Реакция области F на геомагнитные возмущения (обзор)
Номер: 5 Год: 2013 Страницы: 1-33
Номер: 5 Год: 2013 Страницы: 1-33
УДК: 551.510.535
EDN: RXNVEV
Автор(ы):
Данилов Алексей Дмитриевич1, e-mail: adanilov99@mail.ru
Учреждения:
1 - Институт прикладной геофизики им. академика Е.К. Федорова, Москва, Россия
Аннотация:
Реакция области F ионосферы на геомагнитные бури, обычно называемая ионосферной бурей, представляет собой весьма сложное явление. Она состоит из так называемых положительной и отрицательной фаз, поведение которых является очень сложным и в пространстве и во времени. Основные морфологические особенности ионосферных бурь и главные процессы, контролирующие их поведение, были поняты в конце 90-х годов и описаны в серии обзорных статей. В течение предыдущего десятилетия появилось много публикаций, посвященных проблеме ионосферных бурь. В данной статье кратко суммируется концепция морфологии и физики ионосферной бури сформулированная в конце 90-х годов и описываются наиболее интересные результаты, полученные в 2000-х годах. Показано, что основными особенностями исследований прошлого десятилетия были: использование данных GPS TEC (полное содержание электронов, ПСЭ) для анализа морфологии ионосферных бурь, привлечение сложных теоретических моделей для изучения процессов, контролирующих поведение ионосферы в возмущенных условиях, и акцент на анализе поведения ионосферы во время выдающихся событий (очень сильные и сверхсильные геомагнитные бури). Особое внимание уделялось также предбуревым возрастаниям foF2 и ПСЭ.
Ключевые слова: ионосфера, плазмосфера, TEC, ПЭС, буря.
Сведения об источниках финансирования: -
1 - Институт прикладной геофизики им. академика Е.К. Федорова, Москва, Россия
Аннотация:
Реакция области F ионосферы на геомагнитные бури, обычно называемая ионосферной бурей, представляет собой весьма сложное явление. Она состоит из так называемых положительной и отрицательной фаз, поведение которых является очень сложным и в пространстве и во времени. Основные морфологические особенности ионосферных бурь и главные процессы, контролирующие их поведение, были поняты в конце 90-х годов и описаны в серии обзорных статей. В течение предыдущего десятилетия появилось много публикаций, посвященных проблеме ионосферных бурь. В данной статье кратко суммируется концепция морфологии и физики ионосферной бури сформулированная в конце 90-х годов и описываются наиболее интересные результаты, полученные в 2000-х годах. Показано, что основными особенностями исследований прошлого десятилетия были: использование данных GPS TEC (полное содержание электронов, ПСЭ) для анализа морфологии ионосферных бурь, привлечение сложных теоретических моделей для изучения процессов, контролирующих поведение ионосферы в возмущенных условиях, и акцент на анализе поведения ионосферы во время выдающихся событий (очень сильные и сверхсильные геомагнитные бури). Особое внимание уделялось также предбуревым возрастаниям foF2 и ПСЭ.
Ключевые слова: ионосфера, плазмосфера, TEC, ПЭС, буря.
Сведения об источниках финансирования: -
Данилов, А. Д. Реакция области F на геомагнитные возмущения (обзор) / А. Д. Данилов // Гелиогеофизические исследования. – 2013. – № 5. – С. 1-33. – EDN RXNVEV.
Используемая литература
1. Благовещенский Д.В., Калишин А.С. Механизм возрастания критической частоты ионосферы до начала суббури // Геомагнетизм и аэрономия. 2009. Т. 49. № 3. С. 213-223.
2. Благовещенский Д.В. Влияние геомагнитных бурь (суббурь) на КВ распространение (обзор) // Геомагнетизм и аэрономия. 2013. Т. 53. № 3. (в печати).
3. Данилов А.Д., Белик Л.Д. Термосферно-ионосферное взаимодействие во время геомагнитных бурь // Геомагнетизм и аэрономия. 1991. Т. 31. № 2. С. 209-222.
4. Калегаев В.В., Макаренков Е.В. Динамика магнитосферных токовых систем во время магнитных бурь разной интенсивности // Геомагнетизм и аэрономия. 2006. Т. 46. № 5. С. 604-613.
5. Михайлов А.В. Ионосферные возмущения и их прогнозирование // Энциклопедия низкотемпературной плазмы. Серия В. Т. 1-3. Ч. 2. М.: Янус-К, 2010. С. 182-210.
