<?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" xml:lang="en" dtd-version="3.0"><?xmltex \makeatother\@nolinetrue\makeatletter?>
  <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-13-6357-2020</article-id><title-group><article-title>Three decades of tropospheric ozone lidar development<?xmltex \hack{\break}?> at
Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany</article-title><alt-title>Three decades of tropospheric ozone development</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{Three decades of tropospheric ozone development}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{T. Trickl et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes">
          <name><surname>Trickl</surname><given-names>Thomas</given-names></name>
          <email>thomas@trickl.de</email>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no">
          <name><surname>Giehl</surname><given-names>Helmuth</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no">
          <name><surname>Neidl</surname><given-names>Frank</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no">
          <name><surname>Perfahl</surname><given-names>Matthias</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no">
          <name><surname>Vogelmann</surname><given-names>Hannes</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><institution>Karlsruher Institut für Technologie, Institut für Meteorologien und Klimaforschung (IMK-IFU),<?xmltex \hack{\break}?> Kreuzeckbahnstr. 19, 82467
Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Thomas Trickl (thomas@trickl.de)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>27</day><month>November</month><year>2020</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>13</volume>
      <issue>11</issue>
      <fpage>6357</fpage><lpage>6390</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>16</day><month>March</month><year>2020</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>6</day><month>May</month><year>2020</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>10</day><month>September</month><year>2020</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>30</day><month>September</month><year>2020</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2020 Thomas Trickl et al.</copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2020</copyright-year>
      <license license-type="open-access"><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ext-link></license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/13/6357/2020/amt-13-6357-2020.html">This article is available from https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/13/6357/2020/amt-13-6357-2020.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/13/6357/2020/amt-13-6357-2020.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/13/6357/2020/amt-13-6357-2020.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract><title>Abstract</title>
    <p id="d1e118">Since 1988 two ozone lidar systems have been developed at IMK-IFU
(Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany). A stationary system, operated at the
institute, has yielded about 5000 vertical profiles of ozone from next to
the ground to typically 3 km above the tropopause and has contributed data
for a large number of scientific investigations. A mobile system was
successfully operated in a number of field campaigns after its completion in
1996, before it was destroyed in major flooding in May 1999. Both systems
combine high data quality with high vertical resolution dynamically varied
between 50 m in the lower troposphere and 250–500 m below the tropopause
(stationary system). The stationary system has been gradually upgraded over
the years. The noise level of the raw data has reached about
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of the input range of the transient digitizers
after minor smoothing. As a consequence, uncertainties in the ozone mixing
ratios of 1.5 to 4 ppb have been achieved up to about 5 km. The performance
in the upper troposphere, based on the wavelength pair 292–313 nm, varies
between 5 and 15 ppb depending on the absorption of the 292 nm radiation by
ozone and the solar background. In summer it is therefore planned to
extend the measurement time from 41 s to a few minutes in order to improve
the performance to a level that will allow us to trust automatic data
evaluation. As a result of the time needed for manual refinement the number of measurements per year has been restricted to under 600. For longer time
series automatic data acquisition has been used.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

