<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" dtd-version="3.0">
  <front>
    <journal-meta>
<journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">AMT</journal-id>
<journal-title-group>
<journal-title>Atmospheric Measurement Techniques</journal-title>
<abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">AMT</abbrev-journal-title>
<abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Atmos. Meas. Tech.</abbrev-journal-title>
</journal-title-group>
<issn pub-type="epub">1867-8548</issn>
<publisher><publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
<publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
</publisher>
</journal-meta>

    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/amt-10-179-2017</article-id><title-group><article-title>Radiative characteristics of aerosol during extreme fire event over Siberia
in summer 2012</article-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{Radiative characteristics of aerosol during extreme fire event}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{T.~B. Zhuravleva et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Zhuravleva</surname><given-names>Tatiana B.</given-names></name>
          <email>ztb@iao.ru</email>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Kabanov</surname><given-names>Dmitriy M.</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Nasrtdinov</surname><given-names>Ilmir M.</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Russkova</surname><given-names>Tatiana V.</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Sakerin</surname><given-names>Sergey M.</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2 aff3">
          <name><surname>Smirnov</surname><given-names>Alexander</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8208-1304</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Holben</surname><given-names>Brent N.</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1251-9809</ext-link></contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>Division of Radiative Components of Climate and Optical Diagnostics of the Environment,<?xmltex \hack{\newline}?> V. E. Zuev Institute of Atmospheric Optics SB RAS, Tomsk, Russia</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>Science Systems and Applications, Inc., Lanham, MD, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>3</label><institution>NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD, USA</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Tatiana B. Zhuravleva (ztb@iao.ru)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>13</day><month>January</month><year>2017</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>10</volume>
      <issue>1</issue>
      <fpage>179</fpage><lpage>198</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>19</day><month>July</month><year>2016</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>15</day><month>August</month><year>2016</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>21</day><month>November</month><year>2016</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>28</day><month>November</month><year>2016</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
<license license-type="open-access">
<license-p>This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/">http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/</ext-link></license-p>
</license>
</permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/10/179/2017/amt-10-179-2017.html">This article is available from https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/10/179/2017/amt-10-179-2017.html</self-uri>
<self-uri xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/10/179/2017/amt-10-179-2017.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/10/179/2017/amt-10-179-2017.pdf</self-uri>


      <abstract>
    <p>Microphysical and optical properties of aerosol were studied during a
mega-fire event in summer 2012 over Siberia using ground-based measurements
of spectral solar radiation at the AERONET site in Tomsk and satellite
observations. The data were analysed using multi-year (2003–2013)
measurements of aerosol characteristics under background conditions and for
less intense fires, differing in burning biomass type, stage of fire,
remoteness from observation site, etc. (“ordinary” smoke). In June–August
2012, the average aerosol optical depth (AOD, 500 nm) had been
0.95 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.86, about a factor of 6 larger than background values
(0.16 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.08), and a factor of 2.5 larger than in ordinary smoke. The
AOD values were extremely high on 24–28 July and reached 3–5. A comparison
with satellite observations showed that ground-based measurements in the
region of Tomsk not only reflect the local AOD features, but are also
characteristic for the territory of Western Siberia as a whole. Single
scattering albedo (SSA, 440 nm) in this period ranged from 0.91 to 0.99 with
an average of <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.96 in the entire wavelength range of 440–1020 nm.
The increase in absorptance of aerosol particles (SSA(440 nm) <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.92)
and decrease in SSA with wavelength observed in ordinary smoke agree with
the data from multi-year observations in analogous situations in the boreal
zone of USA and Canada. Volume aerosol size distribution in extreme and
ordinary smoke had a bimodal character with significant prevalence of
fine-mode particles, but in summer 2012 the mean median radius and the width
of the fine-mode distribution somewhat increased. In contrast to data from
multi-year observations, in summer 2012 an increase in the volume
concentration and median radius of the coarse mode was observed with growing
AOD.</p>
    <p>The calculations of the average radiative effects of smoke and background
aerosol are presented. Compared to background conditions and ordinary smoke,
under the extreme smoke conditions the cooling effect of aerosol considerably
intensifies: direct radiative effects (DRE) at the bottom (BOA) and at the
top of the atmosphere (TOA) are <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>13, <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>35, and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>60 W m<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>5, <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>14, and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>35 W m<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> respectively. The maximal values of DRE
were observed on 27 July (AOD(500 nm) <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 3.5), when DRE(BOA) reached
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>150 W m<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, while DRE(TOA) and DRE of the atmosphere were
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>75 W m<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. During the fire event in summer 2012 the direct radiative
effect efficiency varied in range: at the BOA it was
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>80–<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>40 W m<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, at the TOA it was <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>50–<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>20 W m<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and in
the atmosphere it was <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>35–<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>20 W m<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <title>Introduction</title>
      <p>Massive forest and peat fires are the greatest source of aerosol–gas
emissions in the boreal zone of northern Eurasia. In
addition to the anthropogenic factor, biomass ignition is favoured by
dangerous consequences of global climate warming, manifested in the
form of strong temperature, circulation, and hydrologic anomalies (Groisman
et al., 2007). In view of enormous stretches of the boreal zone, fires occur in
some or another region of this vast territory almost every year and
strongly influence the radiation budget, air quality, human health,
biological diversity, glaciology, etc. To understand the effects of biomass
burning on the atmosphere, the physical, chemical, and optical properties of
smoke particles need to be studied and parameterized with reliable
uncertainties.</p>
      <p>Since the 1990s, a large amount of information on characteristics of
carbonaceous particles based on in situ measurements and remote sensing
using ground-, aircraft-, and satellite-based instruments has been
accumulated in hundreds of manuscripts. However, even with the availability
of such a volume of data, the determination of key parameters for estimating
atmospheric effects of biomass burning is not straightforward, primarily
because the smoke properties strongly depend on the set of a variety of
reasons, the most important of which are the type of biomass, the stage of fire,
meteorological conditions at the fire site and in the territory of the
dispersal of smoke plumes, age of smoke, etc. (see e.g. the reviews
Dubovik et al., 2002; Reid et al., 2005a, b; Bond and Bergstrom, 2006;
Moosmüller et al., 2009; Giles et al., 2012; Sayer et
al., 2014; Nikonovas et al., 2015 and bibliography therein). Another problem
is that specific features of individual fires may strongly differ from the
ensemble smoke hazes that are a result of some averaging procedures of
characteristics of numerous fires. This aspect is crucial for studying the
radiation effects of aerosol because, in the framework of regional and
global climate models, the most important issue is the development of model
representations concerning the aged smoke that dominates regional hazes and
affects climate.</p>
      <p>A stable anticyclone had formed in summer 2012 in Siberia under the
conditions of a small-gradient high-pressure baric field (Polyakov et al.,
2014), with the consequences being that forest and peat fires burned in a few
regions of Siberia and encompassed the territory from 1 to 10 million
hectares, by different estimates. Optical and microphysical properties of
near-ground aerosol and specific features of their vertical structure
according to data from in situ measurements, as well as spatio-temporal
evolution of aerosol optical depth and active fires according to results of
satellite monitoring, are presented in (Gorchakov et al., 2014; Kozlov et
al., 2014; Sklyadneva et al., 2015; Vinogradova et al., 2015; Panchenko et
al., 2016). In our work, we discuss the columnar optical and microphysical
aerosol characteristics, retrieved on the basis of ground-based photometric
observations in Tomsk during the extreme fire event in 2012. The second aim
is to compare these results with data from multi-year photometric measurements
and satellite observations over Western Siberia under different atmospheric conditions.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <title>Instrumentation, sites, and methods</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <title>Ground-based measurements</title>
      <p>The measurements, presented in this paper, were made with a CIMEL
Electronique CE 318 sun-sky radiometer, which is a part of AErosol RObotic
NETwork (AERONET, Holben et al., 1998). These measurements were performed in
eastern suburb of Tomsk (Tomsk: 56.48<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N; 85.05<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E) in the
period of 2003–2010; and since 2011, CE 318 operated at the Fonovaya
observatory located 60 km away from the city (Tomsk-22: 56.42<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N;
84.07<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E).</p>
      <p>Direct sun measurements are made in the spectral channels centred at 340,
380, 440, 500, 675, 870, 940, and 1020 nm (bandwidth: 10 nm at full width at
half maximum). These solar extinction data are then used to compute aerosol
optical depth (AOD, <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at each wavelength <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> except
940 nm, which is used to retrieve total columnar content of water vapour
(<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>W</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The spectral aerosol optical depth data have been screened for clouds
following the methodology of Smirnov et al. (2000). In addition to direct
sun measurements, radiation measurements in solar almucantar are made in four channels of
CE 318: 440, 675, 870, and 1020 nm. These data and the inverse automated
algorithm by Dubovik and King (2000) (version 1) with enhancements
(version 2, Holben et al., 2006) were used to retrieve other aerosol
characteristics: volume particle size distribution function <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>ln⁡</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>m<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>m<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>), scattering
phase function, asymmetry factor <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>g</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, complex refractive index
(<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and single scattering albedo
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
      <p>Dubovik et al. (2000) presented uncertainties of retrieval estimates for volume
size distribution, refractive index, and single scattering albedo (SSA). For
Level 2 data at moderate aerosol loading (<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn>440</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.4)
uncertainties for such retrievals are 10–35 % for the binned size
distribution in the intermediate particle size range (<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn>0.1</mml:mn><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>m), 0.04 and 30–50 % for the real and imaginary parts of
the refractive index, and 0.03 for single scattering albedo. For typical
biomass burning models (Dubovik et al., 2002) these uncertainties were
propagated onto the other size distribution parameters (Sayer et al., 2014):
the volume mean radius <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">v</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and standard deviation <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> of
fine (f) and coarse (c) modes are retrieved with errors 0.01 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>m for
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">v</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, 0.2 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>m for <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">v</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
and 0.06 for <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. This led to
uncertainties of <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.015–0.04 in the asymmetry factor (AF) of fine-mode aerosol (larger uncertainties at longer wavelengths) and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.01 in
the coarse-mode aerosol (smaller uncertainties at longer wavelengths).</p>
      <p>An original approach, relying upon ground-based spectral measurements of AOD
and radiance phase functions, was also used in addition to the algorithm by
Dubovik and King (2000) to solve the inverse problem. The first version of
the algorithm, namely, Sun-Sky Measurements for Aerosol ReTrieval (SSMART 1.1
software package), was implemented under the assumption of (a) the sphericity
of aerosol particles and (b) the independence of the complex refractive index
on the wavelength and particle size (Bedareva et al., 2013a). An improved
version of the algorithm (SSMART 1.2), in which the inverse light scattering
problem was solved using the model of a mixture of randomly oriented
polydisperse spheroids, was suggested by Bedareva et al. (2014). In both
versions, the aerosol optical characteristics are derived in two ways:
directly from the spectral sun-sky radiometer measurements
(Way 1) and through the
calculation based on the retrieved particle size distribution and complex
refractive index (Way 2). On the
basis of closed numerical experiments, the accuracy of aerosol retrievals was
investigated in error-free conditions and in the presence of measurement
errors. The SSMART algorithm was tested on conditions of moderate and
increased aerosol turbidity of the atmosphere at Tomsk and Dakar
(14<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, 16<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> W) AERONET sites. It was found that the SSMART and AERONET codes give
consistent estimates of aerosol properties within their retrieval
uncertainties (Bedareva et al., 2013a, b, 2014).</p>
      <p>Measured aerosol optical depth and computed retrieval products were used to
derive additional aerosol properties. Spectral dependence of AOD is
traditionally described by the empirical Ångström formula:
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E1" content-type="numbered"><mml:math display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          The absorption AOD (AAOD) is calculated for each wavelength using the
following equation (Giles et al., 2012):
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E2" content-type="numbered"><mml:math display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">abs</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mfenced open="[" close="]"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          Similarly to Eq. (1), it can be represented as
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E3" content-type="numbered"><mml:math display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">abs</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">abs</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">abs</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula></p>
      <p>Having analysed the radiative characteristics of smoke aerosol in summer 2012
(hereinafter referred to as extreme smoke), we additionally employed
data from multi-year AOD observations at Tomsk and Tomsk-22 sites,
obtained from April to October in 2003–2011 and in 2013. Using the method by
Kabanov and Sakerin (2006), the total data set was divided into two subsets:
(1) background (usual) conditions (998 days) and (2) ordinary smoke conditions (81 days). By “ordinary” smoke we mean smoke conditions
from yearly observed Siberian biomass burning of different types (forest and
peat fires, springtime vegetation burning, smoke from remote sources),
which are shorter and less severe than the extreme smoke conditions. Simultaneous measurements at these sites revealed no statistically
significant AOD differences in the warm period of the year (Sakerin et al.,
2010); therefore, the data merging obtained at the neighbouring sites
(Tomsk and Tomsk-22) can be regarded as correct.</p>
      <p>The smaller data volume underwent a comparative analysis of aerosol optical
and microphysical characteristics obtained from the inverse procedure. The
number of retrievals from the total set of characteristics, including refractive
index, single scattering albedo, volume size distribution function, and
scattering phase function (Level 2, <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn>440</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.4</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, was 65 in the
period of the extreme smoke (15 June–10 August 2012) and 140 under
the conditions of ordinary smoke (April–October 2003–2011, 2013).
Out of 140 ordinary smoke conditions, the maximal number of almucantar
retrievals was 39 (2004), 23 (2006), and 22 (2013). In these data,
results obtained in May 2004 deserve special attention. Dry and warm
weather, predominating in the regions of Novosibirsk and Tomsk (with air
temperatures exceeding 30 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C on separate days), led to
numerous forest fires, provoked by the burning of the previous year's vegetation and
bonfires left unextinguished by fishers and hunters. The number of
retrieved aerosol characteristics varied from 1 (2005) to 15 (2008) for
remaining period of multi-year observations.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <title>Satellite data</title>
      <p>AOD observations at 550 nm (collection 6,
<uri>http://giovanni.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/giovanni/</uri>) from
MODIS (Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer) instruments were used. This MODIS product (TERRA and AQUA
platforms, Level 3 data, i.e. daily averaged within the grid cells
1<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) was obtained using the algorithm from Levy
et al. (2013).</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <title>General characteristics of the large-scale smoke pollution in the summer
of 2012</title>
      <p>In this section, we present the general characteristics of smoke conditions
in 2012 in Tomsk.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <title>Weather–climate features</title>
      <p>In summer 2012, a stable anticyclone had formed over the territory of Siberia
under the conditions of a small-gradient high-pressure baric field (Polyakov
et al., 2014). The consequences were substantial changes in climatically
significant characteristics and, primarily, an appreciable increase in air
temperature, and a decrease in precipitation. Data from observations at Tomsk
meteorological station (WMO_ID <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 29 430, <uri>http://rp5.ru</uri>) indicate
that monthly mean temperature in July was maximal over the last decade, while
the amount of precipitation was close to a minimum (Fig. 1). On the whole,
positive anomalies of temperature reached 1.3–7.2 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C in June–July
in Tomsk (<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 56–61<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N; 75–88<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E), and the amount of
precipitation was 20–30 % of climatic norm. A Selyaninov hydrothermal
wetting coefficient was also used as a characteristic of a wetting (drought)
regime (see e.g. Polyakov et al., 2014); it is defined as the ratio of total
precipitation for a period no shorter than 1 month to the sum of temperatures
for the same period, decreased by a factor of 10. Polyakov et al. (2014)
showed that, over the last 70 years, the atmospheric droughts in Tomsk were
longer than 1 month over 9 summers (the hydrothermal wetting coefficient
varied from 0.6 to 1.4), with the summer of 2012 being the driest.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1"><caption><p>Interannual variations in average July temperatures and the amount
of precipitation according to data from the Tomsk meteorological station, as
well as interannual variations in total carbon monoxide content according to
satellite observations over the territory of Tomsk
(<uri>http://giovanni.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/</uri>).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/10/179/2017/amt-10-179-2017-f01.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>These conditions led to extensive forest fires in Western and
Eastern Siberia (Fig. 2), accompanied by considerable pollution of the
atmosphere by combustion products (smoke particles, carbon and nitrogen
oxides, etc.). Ground-based observations in Tomsk indicate that, in the period
of maximal smoke pollution on 25–28 July 2012, the aerosol number
concentration had been 3000–8500 cm<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (particle diameter of 0.25–30 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>m), exceeding the background values by about a factor of 20, while
carbon monoxide concentrations reached 7.7 ppm (Sklyadneva et al., 2015).
Results of satellite (AIRS/TERRA) monitoring indicate that the July-average
total CO content over the territory of Tomsk region in 2012 increased by
approximately 40 % (Fig. 1) compared to 2005–2015 (except 2012).</p>
      <p>An anticyclone over Western Siberia persisted for almost 2 months (second
half of June to the first ten days of August),
similar to anomalous situations observed over the European territory of
Russia in 1972 and 2010 (Shakina and Ivanova, 2010). After 8–10 August, the blocking
cyclone started to break, heat rapidly weakened, and air temperature returned
to within the climatic norm at all meteorological stations of Tomsk region
(Polyakov et al., 2014).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2"><caption><p>The map of forest fires over Siberia in the period from 19 to
28 July 2012
(<uri>http://lance-modis.eosdis.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/imagery/firemaps.cgi</uri>). The
Tomsk region (56–61<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N; 75–88<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E) is highlighted by a
box.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/10/179/2017/amt-10-179-2017-f02.jpg"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3" specific-use="star"><caption><p><bold>(a)</bold> Daily average AOD, <bold>(b)</bold> single scattering
albedo and <bold>(c)</bold> asymmetry factor time series, and
<bold>(d)</bold> examples of particle size distribution in Tomsk-22 during the
summer period of 2012.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=355.659449pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/10/179/2017/amt-10-179-2017-f03.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <title>Aerosol radiation characteristics</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2.SSS1">
  <title>Ground-based observations</title>
      <p>Figure 3a, b, c shows the time variations in daily average values of AOD, single
scattering albedo <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mn>440</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and asymmetry factor <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>g</mml:mi><mml:mn>440</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the
summer period of 2012.</p>
      <p>The AOD data indicate that there are two waves of high atmospheric smoke
turbidities, from 17 June to 5 July and from 19 July to 6 August. Maximal AOD
values (500 nm) reaching 3–5 were observed on 3–6 July and 25–29 July.</p>
      <p>The single scattering albedos did not go out of the interval <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn>0.93</mml:mn><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mn>440</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.99</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in almost all cases. The asymmetry factor <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>g</mml:mi><mml:mn>440</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> varied
from 0.66 to 0.74, i.e. in the same range as multi-year average values in the
territory of Siberia (Sakerin, 2012; Sakerin et al., 2009, 2014). From the
results presented here it also follows that, on those days when SSA and AF
were retrieved by two methods, the SSMART and AERONET codes gave consistent
estimates of aerosol properties within their retrieval uncertainties.</p>
      <p>The arrival of smoke plumes was also accompanied by a substantial increase in
the mass concentrations of black carbon (<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">BC</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and aerosol
(<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the near-ground atmospheric layer. Kozlov et al. (2014)
showed that the average values of these characteristics at the Fonovaya
observatory in the period from 17 June to 4 August varied in the ranges
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">BC</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.9–10.3 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 103–425 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> given the background levels
of <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.45 and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 20 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> respectively for
10–31 August. Similar to AOD, the maximal concentrations of <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">BC</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> were observed in the period of 25–29 July.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4" specific-use="star"><caption><p>Daytime behaviour of <bold>(a)</bold> direct and <bold>(b)</bold> diffuse
fluxes of solar radiation under the usual conditions (24 July 2011) and
during extreme smoke conditions (28 July 2012) in the region of the Fonovaya
observatory.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=324.361417pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/10/179/2017/amt-10-179-2017-f04.png"/>