6. Михайлов А.В., Терехин Ю.Л., Михайлов В.В. Отслеживает ли слой F2 уровень постоянного давления? // Геомагнетизм и аэрономия. 1989. Т. 29. № 6. С. 1035-1043.
7. de Abreu A.J., Sahai Y., Fagundes P.R., Becker-Guedes F., de Jesus R., Guarnieri F.L., Pillat V.G. Response of the ionospheric F-region in the Brazilian sector during the super geomagnetic storm in April 2000 observed by GPS // Advances in Space Research. 2010. Vol. 45. No. 11. P. 1322-1329.
8. Adekoya B.J., Chukwuma V.U. The effects of geomagnetic storm on middle latitude ionospheric F2 variations during storm of April (2-6), 2004 // Indian Journal of Radio & Space Physics. 2012. Vol. 41. No. 6. P. 606-616.
9. Adekoya B.J., Chukwuma V.U., Bakare N.O., David T.W. On the effects of geomagnetic storms and pre storm phenomena on low and middle latitude ionospheric F2 // Astrophysics and Space Science. 2012. Vol. 340. No. 2. P. 217-235.
10. Adeniyi J.O. Magnetic storm effect on the morphology of the equatorial F2-layer // Journal of Atmospheric and Terrestrial Physics. 1986. Vol. 48. No. 8. P. 695-702.
11. Araujo-Pradere E.A., Fuller-Rowell T.J. Evaluation of the STORM time ionospheric empirical model for the Bastille Day event // Solar Physics. 2001. Vol. 204. No. 1-2. P. 315-322.
12. Araujo-Pradere E.A., Fuller-Rowell T.J. STORM: An empirical storm-time ionospheric correction model, 2. Validation // Radio Science. 2002. Vol. 37. No. 5. P. 1071. DOI: 10.1029/2002RS002620.
13. Burton R.K., McPherron R.L., Russel C.T. An empirical relationship between interplanetary conditions and Dst // Journal of Geophysical Research. 1975. Vol. 80. No. A12. P. 4204-4214.
14. Batista I.S., Abdu M.A., Souza J.R., Bertoni F., Matsuoka M.T., Camargo P.O., Bailey G.J. Unusual early morning development of the equatorial anomaly in the Brazilian sector during the Halloween magnetic storm // Journal of Geophysical Research. 2006. Vol. 111. No. A5. A05307.
15. Batista I.S., de Paula E.R., Abdu M.A., Trivedi N.B., Greenspan M.E. Ionospheric effects of the March 1989 magnetic storm at low and equatorial latitudes // Journal of Geophysical Research. 1991. Vol. 96. No. A8. P. 13943-13952.
16. Bhatnagar V.P., Tan A., Ramachandran R. On the response of the exospheric temperature to the auroral heating impulse during geomagnetic disturbances // Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics. 2006. Vol. 68. No. 11. P. 1237-1244.
17. Bilitza D. International Reference Ionosphere // Radio Science. 2001. Vol. 36. No. 2. P. 261-275.
18. Blagoveshchensky D.V., Kalishin A.S., Sergeyeva M.A. Space weather effects on radio propagation: study of the CEDAR, GEM and ISTP storm events // Annales Geophysicae. 2008. Vol. 26. No. 6. P. 1479-1490.
19. Borries C., Jakowski N., Wilken V. Storm induced large scale TIDs observed in GPS derived TEC // Annales Geophysicae. 2009. Vol. 27. No. 4. P. 1605-1612.
20. Buonsanto M.J. Ionospheric storms – A review // Space Science Reviews. 1999. Vol. 88. No. 3-4. P. 563-601.
21. Buresova D., Laštovička J. Pre-storm enhancements of foF2 above Europe // Advances in Space Research. 2007. Vol. 39. No. 8. P. 1298-1303.
22. Buresova D., Laštovička J. Pre-storm electron density enhancements at middle latitudes // Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics. 2008. Vol. 70. No. 15. P. 1898-1906.
23. Danilov A.D. F-2 region response to geomagnetic disturbances // Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics. 2001. Vol. 63. No. 5. P. 441-449.
24. Danilov A.D., Belik L.D. Thermospheric composition and the positive phase of an ionospheric storm // Advances in Space Research. 1992. Vol. 12. No. 10. P. 257-260.
25. Danilov A.D., Laštovička J. Effects of geomagnetic storms on the ionosphere and atmosphere // International Journal of Geomagnetism and Aeronomy. 2001. Vol. 2. No. 3. P. 209-224.