      <?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <label>1</label><title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e152">Lidar measurements of tropospheric ozone have resulted in important
contributions to atmospheric research. Large variations of the
concentrations on timescales of less than 1 h may be observed, which
have led to insight into a number of tropospheric transport processes (see
Table A1 for a large number of examples). In addition, measurements with
ozone lidar systems have contributed to numerous air-quality studies (Table A2). Due to considerable technical progress, rather small changes
in the volume mixing ratio of just a few parts per billion (ppb) can currently be
resolved, which is necessary for also distinguishing the influence of minor
contributions and for reliable trend studies.</p>
      <p id="d1e155">Still, important tasks in tropospheric ozone research exist, such as a
clarification of the positive ozone trend observed until 2003 at high-altitude
observational sites in Europe (Scheel, 2003; Ordoñez et al., 2007)
despite the pronounced reduction of ozone precursors over Europe (Jonson et
al., 2006; Vautard et al., 2006), a detailed analysis of the rather complex
contributions of different sources to long-range transport, and the influence
of vertical mixing on free-tropospheric layers, in particular on
stratospheric air intrusions (Trickl et al., 2014, 2015, 2016). Although
vertical sounding, including lidar measurements of complementary quantities
such as aerosols and water vapour (e.g. Trickl et al., 2014, 2015, 2020;
Strawbridge et al., 2018; Fix et al., 2019), can yield key information for
the understanding of the role of the underlying atmospheric processes, for a
long time there was no significant growth in the number of tropospheric
ozone lidar stations towards something like an international network. By
contrast, more and more ozone lidar systems have even been shut down.
Opposite to<?pagebreak page6358?> this development, the Tropospheric Ozone Lidar Network
(TOLNet, <uri>https://www-air.larc.nasa.gov/missions/ TOLNet/</uri>, last access: 19 November 2020) with seven lidar
stations was recently established in North America (e.g. Newchurch et al., 2016; Wang
et al., 2017; Leblanc et al., 2018). It is important to note that even
vertical profiles from the impressive MOZAIC (Measurements of Ozone and
Water Vapor by Airbus In-Service Aircraft) (Marenco et al., 1998) database
are not able to resolve the fine-scale temporal variability of the vertical
distribution of trace constituents because of the rather confined time slots
for aircraft departures and arrivals at the individual airports.
Satellite measurements cannot yield the necessary information because of
presently insufficient spatial resolution and global coverage within a day.</p>
      <p id="d1e161">With a few exceptions, mostly ultraviolet (UV) differential-absorption lidar
(DIAL) systems for tropospheric applications have been proposed and
developed since 1975 (Papayannis et al., 1990; Table A3). Here, the
advantages of high Rayleigh backscattering and strong absorption cross
sections are combined. In Europe, the TESLAS (Tropospheric Environmental
Studies by Laser Sounding) subproject of EUROTRAC (EUREKA Project on
Transport and Chemical Transformation of Environmentally Relevant Trace
Constituents in the Troposphere over Europe; EUROTRAC, 1997) has resulted in
the coordinated development of several state-of-the art ozone lidar systems
(TESLAS, 1997). Lidar sounding of tropospheric ozone is a demanding
technical task (Weitkamp et al., 2000) because of the considerable dynamical
range of the backscatter signal covering up to about 8 decades, the
presence of aerosols and clouds, interfering trace gases such as SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
and NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and the solar background (stratospheric ozone measurements are
normally made during night-time), all necessitating an elaborate optical and
electronic design. The data evaluation is based on derivative formation that
is particularly sensitive to signal perturbations that set limitations to
resolving the frequently rather small changes in free-tropospheric ozone.</p>
      <p id="d1e182">At IFU (Fraunhofer-Institut für Atmosphärische Umweltforschung; now
Karlsruher Institut für Technologie, IMK-IFU), a differential-absorption
lidar (DIAL) with a particularly wide operating range from next to the
ground to the upper troposphere was completed in 1990 in the framework of
TESLAS and subsequently applied for a full year (1991) within the TOR
(Tropospheric Ozone Research; Kley et al., 1997) subproject of EUROTRAC (Carnuth et al., 2002).
The operating range of this system was extended to roughly 15 km by
introducing three-wavelength operation (Eisele and Trickl, 1997). Due to
thorough upgrading of the data acquisition system an uncertainty level of
1.5 to 4 ppb has been achieved up to the mid-troposphere (slightly higher in
the upper free troposphere, depending on the ozone concentration and solar
background).</p>
      <p id="d1e186">In the mid-1990s a mobile ozone DIAL was additionally built in cooperation
with OHB System (Bremen, Germany; Brenner et al., 1997). This system, which
was completed in spring 1996 and exhibited at the 1996 International Laser
Radar Conference, could be operated in a vertical range between 0.2 and more
than 4 km with a similar accuracy as our stationary system at low altitudes.
It was used in a number of field campaigns before it was destroyed by 2 m
of water during major flooding in southern Bavaria in May 1999 while waiting
for the VOTALP Munich field campaign (VOTALP II, 2000).</p>
      <p id="d1e189">In this paper we review the experience gained with these two lidar systems.
The development of these two systems has significantly contributed to the
state of the art in this field. Meanwhile, even the dream of meaningful
automatic data evaluation looks feasible due to the technical progress made.
Most approaches and instruments used are the same in both lidar systems,
which simplifies the description.</p>
      <p id="d1e192">Most of the paper is devoted to the stationary DIAL. We describe only
deviating design properties of the much compacter mobile system such as the
laser approach and the wavelength separation technique chosen. This system
has been extensively used over 3 decades, but no full-size technical
description has been given. We do not want to give a full description of all
the technical improvements made over the years. Just the decisive steps are
reported.</p>
      <p id="d1e195">Most of the approaches of the ozone DIAL systems have also been successfully
transferred to the other lidar systems of IMK-IFU.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <label>2</label><title>General design considerations</title>
      <p id="d1e206">In both IFU DIAL systems, fixed-frequency lasers and stimulated Raman
shifting in H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and D<inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> have been used for generating suitable
“on” and “off” wavelengths (see de Schoulepnikov et al., 1997; Milton
et al., 1998, for general overviews). In this way just a single high-power
laser source is needed. Both systems are three-wavelength lidars with two
on wavelengths and one off wavelength. This offers the opportunity
for wide-range operation starting below 0.3 km above the ground, with
stronger absorption and accuracy as well as good vertical resolution for the
shorter of the two on wavelengths and a range extension with lower
vertical resolution for the longer on wavelength. In addition, the
comparison of ozone profiles obtained from two separate wavelength pairs
allows for internal quality control. In fact, as described in Sect. 6, for
an optimum alignment and sufficient backscatter signal the agreement between
the different ozone profiles is almost perfect. Apart from the wavelength
separation methods, the basic optical layout principles and detection
electronics are mostly the same. Both systems feature automatic data
acquisition.</p>
      <p id="d1e227">The stationary system (Fig. 1) is operated in two separate, rather large
laboratories at IFU (47.477<inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, 11.064<inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E; 740 m a.s.l.). This offers several advantages such as a simple optical layout,
good alignment control due to long beam paths, reduced thermal drifts
because of no direct exposure of<?pagebreak page6359?> the laser system to outside air, and the
long distance between detection electronics and the interfering laser
system. Two separate power systems are used for the laser and electronics. The
laser PC is connected to the cleaner power system for the electronics and
controls the laser system via optical fibres. Remote control of the laser is
achieved via RS232.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Figure 1</label><caption><p id="d1e250">Overview of the IFU stationary ozone DIAL system; the system covers
two separate laboratories for the laser and the telescopes.
Abbreviations are as follows.
M1, M2: dielectric high-reflecting mirrors for 248 nm;
SM: spherical mirror (M3), high-reflecting for 248 to 313 nm, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m;
M4, M5: dielectric mirrors, high-reflecting for 248 to 313 nm;
BS: 50 % beam splitter;
BC: wavelength-selective beam combiner, reflecting 99 % at 292 nm for
an incidence angle of 45<inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and transmitting all the other lidar
wavelengths with losses not exceeding 12 %.
A: rectangular sand-blasted aluminium apertures for blocking divergent
parts of the amplifier emission that would otherwise hit and evaporate the
black surfaces of the optics holders, leading to more rapid ageing of the
optics.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/13/6357/2020/amt-13-6357-2020-f01.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e281">Due to the clean-air conditions prevailing at this rural site the wavelength
choice is less critical. The ambient concentrations of SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and
NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, species with absorption bands in the spectral range of ozone DIAL
systems, are low, which is known from the local long-term monitoring
stations. Thus, the choice of the laser source was determined by high power
in order to achieve a short measurement time. Krypton fluoride lasers have
been used (Kempfer et al., 1994; Eisele and Trickl, 1997); since 1994 this has been a
model with a maximum available average power of 54 W at 248.5 nm (all
wavelengths in this paper are given for vacuum).</p>
      <p id="d1e302">The laser choice was different for the mobile system (Fig. 2). A
frequency-quadrupled Nd:YAG laser with up to 4.2 W of average power at 266.1 nm served as the basic source of ultraviolet (UV) light. This approach was
preferred for several reasons: due to the expected operation in heavily
polluted areas at least one wavelength combination (266–299 nm)
reduces the cross-sensitivity with respect to SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> to about
0.01 ppb of ozone per part per billion of these species. Under such conditions, the
perspective of low interference by aerosols is also important, which is fulfilled
for short on wavelengths (Völger et al., 1996; Eisele and Trickl, 2005).
Thus, wavelength combinations involving 266 nm are favourable. Finally, due
to the choice of a solid-state laser source the dangerous gas handling in an
excimer laser could be avoided, an issue for the mobile operation.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><label>Figure 2</label><caption><p id="d1e325">Overview of the mobile ozone DIAL: the laser and the Raman-shifting
components were mounted on optical tables at two different levels of a
shock-isolated frame. The Newtonian telescope was located in a separate
tower, with the secondary mirror directing the beam into a polychromator
perpendicularly to the plane formed by the telescope and the outgoing laser
beam. The covers of the Raman compartment (jalousies on both sides) and the
telescope (door) were removed in this simple view. The laser power supply
was delivered in two units custom-made to fit under the lower laser table.
The entire frame was rolled into the lorry through the rear doors.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/13/6357/2020/amt-13-6357-2020-f02.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e334">A clear design goal for the mobile system was a vertical range
significantly exceeding the boundary layer by a few kilometres. This
requirement was seen as crucial for meaningful investigations during
air pollution field campaigns. The mobile ozone DIAL was mounted inside an
air-conditioned truck (Fig. 2) and was designed for autonomous operation
with an on-board power generator, batteries, automatic positioning (GPS), and
detailed safety control management including rain and wind sensors,
shutter control of the laser, and many interlocks. Critical safety
conditions immediately overrode any other action. The operator could be
automatically informed about incidents  during night-time via
telephone. After rain, the system could be restarted automatically, unless
the laser was shut down (see Sect. 3.2).</p>
      <p id="d1e337">The detection system of this DIAL was much simpler, with a less demanding
optical set-up (single telescope for both near- and far-field detection,
simple filter polychromator) and with fewer electronic components due to a
sequential emission of two of the three operating wavelengths. All this
resulted in a considerable reduction of costs, which at that time was an attractive
perspective in view of the goal of our industrial partner of an
affordable commercial system.</p>
      <p id="d1e341">Overall specifications of the two systems are listed in Tables 1 and 2. All
optical components and dielectric coatings have been provided by Laseroptik
GmbH (Garbsen, Germany) unless otherwise specified.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Table 1</label><caption><p id="d1e347">Transmitter details (the numbers are given for normal operating conditions).</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>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col2">Stationary system</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col3">Mobile system</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Laser source</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">KrF laser</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">frequency-quadrupled</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Nd:YAG laser</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Wavelength</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">245.50 nm</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">266.12 nm</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Pulse energy</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">400 mJ</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">70 mJ</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Pulse repetition rate</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">9 Hz</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">30 Hz</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Operating wavelengths (nm)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">277.124<inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, 291.838<inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>,</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">266.12, 289.10<inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>,</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">313.188<inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">299.21<inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Emission</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">simultaneous</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">289 and 299 nm sequential,</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">266 nm for each pulse</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Beam expansion</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Beam divergence</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.75</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mrad</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mrad</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table><table-wrap-foot><p id="d1e350"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> line of first Stokes shift in H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (Bragg et al., 1982; Dickensen et al., 2013): 4155.2521 cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> second Stokes shift in D<inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (Jennings et al., 1986): 2987.289 cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p></table-wrap-foot></table-wrap>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T2" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><label>Table 2</label><caption><p id="d1e675">Receiver details (latest version only).</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"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Stationary system</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Mobile system</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Primary mirrors</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.13 m diameter, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.72</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.36 m diameter, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.56</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.50 m diameter, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Wavelength separation</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">two 1.1 m grating</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">sequential detection of 289 nm,</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">spectrographs</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">299 nm, 266 nm optically separated</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">PMTs</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Hamamatsu 7400</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Hamamatsu 5600</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">modified by RSV</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Pre-amplifiers</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">gain 1–10, bandwidth 4 MHz</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">(1996–2011)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Transient digitizers</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">6 units, 12 bit, 20 MHz</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">4 units, 12 bit, 20 MHz</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">ground-free input stages</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Photon counting</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">10 GHz time bins</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Measurement time</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">41 s</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:math></inline-formula> min</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <label>3</label><title>Transmitter design</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <label>3.1</label><title>Stationary lidar</title>
      <p id="d1e898">The transmitter of the system (Fig. 1, Table 1) is based on a KrF excimer
laser (Lambda Physik, LPX 250, maximum repetition rate 100 Hz) consisting of
a tunable narrowband oscillator and a three-pass power amplifier. CaF<inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
is used for transmitted optics. CaF<inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> is not birefringent, and thus
polarization effects (Kempfer et al., 1994) and ageing are avoided. The
energy was considerably enhanced by anti-reflection (AR) coating on the outer
side windows of the amplifier gas cell and the beam splitter in front of the
energy monitor. A pulse energy of up to 540 mJ was measured several metres
away from the laser where divergent components also emerging from the
amplifier can be separated and blocked by an aperture. For the lidar
measurements the laser energy is usually set to 400 mJ. The unstable cavity
of the amplifier yields a highly collimated rectangular beam with a
divergence of 0.2 mrad. The wavelength was set for maximum output and the
prism-grating combination never touched again. In 2010 measurements with a
HighFinesse WS6 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> pm) wavelength meter carried
out over several days yielded 248.5078 nm <inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.0060 nm, in agreement
with the results of Kempfer et al. (1994). The spectral bandwidth is
specified as 0.2 cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (6 GHz). Locking the amplifier to the oscillator
can be nicely verified by an enhancement of the pulse energy by up to 70 mJ
under our standard operating conditions.</p>
      <?pagebreak page6360?><p id="d1e952">The output of the KrF laser is split by a 50 % beam splitter and focused
into two Raman cells with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m AR-coated plano-convex CaF<inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
lenses. One cell is filled with hydrogen and the other one with deuterium,
and the same pulse energy per cell as previously used for a single cell
(Kempfer et al., 1994) is ensured (almost 0.2 J). A total of six Stokes
components are generated in hydrogen, just 277.124 nm (S1) and 313.188 nm
(S2) are taken (Table 1). For deuterium the second Stokes (S2) component
(291.838 nm) is used. The outer surfaces of the CaF<inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> windows of the
Raman cells are AR-coated. The inner ones are not coated because of the
possibility of ageing in the presence of photolysed hydrogen. The pump
radiation leaving the evacuated Raman cells is of the order of 160 mJ. The
output of the Raman cells is combined with a pair of dichroic beam combiners
and collimated with an <inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m, 150 mm diameter concave spherical mirror.
The beam combiners reflect 99 % of the 292 m radiation at
45<inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and transmit 88 to 90 % of all the other relevant
spectral components. Overlap and pointing of the 292 nm beam are optimized
by placing a wire cross in front of the D<inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> cell or behind the second
beam combiner by watching the images of the cross in front of mirror M4.</p>
      <p id="d1e1016">The Raman conversion efficiency obtained with the LPX 250 laser system is
lower than that previously published (Kempfer et al., 1994). We ascribe this
to the smoother energy distribution in the beam profile of the new laser. As
an example, Fig. 3 shows the conversion efficiencies obtained for hydrogen
for a laser pulse energy of almost 200 mJ per Raman cell, attenuated by the
optics, in particular by the single-side AR-coated cell entrance windows.
The sum of all conversion efficiencies is less than 1.0 starting at already low
pressures. This loss of overall energy is tentatively ascribed to
optical breakdown. Above 3 bar the loss starts to level off. The
non-negligible fourth Stokes emission (Kempfer et al., 1994) was not
determined. The maximum second Stokes conversion efficiency for deuterium is
approximately 17 % (at 11 bar). The operating pressures have been chosen
at around 3.3 and 11 bar for H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and D<inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><label>Figure 3</label><caption><p id="d1e1040">Raman conversion efficiency (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m) as a function of pressure
for shifting the 248.5 nm radiation in hydrogen; the top curve (dark green)
represents the sum of the residual pump energy and the first three Stokes
emissions normalized to the pump energy at zero pressure. The less
important higher Stokes emissions were not measured here but may contribute
above 4 bar, which would shift the sum to higher values.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/13/6357/2020/amt-13-6357-2020-f03.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e1061">The conversion efficiency was determined for a laser repetition rate of 10 Hz in order to avoid damage to the power meter used. During the lidar
measurements it turned out that the second Stokes output may increase when
selecting a<?pagebreak page6361?> repetition rate of 100 Hz, sometimes even leading to range
signal overflow in the transient digitizer. This effect was unexpected and
must be taken into account when setting the detector supply voltages. We did
not analyse this behaviour in detail.</p>
      <p id="d1e1064">Linear polarization is important for single-line output of the Raman
shifters (Kempfer et al., 1994). Thus, we placed a Glan prism and a Fresnel rhomb
(both from Halle) in the beam between the oscillator and amplifier. All mirrors
and beam splitters of the transmitter section were manufactured with minimum
polarization sensitivity. The Fresnel rhomb is rotated for optimum
backscatter signal (Fig. 4). The strong modulation of the lidar signal in
Fig. 4 is mainly caused by the holographic gratings used in the receivers
(Sect. 3).</p>
      <p id="d1e1067">Due to the high average power of the laser system the time for a single
ozone measurement, carried out with a repetition rate of 99 Hz, is as short
as 41 s.</p><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?><?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><label>Figure 4</label><caption><p id="d1e1072">313 nm backscatter signal as a function of the angle of the Fresnel
rhomb (i.e. half the polarization angle): the strongest signal is achieved
with the polarization of the radiation emitted into the atmosphere
perpendicular to the grooves of the grating.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/13/6357/2020/amt-13-6357-2020-f04.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<?pagebreak page6362?><sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <label>3.2</label><title>Mobile lidar</title>
      <p id="d1e1089">The pump laser of the mobile DIAL was a frequency-quadrupled Nd:YAG laser
with a 30 Hz repetition rate and pulse energies of up to 140 mJ at 266 nm
(Continuum, Powerlite 9030). The laser was selected because of a remote
control option. The manufacturer promised external control of warm-up
and rotation of the frequency doubling and quadrupling crystals. The 1064
and 266 nm powers were measured by two Molectron power meters for a PC-based
power optimization. However, the computer control never worked properly:
automatic warm-up of the laser was never achieved. The reason was a conflict
with “keep-alive” pulses that had to be sent by the external control.</p>
      <p id="d1e1092">The quadrupling was achieved by using BBO (beta barium borate). This
approach yielded high conversion efficiency and moderate thermal loading.
However, after more than 1 year of infrequent operation of the lidar the
surface of the crystal started to degenerate. This turbid layer did not
strongly reduce the UV emission and polishing was therefore postponed.</p>
      <p id="d1e1095">At maximum pump energy (1.6 J at 1064 nm) the 266 nm radiation
exhibited a ring-shaped mode at a pulse-energy level of 140 mJ. We reduced
the pulse energy to 1.1 J. Still, 120 mJ could be produced, now with a
filled beam profile. However, a hot spot formed that focused in the
Raman-shifting compartment and we reduced the UV output to about 70 mJ for
safety reasons. This hot-spot problem was solved by the manufacturer in a
later (“precision”) version of the laser.</p>
      <p id="d1e1098">A ceramics shutter was added to the exit holes of the Powerlite laser that
was controlled by both the safety system and the lidar PC. Closing the
shutter was preferred to switching off the laser oscillator in order to
maintain stable thermal conditions in the laser during an interruption.</p>
      <p id="d1e1102"><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>A side view of the lidar including the entire transmitter is given in Fig. 2, which is the lower level of the frame in Fig. 5. Figure 5 shows the Raman-shifting
compartment that also contained a <inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> beam expander used for reducing the
beam divergence. Rotating beam splitters were used for directing the laser
pulses into the H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and D<inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> cells. These beam splitters were based
on circular quartz plates differently coated on the two halves of the
surface: high-reflecting for the lidar wavelengths on one half and high-transmitting on the other one. The rotation was synchronized to the laser
pulses. The control unit issued pulses for identifying the Raman cell
actually passed for the data acquisition system. Two precision motors with
measured out-of-axis rotation of just about <inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">40</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>rad, respectively, were chosen (KaVo, model EWL 4025; with
custom-made electronic control).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5"><?xmltex \currentcnt{5}?><label>Figure 5</label><caption><p id="d1e1167">Lower compartment of the transmitter section of the mobile DIAL; the
266 nm beam enters vertically from the top compartment and hits the first of
the two M1 mirrors. The polychromator is located above the two compartments
as indicated by the broken line.
Abbreviations are as follows.
M1: high-reflecting mirror for 266 nm;
M2: high-reflecting mirror for at least 266–300 nm;
Ch: rotating beam splitter (“chopper”);
L: <inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.00</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m, AR-coated;
M3: curved mirror, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.20</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m, HR-coated for at least 266–300 nm;
M4: curved mirror, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.20</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m, coated for at least 266–300 nm;
M5: rectangular mirrors, high-reflecting mirror for at least 266–300 nm;
R1, R2: motorized rotation stages, mounted vertically and horizontally,
respectively.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/13/6357/2020/amt-13-6357-2020-f05.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e1216">Due to high thermal sensitivity the emission wavelengths of Nd:YAG lasers
may vary considerably from model to model. We derive a guess of the unknown
pump wavelength of our Powerlite laser model from Trickl et al. (1989;
2007) and wavelength measurements for three other injection-seeded Nd:YAG
lasers in our laboratory. The average pump wavelength is 266.120 nm <inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.011 nm. This yields first-Stokes-shifted wavelengths of 289.103 nm (in
D<inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and 299.209 nm (in H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
      <p id="d1e1250">By focusing the 266 nm beam with an <inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m plano-convex lens we reached maximum first Stokes (S1) conversion efficiencies of almost 50 % in both hydrogen and deuterium at pressures as low as 0.9 and 1.6 bar, respectively. This is remarkable in two respects: the theoretical
Raman conversion efficiency reaches 50 % at higher pressures and<?pagebreak page6363?> the
Raman gain of deuterium is substantially smaller than that of hydrogen (de
Schoulepnikov et al., 1997). A total of 5 Stokes orders and 1 anti-Stokes order were visually observed for hydrogen, with fewer orders for
deuterium. There was some contribution of the second Stokes order
(particularly low at 1 bar due to gain competition with S1), but those for
the higher orders were below the 1 mW detection threshold of the power meter
used. Starting at pressures below the threshold for Raman conversion
absorption was realized and, in H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, the conversion efficiency rapidly
dropped to zero above about 1 bar. The same effect was also observed in pure
helium and argon. Thus, we ascribe these observations to laser-induced
breakdown. The role of the hot spot in igniting this breakdown could not be
examined. Quite obviously, the Stokes emission was emitted prior to the
breakdown maximum (see also Trickl, 2010a). In any case, the high conversion
efficiency achieved was more than enough for the lidar operation.</p>
      <p id="d1e1274">Motivated by the hot-spot problem the focusing lens was replaced by a pair
of crossed <inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m cylindrical lenses during the final phase of
operation of this lidar system. As suggested by Perrone and Piccinno (1997) this may result in a softer focus, a larger focal volume, and higher
Raman conversion. The maximum possible distance between the two lenses was
about 12 cm and was chosen for the lidar operation. In Fig. 6 the conversion
efficiencies as a function of cell pressure for this distance and also for
the minimum possible distance of about 5 cm is given. A clear change in
behaviour was seen. The transmitted pump energy no longer dropped to zero
above 1 bar. As one would expect the depletion for pressures up to 2 bar is
smaller for the larger distance between the two lenses. Quite interestingly,
the pump depletion in D<inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> was much less pronounced than that in H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>.
Despite these obvious improvements, the maximum conversion efficiency just
rose for H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (to 61 %, comparable to the results by de Schoulepnikoff
et al., 1997).</p>
      <p id="d1e1317">The rectangular beam-steering mirror was mounted on two mutually orthogonal
rotation stages (OWIS). The beam pointing angle was set on the lidar PC.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4">
  <label>4</label><title>Receiver design</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1">
  <label>4.1</label><title>Design principles</title>
      <p id="d1e1337">The optical layout of the IFU lidar systems built or modernized since 1990
is based on several design principles:
<list list-type="order"><list-item>
      <p id="d1e1342">the use of Newtonian telescopes for a less critical alignment than in
the case of a Cassegrain telescope and for an easier discrimination of the
near-field signal; and</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e1346">separate detection in near-field and far-field channels in order to
reduce the giant dynamical range of the backscatter signal covering roughly
8 decades.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e1350">No  optical elements or detectors must be placed close to the focal points in
order to avoid a modulation of the backscatter signal by the near-field scan
of the focal point across inhomogeneously transmitting or detecting
surfaces. A severe example for a photomultiplier tube (PMT) is given by
Simeonov et al. (1999). In particular, this principle also strongly
prohibits the use of optical fibres because of their unknown input surface
quality (apart from the coupling losses).</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e1354">Particularly inhomogeneous surfaces must be placed in or very close to
image planes (exit pupils) where the image spots and the light bundle as a
whole stay stable in space. As a result even very long beam paths do not
matter as long as no aperture is hit due to an excessive pointing drift of
the laser beam. In this way a stable performance is achieved over long
periods of time. Also, the diameter of the light bundle reaches its minimum
in the exit pupil, and it is important to place components with limited
diameter in (or very close to) this plane, such as detectors, optical
filters, gratings, or beam splitters.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e1358">All lenses with focal lengths below 0.2 m must be anti-reflection-coated
in order to avoid angle-dependent transmittances. Anti-reflection coating
was applied to all lenses in IFU lidar systems after 1995 to avoid
transmission losses.</p></list-item></list>
In most of our lidar systems we have chosen a modular design composed of a
series of relay-imaging pairs of equal lenses (distance 2f) with beam
splitters or filters close to the centre between the lenses (Vogelmann and
Trickl, 2008; Giehl and Trickl, 2010; Klanner et al., 2020). This approach
is also implemented in the receiver of the stationary ozone DIAL but
with a holographic grating instead of optical filters. However, in the
mobile system a convergent beam path was chosen behind the ocular of the
telescope in order to save space.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS2">
  <label>4.2</label><title>Telescopes</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS2.SSS1">
  <label>4.2.1</label><title>Stationary system</title>
      <p id="d1e1377">The large dynamical range of the backscattered light of about 8 decades
is reduced by using two separate Newtonian telescopes (Kempfer et al., 1994)
as shown in Fig. 1 (manufacturers: Vehrenberg for the entire small telescope and
Lichtenknecker  for the mirrors only). The primary mirrors have diameters of 0.13
and 0.5 m and focal lengths of 0.72 and 2.0 m, respectively. The axes of
the two telescopes are in plane with the outgoing laser beam and located
about 0.2 and 1.8 m from that of the beam, respectively.</p>
      <p id="d1e1380">The solar background was reduced by both black surfaces and a black circular
baffle around the input path of the backscattered radiation. This turned out
to be insufficient<?pagebreak page6364?> after introducing new detectors in 2012 that are more
susceptible to the background (Sect. 4.4).</p>
      <p id="d1e1383">The approximate vertical range is 0.2 to 2.5 km above the ground for the
small near-field telescope and 1.5 to 3–5 km above the tropopause for the
large far-field telescope with a dynamically adjusted vertical resolution of
50 to 300–500 m. Both telescopes are combined with 1.1 m grating
spectrographs. This led to a much better daylight rejection in comparison
with Kempfer et al. (1994).</p>
      <p id="d1e1386">The alignment of the small telescope is very difficult, given the very long
beam paths through the polychromator (Sect. 3.3). It was highly difficult to
avoid nonlinearities of the results on the first few hundred metres. The
signal had to be attenuated by a factor of 10. The solution was found a few
years ago. During the routine four-quadrant (“telecover”) testing
(Freudenthaler et al., 2008) introduced for quality assurance within
EARLINET (European Aerosol Research Lidar Network; e.g. Amodeo et al.,
2006; <uri>http://www.earlinet.org/</uri>, last access: 19 November 2020), it turned out that almost the entire
near-field return passed through the quadrant on the side of the outgoing
laser beam (named the “north” sector). This explains the observed sensitivity
to misalignment.</p>
      <p id="d1e1393">The north sector of the telescope was subsequently covered by a triangular
piece of cardboard. After this, the alignment sensitivity of the near-field
receiver (including the spectrograph, see below) disappeared, a stable
linear performance was obtained, and the signal was attenuated to an
acceptable level due to the missing north quadrant. Another important
consequence was that no additional attenuators had to be used after
this change. Most importantly, after the design change a very reliable
diurnal variation of ozone could be retrieved in the boundary layer with a
morning minimum and an afternoon maximum.</p>
      <p id="d1e1396">The alignment of the far-field receiver has remained stable during the past
24 years. The only parameters routinely optimized have been the laser-beam
pointing and the overlap of the two partial laser beams from the two Raman
shifters. Slight deviations in the overall beam pointing do (inside the
slits in the focal planes) not matter (despite the long distances in the
receivers) due to the imaging principles applied: the final and the
intermediate images of the primary mirrors are not shifted.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS2.SSS2">
  <label>4.2.2</label><title>Mobile system</title>
      <p id="d1e1407">A single Newtonian telescope with an <inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.56</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m, 317.5 mm diameter
principal mirror (Intercon Spacetec) was used. The distance between the
laser and the telescope axes was 0.5 m. The exit of the telescope towards
the detection polychromator was (horizontally) perpendicular to these two axes.</p><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS3">
  <label>4.3</label><title>Wavelength separation</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS3.SSS1">
  <label>4.3.1</label><title>Stationary system</title>
      <p id="d1e1439">After 1994, wavelength separation for the stationary system was achieved
with two identically built 1.1 m grating spectrographs, one per telescope
(Figs. 1 and 7). A grating spectrograph has the advantage of the transverse
near-field–far-field beam walk and the spectral separation taking place in
separate, mutually orthogonal planes. As explained in more detail by Kempfer
et al. (1994), a near-Wadsworth configuration was chosen in order to reduce
the astigmatism to an acceptable level. The Wadsworth angle for a given
wavelength is defined by an exit of the first diffraction order along the
grating normal. As shown by ray tracing the spectral resolution is also
close to optimum for this approach and was expected to be 0.2 nm. The design
described by Kempfer et al. (1994) was extended by placing <inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">80</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mm
lenses in front of the detectors for imaging the primary mirrors of the
telescopes onto the photocathode of the PMT. The spherical grating (Carl
Zeiss, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1995</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mm) was also placed in an image plane of the primary
mirror to minimize the diameter of the radiation bundle. Detailed numbers
are given by Eisele (1997).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F6"><?xmltex \currentcnt{6}?><label>Figure 6</label><caption><p id="d1e1468">Raman conversion efficiencies and pump beam depletion for a pair of crossed  <inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m cylindrical lenses: <bold>(a)</bold> S1 and S2 in hydrogen; <bold>(b)</bold> S1 and
S2 in deuterium; <bold>(c)</bold> normalized transmitted pump energy in both H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and D<inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/13/6357/2020/amt-13-6357-2020-f06.png"/>

          </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F7"><?xmltex \currentcnt{7}?><label>Figure 7</label><caption><p id="d1e1519">Layout of the two grating spectrographs; <inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">35</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
is the Wadsworth angle chosen, corresponding to a wavelength of 240.0 nm.
The choice of angle was limited by the space available in the housing of the
spectrograph, also considering the big PMTs initially used.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/13/6357/2020/amt-13-6357-2020-f07.png"/>

