ext-link>, 1977.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>Waliser, D. E., Li, J. L., L'Ecuyer, T. S., and Chen, W. T.: The impact of precipitating ice and snow on the radiation balance in global climate models, Geophys. Res. Lett., 38, L06802, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GL046478" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2010GL046478</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>Wang, H.: Data for Aircraft observations of aerosol and microphysical quantities of stratocumulus in autumn over Guangxi Province, China: Diurnal variation, vertical distribution and aerosol-cloud relationship, Version v2, Zenodo [data set], <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13719678" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5281/zenodo.13719678</ext-link>, 2024.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>Wang, Y., Zheng, X., Dong, X., Xi, B., Wu, P., Logan, T., and Yung, Y. L.: Impacts of long-range transport of aerosols on marine-boundary-layer clouds in the eastern North Atlantic, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 14741–14755, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-14741-2020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-20-14741-2020</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>Wehbe, Y., Tessendorf, S. A., Weeks, C., Bruintjes, R., Xue, L., Rasmussen, R., Lawson, P., Woods, S., and Temimi, M.: Analysis of aerosol–cloud interactions and their implications for precipitation formation using aircraft observations over the United Arab Emirates, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 12543–12560, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-12543-2021" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-21-12543-2021</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>Wex, H., McFiggans, G., Henning, S., and Stratmann, F.: Influence of the external mixing state of atmospheric aerosol on derived CCN number concentrations, Geophys. Res. Lett., 37, L10805, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GL043337" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2010GL043337</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>Wood, R.: Stratocumulus clouds, Mon. Weather. Rev., 140, 2373–2423, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-11-00121.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/MWR-D-11-00121.1</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>Yuan, T., Li, Z., Zhang, R., and Fan, J.: Increase of cloud droplet size with aerosol optical depth: An observation and modeling study, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 113, D04201, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD008632" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2007JD008632</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation>Zaveri, R. A., Wang, J., Fan, J., Zhang, Y., Shilling, J. E., Zelenyuk, A., Mei, F., Newsom, R., Pekour, M., Tomlinson, J., Comstock, J. M., Shrinastava, M., Fortner, E., Machado, L. T., Artaxo, P., and Martin, S. T.: Rapid growth of anthropogenic organic nanoparticles greatly alters cloud life cycle in the Amazon rainforest, Sci. Adv., 8, eabj0329, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abj0329" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1126/sciadv.abj0329</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation>Zelinka, M. D., Andrews, T., Forster, P. M., and Taylor, K. E.: Quantifying components of aerosol-cloud-radiation interactions in climate models, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 119, 7599–7615, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JD021710" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2014JD021710</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation>Zhang, Q., Ma, X., Tie, X., Huang, M., and Zhao, C.: Vertical distributions of aerosols under different weather conditions: Analysis of in-situ aircraft measurements in Beijing, China, Atmos. Environ., 43, 5526–5535, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2009.05.037" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2009.05.037</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation>Zhang, Q., Quan, J., Tie, X., Huang, M., and Ma, X.: Impact of aerosol particles on cloud formation: Aircraft measurements in China, Atmos. Environ., 45, 665–672, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2010.10.025" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2010.10.025</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation>Zhao, C., Klein, S. A., Xie, S., Liu, X., Boyle, J. S., and Zhang, Y.: Aerosol first indirect effects on non-precipitating low-level liquid cloud properties as simulated by CAM5 at ARM sites, Geophys. Res. Lett., 39, L08806, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL051213" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2012GL051213</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><mixed-citation>Zhao, C., Qiu, Y., Dong, X., Wang, Z., Peng, Y., Li, B., Wu, Z., and Wang, Y.: Negative aerosol-cloud re relationship from aircraft observations over Hebei, China, Earth Space. Sci., 5, 19–29, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017EA000346" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2017EA000346</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><mixed-citation>Zhao, C., Zhao, L., and Dong, X.: A case study of stratus cloud properties using in situ aircraft observations over Huanghua, China, Atmosphere, 10, 19, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos10010019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3390/atmos10010019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><mixed-citation>Zhao, Z. L., Mao, J. T., and Wang, L.: In situ aircraft observations of one typical stratocumulus cloud process compared with the satellite measurements, Acta Meteorol. Sin., 69, 521–527, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.11676/qxxb2011.045" ext-link-type="DOI">10.11676/qxxb2011.045</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Measurement report: Aircraft observations of aerosol and microphysical quantities of stratocumulus in autumn over Guangxi Province, China – daylight variation, vertical distribution, and aerosol–cloud interactions</article-title-html>
<abstract-html/>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
      