          </fig>

      <p>The examples of daily average aerosol volume size distribution <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>ln⁡</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for moderate to high AOD values are
presented in Fig. 3d. A noticeable salient feature of the <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>ln⁡</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> distribution is the increase in the
modal radius and in the width of the fine aerosol fraction during extreme
turbidity on 28 July compared to periods on 27 June and 14 July, when AOD
was much lower.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5" specific-use="star"><caption><p>Spatial distributions of AOD (MODIS collection 6) over Western and
Eastern Siberia during 15 June–10 August 2012. The central part of Western Siberia (55–62<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N; 64–88<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E) and the Tomsk region
(56–61<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N; 75–88<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E) are highlighted by boxes.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/10/179/2017/amt-10-179-2017-f05.jpg"/>

          </fig>

      <p>A consequence of anomalously high atmospheric turbidities was substantial
changes in solar radiation reaching the earth's surface. Figure 4 illustrates
the daytime behaviour of direct and diffuse radiative fluxes, measured with
an MS-53 pyrheliometer and MS-802 pyranometer (0.305–2.8 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>m) under
usual (background) conditions on 24 July 2011 (<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn>500</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.07</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and in
the highly turbid atmosphere on 28 July 2012 (<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn>500</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>2.14</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). Under the
influence of smoke plume, there was a 2- to 4-fold decrease in direct
radiation, which was partially compensated for by an approximately equal
increase in diffuse radiation. The diffuse radiation was considerably larger
(a factor of <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.8) than the direct radiation throughout the day
(28 July 2012).</p><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2.SSS2">
  <title>Satellite observations</title>
      <p>The spatial distributions of AOD at 550 nm over Western Siberia and
partially over Eastern Siberia (60–100<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, 52–70<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E),
averaged over the period of 15 June–10 August 2012, are presented in Fig. 5.
These data show that the territory of the Tomsk region in this period was
subjected to an intensive influence of large-scale smoke pollution and
characterized by high values of AOD.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F6" specific-use="star"><caption><p><bold>(a)</bold> Multi-year averages and standard deviations of spectral
aerosol optical depth, <bold>(b)</bold> monthly averages of <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn>500</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in 2012
compared with the multi-year averages for the period of 2003–2011, 2013, and
<bold>(c)</bold> average spectral AOD dependences in the period of 2012 extreme
smoke compared to multi-year data in July (Tomsk, 2003–2011, 2013, combined
data set of smoke and background conditions). One-sided error bars are used
in order not to overburden the figures.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=412.564961pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/10/179/2017/amt-10-179-2017-f06.png"/>

          </fig>

</sec>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4">
  <title>Discussion of results</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1">
  <title>Temporal and spectral variability of aerosol optical depth</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1.SSS1">
  <title>Ground-based data</title>
      <p>An analysis of multi-year AOD variations in a few regions of Russia according
to data from photometric observations showed that, after eruption products of
Pinatubo volcano had sunk out of the stratosphere, the interannual AOD
variations were small and no statistically significant trend was observed in
the past two decades (Sakerin, 2012; Sakerin et al., 2009; Sakerin and
Kabanov, 2015). For instance, the annually average AOD values (500 nm) in
Tomsk during the period of 2003–2015 (except in 2012) varied from 0.13 to
0.21 (Fig. 6a).</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1" specific-use="star"><caption><p>Average (<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> SD) characteristics of AOD and water vapour content
of the atmosphere during the period of extreme smoke in 2012 compared
to multi-year data for July and ordinary smoke (April–October 2003–2011
and 2013).</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="5">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Characteristics</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col2" nameend="col3" align="center">July, multi-year </oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Extreme smoke</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Ordinary smoke</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Background</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Total data set</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">(17 Jun–6 Aug 2012)</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">conditions</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">(with smoke)</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn>340</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.25 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.11</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.33 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.26</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.37 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.10</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.58 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.28</oasis:entry>
       <?xmltex \interline{[5.690551pt]}?></oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn>500</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.16 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.08</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.21 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.18</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.95 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.86</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.36 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.18</oasis:entry>
       <?xmltex \interline{[5.690551pt]}?></oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn>870</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.07 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.04</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.09 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.08</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.40 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.40</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.15 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.09</oasis:entry>
       <?xmltex \interline{[5.690551pt]}?></oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn>440</mml:mn><mml:mtext>–</mml:mtext><mml:mn>870</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn>340</mml:mn><mml:mtext>–</mml:mtext><mml:mn>500</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:mn>1.48</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.29</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>1.48</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.22</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:mn>1.49</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.28</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>1.44</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.22</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:mn>1.58</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.21</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>1.24</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.34</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:mn>1.59</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.22</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>1.43</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.25</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       <?xmltex \interline{[5.690551pt]}?></oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn>440</mml:mn><mml:mtext>–</mml:mtext><mml:mn>870</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn>340</mml:mn><mml:mtext>–</mml:mtext><mml:mn>500</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:mn>0.058</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.037</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>0.049</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.04</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:mn>0.074</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.064</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>0.072</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.092</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:mn>0.33</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.35</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>0.479</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.611</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:mn>0.12</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.071</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>0.12</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.081</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       <?xmltex \interline{[5.690551pt]}?></oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi>W</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, g cm<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">2.09 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.56</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2.16 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.57</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">2.19 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.58</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.93 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.79</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p>Under the influence of massive forest fires in Siberia during summer 2012,
the annual AOD value exceeded the multi-year norm by almost a factor of 2 and
became the highest over the entire period of photometric observations in
Tomsk (since 1992) (Sakerin and Kabanov, 2015). Average summertime AOD values
changed even more: in particular, the average value of <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn>500</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in July
increased by a factor of 4.5 compared to multi-year data (Fig. 6b). Even if
we omit anomalously high turbidities (<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn>500</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, which may be partly
due to clouds that are invisible through haze, the average AOD values in
summer months of 2012 are outside the values defined when taking into account standard
deviations (SDs).</p>
      <p>More detailed characteristics of atmospheric AOD for three wavelengths in UV,
visible, and near-infrared ranges during the extreme smoke in
comparison with the multi-year average data for July are presented in
Table 1. Also given are the average characteristics for various conditions of
ordinary smoke, which are observed every year in Siberia in the warm period.
The comparison showed (see also Fig. 6c) that AOD exceeds the background
values by a factor of 5.5–6 in the entire spectral range during an extreme
fire event in 2012. In absolute value, AOD increased more significantly in
the shortwave part of spectrum, i.e. due to fine aerosol fraction. The slight
increase in the Ångström exponent <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn>440</mml:mn><mml:mtext>–</mml:mtext><mml:mn>870</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, which
depends mainly on the interrelation between contributions of fine and coarse
aerosols to AOD, also indicates that small particles predominate in smoke
aerosol. Despite the temperature, aerosol, and other anomalies, the total
water vapour content of the atmosphere in the period of strong fires differed
little from the multi-year norm.</p>
      <p>Average AOD characteristics in ordinary smoke incorporate data for fires of
different types and distances from the region of measurements and, as such,
occupy an intermediate position between background conditions and extreme
smoke. Independent of their intensity, a common feature of all smoke is an
identical exponent <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, which characterizes a higher content of fine
aerosol.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F7" specific-use="star"><caption><p><bold>(a)</bold> Time series of computed average fine- and coarse-mode
AOD, <bold>(b)</bold> fine-mode fraction of AOD as a function of AOD (500 nm)
for the Tomsk data during extreme fires in 2012.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=369.885827pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/10/179/2017/amt-10-179-2017-f07.png"/>

          </fig>

      <p>It is noteworthy that the multi-year average values of
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn>440</mml:mn><mml:mtext>–</mml:mtext><mml:mn>870</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and AOD in the near-infrared range, calculated for background
conditions and total data set, differ little (see columns 2 and 3 in
Table 1), primarily because of relatively small number (about 8 %) of
smoke conditions in the total data set.</p>
      <p>Under the assumption that aerosol size distributions are bimodal, O'Neil et
al. (2001, 2003) have developed a spectral deconvolution algorithm (SDA) to
infer the component fine- and coarse-mode optical depths from the spectral
dependence of AOD. In June–August 2012, the coarse-mode <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn>500</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is less than fine-mode <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn>500</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and is
typically low (only 3 days show that <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn>500</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.2),
whereas <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn>500</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is high and exhibits very large day-to-day
variability (Fig. 7a). The parameter <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">η</mml:mi><mml:mn>500</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, which characterizes the
contribution of fine fraction to AOD at 500 nm, exceeded 0.7 and approached
0.9 at <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn>500</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (Fig. 7b). These results are consistent with
earlier published data, according to which the content of fine aerosol
fraction predominately increases during vegetation burning in the absence of
any other significant sources (Reid et al., 2005b; Eck et al., 2009; Giles et
al., 2012).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1.SSS2">
  <title>Analysis of satellite observations</title>
      <p>The analysis of spatio-temporal AOD variations was confined to the
consideration of the central part of Western Siberia. A salient feature of
this territory is a uniform landscape (without mountainous terrain) and the
absence of large sources of anthropogenic pollution. Under usual conditions,
the AOD values, retrieved from satellite observations, are characterized by
small (background) values and by quite a uniform spatial distribution
(Zhuravleva et al., 2009; Sakerin, 2012).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F8" specific-use="star"><caption><p>Spatial AOD distribution over the central part of Western
Siberia according to MODIS data for summer 2012: <bold>(a)</bold> 10–14 July,
<bold>(b)</bold> 24–28 July.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=312.980315pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/10/179/2017/amt-10-179-2017-f08.jpg"/>

          </fig>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T2" specific-use="star"><caption><p>Average (<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> SD), minimal, and maximal values of AOD (550 nm) in
different periods of 2012 Siberian fires according to data from ground-based
and satellite measurements over the central part of Western Siberia.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="6">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>  
         <oasis:entry namest="col2" nameend="col3" align="center">Satellite data </oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>  
         <oasis:entry namest="col5" nameend="col6" align="center">Ground-based observations </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>  
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col2"/>  
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col3"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>  
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col5" nameend="col6" align="center">(Tomsk-22) </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Period</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Average <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> SD</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">min/max</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Average <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> SD</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">min/max</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">6–10 June</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.23 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.08</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.04/0.41</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.19  <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.07</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.10/0.27</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">1–4 July</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1.40 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.62</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.18/3.25</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.51 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.05</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.85/2.72</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">10–14 July</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.28 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.11</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.08/0.76</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.22 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.11</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.11/0.35</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">24–28 July</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1.19 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.08</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.00/3.63</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2.74 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.07</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1.32/3.83</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p>Since the formation and evolution of smoke plumes are strongly affected by
large-scale atmospheric dynamics, spatial distributions of AOD may
substantially change from one day to another. The main specific features of
variations can be identified through the analysis of AOD fields, averaged for
a few 5-day periods, selected by taking into account the ground-based
observations (Fig. 3a). On 6–10 June there were background conditions
(before beginning of forest fires), on 1–5 and 24–28 July there were
maximal smoke turbidities, and on 10–14 July there were relatively low AOD
values observed between two turbidity maxima. Hereinafter, for calculations
of the AOD values averaged over the selected time interval (5 days), we used
the daily satellite product.</p>
      <p>Spatial AOD distributions, presented in Fig. 8, show that the Tomsk-22
observation site was either at the centre (Fig. 8b) or on the periphery of
smoke plumes (Fig. 8a) in different periods of time. The periods of small
turbidities of the atmosphere (on 6–10 June and 10–14 July) were
characterized by quite a uniform AOD distribution, and the largest spatial
inhomogeneities and values <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn>550</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> were observed over the central
part of Western Siberia on 24–28 July (Fig. 8 and Table 2).</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T3" specific-use="star"><caption><p>Optical and microphysical properties of biomass burning aerosol
retrieved from AERONET Tomsk sites (Tomsk, Tomsk-22).</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="3">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="left"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Aerosol characteristics</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Extreme smoke 2012</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Ordinary smoke 2003–2011, 2013</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (440/675/870/1020)</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1.469/1.486/1.503/1.499</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.454/1.471/1.485/1.499</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (440/675/870/1020), (<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn>10</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.673/0.538/0.501/0.488</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.126/1.005/1.057/1.06</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (440/675/870/1020)</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.96/0.96/0.95/0.95</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.92/0.91/0.89/0.88</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi>g</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (440/675/870/1020)</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.68/0.59/0.54/0.51</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.68/0.59/0.55/0.54</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">v</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>m), <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>m)</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.181 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.02; 0.507 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.058</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.161 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.030; 0.422 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.058</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">v</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.166</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.017</mml:mn><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn>440</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.47</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">v</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.153</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.011</mml:mn><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn>440</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.13</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">v</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>m), <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>m)</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">3.321 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.365; 0.703 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.056</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2.911 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.665; 0.694 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.077</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">v</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>2.928</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.44</mml:mn><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn>440</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.66</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">v</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>3.10</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.249</mml:mn><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn>440</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.13</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">v</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>m<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>m<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.11 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.065</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.097 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.042</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">v</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.009</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.114</mml:mn><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn>440</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.96</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">v</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.017</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.106</mml:mn><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn>440</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.87</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">v</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>m<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>m<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.025 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.012</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.062 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.04</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">v</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.013</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.014</mml:mn><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn>440</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.62</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">v</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.036</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.035</mml:mn><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn>440</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.24</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p>The statistical characteristics in Table 2 were calculated using measurements
from AQUA and TERRA platforms (MODIS collection 6,
<uri>http://giovanni.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/giovanni</uri>). These data suggest that,
for three out of four periods considered here, the average AOD values at the
Tomsk-22 site are close to spatio-temporal averages across the entire
territory of Western Siberia: the difference between satellite and
ground-based data is much less than between the standard deviations, except
in the period of 24–28 July, when the average AOD at Tomsk-22 site was
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn>550</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>2.74</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and exceeded the average value for Western Siberia (MODIS)
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn>550</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>1.06</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. At the same time, the satellite data in the
(1<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) region of Tomsk-22 site agree well with
the results of photometric observations. Thus, the results of ground-based
measurements in the region of Tomsk-22 can be considered to reflect not only
the local AOD features, but also the regularities of variations for the
entire territory of Western Siberia.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS2">
  <title>Retrieval results</title>
      <p>We will compare the retrievals of aerosol optical and microphysical
characteristics under the conditions of Siberian fires in 2012 against the
average data for ordinary smoke (Table 3). Since the AOD dependence of
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">v</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">v</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for fine- and coarse-mode aerosols has
previously been noted for a wide variety of aerosol types (including biomass
burning aerosol; Dubovik et al., 2002; Sayer et al., 2014), Table 3 also
presents the resulting linear regression relationships between the pairs
(<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">v</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn>440</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
(<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">v</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn>440</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, as well as the
corresponding linear correlation coefficient <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F9" specific-use="star"><caption><p><bold>(a)</bold> Fine-mode volume concentration and <bold>(b)</bold> median
radius vs. AOD(440 nm) in Tomsk.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=369.885827pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/10/179/2017/amt-10-179-2017-f09.png"/>