          </fig>

      <p id="d1e1549">The true spectral resolution was determined with a mercury lamp to be about
0.35 nm, achieved with low-intensity emission lines not exhibiting line
broadening due to absorption in the lamp prior to emission. Due to the
defocusing caused by the beam walk the effective spectral range for the
components of the integrated lidar return is 1.0 nm (full-width at half-maximum, f.w.h.m.), but with sharp edges. The grating efficiency was
specified as 70 % by the manufacturer (Carl Zeiss, Oberkochen) in
auto-collimation, which may be different for the Wadsworth configuration.</p>
      <p id="d1e1552">An aperture with four adjustable blades (custom-made by OWIS) was placed at
the entrance of each spectrograph in the focal plane of the primary mirror
for reducing the level background light. In the large receiver the vertical
blades were adjusted to block the near-field return and to transmit the
return from all longer distances. These vertical blades were never touched
again, and the laser-beam-steering mirror was always set for a peak signal at 8.0 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>s. The horizontal blades are set for a slit width of 2–3 mm, after
alignment with a narrow slit. The minimum slit width possible for S1
radiation is 0.7 mm (0.35 mrad), with more being needed for the S2 components.
The consequence of the small spot size is a low susceptibility to typically
observed laser pointing drifts, and the 277 nm return always yields correct
ozone values.</p>
      <p id="d1e1563">Further adjustable slits (widely open) were placed in the secondary focal
planes in front of the PMTs. However, this was just for occasionally
controlling the alignment since no cross-talk between the different
wavelength channels was observed. As mentioned, no alignment drifts were
found.</p>
      <?pagebreak page6365?><p id="d1e1566">As already mentioned in Sect. 3.1 the lidar signal varies with the
polarization angle of the laser (Fig. 4). An approximate <inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> sinusoidal
modulation is seen. The polarization angle was set for optimum signal.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS3.SSS2">
  <label>4.3.2</label><title>Mobile system</title>
      <p id="d1e1589">The polychromator design for the mobile system is quite different and
is based on dielectric mirrors, beam splitters, an edge filter, and
adjustable-slit apertures (Fig. 8). The 289 and 289 nm returns were
separated by temporal discrimination, triggered by the rotating beam
splitters described in Sect. 3.2. The data were stored in different areas of
the transient digitizers. The separation of the larger gap between 266 nm
and the two longer wavelengths could be conveniently achieved by pairs of
dielectric beam splitters (BS3), each of them transmitting just 3 % of
the longer wavelengths and fully reflecting the 266 nm component at an
incidence angle of 45<inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. In this way, two 266 nm channels
were available for both the near- and far-field sections of the
polychromator. As seen in Fig. 8, the entire arrangement is highly
symmetrical and almost identical for the near- and far-field parts. A <inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
beam splitter and an o.d. 1.0 neutral density filter (Andover) were used to
separate and to attenuate the near-field return. In the far-field section
the signal was first adjusted to perfectly match the near-field signal for
low PMT gain. After this procedure, OWIS adjustable-blade apertures (see
above), placed in the focal planes in front of the PMTs, were used to cut
off the strong near-field return that was shifted horizontally (due to the
perpendicular geometry of the outgoing laser beam, the telescope axis, and
the telescope output axis). Finally, the PMT gain was increased to maximize
the<?pagebreak page6366?> far-field signal. This approach is a rather simple alternative to the
use of two telescopes as done in our stationary system and is also applied
in our water vapour DIAL (Vogelmann and Trickl, 2008). However, it requires
very constant pointing of the outgoing laser beam in order to avoid changes
in signal level. This was not exactly the case for the laser used here
but could be verified for the more recent (precision) version of the
Powerlite laser of the H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O DIAL.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F8" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{8}?><label>Figure 8</label><caption><p id="d1e1624">Polychromator of the mobile ozone DIAL: the opto-mechanical
components were mounted on a rail system attached to a black optical table
with a 25 mm <inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 25 mm hole pattern (M6 threads, not shown). The two
green dots mark the intermediate image planes of the primary mirror of the
telescope (the secondary image planes coincide with the PMT cathodes).
Abbreviations are as follows.
A: rectangular aperture with four adjustable black blades;
BS1: beam splitter for reflecting 532 or 1064 nm out of the received
radiation for aerosol measurements (not implemented);
BS2: 1:100 beam splitter for near-field–far-field separation;
BS3: dichroic beam splitter with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % for 289 and 299 nm;
HR1: high-reflecting mirror (45<inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>);
EF: dielectric edge filter, blocking the radiation above 299 nm;
NDF: <inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % neutral density filter;
L1: <inline-formula><mml:math id="M84" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mm lanes;
L2: <inline-formula><mml:math id="M85" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mm lens;
AL: alignment laser.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=369.885827pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/13/6357/2020/amt-13-6357-2020-f08.png"/>