Albrecht, B. A.: Aerosols, cloud microphysics, and fractional cloudiness,
Science, 245, 1227–1230, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.245.4923.1227" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1126/science.245.4923.1227</a>, 1989.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
      
Almeida, G. P., Brito, J., Morales, C. A., Andrade, M. F., and Artaxo, P.: Measured and modelled cloud condensation nuclei (CCN) concentration in São Paulo, Brazil: the importance of aerosol size-resolved chemical composition on CCN concentration prediction, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 7559–7572, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-7559-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-7559-2014</a>, 2014.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
      
Betts, A. K.: Coupling of water vapor convergence, clouds, precipitation,
and land-surface processes, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 112, D10108,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JD008191" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JD008191</a>, 2007.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
      
Bosilovich, M. G., Akella, S., Coy, L., Cullather, R., Draper, C., Gelaro,
R., Kovach, R., Liu, Q., Molod, A., Norris, P., Wargan, K., Chao, W.,
Reichle, R., Takacs, L., Vikhliaev, Y., Bloom, S., Collow, A., Firth, S.,
Labow, G., Partyka, G., Pawson, S., Reale, O., Schubert, S. D., Suarez, M.,
and Global Modeling and Assimilation Office (GMAO): MERRA-2, Goddard Earth Sciences Data and Information Services Center (GES DISC), Greenbelt, MD,
USA, <a href="https://disc.gsfc.nasa.gov/daac-bin/FTPSubset2.pl" target="_blank"/> (last access: 7 January 2024), 2015.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
      
Che, Y., Zhang, J., Fang, C., Zhou, X., Xue, W., Hu, X., Duan, J., Li, W.,
Gao, Y., Lu, G., Zhao, D., and Zhao, C.: Aerosol and cloud properties over a
coastal area from aircraft observations in Zhejiang, China, Atmos. Environ.,
267, 118771, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2021.118771" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2021.118771</a>, 2021.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
      
Chen, Y.-C., Wang, S.-H., Min, Q., Lu, S., Lin, P.-L., Lin, N.-H., Chung, K.-S., and Joseph, E.: Aerosol impacts on warm-cloud microphysics and drizzle in a moderately polluted environment, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 4487–4502, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-4487-2021" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-4487-2021</a>, 2021.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
      
Collaud Coen, M., Weingartner, E., Apituley, A., Ceburnis, D., Fierz-Schmidhauser, R., Flentje, H., Henzing, J. S., Jennings, S. G., Moerman, M., Petzold, A., Schmid, O., and Baltensperger, U.: Minimizing light absorption measurement artifacts of the Aethalometer: evaluation of five correction algorithms, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 3, 457–474, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-3-457-2010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-3-457-2010</a>, 2010.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
      
de Boer, G., Tripoli, G. J., and Eloranta, E. W.: Preliminary comparison of
CloudSAT-derived microphysical quantities with ground-based measurements for
mixed-phase cloud research in the Arctic, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 113,
D00A06, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JD010029" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JD010029</a>, 2008.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
      
Dusek, U., Frank, G. P., Hildebrandt, L., Curtius, J., Schneider, J., Walter, S., Chand, D., Drewnick, F., Hings, S., Jung, D., Borrmann, S., and Andreae, M. O.: Size matters more than chemistry for cloud-nucleating ability of aerosol particles, Science, 312, 1375–1378, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1125261" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1125261</a>, 2006.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
      
Feingold, G., Remer, L. A., Ramaprasad, J., and Kaufman, Y. J.: Analysis of
smoke impact on clouds in Brazilian biomass burning regions: An extension of
Twomey's approach, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 106, 22907–22922,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JD000732" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JD000732</a>, 2001.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
      