        </fig>

<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS2.SSS1">
  <title>Volume size distributions</title>
      <p>During the extreme smoke, the average values of volume median radii for fine
and coarse fractions were <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">v</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.18</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>m and
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">v</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>3.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>m, a little larger than these
characteristics for ordinary smoke, equalling 0.16 and 2.9 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>m
respectively (Table 3). The <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">v</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> value, in both cases,
was in the range of values obtained for biomass burning in other regions of
the globe (Reid et al., 2005a, b; Eck et al., 2009; Chubarova et al., 2012),
as well as in the range of measurements for aged smoke, performed using an
optical particle counter (0.1–3 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>m) and a differential mobility
particle sizer (0.01–0.6 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>m) in the boreal zones of Europe and
North America (Reid et al., 2005a). As in Siberia, a wider size distribution
of fine particles than for ordinary smoke (Table 3; Fig. 3d) was also noted
by other authors for severe fires in the boreal zone of Alaska (Bonanza
Creek, 2004–2005, Eck et al., 2009).</p>
      <p>The noteworthy salient features of fine aerosol fraction during summer 2012
are as follows. The contribution of fine fraction to the total volume
(<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">v</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">v</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">t</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, on average,
increased to <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn>0.8</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.065</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> compared to the value <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn>0.65</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.21</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> according to
multi-year observations. Volume concentrations and volume median radii of the
fine mode are plotted in Fig. 9a as functions of AOD at 440 nm. This figure
shows that there is a general increase in volume concentrations
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">v</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> as <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn>440</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> increases (Fig. 9a). The median
radius of the fine mode increased from about 0.15 to 0.22 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>m as
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn>440</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> changed from 0.4 to 1.5 and larger (Fig. 9b). The smoke
particles have large radii, and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">v</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn>440</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
are closely correlated, possibly because of a high concentration of aerosol,
which leads to greater coagulation, condensation, and gas-to-particle
conversion (Reid et al., 1998, 2005a; Eck et al., 2009). From this figure it
also follows that the interrelation between median radius of fine aerosol
fraction and AOD at 440 nm in ordinary smoke is much less pronounced,
primarily because of the variety of properties of biomass burning aerosol
combined in this data set. For instance, in May 2004, the median radius was
relatively small (<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">v</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.14 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>m) and did
not practically change with varying <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn>440</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Most probably, this was
because the burning of the previous year's vegetation was one of the sources
of smoke particles in this period of time. An analogous feature was also
observed during African savanna fires (Dubovik et al., 2002).</p>
      <p>In contrast to data from multi-year observations, in summer 2012 an increase
in the volume concentration and median radius of the coarse mode was observed
with growing AOD. Most probably, soil particles, having been suspended by
saltation of surface dust driven by fire generated winds, were also present
during this period of time in the composition of coarse mode in addition to
carbon aggregates.</p>
      <p>Results of retrieval of disperse composition of fine-mode aerosol in the
atmospheric column agree with measurements in the near-ground layer (Kozlov
et al., 2014). Data from spectral-polarization nephelometric measurements
were used to show that the volume median radius of the fine mode under the
conditions of weak turbidity of the atmosphere (10–13 July 2012) increased
from 0.1 to 0.4–0.5 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>m when smoke plumes intruded into the region
of observations (25–29 July 2012).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS2.SSS2">
  <title>Refractive index</title>
      <p>Average values of the real and imaginary parts of the refractive index in
extreme and ordinary smoke are presented in Table 3. In ordinary smoke, the
imaginary part of the refractive index <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> changes weakly
with increasing wavelength and is approximately 0.01. However, the imaginary
refractive index during smoke pollution in 2012 shows low values and
relatively large decrease in <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> as the wavelength grows
from 440 to 675 nm. The <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> variations in the wavelength
interval of 675–1020 nm are not so large.</p>
      <p>The quantitative differences and specific features of spectral dependence of
the imaginary refractive indices stem from different properties of
atmospheric carbonaceous particles, i.e. black carbon (BC) and organic
aerosol (OA). Recent studies showed that OA components can contribute
substantially to light absorption. In contrast to BC, which absorbs light
throughout the UV-visible spectrum, an OA component such as brown carbon
(BrC) absorbs mostly at the ultraviolet wavelengths and less significantly in
the visible spectral range (Kirchstetter et al., 2004; Bergstrom et al.,
2007; Chen and Bond, 2010; Zhong and Jang, 2014; Chakrabarty et al., 2016).
The majority of BrC is emitted to the atmosphere through low temperature,
incomplete combustion of biomass, bio- and fossil fuel (Bond, 2001;
Kirchstetter et al., 2004; Bergstrom et al., 2007; Lewis et al., 2008; Chen
and Bond, 2010; Zhong and Jang, 2014).</p>
      <p>The absorption efficiency and spectral dependence vary depending on the type
of BrC origin. Lu et al. (2015) reviewed available measurements (laboratory
and field observations) of light-absorbing primary organic aerosols, and
quantify the wavelength-dependent imaginary refractive indices (<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">OA</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for the bulk primary OA emitted from biomass/biofuel,
lignite, propane, and oil combustion sources. Based on generalized
information, they suggested parameterizing <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">OA</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of
biomass/biofuel combustion sources as a function of BC-to-OA ratio. Analysis
of imaginary refractive indices showed the stronger wavelength-dependent
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">OA</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for lower BC-to-OA ratio conditions (smoldering
combustion), while the greater <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">OA</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values at <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> &gt; 350 nm are observed for higher BC-to-OA ratio (flaming
combustion).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F10"><caption><p>Ultraviolet aerosol index
(<uri>http://giovanni.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/giovanni</uri>/) near Tomsk
(55–57<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, 83–85<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E) and AOD according to data from
ground-based measurements (<uri>http://aeronet.gsfc.nasa.gov</uri>).</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=221.931496pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/10/179/2017/amt-10-179-2017-f10.png"/>

          </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F11" specific-use="star"><caption><p><bold>(a)</bold> Examples of spectral dependence of single scattering
albedo (Dubovik and King, 2000), and diurnally averaged spectral variations
of SSMART- and AERONET-derived <bold>(b)</bold> single scattering albedo and
<bold>(c)</bold> asymmetry factor for 28 July 2012; error bars indicate the
standard deviations.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=455.244094pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/10/179/2017/amt-10-179-2017-f11.png"/>

          </fig>

      <p>These results allow us to hypothesize that the reason for the <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> decrease in the interval of 440–675 nm during summer 2012 may
be due to the contribution of compounds absorbing radiation in UV wavelength
region (brown carbon). To confirm this hypothesis, we considered
OMI (Ozone Monitoring Instrument) observations of the ultraviolet
aerosol index (UVAI), the value of which is sensitive to aerosol absorption
in the ultraviolet wavelength region (Torres et al., 1998; Jethva and Torres,
2011; Hammer et al., 2016). Satellite data indicate that UVAI values were
quite high during the smoke pollution in 2012, and exceeded 4–5 on
individual days, thus explaining the above-mentioned <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
decrease from UV to the visible spectral region (Fig. 10).</p>
      <p>The relatively constant imaginary refractive index in ordinary smoke is due
to averaging over many situations and differs, in particular, in the type of
burning biomass (peat, forest, grass). For instance, in May 2004, when the
characteristics of smoke aerosol were quite homogeneous, the average spectral
behaviour of <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was weakly manifested, with
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.013</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the interval of 440–1020 nm. At the
same time, the UVAI value did not exceed 1.2
(<uri>http://giovanni.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/giovanni/</uri>), suggesting that BC was
seemingly the main absorbing substance in this period of time.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS2.SSS3">
  <title>Single scattering albedo and asymmetry factor</title>
      <p>The main results, presented in this section, were obtained using the
algorithm from Dubovik and King (2000). At the same time, we present the SSA
and AF values, retrieved using our SSMART algorithm in separate atmospheric
conditions. The SSA and AF values were retrieved directly from the data from
AOD and sky radiance measurements through solution of radiative transfer
equation (Way 1, Bedareva et al.,
2013a, 2014).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS2.SSSx1" specific-use="unnumbered">
  <title>Cases of study</title>
      <p>Detailed analysis of spectral SSA in 2012 has revealed two types of
dependence: monotonically decreasing and monotonically increasing <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> with growing wavelength (Fig. 11a).</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T4" specific-use="star"><caption><p>Single scattering albedo and asymmetry factor, retrieved using
the AERONET algorithm and SSMART software package.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="10">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="8" colname="col8" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="9" colname="col9" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="10" colname="col10" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">  
         <oasis:entry namest="col1" nameend="col10" align="center">Single scattering albedo </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>  
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col3" nameend="col6" align="center" colsep="1">AERONET </oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col7" nameend="col10" align="center">SSMART </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Date</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Time</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">440</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">675</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">870</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1020</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">440</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">675</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">870</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">1020</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">28 Jul</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">17:03</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.940</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.975</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.981</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.981</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.940</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.976</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.998</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">0.999</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">1 Aug</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">18:58</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.996</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.996</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.995</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.994</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.972</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">1.0</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">1.0</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">1.0</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">4 Aug</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">09:26</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.941</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.924</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.906</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.892</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.956</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.947</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.934</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">0.911</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">  
         <oasis:entry namest="col1" nameend="col10" align="center">Asymmetry factor </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>  
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col3" nameend="col6" align="center" colsep="1">AERONET </oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col7" nameend="col10" align="center">SSMART </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Date</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Time</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">440</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">675</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">870</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1020</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">440</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">675</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">870</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">1020</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">28 Jul</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">17:03</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.682</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.625</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.581</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.554</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.663</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.618</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.552</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">0.513</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">1 Aug</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">18:58</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.699</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.619</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.568</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.548</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.713</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.631</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.545</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">0.515</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">4 Aug</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">09:26</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.659</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.585</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.545</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.529</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.659</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.568</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.518</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">0.488</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p>The main group of SSA data (45 cases out of 65) is characterized by a weakly
decreasing spectral dependence: the range of the differences <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mn>440</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mn>1020</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> did not exceed 0.03. Practically
all sets of retrieved SSA of this type lie between curves 2 (<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mn>440</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.926</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and 3 (<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mn>440</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.996</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. In other cases, the <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> decrease with growing wavelength is larger, but does not exceed 0.06
(curve 4, Fig. 11a). We note that the values of the imaginary part of the
refractive index are <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.006 for this subset of data. In a few (14 out
of 65) situations with high atmospheric turbidities (<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn>440</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.9</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, there was an increase in SSA with growing wavelength (curve 1 in
Fig. 11a). The monotonic increase in <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> agrees with a
decrease in <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (on average, from 0.01 at 440 nm to
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.006 at 675 nm), presumably due to additional absorption of brown
carbon in the UV wavelength region.</p>
      <p>We will compare the single scattering albedo and asymmetry factor, retrieved
using AERONET and SSMART algorithms (Table 4, Fig. 11b, c). Table 4 presents
the <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>g</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values for three individual
atmospheric conditions. These data illustrate that both approaches ensure a
consistent spectral behaviour of SSA: the increase (28 July) and decrease
(4 August) of the single scattering albedo with growing wavelength, as well
as a near-neutral spectral dependence of SSA (1 August). The difference in
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values in these examples does not exceed 0.03 and is
within the uncertainty of retrieval estimates of both algorithms. The
difference in asymmetry factor is <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.03, increasing to 0.05 at
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 1020 nm.</p>
      <p>The reason for the differences in the optical characteristics may be the
following circumstances. When measurements of solar radiation in solar
almucantar are used in the solution of the inverse problem with the help of
the SSMART algorithm (Way 1), the
scattering phase function of aerosol particles <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>g</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> can be
retrieved only in the region of scattering angles <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
(<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the solar zenith angle); while in the remaining angular
range the values of aerosol scattering phase function are extrapolated. The
extrapolation procedure may lead to relatively large (larger than
20–30 %) uncertainties of <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>g</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> retrieval for <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> &gt; 2<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and may influence the accuracy of the
retrieval of the asymmetry factor and, to a lesser degree, the single
scattering albedo. We discussed these issues in our earlier work (Bedareva
and Zhuravleva, 2011). Another reason for the differences may be the fact
that the SSMART algorithm retrieves the optical characteristics for each
spectral channel singly, rather than calculating them for all channels
simultaneously on the basis of retrieved complex refractive index and
particle size spectrum, as the AERONET algorithm makes. Therefore, the
results of the solution of the inverse problem with the use of the algorithm
from Dubovik and King (2000) are characterized by more consistent spectral
dependence of SSA and AF compared to the SSMART software package.</p>
      <p>We will consider the results of retrieval of single scattering albedo and
asymmetry factor from 28 July 2012 (Fig. 11b, c). The solutions of the
inverse problem, based on application of two independent approaches, agree
not only qualitatively but also quantitatively. At the same time, the daily
average SSA (AF) values, retrieved using the SSMART algorithm, are
overestimated (underestimated) relative to AERONET data by about 0.01, except
for <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 1020 nm, when the differences increase to 0.02 and 0.04
respectively.</p>
      <p>The consistency of results can be considered as an indirect evidence that the
spectral SSA dependence, atypical for the smoke aerosol, is not so much due
to methodic features of retrieval procedures, but to specific features of
smoke aerosol over the AERONET site in Tomsk on 28 July (possibly, chemical
composition and particle sizes). In Sect. 4.2.2 we hypothesized that the
increased absorption by aerosol particles in the ultraviolet spectral range
may be due to the presence of brown carbon; indeed, the largest value
UVAI <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 4–6 over the entire period of extreme smoke was observed on
26–28 July (Fig. 10). However, the limited data set considered in this work
still does not allow us to explain the observed spectral behaviour of SSA. We
can now only state that the increase in the single scattering albedo with
growing wavelength was observed not only in Tomsk, but also in certain
situations during severe fires in Moscow during 2010 and in Alaska during
2004 (<uri>http://aeronet.gsfc.nasa.gov</uri>). In addition, the laboratory
analysis showed that brown carbon, with a negligible amount of black carbon,
predominated in the composition of aerosol particles emitted from the burning
of Alaskan and Siberian peatlands (Chakrabarty et al., 2016). A more detailed
analysis of the spectral dependence of SSA of smoke aerosol under the
conditions of extraordinary fires will be the subject of further studies.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F12" specific-use="star"><caption><p>Average <bold>(a)</bold> SSA and <bold>(b)</bold> AF for different periods
and regions of observations and <bold>(c)</bold> average spectral absorption
aerosol optical depth for 2012 extreme and ordinary smoke; the error
bars indicate the standard deviations. One-sided error bars are used in order
not to overburden the figures.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=455.244094pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/10/179/2017/amt-10-179-2017-f12.png"/>