          </fig>

      <p id="d1e1698">An OWIS adjustable-slit aperture was also placed in the focal plane of the
telescope (top of Fig. 8) for the reduction of the solar background. To
account for the changing position of the “focus” as a function of the
changing position of the outgoing laser pulse the orientation of the slit
was horizontally tilted (i.e. perpendicular to the orientation in the
stationary system due to the 90<inline-formula><mml:math id="M86" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> rotation of the telescope
exit). The vertical blades of the aperture could be closed to 1.7 mm
(corresponding to an acceptance angle of 1 mrad) without a loss of signal
but were set slightly wider during normal operation.</p>
      <p id="d1e1711">Each of the four detection channels principally look the same, apart from
the different surfaces of the components (HR1, high reflector for 266 nm;
BS3). As mentioned, the set-up deviates from the conventional modular
set-up with relay-imaging lenses. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M87" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mm ocular (L1) does
not collimate the lidar return: it directly refocuses the radiation to an
intermediate focal point. In this way, the overall distance to the detectors
could be shortened. Just one additional lens (L2, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M88" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mm) was
used for exactly imaging the principal mirror of the telescope onto the
photocathodes of the PMTs. Most optical components were placed in the
vicinity of the intermediate images of the primary mirror (green dots in
Fig. 8).</p>
      <p id="d1e1744">One deficiency that was never overcome before the destruction of the system
was that just a single PMT was for both on and off channels in the
far-field section. Since the on signal peak is already rather small at
the beginning of the far-field signal, the off component should be
attenuated e.g. by rotating quartz plates with two differently coated
halves similar to those next to the Raman shifter. This would
allow the off signal to be reduced to about the same level as the on
signal, and a higher PMT gain could be used.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS4">
  <label>4.4</label><title>Detectors</title>
      <p id="d1e1756">The detectors are key components of our lidar development, which calls for
an explicit description. As suggested by Kempfer et
al. (1994), we exclusively used the 14-stage EMI 9893B
photomultiplier tubes (PMTs) between 1994 and April 1996. For linear performance the 9893B detectors
were operated with maximum analogue signal levels below 10 mV (50 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ω</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>
termination). This means that the very high gain of this 14-dynode PMT
(up to 8 decades) is completely unnecessary. The big plus was range
gating (Kempfer et al., 1994), lifting the far-field signal level to values
mostly well above the electronic imperfections of the signal processing
system. The range-gating circuit was further improved for repetition rates
of more than 20 Hz.</p>
      <p id="d1e1766">However, after very positive testing in 1995, we introduced Hamamatsu
H5783P-06 PMT modules to both DIAL systems in spring 1996 (Brenner et al.,
1997; Eisele and Trickl, 1997). The miniature PMT features a built-in
Cockroft–Walton power supply, an 8 mm diameter photocathode, and six mesh
dynodes, leading to a maximum current gain of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. This
gain is sufficient for obtaining a very big lidar signal. This module is
extremely linear over at least 5 decades for analogue signals up to at
least 100 mV (50 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ω</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> termination) in the operating voltage range
around the most recommended 800 V. Fluorescence-free Corion SB-300-F
short-pass filters were placed on the PMTs and efficiently removed radiation
for wavelengths beyond 320 nm.</p>
      <p id="d1e1791">The small size of the modules allowed us to achieve a very compact design of
the polychromators of the two lidar systems. In particular, side-by-side
operation of all three PMTs in the spectrographs of the stationary DIAL
became possible. These modules were used in our stationary system for more
than 15 years without discernible signs of ageing.</p>
      <p id="d1e1794">Finally, driven by the hope for further improvement, we replaced the
Hamamatsu H5783P-06 modules in 2012 with an actively stabilized version optimized for
us in 1999 for our three-wavelength aerosol lidar (Kreipl, 2006) by Romanski
Sensors (RSV). This device had to be based on the follow-up PMT version
Hamamatsu R7400U-03 because the 5600 series was longer available. The
socket was further modified to deliver optimized single-photon spikes
without the ringing of the original PMTs (Fig. 9a and b). The power
connection cable is shielded, but the shield is grounded just on one side.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F9"><?xmltex \currentcnt{9}?><label>Figure 9</label><caption><p id="d1e1800"><bold>(a)</bold> Single-photon pulse from a Hamamatsu 5600 or 7400 PMT,
measured with a 500 MHz digital oscilloscope (Tektronix, TDS 3045 C). <bold>(b)</bold> Single-photon pulse from a Hamamatsu R7400P-03 PMT
with the most recent version of the Romanski (RSV) socket, measured with a
1 GHz digital oscilloscope (Tektronix, DPO 7104).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/13/6357/2020/amt-13-6357-2020-f09.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e1814">Similar to the Hamamatsu module the RSV socket generates a clean reference
voltage (5 V). This voltage is produced from the 15 V supply voltage. The
5 V reference, corresponding to a PMT voltage of 1000 V, is then returned to
the power supply where it is divided to the adjustable final control voltage
level (0 to 5 V) that is sent back to the detector (Fig. 3.12 of Kreipl, 2006). This loop was necessary to clean the lidar signals to a level below
10<inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> of the peak signal. Sending in just an external control voltage
resulted in an unacceptable baseline crossing of about 10<inline-formula><mml:math id="M93" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> of the
peak lidar signal.</p>
      <p id="d1e1841">The diameter of these detector modules, 50 mm, was too large for operating
the PMTs for 277 and 292 nm side by side in the spectrograph of the
stationary system. In order to make this possible, RSV delivered four of the
modules with the small PMT tubes mounted off-axis.</p>
      <p id="d1e1844">Testing of the PMTs in our three-wavelength aerosol lidar showed that
above peak signals of 40 mV signal-induced nonlinearities become observable
that are attributed to photocathode overload (Fig. 3.10 of Kreipl, 2006;
English version: <uri>http://www.trickl.de/PMT.PDF</uri>, last access: 19 November 2020). However, this result was
obtained for a PMT supply voltage of the order of just 450 V and
therefore corresponded to an excessive photon flux (see Fig. 10 for a gain
curve). For voltages around 800 V (maximum: 1000 V), as<?pagebreak page6367?> recommended for
photon counting, the incident radiation levels for creating the same signal
are roughly 100 times lower. As a consequence, much higher signal levels can
be afforded, and in recent years we have routinely set the peak signals in
the far-field receiver to 70 mV, this being a rather conservative choice.
This setting was motivated by the decision to stay within the 100 mV input range
of the transient digitizer (Sect. 4.5).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F10"><?xmltex \currentcnt{10}?><label>Figure 10</label><caption><p id="d1e1852">Peak lidar signal measured with an R7400P-03 PMT as a function of
the supply high voltage. The measurement was made for different attenuations
of the incoming radiation by calibrating the data to the results for the
standard settings. Signal-induced nonlinearities were only observed for very
high photon fluxes, for which the supply voltage had to be reduced to 450 V
to ensure signals below 100 mV (Kreipl, 2006).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/13/6357/2020/amt-13-6357-2020-f10.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e1862">We ascribe this unprecedented performance to the mesh layers of the
dynode stages that likely act as electrostatic kinetic energy filters for
the electrons. A pulse-height spectrum of one of the PMTs for the
recommended operating voltage of 800 V is shown in Fig. 11. This spectrum
was derived from a time scan with a 1 GHz digital oscilloscope (Tektronix,
DPO 7104). No rise in photon counts towards 0 V pulse height is seen that
would indicate signal-induced cathode emission, this result being limited by
the chosen trigger level of the scope of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>1.5 mV. It is important to
mention that the pulse-height distribution does not end at <inline-formula><mml:math id="M95" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>23 mV. As can
be concluded from Fig. 9a and b, much higher pulses exist that can reach
almost <inline-formula><mml:math id="M96" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>200 mV. For 1 h measurements with our Raman lidar (Klanner et
al., 2020) we did not<?pagebreak page6368?> observe dark counts in 7.5 m bins for discriminator
thresholds of 4 mV and PMT supply voltages beyond 900 V.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F11"><?xmltex \currentcnt{11}?><label>Figure 11</label><caption><p id="d1e1888">Pulse height distribution of a Hamamatsu R7400-03 PMT (RSV module)
for 800 V of operating voltage determined from a long time scan with a 1 GHz
digital oscilloscope (sign of the pulse amplitudes inverted).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/13/6357/2020/amt-13-6357-2020-f11.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e1897">In the far-field receiver we found that a high number of photons is more
important than a high peak analogue voltage because the photon noise
dominates the signal at large distances. Thus, we no longer attenuate the
signals and irradiate the photocathode with all the light emerging from the
spectrograph. For compensation we reduce the PMT voltage to about 700 V.
Now, the 70 mV signal level corresponds to about 2.5 times more photons per
time interval than before. This change has resulted in considerable lowering
of the ozone noise for the 292–313 nm wavelength combination in recent
years. Photon counting at 700 V, along with the resulting much lower single-photon
amplitudes, has not been tested so far (Sect. 4).</p>
      <p id="d1e1900">A really bad surprise was that the 7400 PMT is more than 1 order of
magnitude more susceptible to daylight than the old modules. The H5783P-06
modules stayed linear up to about 12 mV of constant-background analogue
signal. Now, the constant signal background must be kept below 1 mV. This
task is demanding at 313 nm during the brightest part of<?pagebreak page6369?> the day,
aggravated by the degraded surface of the primary mirror and in the presence
of clouds. In spring and summer signal undershoot to below the signal
baseline has even been observed during the hours around noon. We added a 5.7 nm
(f.w.h.m.) filter from Laseroptik for additional background
blocking. Still, mathematical corrections had to be made, which were
particularly important for optimum aerosol retrievals. A filter with a
0.5 nm flat top and very steep edges is needed. Additional solutions could
be an additional light baffle above the telescope and replacing the aged
primary mirror of the telescope.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS5">
  <label>4.5</label><title>Transient digitizers</title>
      <p id="d1e1912">For the digitization of the analogue signal a 12 bit transient digitizer was
found to be sufficient for avoiding the influence of single-bit steps since
the shot-to-shot noise is larger than a least significant bit (LSB). This
was anticipated by numerical simulations with artificial noise before the
1994–1995 upgrading of the stationary system that demonstrated the absence
of steps for a noise amplitude of 4 LSBs. A sawtooth generator built for
randomizing the single-bit steps turned out to be unnecessary. By contrast,
Langford (1995) reported a significant improvement in his system achieved by
modulating the signal.</p>
      <p id="d1e1915">In the upgraded stationary system, a 12 bit, 20 Hz system from DSP
Technology was used until 2003. Since the mobile system was built 1 year
later, the first 12 bit, low-noise 20 Hz transient digitizers systems from
Licel became available and were used. The performance was excellent with
lower noise than in the DSP system. In 2013, the Licel transient digitizers
were upgraded at our request by introducing custom-made ground-free input
amplifiers. This latest version has led to an unprecedented performance with
a relative noise level of about <inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of the full
100 mV voltage range after minor smoothing (Sect. 7.1), also yielding highly
sensitive aerosol measurements at 313 nm despite the short wavelength. This
unprecedented performance has made it possible to operate the system without
photon counting with very little loss of quality.</p>
      <p id="d1e1938">Though being much noisier, the DSP Technology system was more linear than
that of Licel as resolved down to a level of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of the
full scale (Kreipl, 2006; Fig. 3.10: <uri>http://www.trickl.de/PMT.PDF</uri>, last access: 19 November 2020). When
firing the laser of our mobile aerosol lidar nearly horizontally onto a rock
at a distance of 9 km, where the peak equalled the signal maximum, the
return from beyond the rock instantaneously and exactly returned to zero. By
contrast, the Licel system yields a small undershoot for distances beyond
remote clouds that is larger for larger signal areas. Of course, the performance is
perfect in the absence of clouds that generate very pronounced spikes. The
performance of the most recent version of the Licel system is discussed
further in Sect. 7.1.</p><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS6">
  <label>4.6</label><title>Pre-amplifiers</title>
      <p id="d1e1971">In order to lift the PMT output, typically around 10 mV for the old PMTs and
70 mV for those from Hamamatsu (into 50 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M99" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ω</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, to the coarsest range of
the transient digitizers, adjustable-gain pre-amplifiers were used until 2011
(Analog Modules, model 351, bandwidth 4 MHz, gain-adjustable between 1 and
10). In two of the far-field channels (on wavelengths) these
pre-amplifiers produced some very small ringing. Between 1997 and 2003
these problems were overcome by using photon-counting data. For many years
of exclusively using analogue data the ringing had to be removed by
mathematical corrections. The ringing and the additional noise finally
completely disappeared after disconnecting the zero voltage. After
introducing the latest (ground-free) version of the Licel input stage the
pre-amplifiers were removed.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS7">
  <label>4.7</label><title>Photon counting</title>
      <p id="d1e1992">In the stationary ozone DIAL single-photon counting was applied between
spring 1997 and 2003 with an FDC700 1 GHz photon-counting system from Optec.
The signals were fully linear starting in the middle troposphere but
produced extra counts at lower altitudes, presumably due to pile-up effects
of the PMT ringing (Fig. 9a). The signal for photon counting was separated
from the analogue output by an impedance-matched junction containing an
adjustable discriminator custom-made by RSV. In the first version the
discriminator level could not be reduced to below 11 mV. This level had to
be chosen to ensure linear performance and maximum signal (Fig. 11). The
unit was upgraded several years ago for picosecond time resolution and
discriminator levels down to 2 mV.</p>
      <p id="d1e1995">The new PMT units delivered by RSV are free of the ringing of the original
Hamamatsu tubes (Sect. 4.4) and feature pulse widths of about 1.5 ns (Fig. 10). In order to benefit from this considerable time resolution we recently
purchased MCS6 and MCS6A five-channel high-speed photon-counting systems
from Fast Comtec for several of our lidar systems. The signals are scanned
for selectable pulse edges at intervals of 100 ps, which means a maximum
count rate of about 5 GHz for equidistant picosecond pulses. For both
reasons a highly linear photon-counting performance was achieved that is
presented in detail in the parallel publication on our Raman lidar for water
vapour and temperature (Klanner et al., 2020).</p>
      <p id="d1e1998">The simultaneous analogue and photon-counting measurements from a single PMT
lead to a deterioration of the analogue signal with an artificial
perturbation of the signal of the order of 10<inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> of the peak voltage.
This could be reduced by 1 order of magnitude by adding an optocoupler to
the trigger input of the counting system. However, the shape of the
perturbation was somewhat complex and thus difficult to correct
mathematically. In addition, we do not have experience with photon counting
at the currently preferred PMT voltages of<?pagebreak page6370?> around 700 V or less (see above). At
this time the simultaneous application of photon counting is postponed until
a better solution becomes available.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS8">
  <label>4.8</label><title>System control</title>
      <p id="d1e2021">All connections between electronic components of the two DIAL systems are
ground-free. The trigger pulse is derived from a photodiode and subsequently
distributed into numerous output channels via optocouplers
(Ingenieurbüro W. Funk). The supply voltages for the PMTS, pre-amplifiers,
and discriminators (Ingenieurbüro W. Funk) are generated through
high-quality DC–DC converters (TRACO POWER, models TYL 05-05S30 and TYL
05-15W05). They are transferred to the different devices in shielded cables.
The shields of the cable leading to the PMTs are open on the side of the
detectors. The supply voltage can be set by the lidar PC via an I<inline-formula><mml:math id="M101" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C
bus, but this option has never been used in the stationary system because of
the rather stable clean-air conditions at Garmisch-Partenkirchen. Also, the
opening and closing of the flap in the roof was initiated via an I<inline-formula><mml:math id="M102" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C bus.</p>
      <p id="d1e2042">Electromagnetic interference from outside (e.g. the laser) has been kept at
a negligible level by using doubly shielded signal cables (Suhner, G03332;
the outer shield is left open on one side) and ground-free circuits. The
trigger pulses were obtained from photodiodes and then distributed via
optocouplers.</p>
      <p id="d1e2045">The firing of the XeCl laser was initiated via RS232 remote control of the
computer of the excimer laser. The power for the high-voltage circuits of
the laser is supplied by a separate source. The laser PC was connected
to the clean power in the lidar laboratory. The laser itself is controlled
by its computer via optical fibres. Finally, both cables connecting the
lidar laboratory and the laser PC are shielded, which successfully removed
any interference from the high-voltage pulses (Eisele and Trickl, 1997).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS9">
  <label>4.9</label><title>Automatic operation</title>
      <p id="d1e2056">Both DIAL systems have been extensively operated under automatic control by
the lidar PC. In the mobile system an external start and warm-up of the
laser was not possible due to issues in the programmes delivered by Continuum.
The laser output was continuously controlled: the measurements were
interrupted if the 1064 and 266 nm power levels were below maximum.</p>
      <p id="d1e2059">Among the various error conditions the most important ones are rain and high
wind speed. This results in an immediate closing of the flap in the roof. As to
the KrF laser the high-voltage is shut down, and as to the Nd:YAG laser the
output shutter is closed, with the laser continuing to fire in order to maintain
thermal equilibrium of the frequency-doubling crystals.</p>
      <p id="d1e2062">Time series under automatic control have been extended for the stationary
system to up to 4 d. In this way, numerous atmospheric transport
studies could by made, with the first 4 d series leading to the first
detection of North American ozone over Europe (Eisele et al., 1999; Trickl
et al., 2003).</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5">
  <label>5</label><title>Data processing</title>
      <p id="d1e2074">The number density of ozone, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M103" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, is obtained by computing the DIAL
equation,
          <disp-formula id="Ch1.E1" content-type="numbered"><label>1</label><mml:math id="M104" display="block"><mml:mtable columnspacing="1em" class="split" rowspacing="0.2ex" displaystyle="true" columnalign="right left"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mi>ln⁡</mml:mi><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><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:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mi>ln⁡</mml:mi><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><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:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><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:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
        with the difference
          <disp-formula id="Ch1.E2" content-type="numbered"><label>2</label><mml:math id="M105" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
        of the absorption cross sections of ozone. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M106" display="inline"><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the power returning from the
atmosphere (“lidar signal”), <inline-formula><mml:math id="M107" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> the total backscatter coefficient,
and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M108" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> the residual extinction coefficient that includes
Rayleigh and particle scattering as well as absorption by molecules other
than ozone. In the absence of aerosols and interfering gas Eq. (1) reduces to
          <disp-formula id="Ch1.E3" content-type="numbered"><label>3</label><mml:math id="M109" display="block"><mml:mtable columnspacing="1em" rowspacing="0.2ex" class="split" displaystyle="true" columnalign="right left"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ln</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><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:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">R</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><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:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">R</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
        with the subscript R denoting “Rayleigh”. The Rayleigh extinction coefficients
can be calculated in the ultraviolet spectral region with relative
uncertainties less than 1 % if radiosonde data are used for deriving the
atmospheric density. For short on wavelengths (266 nm, 277 nm) the
absorption of the radiation by ozone dominates the extinction coefficients,
and thus the uncertainty due to the Rayleigh term is
negligible.</p>
      <p id="d1e2484">Under the clean-air conditions prevailing at Garmisch-Partenkirchen Eq. (2) is
a mostly reasonable approximation. However, occasionally aerosol corrections
must be made. Due to the large wavelength separation in UV ozone DIALs, the
inference by aerosols may contribute more seriously than in DIAL systems
measuring species with a well-resolved line structure allowing the use of
neighbouring wavelengths. Operational procedures based on an iterative
parameter search were developed that are described in detail in our
preceding publication (Eisele and Trickl, 2005). For calculating ozone in
the presence of structured aerosol distributions the lowest errors have been
obtained for the wavelength pair 277–292 nm, followed by 277–313 nm and 292–313 nm. The most important factor is a strong absorption
cross section of ozone and then a minimum (but finite) wavelength
difference (Völger et al., 1996; Eisele and Trickl, 2005), in contrast
to a frequently heard, but obviously wrong, opinion.</p>
      <p id="d1e2487">Our numerical approach was significantly modified with respect to that
published earlier (Kempfer et al., 1994). Previously, the derivatives in the
DIAL equation were calculated<?pagebreak page6371?> by fitting third-order polynomials to the
backscatter profiles within a given evaluation interval. This method worked
rather well but was slow. A faster modified approach resulted in small
steps in the generated ozone profiles, requiring the application of some moderate data
smoothing in addition (Kempfer et al., 1994).</p>
      <p id="d1e2490">From the point of view of numerical filter theory polynomials are not ideal
because their transfer functions expose ringing. We decided to calculate the
derivative with a simple linear least-squares fit of just a short interval,
keeping the vertical resolution (see further below) at about 50 m, followed
by optimized numerical filtering. A five-step algorithm is applied,
consisting of
<list list-type="order"><list-item>
      <p id="d1e2495">data pre-smoothing at a level roughly corresponding to the chosen minimum
vertical resolution of 50 m (important for smooth aerosol retrievals for the
near-field telescope),</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e2499">calculation of the derivative with a constant number of data points in a
sliding interval,</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e2503">range-dependent data smoothing with a vertical resolution of about 50 m at
low altitudes and 250 to 500 m in the tropopause region, depending on the
noise level of the respective measurement,</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e2507">truncation of the uppermost ozone profiles at an altitude below
the onset of diverging noise, in summer sometimes even below the tropopause, and</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e2511">final minor smoothing of the composite ozone profile put together from the
best segments of the partial ozone profiles from different wavelength
combinations and the two telescopes.</p></list-item></list>
The smoothing intervals in step 3 have been mostly minimized in order not to
suppress existing ozone structures.</p>
      <p id="d1e2516">For a linear fit and equidistant data points the result of the fits may be
expressed in a rather simple formula, resulting in the following solution of
the DIAL equation for the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M110" display="inline"><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>th data point (Vogelmann and Trickl, 2008).
Selecting a fit interval between data point <inline-formula><mml:math id="M111" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M112" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, one obtains
          <disp-formula id="Ch1.E4" content-type="numbered"><label>4</label><mml:math id="M113" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mi>ln⁡</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:munderover><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∑</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:munderover><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
        with the signal ratio
          <disp-formula id="Ch1.E5" content-type="numbered"><label>5</label><mml:math id="M114" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">on</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">off</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">and</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:munderover><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∑</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:munderover><mml:msub><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
        with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M115" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> being the size of the range bin of the transient digitizer or
photon-counting system. Application of Eq. (3) allows a fast computation of
the derivative, in particular for constant <inline-formula><mml:math id="M116" display="inline"><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, when only the sum in the
numerator must be calculated for each step. In Eq. (3) <inline-formula><mml:math id="M117" display="inline"><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M118" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is written instead of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M119" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> as by Vogelmann and Trickl (2008). This is explained further below.</p>
      <p id="d1e2815">Another important advantage of Eq. (3) is that the least-squares fit is not
applied to the logarithm, but to the signal ratio itself, due to the
transformation
          <disp-formula id="Ch1.E6" content-type="numbered"><label>6</label><mml:math id="M120" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mi>ln⁡</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:msub><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
        In contrast to the noise of the logarithm of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M121" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> the noise of the signal
ratio is symmetrical and fulfils a key prerequisite of least-squares
fitting. A negative density ozone bias is therefore avoided.</p>
      <p id="d1e2879">However, the application of Eq. (3) has limitations. Its application to
simulated lidar profiles revealed that there are numerical biases with
growing interval sizes 2<inline-formula><mml:math id="M122" display="inline"><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>. This is further discussed below.</p>
      <p id="d1e2889">The linear approach in Eq. (3) is reasonable for interval sizes <inline-formula><mml:math id="M123" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> not exceeding a scale representing the ozone distribution. Equation (3) is
a reasonable choice for data smoothing, but it is not a perfect frequency
filter and transmits residual high-frequency noise. Therefore, we have used
a combination of Eq. (3) in a limited interval and numerical low-pass
filtering.</p>
      <?pagebreak page6372?><p id="d1e2910">Numerical low-pass
filtering of data points <inline-formula><mml:math id="M124" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>y</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is based on the general equation (Eisele,
1997, and references therein)
          <disp-formula id="Ch1.E7" content-type="numbered"><label>7</label><mml:math id="M125" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>y</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>′</mml:mo></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:munderover><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∑</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:munderover><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>y</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
        with the smoothed value <inline-formula><mml:math id="M126" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>y</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>′</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and the coefficients
          <disp-formula id="Ch1.E8" content-type="numbered"><label>8</label><mml:math id="M127" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sin</mml:mi><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
        with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M128" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M129" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> being the cut-off and sampling frequencies, respectively, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M130" display="inline"><mml:mi>N</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> a
normalization factor. The interval width is <inline-formula><mml:math id="M131" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. One general problem with numerical low-pass
filtering is the occurrence of ringing. This can be minimized by introducing
window functions <inline-formula><mml:math id="M132" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>w</mml:mi><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
          <disp-formula id="Ch1.E9" content-type="numbered"><label>9</label><mml:math id="M133" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>y</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>′</mml:mo></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:munderover><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∑</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:munderover><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>w</mml:mi><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>y</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
        After comparing several listed window functions a Blackman-type window (Blackman
and Tukey, 1959) was chosen:
          <disp-formula id="Ch1.E10" content-type="numbered"><label>10</label><mml:math id="M134" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>w</mml:mi><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.42</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.50</mml:mn><mml:mi>cos⁡</mml:mi><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.08</mml:mn><mml:mi>cos⁡</mml:mi><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
        The best
performance was achieved by selecting
          <disp-formula id="Ch1.E11" content-type="numbered"><label>11</label><mml:math id="M135" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
        with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M136" display="inline"><mml:mi>c</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> being the speed of light. The response function obtained for applying Eqs. (5)–(7) with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M137" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">25</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is depicted in Fig. 12 together with that for a sliding
arithmetic mean over <inline-formula><mml:math id="M138" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">51</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> symmetrically arranged data points. A
linear least-squares fit is equivalent to the arithmetic mean. These linear
operations, though suitable for smoothing, are not perfect frequency filters
and therefore transmit residual high-frequency noise. More details on the
frequency transfer functions for some filters are given by Eisele (1997)
and, more recently, by Iarlori et al. (2015) and Leblanc et al. (2016).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F12"><?xmltex \currentcnt{12}?><label>Figure 12</label><caption><p id="d1e3316">Response of the digital filter used in the data evaluation
procedure for the IFU DIAL systems to a Heaviside ozone step and for a
sliding arithmetic mean; both filters are shown for smoothing over 101 points, and a
digitizer bin size of 7.4948 m is assumed. The VDI vertical resolution is
the altitude difference for a rise from 25 % to 75 % of the input
step. For comparison, the very small response of the Blackman filter to a
delta (single-bin) signal peak of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M139" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">18</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> residing on a
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M140" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">17</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> background is shown, with the enhancement also multiplied
by 5. The slope for a <inline-formula><mml:math id="M141" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">27</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> derivative filter (see text) is identical
to that of the Blackman filter at half-rise. Finally, the result of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M142" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">25</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> Savitsky–Golay smoothing is shown, 25 being the maximum possible <inline-formula><mml:math id="M143" display="inline"><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> value
in the ORIGIN graphics package. This kind of smoothing is absolutely
inadequate.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/13/6357/2020/amt-13-6357-2020-f12.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e3386">The vertical resolution can be defined in a number of ways (Iarlori et al., 2015;
Leblanc, 2016). For practical reasons the German Engineering Society (Verein
Deutscher Ingenieure, VDI, 1999) introduced a definition of the range
resolution as the interval between 25 % and 75 % of the rise in
the response to a Heaviside step (Fig. 12). Here, the response reaches a
signal level of 100 % at large distances from the step. Since the VDI
guideline was published we have preferred to apply this definition. In spectroscopy, the spectral resolution is preferentially defined as the full-width at half-maximum of the response to a delta peak. As we can see in Fig. 12,
without normalization the delta response is much smaller than the original
one, which looks strange in practice.</p>
      <p id="d1e3389">From Fig. 12 we derive for the Blackman filter a VDI vertical resolution of
19.2 % of the full filtering interval <inline-formula><mml:math id="M144" display="inline"><mml:mi>L</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>. The response of the Blackman
filter to a single-channel (“delta”) peak (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M145" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">17</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>  m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M146" 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>
to  <inline-formula><mml:math id="M147" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">18</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M148" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was found to exhibit a full-width at half-maximum of 34.3 % of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M149" display="inline"><mml:mi>L</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (Fig. 12). This fraction looks surprisingly large
in comparison with the step response. The fractions for the pure Blackman
filter (Eqs. 5, 6) are also valid for much smaller smoothing intervals than
in this example.</p>
      <p id="d1e3464">We also give in Fig. 3 an example for numerical differentiation of a
simulated lidar measurement based on Eq. (3). The DIAL equation was
synthesized for the wavelength pair 277–313 nm based on the artificial
ozone density step between bins 999 and 1000 and on an air density profile
calculated from the U.S.  Standard Atmosphere (1976). The absence of
particles and absorbing molecules other than ozone was assumed. The
application of Eq. (3) yields a similar step (Fig. 3) that matches that for
the Blackman filter within most of the rise if one selects <inline-formula><mml:math id="M150" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">27</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. In
contrast to an ideal filter the derivative filter transmits some residual
noise. The VDI vertical resolution is about 45 % of the filtering
interval (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M151" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to 30, presumably in a wider <inline-formula><mml:math id="M152" display="inline"><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> range).</p>
      <p id="d1e3498">It is important to note that due to the curvature of the backscatter
profiles Eq. (3) yields a bias that is absent in the case of missing Rayleigh
scattering. This bias grows with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M153" display="inline"><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and is negative for Eq. (3) (for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M154" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">27</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>:
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M155" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.0050 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M156" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 10<inline-formula><mml:math id="M157" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">17</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M158" 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> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M159" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.10 %) ahead of the step and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M160" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.0033 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M161" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 10<inline-formula><mml:math id="M162" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">18</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M163" 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> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M164" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.33 %) behind it). This bias
is small, and it even becomes negligible for e.g. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M165" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (and less).
However, it grows with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M166" display="inline"><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>. Thus, it is reasonable to use moderate values of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M167" display="inline"><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> for the derivative and subsequent numerical filtering with Eqs. (5) and (6) to
remove the residual noise. Finally, the use of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M168" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> instead on <inline-formula><mml:math id="M169" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the denominator of Eq. (3) yields a positive bias larger
than the negative one for using Eq. (3). This justifies the choice of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M170" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. One could think about an empirical
mathematical correction interpolating between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M171" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and  <inline-formula><mml:math id="M172" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
      <p id="d1e3700">The filter interval for the smoothing is dynamically enhanced with height
by applying a linear relation for simplicity (a quadratic dependence might be
better). The coefficients <inline-formula><mml:math id="M173" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M174" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are preselected for each
wavelength pair:
          <disp-formula id="Ch1.E12" content-type="numbered"><label>12</label><mml:math id="M175" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">for</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">bin</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
