Responses of the African and American Equatorial Ionization Anomaly (EIA) to 2014 Arctic SSW Events

Idolor, O. R.; Akala, A. O.; Bolaji, O. S.

doi:10.1029/2021sw002812

Cited by 5 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 67 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For instance, the geomagnetic equator line is in the geographic NH in the African sector and in the geographic SH in the American sector. Very recently, Idolor et al (2021) stressed that the offsets are more in the American sector than in the African sector. Geometric configurations are related to the offsets, and they are more conspicuous in the American sector than in the African sector.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

African and American Equatorial Ionization Anomaly (EIA) Responses to 2013 SSW Event

2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigates the responses of the African and American Equatorial Ionization Anomaly (EIA) regions to 2013 Sudden Stratospheric Warming (SSW) event. The Total Electron Content (TEC) data obtained from chains of Global Positioning System receivers within ±40° geomagnetic latitudes in the African and American sectors were used to construct the EIA structures for both longitudinal sectors. The responses of the EIA structures, constructed from the TEC, ΔTEC, and ionospheric irregularities data to the 2013 SSW event were investigated. During the SSW peak phase, EIA structures in both longitudinal sectors responded significantly, with the pole‐ward flow of plasma from the equator to higher crests' locations (strengthening of the EIA). Furthermore, a clear asymmetry in plasma distribution in the northern and southern crests of the EIA was observed. Generally, for the entire data span, TEC enhancements and ionospheric irregularities occurrences during SSW were more in the American sector than the African sector. The geomagnetic activity of 17 January 2013 caused negative TEC response in the African sector and positive TEC response in the American sector. Moderate storm‐induced TEC enhancements were generally lower than SSW‐induced TEC enhancements. Furthermore, solar flux‐induced TEC of 10 January 2013 was lesser than the SSW‐induced TEC of 15–16 January 2013.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Very recently, Idolor et al. (2021) stressed that the offsets are more in the American sector than in the African sector. Geometric configurations are related to the offsets, and they are more conspicuous in the American sector than in the African sector.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

African and American Equatorial Ionization Anomaly (EIA) Responses to 2013 SSW Event

2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The EEJ current is given by the following expression: where H HUA is the solar quiet (Sq) current computed for Huancayo and H PLU is the Sq current computed for the Piura magnetometer stations, respectively, while the estimated inferred vertical drift of the ΔH horizontal current was obtained from a mathematical relationship using the vertical drift model ). Anderson's quantitative mathematical formulation obtained from the neural regression technique is given by the following expression (Anderson et al, 2002;Yizengaw et al, 2014;Kassamba et al, 2020;Idolor et al, 2021;Idolor et al, 2022).…”

Section: Data and Methods Of Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…De Jesus et al (2017a) reported a nighttime enhancement in the TEC during the 2014 major SSW event in March. Both the SSW events (2013 and 2014) were also reported to overlap with the occurrence of geomagnetic storms (Idolor et al, 2021(Idolor et al, , 2022. Modeling results using the thermosphereionosphere-mesosphere-electrodynamics general circulation model (TIME-GCM) of the vertical drifts for the 2013 SSW event showed a significant increase in daytime vertical drift of ~100% associated with the moderate geomagnetic storm occurrence for the American sector (Maute et al, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Despite the earlier results mentioned on the overlapping of these SSW phenomena with geomagnetic storms, more concerted efforts are still required from the space weather community to resolve the attendant effects associated with the simultaneous overlap of the SSW events with geomagnetic storms (Goncharenko et al, 2021a). It is generally perceived that the Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sciences frontiersin.org combined force arising from these two distinct phenomena can result in more drastic ionospheric effects that can negatively affect space-based and ground-based technological infrastructures heavily relied on for daily economic activities (Idolor et al, 2021). The present study investigates the ionospheric response during 2016 SSW events in the American sector with the motive of distinctly characterizing the two geophysical drivers associated with the coupling of the lower and upper atmospheres in order to isolate their individual contributions to the ionospheric electrodynamics.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Response of the American equatorial ionization anomaly to 2016 Arctic sudden stratospheric warming events

Idolor

Akala²,

Bolaji³

et al. 2022

Front. Astron. Space Sci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Apart from the rapid ionospheric response to geomagnetic forcing originating from the Sun during extreme space weather events, forcing from the lower atmosphere below still exerts a significant influence on the ionosphere during quiet-time conditions. This study examines the ionospheric response of the equatorial ionization anomaly (EIA) in the American sector to the combined influence of the cascades of sudden stratospheric warming (SSW) events and the geomagnetic storms that coexisted with them during the period of January–March 2016. We adopted a multi-instrument and multi-modeling approach with the study locations spanning ±40° geomagnetic latitudes. Our results showed a hemispheric asymmetry in the total electron content and change in total electron content (ΔTEC) distribution with higher enhancement clearly visible in the Northern Hemisphere in comparison to the Southern Hemisphere (NH). Semidiurnal signatures were observed in both ΔTEC and equatorial electrojet parameters for some days. The double-peak zonal mean zonal wind amplitude days supported the formation of the reverse fountain effects. The different SSW peak temperature days also showed either positive or negative ionospheric response. Generally, orientation of the prompt penetration electric field (PPEF) and their strengths at either daytime or nighttime played a weak role in the ionosphere response during some of the geomagnetic storms. The negative and positive ionospheric responses under geomagnetic storm conditions were ascribed to changes in the composition of the thermosphere, prompt penetration electric field (PPEF), and traveling atmospheric disturbances (TADs).

show abstract

Ionospheric disturbances over the American and African sectors due to the 2019 major Sudden Stratospheric Warming (SSW 2019), under low solar activity conditions

Vieira

Fagundes

Pillat

et al. 2022

Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Responses of the African and American Equatorial Ionization Anomaly (EIA) to 2014 Arctic SSW Events

Abstract: Previous studies have revealed that the variability in the ionosphere during Sudden Stratospheric Warming (SSW) events is connected to the coupling of the lower and upper atmosphere (

Cited by 5 publications

References 67 publications

African and American Equatorial Ionization Anomaly (EIA) Responses to 2013 SSW Event

African and American Equatorial Ionization Anomaly (EIA) Responses to 2013 SSW Event

Response of the American equatorial ionization anomaly to 2016 Arctic sudden stratospheric warming events

Ionospheric disturbances over the American and African sectors due to the 2019 major Sudden Stratospheric Warming (SSW 2019), under low solar activity conditions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About