Feingold, G., Eberhard, W. L., Veron, D. E., and Previdi, M.: First measurements of the Twomey indirect effect using ground-based remote sensors, Geophys. Res. Lett., 30, 1287, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002GL016633" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2002GL016633</a>, 2003.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
      
Ferek, R. J., Hegg, D. A., Hobbs, P. V., Durkee, P., and Nielsen, K.:
Measurements of ship-induced tracks in clouds off the Washington coast, J.
Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 103, 23199–23206, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/98JD02121" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/98JD02121</a>, 1998.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
      
Ge, J., Wang, Z., Wang, C., Yang, X., Dong, Z., and Wang, M.: Diurnal variations of global clouds observed from the CATS spaceborne lidar and their links to large-scale meteorological factors, Clim. Dynam., 57, 2637–2651,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-021-05829-2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-021-05829-2</a>, 2021.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
      
Gunthe, S. S., King, S. M., Rose, D., Chen, Q., Roldin, P., Farmer, D. K., Jimenez, J. L., Artaxo, P., Andreae, M. O., Martin, S. T., and Pöschl, U.: Cloud condensation nuclei in pristine tropical rainforest air of Amazonia: size-resolved measurements and modeling of atmospheric aerosol composition and CCN activity, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 9, 7551–7575, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-7551-2009" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-7551-2009</a>, 2009.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
      
Han, Q., Rossow, W. B., and Lacis, A. A.: Near-global survey of effective
droplet radii in liquid water clouds using ISCCP data, J. Climate., 7,
465–497, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(1994)007&lt;0465:NGSOED&gt;2.0.CO;2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(1994)007&lt;0465:NGSOED&gt;2.0.CO;2</a>, 1994.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
      
Harikishan, G., Padmakumari, B., Maheskumar, R. S., Pandithurai, G., and Min, Q. L.: Aerosol indirect effects from ground-based retrievals over the rain
shadow region in Indian subcontinent, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 121,
2369–2382, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD024577" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD024577</a>, 2016.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
      
Jose, S., Nair, V. S., and Babu, S. S.: Anthropogenic emissions from South Asia reverses the aerosol indirect effect over the northern Indian Ocean, Sci. Rep., 10, 18360, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-74897-x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-74897-x</a>, 2020.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
      
Kennedy, A. D., Dong, X., Xi, B., Xie, S., Zhang, Y., and Chen, J.: A comparison of MERRA and NARR reanalyses with the DOE ARM SGP data, J. Climate, 24, 4541–4557, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/2011JCLI3978.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/2011JCLI3978.1</a>, 2001.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
      
Kim, B. G., Schwartz, S. E., Miller, M. A., and Min, Q.: Effective radius of
cloud droplets by ground-based remote sensing: Relationship to aerosol, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 108, 4740, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD003721" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD003721</a>, 2003.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
      
Kim, S. W., Yoon, S. C., Won, J. G., and Choi, S. C.: Ground-based remote
sensing measurements of aerosol and ozone in an urban area: A case study of
mixing height evolution and its effect on ground-level ozone concentrations,
Atmos. Environ., 41, 7069–7081, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2007.04.063" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2007.04.063</a>, 2007.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
      
King, M. D., Platnick, S., Menzel, W. P., Ackerman, S. A., and Hubanks, P. A.: Spatial and temporal distribution of clouds observed by MODIS onboard the
Terra and Aqua satellites, IEEE T. Geosci. Remote, 51, 3826–3852, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2012.2227333" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2012.2227333</a>, 2013.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
      
Kleinman, L. I., Daum, P. H., Lee, Y.-N., Lewis, E. R., Sedlacek III, A. J., Senum, G. I., Springston, S. R., Wang, J., Hubbe, J., Jayne, J., Min, Q., Yum, S. S., and Allen, G.: Aerosol concentration and size distribution measured below, in, and above cloud from the DOE G-1 during VOCALS-REx, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 207–223, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-207-2012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-207-2012</a>, 2012.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
      
Koren, I., Kaufman, Y. J., Rosenfeld, D., Remer, L. A., and Rudich, Y.: Aerosol
invigoration and restructuring of Atlantic convective clouds, Geophys. Res.
Lett., 32, 14828, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2005GL023187" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2005GL023187</a>, 2005.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
      