          </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS2.SSSx2" specific-use="unnumbered">
  <title>Comparison of Tomsk extreme and ordinary smoke to other
boreal biomass burning sites</title>
      <p>On the whole, the period of strong fires in Tomsk was characterized by weak
spectral variations in SSA, the average being <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.96, consistent with
previous results in other regions of the Eurasian boreal zone, e.g. in Moscow
(2002 and 2010) and Alaska (2004–2005), where the smoldering phase prevailed
over the flaming fire phase (Eck et al., 2009; Chubarova et al., 2011; Sayer
et al., 2014) (Fig. 12a). The relatively constant spectral single scattering
albedo during extreme smoke in 2012 may be also partly due to growth of
aerosol particle sizes (Sect. 4.2.1, Table 3; see also Eck et al., 2009).</p>
      <p>The SSA retrievals in the atmospheric column satisfactorily agree with data
in the ground-layer (Kozlov et al., 2014), according to which the single
scattering albedos in the visible range (<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 510 nm) were in the
interval of 0.95–0.98. At the same time, the imaginary and real parts of the
complex refractive index of dry base of substance varied in the ranges of
0.01–0.02 and 1.36–1.47 respectively.</p>
      <p>The overwhelming majority of results of individual retrievals in ordinary
smoke also showed a monotonic SSA decrease with the increasing wavelength,
with the opposite dependence being observed in only 6 cases out of 140.
However, in contrast to extreme smoke, the spectral SSA behaviour was more
pronounced: <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> reached 0.06–0.18 in 18 % of
cases; <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was 0.03–0.06 in 40 % of cases, and
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was less than 0.03 in 34 % of cases.</p>
      <p>The average single scattering albedos in ordinary smoke, presented in
Fig. 12a, turned out to be about 0.02 lower than those observed in the boreal
forests of USA and Canada (Dubovik et al., 2002). These differences may be
due to both methodic and physical factors. Methodic-type differences might
stem from different methods for selecting the smoke conditions. The specific
features of the spectral dependence of SSA can also be explained by different
combinations of the composition and age of smoke aerosol, which were recorded
at AERONET observation sites. This is clearly illustrated by results obtained
in May 2004 in Tomsk (Fig. 12a). Lower values and pronounced spectral
variations of SSA (a decrease from 0.9 to 0.85) may be due to the previous
year's grass and agricultural vegetation combustion products present in the
smoke composition, as well as due to a flaming phase of combustion which
predominated in that period of time. Close values and analogous spectral
dependence of single scattering albedo were also noted in African savanna
fires in Zambia (Dubovik et al., 2002; Sayer et al., 2014).</p>
      <p>Aerosol absorption optical depth <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">abs</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and absorption
Ångström exponent <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">abs</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, computed for the spectral
interval of 440–870 nm (Sect. 2), were considered as other characteristics
of absorbing properties of aerosol particles.</p>
      <p>Data presented in Fig. 12c show that the average values of <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">abs</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> during strong fires in 2012 were about a factor of
1.5–2 smaller than for ordinary smoke. In addition, there are differences in
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">abs</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, which are 1.6 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.44 for extreme smoke and
1.2 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.5 for ordinary smoke.</p>
      <p>The AAE values can be used as an indicator of aerosol composition (Andreae
and Gelencsér, 2006; Russell et al., 2010; Schuster et al., 2016). The
relatively low values <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">abs</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 1 are typical for aerosol
absorption largely dominated by black or light absorbing carbon, while larger
values suggest absorption by different material organic carbon (Bergstrom et
al., 2002, 2007; Kirchstetter et al., 2004; Lewis et al., 2008; Russell et
al., 2010; Schuster et al., 2016). The <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">abs</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> increase in
the 2012 fires may indicate that, on average, smoke absorption possibly
shifted from domination by black carbon in ordinary smoke to an increasing
influence of absorption by other materials, most likely organic carbon (see
also Fig. 10).</p>
      <p>In contrast to single scattering albedo, the spectral asymmetry factor
differs insignificantly among the 2012 fires, ordinary smoke, and May
2004 smoke (Table 3, Fig. 12b).</p>
</sec>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5">
  <title>Radiative effects of smoke aerosol</title>
      <p>The radiative effects of smoke aerosol were accounted for by calculating the
transmittance (<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>), albedo (<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi>A</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>), and absorptance of the atmosphere
(ABS<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ATM</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and underlying surface (ABS<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SUR</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>:

              <disp-formula specific-use="align" content-type="numbered"><mml:math display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>100</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">%</mml:mi><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">BOA</mml:mi><mml:mo>↓</mml:mo></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">TOA</mml:mi><mml:mo>↓</mml:mo></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>100</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">%</mml:mi><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">TOA</mml:mi><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">TOA</mml:mi><mml:mo>↓</mml:mo></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ABS</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ATM</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>100</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">%</mml:mi><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">TOA</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">net</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">BOA</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">net</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">TOA</mml:mi><mml:mo>↓</mml:mo></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E4"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ABS</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SUR</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>100</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">%</mml:mi><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">BOA</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">net</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">TOA</mml:mi><mml:mo>↓</mml:mo></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>

          Here, <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">BOA</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">TOA</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>↓</mml:mo><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are
broadband solar radiative fluxes in the interval of (0.2–5 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>m),
the symbols <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>↓</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are used to denote the downward and
upward radiation at the TOA and BOA. Radiative influxes <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">net</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at
different levels are calculated as follows.

              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E5" content-type="numbered"><mml:math display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">BOA</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">TOA</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">net</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">BOA</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">TOA</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mo>↓</mml:mo></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">BOA</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">TOA</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

        The results of radiative flux simulation were used to calculate the direct
radiative effect (DRE) at TOA and BOA and in atmospheric column:

              <disp-formula specific-use="align" content-type="numbered"><mml:math display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Φ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">TOA</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">BOA</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">TOA</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">BOA</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">net</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">TOA</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">BOA</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">net</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">R</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E6"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Φ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ATM</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Φ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">TOA</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Φ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">BOA</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>

          where superscript “a” and “R” correspond to the calculations in
aerosol-molecular atmosphere and in the aerosol-free atmosphere, with only
molecular (Rayleigh) scattering and absorption taken into consideration. The
negative and positive DRE values are associated with an aerosol cooling and
warming, both at TOA and BOA. In addition to the proper DRE, we also
considered the radiative effect efficiency:

              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E7" content-type="numbered"><mml:math display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Φ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">TOA</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">BOA</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">e</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Φ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">TOA</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">BOA</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn>550</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Φ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ATM</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">e</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Φ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ATM</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn>550</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

        which characterizes the rate at which the atmosphere is forced per unit of
AOD at 550 nm. The <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Φ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">e</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> value depends on reflective properties
of underlying surface, size distribution of aerosol particles, and their
chemical composition. It also depends on AOD to some extent (due to the
multiple scattering effects).</p><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
<sec id="Ch1.S5.SS1">
  <title>Model and input data</title>
      <p>The broadband fluxes of the solar radiation in the molecular-aerosol
plane-parallel atmosphere were calculated using the algorithm from the Monte
Carlo method, which we developed earlier (Zhuravleva et al., 2009). The
radiative fluxes at a given atmospheric level <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi>z</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> are represented as a sum of
fluxes in separate spectral intervals:

                <disp-formula id="Ch1.E8" content-type="numbered"><mml:math display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>↓</mml:mo><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>z</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:munderover><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∑</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mi>M</mml:mi></mml:munderover><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>↓</mml:mo><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>z</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

          where <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>31</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the number of bands <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">…</mml:mi><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>m, <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mi>M</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>5.0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>m. Within each subinterval,
the optical characteristics of aerosol and molecular scattering coefficient
are assumed to be constant and equal to their values in the middle of the
subinterval. The transmission function is approximated by a finite
exponential series (k-distribution method). The algorithm intrinsically takes
into account the multiple scattering, absorption by aerosol and molecular
particles, as well as the reflection of incident radiation from the
underlying surface according to Lambert's law. The comparisons showed that
the numerical simulation results are in a satisfactory agreement with results
of line-by-line calculations and data from field measurements (Tvorogov et
al., 2008; Zhuravleva et al., 2009, 2014).</p>
      <p>The spectral AOD (340–1020 nm), the water vapour content, the
column-integrated single scattering albedo, and the asymmetry parameter taken
from AERONET were used as the main input parameters of the algorithm under
the smoke conditions. In the interval of 440–1020 nm, the spectral values
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>g</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> have been linearly interpolated from
the values of SSA and AF retrieved at the four AERONET inversion wavelengths,
while for <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo><mml:mn>440</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nm and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mn>1020</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nm they have been
considered constant, similar to García et al. (2012) and Panchenko et
al. (2012). Under the background conditions, Level-2.0 retrieval products for
the single scattering albedo and asymmetry factor, obtained on the basis of
standard AERONET algorithm, are not available due to low AOD values
(<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn>550</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.13</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> according to data from multi-year ground-based
measurements under summer conditions, Sakerin et al., 2009; Sakerin and
Kabanov, 2015). Therefore, the OPAC model (averaged continental aerosol,
relative air humidity is 70 %; Hess et al., 1998) was used to simulate
the radiative characteristics under the conditions of the weakly turbid
atmosphere.</p>
      <p>As in Panchenko et al. (2012), the aerosol optical depth was assumed to be
constant outside the wavelength interval of 340–1020 nm: <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>(<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo><mml:mn>340</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nm) <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn>340</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>(<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mn>1020</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nm) <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn>1020</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Such an approach was chosen for the
following reasons. The contribution of solar radiation, incoming at TOA in
the interval of 200–340 nm, is about 3.5 %; therefore, in the absence
of measurements, the specified character of spectral dependence of AOD cannot
significantly influence the simulation results. Based on the data from
multi-year ground-based observations in Siberia, Sakerin and Kabanov (2007)
showed that AOD hardly varies in the interval <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> &gt; 1000 nm; therefore, we can assume that <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>(<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> &gt; 1000 nm) <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>(<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 1000 nm).</p>
      <p>The molecular absorption coefficients were calculated on the basis of the
HITRAN2008 database and MT_CKD v.2.4 continuum model
(<uri>http://rtweb.aer.com/continuum_frame.html</uri>) using a regional model of
temperature, pressure, and water vapour concentration profiles (Komarov and
Lomakina, 2008) and taking into account the absorption by all the atmospheric
gases which were presented in the AFGL meteorological model (Anderson et al.,
1986). The profiles of ozone O<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and carbon dioxide CO<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> were
specified taking into consideration the data from multi-year observations,
obtained in Western Siberia during summer. The total O<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> content was
taken to be equal to 340 DU (according to data from
TOMS (Total Ozone Mapping Spectrometer) satellite instrumentation,
2000–2010) and the CO<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> mixing ratio was taken to be equal to 380 ppm
(according to data from aircraft sensing in 1997–2007; Arshinov et al.,
2009).</p>
      <p>It is well known that the surface albedo affects (primarily upward) radiative
fluxes and may even cause DRE sign reversal (see e.g. Zhuravleva and Sakerin,
2009; García et al., 2012; Tomasi et al., 2015). The processes of soot
sedimentation on the ground and appearance of blanked patches from burning
produce changes in the surface reflectance and possible variations in the
radiative characteristics of the atmosphere. A detailed discussion of these
problems is beyond the scope of the present work; therefore, all calculations
below were performed for the same surface albedos <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
specified using multi-year data from MODIS satellite measurements for the
region of Tomsk in June–August (Moody et al., 2005).</p>
      <p>Data from Fontenla et al. (1999) were used to account for the spectral
behaviour of the solar constant.</p>
      <p>The applicability of the algorithm and the approach to specifying the set of
input parameters were confirmed by our earlier results of the complex
radiation experiments (Zhuravleva et al., 2009, 2014).</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T5" specific-use="star"><caption><p>Parameters of radiation calculations.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="7">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">  
         <oasis:entry namest="col1" nameend="col2" align="center">Case </oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn>550</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn>440</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn>870</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi>W</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mn>550</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>g</mml:mi><mml:mn>550</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">1</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Background aerosol</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.13</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.46</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2.1</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.925</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.7</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Ordinary smoke</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.33</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.59</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.9</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.92</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.64</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">3</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Extreme smoke 2012</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.84</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.58</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2.2</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.96</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.64</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">4</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">14 July</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.34</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.74</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2.5</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.98</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.64</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">5</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">27 July</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">3.54</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.54</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.2</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.94</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.65</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table><table-wrap-foot><p>Spectral surface albedo: <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn>470</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.036</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>;
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn>550</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.067</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>; <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn>670</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.068</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>; <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn>870</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.251</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>; <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn>1250</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.285</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>; <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn>1650</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.196</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>;
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn>2150</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p></table-wrap-foot></table-wrap>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5.SS2">
  <title>Simulation results</title>
      <p>Recent studies showed that considering only a specific spectral range of
aerosol properties and neglecting uncertainties when specifying the input
parameters (aerosol optical characteristics, surface albedo, total content,
and vertical profiles of concentrations of atmospheric gases, etc.) may
result in important error sources in estimates of aerosol radiation effects
(Myhre et al., 2003; Zhou et al., 2005; García et al., 2008, 2012;
Zhuravleva et al., 2009; Zhuravleva and Sakerin, 2009). The magnitude of
these errors depends mainly on aerosol type (background continental, oceanic,
biomass burning, urban-industrial, desert dust, etc.), reflection model, and
albedo of underlying surface, as well as on solar zenith angle (see e.g.
García et al., 2008, 2012, 2014; Zhuravleva and Sakerin, 2009).</p>
      <p><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>In this work, we present the diurnally average radiative effects for five
different situations (Table 5). To correctly estimate their uncertainties, it
is necessary to take into account both variations in the characteristics of
the atmosphere and underlying surface during the day and the dependence of
uncertainties on the solar zenith angle. The estimates, presented in the
literature, were generally obtained for fixed illumination conditions (see
e.g. García et al., 2008, 2012, 2014; Zhuravleva and Sakerin, 2009),
while uncertainty estimates for diurnally average radiative effects are
scarce (see e.g. Tomasi et al., 2015, Esteve et al., 2016). In this work, we
restrict ourselves to a discussion of radiation effects in different
situations. The issue of what is the magnitude of uncertainty due to
inaccurate information on input parameters of the problem needs additional
numerical experiments.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F13" specific-use="star"><caption><p>Radiative effects of aerosol under different atmospheric
conditions.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=469.470472pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/10/179/2017/amt-10-179-2017-f13.jpg"/>