26. David T.V., Adedakun V.O. Effects of local time on the F2-region response to the Geomagnetic Storm on January 28, 1985 // Journal of Natural and Applied Sciences. 2009. Vol. 5. No. 3. P. 244-250.
27. David M., Sojka J.J., Schunk R.W., Liemohn M.W., Coster A.J. Dayside midlatitude ionospheric response to storm time electric fields: A case study for 7 September 2002 // Journal of Geophysical Research. 2011. Vol. 116. No. A12. A12302. DOI: 10.1029/2011JA016988.
28. Deng Y., Maute A., Richmond A.D., Roble R.G. Analysis of thermospheric response to magnetospheric inputs // Journal of Geophysical Research. 2008. Vol. 113. No. A4. A04301. DOI: 10.1029/2007JA012840.
29. Ding F., Wan W., Liu L., Afraimovich E.L., Voeykov S.V., Perevalova N.P. A statistical study of large-scale traveling ionospheric disturbances observed by GPS TEC during major magnetic storms over the years 2003–2005 // Journal of Geophysical Research. 2008. Vol. 113. No. A00. A00A01. DOI: 10.1029/2008JA013037.
30. Dmitriev A., Yeh H.-C. Storm-time ionization enhancements at the topside low-latitude ionosphere // Annales Geophysicae. 2008. Vol. 26. No. 4. P. 867-876.
31. Fejer B.G., Jensen J.W., Kikuchi T., Abdu M.A., Chau J.L. Equatorial Ionospheric Electric Fields During the November 2004 Magnetic Storm // Journal of Geophysical Research. 2007. Vol. 112. No. A10. A10304. DOI: 10.1029/2007JA012376.
32. Field P.R., Rishbeth H., Moffett R.J., Idenden D.W., Fuller-Rowell T.J., Millward G.H., Aylward A.D. Modeling composition changes in F-layer storms // Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics. 1998. Vol. 60. No. 5. P. 523-543.
33. Foster J.C., Rideout W. Storm enhanced density: magnetic conjugacy effects // Annales Geophysicae. 2007. Vol. 25. No. 8. P. 1791-1799.
34. Fuller-Rowell T.J., Codrescu M.V., Moffett R.J., Quegan S. Response of the thermosphere and ionosphere to geomagnetic storms // Journal of Geophysical Research. 1994. Vol. 99. No. A3. P. 3893-3914.
35. Fuller-Rowell T.M., Millward G.H., Richmond A.D., Codrescu M.V. Storm-time changes in the upper atmosphere at low latitudes // Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics. 2002. Vol. 64. No. 12-14. P. 1383-1391.
36. Galav P., Sharma S., Pandey R. Study of simultaneous penetration of electric fields and variation of total electron content in the day and night sectors during the geomagnetic storm of 23 May 2002 // Journal of Geophysical Research. 2011. Vol. 116. No. A12. A12324. DOI: 10.1029/2011JA017002.
37. Gillies D.M., McWilliams K.A., St. Maurice J.-P., Milan S.E. Global-scale observations of ionospheric convection during geomagnetic storms // Journal of Geophysical Research. 2011. Vol. 116. No. A12. A12238. DOI: 10.1029/2011JA017086.
38. Goncharenko L.P., Foster J.C., Coster A.J., Huang C., Aponte N., Paxton L.J. Observations of a positive storm phase on September 10, 2005 // Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics. 2007. Vol. 69. No. 10-11. P. 1253-1272.
39. Gonzalez W.D., Tsurutani B.T., Gonzalez A.L.C. Interplanetary origin of geomagnetic storms // Space Science Reviews. 1999. Vol. 88. No. 3-4. P. 529-562.
40. Heelis R.A., Sojka J.J., David M., Schunk R.W. Stormtime density enhancements in the middle latitude dayside ionosphere // Journal of Geophysical Research. 2009. Vol. 114. No. A3. A03315. DOI: 10.1029/2008JA013690.
41. Hecht J.H., Mulligan T., Strickland D.J., et al. Satellite and ground-based observations of auroral energy deposition and the effects on thermospheric composition during large geomagnetic storms: 1. Great geomagnetic storm of 20 November 2003 // Journal of Geophysical Research. 2008. Vol. 113. No. A1. A01310. DOI: 10.1029/2007JA012365.
