Comparison of TOMS retrievals and UVMRP measurements of surface spectral UV radiation in the United States

Surface noontime spectral ultraviolet (UV) irradiances during May-September of 2000–2004 from the total ozone mapping spectrometer (TOMS) satellite retrievals are systematically compared with the ground measurements at 27 climatological sites maintained by the USDA UV-B Monitoring and Research Progr...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: M. Xu, X.-Z. Liang, W. Gao, N. Krotkov
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Copernicus Publications 2010-09-01
Series:Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics
Online Access:http://www.atmos-chem-phys.net/10/8669/2010/acp-10-8669-2010.pdf
_version_ 1818128152091688960
author M. Xu
X.-Z. Liang
W. Gao
N. Krotkov
author_facet M. Xu
X.-Z. Liang
W. Gao
N. Krotkov
author_sort M. Xu
collection DOAJ
description Surface noontime spectral ultraviolet (UV) irradiances during May-September of 2000–2004 from the total ozone mapping spectrometer (TOMS) satellite retrievals are systematically compared with the ground measurements at 27 climatological sites maintained by the USDA UV-B Monitoring and Research Program. The TOMS retrievals are evaluated by two cloud screening methods and local air quality conditions to determine their bias dependencies on spectral bands, cloudiness, aerosol loadings, and air pollution. Under clear-sky conditions, TOMS retrieval biases vary from −3.4% (underestimation) to 23.6% (overestimation). Averaged over all sites, the relative mean biases for 305, 311, 325, and 368 nm are respectively 15.4, 7.9, 7.6, and 7.0% (overestimation). The bias enhancement for 305 nm by approximately twice that of other bands likely results from absorption by gaseous pollutants (SO<sub>2</sub>, O<sub>3</sub>), and aerosols that are not included in the TOMS algorithm. For all bands, strong positive correlations of the TOMS biases are identified with aerosol optical depth, which explains nearly 50% of the variances of TOMS biases. The more restrictive in-situ cloud screening method reduces the biases by 3.4–3.9% averaged over all sites. This suggests that the TOMS biases from the in-situ cloud contamination may account for approximately 25% for 305 nm and 50% for other bands of the total bias. The correlation coefficients between total-sky and clear-sky biases across 27 sites are 0.92, 0.89, 0.83, and 0.78 for 305, 311, 325, and 368 nm, respectively. The results show that the spatial characteristics of the TOMS retrieval biases are systematic, representative of both clear and total-sky conditions.
first_indexed 2024-12-11T07:28:42Z
format Article
id doaj.art-25d3631d0aff4bc9b3972d493e64797a
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1680-7316
1680-7324
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-11T07:28:42Z
publishDate 2010-09-01
publisher Copernicus Publications
record_format Article
series Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics
spelling doaj.art-25d3631d0aff4bc9b3972d493e64797a2022-12-22T01:15:53ZengCopernicus PublicationsAtmospheric Chemistry and Physics1680-73161680-73242010-09-0110188669868310.5194/acp-10-8669-2010Comparison of TOMS retrievals and UVMRP measurements of surface spectral UV radiation in the United StatesM. XuX.-Z. LiangW. GaoN. KrotkovSurface noontime spectral ultraviolet (UV) irradiances during May-September of 2000–2004 from the total ozone mapping spectrometer (TOMS) satellite retrievals are systematically compared with the ground measurements at 27 climatological sites maintained by the USDA UV-B Monitoring and Research Program. The TOMS retrievals are evaluated by two cloud screening methods and local air quality conditions to determine their bias dependencies on spectral bands, cloudiness, aerosol loadings, and air pollution. Under clear-sky conditions, TOMS retrieval biases vary from −3.4% (underestimation) to 23.6% (overestimation). Averaged over all sites, the relative mean biases for 305, 311, 325, and 368 nm are respectively 15.4, 7.9, 7.6, and 7.0% (overestimation). The bias enhancement for 305 nm by approximately twice that of other bands likely results from absorption by gaseous pollutants (SO<sub>2</sub>, O<sub>3</sub>), and aerosols that are not included in the TOMS algorithm. For all bands, strong positive correlations of the TOMS biases are identified with aerosol optical depth, which explains nearly 50% of the variances of TOMS biases. The more restrictive in-situ cloud screening method reduces the biases by 3.4–3.9% averaged over all sites. This suggests that the TOMS biases from the in-situ cloud contamination may account for approximately 25% for 305 nm and 50% for other bands of the total bias. The correlation coefficients between total-sky and clear-sky biases across 27 sites are 0.92, 0.89, 0.83, and 0.78 for 305, 311, 325, and 368 nm, respectively. The results show that the spatial characteristics of the TOMS retrieval biases are systematic, representative of both clear and total-sky conditions.http://www.atmos-chem-phys.net/10/8669/2010/acp-10-8669-2010.pdf
spellingShingle M. Xu
X.-Z. Liang
W. Gao
N. Krotkov
Comparison of TOMS retrievals and UVMRP measurements of surface spectral UV radiation in the United States
Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics
title Comparison of TOMS retrievals and UVMRP measurements of surface spectral UV radiation in the United States
title_full Comparison of TOMS retrievals and UVMRP measurements of surface spectral UV radiation in the United States
title_fullStr Comparison of TOMS retrievals and UVMRP measurements of surface spectral UV radiation in the United States
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of TOMS retrievals and UVMRP measurements of surface spectral UV radiation in the United States
title_short Comparison of TOMS retrievals and UVMRP measurements of surface spectral UV radiation in the United States
title_sort comparison of toms retrievals and uvmrp measurements of surface spectral uv radiation in the united states
url http://www.atmos-chem-phys.net/10/8669/2010/acp-10-8669-2010.pdf
work_keys_str_mv AT mxu comparisonoftomsretrievalsanduvmrpmeasurementsofsurfacespectraluvradiationintheunitedstates
AT xzliang comparisonoftomsretrievalsanduvmrpmeasurementsofsurfacespectraluvradiationintheunitedstates
AT wgao comparisonoftomsretrievalsanduvmrpmeasurementsofsurfacespectraluvradiationintheunitedstates
AT nkrotkov comparisonoftomsretrievalsanduvmrpmeasurementsofsurfacespectraluvradiationintheunitedstates