the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Sensitivity of aerosol and cloud properties to coupling strength of marine boundary layer clouds over the northwest Atlantic
Abstract. Quantifying the degree of coupling between marine boundary layer clouds and the surface is critical for understanding the evolution of low clouds and explaining the vertical distribution of aerosols and microphysical cloud properties. In this study, we use aircraft data from the NASA Aerosol Cloud meTeorology Interactions oVer western ATlantic Experiment (ACTIVATE) to assess aerosol and cloud characteristics for the following four regimes of coupling strength as quantified using differences in liquid water potential temperature (θl) and total water mixing ratio (qt) between a near-surface level (~ 150 m) and directly below cloud bases: strong coupling (Δθl ≤ 1.0 K, Δqt ≤ 0.8 g kg-1), moderate coupling with high Δθl (Δθl > 1.0 K, Δqt ≤ 0.8 g kg-1), moderate coupling with high Δqt (Δθl ≤ 1.0 K, Δqt > 0.8 g kg-1), weak coupling (Δθl > 1.0 K, Δqt > 0.8 g kg-1). Results show that (i) turbulence is greater in the strong coupling regime compared to the weak coupling regime, with the former corresponding to smaller differences in 550 nm aerosol scattering, integrated aerosol volume concentration, and giant aerosol number concentration (Dp > 3 µm) between the near-surface level and just below marine boundary layer (MBL) cloud bases coincident with increased MBL mixing, (ii) cloud drop number concentration is greater during periods of strong coupling due to the greater upward vertical velocity and subsequent activation of particles, (iii) sea-salt tracer species (Na+, Cl-, Mg2+, K+) are present in greater concentrations in the strong coupling regime compared to weak coupling, while Ca2+, nss-SO42-, NO3-, oxalate, and NH4+ (tracers of continental pollution) are higher in mass fraction for the weak coupling regime. Additionally, pH and Cl-:Na+ (a marker for chloride depletion) are consistently lower in the weak coupling regime. There were differences between the two moderate regimes: the moderate high Δqt regime had greater turbulent mixing and sea salt concentrations in cloud water, along with smaller differences in integrated volume and giant aerosol number concentration between the two vertical levels compared. This work shows value in defining multiple coupling regimes (rather than the traditional coupled versus decoupled) and demonstrates differences in aerosol and cloud behavior in the MBL for the various regimes.
- Preprint
(1036 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(290 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: final response (author comments only)
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-2743', Anonymous Referee #1, 21 Oct 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2024/egusphere-2024-2743/egusphere-2024-2743-RC1-supplement.pdf
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-2743', Anonymous Referee #2, 27 Oct 2024
General
This is an interesting study of the variation of cloud and aerosol properties over the northwest Atlantic region using observations during the ACTIVATE campaign. By carefully selecting aircraft measurements in specific flight patterns, this manuscript reports different aerosol and cloud properties in environments with different boundary strengths. The manuscript is well-written, and I do not have major concerns about the reported results. I have the following comments for the authors to consider.
Major
While it is clear how the cloud and aerosol properties differ under different boundary layer conditions, the motivation of this work is not well conceived. I agree that having multiple categories to describe boundary layer coupling strength is important, but how do the proposed categorization and the reported results help the modeling community? Instead of more categories (mainly the moderate coupled categories) and a name is ‘weakly coupled’ rather than ‘decoupled’ boundary layer, what are the new findings from the boundary layer coupling strength analysis in this work? Or is it to confirm some of the previous findings in other regions that are also true in the northwest Atlantic?
Minor
L106: what do you mean by ‘more similar values for aerosol properties in the sub-cloud layer’? Are you referring to, for example, the aerosol numbers and compositions are similar among coupled cases?
L106-108: Please clarify if the statements in the list are from previous studies and preferably include references for each statement. I am curious about what the third statement means. Higher cloud droplet number concentration compared to where or what? Compare to less coupled cases?
L150-153: It took me a while to figure out how the data was analyzed. Can you mark the portion of the legs where the data is used in Figure 1?
L155: do you restrict how far away (or how many seconds apart) the two adjacent MinAlt-BCB legs are?
L156: can you clarify, in the case of slants, if the data are taken from around the BCB leg or the red star in Figure 1? I assume it is the former, but I’m not sure.
L219: How do you determine the threshold for ? Is it based on visual observations of the coupling state and statistics of all the profiles collected during ACTIVATE? Does the distance between BCB and the actual cloud base height affect the threshold selection?
Figure 2: I understand this is a typical case, but do most weakly coupled cases have BCB legs around the middle of the cloud-base height?
L338-340: this is related to the question on the height of CBC leg altitude. Suppose it is the case that the CBC usually sits around half of the cloud-base height. In that case, you are calculating vertical velocity variance at different levels of the boundary layer for the weakly coupled cases than for the other three categories.
L351-352: here, the giant particles refer to aerosol particles, right?
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2743-RC2 -
AC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-2743', Kira Zeider, 27 Nov 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2024/egusphere-2024-2743/egusphere-2024-2743-AC1-supplement.pdf
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
246 | 64 | 11 | 321 | 16 | 5 | 5 |
- HTML: 246
- PDF: 64
- XML: 11
- Total: 321
- Supplement: 16
- BibTeX: 5
- EndNote: 5
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1