        </fig>

      <p>Average values of AOD, W, SSA, and AF, which reflect the average radiative
effects of smoke and background aerosol, were chosen as input parameters for
the first three cases. In order to avoid the effect of the astronomical
factor, the instantaneous values of <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">TOA</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">BOA</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>↓</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> were calculated for the period between sunrise and sunset on
15 July for the latitude of Tomsk (56<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N). Cases 4 and 5 correspond
to the conditions of strong (27 July) and relatively weak (14 July) aerosol
turbidity and, as such, make it possible to estimate the variability range of
radiative characteristics in the period of strong Siberian fires.</p>
      <p>Figure 13 shows how radiation characteristics of the atmosphere and the
underlying surface are redistributed under different conditions.</p>
      <p>The atmospheric transmittance (hence ABS<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SUR</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was maximal
(71 %) under the background conditions. The appearance of optically dense
smoke cloud caused <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> to decrease to 60 % (Case 3). Immediately in the
period of extreme smoke, the <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> value varied from 67 % (14 July) to
37 % (27 July), being almost a factor of two smaller in the latter case
than under the background conditions. Data from calculations agree with
results of measurements of total radiative fluxes in Tomsk (Sklyadneva et
al., 2015), which indicated that on 27 July 2012 the total radiation
decreased by about 50 % relative to the usual conditions. Atmospheric
albedo was also maximal (34 %) on this day.</p>
      <p>In an analysis of ABS<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ATM</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, the existence of two competing factors
should be taken into consideration. If we represent the atmospheric
absorption as a series in the order of scattering, its <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>th term will be
proportional to <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and for
large <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> the contribution of high orders of scattering will
be significant. Therefore, AOD increase (and, consequently, increment in the
average order of scattering) favours absorption growth due to the
contribution of high orders of scattering. At the same time, large SSA values
act as a factor reducing the atmospheric absorptance.</p>
      <p>The ABS<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ATM</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> value, calculated with averaged parameters, increased
from 22 % (Case 1) to 26 % (Case 3); while for certain situations
during summer 2012 the atmospheric absorptance varied in the range of
24–36 %. A substantial increment in ABS<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ATM</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> on 27 July was a
consequence of a considerable (almost an order of magnitude) increase in AOD,
accompanied by growth in the average order of scattering.</p>
      <p>The direct radiative effect of aerosol for fixed characteristics of
underlying surface and fixed solar zenith angle primarily depends on AOD,
single scattering albedo, and the asymmetry factor (Zhou et al., 2005; Yu et
al., 2006; Tomasi et al., 2015). The results, presented in Fig. 13b, show a
cooling effect of aerosol at the top and bottom of the atmosphere. As
expected, the interrelation between DRE values was determined by aerosol
optical depth and was maximal (in absolute value) on 27 July 2012:
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Φ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">BOA</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn>150</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Φ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">TOA</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn>75</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Φ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ATM</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>75</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. Under the
background conditions, the DRE value was minimal: <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>13 W m<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at BOA
and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>5 W m<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at TOA.</p>
      <p>The AOD influence on direct radiative effect efficiency <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Φ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">e</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
compared to DRE is much less pronounced, making it possible to estimate the
influence of absorbing and scattering aerosol properties on radiative
effects. However, it should be kept in mind that the increase of multiple
scattering effects and attenuation of the transmitted radiation for large AOD
moderate their effect (Conant et al., 2003).</p>
      <p>For small atmospheric turbidity, the aerosol single scattering albedo weakly
influences the radiative effect efficiency, and high <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mfenced open="|" close="|"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Φ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">e</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values at TOA, BOA, and in the atmosphere are
primarily determined by AOD (Case 1, Fig. 13c). The increase of efficiency
for the lowest AOD range was also noted by other authors (see e.g.
García et al., 2012; background continental regions).</p>
      <p>The aerosol optical depths in the ordinary smoke and on 14 July are close in
value, whereas SSA values substantially differ (Table 5). A consequence of
this is the inequality <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mfenced open="|" close="|"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Φ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">e</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Case</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mfenced close="|" open="|"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Φ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">e</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Case</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, primarily because
of the higher absorptance of aerosol particles in ordinary smoke. The
comparison of cases 3–5 (extreme smoke) shows that the <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mfenced close="|" open="|"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Φ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">e</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Case</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> value is maximal for SSA close to
unity (Fig. 13c), suggesting that the influence of absorbing and scattering
aerosol properties on radiative effect efficiency is moderated for high AOD
values.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S6" sec-type="conclusions">
  <title>Conclusion</title>
      <p>Previous studies showed that smoke from vegetation burning, together with
large volcanic eruptions, are the most intense natural sources of
aerosol–gas emissions in the boreal zones of the planet. They strongly
influence the radiation budget on large scales over a few weeks. One such
event, i.e. extreme smoke due to massive forest fires, took place during
summer 2012 in a few Siberian regions.</p>
      <p>In this work, we present the results of a complex study of the optical and
microphysical characteristics and radiation effects of aerosol, observed
under the conditions of severe smoke turbidity of the atmosphere. The basis
for analysis was photometric observations (AERONET/Tomsk-22) of spectral
solar radiation with the use of the algorithms of solution of inverse
problems of atmospheric optics and model calculations of the main components
of the shortwave radiation budget. The obtained radiation characteristics
from the 2012 extreme fire event are compared with data from multi-year
(2003–2013) observations under the background conditions for ordinary smoke,
as well as with the results obtained by other authors.</p>
      <p>Intensive wildfires in 2012 in Siberia led to high aerosol loading of
the atmosphere: the average AOD(500 nm) in the period of extreme smoke
was 0.95 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.86, a factor of 6 larger than under the background
conditions (0.16 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.08), and almost a factor of 2.5 larger than AOD in
ordinary smoke (0.36 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.18). The AOD value exceeded 3 in certain
periods of measurements (on 24–28 July).</p>
      <p><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>Like at other AERONET sites, where smoke aerosol was recorded, in Tomsk the
volume aerosol size distributions were bimodal with a dominating fine-mode
fraction. In June–August 2012, the mean median radius of fine fraction
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">v</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> had increased to 0.18 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>m compared to
ordinary smoke (<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">v</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.16</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>m). The width of
the fine-mode distribution increased, as was the case in the period of
intense fires during summer 2004–2005 in Alaska (Eck et al., 2009). In
contrast to data from multi-year observations, in summer 2012 an increase in
the volume concentration and median radius of the coarse mode was observed
with growing AOD.</p>
      <p>The average imaginary refractive index of the 2012 Tomsk fires shows low
values and a relatively large decrease in <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> as the
wavelength grows from 440 nm (0.0067) to 675 nm (0.0054). The <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> variations in the wavelength interval of 675–1020 nm are not
so large. At the same time, in ordinary smoke the imaginary part of the
refractive index showed spectral behaviour close to neutral (<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.01</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
      <p>A consequence of small values of the imaginary index of refraction coupled
with the large fine-mode particle radius was, on average, quite high single
scattering albedos of smoke aerosol, weakly varying with wavelength (0.96). A
similar situation was also observed at other AERONET sites, located in the
boreal zone of Eurasia during extended wildfires, e.g. in Moscow (2002 and
2010), Alaska (2004 and 2005). At the same time, increasing spectral
behaviour of single scattering albedo with growing wavelength was observed in
certain periods of smoke turbidities. Possibly, this spectral dependence was
because brown carbon, which absorbs most intensely in ultraviolet spectral
region, was present in the atmosphere. A comparative analysis also showed
that SSA values and their spectral dependence differ between extreme and
ordinary smoke. In the latter case, the increase in absorptance of aerosol
particles and decrease in SSA with growing wavelength correspond well to the
character of SSA variations, recorded in the boreal zone of USA and Canada
according to data from multi-year observations (Dubovik et al., 2002).</p>
      <p>Extraordinary events such as severe fires (Siberia, 2012; Moscow, 2010; etc.)
are quite rare in occurrence. However, when optical and microphysical
characteristics obtained during these periods of time are included in the
total data set (ordinary smoke, usual conditions), they may introduce
substantial changes in the statistical characteristics of aerosol, typical
for a given region (see e.g. Sayer et al., 2014), and will lead to a greater
uncertainty in estimates of radiation-climatic effects of aerosol. In our
opinion, it is more correct to use the obtained information for analysing
characteristics of “pure” smoke aerosol (in view of its predominating
contribution), as well as for estimating maximal radiation effect of smoke.</p>
      <p>The results of simulating the diurnally average radiative characteristics,
presented in the work, reflect the average radiative effects of smoke and
background aerosol. Compared to background conditions and ordinary smoke,
under the conditions of 2012 extreme fires the cooling effect of aerosol
intensifies (predominately due to a substantial increase in AOD): the direct
radiative effects at the bottom and top of the atmosphere are <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>13, <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>35,
and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>60 W m<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>5, <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>14, and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>35 W m<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> respectively.
Values of direct radiative effect efficiency <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Φ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">e</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> under the
background conditions and under the conditions of ordinary smoke are
comparable (<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Φ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">BOA</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">e</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>100 W m<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Φ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">TOA</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">e</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>40 W m<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>,
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Φ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ATM</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">e</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>60 W m<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. During the fire
event in summer 2012 direct radiative effect efficiency varies in range: at
the BOA it is <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>80, <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>40 W m<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, at the TOA it is <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>50,
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>20 W m<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and in the atmosphere it is <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>35, <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>20 W m<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>.
These results show that the influence of absorbing and scattering aerosol
properties on radiative effect efficiency is moderated for high AOD values.
We note that this work presents estimates of daytime values of aerosol
radiation effects under different atmospheric conditions. The issue of the
uncertainty of these estimates, caused by insufficiently exact information on
the input parameters of radiation calculations, requires further study.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S7">
  <title>Data availability</title>
      <p>The text provides links to data sources, which we used:
<uri>http://giovanni.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/giovanni/</uri> (NASA GES DISC, 2016),
<uri>http://aeronet.gsfc.nasa.gov</uri> (GSFC NASA, 2015),
<uri>http://lance-modis.eosdis.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/imagery/firemaps.cgi</uri> (GSFC
Terrestrial Information Systems Laboratory, 2016), <uri>http://rp5.ru</uri>
(Raspisaniye Pogodi Ltd., 2016), and
<uri>http://rtweb.aer.com/continuum_frame.html</uri> (Atmospheric and
Environmental Research, 2016).</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p>The authors would like to thank Thomas F. Eck at NASA Goddard Space Flight
Center for fruitful discussions of certain issues.<?xmltex \hack{\newline}?><?xmltex \hack{\newline}?>
Edited by: A. Kokhanovsky<?xmltex \hack{\newline}?>
Reviewed by: three anonymous referees</p></ack><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
Anderson, G., Clough, S., Kneizys, F., Chetwynd, J., and Shettle, E.: AFGL
Atmospheric Constituent Profiles (0–120 km), Air Force Geophysics
Laboratory, AFGL-TR-86-0110, Environmental Research Paper, N 954, Hanscom
AFB, MA 01731, USA, 1986.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>Andreae, M. O. and Gelencsér, A.: Black carbon or brown carbon? The
nature of light-absorbing carbonaceous aerosols, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6,
3131–3148, <ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-3131-2006" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-6-3131-2006</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
Arshinov, M. Yu., Belan, B. D., Davydov, D. K., Inouye, G., Maksyutov, Sh.,
Machida, T., and Fofonov, A. V.: Vertical distribution of greenhouse gases
above Western Siberia by the long-term measurement data, Atmos. Ocean. Opt.,
22, 316–324, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>Atmospheric and Environmental Research: MT_CKD Continuum Model, Lexington,
USA, available at: <uri>http://rtweb.aer.com/continuum_frame.html</uri>, last
access: 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
Bedareva, T. V. and Zhuravleva, T. B.: Retrieval of aerosol scattering phase
function and single scattering albedo according to data of radiation
measurements in solar almucantar: numerical simulation, Atmos. Ocean. Opt.,
24, 373–384, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
Bedareva, T. V., Sviridenkov, M. A., and Zhuravleva, T. B.: Retrieval of
aerosol optical and microphysical characteristics according to data of
ground-based spectral measurements of direct and scattered solar radiation.
Part 1. Testing of Algorithm, Atmos. Ocean. Opt., 26, 24–34, 2013a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
Bedareva, T. V., Sviridenkov, M. A., and Zhuravleva, T. B.: Retrieval of
aerosol optical and microphysical characteristics according to data of
ground-based spectral measurements of direct and scattered solar radiation.
Part 2. Approbation of Algorithm, Atmos. Ocean. Opt., 26, 107–117, 2013b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>Bedareva, T. V., Sviridenkov, M. A., and Zhuravleva, T. B.: Retrieval of dust
aerosol optical and microphysical properties from ground-based Sun-sky
radiometer measurements in approximation of randomly oriented spheroids, J.
Quant. Spectrosc. Ra., 146, 140–157, <ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jqsrt.2014.05.006" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.jqsrt.2014.05.006</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
Bergstrom, R. W., Russell, P. B., and Hignett, P.: Wavelength dependence of
the absorption of black carbon particles: Predictions and results from the
TARFOX experiment and implications for the aerosol single scattering albedo,
J. Atmos. Sci., 59, 567–577, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>Bergstrom, R. W., Pilewskie, P., Russell, P. B., Redemann, J., Bond, T. C.,
Quinn, P. K., and Sierau, B.: Spectral absorption properties of atmospheric
aerosols, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 5937–5943, <ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-5937-2007" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-7-5937-2007</ext-link>,
2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
Bond, T. C.: Spectral dependence of visible light absorption by carbonaceous
particles emitted from coal combustion, Geophys. Res. Lett., 28, 4075–4078,
2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>Bond, T. C. and Bergstrom, R. W.: Light Absorption by Carbonaceous Particles:
An Investigative Review, Aerosol Sci. Tech., 40, 27–67,
<ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02786820500421521" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1080/02786820500421521</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>Chakrabarty, R. K., Gyawali, M., Yatavelli, R. L. N., Pandey, A., Watts, A.
C., Knue, J., Chen, L.-W. A., Pattison, R. R., Tsibart, A., Samburova, V.,
and Moosmüller, H.: Brown carbon aerosols from burning of boreal
peatlands: microphysical properties, emission factors, and implications for
direct radiative forcing, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 3033–3040,
<ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-3033-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-16-3033-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>Chen, Y. and Bond, T. C.: Light absorption by organic carbon from wood
combustion, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 1773–1787, <ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-1773-2010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-10-1773-2010</ext-link>,
2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
Chubarova, N., Smirnov, A., and Holben, B. N.: Aerosol properties in Moscow
according to 10 years of AERONET measurements at the meteorological
observatory of Moscow state university, Geography, Environment,
Sustainability, 4, 19–32, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>Chubarova, N., Nezval', Ye., Sviridenkov, I., Smirnov, A., and Slutsker, I.:
Smoke aerosol and its radiative effects during extreme fire event over
Central Russia in summer 2010, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 5, 557–568,
<ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/amt-5-557-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-5-557-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>Conant, W. C., Seinfeld, J. H., Wang, J., Carmichael, G. R., Tang, Y., Uno,
I., Flatau, P. J., Markowicz, K. M., and Quinn, P. K.: A model for the
radiative forcing during ACE-Asia derived from CIRPAS Twin Otter and R/V
<italic>Ronald H. Brown</italic> data and comparison with observations, J. Geophys.
Res., 108, 8661, <ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2002JD003260" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2002JD003260</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
Dubovik, O., Smirnov, A., Holben, B., King, M., Kaufman, Y., Eck, T., and
Slutsker, I.: Accuracy assessments of aerosol optical properties retrieved
