Global Ionospheric Response to Intense Variations
of Solar and Geomagnetic Activity According to the Data
of the GNSS Global Networks of Navigation Receivers

M. S. Pulinets; Пулинец М. С.; P. A. Budnikov; Будников П. А.; S. A. Pulinets; Пулинец С. А.

doi:10.31857/S0016794022600703

Global Ionospheric Response to Intense Variations of Solar and Geomagnetic Activity According to the Data of the GNSS Global Networks of Navigation Receivers

Authors: Pulinets M.S.¹, Budnikov P.A.², Pulinets S.A.³
Affiliations:
1. Skobeltsyn Institute of Nuclear Physics, Lomonosov Moscow State University (SINP MSU)
2. Fedorov Institute of Applied Geophysics (IAG)
3. Space Research Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences (SRI RAS)
Issue: Vol 63, No 2 (2023)
Pages: 202-215
Section: Articles
URL: https://journal-vniispk.ru/0016-7940/article/view/134713
DOI: https://doi.org/10.31857/S0016794022600703
EDN: https://elibrary.ru/DKQTMG
ID: 134713

Cite item

Full Text

Open Access
Restricted Access

Access granted
Restricted Access

Subscription Access

Abstract
About the authors
References
Supplementary files
Statistics

Abstract

The global response of the ionosphere to intense geomagnetic storms and variations of the solar
activity according to the solar flux F10.7 is considered. As a source of information, data on total electron content
(TEC) calculated from measurements of the global network of receivers of the global navigation satellite
systems are used. Unlike many publications, where the effects of individual unique geophysical events are
studied in detail (for example, the superstorm of October 28, 2003), we considered the effects of strong storms
(Dst ≤ –80 nT) starting from 2005. The main attention was paid to the dependence on the onset time of the
main phase of the storm relative to local time/longitude, as well as the dependence of the intensity of the ionospheric
response on latitude. To display the ionospheric effects of magnetic storms, a visual image was used – a
two-dimensional representation in the day-local time format, which was used to visualize ionospheric earthquake
precursors. This approach also makes it possible to visualize the effects of solar activity variations according
to the F10.7 index and to distinguish them from ionospheric variations during geomagnetic storms. As a
result, it was possible to create a generalized global “pattern” of a geomagnetic storm in the Earth’s ionosphere

References

– Данилов А.Д. Реакция области F на геомагнитные возмущения (обзор) // Гелиогеофизические исследования. Вып. 5. С. 1–33. 2013.
– Медникова Н.В. Вариации ионосферы во время магнитосферных возмущений // Сб. статей АН СССР, Ин-т земного магнетизма, ионосферы и распространения радиоволн. Отв. ред. Л. Н. Ляхова, Н. П. Сергеенко. М.: Наука, 131 с. 1980.
– Пулинец С.А., Давиденко Д.В. Положительная ночная аномалия электронной концентрации в ионосфере как краткосрочный предвестник землетрясений и возможный физический механизм ее формирования // Геомагнетизм и аэрономия. Т. 58. № 4. С. 579–591. 2018.
– Ратовский К.Г., Клименко М.В., Ясюкевич Ю.В., Веснин А.М., Клименко В.В. Статистический анализ ионосферного отклика на геомагнитные бури с использованием данных глобальных ионосферных карт // Химическая физика. Т. 39. № 10. С. 57–68. 2020
– Черняков С.М. Изменение полного электронного содержания в ионосфере во время магнитной бури 24–28 марта 1991 года по данным разнесенного приема сигналов навигационных спутников // Сб. науч. тр. физ.-мат. факультета Мурманского гос. педагогического ун-та. Мурманск: изд-во МГПУ. С. 107–132. 2003.
– Afraimovich E L., Astafyeva E., Oinats A.V., Yasukevich Y., Zhivetiev I.V. Global electron content: a new conception to track solar activity // Ann. Geophysicae. V. 26. № 2. P. 335–344. 2008.
– Buonsanto M. Ionospheric Storms – A Review// Space Sci. Rev. V. 88. P. 563–601. 1999. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005107532631
– Chernigovskaya M.A., Shpynev B.G., Yasyukevich A.S. et al. Longitudinal variations of geomagnetic and ionospheric parameters in the Northern Hemisphere during magnetic storms according to multi-instrument observations// Adv. Space Res. 67. 762–776. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2020.10.028
– Foster J.C., Rideout W. Midlatitude TEC enhancements during the October 2003 superstorm // Geophys. Res. Lett. V. 32. L12S04. 2005. https://doi.org/10.1029/2004GL021719
–Fuller-Rowell T.J., Codrescu M.V., Rishbeth H., Moffett R.J., Quegan S. On the seasonal response of the thermosphere and ionosphere to geomagnetic storms //J. Geophys. Res. V. 101. № A2. P. 2343–2353. 1996.
– Lakhina G.S., Tsurutani B.T. Geomagnetic storms: historical perspective to modern view// Geosci. Lett. V. 3. № 5. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40562-016-0037-4
– Liu L.B., Wan W.X., Chen Y.D. et al. Solar activity effects of the ionosphere: A brief review // Chinese Sci. Bull. V. 56. P. 1202–1211. 2011. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11434-010-4226-9
– Panasyuk M.I., Kuznetsov S.N., Lazutin L.L. et al. Magnetic Storms in October 2003 // Cosmic Res. V. 42. № 5. P. 489–534. 2004.
– Sahai Y., Becker-Guedes F., Fagundes P.R. et al. Observations of the F-region ionospheric irregularities in the South American sector during the October 2003 “Halloween Storms” // Ann. Geophysicae. V. 27. № 12. P. 4463–4477. 2009.
– Szuszczewicz E.P., Lester M., Wilkinson P., Blanchard P., Abdu M., Hanbaba R., Igarashi K., Pulinets S., Reddy B.M. // A comparative study of global ionospheric responses to intense magnetic storm conditions // J. Geophys. Res. V. 103. № A6. P. 11 665–11 684. 1998.
– Vaishnav R., Jacobi C., Berdermann J., Codrescu M., Schmölter E. Role of eddy diffusion in the delayed ionospheric response to solar flux changes // Ann. Geophysicae. V. 39. 641–655. № 4. 2021. https://doi.org/10.5194/angeo-39-641-2021