Изменения в области F ионосферы перед магнитными бурями (статьи последних двух лет)

Изменения в области F ионосферы перед магнитными бурями (статьи последних двух лет)
Номер: 45 Год: 2024 Страницы: 15-27

УДК: 550.388.2

EDN: JWQDBO

Автор(ы):

Данилов Алексей Дмитриевич¹, e-mail: adanilov99@mail.ru

Константинова Анна Владимировна¹, e-mail: anna@tabulata.ru

Учреждения:
1 - Институт прикладной геофизики имени академика Е.К. Федорова (ФГБУ «ИПГ»), Москва, Россия

Аннотация:
Приводится обзор опубликованных в течение двух последних лет (2022–2023 гг.) работ, посвященных изменениям ионосферных параметров в дни перед магнитными бурями (так называемых «case studies»). Показано, что в результатах такого анализа в большинстве случаев видны отклонения этих параметров (прежде всего – foF2 и TEC) в дни, предшествующие внезапному началу бури (SC). При этом многие авторы обращают на них внимание, обсуждают их связь с параметрами космической погоды и даже высказывают предположения о возможных механизмах их формирования. Показано, что число таких публикаций в течение последних двух лет заметно возросло. Подчеркивается, что изменения состояния ионосферы в предбуревые дни обнаруживаются не только в «классических» параметрах (foF2 и TEC), но и в других ионосферных характеристиках. Подробно рассматриваются статьи, посвященные именно проблеме ионосферных предвестников и их возможной роли в предсказании предстоящей магнитной бури.

Ключевые слова: магнитная буря, область F, предбуревые ионосферные возмущения

Сведения об источниках финансирования: Работа выполнена в рамках НИТР Росгидромета 2020–2024 гг. (тема 6.1). Регистрационный номер АААА-А20-1200112390082-9