        For example, for the large telescope of the stationary lidar <inline-formula><mml:math id="M176" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ad
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M177" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.125</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for the pair 277–313 nm and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M178" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M179" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.156</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for 292–313 nm. This results in filtering intervals <inline-formula><mml:math id="M180" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of the order
of 250 and 500 near the upper end of the respective useful range (VDI
vertical resolutions of 360 and 720 m, respectively). These preset
coefficients are used for the initially automatically produced set of
quick-look profiles but are afterwards reduced in size in some subranges if
allowed by the noise level. In ranges with clearly distinguishable ozone
gradients (e.g. stratospheric intrusion peaks or tropopause) or strong
narrow features, the vertical resolution is also reduced as far as
reasonable. In particularly noisy subranges in the upper troposphere
sometimes homogeneously distributed ozone is fitted to the corresponding
density<?pagebreak page6373?> segments. The different segments are pasted into the actual overall
ozone profile.</p>
      <p id="d1e3837">As a consequence of this complexity, a solution for automatically deriving
uncertainties for all partial data segments has been postponed. In the early
1990s uncertainties for the much less sophisticated evaluation procedure was calculated from the least-squares fitting approach applied (Kempfer, 1992).</p>
      <p id="d1e3840">The calculation of mixing ratios and the retrieval of aerosol backscatter
coefficients require knowledge of the atmospheric density. Within the
troposphere this is not extremely important and simple annual average
density profiles do not contribute more than a few percent to uncertainty
(Carnuth et al., 2002). However, with growing data quality and a range
reaching the stratosphere the incorporation of a better density profile
became mandatory. This is achieved by importing the radiosonde data for the
nearest station of the German Weather Service, Munich or Stuttgart, from
the University of Wyoming database (<uri>http://weather.uwyo.edu/upperair/sounding.html</uri>, last access: 19 November 2020).</p>
      <p id="d1e3846">313 nm aerosol backscatter coefficients have been routinely calculated for
each measurement since 2007 based on the methods mentioned above (Eisele and
Trickl, 2005). They are publicly available for all years starting in 2007
from the EARLINET database (<uri>https://data.earlinet.org/</uri>, last access: 19 November 2020).</p>
      <p id="d1e3852">The quality of the aerosol backscatter coefficients for the latest period of
lidar operation is extremely high during most of the day, as can be
seen in Trickl et al. (2015) and in Sect. 7.1. This has served as an
additional quality criterion for the ozone retrieval, together with the
comparison of the DIAL profiles for different wavelength combinations and
the single-wavelength ozone retrieval for 292 nm. In the absence of aerosol this
single channel is extremely reliable and, in summer, less noisy than the
DIAL solution for 292–313 nm. However, the Rayleigh backscatter
coefficients must be calculated from radiosonde data in order to achieve
good quality.</p>
      <p id="d1e3855">After the introduction of the 7400 PMTs, a slight correction of the
far-field 313 nm profiles became necessary during the hours around noon
(Sect. 4.4). The overshoot of the normally negative signal is particularly
pronounced in summer due to the PMT overload effects in the presence of a
daylight background exceeding 1 mV. Aerosol retrievals are mostly perfect during
night-time; just a constant displacement of the order of 10<inline-formula><mml:math id="M181" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M182" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> sr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M183" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> must be corrected. As the 313 nm PMT starts to exhibit overshoot
for large distances, a mathematical correction becomes necessary, in summer
even before 10:00 CET. In the absence of aerosol in the upper troposphere and
the lower stratosphere the corrections can be nicely verified by comparing
the DIAL ozone with the 292 nm single-signal ozone retrieval.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S6">
  <label>6</label><title>System validation and measurements</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S6.SS1">
  <label>6.1</label><title>Calibration</title>
      <p id="d1e3909">Since the first measurement series in 1991 the ozone data have been
calibrated by using the absorption cross sections from the University of
Reims (Daumont et al., 1992; Malicet et al., 1995). The motivation for this
is described by Kempfer et al. (1994). Most importantly, the measurements
account for the decomposition of ozone during the absorption measurements by
precise pressure measurements. The cross sections have measured again and
again (e.g. Gorshelev et al., 2014; Serdyuchenko et al., 2014, and
references therein), but no improvement has been achieved, except for
perhaps the temperature dependence. Very recently, four new cross sections
measured between 244 and 254 nm at an uncertainty level of 0.1 % have
been provided by Viallon et al. (2015). In view of the choice for our ozone
DIALs it is extremely satisfactory that the agreement with the corresponding
values in the Reims data is within <inline-formula><mml:math id="M184" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.06</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %.</p>
      <p id="d1e3922">The temperature dependence as a function of altitude is obtained by
interpolation of the cross sections from Reims measured for different
temperatures.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S6.SS2">
  <label>6.2</label><title>Validation</title>
      <p id="d1e3933">For the convenience of data users, the system performance is summarized in
Table 4 for the different periods of operation. The uncertainties have been
derived from validation exercises, sensitivity studies in low-signal ranges,
and noise estimates and reproducibility of the ozone densities during
diurnal series of measurements.</p>
      <p id="d1e3936">The lidar system has been systematically validated (since 2007 on each
sounding day) by using the in situ data from the nearby mountain stations
Wank (1780 m a.s.l.) and Zugspitze (2962 m a.s.l.) until the measurements at
these sites were discontinued (evaluated data are available until 2010).
Afterwards, the ozone values of the Schneefernerhaus (UFS) Global Atmosphere
Watch station have been used for occasional comparisons (Trickl et al.,
2014, 2020). UFS is located on the southern face of Zugspitze at a distance
of 9 km from the ozone DIAL at IFU. The gas inlet is at 2670 m. The average
ozone mixing ratios are about 1 % lower than those at the summit (Ludwig
Ries, personal communication). The lidar data agree similarly well with
those from UFS as previously with the Zugspitze ozone.</p>
      <p id="d1e3939">In addition, a large number of successful comparisons have been made with
the Hohenpeißenberg ozonesondes (distance: 38 km); a few examples were
given by Eisele et al. (1999). A more extensive comparison is planned for
the 2018 data, accompanied by a highly successful comparison with a sonde
launched by colleagues from Jülich directly at IMK-IFU in February 2019.
The latter side-by-side comparison for mixing ratios of about 50 ppb yielded
a rather<?pagebreak page6374?> constant bias of the sonde of 2 to 3 ppb up to 7 km and, above
this, a slightly higher variability of the differences.</p>
      <p id="d1e3942">These comparisons have certain limitations. In the case of the
Hohenpeißenberg sondes the air-mass difference matters in certain
altitude ranges due to a 48 km distance between the two stations. Under
comparable conditions the differences between the profiles have been between
5 % and 10 %.</p>
      <p id="d1e3946">The lidar has shown a slightly positive bias with respect to the Wank site,
mostly not exceeding 5 ppb. This bias is not present during night-time but
mostly forms in the morning under warm conditions. It has therefore been
ascribed mostly to slope winds (Carnuth and Trickl, 2000, Fig. 5) venting
morning-type low-ozone air from the valley up this rather isolated summit
that acts like a chimney. Frequently the summertime morning values agree
better with the 05:00 CET measurement than with the Wank mixing ratio for the
true data acquisition time. Until 2011 some alignment issues
occasionally exist that enhanced the uncertainty for distances below 0.5 km.
The Wank site has been invaluable for verifying good alignment of the
near-field telescope, until 2011 with some resulting problems.</p>
      <p id="d1e3949">The comparisons with the Zugspitze in situ data have been mostly very
convenient. The differences of the mixing ratio have rarely exceeded 2 ppb,
with exceptions typically occurring if there is a pronounced ozone gradient
around 3000 m. In the absence of an extended comparison since 2012 an example
from a 4 d series in May 1999 (Trickl et al., 2003, 2011) is shown in
Fig. 13 that exhibits more noise than recent comparisons. The data are
compared for two lidar altitudes, 2970 and 2786 m. The lower altitude
accounts for the air-mass rise during the final approach towards the high
mountain. The results for 2970 m show a few positive departures that result
in a positive average difference between the lidar and station of 0.82 ppb (standard deviation: 2.15 ppb). For the lower altitude the “bias” is just
0.34 ppb (standard deviation: 1.61 ppb). These values are all small in
comparison with the average Zugspitze mixing ratio, but the sign agrees with
the expectation for the 1.8 % bias of the in situ measurements obtained
in the recent cross-sectional study by Viallon et al. (2015).</p>
      <p id="d1e3952">The performance of the mobile system is discussed in Sect. 5.5.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F13"><?xmltex \currentcnt{13}?><label>Figure 13</label><caption><p id="d1e3957">Comparison of the stationary DIAL with the Zugspitze in situ data
during 4 d in May 1999 (VOTALP Munich field campaign); the
deviations have since diminished to about one-half of the noise shown here.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/13/6357/2020/amt-13-6357-2020-f13.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S6.SS3">
  <label>6.3</label><title>Interference by other gases</title>
      <p id="d1e3974">Important species absorbing in the typical wavelength range of ozone DIAL
systems are SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M185" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M186" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and some hydrocarbons. Under the clean-air
conditions prevailing at the Alpine site Garmisch-Partenkirchen and in the
free troposphere, spectral interference from these constituents should be
very rare. As mentioned, the mobile DIAL retrievals for the wavelength
pair 266–299 nm are almost insensitive with respect to SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M187" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M188" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
      <p id="d1e4013">Oxygen must also be considered in the wavelength region below 285.66 nm
(Krupenie, 1972; Jeunouvrier et al, 1999). The absorption cross sections of
O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M189" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in this region (Herzberg bands) are rather low, but absorption
cannot be completely neglected due to the high concentration of this
molecule. We found some approximate coincidences with non-relevant high
rotational levels and an approximate coincidence of the 277.11 nm emission
with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M190" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>J</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>–7 components of the extremely weak <inline-formula><mml:math id="M191" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mo>′</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo>→</mml:mo><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (2,0) band.
266.12 nm is slightly outside a group of O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M192" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> lines. In summary,
absorption of the emissions used in the two DIAL systems in oxygen can be
neglected, in agreement with the good validation results.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S7">
  <label>7</label><title>Measurements</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S7.SS1">
  <label>7.1</label><title>Examples for the stationary system</title>
      <p id="d1e4077">After the first upgrading of the stationary DIAL in 1994 and 1995, the system
yielded greatly improved sensitivity and a much larger vertical range up
to about 15 km due to the three-wavelength operation. The number of
measurements per year grew and time series under automatic control were
extended up to 4 d, the first 4 d series being the
well-documented one in May 1996 published by Eisele et al. (1999), Stohl et
al. (2000), Cristofanelli et al. (2003), and Trickl et al. (2003). However,
until 2003 the operation was limited to funded projects and focused
research topics. After the second major system upgrading routine
measurements were started in 2007. Almost 5000 ozone profiles were obtained
from 1991 to February 2019, and numerous examples can be found in our
publications (see the Appendix; the most recent one for the period 2007 to 2016 can be found in Trickl et al., 2020).</p>
      <p id="d1e4080">A summary of the work done is given in Table 3. Uncertainties estimated for
the different periods and altitude ranges are specified in Table 4 as a
guide for potential data users.</p><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?><?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T3" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><label>Table 3</label><caption><p id="d1e4086">Measurement periods of the stationary DIAL.</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="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry namest="col1" nameend="col3">Projects: TOR (EUROTRAC subproject Tropospheric Ozone Research <inline-formula><mml:math id="M197" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, VOTALP (Vertical Ozone </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry namest="col1" nameend="col3">Transport in the Alps<inline-formula><mml:math id="M198" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, STACCATO (Influence of Stratosphere-Troposphere Exchange in a Changing </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry namest="col1" nameend="col3">Climate on Atmospheric Transport and  Oxidation Capacity<inline-formula><mml:math id="M199" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, ATMOFAST (German abbreviation of </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry namest="col1" nameend="col3">“Atmospheric Long-range Transport and its Impact on the  Trace-gas Concentrations in the Free </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry namest="col1" nameend="col3">Troposphere over Central Europe” <inline-formula><mml:math id="M200" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>; for references see text. </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Period</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Measurements</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Comments</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Jan–Dec 1991</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">580 measurements (just about 60 within TOR</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">re-evaluated)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">1993</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">a few measurements</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">within TOR</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Jan 1996–Feb 1998</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1122 evaluated measurements</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">within VOTALP <inline-formula><mml:math id="M201" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">May 1999</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">86 evaluated measurements</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">within VOTALP 2</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Aug 2000–Aug 2001</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">520 evaluated measurements</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">within STACCATO</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Jul 2003</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">37 evaluated measurements</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">within ATMOFAST</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2007–2018</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">2959 evaluated measurements</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">routine measurements;</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">gaps due to repairs</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table><table-wrap-foot><p id="d1e4089"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M193" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> Kley et al., 1997, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M194" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> Wotava and Kromp-Kolb, 2000; VOTALP II, 2000, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M195" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> Stohl et al., 2003, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M196" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> ATMOFAST, 2005.</p></table-wrap-foot></table-wrap>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T4" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><label>Table 4</label><caption><p id="d1e4353">Uncertainties of the stationary ozone lidar.</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="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="left"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry namest="col1" nameend="col5">Altitudes: above sea level (a.s.l.); E: EMI PMTs, H: Hamamatsu PMTs </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Period</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1–2.3 km</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2.3–5 km</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">5–8 km</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">8 km to tropopause</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Electronics</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">1991–1993</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5 ppb</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">3–5 ppb</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">5–20 ppb</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">not reached</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">8 bit DSP, E</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">1996–Apr 1996</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5 ppb</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2–4 ppb</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">4–8 ppb</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">up to 10 ppb (winter)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">12 bit DSP, E</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">up to 20 ppb (summer)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">May 1996–Apr 1997</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5 ppb</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2–4 ppb</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">4–8 ppb</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">unknown<inline-formula><mml:math id="M203" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∗</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">12 bit DSP, H</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">May 1997–2003</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5 ppb</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2–4 ppb</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">4–8 ppb</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">best: 7 ppb; up to 10 ppb (winter)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">12 bit DSP, H,</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">best: 7–10 ppb; up to 20 ppb (summer)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1 GHz Optec</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2007–2011</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5 ppb</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2.5–4 ppb</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">3–7 ppb</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">best: 7 ppb; up to 10 ppb (winter)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">12 bit Licel, H</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">best: 7–10 ppb; up to 20 ppb (summer)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2012–2019</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">2–4 ppb</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.5–4 ppb</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">3–7 ppb</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">best: 5 ppb; up to 8 ppb (winter)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">12 bit Licel, H</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">best: 5–8 ppb; up to 15 ppb (summer)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">(ground-free)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table><table-wrap-foot><p id="d1e4356"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M202" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∗</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> Sometimes there are artefacts in the upper troposphere due to pre-amplifier ringing, which are corrected for important examples.</p></table-wrap-foot></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e4632">Figure 14 shows the raw backscatter signals (a) uncorrected and (b) with
automatic exponential correction. The amplitudes of the corrections grow
with the area of the backscatter signal, which is larger for the far-field
telescope than for the near-field telescope, and grow with the wavelength
due to the decreasing absorption cross section. In the range in which such an
exponential wing affects the lidar signal it does not exceed a few times
10<inline-formula><mml:math id="M204" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> of the input voltage range (100 mV). The slightly enhanced noise
in channel 6 (313 nm, red curve) is caused by the early-morning daylight
roughly 1 h after sunrise.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F14"><?xmltex \currentcnt{14}?><label>Figure 14</label><caption><p id="d1e4649">Strongly expanded backscatter profiles without <bold>(a)</bold> and with <bold>(b)</bold> exponential correction, recorded after the introduction of the ground-free
input stage to the transient digitizers in late 2012; the 313 nm signals are
noisier due to the early-morning daylight background. The data are smoothed
over <inline-formula><mml:math id="M205" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">14</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> points (VDI vertical resolution 40 m) in order to reduce the
digital ripple.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/13/6357/2020/amt-13-6357-2020-f14.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e4674">The introduction of three-wavelength operation made possible an internal
quality assurance. Ozone profiles are derived from different wavelength
combinations. The observation of mutual deviations in the retrieved
densities results in immediate re-examination of the alignment. As mentioned,
just two misalignments matter: the overlap of the partial beams emerging
from the Raman shifters after recombination and the pointing of the beam
emitted into the atmosphere. Minor discrepancies for 292–313 nm due to
alignment drifts during extended periods of unattended operation can be
conveniently recalibrated by using the 277–313 nm profiles as a
reference, which was routinely done in recent years. As mentioned, the 277 nm
channel of the large telescope was found to be insensitive to slight
misalignments, presumably due to the particularly small focal point in the
entrance slit of the spectrograph. In addition, small drifts in laser
pointing do not result in a transverse displacement of the spot on the
detectors that are placed in the image planes of the principal mirror of the
telescope.</p>
      <p id="d1e4677">One example of a measurement with a perfectly aligned lidar is shown in Fig. 15 (26 October 2015). The figure contains three ozone profiles from both
receivers. The three ozone profiles match well in their common overlap
regions. Nevertheless, due to low ozone the near-field signal (here 277–313 nm) yields reasonable ozone values up to 2.5 km above the ground (740 m a.s.l.). The range for the same wavelength pair in the large receiver extends up
to 6.5 km a.s.l., with moderately elevated ozone. The simultaneously
measured ozone value at UFS is lower by just 0.7 ppb. The 292–313 nm
ozone profile exhibits less structure than that for 277–313 nm. The
absorption cross section for 292 nm is less than one quarter of that for 277 nm, which necessitates smoothing the 292–313 nm ozone over larger
intervals (Sect. 5). In the uppermost part of the red curve a 292 nm
single-wavelength retrieval was applied that reduces the noise inferred by
the 313 nm profile, but it otherwise agrees with the DIAL solution. Such a
retrieval is not possible in the presence of aerosol or clouds.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F15"><?xmltex \currentcnt{15}?><label>Figure 15</label><caption><p id="d1e4683">Selection of partial ozone profiles from both receivers of the
stationary system: the near-field result can be used here to more than 2 km above
the lidar due to low ozone density. The ozone hump between about 3.0 and 4.8 km is caused by a remote stratospheric air intrusion. The lidar measurement
agrees with that at the nearby Schneefernerhaus station (UFS, 2670 m; 0.7 ppb below blue curve). The altitude of the tropopause is taken from the
Munich radiosonde.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/13/6357/2020/amt-13-6357-2020-f15.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e4692">The ozone hump between 3.0 and 4.7 km is caused by a very dry layer (1 %
minimum relative humidity at 4.2 km for the Munich radiosonde, roughly 100 km to the north; 1 % is an artificial cut-off in the listings for the
RS92 radiosonde; Trickl et al., 2014). 315 h backward trajectories
calculated with the HYSPLIT model (Draxler and Hess, 1998;
<uri>http://ready.arl.noaa.gov/HYSPLIT_traj.php</uri>, last access: 19 November 2020), selecting
reanalysis meteorological data, suggest a long-range descent from the
stratosphere over western Canada. The Munich thermal tropopause for both
standard launch times is significantly higher than the onset of the ozone
rise. It is well-known, also from our measurements, that the thermal
tropopause does not perfectly coincide with the onset of the ozone rise
(Hoerling et al., 1991; Pan et al., 2004).</p>
      <p id="d1e4698">In general, as pointed out in Sect. 4.2, the near-field receiver yields
reasonable ozone typically up to at least 2 km above the ground (2.74 km a.s.l). The quality is limited due to the rapid drop of the backscatter
signal. The useful range for 277 nm of the far-field receiver is 6.5 to 8 km
in winter (40 to 50 ppb). 292 nm is rarely used in the lower troposphere
because of the lower sensitivity for ozone and the stronger sensitivity to
aerosol (Eisele and Trickl, 2005). However, the 277–292 nm profiles are
preferred in the presence of<?pagebreak page6376?> pronounced aerosol structures because of a less
critical aerosol correction. The typical range for 292 nm is roughly 3 km
above the tropopause, which can vary with the slope of ozone rise. In
summer, when ozone in the free troposphere can exceed 100 ppb, sometimes the
range is limited to 10 to 11 km and the seasonally higher tropopause is not
reached due to the strong loss of radiation.</p>
      <p id="d1e4701">Due to the short measurement time of just 41 s the reproducibility of the
data can be easily verified. In Fig. 16 we show the profiles for three
measurements under complex conditions (Saharan dust up to 4 km and a
stratospheric air intrusion around 5.7 km) obtained within less than
3 min on 18 June 2013. The intrusion originated at 10 km or more higher the
United States at least 13 d backward in time (Trickl et al., 2020). The
layer descended to southern Spain and then turned north-eastward towards the
Alps, slightly rising. Due to the long travel the minimum relative humidity
was as high as 6 %, as measured by both our water vapour DIAL and the
Munich radiosonde (Trickl et al., 2020).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F16"><?xmltex \currentcnt{16}?><label>Figure 16</label><caption><p id="d1e4706">Example for reproducibility testing during a period of elevated
ozone: the on wavelengths used are 277 nm (channel 1, near-field
telescope, up to 2.23 km), 277 nm (channel 6, up to about 6 km), and 292 nm
(channel 5, up to the top). The lidar measurement perfectly agrees with that
at UFS if the altitude is shifted to that of the Zugspitze summit (2962 m),
justified by the southerly advection. Above 5 km the signal in channel 6
becomes low due to the high ozone values in the lower troposphere, and a
weighted average of the 277–292 nm ozone profile with that for 292–313 nm
was applied for the final few hundred metres below 6 km. Above 9 km the
292 nm signal starts to become noisy, resulting in reduced reproducibility.
The altitude of the tropopause is taken from the Munich radiosonde.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/13/6357/2020/amt-13-6357-2020-f16.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e4716">Due to elevated ozone mixing ratios (50 to 80 ppb) the radiation loss
results in an increase in the short-term variability of the ozone profiles
in the upper troposphere, which indicates a level of uncertainty of about
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M206" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ppb. The noise<?pagebreak page6377?> of the 277–313 nm ozone values strongly increases
above 5.5 km, where the data from the 292–313 nm pair are used.</p>
      <p id="d1e4729">With the latest PMT version (2012) the far-field performance of the lidar
during the warm season decreases around noon due to the growing daylight
background at 313 nm and the resulting nonlinearity. The 313 nm constant
background is largest in the presence of clouds. The signal must be
corrected mathematically (Sect. 5) to achieve both a quantitative ozone
profile and a reasonable aerosol retrieval with zero aerosol in clean parts
of the atmosphere. The DIAL result based on the corrected 313 nm data is
then also compared with the 292 nm single-trace ozone retrieval and usually
agrees well. These comparisons demonstrate the value of simultaneously
evaluating aerosol and O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M207" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>. For the strongest ozone mixing ratios
(exceeding 100 ppb in the middle and upper troposphere) the range of the
system may be limited to about 10 km and the stratospheric ozone rise is
missed.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F17"><?xmltex \currentcnt{17}?><label>Figure 17</label><caption><p id="d1e4743">Ozone measurement with the stationary DIAL on 13 February 2014; the
variability is low apart from the two dry layers at below 4 km and at 6.1 km
that are also visible in the 01:00 CET Munich radiosonde data and that seem to
erode after 08:35 CET. The agreement with the in situ measurements at UFS is
perfect.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/13/6357/2020/amt-13-6357-2020-f17.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F18"><?xmltex \currentcnt{18}?><label>Figure 18</label><caption><p id="d1e4754">313 nm aerosol backscatter coefficients for 12 June 2015.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/13/6357/2020/amt-13-6357-2020-f18.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e4763">The best results are achieved in winter due to low ozone and low solar
background. In Fig. 18 we give as an example the measurements on 13 February 2014. The measurements were limited to the morning hours due to the arrival
of clouds ahead of a cold front, just before 11:00 CET. The profiles
coincide extremely well outside two dry layers (01:00 CET Munich radiosonde, 4 %
to 12 % and 6 % RH, respectively) in the lower free troposphere and
above 6 km that might be associated with the slightly elevated ozone at 08:00 CET at around 3.8 and 6.1 km, respectively. The tiny peak at 6.1 km at 08:35 CET does not significantly exceed the uncertainty level in that altitude
range. However, in addition to the low RH around 01:00 CET the corresponding
HYSPLIT trajectories indicate a descent over at least 13 d
from high altitudes over the North Pacific for both layers, confirming the idea of
stratospheric intrusions. Intrusions with just a low rise in ozone are not
rare during the cold season (Trickl et al., 2020). They can be resolved at
least in the range covered by the less noisy 277–313 nm wavelength pair.</p>
      <p id="d1e4767">In Fig. 19 examples of aerosol retrievals of ozone-corrected 313 nm
backscatter profiles during the brightest period of the year are shown. A
constant backscatter-to-extinction ratio of 0.020 sr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M208" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> was applied.
Backscatter coefficients of (1–<inline-formula><mml:math id="M209" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M210" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> sr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M211" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
are typical of the warm season at this site unless there is a strong Saharan
dust or fire event. Here, the air masses originate in Italy and eastern
Europe. The top altitude of 5 km resembles that for Saharan dust (Jäger
et al., 1988; Papayannis et al., 2008) but was caused by orographic lifting
during transport across the Alps almost parallel to the mountains. The
free troposphere was free of aerosol on that day, which allows one to
visualize the low noise of the lidar, at least during the early hours.
Aerosol<?pagebreak page6378?> data from ultraviolet channels are usually strongly influenced by
the noise of the strong Rayleigh background.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F19"><?xmltex \currentcnt{19}?><label>Figure 19</label><caption><p id="d1e4828">Ozone measurement with the mobile DIAL during the brightest part of
the day, after all modifications had been made (about 10<inline-formula><mml:math id="M212" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> laser shots);
the vertical axis is the height above the lidar site (IFU, 730 m a.s.l.), and up
to 2.7 km above the ground 266–299 nm wavelength pairs were taken
(near-field: up to 1.5 km). Up to 3.7 km the combination 289–299 nm was
used. Above this, ozone was obtained from a single-trace evaluation for 299 nm, slightly recalibrated at the lower end of that range. For comparison,
in situ ozone values from the three local monitoring stations IFU (745 m a.s.l.), Wank (1780 m a.s.l.), and Zugspitze (2962 m a.s.l.) are shown for
11:30 CET (red squares). Additional values from these stations are marked
with open circles for 05:00 CET, 09:30 CET, 14:00 CET, and 17:00 CET (labelled
in some cases). For the interpretation of the complicated meteorological
situation, the corresponding relative humidity of the Zugspitze summit and
the noon operational ascent of the Munich radiosonde are also included.
Outside the most reliable part of the operating range a few representative
error bars are drawn.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/13/6357/2020/amt-13-6357-2020-f19.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e4846">In the presence of strong aerosol in the planetary  boundary layer (PBL), such as in the case of smoke
or pronounced Saharan dust, the signal-to-noise ratio is strongly
attenuated. High-aerosol events prevail in summer, which adds to lowering the
upper-tropospheric performance of the system.</p>
      <p id="d1e4849">Starting in late 2012, the aerosol backscatter coefficients were
archived in the EARLINET database, mostly with a delay of less than 1 d
after the measurements.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S7.SS2">
  <label>7.2</label><title>Examples for the mobile system</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S7.SS2.SSS1">
  <label>7.2.1</label><title>29 April 1999</title>
      <p id="d1e4867">The final performance of the mobile system was achieved shortly before its
destruction in late May 1999 (Fig. 19). It turned out that a daylight
signal background of more than 12 mV was present in the 299 nm channel, which
lead to signal distortion (Sect. 4.4). Due to inserting a 300 nm cut-off
filter, bridging the gap to the 320 nm edge of the Corion filter, the 299 nm
channels became linear and the planned operating range of the DIAL of 4 km
could be reached. As mentioned, further range extension would be possible if
a rotating attenuator could be used for 299 nm to get roughly equal<?pagebreak page6379?> maximum
far-field returns for 289 and 299 nm. Below a distance <inline-formula><mml:math id="M213" display="inline"><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> of 2.7 km, 266–299 nm pairs were taken.</p>
      <p id="d1e4877">In the example in Fig. 19 the range could be extended to a distance <inline-formula><mml:math id="M214" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">8.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> km (9.0 km a.s.l.) by evaluating ozone from the much stronger (less
noisy) 299 nm signal alone. A slight adjustment of that partial profile had
to be made based on the DIAL results for lower altitudes, which resulted in
elevated uncertainties. As can be seen from the edges of the isolated
structures, smoothing over several hundred metres was applied here.</p>
      <p id="d1e4892">The validation is based just on comparisons with the in situ measurements at
the three local stations operated by IFU. The small deviations from the
11:30 CET Wank and Zugspitze in situ data also shown in the figure suggest
an uncertainty of 2 ppb in this altitude range. For the higher altitudes a
comparison is missing because the measurement was made on a Thursday, too
early for the Friday morning Hohenpeißenberg ozonesonde ascent.</p>
      <p id="d1e4895">As can be concluded from the rich structure of the ozone profile and the
pronounced ozone changes in the in situ data (in Fig. 19 we select the data
for 05:00, 09:30, 11:30, 14:00, and 17:00 CET), the meteorological situation
was complex. The situation was characterized by prefrontal advection of North
American air via Algeria at most altitudes, where the minimum altitude of
about 1.5 km was reached. Up to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M215" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> km the ozone profile is difficult
to interpret. The ozone peak between 2.5 and 3.0 km is not necessarily
caused by a subsiding stratospheric air intrusion: the relative humidity
(RH) at the Zugspitze summit rose from 38 % to 66 % until 17:00 CET,
when the Zugspitze ozone reached the mixing ratio of the 11:30 peak above
the summit. Subsidence is not very likely under prefrontal conditions anyway
(Trickl et al., 2020). Also, contributions from northern Italy could have
been picked up.</p>
      <p id="d1e4911">Above 3.5 km we clearly see a pronounced stratospheric intrusion layer. This
view is supported by the very high peak ozone of 113 ppb, the minimum RH of
1 % in the 13:00 CET ascent of the Munich radiosonde, and HYSPLIT backward
trajectories. The HYSPLIT trajectories revealed descent over more than
10 d from the north-western part of North America or beyond.</p>
      <p id="d1e4914">The low upper-tropospheric ozone values are in agreement with the calculated
source region 2 km above the Pacific south of Hawaii. Directly above the
remote Pacific almost zero ozone has been found (Kley et al., 1996), which
justifies the assumption of 20–30 ppb 2 km above the surface.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S7.SS2.SSS2">
  <label>7.2.2</label><title>Milano field campaign</title>
      <p id="d1e4925">The second example is chosen from the VOTALP II (Vertical Ozone Transport in
the Alps) Milano field campaign in 1998, in a joint effort together with
the PIPAPO (Pianura Padana Produzione di Ozono) air-quality campaign around
Milano (Italy) (more details on the measurements: Trickl, 2010b). The mobile
ozone DIAL was operated at Barni (Provincia di Como) within the first
mountain range of the Alps, about 40 km north of Milano between 1 and 5 June
1998. On the first 4 d a day-by-day increase in the afternoon peak
ozone advected from the Milano metropolitan area to Barni by the daytime
up-valley wind was observed. During each night the O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M216" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> mixing ratio
dropped to roughly 60 ppb due to the reversal of the orographic wind
direction.</p>
      <p id="d1e4937">Figure 20 shows the situation for the day with the highest ozone values, 4 June. The behaviour of the ozone rise was surprisingly similar to that on
the previous days, including the bimodal profile at 13:36 CET (Central
European Time <inline-formula><mml:math id="M217" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> UTC <inline-formula><mml:math id="M218" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> h). In the late afternoon 120 ppb of ozone was
reached, exactly verified by side-by-side measurements with ozonesondes
launched by a team from the Swiss Paul-Scherrer Institute. This high mixing
ratio turned out to be the very limit for retaining an overlap between the
near-field and the far-field 266 nm “on” detection channels for the chosen
position of the far-field apertures (blades) and PMT settings. The
comparison of the DIAL and the sonde measurements also indicates some
air-mass lifting towards the main part of the lake since the boundary layer
height (defined here by elevated ozone) grew as the sonde drifted northward
during its ascent. It is interesting to note that the 19:10 CET DIAL profile
next to the ground would agree with the sonde profiles for some average
position of the two sonde maxima.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F20"><?xmltex \currentcnt{20}?><label>Figure 20</label><caption><p id="d1e4959">Ozone measurements at Barni (Provincia di Como, Italy) on 4 June 1998 during the VOTALP Milano field campaign; the profiles show the
daytime gradual advection of the Milano ozone plume. The ozonesonde data
from the two launches at the lidar site have been kindly supplied by J. Keller (Paul-Scherrer-Institut, Switzerland; the times are launch times).
Only 266 nm could be used as the on wavelength. As a consequence the
range was strongly reduced during the period with the highest ozone mixing
ratio.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/13/6357/2020/amt-13-6357-2020-f20.png"/>