42. Horvath I., Lovell B.C. Large-scale traveling ionospheric disturbances impacting equatorial ionization anomaly development in the local morning hours of the Halloween Superstorms on 29–30 October 2003 // Journal of Geophysical Research. 2010. Vol. 115. No. A4. A04305. DOI: 10.1029/2009JA014922.
43. Kil H., Paxton L.J., Pi X., Hairston M.R., Zhang Y. Case study of the 15 July 2000 magnetic storm effects on the ionosphere-driver of the positive ionospheric storm in the winter hemisphere // Journal of Geophysical Research. 2003. Vol. 108. No. A1. 1001. DOI: 10.1029/2002JA009782.
44. de Jesus R., Sahai Y., Guarnieri F.L., et al. Effects observed in the ionospheric F-region in the South American sector during the intense geomagnetic storm of 14 December 2006 // Advances in Space Research. 2010. Vol. 46. No. 7. P. 909-920.
45. Jin H., Maruyama T. Temporary decrease in daytime F-region peak electron density due to eastward electric field penetration during magnetic storm // Journal of Geophysical Research. 2008. Vol. 113. No. A5. A05305. DOI: 10.1029/2006JA011928.
46. Kalegaev V.V., Ganushkina N.Yu., Pulkkinen T.I., Kubyshkina M.V., Singer H.J., Russell C.T. Relation between the ring current and the tail current during magnetic storms // Annales Geophysicae. 2005. Vol. 26. No. 2. P. 523-533.
47. Kane R.P. Storm-time variations of F2 // Annales Geophysicae. 1973a. Vol. 29. No. 1. P. 25-42.
48. Kane R.P. Global evolution of F2-region storms // Journal of Atmospheric and Terrestrial Physics. 1973b. Vol. 35. No. 11. P. 1953-1966.
49. Kane R.P. Global evolution of the ionospheric electron content during some geomagnetic storms // Journal of Atmospheric and Terrestrial Physics. 1975. Vol. 37. No. 4. P. 601-611.
50. Kane R.P. Ionospheric foF2 anomalies during some intense geomagnetic storms // Annales Geophysicae. 2005. Vol. 23. No. 7. P. 2487-2499.
51. Kelley M.C., Makela J.J., de la Beaujardiere O. Convective ionospheric storms: A major space weather problem // Space Weather. 2006. Vol. 4. No. 2. S02C04. DOI: 10.1029/2005SW000144.
52. Kil H., Paxton L.J., Kim K.H., Park S., Zhang Y., Oh S.J. Temporal and spatial components in the storm-time ionospheric disturbances // Journal of Geophysical Research. 2011. Vol. 116. No. A11. A11315. DOI: 10.1029/2011JA016750.
53. Lei J., Wang W., Burns A.G., Solomon S.C., Richmond A.D., Wiltberger M., Goncharenko L.P., Coster A., Reinisch B.W. Observations and simulations of the ionospheric and thermospheric response to the December 2006 geomagnetic storm: Initial phase // Journal of Geophysical Research. 2008. Vol. 113. No. A1. A01314. DOI: 10.1029/2007JA012807.
54. Liu L., Wan W., Zhang M.-L., Zhao B. Case study on total electron content enhancements at low latitudes during low geomagnetic activities before the storms // Annales Geophysicae. 2008a. Vol. 26. No. 4. P. 893-903.
55. Liu L., Wan W., Zhang M-L., Zhao B., Ning B. Pre-storm enhancements in NmF2 and total electron content at low latitudes // Journal of Geophysical Research. 2008b. Vol. 113. No. A2. A02311. DOI: 10.1029/2007JA012832.
56. Lu G., Goncharenko L.P., Richmond A.D., Roble R.G., Aponte N. A dayside ionospheric positive storm phase driven by neutral winds // Journal of Geophysical Research. 2008. Vol. 113. No. A8. A08304. DOI: 10.1029/2007JA012895.
57. Mahrous A. Global Ionospheric Response to the Magnetic Storm of 21 October 1999 // Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences. 2007. Vol. 1. No. 4. P. 678-686.
58. Mansilla G.A. Disturbances at F2-region heights of equatorial anomaly during geomagnetic storms // Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics. 2003. Vol. 65. No. 9. P. 987-995.
59. Mansilla G.A. Mid-latitude effects of a great geomagnetic storm // Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics. 2004. Vol. 66. No. 12. P. 1085-1091.
60. Mansilla G.A. Ionospheric effects of an intense geomagnetic storm // Studia Geophysica et Geodaetica. 2007. Vol. 51. No. 4. P. 563-574.