Lance, S., Nenes, A., and Rissman, T. A.: Chemical and dynamical effects on
cloud droplet number: Implications for estimates of the aerosol indirect
effect, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 109, D22208, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JD004596" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JD004596</a>, 2004.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
      
Li, J., Li, P., Ren, G., Yuan, L., Li, Y., and Yang, J.: Aircraft measurements of aerosol distribution, warm cloud microphysical properties, and their relationship over the Eastern Loess Plateau in China, Tellus B, 71, 1663994, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/16000889.2019.1663994" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1080/16000889.2019.1663994</a>, 2019.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
      
Li, Z., Li, R., and Li, B.: Analyses on Vertical Microphysical Characteristics of Autumn Stratiform Cloud in Lanzhou Region, Plateau Meteorology, 22, 583–589, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3321/j.issn:1000-0534.2003.06.008" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3321/j.issn:1000-0534.2003.06.008</a>, 2003.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>
      
Liu, S., Wang, H., Zhao, D., Ke, Y., Wu, Z., Shen, L., and Zhao, T.: Aircraft
observations of aerosols and BC in autumn over Guangxi Province, China: Diurnal variation, vertical distribution and source appointment, Sci. Total.
Environ., 906, 167550, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.167550" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.167550</a>, 2024.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
      
Liu, T., Liu, Q., Chen, Y., Wang, W., Zhang, H., Li, D., and Sheng, J.: Effect of aerosols on the macro-and micro-physical properties of warm clouds in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region, Sci. Total. Environ., 720, 137618,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.137618" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.137618</a>, 2020.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
      
Lu, C., Liu, Y., and Niu, S.: Examination of turbulent entrainment-mixing
mechanisms using a combined approach, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 116, D20207,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD015944" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD015944</a>, 2011.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>
      
Lu, M. L., Conant, W. C., Jonsson, H. H., Varutbangkul, V., Flagan, R. C., and Seinfeld, J. H.: The marine stratus/stratocumulus experiment (MASE):
Aerosol-cloud relationships in marine stratocumulus, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos.,
112, D10209, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JD007985" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JD007985</a>, 2007.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
      
Lu, Z., Liu, X., Zhang, Z., Zhao, C., Meyer, K., Rajapakshe, C., Wu, C.,
Yang, Z., and Penner, J. E.: 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.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
      
McFarquhar, G. M., Bretherton, C. S., Marchand, R., Protat, A., DeMott, P.
J., Alexander, S. P., Roberts, G. C., Twohy, C. H., Toohey, D., Siems, S.,
Huang, Y., Wood, R., Rauber, R. M., Lasher-Trapp, S., Jensen, J., Stith, J.
L., Mace, J., Um, J. U., Järvinen, E., Schnaiter, M., Gettelman, A.,
Sanchez, K. J., McCluskey, C. S., Russell, L. M., McCoy, I. L., Atlas, R.
L., Bardeen, C. G., Moore, K. A., Hill, T. C. J., Humphries, R. S., Keywood,
M. D., Ristovski, Z., Cravigan, L., Schofield, R., Fairall, C., Mallet, M.
D., Kreidenweis, S. M., Rainwater, B., Alessandro, J. D., Wang, Y., Wu, W.,
Saliba, G., Levin, E. T., Ding, S., Lang, F, Truong, S. H., Wolff, C.,
Haggerty, J., Harvey, M. J., Klekociuk, A. R., and McDonald, A.: Observations of clouds, aerosols, precipitation, and surface radiation over the Southern
Ocean: An overview of CAPRICORN, MARCUS, MICRE, and SOCRATES, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 102, E894–E928, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-20-0132.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-20-0132.1</a>, 2021.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
      
Miles, N. L., Verlinde, J., and Clothiaux, E. E.: Cloud droplet size
distributions in low-level stratiform clouds, J. Atmos. Sci., 57, 295–311,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(2000)057&lt;0295:CDSDIL&gt;2.0.CO;2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(2000)057&lt;0295:CDSDIL&gt;2.0.CO;2</a>, 2000.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
      
