the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Evaluation of the dust-dominated total AOD extracted from the PMAp satellite Climate Data Record
Abstract. The Polar Multi-Sensor Aerosol optical properties product (PMAp) provides global Aerosol Optical Depth (AOD) observations that are retrieved using a combination of measurements from instruments onboard the Metop satellites, including the Global Ozone Monitoring Experiment-2 (GOME-2), the Infrared Atmospheric Sounding Interferometer (IASI), and the Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer (AVHRR). The PMAp Climate Data Record (CDR), published in 2022, comprises data from the Metop-A and Metop-B satellites covering the period from 2007 to 2019. The PMAp also includes classification for selected aerosol types, including dust. Based on the classification, a dust-dominated total AOD can be extracted. The focus of this work is to assess the dust aerosols in the PMAp CDRs, by analysing the spatio-temporal occurrence of dust and aerosol classification reliability, as well as by carrying out dust-dominated total AOD validation against AErosol RObotic NETwork (AERONET) observations. Our results show that the occurrence and classification of PMAp dust-dominated AOD agrees well with AERONET metrics. For PMAp dust-dominated total AODs, moderate to strong correlations with AERONET (0.45–0.8) are observed, while mean biases exhibit relatively high variability. The root-mean-square errors (RMSEs) typically represent 50–80 % of the mean AERONET AOD conditions. As most of the comparisons here occur at relatively high AOD levels over bright land surfaces, where measurement uncertainties and variability are inherently greater, this is somewhat expected. The results also bring up certain challenges, e.g. PMAp AOD overestimation at Central Asian AERONET stations or occasional occurrences of dust-dominated total AODs that appeared as clear outliers in AERONET comparisons. Further investigation is needed to determine their underlying causes. On a larger spatial scale, The PMAp CDRs can capture the expected seasonal variation in dust-affected AODs, such as over the Saharan outflow area, but sampling density can vary across seasons, especially over land. Therefore, full AOD distributions, along with median and mean, should be analyzed to ensure accurate conclusions. Despite challenges, the PMAp CDRs show potential for monitoring global dust aerosol patterns.
- Preprint
(9727 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: final response (author comments only)
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2025-914', Anonymous Referee #1, 08 Jun 2025
This manuscript presents a comprehensive validation of the dust-dominated total AOD derived from the PMAp CDR, with a particular focus on dust detection and AOD retrieval accuracy. The study uses high-quality AERONET ground-based observations across multiple global dust hotspots and applies robust comparison techniques, including both general and dust-specific evaluation metrics. The analysis is detailed, and the case study coverage is broad, making this an important contribution to satellite aerosol product validation literature. In addition, the manuscript is well-structured and the goals are clearly stated. The validation strategy is sound, and the distinction between “dust-dominated” AOD and conventional DAOD is clearly explained. The study highlights strengths and limitations of the PMAp dust product and provides guidance for future product use and development. I recommend the paper for publication after minor revisions to address the comments below.
Scientific/Technical Comments
1. line-594, section 5 on definition and Interpretation of Dust-Related AOD.
The definition of “dust-related AOD” as the mean AOD within grid cells where any dust detection occurred, may blur interpretation in regions with aerosol mixtures (e.g., Sahel during biomass burning). Please expand the discussion on the implications of this choice: how might this affect conclusions from Figure 16 and the seasonal diagnostics? Could a sensitivity test (e.g., thresholding dust pixel fraction) be included or at least recommended?
2. line-581, section 4.4 the Central Asia region shows a consistent positive bias. The authors could elaborate further: are there known limitations in the GOME-2 GLER surface reflectance climatology for this region? Could dust mineralogy or vertical structure differ significantly in a way that violates retrieval assumptions (e.g., stronger absorption)? In addition, several regions exhibit sporadic high-AOD outliers. Even a brief diagnostic on a few cases (e.g., examining viewing angle, surface reflectance, or retrieval geometry) could help determine whether these are algorithm edge cases. This would provide useful guidance for future product refinement.
3. Line 374: The statement that AERONET AOD distributions for PMAp “dust” and “other” are clearly distinct in the Saharan outflow seems overstated. The figure shows substantial overlap, please qualify this interpretation.
4. Line 398: Clarify which comparison approach corresponds to which figure. Explicitly stating that Figure 5 corresponds to comparisons 1 and 2, and that Figure A2.1 represents comparison 3, would improve reader orientation.
5. line-301, the threshold (α ≤ 0.75) is used to identify coarse-mode dominance. Please clarify whether this is based on literature or derived from your Figure 4. If the latter, a forward reference would help readers understand the justification.
Other minor comments:
6. Line 104: “Aerosol Optical Depth (AOD)” was already defined; abbreviation does not need repeating.
7. Line 181: Only introduce full name of AERONET at first mention.
8. Line 205: Add degree symbols (°) to latitude and longitude coordinates.
9. Line 300: Only define “Single Scattering Albedo (SSA)” at first use.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-914-RC1 -
RC2: 'Reply on RC1', Athanasios Natsis, 14 Jul 2025
In general, this paper combines multiple input datasets to create a spatial and temporal description of "DAOD". The resulting data exhibit some inherent weaknesses, although they provide valuable insights into large-scale phenomena and dust occurrences. The methodology and the quality of the results have the potential to improve, particularly with advances in satellite instrumentation and the expansion of ground-based observations.
The author clearly describes both the strengths and weaknesses of the methodology. The selected ground sites correspond to different local conditions, providing an opportunity for a robust evaluation of the PMAp product.
Suggestions for Minor Improvements1. A further analysis of seasonal patterns would be valuable—both within the final product itself and in comparison to AERONET or other established dust products.
2. It would be desirable for the authors to quantify the extent of missing data caused by systematic limitations in satellite observations. This would help demonstrate the impact of such limitations on the final results and could highlight potential constraints for the broader application of the method.
Technical Recommendations and Errors1. Due to the very dense data shown in most of the figures, I recommend using vector graphics formats (e.g., PDF, SVG, EPS) rather than raster formats like PNG or JPEG. This would ensure that the figures maintain full clarity when the article is viewed electronically—particularly for map-based figures such as Figures 1, 3, and 16.
2. In line 430, the text references Figure A2.2, but the actual figure is labelled A2. Additionally, the font size in Figure A2 should be increased for better readability.
3. Figures A2.3, A2.4, and A2.10 are mis referenced similarly to A2.2 and should be corrected.
4. Section numbering in the appendix is inconsistent. For example, on page 39, the section is titled “A2.4 Asia 2”, whereas on page 38 it is simply “Asia 1”. This should be standardized.
5. In Figure 15, to improve readability, I suggest using colour scales with continuous transitions. For example:
- When the scale includes negative values, use a **blue–white–red** gradient, with white centered at zero.
- When the scale is non-negative, use a gradient such as **green–red** or **white–red**.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-914-RC2
-
RC2: 'Reply on RC1', Athanasios Natsis, 14 Jul 2025
Data sets
AERONET Level 2.0 Version 3 AERONET https://aeronet.gsfc.nasa.gov/new_web/download_all_v3_aod.html
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
326 | 68 | 18 | 412 | 30 | 31 |
- HTML: 326
- PDF: 68
- XML: 18
- Total: 412
- BibTeX: 30
- EndNote: 31
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1