Скачать текст Ссылка на цитирование Ссылка на Elibrary

1. Благовещенский Д. Космическая погода и ионосферные радиоволны. Saarbrucken –Germany: Palmarium Academic Publishing. 123 p. 2012. 2. Данилов А. Д. Обсуждение проблемы ионосферных предвестников магнитных бурь // Геомагнетизм и аэрономия. T. 62. №1. C.97-105. 2022. 3. Данилов А. Д., Константинова А. В. Ионосферные предвестники геомагнитных бурь. 1. Обзор проблемы. // Геомагнетизм и аэрономия Т. 59. №5. 594–606. 2019. 4. Фетисова Н. В., Мандрикова О. В. // Моделирование и анализ параметров ионосферы на основе обобщенной многокомпонентной модели. // Вестник КРАУНЦ. Физ.–мат. науки, Т. 41, № 4, С. 89–106. 2022. DOI: 10.26117/2079–6641–2022–41–4-89–106. 5. Adekoya B.J., Chukwuma V.U., Adebiyi S.J., Adebesin B.O., Ikubanni S.O., Bolaji O.S., Oladunjoye H.T., Bisuga O.O. Ionospheric storm effects in the EIA region in the American and Asian-Australian sectors during geomagnetic storms of October 2016 and September 2017 // Adv. Space Res. V. 72. P. 1237–1265. 2023. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2023.04.016. 6. Bakare N. O. Adebesin B. O. Mid-Latitude Ionospheric Response and Plasma Distribution associated with the geomagnetic storm of 12-14 October 2016 in the European sector. // Adv. Space Res. 2023. https://ssrn.com/abstract=4179677 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4179677. 7. Balodis J., Normand M., Zarins A. The movement of the GPS positioning discrepancy clouds in March 2015. // Remote Sens. V. 15. No. 8. P. 2032. 2023 https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15082032. 8. Berényi K. A., Heilig B., Urbář J., Kouba D., Kis Á., Barta V. Comprehensive analysis of the ionospheric response to the largest geomagnetic storms from solar cycle 24 over Europe. // Front. Astron. Space Sci. 10:1092850. doi: 10.3389/fspas.2023.109285. 9. Blagoveshchensky D.V., Sergeeva M.A., Kozlovsky A. Ionospheric parameters as the precursors of disturbed geomagnetic conditions // Adv. Space Res. V. 60. N 11. P. 2437–2451. 2017. 10. Bojilova R. Mukhtarov P. Comparative Analysis of Global and Regional Ionospheric Responses during Two Geomagnetic Storms on 3 and 4 February 2022. // Remote Sens. V. 15. P. 1739. 2023. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15071739. 11. Bojilova R., Mukhtarov P. Analysis of the Ionospheric Response to Sudden Stratospheric Warming and Geomagnetic Forcing over Europe during February and March 2023 // Universe, V. 9. P. 351. 2023. https://doi.org/10.3390/universe9080351. 12. Danilov A. Ionospheric F2-region response to geomagnetic disturbances // Adv. Space Res. V. 52. P. 343–366. 2013. 13. Danilov A.D., Belik L.D. Thermospheric composition and the positive phase of an ionospheric storm // Adv. Space Res. V. 12. N 10. P. 257–260. 1992. 14. Danilov A.D., Konstantinova A.V. Behavior of foF2 prior to geomagnetic storms according to Slough and Juliusruh data // Adv. Space Res. V. 67. N 12. P. 4066−4077. 2021. 15. de Abreu A.J., Correia E., de Jesus R., Venkatesh K., Macho E.P., Roberto M., Fagundes P.R., Gende M. Statistical analysis on the ionospheric response over South American mid-and near high-latitudes during 70 intense geomagnetic storms occurred in the period of two decades. // J. Atm. Sol-Terr. Phys. 2023 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jastp.2023.106060. 16. Dugassa T., Mezgebe N., Habarulema J. B., Habyarimana V., Oljira A. Ionospheric response to the 23–31 August 2018 geomagnetic storm in the Europe-African longitude sector using multi-instrument observations. // Adv. Space Res. 2023 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2022.10.063. 17. Giri A., Adhikari B., Shrestha B., Rimal S. Wavelet coherence analysis foF2 over Boulder station during different geomagnetic activity. // Him. Phys. V. 10. No. 1. P. 66-77. 2023. 18. Gordiyenko G. Ionospheric response over the Middle Asian region to the May 1967 geomagnetic storm // J Atmos. Solar–Terr. Phys. V. 253. 106151. 2023. www.elsevier.com/locate/jastp. 19. Habyarimana V., Habarulema J. B., Dugassa T. Analysis of ionospheric storm‑time effects over the East African sector during the 17 March 2013 and 2015 geomagnetic storms. // Earth, Planets and Space. 2023. 75:58 https://doi.org/10.1186/s40623-023-01812-9. 20. Idosa C., Adhikari B., Shogile K. Features of ionospheric total electron content over high latitude regions during geomagnetic storm of November 04, 2021 Variations of TEC over high latitude regions during geomagnetic storm of November 04, 2021. // Indian Journal of Physics. · May 2023 DOI: 10.1007/s12648-023-02746-4. 21. Joshua B. W., Adeniyi J. O., Olawepo A. O. et al. Latitudinal Dependence of Ionospheric Responses to Some Geomagnetic Storms during Low Solar Activity. // Geomag. Aeron., V. 61, No. 3, P. 418–437. 2021a. 22. Joshua B. W., Adeniyi J. O., Amory-Mazaudier C., Adebiyi S. J. On the Pre-Magnetic Storm Signatures in NmF2 in Some Equatorial, Low and Mid-Latitude Stations. // J. Geophys. Res. Space Phys. 126, e2021JA029459://doi.org/10.1029/2021JA029459. 2021b. 23. Katsko S. V., Emelyanov L. Ya. Variations in the Mid-Latitude Ionosphere Parameters over Ukraine during the Very Moderate Magnetic Storm on December 18, 2019. // Kinematics and Physics of Celestial Bodies, V. 39, No. 2, P. 78–89. 2023. 24. Kumar V. V., Parkinson M. L. A global scale picture of ionospheric peak electron density changes during geomagnetic storms // Space Weather. V. 15. N 4. P. 637–652. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1002/2016SW001573. 25. Mansilla G. A., Zossi M. M. Ionospheric response to the 26 August 2018 geomagnetic storm along 280_ E and 316_ E in the South American sector. // Adv. Space Res. V. 69. P. 48–58. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2021.08.002. 26. Mansilla G. A., Zossi M. M. Response of the South American equatorial ionization anomaly to an intense geomagnetic storm. Adv. Space Res. 2023. 27. Mikhailov A.V., L. Perrone L. Pre-storm NmF2 enhancements at middle latitudes: Delusion or reality? //Ann. Geophysicae. V. 27. N 3. P. 1321−1330. 2009. 28. Mikhailov A.V., Perrone L. Pre-storm F2-layer Q-disturbances at middle latitudes: Do they exist? // J. Atmos. Solar-Terr. Phys. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jastp.2020.105473. 2020. 29. Naidu P. P., Latha T. M., Devi M. I. Hemispheric asymmetry in ionospheric response to geomagnetic storms at midlatitudes – comparison with IRI model predictions // J. Atm. Sol-Terr. Phys. JASTP-D-22-00272. 2023. 30. Sawadogo S., Gnabahou D. A., Sandwidi S. A., Ouattara F. Koudougou (Burkina Faso, Africa), GPS-TEC Response to Recurrent Geomagnetic Storms during Solar Cycle 24 Declining Phase. // International Journal of Geophysics V. 2023, Article ID 4181389. https://doi.org/10.1155/2023/4181389. 31. Sharan A. Analysing the effect of geomagnetic storms on the F2-region ionosphere in South Pacific region. // Geomagn. Aeron. V. 62, No. 6, P. 802-814. 2022. DOI: 10.1134/S0016793222060147. 32. Swarnalingam N., Wu D. L., Gopalswamy N. Interhemispheric asymmetries in ionospheric electron density responses during geomagnetic storms: A study using space-based and ground-based GNSS and AMPERE observations. // J. Geophys. Res. Space Physics. V. 127. 2022. e2021JA030247. DOI: 10.1029/2021JA030247. 33. Younas W., Khan M., Amory-Mazaudier C., Amaechi P. O., Fleury R. Middle and low latitudes hemispheric asymmetries in  O/N2 and TEC during intense magnetic storms of solar cycle 24 // Adv Space Res. V. 69. P. 220–235. 2022. 34. Ye H., Yi W., Zhou B. et al. Multi‐Instrumental Observations of Midlatitude Plasma Irregularities over Eastern Asia during a Moderate Magnetic Storm 3 on 16 July 2003. // Remote Sens. 2022, https://doi.org/10.3390/xxxxx. 35. Younas W., Khan M., Amory-Mazaudier C., Amaechi P.O., Fleury R. Middle and low latitudes hemispheric asymmetries in ΣO/N2 and TEC during intense magnetic storms of Solar Cycle 24. 2022. 36. Zhai C., Tang S., Peng P., Cheng X., Zheng D. Driver of the Positive Ionospheric Storm over the South American Sector during 4 November 2021 Geomagnetic Storm. // Remote Sens. 2023a, V. 15. P. 111. 2023a. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15010111. 37. Zhai C., Chen Y., Cheng X. Yin X. Spatiotemporal Evolution and Drivers of the Four Ionospheric Storms over the American Sector during the August 2018 Geomagnetic Storm. // Atmosphere V. 14. P. 335. 2023b. https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos14020335.