          </fig>

<?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
</sec>
</sec>
</sec>
<?pagebreak page6380?><sec id="Ch1.S8" sec-type="conclusions">
  <label>8</label><title>Discussion and conclusions</title>
      <p id="d1e4980">Differential-absorption lidar systems for trace-gas measurements have proved
to be an invaluable tool for atmospheric studies (Trickl, 2010b). Despite
this fact the application of DIAL systems is rather limited, in particular
combined approaches. Despite promising developments in Europe within TESLAS
in the early 1990s no continental-scale ozone lidar network could be
established. Ozone measurements have been mostly limited to Haute Provence
(Gaudel et al., 2015; Tarasick et al., 2019), Garmisch-Partenkirchen, and
Athens (Kalobakas et al., 2012; Mytilinaios et al., 2018). By contrast, the
ozone lidar network TolNET was implemented in North America (Newchurch et
al., 2016).</p>
      <p id="d1e4983">At IMK-IFU (Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany) three DIAL systems have been
developed since 1988, two for ozone and one for water vapour (Vogelmann and
Trickl, 2008). The ozone systems were used for a large number of
focused investigations until 2003 (e.g. Carnuth et al., 2002; Eisele et
al., 1999; Stohl and Trickl, 1999; Trickl, 2003; Trickl et al., 2003, 2010,
2011). The stationary ozone and water vapour lidars have been used for
routine measurements since 2007 (e.g. Trickl et al., 2014, 2015, 2016,
2020). The measurements with the stationary ozone DIAL have yielded a total
of almost 5000 evaluated ozone profiles since 1991. In the absence of
interruptions in the measurement programme, the typical annual number of
evaluated measurements has been of the order of 500. This
number will grow with further increasing reliability of the automatically
produced quick-look ozone and 313 nm aerosol profiles due to a diminishing
requirement for manual optimization. Manual corrections are still required
in the presence of high ozone levels due to the residual daytime issues at
313 nm and in the presence of pronounced aerosol and cloud structures.</p>
      <p id="d1e4986">In the course of 3 decades of ozone DIAL development at IMK-IFU we have
gradually optimized the technology to a state in which even small variations in
tropospheric ozone can be sensed with a high level of credibility. A full
restriction to analogue data acquisition is possible due to the large
dynamic range of the 5600 and 7400 Hamamatsu PMTs. Automatic operation was
introduced in 1996 (for both systems), although it has been limited to clear-weather situations. Thus, the largest effort has been devoted to data
evaluation. The results of automatic data evaluation have rarely been
directly adopted and careful manual corrections have been made. These
corrections include the selection of the best partial profiles based on
comparisons and optimizing the vertical resolution in relation to the
changing signal-to-noise ratio or when zooming into interesting ozone
features. As a consequence of the excellent data quality the full use of
automatic data evaluation is now coming within reach, at least under
conditions of low to moderate aerosol.</p>
      <p id="d1e4989">The quality of the retrieved 313 nm aerosol backscatter coefficients almost
matches that traditionally obtained in the green spectral region. Baseline
corrections are needed during daytime due to signal distortions caused by
the high daylight sensitivity of the 7400 PMTs. Spectral filtering must be
improved. Perhaps one of the old 5400 PMTs must return to the far-field
313 nm channel.</p>
      <p id="d1e4993">Quite a number of lessons have been learnt.
<list list-type="bullet"><list-item>
      <p id="d1e4998">Three-wavelength operation is mandatory: it provides a wide vertical range
and internal quality assurance; the aerosol retrieval yields an additional
quality control of the 313 nm backscatter profiles.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e5002">Use of at least one short on wavelength below 280 nm is an important base
for high accuracy and for a low to moderate level of interference by
aerosols that can be readily corrected for. Even for 266 nm a range up to
about <inline-formula><mml:math id="M219" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> km above the lidar was demonstrated.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e5018">A short measurement time of 41 s was achieved with the stationary system,
whereas for the mobile system about 10 min were necessary. This longer
signal accumulation is in part due to the slower repetition rate of 15 Hz
per wavelength for the longer wavelengths and also in part to the strong signal
decay for 266 nm (30 Hz repetition rate) that necessitates longer averaging
to achieve a reasonable signal-to-noise ratio at larger distances. For the
stationary system, longer averaging (e.g. 5 min) will yield better results
in the upper troposphere in summer. In principle, the free-tropospheric
capability (i.e. without significant amounts of aerosol) can be driven
close to the uncertainty limit set by the absorption cross sections.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e5022">Current-day transient digitizers make single-photon counting in an ozone
DIAL almost superfluous, except for very long measurements in a dark
environment.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e5026">Simultaneous analogue and PC counting out of a single PMT is possible but
has so far led to a deterioration of the analogue signal that cannot easily
be corrected mathematically (see Klanner et al., 2020). Single-photon
counting will be resumed if the residual signal distortions can be removed.
However, an operation for low PMT supply voltages must be ensured to avoid
signal attenuation and excessively long averaging.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e5030">The application of the small Hamamatsu PMTs has allowed the use of higher
signal voltage levels (100 mV or more) than in the traditionally used phototubes. A photon flux as high as possible should be applied in the far-field
channels since the signal noise is strongly influenced by the photon
noise<fn id="Ch1.Footn1"><p id="d1e5033">In the case of the mobile lidar this would have required
enhancing the 266 nm pulse energy of the Powerlite 9030 laser to the full 120 mJ or using a larger receiver (see first example in Sect. 7.2).</p></fn>. This is an issue if both analogue and photon counting from the same PMT are chosen because photon counting requires elevated supply
voltages of the order of 800 V, too high for strong irradiation.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e5038">A problem with the Hamamatsu 7400 PMTs not yet fully solved is the high
sensitivity with respect to daylight: the background signal must not exceed
1 mV in order to avoid undershot, which can be minimized by higher laser
pulse energy (improving the peak-signal-to-background ratio), careful
spectral filtering, reducing the slit width at the polychromator entrance,
adding another black baffle for the incoming radiation just below the
entrance flap in the roof, and a very clean surface of the primary mirror of
the telescope. Also, for 313 nm, a return to a 5600 PMT can be considered in
the far-field receiver.
<?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?></p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e5043">The use of two spatially separated telescopes for near-field–far-field
separation is superior to cutting off the near-field portions in the
far-field channels as done in the mobile system (and the water vapour DIAL;
Vogelmann and Trickl, 2008), unless a rotating signal attenuator is used
for reducing the stronger off return.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e5047">An operational calculation of uncertainties is planned, an important
requirement for archiving data in international databases.</p></list-item></list></p><?xmltex \hack{\clearpage}?>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><app-group>

<?pagebreak page6382?><app id="App1.Ch1.S1">
  <?xmltex \currentcnt{A}?><label>Appendix A</label><title/>

<?xmltex \floatpos{h}?><table-wrap id="App1.Ch1.S1.T5"><?xmltex \hack{\hsize\textwidth}?><?xmltex \currentcnt{A1}?><label>Table A1</label><caption><p id="d1e5065">List of citations for atmospheric transport studies including ozone lidar systems.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="4">
     <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:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="left"/>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Browell et al. (1987)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Ancellet et al. (1991)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Ancellet et al. (1994)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Browell et al. (1996)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Lamarque et al. (1996)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Langford et al. (1996)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Newell et al. (1997)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Ravetta et al. (1999)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Eisele et al. (1999)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Stohl and Trickl (1999)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Grant et al. (2000)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Baray et al. (2000)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Seibert et al. (2000)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Kowol-Santen and Ancellet (2000)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Browell et al. (2001)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Carnuth et al. (2002)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Zanis et al. (2003)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Roelofs et al. (2003)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Trickl et al. (2003)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Galani et al. (2003)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Papayannis et al. (2005)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Leclair De Bellevue et al. (2006)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Ravetta et al. (2007)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Liang et al. (2007)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Trickl et al. (2010)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Trickl et al. (2011)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Kuang et al. (2012)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Trickl et al. (2014)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Trickl et al. (2015)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Ancellet et al. (2016)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Granados-Muñoz and Leblanc (2016)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Sullivan et al. (2016)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Kuang et al. (2017)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Granados-Muñoz et al. (2017)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Langford et al. (2018)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Trickl et al. (2020)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

<?xmltex \floatpos{h}?><table-wrap id="App1.Ch1.S1.T6"><?xmltex \hack{\hsize\textwidth}?><?xmltex \currentcnt{A2}?><label>Table A2</label><caption><p id="d1e5224">List of citations for air-quality studies including ozone lidar systems.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="4">
     <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:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="left"/>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Durieux et al. (1998)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Fiorani et al. (1998)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Zhao et al. (1998)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Banta et al. (1998)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Valente et al. (1998)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Senff et al. (1998)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Thomasson et al. (2002)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Kourtidis et al. (2002)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Duclaux et al. (2002)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Couach et al. (2003)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Dufour et al. (2005)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Simeonov et al. (2005)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Langford et al. (2009)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Senff et al. (2010)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Trickl (2010b)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Langford et al. (2012)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Dreessen et al. (2016)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Langford et al. (2017)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Sullivan et al. (2017)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Yates et al. (2017)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

