Ionospheric total electron contents (TECs) as indicators of solar EUV changes during the last two solar minima

2014 ◽  
Vol 119 (6) ◽  
pp. 4175-4184 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leonid Didkovsky ◽  
Seth Wieman
Keyword(s):  
Total Electron ◽  
Total Electron Contents ◽  
Ionospheric Total Electron Contents

scholarly journals Co-Seismic Ionospheric Disturbance with Alaska Strike-Slip Mw7.9 Earthquake on 23 January 2018 Monitored by GPS

Atmosphere ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 83
Author(s):  
Yongming Zhang ◽  
Xin Liu ◽  
Jinyun Guo ◽  
Kunpeng Shi ◽  
Maosheng Zhou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Fault Location ◽  
Ionospheric Disturbance ◽  
Near Field ◽  
Singular Spectrum Analysis ◽  
Maximum Amplitude ◽  
Strike Slip ◽  
Ionospheric Disturbances ◽  
Total Electron ◽  
Total Electron Contents ◽  
Alaska Earthquake

The Mw7.9 Alaska earthquake at 09:31:40 UTC on 23 January 2018 occurred as the result of strike slip faulting within the shallow lithosphere of the Pacific plate. Global positioning system (GPS) data were used to calculate the slant total electron contents above the epicenter. The singular spectrum analysis (SSA) method was used to extract detailed ionospheric disturbance information, and to monitor the co-seismic ionospheric disturbances (CIDs) of the Alaska earthquake. The results show that the near-field CIDs were detected 8–12 min after the main shock, and the typical compression-rarefaction wave (N-shaped wave) appeared. The ionospheric disturbances propagate to the southwest at a horizontal velocity of 2.61 km/s within 500 km from the epicenter. The maximum amplitude of CIDs appears about 0.16 TECU (1TECU = 1016 el m−2) near the epicenter, and gradually decreases with the location of sub-ionospheric points (SIPs) far away from the epicenter. The attenuation rate of amplitude slows down as the distance between the SIPs and the epicenter increases. The direction of the CIDs caused by strike-slip faults may be affected by the horizontal direction of fault slip. The propagation characteristics of the ionospheric disturbance in the Alaska earthquake may be related to the complex conditions of focal mechanisms and fault location.

scholarly journals Lithosphere–Atmosphere–Ionosphere Coupling Effects Based on Multiparameter Precursor Observations for February–March 2021 Earthquakes (M~7) in the Offshore of Tohoku Area of Japan

Geosciences ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (11) ◽  
pp. 481
Author(s):  
Masashi Hayakawa ◽  
Jun Izutsu ◽  
Alexander Schekotov ◽  
Shih-Sian Yang ◽  
Maria Solovieva ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atmospheric Gravity Wave ◽  
Total Electron ◽  
Ionospheric Perturbation ◽  
Initial Expectation ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Total Electron Contents ◽  
Coupling Channel ◽  
Subducting Plate ◽  
A Chain ◽  
Atmospheric Gravity

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the lithosphere–atmosphere–ionosphere coupling (LAIC) effects with the use of multiparameter precursor observations for two successive Japanese earthquakes (EQs) (with a magnitude of around 7) in February and March 2021, respectively, considering a seemingly significant difference in seismological and geological hypocenter conditions for those EQs. The second March EQ is very similar to the famous 2011 Tohoku EQ in the sense that those EQs took place at the seabed of the subducting plate, while the first February EQ happened within the subducting plate, not at the seabed. Multiparameter observation is a powerful tool for the study of the LAIC process, and we studied the following observables over a 3-month period (January to March): (i) ULF data (lithospheric radiation and ULF depression phenomenon); (ii) ULF/ELF atmospheric electromagnetic radiation; (iii) atmospheric gravity wave (AGW) activity in the stratosphere, extracted from satellite temperature data; (iv) subionospheric VLF/LF propagation data; and (v) GPS TECs (total electron contents). In contrast to our initial expectation of different responses of anomalies to the two EQs, we found no such conspicuous differences of electromagnetic anomalies between the two EQs, but showed quite similar anomaly responses for the two EQs. It is definite that atmospheric ULF/ELF radiation and ULF depression as lower ionospheric perturbation are most likely signatures of precursors to both EQs, and most importantly, all electromagnetic anomalies are concentrated in the period of about 1 week–9 days before the EQ to the EQ day. There seems to exist a chain of LAIC process (cause-and-effect relationship) for the first EQ, while all of the observed anomalies seem to occur nearly synchronously in time for the send EQ. Even though we tried to discuss possible LAIC channels, we cannot come to any definite conclusion about which coupling channel is plausible for each EQ.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document