Ссылка на XML

Changes in the ionospheric F region prior to magnetic storms (papers of the recent two years)
Number: 45 Year: 2024 Pages: 15-27

Danilov Alexey Dmitrievich¹e-mail: adanilov99@mail.ru

Konstantinova Anna Vladimirovna¹e-mail: anna@tabulata.ru

Institutions:
1 - Institute of Applied Geophysics named after Academician E.K. Fedorov (FSBI "IPG"), Moscow, Russia

Abstract
A review of the papers published during two recent years (2022–2023) on changes in the ionospheric parameters prior to geomagnetic storms (the so-called «case studies») is presented. It is shown that, as a result of such analysis, deviations of these parameters (first of all, foF2 and TEC) is the days preceding sudden commencement of a storm (SC) are seen in the majority of cases. At the same time, many authors draw attention to them, discuss their relation to the space weather, and even suggest possible mechanisms of their formation. It is shown that number of such publications increases substantially during recent two years. It is emphasized that changes in the ionospheric state on the prestorm days is detected not only in the “classical” parameters (foF2 and TEC) but in other ionospheric characteristics as well. The papers devoted namely to the problem of ionospheric precursors and their possible role in prediction of the coming magnetic storm are considered in detail.

Keywords: Magnetic storms, ionospheric F-region, prestorm ionospheric disturbances

Information about sources of financing: The work was carried out within the framework of the Russian Hydrometeorological Research Center for 2020-2024. (topic 6.1). Registration number AAAAA-A20-1200112390082-9