61. Mansilla G.A. Thermosphere–ionosphere response at middle and high latitudes during perturbed conditions: A case study // Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics. 2008. Vol. 70. No. 11-13. P. 1448-1454.
62. Mansilla G.A. Some effects in the upper atmosphere during geomagnetic storms // Advances in Space Research. 2010. Vol. 47. No. 6. P. 930-937.
63. Mansilla G.A., Zossi M.M. Ionospheric response to the 3 August 2010 geomagnetic storm at mid and mid-high latitudes // Advances in Space Research. 2012a. Vol. 51. No. 1. P. 50-60.
64. Mansilla G.A., Zossi M. Thermosphere-ionosphere response to a severe magnetic storm: A case study // Advances in Space Research. 2012b. Vol. 49. No. 11. P. 1581-1586.
65. Mannucci A.J., Tsurutani B.T., Iijima B.A., Komjathy A., Saito A., Gonzalez W.D., Guarnieri F.L., Kozyra J.U., Skoug R. Dayside global ionospheric response to the major interplanetary events of October 29–30, 2003 "Halloween Storms" // Geophysical Research Letters. 2005. Vol. 32. No. 12. L12S02. DOI: 10.1029/2004GL021467.
66. Mannucci A.J., Tsurutani B.T., Abdu M.A., Gonzalez W.D., Komjathy A., Echer E., Iijima B.A., Crowley G., Anderson D. Superposed epoch analysis of the dayside ionospheric response to four intense geomagnetic storms // Journal of Geophysical Research. 2008. Vol. 113. No. A00. A00A02. DOI: 10.1029/2007JA012732.
67. Maruyama T., Ma G., Nakamura M. Signature of TEC storm on 6 November 2001 derived from dense GPS receiver network and ionosonde chain over Japan // Journal of Geophysical Research. 2004. Vol. 109. No. A10. A10302. DOI: 10.1029/2004JA010451.
68. Maruyama N., Richmond A.D., Fuller-Rowell T.J., Codrescu M.V., Sazykin S., Toffoletto F.R., Spiro R.W., Millward G.H. Interaction between direct penetration and disturbance dynamo electric fields in the storm-time equatorial ionosphere // Geophysical Research Letters. 2005. Vol. 32. No. 17. L17105.
69. Maruyama N., Sazykin S., Spiro R.W., et al. Modeling storm-time electrodynamics of the low-latitude ionosphere–thermosphere system: Can long lasting disturbance electric fields be accounted for? // Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics. 2007. Vol. 69. No. 10-11. P. 1182-1199.
70. Mendillo M. Storms in the ionosphere: Patterns and processes for total electron content // Reviews of Geophysics. 2006. Vol. 44. No. 4. RG4001. DOI: 10.1029/2005RG000193.
71. Mendillo M., Narvaez C. Ionospheric storms at geophysically-equivalent sites – Part 1: Storm-time patterns for sub-auroral ionospheres // Annales Geophysicae. 2009. Vol. 27. No. 4. P. 1679-1694.
72. Mendillo M., Narvaez C. Ionospheric storms at geophysically-equivalent sites – Part 2: Local time storm patterns for sub-auroral ionospheres // Annales Geophysicae. 2010. Vol. 27. No. 4. P. 1449-1462.
73. Mikhailov A.V., Forster M. Day-to-day thermosphere parameter variation as deduced from Millstone Hill incoherent scatter radar observations during March 16-22, 1990 magnetic storm period // Annales Geophysicae. 1997. Vol. 15. No. 11. P. 1429-1438.
74. Mikhailov A.V., Foster J.C. Daytime thermosphere above Millstone Hill during severe geomagnetic storms // Journal of Geophysical Research. 1997. Vol. 102. No. A8. P. 17275-17282.
75. Mikhailov A.V., Perrone L. Pre-storm NmF2 enhancements at mid latitudes: Delusion or reality? // Annales Geophysicae. 2009. Vol. 27. No. 4. P. 1321-1330.
76. Mikhailov A., Schlegel K. Physical mechanism of strong negative storm effect in the daytime ionospheric F2 region observed with EISCAT // Annales Geophysicae. 1998. Vol. 16. No. 5. P. 602-608.
77. Mikhailov A.V., Forster M., Skoblin M.G. Neutral gas composition changes and ExB vertical plasma drift contribution to the daytime equatorial F2-region storm effects // Annales Geophysicae. 1994. Vol. 12. No. 2-3. P. 226-231.