Nakajima, T. Y., Uchiyama, A., Takamura, T., Tsujioka, N., Takemura, T.,
and Nakajima, T.: Comparisons of warm cloud properties obtained from satellite, ground, and aircraft measurements during APEX intensive observation period in 2000 and 2001, J. Meteorol. Soc. Jpn., Ser. II, 83, 1085–1095, <a href="https://doi.org/10.2151/jmsj.83.1085" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.2151/jmsj.83.1085</a>, 2005.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
      
Painemal, D., Corral, A. F., Sorooshian, A., Brunke, M. A., Chellappan, S.,
Afzali Gorooh, V., Ham, S. H., O'Neill, L., Smith Jr., W. L., Tselioudis, G.,
Wang, H., Zeng, X., and Zuidema, P.: An overview of atmospheric features over
the Western North Atlantic Ocean and North American East Coast-Part 2:
Circulation, boundary layer, and clouds, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 126, e2020JD033423, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JD033423" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JD033423</a>, 2021.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</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.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
      
Pyrina, M., Hatzianastassiou, N., Matsoukas, C., Fotiadi, A., Papadimas, C.
D., Pavlakis, K. G., and Vardavas, I.: Cloud effects on the solar and thermal
radiation budgets of the Mediterranean basin, Atmos. Res., 152, 14–28,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2013.11.009" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2013.11.009</a>, 2015.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>
      
Ramanathan, V. L. R. D., Cess, R. D., Harrison, E. F., Minnis, P.,
Barkstrom, B. R., Ahmad, E., and Hartmann, D.: Cloud-radiative forcing and
climate: Results from the Earth Radiation Budget Experiment, Science,
243, 57–63, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.243.4887.57" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1126/science.243.4887.57</a>, 1989.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>
      
Rosenfeld, D., Andreae, M. O., Asmi, A., Chin, M., de Leeuw, G., Donovan, D.
P., Kahn, R., Kinne, S., Kivekäs, N., Kulmala, M., Lau, W., Schmidt, K.
S., Suni, T, Wagner, T., Wild, M., and Quaas, J.: Global observations of
aerosol-cloud-precipitation-climate interactions, Rev. Geophys., 52, 750–808, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2013RG000441" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2013RG000441</a>, 2014.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>
      
Strapp, J. W., Leaitch, W., and Liu, P.: Hydrated and dried
aerosol-size-distribution measurements from the particle measuring systems
FSSP-300 probe and the deiced PCASP-100X probe, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 9, 548–555, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0426(1992)009&lt;0548:HADASD&gt;2.0.CO;2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0426(1992)009&lt;0548:HADASD&gt;2.0.CO;2</a>, 1992.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>
      
Su, T., Li, J., Li, C., Xiang, P., Lau, A. K. H., Guo, J., Yang, D., and Miao, Y.: An intercomparison of long-term planetary boundary layer heights
retrieved from CALIPSO, ground-based lidar, and radiosonde measurements over
Hong Kong, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 122, 3929–3943, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD025937" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD025937</a>, 2017.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>
      
Terai, C. R., Bretherton, C. S., Wood, R., and Painter, G.: Aircraft observations of aerosol, cloud, precipitation, and boundary layer properties in pockets of open cells over the southeast Pacific, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 8071–8088, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-8071-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-8071-2014</a>, 2014.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>
      
Twomey, S.: The influence of pollution on the shortwave albedo of clouds, J.
Atmos. Sci., 34, 1149–1152,  <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1977)034&lt;1149:TIOPOT&gt;2.0.CO;2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1977)034&lt;1149:TIOPOT&gt;2.0.CO;2</a>, 1977.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>
      
Waliser, D. E., Li, J. L., L'Ecuyer, T. S., and Chen, W. T.: The impact of
precipitating ice and snow on the radiation balance in global climate models, Geophys. Res. Lett., 38, L06802, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GL046478" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GL046478</a>, 2011.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>
      
Wang, H.: Data for Aircraft observations of aerosol and microphysical
quantities of stratocumulus in autumn over Guangxi Province, China: Diurnal
variation, vertical distribution and aerosol-cloud relationship, Version v2, Zenodo [data set], <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13719678" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13719678</a>, 2024.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>
      