from Aerosol Robostic Network (AERONET) Sun and sky radiance measurements, J.
Geophys. Res., 105, 9791–9806, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
Dubovik, O., Holben, B., Eck, T., Smirnov, A., Kaufman, Y., King, M.,
Tanré, D., and Slutsker I.: Variability of absorption and optical
properties of key aerosol types observed in worldwide locations, J. Atmos.
Sci., 59, 590–608, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
Dubovik, O. T. and King, M.: A flexible inversion algorithm for retrieval
aerosol optical properties from Sun and sky radiance measurements, J.
Geophys. Res., 105, 20673–20696, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>Eck, T. F., Holben, B. N., Reid, J. S., Sinyuk, A., Hyer, E. J., O'Neill, N.
T., Shaw, G. E., Vande Castle, J. R., Chapin, F. S., Dubovik, O., Smirnov,
A., Vermote, E., Schafer, J. S., Giles, D., Slutsker, I., Sorokine, M., and
Newcomb, W. W.: Optical properties of boreal region biomass burning aerosols
in central Alaska and seasonal variation of aerosol optical depth at an
Arctic coastal site, J. Geophys. Res., 114, D11201,
<ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2008JD010870" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2008JD010870</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>Esteve, A. R., Highwood, E. J., and Ryder, C. L.: A case study of the
radiative effect of aerosols over Europe: EUCAARI-LONGREX, Atmos. Chem.
Phys., 16, 7639–7651, <ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-7639-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-16-7639-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
Fontenla, J., White, O. R., Fox, P. A., Avert, E. H., and Kurucz, R. L.:
Calculation of solar irradiances, I. Synthesis of the solar spectrum,
Astrophys. J., 518, 480–500, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>García, O. E., Díaz, A. M., Exposito, F. J., Díaz, J. P.,
Dubovik, O., Dubuisson, P., Roger, J.-C., Eck, T. F., Sinyuk, A., Derimian,
Y., Dutton, E. G., Schafer, J. S., Holben, B. N., and García, C. A.:
Validation of AERONET estimates of atmospheric solar fluxes and aerosol
radiative forcing by ground-based broadband measurements, J. Geophys. Res.,
113, D21207, <ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2008JD010211" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2008JD010211</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>García, O. E., Díaz, J. P., Expósito, F. J., Díaz, A. M.,
Dubovik, O., Derimian, Y., Dubuisson, P., and Roger, J.-C.: Shortwave
radiative forcing and efficiency of key aerosol types using AERONET data,
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 5129–5145, <ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-5129-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-12-5129-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>Garcia, R. D., Garcia, O. E., Cuevas, E., Cachorro, V. E., Romero-Campos, P.
M., Ramos, R., and de Frutos, A. M.: Solar radiation measurements compared to
simulations at the BSRN Izana station: Mineral dust radiative forcing and
efficiency study, J. Geophys. Res., 119, 179–194, <ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/2013JD020301" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2013JD020301</ext-link>,
2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>Giles, D. M., Holben, B. N., Eck, T. F., Sinyuk, A., Smirnov, A., Slutsker,
I., Dickerson, R. R., Thompson, A. M., and Schafer, J. S.: An analysis of
AERONET aerosol absorption properties and classifications representative of
aerosol source regions, J. Geophys. Res., 117, D17203,
<ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2012JD018127" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2012JD018127</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
Gorchakov, G. I., Sitnov, S. A., Sviridenkov, M. A., Semoutnikova, E. G.,
Emilenko, A. S., Isakov, A. A., Kopeikin, V. M., Karpov, A. V., Gorchakova,
I. A., Verichev, K. S., Kurbatov, G. A., and Ponomareva, T. Ya.: Satellite
and ground-based monitoring of smoke in the atmosphere during the summer
wildfires in European Russia in 2010 and Siberia in 2012, Int. J. Remote
Sens., 35, 5698–5721, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
Groisman, P. Ya., Sherstyukov, B. G., Razuvaev, V. N., Knight, R. W., Enloe,
J. G., Stroumentova, N. S., Whitfield, P. H., Førland, E., Hannsen-Bauer,
I., Tuomenvirt, H., Aleksandersson, H., Mescherskaya, A., and Karl, T. R.:
Potential forest fire danger over Northern Eurasia: Changes during the 20th
century, Global Planet. Change, 56, 371–386, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>GSFC NASA: AERONET Data Download Tool, USA, available at:
<uri>http://aeronet.gsfc.nasa.gov</uri>, last access: January 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>GSFC Terrestrial Information Systems Laboratory: LANCE-MODIS data system,
NASA, USA, available at:
<uri>http://lance-modis.eosdis.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/imagery/firemaps.cgi</uri>, last
access: March 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>Hammer, M. S., Martin, R. V., van Donkelaar, A., Buchard, V., Torres, O.,
Ridley, D. A., and Spurr, R. J. D.: Interpreting the ultraviolet aerosol
index observed with the OMI satellite instrument to understand absorption by
organic aerosols: implications for atmospheric oxidation and direct radiative
effects, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 2507–2523, <ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-2507-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-16-2507-2016</ext-link>,
2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
Hess, M., Koepke, P., and Schult, I.: Optical properties of aerosols and
clouds: The software package OPAC, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 79, 831–844, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
Holben, B. N., Eck, T. F., Slutsker, I., Tanre, D., Buis, J. P., Setzer, A.,
Vermote, E., Reagan, J. A., Kaufman, Y. J., Nakadjima, T., Lavenu, F.,
Jankowiak, I., and Smirnov, A.: AERONET – A federated instrument network and
data archive for aerosol characterization, Remote Sens. Environ., 66, 1–16,
1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>Holben, B. N., Eck, T. F., Slutsker, I., Smirnov, A., Sinyuk, A., Schafer,
J., Giles, D., and Dubovik, O.: AERONET's Version 2.0 quality assurance
criteria, Remote Sensing of Atmosphere and Clouds, Proc. SPIE, 6408, 64080Q,
<ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1117/12.706524" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1117/12.706524</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>Jethva, H. and Torres, O.: Satellite-based evidence of wavelength-dependent
aerosol absorption in biomass burning smoke inferred from Ozone Monitoring
Instrument, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 10541–10551,
<ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-10541-2011" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-11-10541-2011</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
Kabanov, D. M. and Sakerin, S. M.: Variations of the characteristics of the
aerosol optical depth under conditions of forest fires, Proc. of SPIE:
Thirteenth Joint International Symposium on Atmospheric and Ocean Optics.
Atmospheric Physics, 2–7 July 2006, Tomsk, Russia, 6522, 65221J-1–65221J-6,
2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>Kirchstetter, T. W., Novakov, T., and Hobbs, P. V.: Evidence that the
spectral dependence of light absorption by aerosols is affected by organic
carbon, J. Geophys. Res., 109, D21208, <ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2004jd004999" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2004jd004999</ext-link>, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>
Komarov, V. S. and Lomakina, N. Ya.: Statistical models of the atmospheric
boundary layer, IAO Publishing House, Tomsk, Russia, 2008 (in Russian).</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>
Kozlov, V. S., Yausheva, E. P., Terpugova, S. A., Panchenko, M. V., Chernov,
D. G., and Shmargunov V. P.: Optical–microphysical properties of smoke haze
from Siberian forest fires in summer 2012, Int. J. Remote Sens., 35,
5722–5741, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>
Levy, R. C., Mattoo, S., Munchak, L. A., Remer, L. A., Sayer, A. M., Patadia,
F., and Hsu, N. C.: The Collection 6 MODIS aerosol products over land and
ocean, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 6, 2989–3034, doi:10.5194/amt-6-2989-2013, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>Lewis, K., Arnott, W. P., Moosmuller, H., and Wold, C. E.: Strong spectral
variation of biomass smoke light absorption and single scattering albedo
observed with a novel dual-wavelength photoacoustic instrument, J. Geophys.
Res., 113, D16203 <ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2007jd009699" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2007jd009699</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>Lu, Z., Streets, D. J., Winijkul, E., Yan, F., Chen, Y., Bond, T. C., Feng,
Y., Dubey, M. K., Liu, S., Pinto, J. P., and Carmichael, G. R.: Light
Absorption Properties and Radiative Effects of Primary Organic Aerosol
Emissions, Environ. Sci. Technol., 49, 4868–4877,
<ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.5b00211" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1021/acs.est.5b00211</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>
Moody, E. G., King, M. D., Platnick, S., Schaaf, C. B., and Gao, F.:
Spatially compete global spectral surface albedos: value-added datasets
derived from Terra MODIS Land products, IEEE T. Geosci. Remote, 43, 144–158,
2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>
Moosmüller, H, Chakrabarty, R. K., and Arnott, W. P.: Aerosol light
absorption and its measurement: A review, J. Quant. Spectrosc. Ra., 110,
844–878, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>Myhre, G., Berntsen, T. K., Haywood, J. M., Sundet, J. K., Holben, B. N.,
Johnsrud, M., and Stordal, F.: Modeling the solar radiative impact of
aerosols from biomass burning during the Southern African Regional Science
Initiative (SAFARI-2000) experiment, J. Geophys. Res., 108, 8501,
<ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002313" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2002JD002313</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>NASA GES DISC: Giovanni online data system, USA, available at:
<uri>http://giovanni.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/giovanni/</uri>, last access: April 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>Nikonovas, T., North, P. R. J., and Doerr, S. H.: Smoke aerosol properties
and ageing effects for northern temperate and boreal regions derived from
AERONET source and age attribution, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 7929–7943,
<ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-7929-2015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-15-7929-2015</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>O'Neill, N. T., Eck, T. F., Holben, B. N., Smirnov, A., Dubovik, O., and
Royer, A.: Bimodal size distribution influences on the variation of Angstrom
derivatives in spectral and optical depth space, J. Geophys. Res., 106,
9787–9806, <ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2000JD900245" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2000JD900245</ext-link>, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>O'Neill, N. T., Eck, T. F., Smirnov, A., Holben, B. N., and Thulasiraman, S.:
Spectral discrimination of coarse and fine mode optical depth, J. Geophys.
Res., 108, 4559, <ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002975" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2002JD002975</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation>Panchenko, M. V., Zhuravleva, T. B., Terpugova, S. A., Polkin, V. V., and
Kozlov, V. S.: An empirical model of optical and radiative characteristics of
the tropospheric aerosol over West Siberia in summer, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 5,
1513–1527, <ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/amt-5-1513-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-5-1513-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation>
Panchenko, M. V., Zhuravleva, T. B., Kozlov, V. S., Nasrtdinov, I. M.,
Pol'kin, V. V., Terpugova, S. A., and Chernov, D. G.: Estimation of Aerosol
Radiation Effects under Background and Smoke-haze Atmospheric Conditions over
Siberia from Empirical Data, Russ. Meteorol. Hydrol., 41, 104–111, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation>
Polyakov, D. V., Barashkova, N. K., and Kuzhevskaya, I. V.: Weather and
Climate Description of Anomalous Summer 2012 in Tomsk Region, Russ. Meteorol.
Hydrol., 39, 22–28, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation>Raspisaniye Pogodi Ltd.: Reliable prognosis, St. Petersburg, Russia,
available at: <uri>http://rp5.ru</uri>, last access: April 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation>
Reid, J. S., Hobbs, P. V., Ferek, R. J., Blake, D. R., Martins, J. V.,
Dunlap, M. R., and Liousse, C.: Physical, chemical, and optical properties
of regional hazes dominated by smoke in Brazil, J. Geophys. Res., 103,
32059–32080, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><mixed-citation>Reid, J. S., Koppmann, R., Eck, T. F., and Eleuterio, D. P.: A review of
biomass burning emissions part II: intensive physical properties of biomass
burning particles, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 5, 799–825,
<ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-5-799-2005" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-5-799-2005</ext-link>, 2005a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><mixed-citation>Reid, J. S., Eck, T. F., Christopher, S. A., Koppmann, R., Dubovik, O.,
Eleuterio, D. P., Holben, B. N., Reid, E. A., and Zhang, J.: A review of
biomass burning emissions part III: intensive optical properties of biomass
burning particles, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 5, 827–849,
<ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-5-827-2005" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-5-827-2005</ext-link>, 2005b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><mixed-citation>Russell, P. B., Bergstrom, R. W., Shinozuka, Y., Clarke, A. D., DeCarlo, P.
F., Jimenez, J. L., Livingston, J. M., Redemann, J., Dubovik, O., and Strawa,
A.: Absorption Angstrom Exponent in AERONET and related data as an indicator
of aerosol composition, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 1155–1169,
<ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-1155-2010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-10-1155-2010</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><mixed-citation>
Sakerin, S. M. (Ed.): Study of radiative characteristics of aerosol in Asian
part of Russia, Publishing House of Institute of Atmospheric Optics SB RAS,
Tomsk, Russia, 484 pp., 2012 (in Russian).</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><mixed-citation>Sakerin, S. M. and Kabanov, D. M.: Spectral dependence of the atmosphere
aerosol optical depth near 0.37–4 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>m, Atmos. Ocean. Opt., 20,
141–149, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><mixed-citation>Sakerin, S. M. and Kabanov, D. M.: Finely and coarsely dispersed components
of atmospheric aerosol optical depth in the region of Tomsk: interannual and
seasonal variations, Proc. of SPIE, 1316, 9680, <ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1117/12.22050" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1117/12.22050</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><mixed-citation>
Sakerin, S. M., Beresnev, S. A., Gorda, S. Yu., Kabanov, D. M., Kornienko, G.
I., Markelov, Yu. I., Mikhalev, A. V., Nikolashkin, S. V., Panchenko, M. V.,
Poddubnyi, V. A., Pol'kin, V. V., Smirnov, A., Tashchilin, M. A.,
Turchinovich, S. A., Turchinovich, Yu. S., Holben, B., and Eremina, T. A.:
Characteristics of the annual behavior of the spectral aerosol optical depth
of the atmosphere under conditions of Siberia, Atmos. Ocean. Opt., 22,
446–456, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib63"><label>63</label><mixed-citation>
Sakerin, S. M., Kabanov, D. M., Nasrtdinov, I. M., Turchinovich, S. A., and
Turchinovich, Yu. S.: The results of two-point experiments on the estimation
of the urban anthropogenic effect on the characteristics of atmospheric
transparency, Atmos. Ocean. Opt., 23, 88–94, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib64"><label>64</label><mixed-citation>
Sakerin, S. M., Andreev, S. Yu., Kabanov, D. M., Nikolashkin, S. V., Prakhov,
A. N., Radionov, V. F., Turchinovich, Yu. S., Chernov, D. G., Holben, B. N.,
and Smirnov, A.: On results of studies of atmospheric aerosol optical depth
in arctic regions, Atmos. Ocean. Opt., 27, 517–528, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib65"><label>65</label><mixed-citation>Sayer, A. M., Hsu, N. C., Eck, T. F., Smirnov, A., and Holben, B. N.:
AERONET-based models of smoke-dominated aerosol near source regions and
transported over oceans, and implications for satellite retrievals of aerosol
optical depth, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 11493–11523,
<ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-11493-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-14-11493-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib66"><label>66</label><mixed-citation>Schuster, G. L., Dubovik, O., and Arola, A.: Remote sensing of soot carbon –
Part 1: Distinguishing different absorbing aerosol species, Atmos. Chem.
Phys., 16, 1565–1585, <ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-1565-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-16-1565-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib67"><label>67</label><mixed-citation>
Shakina, N. P. and Ivanova, A. R.: The Blocking Anticyclones: the State of
Studies and Forecasting, Russ. Meteorol. Hydrol., 35, 721–730, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib68"><label>68</label><mixed-citation>
Sklyadneva, T. K., Ivlev, G. A., Belan, B. D., Arshinov, M. Yu., and
Simonenkov, D. V.: The radiation regime of Tomsk in conditions of a smoky
haze, Atmos. Ocean. Opt., 28, 215–222, 2015 (in Russian).</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib69"><label>69</label><mixed-citation>
Smirnov, A., Holben, B. N., Eck, T. F., Dubovik, O., and Slutsker, I.: Cloud
screening and quality control algorithms for the AERONET data base, Remote
Sens. Environ., 73, 337–349, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib70"><label>70</label><mixed-citation>
Tomasi, C., Lanconelli, C., Lupi, A., and Mazzola, M.: Diurnally averaged
direct aerosol-induced radiative forcing from cloud-free sky field
measurements performed during seven regional experiments, in: Light
Scattering Reviews 9, edited by: Kokhanovsky, A., Springer Praxis Books,
Chichester, UK, 297–425, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib71"><label>71</label><mixed-citation>Torres, O., Bhartia, P. K., Herman, J. R., Ahmad, Z., and Gleason, J.:
Derivation of aerosol propertiesfrom satellite measurements of backscattered
ultraviolet radiation: theoretical basis, J. Geophys. Res., 103,
17099–17110, <ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/98JD00900" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/98JD00900</ext-link>, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib72"><label>72</label><mixed-citation>
Tvorogov, S. D., Zhuravleva, T. B., Rodimova, O. B., and Firsov, K. M.:
Theory of series of exponents and its application for analysis of radiation
processes, in: Problems of Global Climatology and Ecodynamics. Anthropogenic
Effects on the State of Planet Earth, edited by: Cracknell, A. P., Krapivin,
V. F., and Varotsos, C. A., Springer/Praxis, Chichester, UK, 211–240, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib73"><label>73</label><mixed-citation>Vinogradova, A. A., Smirnov, N. S., Korotkov, V. N., and Romanovskaya, A. A.:
Forest Fires in Siberia and the Far East: Emissions and Atmospheric Transport
of Black Carbon to the Arctic, Atmos. Ocean. Opt., 28, 566–574, 2015.
 </mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib74"><label>74</label><mixed-citation>Yu, H., Kaufman, Y. J., Chin, M., Feingold, G., Remer, L. A., Anderson, T.
L., Balkanski, Y., Bellouin, N., Boucher, O., Christopher, S., DeCola, P.,
Kahn, R., Koch, D., Loeb, N., Reddy, M. S., Schulz, M., Takemura, T., and
Zhou, M.: A review of measurement-based assessments of the aerosol direct
radiative effect and forcing, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6, 613–666,
<ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-613-2006" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-6-613-2006</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib75"><label>75</label><mixed-citation>Zhong, M. and Jang, M.: Dynamic light absorption of biomass-burning organic
carbon photochemically aged under natural sunlight, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14,
1517–1525, <ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-1517-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-14-1517-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib76"><label>76</label><mixed-citation>Zhou, M., Yu, H., Dickinson, R., Dubovik, O., and Holben, B.: A normalized
description of the direct effect of key aerosol types on solar radiation as
estimated from AERONET aerosols and MODIS albedo, J. Geophys. Res., 110,
D19202, <ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2005JD005909" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2005JD005909</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib77"><label>77</label><mixed-citation>
Zhuravleva, T. B. and Sakerin, S. M..: Simulation of direct aerosol radiative
forcing for typical summer conditions of Siberia. Part II: Variability range
and sensitivity to the input parameters, Atmos. Ocean. Opt, 22, 74–83, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib78"><label>78</label><mixed-citation>
Zhuravleva, T. B., Kabanov, D. M., Sakerin, S. M., and Firsov, K. M.:
Simulation of direct aerosol radiative forcing for typical summer conditions
of Siberia. Part 1: Method of calculation and choice of the input parameters,
Atmos. Ocean. Opt., 22, 63–73, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib79"><label>79</label><mixed-citation>
Zhuravleva, T. B., Sakerin, S. M., Bedareva, T. V., Kabanov, D. M.,
Nasrtdinov, I. M., and Chesnokova, T. Yu.: Solar radiative fluxes in the
clear-sky atmosphere of Western Siberia: A comparison of simulations with
field measurements, Atmos. Ocean. Opt., 27, 176–186, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list><app-group content-type="float"><app><title/>

