Combined characterisation of GOME and TOMS total ozone measurements from space using ground-based observations from the NDSC

Lambert, J. C.; Roozendaël, Michel Van; Simon, P. C.; Pommereau, J. P.; Goutail, Florence; Gleason, J. F.; Andersen, S. B.; Arlander, D. W.; Van, N.A. Bui; Claude, H.; Noë, J. de La; Mazière, Martine De; Dorokhov, V.; Eriksen, P.; Green, A.; Tørnkvist, Kjersti Karlsen; Høiskar, Britt Ann Kåstad; Kyrö, E.; Leveau, Jean; Mérienne, M.-F.; Milinevsky, Gennadi; Roscoe, H. K.; Sarkissian, Alain; Shanklin, Jonathan; Stähelin, J.; Tellefsen, Cathrine W.; Vaughan, G.

doi:10.1016/s0273-1177(00)00178-2

Cited by 30 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This feature of the TOMS data product was also observed by other authors (Bodeker et al, 2001;Lambert et al, 2000). Remarkable here is that the GOMETOMS dataset shows the same difference of 2.2% between the northern and southern hemisphere.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

“…Similar seasonal variations were already observed for previous GDP versions in northern midlatitudes (Lambert et al, 2000). These are introduced by the airmass factor calculations.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

“…The Dobson network has been already used for validating total ozone (Lambert et al, 2000). Version 7 of Nimbus 7 TOMS has been shown to agree within 1% with the Dobson network in the northern hemisphere for solar zenith angles up to about 80% (McPeters and Labow, 1996).…”

Section: Dobson and Brewer Spectrophotometermentioning

confidence: 94%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Comparison of total ozone from the satellite instruments GOME and TOMS with measurements from the Dobson network 1996–2000

Bramstedt

Gleason

Loyola³

et al. 2003

Atmos. Chem. Phys.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Over the last 3 decades, satellite data have been used to monitor long-term global changes in stratospheric ozone. The TOMS series (1978-present) and GOME (1995-present) are two very important instruments in this context. In this paper, TOMS total ozone and three approaches to derive total ozone from GOME measurements are validated with ground-based Dobson network data. Beyond the operational products of both instruments, e.g. TOMS version 7 and GOME Data Processor version 2.7, total ozone is calculated by integrating FURM ozone profiles and by applying the TOMS algorithm to the GOME spectra. All algorithms show in general good agreement with ground-based measurements. The operational GOME total ozone shows seasonal variations, most likely introduced by difficulties in the derivation of airmass factors, which convert measured slant columns into vertical columns. The TOMS algorithm estimates on average 2% higher total ozone in the southern hemisphere than in the northern for both instruments as compared to the ground-based data, indicating that the source of the observed hemispheric differences is in the TOMS algorithm. Both instruments show aging effects in 2000, leading to enhanced variability in the ozone column differences with respect to Dobson data. In addition, the integrated GOME ozone profiles and the TOMS algorithm applied to GOME data show larger mean deviations in 2000.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

“…Similar seasonal variations were already observed for previous GDP versions in northern midlatitudes (Lambert et al, 2000). These are introduced by the airmass factor calculations.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of total ozone from the satellite instruments GOME and TOMS with measurements from the Dobson network 1996–2000

Bramstedt

Gleason

Loyola³

et al. 2003

Atmos. Chem. Phys.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Lambert et al, 1999Lambert et al, , 2000Bramstedt et al, 2003;Balis et al, 2007a, b;McPeters et al, 2008;Koukouli et al, 2012Koukouli et al, , 2015. An "inverse" quality assessment, i.e.…”

Section: Ground-based Network Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Metrology of ground-based satellite validation: co-location mismatch and smoothing issues of total ozone comparisons

et al. 2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Comparisons with ground-based correlative measurements constitute a key component in the validation of satellite data on atmospheric composition. The error budget of these comparisons contains not only the measurement errors but also several terms related to differences in sampling and smoothing of the inhomogeneous and variable atmospheric field. A versatile system for Observing System Simulation Experiments (OSSEs), named OSSSMOSE, is used here to quantify these terms. Based on the application of pragmatic observation operators onto high-resolution atmospheric fields, it allows a simulation of each individual measurement, and consequently, also of the differences to be expected from spatial and temporal field variations between both measurements making up a comparison pair. As a topical case study, the system is used to evaluate the error budget of total ozone column (TOC) comparisons between GOME-type direct fitting (GODFITv3) satellite retrievals from GOME/ERS2, SCIAMACHY/Envisat, and GOME-2/MetOp-A, and ground-based direct-sun and zenith-sky reference measurements such as those from Dobsons, Brewers, and zenith-scattered light (ZSL-)DOAS instruments, respectively. In particular, the focus is placed on the GODFITv3 reprocessed GOME-2A data record vs. the ground-based instruments contributing to the Network for the Detection of Atmospheric Composition Change (NDACC). The simulations are found to reproduce the actual measurements almost to within the measurement uncertainties, confirming that the OSSE approach and its technical implementation are appropriate. This work reveals that many features of the comparison spread and median difference can be understood as due to metrological differences, even when using strict colocation criteria. In particular, sampling difference errors exceed measurement uncertainties regularly at most mid-and high-latitude stations, with values up to 10 % and more in extreme cases. Smoothing difference errors only play a role in the comparisons with ZSL-DOAS instruments at high latitudes, especially in the presence of a polar vortex due to the strong TOC gradient it induces. At tropical latitudes, where TOC variability is lower, both types of errors remain below about 1 % and consequently do not contribute significantly to the comparison error budget. The detailed analysis of the comparison results, including the metrological errors, suggests that the published random measurement uncertainties for GODFITv3 reprocessed satellite data are potentially overestimated, and adjustments are proposed here. This successful application of the OSSSMOSE system to close for the first time the error budget of TOC comparisons, bodes well for potential future applications, which are briefly touched upon.