78. Mikhailov A.V., Skoblin M.G., Forster M. Daytime F2-layer positive storm effect at middle and lower latitudes // Annales Geophysicae. 1995. Vol. 13. No. 5. P. 532-540.
79. Morton Y.T., Mathews J.D., Zhou Q. Electron Concentration Configurations During the 13–14 March 1989 Geomagnetic Storm as Measured by Arecibo Incoherent Scatter Radar // Spring American Geophysical Union Meeting. Baltimore, MD, 28 May–1 June 1991.
80. Ngwira C.M., McKinnell L.-A., Cilliers P.J., Coster A.J. Ionospheric observations during the geomagnetic storm events on 24–27 July 2004: Long-duration positive storm effects // Journal of Geophysical Research. 2012. Vol. 117. No. A00. A00L02. DOI: 10.1029/2011JA016990.
81. Nogueira P.A.B., Abdu M.A., Batista I.S., deSiqueira P.M. Equatorial ionization anomaly and thermospheric meridional winds during two major storms over Brazilian low latitudes // Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics. 2011. Vol. 73. No. 11-12. P. 1535-1543.
82. Oyama S., Watkins B.J., Maeda S., Shinagawa H., Nozawa S., Ogawa Y., Brekke V., Lathuillere C., Kofman W. Generation of the lower-thermospheric vertical wind estimated with the EISCAT KST radar at high latitudes during periods of moderate geomagnetic disturbance // Annales Geophysicae. 2008. Vol. 26. No. 6. P. 1491-1505.
83. Pavlov A.V. The role of vibrationally excited nitrogen in the formation of the midlatitude negative ionospheric storms // Annales Geophysicae. 1994. Vol. 12. No. 6. P. 554-564.
84. Pavlov A.V., Buonsanto M.J. Comparison of model electron densities and temperatures with Millstone Hill observations during undisturbed period and the geomagnetic storms of 16-23 March and 6-12 April 1990 // Annales Geophysicae. 1997. Vol. 15. No. 3. P. 327-344.
85. Prikryl P., Spogli L., Jayachandran P.T., et al. Interhemispheric comparison of GPS phase scintillation at high latitudes during the magnetic-cloud-induced geomagnetic storm of 5–7 April 2010 // Annales Geophysicae. 2011. Vol. 29. No. 12. P. 2287-2304.
86. Prolls G.W. Magnetic storm associated perturbations of the upper atmosphere: recent results obtained by satellite-borne gas analyzers // Reviews of Geophysics and Space Physics. 1980. Vol. 18. No. 1. P. 183-202.
87. Prolls G. Ionospheric F-region storms // Handbook of Atmospheric Electrodynamics. Vol. 2 / ed. by H. Volland. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 1995. P. 195-248.
88. Prolls G.W., von Zahn U. ESRO 4 gas analyzer results. 2. Direct measurements of changes in the neutral composition during an ionospheric storm // Journal of Geophysical Research. 1974. Vol. 79. No. 16. P. 2535-2539.
89. Rees D. Observations and modeling of ionospheric and thermospheric disturbances during major geomagnetic storms: A review // Journal of Atmospheric and Terrestrial Physics. 1995. Vol. 57. No. 12. P. 1433-1457.
90. Rich F.J., Denig W.F. The major magnetic storm of 13–14 March 1989 and associated ionospheric effects // Canadian Journal of Physics. 1992. Vol. 70. No. 7. P. 510-525.
91. Rishbeth H., Barron R. Equilibrium electron distribution in the ionospheric F2-layer // Journal of Atmospheric and Terrestrial Physics. 1960. Vol. 18. No. 4. P. 234-252.
92. Saranya P.L., Venkatesh K., Prasad D.S.V.V.D., Rama Rao P.V.S., Niranjan K. Pre-storm behaviour of NmF2 and TEC (GPS) over equatorial and low latitude stations in the Indian sector // Advances in Space Research. 2011. Vol. 48. No. 2. P. 207-217.
93. Sahai Y., De Abreu A.J., Fagundes P.R., et al. Effects of geomagnetic super storms on the ionospheric F region in the South American Sector using a GPS technique // Asian Journal of Physics. 2011. Vol. 20. No. 4. P. 299-318.
94. Schunk R.W., Sojka J.J. Ionosphere-thermosphere space weather issues // Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics. 1996. Vol. 58. No. 14. P. 1527-1574.