    </app></app-group></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Radiative characteristics of aerosol during extreme fire event over Siberia in summer 2012</article-title-html>
<abstract-html><p class="p">Microphysical and optical properties of aerosol were studied during a
mega-fire event in summer 2012 over Siberia using ground-based measurements
of spectral solar radiation at the AERONET site in Tomsk and satellite
observations. The data were analysed using multi-year (2003–2013)
measurements of aerosol characteristics under background conditions and for
less intense fires, differing in burning biomass type, stage of fire,
remoteness from observation site, etc. (<q>ordinary</q> smoke). In June–August
2012, the average aerosol optical depth (AOD, 500 nm) had been
0.95 ± 0.86, about a factor of 6 larger than background values
(0.16 ± 0.08), and a factor of 2.5 larger than in ordinary smoke. The
AOD values were extremely high on 24–28 July and reached 3–5. A comparison
with satellite observations showed that ground-based measurements in the
region of Tomsk not only reflect the local AOD features, but are also
characteristic for the territory of Western Siberia as a whole. Single
scattering albedo (SSA, 440 nm) in this period ranged from 0.91 to 0.99 with
an average of  ∼  0.96 in the entire wavelength range of 440–1020 nm.
The increase in absorptance of aerosol particles (SSA(440 nm)  =  0.92)
and decrease in SSA with wavelength observed in ordinary smoke agree with
the data from multi-year observations in analogous situations in the boreal
zone of USA and Canada. Volume aerosol size distribution in extreme and
ordinary smoke had a bimodal character with significant prevalence of
fine-mode particles, but in summer 2012 the mean median radius and the width
of the fine-mode distribution somewhat increased. In contrast to data from
multi-year observations, in summer 2012 an increase in the volume
concentration and median radius of the coarse mode was observed with growing
AOD.</p><p class="p">The calculations of the average radiative effects of smoke and background
aerosol are presented. Compared to background conditions and ordinary smoke,
under the extreme smoke conditions the cooling effect of aerosol considerably
intensifies: direct radiative effects (DRE) at the bottom (BOA) and at the
top of the atmosphere (TOA) are −13, −35, and −60 W m<sup>−2</sup> and
−5, −14, and −35 W m<sup>−2</sup> respectively. The maximal values of DRE
were observed on 27 July (AOD(500 nm)  =  3.5), when DRE(BOA) reached
−150 W m<sup>−2</sup>, while DRE(TOA) and DRE of the atmosphere were
−75 W m<sup>−2</sup>. During the fire event in summer 2012 the direct radiative
effect efficiency varied in range: at the BOA it was
−80–−40 W m<sup>−2</sup>, at the TOA it was −50–−20 W m<sup>−2</sup> and in
the atmosphere it was −35–−20 W m<sup>−2</sup>.</p></abstract-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
Anderson, G., Clough, S., Kneizys, F., Chetwynd, J., and Shettle, E.: AFGL
Atmospheric Constituent Profiles (0–120 km), Air Force Geophysics
Laboratory, AFGL-TR-86-0110, Environmental Research Paper, N 954, Hanscom
AFB, MA 01731, USA, 1986.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
Andreae, M. O. and Gelencsér, A.: Black carbon or brown carbon? The
nature of light-absorbing carbonaceous aerosols, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6,
3131–3148, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-3131-2006" target="_blank">doi:10.5194/acp-6-3131-2006</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
Arshinov, M. Yu., Belan, B. D., Davydov, D. K., Inouye, G., Maksyutov, Sh.,
Machida, T., and Fofonov, A. V.: Vertical distribution of greenhouse gases
above Western Siberia by the long-term measurement data, Atmos. Ocean. Opt.,
22, 316–324, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
Atmospheric and Environmental Research: MT_CKD Continuum Model, Lexington,
USA, available at: <a href="http://rtweb.aer.com/continuum_frame.html" target="_blank">http://rtweb.aer.com/continuum_frame.html</a>, last
access: 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
Bedareva, T. V. and Zhuravleva, T. B.: Retrieval of aerosol scattering phase
function and single scattering albedo according to data of radiation
measurements in solar almucantar: numerical simulation, Atmos. Ocean. Opt.,
24, 373–384, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
Bedareva, T. V., Sviridenkov, M. A., and Zhuravleva, T. B.: Retrieval of
aerosol optical and microphysical characteristics according to data of
ground-based spectral measurements of direct and scattered solar radiation.
Part 1. Testing of Algorithm, Atmos. Ocean. Opt., 26, 24–34, 2013a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
Bedareva, T. V., Sviridenkov, M. A., and Zhuravleva, T. B.: Retrieval of
aerosol optical and microphysical characteristics according to data of
ground-based spectral measurements of direct and scattered solar radiation.
Part 2. Approbation of Algorithm, Atmos. Ocean. Opt., 26, 107–117, 2013b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
Bedareva, T. V., Sviridenkov, M. A., and Zhuravleva, T. B.: Retrieval of dust
aerosol optical and microphysical properties from ground-based Sun-sky
radiometer measurements in approximation of randomly oriented spheroids, J.
Quant. Spectrosc. Ra., 146, 140–157, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jqsrt.2014.05.006" target="_blank">doi:10.1016/j.jqsrt.2014.05.006</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
Bergstrom, R. W., Russell, P. B., and Hignett, P.: Wavelength dependence of
the absorption of black carbon particles: Predictions and results from the
TARFOX experiment and implications for the aerosol single scattering albedo,
J. Atmos. Sci., 59, 567–577, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
Bergstrom, R. W., Pilewskie, P., Russell, P. B., Redemann, J., Bond, T. C.,
Quinn, P. K., and Sierau, B.: Spectral absorption properties of atmospheric
aerosols, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 5937–5943, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-5937-2007" target="_blank">doi:10.5194/acp-7-5937-2007</a>,
2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
Bond, T. C.: Spectral dependence of visible light absorption by carbonaceous
particles emitted from coal combustion, Geophys. Res. Lett., 28, 4075–4078,
2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
Bond, T. C. and Bergstrom, R. W.: Light Absorption by Carbonaceous Particles:
An Investigative Review, Aerosol Sci. Tech., 40, 27–67,
<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02786820500421521" target="_blank">doi:10.1080/02786820500421521</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
Chakrabarty, R. K., Gyawali, M., Yatavelli, R. L. N., Pandey, A., Watts, A.
C., Knue, J., Chen, L.-W. A., Pattison, R. R., Tsibart, A., Samburova, V.,
and Moosmüller, H.: Brown carbon aerosols from burning of boreal
peatlands: microphysical properties, emission factors, and implications for
direct radiative forcing, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 3033–3040,
<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-3033-2016" target="_blank">doi:10.5194/acp-16-3033-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
Chen, Y. and Bond, T. C.: Light absorption by organic carbon from wood
combustion, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 1773–1787, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-1773-2010" target="_blank">doi:10.5194/acp-10-1773-2010</a>,
2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
Chubarova, N., Smirnov, A., and Holben, B. N.: Aerosol properties in Moscow
according to 10 years of AERONET measurements at the meteorological
observatory of Moscow state university, Geography, Environment,
Sustainability, 4, 19–32, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
Chubarova, N., Nezval', Ye., Sviridenkov, I., Smirnov, A., and Slutsker, I.:
Smoke aerosol and its radiative effects during extreme fire event over
Central Russia in summer 2010, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 5, 557–568,
<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/amt-5-557-2012" target="_blank">doi:10.5194/amt-5-557-2012</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
Conant, W. C., Seinfeld, J. H., Wang, J., Carmichael, G. R., Tang, Y., Uno,
I., Flatau, P. J., Markowicz, K. M., and Quinn, P. K.: A model for the
radiative forcing during ACE-Asia derived from CIRPAS Twin Otter and R/V
<i>Ronald H. Brown</i> data and comparison with observations, J. Geophys.
Res., 108, 8661, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2002JD003260" target="_blank">doi:10.1029/2002JD003260</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
Dubovik, O., Smirnov, A., Holben, B., King, M., Kaufman, Y., Eck, T., and
Slutsker, I.: Accuracy assessments of aerosol optical properties retrieved
from Aerosol Robostic Network (AERONET) Sun and sky radiance measurements, J.
Geophys. Res., 105, 9791–9806, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
Dubovik, O., Holben, B., Eck, T., Smirnov, A., Kaufman, Y., King, M.,
Tanré, D., and Slutsker I.: Variability of absorption and optical
properties of key aerosol types observed in worldwide locations, J. Atmos.
Sci., 59, 590–608, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
Dubovik, O. T. and King, M.: A flexible inversion algorithm for retrieval
aerosol optical properties from Sun and sky radiance measurements, J.
Geophys. Res., 105, 20673–20696, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
Eck, T. F., Holben, B. N., Reid, J. S., Sinyuk, A., Hyer, E. J., O'Neill, N.
T., Shaw, G. E., Vande Castle, J. R., Chapin, F. S., Dubovik, O., Smirnov,
A., Vermote, E., Schafer, J. S., Giles, D., Slutsker, I., Sorokine, M., and
Newcomb, W. W.: Optical properties of boreal region biomass burning aerosols
in central Alaska and seasonal variation of aerosol optical depth at an
Arctic coastal site, J. Geophys. Res., 114, D11201,
<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2008JD010870" target="_blank">doi:10.1029/2008JD010870</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
Esteve, A. R., Highwood, E. J., and Ryder, C. L.: A case study of the
radiative effect of aerosols over Europe: EUCAARI-LONGREX, Atmos. Chem.
Phys., 16, 7639–7651, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-7639-2016" target="_blank">doi:10.5194/acp-16-7639-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
Fontenla, J., White, O. R., Fox, P. A., Avert, E. H., and Kurucz, R. L.:
Calculation of solar irradiances, I. Synthesis of the solar spectrum,
Astrophys. J., 518, 480–500, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
García, O. E., Díaz, A. M., Exposito, F. J., Díaz, J. P.,
Dubovik, O., Dubuisson, P., Roger, J.-C., Eck, T. F., Sinyuk, A., Derimian,
Y., Dutton, E. G., Schafer, J. S., Holben, B. N., and García, C. A.:
Validation of AERONET estimates of atmospheric solar fluxes and aerosol
radiative forcing by ground-based broadband measurements, J. Geophys. Res.,
113, D21207, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2008JD010211" target="_blank">doi:10.1029/2008JD010211</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
García, O. E., Díaz, J. P., Expósito, F. J., Díaz, A. M.,
Dubovik, O., Derimian, Y., Dubuisson, P., and Roger, J.-C.: Shortwave
radiative forcing and efficiency of key aerosol types using AERONET data,
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 5129–5145, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-5129-2012" target="_blank">doi:10.5194/acp-12-5129-2012</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
Garcia, R. D., Garcia, O. E., Cuevas, E., Cachorro, V. E., Romero-Campos, P.
M., Ramos, R., and de Frutos, A. M.: Solar radiation measurements compared to
simulations at the BSRN Izana station: Mineral dust radiative forcing and
efficiency study, J. Geophys. Res., 119, 179–194, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/2013JD020301" target="_blank">doi:10.1002/2013JD020301</a>,
2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>
Giles, D. M., Holben, B. N., Eck, T. F., Sinyuk, A., Smirnov, A., Slutsker,
I., Dickerson, R. R., Thompson, A. M., and Schafer, J. S.: An analysis of
AERONET aerosol absorption properties and classifications representative of
aerosol source regions, J. Geophys. Res., 117, D17203,
<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2012JD018127" target="_blank">doi:10.1029/2012JD018127</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
Gorchakov, G. I., Sitnov, S. A., Sviridenkov, M. A., Semoutnikova, E. G.,
Emilenko, A. S., Isakov, A. A., Kopeikin, V. M., Karpov, A. V., Gorchakova,
I. A., Verichev, K. S., Kurbatov, G. A., and Ponomareva, T. Ya.: Satellite
and ground-based monitoring of smoke in the atmosphere during the summer
wildfires in European Russia in 2010 and Siberia in 2012, Int. J. Remote
Sens., 35, 5698–5721, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
Groisman, P. Ya., Sherstyukov, B. G., Razuvaev, V. N., Knight, R. W., Enloe,
J. G., Stroumentova, N. S., Whitfield, P. H., Førland, E., Hannsen-Bauer,
I., Tuomenvirt, H., Aleksandersson, H., Mescherskaya, A., and Karl, T. R.:
Potential forest fire danger over Northern Eurasia: Changes during the 20th
century, Global Planet. Change, 56, 371–386, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>
GSFC NASA: AERONET Data Download Tool, USA, available at:
<a href="http://aeronet.gsfc.nasa.gov" target="_blank">http://aeronet.gsfc.nasa.gov</a>, last access: January 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
GSFC Terrestrial Information Systems Laboratory: LANCE-MODIS data system,
NASA, USA, available at:
<a href="http://lance-modis.eosdis.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/imagery/firemaps.cgi" target="_blank">http://lance-modis.eosdis.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/imagery/firemaps.cgi</a>, last
access: March 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
Hammer, M. S., Martin, R. V., van Donkelaar, A., Buchard, V., Torres, O.,
Ridley, D. A., and Spurr, R. J. D.: Interpreting the ultraviolet aerosol
index observed with the OMI satellite instrument to understand absorption by
organic aerosols: implications for atmospheric oxidation and direct radiative
effects, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 2507–2523, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-2507-2016" target="_blank">doi:10.5194/acp-16-2507-2016</a>,
2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
Hess, M., Koepke, P., and Schult, I.: Optical properties of aerosols and
clouds: The software package OPAC, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 79, 831–844, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
Holben, B. N., Eck, T. F., Slutsker, I., Tanre, D., Buis, J. P., Setzer, A.,
Vermote, E., Reagan, J. A., Kaufman, Y. J., Nakadjima, T., Lavenu, F.,
Jankowiak, I., and Smirnov, A.: AERONET – A federated instrument network and
data archive for aerosol characterization, Remote Sens. Environ., 66, 1–16,
1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
Holben, B. N., Eck, T. F., Slutsker, I., Smirnov, A., Sinyuk, A., Schafer,
J., Giles, D., and Dubovik, O.: AERONET's Version 2.0 quality assurance
criteria, Remote Sensing of Atmosphere and Clouds, Proc. SPIE, 6408, 64080Q,
<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1117/12.706524" target="_blank">doi:10.1117/12.706524</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>
Jethva, H. and Torres, O.: Satellite-based evidence of wavelength-dependent
aerosol absorption in biomass burning smoke inferred from Ozone Monitoring