show abstract

“…There are about 20 ground-based SAOZ instruments deployed at latitudes from Antarctica to the Arctic; data from these instruments have been used since 1988 for the validation of O 3 and NO 2 column satellite measurements by TOMS, GOME, SCIAMACHY and OMI (e.g. Lambert et al, 1999Lambert et al, , 2001, whilst the profiles from the balloon version have been also used for the validation of profiles measured by SAGE II, HALOE, POAM II and III, ILAS II, MI-PAS and GOMOS (e.g. Irie et al, 2002;Wetzel et al, 2007).…”

Section: Osiris On Odinmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of NO<sub>2</sub> and NO from the Atmospheric Chemistry Experiment (ACE)

et al. 2008

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Vertical profiles of NO 2 and NO have been obtained from solar occultation measurements by the Atmospheric Chemistry Experiment (ACE), using an infrared Fourier Transform Spectrometer (ACE-FTS) and (for NO 2 ) an ultraviolet-visible-near-infrared spectrometer, MAESTRO (Measurement of Aerosol Extinction in the Stratosphere and Troposphere Retrieved by Occultation). In this paper, the quality of the ACE-FTS version 2.2 NO 2 and NO and the MAESTRO version 1.2 NO 2 data are assessed using other solar occultation measurements (HALOE, SAGE II, SAGE III, POAM III, SCIAMACHY), stellar occultation measurements (GOMOS), limb measurements (MIPAS, OSIRIS), nadir measurements (SCIA-MACHY), balloon-borne measurements (SPIRALE, SAOZ) and ground-based measurements (UV-VIS, FTIR). Time differences between the comparison measurements were reduced using either a tight coincidence criterion, or where possible, chemical box models. ACE-FTS NO 2 and NO and the MAESTRO NO 2 are generally consistent with the correlative data. The ACE-FTS and MAESTRO NO 2 volume mixing ratio (VMR) profiles agree with the profiles from other satellite data sets to within about 20% between 25 and 40 km, with the exception of MIPAS ESA (for ACE-FTS) and SAGE II (for ACE-FTS (sunrise) and MAESTRO) and suggest a negative bias between 23 and 40 km of about 10%. MAESTRO reports larger VMR values than the ACE-FTS. In comparisons with HALOE, ACE-FTS NO VMRs typically (on average) agree to ±8% from 22 to 64 km and to +10% from 93 to 105 km, with maxima of 21% and 36%, respectively. Partial column comparisons for NO 2 show that there is quite good agreement between the ACE instruments and the FTIRs, with a mean difference of +7.3% for ACE-FTS and +12.8% for MAESTRO.

show abstract

Combined characterisation of GOME and TOMS total ozone measurements from space using ground-based observations from the NDSC

Cited by 30 publications

References 9 publications

Comparison of total ozone from the satellite instruments GOME and TOMS with measurements from the Dobson network 1996–2000

Comparison of total ozone from the satellite instruments GOME and TOMS with measurements from the Dobson network 1996–2000

Metrology of ground-based satellite validation: co-location mismatch and smoothing issues of total ozone comparisons

Validation of NO<sub>2</sub> and NO from the Atmospheric Chemistry Experiment (ACE)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Combined characterisation of GOME and TOMS total ozone measurements from space using ground-based observations from the NDSC

Cited by 30 publications

References 9 publications

Comparison of total ozone from the satellite instruments GOME and TOMS with measurements from the Dobson network 1996–2000

Comparison of total ozone from the satellite instruments GOME and TOMS with measurements from the Dobson network 1996–2000

Metrology of ground-based satellite validation: co-location mismatch and smoothing issues of total ozone comparisons

Validation of NO&lt;sub&gt;2&lt;/sub&gt; and NO from the Atmospheric Chemistry Experiment (ACE)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Validation of NO<sub>2</sub> and NO from the Atmospheric Chemistry Experiment (ACE)