<?xmltex \floatpos{h}?><table-wrap id="App1.Ch1.S1.T7"><?xmltex \hack{\hsize\textwidth}?><?xmltex \currentcnt{A3}?><label>Table A3</label><caption><p id="d1e5323">List of citations for papers describing ozone DIAL systems.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><?xmltex \begin{scaleboxenv}{.97}[.97]?><oasis:tgroup cols="4">
     <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:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="left"/>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Grant et al. (1975)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Browell (1982)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Pelon and Mégie (1982)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Browell et al. (1983)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Uchino et al. (1983)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Ancellet (1989)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">McDermid (1991)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Zhao et al. (1992)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Uthe and Livingston (1992)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Sunesson et al. (1994)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Kempfer et al. (1994)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Bucreev et al. (1994)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Bucreev et al. (1996)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Grabbe et al. (1996)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Reichardt et al. (1996)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Eisele and Trickl (1997)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Brenner et al. (1997)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Ancellet and Ravetta (1997)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Wallinder et al. (1997)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Proffitt and Langford (1997)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Ancellet and Ravetta (1998)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Alvarez et al. (1998)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Veselovskii and Barchunov (1999)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Baray et al. (1999)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Matthias (2000)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Lazzarotto et al. (2001)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">McDermid et al. (2002)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Fix et al. (2002)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Nakazato et al. (2007)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Machol et al. (2008)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Burlakov et al. (2010)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Alvarez et al. (2011)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Kuang et al. (2011)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Kuang et al. (2013) Uchino et al. (2014)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Sullivan et al. (2014)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">De Young et al. (2017)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Strawbridge et al. (2018)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Fix et al. (2019)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup><?xmltex \end{scaleboxenv}?></oasis:table></table-wrap>

<?xmltex \hack{\clearpage}?>
</app>
  </app-group><notes notes-type="dataavailability"><title>Data availability</title>

      <p id="d1e5498">Data and information on the lidar systems can be obtained on request from
the corresponding  author of this paper (thomas@trickl.de as of February 2020). The 313 nm aerosol backscatter coefficients are archived in the
EARLINET database, which is accessible through the ACTRIS data portal at
<uri>http://actris.nilu.no/</uri> (last access: 19 November 2020, ACTRIS, 2020).</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="authorcontribution"><title>Author contributions</title>

      <p id="d1e5507">TT carried out most lidar measurements after spring 1997, following U. Kempfer and H. Eisele, assisted by HG and MP. He has led the technical
development of both ozone DIAL systems since 1990. FN was responsible for
the technical infrastructure of the mobile system. HG, MP, and HV have been
involved in the system upgrading since 2007.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests"><title>Competing interests</title>

      <p id="d1e5513">The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e5519">The authors thank Wolfgang Seiler and Hans Peter Schmid for their support
over many years. Walter Carnuth designed the first version of the
stationary ozone DIAL that was built by Ulrich Kempfer and Raul Lotz. The
decisive upgrading, which included a lot of new approaches, was achieved in
cooperation with Holger Eisele. The authors are indebted to Werner Funk, Bernd
Mielke, Heinz Josef Romanski, and Bernhard Stein for numerous important
discussions and technical improvements of the detection electronics. The
valuable contributions during certain periods of the system development by
Pietro Brenner, Josef-Michael Burger, Bernd Jänker, and Karl Maurer are
emphasized. Hans-Eckhart Scheel, Ludwig Ries, Hans Claude, and Wolfgang
Steinbrecht have provided reference ozone data for the Wank, Zugspitze, and
Schneefernerhaus mountain stations in the vicinity of IFU and ozonesonde
data for the Hohenpeißenberg observatory of the German weather service.
Johannes Keller provided the ozonesonde profiles of the team from the Swiss
Paul-Scherrer-Institut for the Milano field campaign. The development of the
mobile system was based on a highly efficient cooperation with the company
OHB System (Bremen). The different steps of the lidar development have been
funded by the German Ministry of Research and Technology (BMFT), the German
Foundation for the Environment (DBU, two projects), and the Bavarian
Ministry of Economics. Since 2007 the aerosol results have contributed to
EARLINET (European Aerosol Research Lidar Network), which is currently part
of the European Research Infrastructure ACTRIS.</p></ack><notes notes-type="financialsupport"><title>Financial support</title>

      <p id="d1e5524">The article processing charges for this open-access publication  were covered by a Research Centre of the Helmholtz Association.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="reviewstatement"><title>Review statement</title>