Instrument, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 10541–10551,
<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-10541-2011" target="_blank">doi:10.5194/acp-11-10541-2011</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
Kabanov, D. M. and Sakerin, S. M.: Variations of the characteristics of the
aerosol optical depth under conditions of forest fires, Proc. of SPIE:
Thirteenth Joint International Symposium on Atmospheric and Ocean Optics.
Atmospheric Physics, 2–7 July 2006, Tomsk, Russia, 6522, 65221J-1–65221J-6,
2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>
Kirchstetter, T. W., Novakov, T., and Hobbs, P. V.: Evidence that the
spectral dependence of light absorption by aerosols is affected by organic
carbon, J. Geophys. Res., 109, D21208, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2004jd004999" target="_blank">doi:10.1029/2004jd004999</a>, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>
Komarov, V. S. and Lomakina, N. Ya.: Statistical models of the atmospheric
boundary layer, IAO Publishing House, Tomsk, Russia, 2008 (in Russian).
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>
Kozlov, V. S., Yausheva, E. P., Terpugova, S. A., Panchenko, M. V., Chernov,
D. G., and Shmargunov V. P.: Optical–microphysical properties of smoke haze
from Siberian forest fires in summer 2012, Int. J. Remote Sens., 35,
5722–5741, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>
Levy, R. C., Mattoo, S., Munchak, L. A., Remer, L. A., Sayer, A. M., Patadia,
F., and Hsu, N. C.: The Collection 6 MODIS aerosol products over land and
ocean, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 6, 2989–3034, doi:10.5194/amt-6-2989-2013, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>
Lewis, K., Arnott, W. P., Moosmuller, H., and Wold, C. E.: Strong spectral
variation of biomass smoke light absorption and single scattering albedo
observed with a novel dual-wavelength photoacoustic instrument, J. Geophys.
Res., 113, D16203 <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2007jd009699" target="_blank">doi:10.1029/2007jd009699</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>
Lu, Z., Streets, D. J., Winijkul, E., Yan, F., Chen, Y., Bond, T. C., Feng,
Y., Dubey, M. K., Liu, S., Pinto, J. P., and Carmichael, G. R.: Light
Absorption Properties and Radiative Effects of Primary Organic Aerosol
Emissions, Environ. Sci. Technol., 49, 4868–4877,
<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.5b00211" target="_blank">doi:10.1021/acs.est.5b00211</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>
Moody, E. G., King, M. D., Platnick, S., Schaaf, C. B., and Gao, F.:
Spatially compete global spectral surface albedos: value-added datasets
derived from Terra MODIS Land products, IEEE T. Geosci. Remote, 43, 144–158,
2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>
Moosmüller, H, Chakrabarty, R. K., and Arnott, W. P.: Aerosol light
absorption and its measurement: A review, J. Quant. Spectrosc. Ra., 110,
844–878, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>
Myhre, G., Berntsen, T. K., Haywood, J. M., Sundet, J. K., Holben, B. N.,
Johnsrud, M., and Stordal, F.: Modeling the solar radiative impact of
aerosols from biomass burning during the Southern African Regional Science
Initiative (SAFARI-2000) experiment, J. Geophys. Res., 108, 8501,
<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002313" target="_blank">doi:10.1029/2002JD002313</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>
NASA GES DISC: Giovanni online data system, USA, available at:
<a href="http://giovanni.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/giovanni/" target="_blank">http://giovanni.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/giovanni/</a>, last access: April 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>
Nikonovas, T., North, P. R. J., and Doerr, S. H.: Smoke aerosol properties
and ageing effects for northern temperate and boreal regions derived from
AERONET source and age attribution, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 7929–7943,
<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-7929-2015" target="_blank">doi:10.5194/acp-15-7929-2015</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>
O'Neill, N. T., Eck, T. F., Holben, B. N., Smirnov, A., Dubovik, O., and
Royer, A.: Bimodal size distribution influences on the variation of Angstrom
derivatives in spectral and optical depth space, J. Geophys. Res., 106,
9787–9806, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2000JD900245" target="_blank">doi:10.1029/2000JD900245</a>, 2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>
O'Neill, N. T., Eck, T. F., Smirnov, A., Holben, B. N., and Thulasiraman, S.:
Spectral discrimination of coarse and fine mode optical depth, J. Geophys.
Res., 108, 4559, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002975" target="_blank">doi:10.1029/2002JD002975</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation>
Panchenko, M. V., Zhuravleva, T. B., Terpugova, S. A., Polkin, V. V., and
Kozlov, V. S.: An empirical model of optical and radiative characteristics of
the tropospheric aerosol over West Siberia in summer, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 5,
1513–1527, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/amt-5-1513-2012" target="_blank">doi:10.5194/amt-5-1513-2012</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation>
Panchenko, M. V., Zhuravleva, T. B., Kozlov, V. S., Nasrtdinov, I. M.,
Pol'kin, V. V., Terpugova, S. A., and Chernov, D. G.: Estimation of Aerosol
Radiation Effects under Background and Smoke-haze Atmospheric Conditions over
Siberia from Empirical Data, Russ. Meteorol. Hydrol., 41, 104–111, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation>
Polyakov, D. V., Barashkova, N. K., and Kuzhevskaya, I. V.: Weather and
Climate Description of Anomalous Summer 2012 in Tomsk Region, Russ. Meteorol.
Hydrol., 39, 22–28, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation>
Raspisaniye Pogodi Ltd.: Reliable prognosis, St. Petersburg, Russia,
available at: <a href="http://rp5.ru" target="_blank">http://rp5.ru</a>, last access: April 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation>
Reid, J. S., Hobbs, P. V., Ferek, R. J., Blake, D. R., Martins, J. V.,
Dunlap, M. R., and Liousse, C.: Physical, chemical, and optical properties
of regional hazes dominated by smoke in Brazil, J. Geophys. Res., 103,
32059–32080, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><mixed-citation>
Reid, J. S., Koppmann, R., Eck, T. F., and Eleuterio, D. P.: A review of
biomass burning emissions part II: intensive physical properties of biomass
burning particles, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 5, 799–825,
<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-5-799-2005" target="_blank">doi:10.5194/acp-5-799-2005</a>, 2005a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><mixed-citation>
Reid, J. S., Eck, T. F., Christopher, S. A., Koppmann, R., Dubovik, O.,
Eleuterio, D. P., Holben, B. N., Reid, E. A., and Zhang, J.: A review of
biomass burning emissions part III: intensive optical properties of biomass
burning particles, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 5, 827–849,
<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-5-827-2005" target="_blank">doi:10.5194/acp-5-827-2005</a>, 2005b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><mixed-citation>
Russell, P. B., Bergstrom, R. W., Shinozuka, Y., Clarke, A. D., DeCarlo, P.
F., Jimenez, J. L., Livingston, J. M., Redemann, J., Dubovik, O., and Strawa,
A.: Absorption Angstrom Exponent in AERONET and related data as an indicator
of aerosol composition, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 1155–1169,
<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-1155-2010" target="_blank">doi:10.5194/acp-10-1155-2010</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><mixed-citation>
Sakerin, S. M. (Ed.): Study of radiative characteristics of aerosol in Asian
part of Russia, Publishing House of Institute of Atmospheric Optics SB RAS,
Tomsk, Russia, 484 pp., 2012 (in Russian).
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><mixed-citation>
Sakerin, S. M. and Kabanov, D. M.: Spectral dependence of the atmosphere
aerosol optical depth near 0.37–4 µm, Atmos. Ocean. Opt., 20,
141–149, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><mixed-citation>
Sakerin, S. M. and Kabanov, D. M.: Finely and coarsely dispersed components
of atmospheric aerosol optical depth in the region of Tomsk: interannual and
seasonal variations, Proc. of SPIE, 1316, 9680, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1117/12.22050" target="_blank">doi:10.1117/12.22050</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><mixed-citation>
Sakerin, S. M., Beresnev, S. A., Gorda, S. Yu., Kabanov, D. M., Kornienko, G.
I., Markelov, Yu. I., Mikhalev, A. V., Nikolashkin, S. V., Panchenko, M. V.,
Poddubnyi, V. A., Pol'kin, V. V., Smirnov, A., Tashchilin, M. A.,
Turchinovich, S. A., Turchinovich, Yu. S., Holben, B., and Eremina, T. A.:
Characteristics of the annual behavior of the spectral aerosol optical depth
of the atmosphere under conditions of Siberia, Atmos. Ocean. Opt., 22,
446–456, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib63"><label>63</label><mixed-citation>
Sakerin, S. M., Kabanov, D. M., Nasrtdinov, I. M., Turchinovich, S. A., and
Turchinovich, Yu. S.: The results of two-point experiments on the estimation
of the urban anthropogenic effect on the characteristics of atmospheric
transparency, Atmos. Ocean. Opt., 23, 88–94, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib64"><label>64</label><mixed-citation>
Sakerin, S. M., Andreev, S. Yu., Kabanov, D. M., Nikolashkin, S. V., Prakhov,
A. N., Radionov, V. F., Turchinovich, Yu. S., Chernov, D. G., Holben, B. N.,
and Smirnov, A.: On results of studies of atmospheric aerosol optical depth
in arctic regions, Atmos. Ocean. Opt., 27, 517–528, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib65"><label>65</label><mixed-citation>
Sayer, A. M., Hsu, N. C., Eck, T. F., Smirnov, A., and Holben, B. N.:
AERONET-based models of smoke-dominated aerosol near source regions and
transported over oceans, and implications for satellite retrievals of aerosol
optical depth, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 11493–11523,
<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-11493-2014" target="_blank">doi:10.5194/acp-14-11493-2014</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib66"><label>66</label><mixed-citation>
Schuster, G. L., Dubovik, O., and Arola, A.: Remote sensing of soot carbon –
Part 1: Distinguishing different absorbing aerosol species, Atmos. Chem.
Phys., 16, 1565–1585, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-1565-2016" target="_blank">doi:10.5194/acp-16-1565-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib67"><label>67</label><mixed-citation>
Shakina, N. P. and Ivanova, A. R.: The Blocking Anticyclones: the State of
Studies and Forecasting, Russ. Meteorol. Hydrol., 35, 721–730, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib68"><label>68</label><mixed-citation>
Sklyadneva, T. K., Ivlev, G. A., Belan, B. D., Arshinov, M. Yu., and
Simonenkov, D. V.: The radiation regime of Tomsk in conditions of a smoky
haze, Atmos. Ocean. Opt., 28, 215–222, 2015 (in Russian).
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib69"><label>69</label><mixed-citation>
Smirnov, A., Holben, B. N., Eck, T. F., Dubovik, O., and Slutsker, I.: Cloud
screening and quality control algorithms for the AERONET data base, Remote
Sens. Environ., 73, 337–349, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib70"><label>70</label><mixed-citation>
Tomasi, C., Lanconelli, C., Lupi, A., and Mazzola, M.: Diurnally averaged
direct aerosol-induced radiative forcing from cloud-free sky field
measurements performed during seven regional experiments, in: Light
Scattering Reviews 9, edited by: Kokhanovsky, A., Springer Praxis Books,
Chichester, UK, 297–425, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib71"><label>71</label><mixed-citation>
Torres, O., Bhartia, P. K., Herman, J. R., Ahmad, Z., and Gleason, J.:
Derivation of aerosol propertiesfrom satellite measurements of backscattered
ultraviolet radiation: theoretical basis, J. Geophys. Res., 103,
17099–17110, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/98JD00900" target="_blank">doi:10.1029/98JD00900</a>, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib72"><label>72</label><mixed-citation>
Tvorogov, S. D., Zhuravleva, T. B., Rodimova, O. B., and Firsov, K. M.:
Theory of series of exponents and its application for analysis of radiation
processes, in: Problems of Global Climatology and Ecodynamics. Anthropogenic
Effects on the State of Planet Earth, edited by: Cracknell, A. P., Krapivin,
V. F., and Varotsos, C. A., Springer/Praxis, Chichester, UK, 211–240, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib73"><label>73</label><mixed-citation>
Vinogradova, A. A., Smirnov, N. S., Korotkov, V. N., and Romanovskaya, A. A.:
Forest Fires in Siberia and the Far East: Emissions and Atmospheric Transport
of Black Carbon to the Arctic, Atmos. Ocean. Opt., 28, 566–574, 2015.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib74"><label>74</label><mixed-citation>
Yu, H., Kaufman, Y. J., Chin, M., Feingold, G., Remer, L. A., Anderson, T.
L., Balkanski, Y., Bellouin, N., Boucher, O., Christopher, S., DeCola, P.,
Kahn, R., Koch, D., Loeb, N., Reddy, M. S., Schulz, M., Takemura, T., and
Zhou, M.: A review of measurement-based assessments of the aerosol direct
radiative effect and forcing, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6, 613–666,
<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-613-2006" target="_blank">doi:10.5194/acp-6-613-2006</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib75"><label>75</label><mixed-citation>
Zhong, M. and Jang, M.: Dynamic light absorption of biomass-burning organic
carbon photochemically aged under natural sunlight, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14,
1517–1525, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-1517-2014" target="_blank">doi:10.5194/acp-14-1517-2014</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib76"><label>76</label><mixed-citation>
Zhou, M., Yu, H., Dickinson, R., Dubovik, O., and Holben, B.: A normalized
description of the direct effect of key aerosol types on solar radiation as
estimated from AERONET aerosols and MODIS albedo, J. Geophys. Res., 110,
D19202, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2005JD005909" target="_blank">doi:10.1029/2005JD005909</a>, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib77"><label>77</label><mixed-citation>
Zhuravleva, T. B. and Sakerin, S. M..: Simulation of direct aerosol radiative
forcing for typical summer conditions of Siberia. Part II: Variability range
and sensitivity to the input parameters, Atmos. Ocean. Opt, 22, 74–83, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib78"><label>78</label><mixed-citation>
Zhuravleva, T. B., Kabanov, D. M., Sakerin, S. M., and Firsov, K. M.:
Simulation of direct aerosol radiative forcing for typical summer conditions
of Siberia. Part 1: Method of calculation and choice of the input parameters,
Atmos. Ocean. Opt., 22, 63–73, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib79"><label>79</label><mixed-citation>
Zhuravleva, T. B., Sakerin, S. M., Bedareva, T. V., Kabanov, D. M.,
Nasrtdinov, I. M., and Chesnokova, T. Yu.: Solar radiative fluxes in the
clear-sky atmosphere of Western Siberia: A comparison of simulations with
field measurements, Atmos. Ocean. Opt., 27, 176–186, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