95. Schunk R.W., Raitt W.J., Banks P.M. Effects of electric fields on the daytime high-latitude E and F regions // Journal of Geophysical Research. 1975. Vol. 80. No. 22. P. 3121-3130.
96. Seaton M.J. A possible explanation of the drop in F-region critical densities accompanying major ionospheric storms // Journal of Atmospheric and Terrestrial Physics. 1956. Vol. 8. No. 2. P. 122-123.
97. Sharma S., Galav P., Dashora N., Pandey R. Longitudinal study of the ionospheric response to the geomagnetic storm of 15 May 2005 and manifestation of TADs // Annales Geophysicae. 2011. Vol. 29. No. 6. P. 1063-1070.
98. Shimeis A., Fathy I., Amory-Mazaudier C., Fleury R., Mahrous A.M., Yumoto K., Groves K. Signature of the Coronal Hole on near the North Crest Equatorial Anomaly over Egypt during the strong Geomagnetic Storm 5th April 2010 // Journal of Geophysical Research. 2013. DOI: 10.1029/2012JA017753.
99. de Siqueira P.M., de Paula E.R., Muella M.T.A.H., Rezende L.F.C., Abdu M.A., Gonzalez W.D. Storm-time total electron content and its response to penetration electric fields over South America // Annales Geophysicae. 2011. Vol. 29. No. 10. P. 1765-1778.
100. Sojka J.J., David M., Schunk R.W., Heelis R.A. A modeling study of the longitudinal dependence of storm time midlatitude dayside total electron content enhancements // Journal of Geophysical Research. 2012. Vol. 117. No. A2. A02315. DOI: 10.1029/2011JA017000.
101. Song Q., Ding F., Wan W., Ning B., Liu L. Global propagation features of large-scale traveling ionospheric disturbances during the magnetic storm of 7–10 November 2004 // Annales Geophysicae. 2012. Vol. 30. No. 4. P. 683-694.
102. Stephan A.W., Meier R.R., Paxton L.J. Comparison of Global Ultraviolet Imager limb and disk observations of column O/N2 during a geomagnetic storm // Journal of Geophysical Research. 2008. Vol. 113. No. A1. A01301. DOI: 10.1029/2007JA012599.
103. Subrahmanyam P., Jain A.R., Singh L., Garg S.C. Role of neutral wind and storm time electric fields inferred from the storm time ionization distribution at low latitudes: in-situ measurements by Indian satellite SROSS-C2 // Annales Geophysicae. 2005. Vol. 23. No. 10. P. 3289-3299.
104. Sun S.J., Ban P.P., Chen C., Xu Z.W., Zhao Z.W. On the vertical drift of ionospheric F layer during disturbance time: Results from ionosondes // Journal of Geophysical Research. 2012. Vol. 117. No. A1. A01303. DOI: 10.1029/2011JA017106.
105. Troshichev O., Janzhura A. Relationship between the PC and AL indices during repetitive bay-like magnetic disturbances in the auroral zone // Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics. 2009. Vol. 71. No. 12. P. 1340-1352.
106. Tsugawa T., Saito A., Otsuka Y. A statistical study of large scale traveling ionospheric disturbances using the GPS network in Japan // Journal of Geophysical Research. 2004. Vol. 109. No. A6. A06302. DOI: 10.1029/2003JA010302.
107. Tsurutani B.T., Verkhoglyadova O.P., Mannucci A.J., et al. Prompt penetration electric fields (PPEFs) and their ionospheric effects during the great magnetic storm of 30–31 October 2003 // Journal of Geophysical Research. 2008. Vol. 113. No. A5. A05311. DOI: 10.1029/2007JA012879.
108. Turunen T., Rao M.N. Examples of the influence of strong magnetic storms on the equatorial F-layer // Journal of Atmospheric and Terrestrial Physics. 1980. Vol. 42. No. 3. P. 323-330.
109. Unnikrishnan K., Saito A., Otsuka Y., Yamamoto M., Fukao S. Transition region of TEC enhancement phenomena during geomagnetically disturbed periods at mid-latitudes // Annales Geophysicae. 2005. Vol. 23. No. 10. P. 3439-3450.
110. Venkateswara Rao N., Madhu T., Lal Kishore K. Geomagnetic Storm Effects on GPS Aided Navigation over Low Latitude South Indian Region // International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security. 2010. Vol. 10. No. 3. P. 244-250.
111. Wanliss J.A., Dobias P. Space Storm as a phase transition // Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics. 2007. Vol. 69. No. 6. P. 675-684.