Wang, Y., Zheng, X., Dong, X., Xi, B., Wu, P., Logan, T., and Yung, Y. L.: Impacts of long-range transport of aerosols on marine-boundary-layer clouds in the eastern North Atlantic, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 14741–14755, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-14741-2020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-14741-2020</a>, 2020.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>
      
Wehbe, Y., Tessendorf, S. A., Weeks, C., Bruintjes, R., Xue, L., Rasmussen, R., Lawson, P., Woods, S., and Temimi, M.: Analysis of aerosol–cloud interactions and their implications for precipitation formation using aircraft observations over the United Arab Emirates, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 12543–12560, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-12543-2021" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-12543-2021</a>, 2021.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>
      
Wex, H., McFiggans, G., Henning, S., and Stratmann, F.: Influence of the
external mixing state of atmospheric aerosol on derived CCN number concentrations, Geophys. Res. Lett., 37, L10805, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GL043337" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GL043337</a>, 2010.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>
      
Wood, R.: Stratocumulus clouds, Mon. Weather. Rev., 140, 2373–2423,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-11-00121.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-11-00121.1</a>, 2012.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>
      
Yuan, T., Li, Z., Zhang, R., and Fan, J.: Increase of cloud droplet size with
aerosol optical depth: An observation and modeling study, J. Geophys.
Res.-Atmos., 113, D04201, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD008632" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD008632</a>, 2008.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation>
      
Zaveri, R. A., Wang, J., Fan, J., Zhang, Y., Shilling, J. E., Zelenyuk, A.,
Mei, F., Newsom, R., Pekour, M., Tomlinson, J., Comstock, J. M.,
Shrinastava, M., Fortner, E., Machado, L. T., Artaxo, P., and Martin, S. T.:
Rapid growth of anthropogenic organic nanoparticles greatly alters cloud
life cycle in the Amazon rainforest, Sci. Adv., 8, eabj0329,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abj0329" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abj0329</a>, 2022.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation>
      
Zelinka, M. D., Andrews, T., Forster, P. M., and Taylor, K. E.: Quantifying
components of aerosol-cloud-radiation interactions in climate models, J.
Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 119, 7599–7615, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JD021710" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JD021710</a>, 2014.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation>
      
Zhang, Q., Ma, X., Tie, X., Huang, M., and Zhao, C.: Vertical distributions of aerosols under different weather conditions: Analysis of in-situ aircraft
measurements in Beijing, China, Atmos. Environ., 43, 5526–5535, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2009.05.037" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2009.05.037</a>, 2009.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation>
      
Zhang, Q., Quan, J., Tie, X., Huang, M., and Ma, X.: Impact of aerosol particles on cloud formation: Aircraft measurements in China, Atmos. Environ., 45, 665–672, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2010.10.025" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2010.10.025</a>, 2011.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation>
      
Zhao, C., Klein, S. A., Xie, S., Liu, X., Boyle, J. S., and Zhang, Y.:
Aerosol first indirect effects on non-precipitating low-level liquid cloud
properties as simulated by CAM5 at ARM sites, Geophys. Res. Lett., 39,
L08806, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL051213" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL051213</a>, 2012.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><mixed-citation>
      
Zhao, C., Qiu, Y., Dong, X., Wang, Z., Peng, Y., Li, B., Wu, Z., and Wang, Y.: Negative aerosol-cloud re relationship from aircraft observations over
Hebei, China, Earth Space. Sci., 5, 19–29, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017EA000346" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2017EA000346</a>, 2018.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><mixed-citation>
      
Zhao, C., Zhao, L., and Dong, X.: A case study of stratus cloud properties using in situ aircraft observations over Huanghua, China, Atmosphere, 10, 19,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos10010019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos10010019</a>, 2019.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><mixed-citation>
      
Zhao, Z. L., Mao, J. T., and Wang, L.: In situ aircraft observations of one
typical stratocumulus cloud process compared with the satellite measurements, Acta Meteorol. Sin., 69, 521–527, <a href="https://doi.org/10.11676/qxxb2011.045" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.11676/qxxb2011.045</a>, 2011.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