112. Wanliss J.A., Showalter K. The high resolution global storm index: DST versus SYM-H // Journal of Geophysical Research. 2006. Vol. 111. No. A2. A02202.
113. Wolf R.A., Spiro R.W., Sazykin S., Toffoleto F.R. How the Earth's inner magnetosphere works: An evolving picture // Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics. 2007. Vol. 69. No. 3. P. 288-302.
114. Yeh K.C., Lin K.H., Conkright R.O. The global behavior of the March 1989 ionospheric storm // Canadian Journal of Physics. 1992. Vol. 70. No. 7. P. 532-543.
115. Yizengaw E., Dyson P.L., Essex E.A., Moldwin M. Ionosphere dynamics over the Southern Hemisphere during the 31 March 2001 severe magnetic storm using multi-instrument measurement data // Annales Geophysicae. 2005. Vol. 23. No. 3. P. 707-721.
116. Yizengaw E., Moldwin M.B., Komjathy M.B., Mannucci A.J. Unusual topside ionospheric density response to the November 2003 superstorm // Journal of Geophysical Research. 2006. Vol. 111. No. A2. A02308. DOI: 10.1029/2005JA011433.
117. Yizengaw E., Essex E.A., Birsa R. The Southern Hemisphere and equatorial region ionization response for a 22 September 1999 severe magnetic storm // Annales Geophysicae. 2004. Vol. 22. No. 8. P. 2765-2773.
118. Zhao B., Wan W., Lei J., Wei Y., Sahai Y., Reinisch B. Positive Ionospheric Storm Effects at Latin America Longitude during the Superstorm of 20–22 November 2003: Revisit // Advances in Space Research. 2013. Vol. 51. No. 1. P. 50-60.
119. Zhang W., Zhang D.H., Xiao Z. The influence of geomagnetic storms on the estimation of GPS instrumental basis // Annales Geophysicae. 2009. Vol. 27. No. 4. P. 1613-1623.
Ссылка на XML
Reaction of F region to geomagnetic disturbances (review)
Number: 5 Year: 2013 Pages: 1-33
Number: 5 Year: 2013 Pages: 1-33
Danilov Alexey Dmitrievich1 e-mail: adanilov99@mail.ru
Institutions:
1 - Institute of Applied Geophysics named after Academician E.K. Fedorova, Moscow, Russia
The F2-region reaction to geomagnetic storms usually called as an ionospheric storm is a rather complicated event. It consists of so called positive and negative phases, which have very complicated spatial and temporal behavior. The main morphological features of ionospheric storms and the main processes governing their behavior were understood at the end of the 1900s and described in a series of review papers. During the recent decade there were many publications dedicated to the problem of ionospheric storms. In this paper a concept of ionospheric storm morphology and physics formulated at the end of the 1990s is briefly summarized and the most interesting results obtained in the 2000s are described. It is shown that the main features of the studies of the previous decade were: the use of GPS TEC data for analyzing the ionospheric storm morphology, attraction of sophisticated theoretical models for studying the processes governing ionospheric behavior in disturbed conditions, and accent to analysis of ionospheric behavior during prominent events (very strong and great geomagnetic storms). Also a special attention was paid to the pre-storm enhancements in foF2 and TEC.
Keywords: IONOSPHERE , PLASMOSPHERE , TEC, STORM
Information about sources of financing: -
1 - Institute of Applied Geophysics named after Academician E.K. Fedorova, Moscow, Russia
The F2-region reaction to geomagnetic storms usually called as an ionospheric storm is a rather complicated event. It consists of so called positive and negative phases, which have very complicated spatial and temporal behavior. The main morphological features of ionospheric storms and the main processes governing their behavior were understood at the end of the 1900s and described in a series of review papers. During the recent decade there were many publications dedicated to the problem of ionospheric storms. In this paper a concept of ionospheric storm morphology and physics formulated at the end of the 1990s is briefly summarized and the most interesting results obtained in the 2000s are described. It is shown that the main features of the studies of the previous decade were: the use of GPS TEC data for analyzing the ionospheric storm morphology, attraction of sophisticated theoretical models for studying the processes governing ionospheric behavior in disturbed conditions, and accent to analysis of ionospheric behavior during prominent events (very strong and great geomagnetic storms). Also a special attention was paid to the pre-storm enhancements in foF2 and TEC.
Keywords: IONOSPHERE , PLASMOSPHERE , TEC, STORM
Information about sources of financing: -