      <p id="d1e5530">This paper was edited by Mark Weber and reviewed by two anonymous referees.</p>
  </notes><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>ACTRIS: Data Policy Disclaimer,  available at: <uri>http://actris.nilu.no/</uri>, last access: 19 November 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Amodeo, A., Bösenberg, J., Ansmann, A., Balis, D., Böckmann, C.,
Chaikovsky, A., Comeron, A., Mitev, V., Papayannis, A., Pappalardo, G.,
Perrone, M. R., Rizi, V., Simeonov, V., Sobolewski, P., Spinelli, N.,
Stoyanov, D. V., Trickl, T., and Wiegner, M.: EARLINET: the European Aerosol
Lidar Network, Optica Pura y Aplicada, 39, 1–10, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Ancellet, A. and Ravetta, F.: The Airborne Lidar for Tropospheric Ozone
(ALTO), Advances in Atmospheric Remote Sensing with Lidar in Selected Papers
of the 18th International Laser Radar Conference, Berlin (Germany, 1996), edited by:
Ansmann, A., Neuber, R., Rairoux, P., and Wandinger, U., Springer, Berlin,
Heidelberg, New York, 22–26 July 1996, 399–402, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Ancellet, A. and Ravetta, F.: Compact airborne lidar for tropospheric
ozone: description and field measurements, Appl. Opt., 37, 5509–5521, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Ancellet, G., Papayannis, A., Pelon, J., and Mégie, G.: DIAL
Tropospheric Ozone Measurement Using a Nd:YAG Laser and the Raman Shifting
Technique, J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol., 6, 832–839, 1989.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Ancellet, G., Pelon, J., Beekmann, M., Papayannis, A., and Mégie, G.:
Ground-Based Lidar Studies of Ozone Exchanges Between the Stratosphere and
the Troposphere, J. Geophys. Res., 96, 22401–22421, 1991.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Ancellet, A., Beekmann, M., and Papayannis, A.: Impact of cutoff low
development on downward transport of ozone in the troposphere, J. Geophys.
Res., 99, 3451–3468, 1994.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Ancellet, G., Pelon, J., Totems, J., Chazette, P., Bazureau, A., Sicard, M., Di Iorio, T., Dulac, F., and Mallet, M.: Long-range transport and mixing of aerosol sources during the 2013 North American biomass burning episode: analysis of multiple lidar observations in the western Mediterranean basin, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 4725–4742, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-4725-2016, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Alvarez II, R. J., Senff, C. J., Hardesty, R. M., Parrish, D. D., Like, W.
T., Watson, T. B., Daum, P. H., and Gillani, N.: Comparisons of airborne
lidar measurements of ozone with airborne in situ measurements during the
1995 Southern Oxidants Study, J. Geophs. Res., 103, 31155–31171, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Alvarez II, R. J., Senff, C. J., Langford, A. O., Weikmann, A. M., Law, D.
C., Machol, J. L., Merrit, D. A., Marchbanks, R. D., Sandberg, S. P.,
Brewer, W. A., Hardesty, R. M., and Banta, R. M.: Development and
application of a compact, tunable, solid-state airborne ozone lidar system
for boundary layer profiling, J. Atmos. Ocean. Technol., 28, 1258–1271,
2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page6384?><ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>ATMOFAST: Atmosphärischer Ferntransport und seine Auswirkungen auf die
Spurengaskonzentrationen in der freien Troposphäre über Mitteleuropa
(Atmospheric Long-range Transport and its Impact on the Trace-gas
Composition of the Free Troposphere over Central Europe), Project Final
Report, T. Trickl, co-ordinator, M. Kerschgens, A. Stohl, and T. Trickl,
subproject co-ordinators, funded by the German Ministry of Education and
Research within the programme “Atmosphärenforschung 2000“,
Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe, IMK-IFU (Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany),
<uri>http://www.trickl.de/ATMOFAST.htm</uri> (last access: 19 November 2020), 130 pp., 2005  (with revised
publication list 2012; in German).</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Banta, R. M., Senff, C. J., White, A. B., Trainer, M., McNider, R. T.,
Valente, R. J., Mayor, S. D., Alvarez, R. J., Hardesty, R. M., Parrish, D.,
and Fehsenfeld, F. C.: Daytime buildup and nightime transport of urban ozone
in the boundary layer during a stagnation episode, J. Geophys. Res., 103,
22519–22544, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Baray, J.-L., Leveau, J., Porteneuve, J., Ancellet, G., Keckhut, P., Posny,
F., and Baldy, S.: Description and and evaluation of a tropospheric ozone
lidar implemented on an existing lidar in the southern subtropics, Appl.
Opt., 38, 6808–6817, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Baray, J.-L., Daniel, V., Ancellet, G., and Legras, B.: Planetary-scale
tropopause folds in the southern subtropics, Geophys. Res. Lett., 27,
353–356, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Blackman, R. B. and Tukey, J. W.: in: The Measurement of Power Spectra,
From the Point of View of Communications Engineering, Dover, Publications,
New York, USA, 95–101, 1959.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bragg, S. L., Brault, J. W., and Smith, W. H.: Line Positions and Strengths
in the H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M220" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> Quadrupole Spectrum, Astrophys. J., 263, 999–1004, 1982.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Brenner, P., Reitebuch, O., Schäfer, K., Trickl, T., and Stichternath,
A.: A Novel Mobile Vertical-sounding System for Ozone Studies in the Lower
Troposphere”, Advances in Atmospheric Remote Sensing with Lidar, Selected
Papers of the 18th International Laser Radar Conference, Berlin (Germany,
1996), edited by: Ansmann, A., Neuber, R., Rairoux, P.,  and Wandinger, U., Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, 22–26 July 1996, 383–386, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Browell, E. V.: Lidar measurements of tropospheric gases, Opt. Eng., 21,
128–132, 1982.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Browell, E. V., Carter, A. F., Shipley, S. T., Allen, R. J., Butler, C. F.,
Mayo, M. N., Siviter, J. H., and Hall, W. M.: NASA multipurpose airborne
DIAL system and measurements of ozone and aerosol profiles, Appl. Opt., 22,
522–534, 1983.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Browell, E. V., Danielsen, E. F., Ismail, S., Gregory, G. L., and Beck, S.
M.: Tropopause Fold Structure Determined From Airborne Lidar and in Situ
Measurements, J. Geophys. Res., 92, 2112–2120, 1987.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Browell, E. V., Fenn, M. A., Butler, C. F., Grant, W. B., Merrill, J. T.,
Newell, R. E., Bradshaw, J. D., Sandholm, S. T., Anderson, B. E., Bandy, A.
R., Bachmeier, A. S., Blake, D. R., Davis, D. D., Gregory, G. L., Heikes, B.
G., Kondo, Y., Liu, S. C., Rowland, F. S., Sachse, G. W., Singh, H. B.,
Talbot, R. W., and Thornton, D. C.: Large-scale air mass characteristics
observed over the Western Pacific during summertime, J. Geophys. Res., 111,
1691–1712, 1996.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Browell, E. V., Fenn, M. A., Butler, C. F., Grant, W. B., Ismail, S.,
Ferrare, R. A., Kooi, S. A., Brackett, V. G., Clayton, M. B., Avery, M. A.,
Barrick, J. D. W., Fuelberg, H. E., Maloney, J. C., Newell, R. E., Zhu, Y.,
Mahoney, M. J., Anderson, B. E., Blake, D. R., Brune, W. H., Heikes, B. G.,
Sachse, G. W., Singh, H. B., and Talbot, R. W.: Large-scale air mass
characteristics observed over the remote tropical Pacific Ocean during March–April 1999: Results from the PEM-Tropics B field experiment, J. Geophys.
Res., 106, 32481–32501, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Bucreev, V. S., Vartapetov, S. K., Veselovskii, I. A., Galustov, A. S.,
Kovalev, Y. M., Prokhorov, A. M., Svetogorov, E. S., Khmelevtsov, S. S.,
and Lee, C. H.: Excimer-laser-based lidar system for stratospheric and
tropospheric ozone measurements, Quantum Electron+., 24, 546–551 (translated from Kvantovaya Electron+., 21, 591–596, 1994), 1994.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Bucreev, V. S., Vartapetov, S. K., Veselovskii, I. A., Galustov, A. S.,
Kovalev, Y. M., Svetogorov, E. S., and Khmelevtsov, S. S.: Combined lidar
system for stratospheric and tropospheric ozone measurements, Appl. Phys. B,
62, 97–101, 1996.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Burlakov, V. D., Dolgii, S. I., Makeev, A. P., Nevzorov, A. V., Romanovskii,
O. A., and Kharchenko, O. V.: A Differential-Absorption Lidar for Ozone
Sensing in the Upper Atmosphere – Lower Stratosphere, Instrum. exp. Tech+., 53, 886–889, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Carnuth, W. and Trickl, T., Transport studies with the IFU three-wavelength
aerosol lidar during the VOTALP Mesolcina experiment, Atmos. Environ., 34,
1425–1434, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Carnuth, W., Kempfer, U., and Trickl, T.: Highlights of the tropospheric
lidar studies at IFU within the TOR project, Tellus B, 54, 163–185, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Couach, O., Balin, I., Jiménez, R., Ristori, P., Perego, S., Kirchner, F., Simeonov, V., Calpini, B., and van den Bergh, H.: An investigation of ozone and planetary boundary layer dynamics over the complex topography of Grenoble combining measurements and modeling, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 3, 549–562, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-3-549-2003, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Cristofanelli, P., Bonasoni, P., Collins, W., Feichter, J., Forster, C.,
James, P., Kentarchos, A., Kubik, P. W., Land, C., Meloen, J., Roelofs, G.
J., Siegmund, P., Sprenger, M., Schnabel, C., Stohl, A., Tobler, L.,
Tositti, L., Trickl, T., and Zanis, P.: Stratosphere to troposphere
transport: a model and method evaluation, J. Geophys. Res., 108, 8525, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002600" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2002JD002600</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Daumont, D., Brion, J., Charbonnier, J., and Malicet, J.: Ozone UV
Spectroscopy I: Absorption Cross-Sections at Room Temperature, J. Atmos.
Chem., 15, 145–155, 1992.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
De Schoulepnikoff, L., Mitev, V., Simeonov, V., Calpini, B., and van den
Bergh, H.: Experimental investigation of high-power single-pass Raman
shifters in the ultraviolet with Nd:YAG and KrF lasers, Appl. Opt., 36,
5026–5043, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
De Young, R., Carrion, W., Ganoe, R., Pliutau, D., Gronoff, G., Berkoff, T.,
and Kuang, S.: Langley mobile ozone lidar: ozone and aerosol atmospheric
profiling for air quality research, Appl. Opt., 56, 721–730, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Dickensen, G. D., Niu, M. L., Salumbides, E. J., Komasa, J., Eikema, K. S.
E., Pachuki, K., and Ubachs, W.: Fundamental Vibration of Molecular
Hydrogen, Phys. Rev. Lett., 110, 193601, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.193601 " ext-link-type="DOI">10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.193601 </ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Draxler, R. and Hess, G.: An overview of the HYSPLIT_4
modelling system for trajectories, dispersion, and deposition, Aust.
Meteorol. Mag., 47, 295–308, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Dreessen, J., Sullivan, J., and Delgado, R.: Observations and impacts of
transported Canadian wildfire smoke on ozone and aerosol air quality in the
Maryland region on June 9–12, 2015, J. Air  Waste Manage Assoc., 66,
842–862, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Duclaux, O., Frejafon, E., Thomasson, A., Yu, J., C., Puel, C., Savoie, F.,
Ritter, P., Boch, J. P., and Wolf, J. P.: 3D-air quality model evaluation
using the Lidar technique, Atmos. Environ., 36, 5081–5095, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Dufour, A., Amodei, M., Ancellet, G., and Peuch, V.-H.: Observed and
modelled ”chemical weather” during ESCOMPTE, Atmos. Res., 74, 161–189,
2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page6385?><ref id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Durieux, E., Fiorani, L., Calpini, B., Flamm, M., Jaquet, L., and van den
Bergh, H.: Tropospheric Ozone Measurements over the Great Athens Area during
the MEDCAPHOT-TRACE Campaign, Atmos. Environ., 32, 2141–2150, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Eisele, H.: Aufbau und Betrieb eines Dreiwellenlängen-Lidars für
Ozonmessungen in der gesamten Troposphäre und Entwicklung eines neuen
Auswerteverfahrens zur Aerosol-korrektur, Dissertation, Universität
Tübingen (Germany, 1997), published as Schriftenreihe des
Fraunhofer-Instituts für Atmosphärische Umweltforschung, Vol. 55,
Verlag Dr. W. Maraun, Frankfurt/Main, Germany, 1998, ISBN 3-932666-08-9,
107 pp., 1997 (in German).</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Eisele, H. and Trickl, T.: Second Generation of the IFU Stationary
Tropospheric Ozone Lidar, Advances in Atmospheric Remote Sensing with Lidar,
Selected Papers of the 18th International Laser Radar Conference (Berlin,
Germany, 1996), edited by: Ansmann, A., Neuber, R., Rairoux, P., and Wandinger, U.,  Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, 22–26 July 1996, 379–382, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Eisele, H. and Trickl, T.: Improvements of the aerosol algorithm in
ozone-lidar data processing by use of evolutionary strategies, Appl. Opt.,
44, 2638–2651, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Eisele, H., Scheel, H. E., Sladkovic, R., and Trickl, T.: High-Resolution
Lidar Measurements of Stratosphere-Troposphere Exchange, J. Atmos. Sci., 56,
319–330, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
EUROTRAC: Transport and Chemical Transformation of Pollutants in the
Troposphere, Vol. 1, An Overview of the Work of EUROTRAC, edited by: Borrell, P. and Borrell, P.
M., Springer (Berlin, Heidelberg, New York), ISBN
3-540-66775-X, 474 pp., 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Fiorani, L., Calpini, B., Jaquet, L., van den Bergh, H., and Durieux, E.: A
Combined Determination of Wind Velocities and Ozone Concentration for a
First Measurement of Ozone Fluxes with a DIAL Instrument during the
MEDCAPHOT-TRACE Campaign, Atmos. Environ., 32, 2151–2159, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Fix, A., Wirth, M., Meister, A., Ehret, G., Pesch, M., and Weidauer, D.:
Tunable ultraviolet optical parametric oscillator for differential
absorption lidar measurements of tropospheric ozone, Appl. Phys. B., 75,
153–163, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Fix, A., Steinebach, F., Wirth, M., Schäfler, A., and Ehret, G.:
Development and application of an airborne differential absorption lidar for
the simultaneous measurement of ozone and water vapor profiles in the
tropopause region, Appl. Opt., 58, 5892–5900, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Freudenthaler, V.: The telecover test: A Quality assurance tool for the
optical part of a lidar system, in: Reviewed and Revised Papers Presented at
the 24th International Laser Radar Conference, Boulder, Colorado,
USA, 23–27 June 2008, Vol. II, edited by: Hardesty, M. and Mayor, S.,  ISBN 978-0-615-21489-4,
145–146, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Galani, E., Balis, D., Zanis, P., Zerefos, C., Papayannis, A., Wernli, H.,
and Gerasopoulos, E.: Observations of stratosphere-to-troposphere transport
events over the eastern Mediterranean using a ground-based lidar system, J.
Geophys. Res., 108, 8527, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002596" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2002JD002596</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Gaudel A., Ancellet G., and Godin-Beekmann S.: Analysis of 20 years of
tropospheric ozone vertical profiles by lidar and ECC at Observatoire de
Haute Provence (OHP) at 44<inline-formula><mml:math id="M221" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, 6.7<inline-formula><mml:math id="M222" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E, Atmos. Environ.,
113, 78–89, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Giehl, H. and Trickl, T.: Testing the IFU High-Spectral-Resolution Lidar at
the 2009 Leipzig Field Campaign, in: Proceedings of the 25th
International Laser Radar Conference, St.-Petersburg (Russia), 5–9 July 2010,
2010, edited by: Matvienko, G. and Zemlyanov, A., V. E. Zuev Institute of Optics (Tomsk, Russia), 920–923, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Gorshelev, V., Serdyuchenko, A., Weber, M., Chehade, W., and Burrows, J. P.: High spectral resolution ozone absorption cross-sections – Part 1: Measurements, data analysis and comparison with previous measurements around 293 K, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 7, 609–624, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-7-609-2014, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Grabbe, G. C., Bösenberg, J., Dier, H., Görsdorf, U., Matthias, V.,
Peters, G., Schaberl, T., and Senff, C.: Intercomparison of Ozone
Measurements between Lidar and ECC Sondes, Contr. Atmos. Phys., 69, 189–203,
1996.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Granados-Muñoz, M. J. and Leblanc, T.: Tropospheric ozone seasonal and long-term variability as seen by lidar and surface measurements at the JPL-Table Mountain Facility, California, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 9299–9319, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-9299-2016, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Granados-Muñoz, M. J., Johnson, M. S., and Leblanc, T.: Influence of the
North American monsoon on Southern California tropospheric ozone levels
during summer in 2013 and 2014, Geophys. Res. Lett., 44, 6431–6439,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL073375" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2017GL073375</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Grant, W. B. and Hake, R. D.: Calibrated remote measurements of SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M223" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
and O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M224" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> using atmospheric backscatter, J. Appl. Phys., 46, 3019–3023,
1975.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Grant, W. B., Browell, E. V., Butler, C. F., Fenn, M. A., Clayton, M. B.,
Hannan, J. R., Fuelberg, H. E., Blake, D. R., Blake, N. J., Gregory, G. L,
Heikes, B. G., Sachse, G. W., Singh, H. B., Snow, J., and Talbot, R. W.: A
case study of transport of tropical marine boundary layer and lower
tropospheric air masses to the northern midlatitude upper troposphere, J.
Geophys. Res., 105, 3757–3769, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Hoerling, M. P., Schaack, T. K., and Lenzen, A. J.: Global Objective
Tropopause Analysis, Mon. Weather Rev., 119, 1816–1831, 1991.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Iarlori, M., Madonna, F., Rizi, V., Trickl, T., and Amodeo, A.: Effective resolution concepts for lidar observations, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 8, 5157–5176, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-8-5157-2015, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Jäger, H., Carnuth, W., and Georgii, B.: Observations of Saharan dust at
a North Alpine mountain station, J. Aerosol Sci., 19, 1235–1238, 1988.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Jennings, D. E., Weber, A., and Brault, J. W.: Raman spectroscopy of gases with a Fourier transform spectrometer: the spectrum of D<inline-formula><mml:math id="M225" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, Appl. Opt., 25, 284-290, 1986</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Jeunouvrier, A., Mérienne, M.-F., Coquart, B., Carleer, M., Fally, S.,
Vandaele, A. C., Hermans, C., and Colin, R.: Fourier Transform Spectroscopy
of the O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M226" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> Herzberg Bands – I. Rotational Analysis, J. Mol. Spectrosc.,
198, 136–162, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Jonson, J. E., Simpson, D., Fagerli, H., and Solberg, S.: Can we explain the trends in European ozone levels?, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6, 51–66, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-51-2006, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib63"><label>63</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Kalabokas, P., Papayannis, A., Tsaknakis, G., and Ziomas, I.: A
study on the atmospheric concentrations of primary and secondary air
pollutants in the Athens basin performed by DOA<?pagebreak page6386?>S and DIAL measuring
techniques, Sci. Total Environ., 414, 556–563, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib64"><label>64</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Kempfer, U.: Entwicklung und Anwendung eines differentiellen
Absorptions-LIDAR-Systems zur Messung der troposphärischen
Ozonkonzentration, Dissertation, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München (Germany), 151 pp., 1992.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib65"><label>65</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Kempfer, U., Carnuth, W., Lotz, R., and Trickl, T.: A wide range ultraviolet
lidar system for tropospheric ozone measurements: development and
application, Rev. Sci. Instrum., 65, 3145–3164, 1994.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib66"><label>66</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Klanner, L., Höveler, K., Khordakova, D., Perfahl, M., Rolf, C., Trickl, T., and Vogelmann, H.: A powerful lidar system capable of one-hour measurements of water vapour in the troposphere and the lower stratosphere as well as the temperature in the upper stratosphere and mesosphere, Atmos. Meas. Tech. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-2020-90, in review, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib67"><label>67</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Kley, D., Crutzen, P. J., Smit, H. G. J., Vömel, H., Oltmans, S. J.,
Grassl, H., and Ramanathan, V.: Observations of near-zero ozone
concentrations over the convective Pacific: effects of air chemistry,
Science, 274, 230–233, 1996.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib68"><label>68</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Kley, D., Beck, J., Grennfelt, P. I., Hov, O., and Penkett, S. A.:
Tropospheric Ozone Research (TOR) A Sub-Project of EUROTRAC, J. Atmos.
Chem., 28, 1–9, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib69"><label>69</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Kourtidis, K., Zerefos, C., Rapsomanikis, S., Simeonov, V., Balis, D.,
Perros, P. E., Thompson, A. M., Witte, J., Calpini, B., Sharobiem, W. M.,
Papayannis, A., Mihalopoulos, N., and Drakou, R.: Regional levels of ozone
in the troposphere over eastern Mediterranean, J. Geophys. Res., 107, 8140,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2000JD000140" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2000JD000140</ext-link>, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib70"><label>70</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Kowol-Santen, J. and Ancellet, G.: Mesoscale analysis of transport across
the subtropical tropopause, Geophys. Res. Lett., 27, 3345–3347, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib71"><label>71</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Kreipl, S.: Messung des Aerosoltransports am Alpennordrand mittels
Laserradar (Lidar), Dissertation, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität
Erlangen-Nürnberg (Germany), 195 pp., 2006 (in German).</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib72"><label>72</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Krupenie, P. H.: The Spectrum of Molecular Oxygen, J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data,
1, 423–534, 1972.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib73"><label>73</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Kuang, S., Burris, J. F., Newchurch, M. J., Johnson, S., and Long, S.:
Differential Absorption Lidar to measure subhourly variation of tropospheric
ozone profiles, IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens., 49, 557–571, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib74"><label>74</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Kuang, S., Newchurch, M. J., Burris, J., Wang, L., Knupp, K., and Huang, G.:
Stratosphere-to-troposphere transport revealed by ground-based lidar and
ozonesonde at a midlatitude site, J. Geophys. Res., 117, D18305, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JD017695" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2012JD017695</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib75"><label>75</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Kuang, S., Newchurch, M. J., Burris, J. F., and Liu, X.: Ground-based lidar
for atmospheric boundary layer ozone measurements, Appl. Opt., 52,
3557–3566, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib76"><label>76</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Kuang, S., Newchurch, M. J., Johnson, M. S., Wang, L., Burris, J. F.,
Pierce, R. B., Eloranta, E. W., Pollack, I. W., Graus, M., de Gouw, J.,
Warneke, C., Ryerson, T. B., Markovic, M. Z., Holloway, J. S., Pour-Biazar,
A., Huang, G., Liu, X., and Feng, N.: Summertime tropospheric ozone
enhancement associated with a cold front passage due to
stratosphere-to-troposphere transport and biomass burning: Simultaneous
ground-based lidar and airborne measurements, J. Geophys. Res., 122, 1293–1311,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD026078" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2016JD026078</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib77"><label>77</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Lamarque, J.-F., Langford, A. O., and Proffitt, M. H.: Cross-tropopause
mixing of ozone through gravity wave breaking: Observation and modelling, J.
Geophys. Res., 101, 22969–22976, 1996.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib78"><label>78</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Langford, A. O.: Identification and correction of
analog-to-digital-converter nonlinearities and their implications for
differential absorption lidar measurements, Appl. Opt., 34, 8330–8340, 1995.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib79"><label>79</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Langford, A. O., Masters, C. D., Proffitt, M. H., Hsie, E.-Y., and Tuck, A.
F.: Ozone measurements in a tropopause fold associated with a cut-off low
system, Geophys. Res. Lett., 23, 2501–2504, 1996.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib80"><label>80</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Langford, A. O., Aikin, K. C., Eubank, C. S., and Williams, E. J.:
Stratospheric contribution to high surface ozone in Colorado during
springtime, Geophys. Res. Lett., 36, L12801, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GL038367" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2009GL038367</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib81"><label>81</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Langford, A. O., Brioude, J., Cooper, O. R., Senff, C. J., Alvarez II, R.
J., Hardesty, R. M., Johnson, B. J., and Oltmans, S. J.: Stratospheric
influence on surface ozone in the Los Angeles area during late spring and
early summer of 2010, J. Geophys. Res., 117, D00V06, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD016766" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2011JD016766</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib82"><label>82</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Langford, A. O., Alvarez II, R. J., Brioude, J., Fine, R., Gustin, M. S.,
Lin, M. Y., Marchbanks, R. D., Pierce, R. B., Sandberg, S. P., Senff, C. J.,
Weickmann, A. M., and Williams, E. J.: Entrainment of stratospheric air and
Asian pollution by the convective boundary layer in the southwestern U.S.,
J. Geophys. Res., 122, 1312–1337, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD025987" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2016JD025987</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib83"><label>83</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Langford, A. O., Alvarez II, R. J., Brioude, Evan, S., Iraci, L. T., Kirgas,
G., Kuang, S., Leblanc, T., Newchurch, M. J., Pierce, R. B., Senff, C. J.,
and Yates, E. L.: Coordinated profiling of stratospheric intrusions and
transported pollution by the Tropospheric Ozone Lidar Network (TOLNet) and
NASA Alpha Jet experiment (AJAX): Observations and comparison to HYSPLIT,
RAQMS, and FLEXPART, Atmos. Environ., 174, 1–14, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib84"><label>84</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Lazzarotto, B., Frioud, M., Larchevêque, G., Mitev, V., Quaglia, P.,
Simeonov, V., Thompson, A., van den Bergh, H., and Calpini, B.: Ozone and
water-vapor measurements by Raman lidar in the planetary boundary layer:
error sources and field measurements, Appl. Opt., 40, 2985–2997, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib85"><label>85</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Leblanc, T., Sica, R. J., van Gijsel, J. A. E., Godin-Beekmann, S., Haefele, A., Trickl, T., Payen, G., and Gabarrot, F.: Proposed standardized definitions for vertical resolution and uncertainty in the NDACC lidar ozone and temperature algorithms – Part 1: Vertical resolution, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 9, 4029–4049, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-9-4029-2016, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib86"><label>86</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Leblanc, T., Brewer, M. A., Wang, P. S., Granados-Muñoz, M. J., Strawbridge, K. B., Travis, M., Firanski, B., Sullivan, J. T., McGee, T. J., Sumnicht, G. K., Twigg, L. W., Berkoff, T. A., Carrion, W., Gronoff, G., Aknan, A., Chen, G., Alvarez, R. J., Langford, A. O., Senff, C. J., Kirgis, G., Johnson, M. S., Kuang, S., and Newchurch, M. J.: Validation of the TOLNet lidars: the Southern California Ozone Observation Project (SCOOP), Atmos. Meas. Tech., 11, 6137–6162, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-6137-2018, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib87"><label>87</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Leclair De Bellevue, J., Réchou, A., Baray, J. L., Ancellet, G., and
Diab, R. D.: Signatures of stratosphere to troposphere transport near deep
convective events in the southern subtropics, J. Geophys Res., 111, D24107,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD006947" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2005JD006947</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page6387?><ref id="bib1.bib88"><label>88</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Liang, Q., Jaeglé, L., Hudman, R. C., Turquety, S., Jacob, D. J., Avery,
M. A., Browell, E. V., Sachse, G. W., Blake, D. R., Brune, W., Ren, X.,
Cohen, R. C., Dibb, J. E., Fried, A., Fuelberg, H., Porter, M., Heikes, B.
G., Huey, G., Singh, H. B., and Wennberg, P. O.: Summertime influence of
Asian pollution in the free troposphere over North America, J. Geophys.
Res., 112, D12S11, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JD007919" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2006JD007919</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib89"><label>89</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Machol, J. L., Marchbanks, R. D., Senff, C. J., McCarty, B. J., Eberhard, W.
L., Brewer, W. A., Richter, R. A., Alvarez II, R. J., Law, D. C., Weickmann,
A. M., and Sandberg, S. P.: Scanning tropospheric ozone and aerosol lidar
with double-gated photomultipliers, Appl. Optics, 48, 512–524, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib90"><label>90</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Malicet, J., Daumont, D., Charbonnier, J., Parisse, C., Chakir, A., and
Brion, J.: Ozone UV Spectroscopy I: Absorption Cross-Sections and
Temperature Dependence, J. Atmos. Chem., 21, 263–273, 1995.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib91"><label>91</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Marenco, A., Thouret, V., Nédélec, P., Smit, H., Helten, M., Kley,
D., Karcher, F., Simon, P., Law, K., Pyle, J., Poschmann, G., von Wrede, R.,
Hume, C., and Cook, T.: Measurement of ozone and water vapor by Airbus
in-service aircraft: The MOZAIC airborne program, An overview, J. Geophys.
Res., 103, 25631–25642, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib92"><label>92</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Matthias, M.: Vertikalmessungen der Aerosolextinktion und des Ozons mit
einem UV-Raman-Lidar, Dissertation, Universität Hamburg, published as
Examensarbeit Nr. 80, Max-Planck-Institut für Meteorologie (Hamburg,
Germany), ISSN 0938-5177, 143 pp., 2000 (in German).</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib93"><label>93</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
McDermid, I. S., Haner, D. A., Kleiman, M. M., Walsh, T. D., and White, M.
L.: Differential absorption lidar systems for tropospheric and stratospheric
ozone measurements, Opt. Engin., 30, 22–30, 1991.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib94"><label>94</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
McDermid, I. S., Beyerle, G., Haner, D. A., and Leblanc, T.: Redesign and
improved performance of the tropospheric ozone lidar at the Jet Propulsion
Laboratory Table Mountain Facility, Appl. Opt., 41, 7550–7555, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib95"><label>95</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Milton, M. J. T., Ancellet, G., Apituley, A., Bösenberg, J., Carnuth,
W., Castagnoli, F., Trickl, T., Edner, H., Stefanutti, L., Schaberl, T.,
Sunesson, A., and Weitkamp, C.: Raman-shifted laser sources suitable for
differential-absorption lidar measurements of ozone in the troposphere,
Appl. Phys. B, 66, 105–113, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib96"><label>96</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Mytilinaios, M., Papayannis, A., and Tsaknakis, G.: Lower-free tropospheric
ozone DIAL measurements over Athens, Greece, EPJ Web of Conferences, 28th International Laser Radar Conference, Bucharest, Romania,  25–30 June 2017, 176,
05025, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1051/epjconf/201817605025" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1051/epjconf/201817605025</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib97"><label>97</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Nakazato, M., Nagai, T., Sakai, T., and Hirose, Y.: Tropospheric ozone
differential-absorption lidar using stimulated Raman scattering in carbon
dioxide, Appl. Opt., 46, 2269–2279, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib98"><label>98</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Newchurch, M. J., Kuang, S., Leblanc, T., Alvarez II, R. J., Langford, A.
O., Senff, C. J., Burris, J. F., McGee, T. J., Sullivan, J. T., DeYoung, R.
J., Al-Saadi, J., Johnson, M., and Pszenny, A.: TOLNet – A Tropospheric
Ozone Lidar Profiling Network for Satellite Continuity and Process Studies,
Proc. 27th International Laser Radar Conference, New York, USA,
2015, 5–10 July 2015, EPJ Web of Conferences, 119, 20001, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib99"><label>99</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Newell, R. E., Browell, E. V., Davis, D. D., and Liu, S. C.: Western Pacific
ozone and potential vorticity: Implications for Asian pollution, Geophys.
Res. Lett., 24, 2733–2736, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib100"><label>100</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Ordoñez, C., Brunner, D., Staehelin, J., Hadjinicolaou, P., Pyle, J. A.,
Jonas, M., Wernli, H., and Prévôt, A. S. H.: Strong influence of
lowermost stratospheric ozone on lower tropospheric background ozone changes
over Europe, Geophys. Res. Lett., 34, L07805, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2006GL029113" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2006GL029113</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib101"><label>101</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Pan, L. L., Randel, W. J., Gary, B. L., Mahoney, M. J., and Hintsa, E. J.:
Definitions and sharpness of the extratropical tropopause: A trace gas
perspective, J. Geophys. Res., 109, D23103, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JD004982" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2004JD004982</ext-link>, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib102"><label>102</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Papayannis, A., Ancellet, G., Pelon, J., and Mégie, G.: Multiwavelength
lidar for ozone measurements in the troposphere and the lower stratosphere,
Appl. Opt., 29, 467–476, 1990.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib103"><label>103</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Papayannis, A., Balis, D., Zanis, P., Galani, E., Wernli, H., Zerefos, C., Stohl, A., Eckhardt, S., and Amiridis, V.: Sampling of an STT event over the Eastern Mediterranean region by lidar and electrochemical sonde, Ann. Geophys., 23, 2039–2050, https://doi.org/10.5194/angeo-23-2039-2005, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib104"><label>104</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Papayannis, A., Amiridis, V., Mona, L.,
Tsaknakis, G., Balis, D., Bösenberg, J., Chaikovsky, A., De Tomasi, F.,
Grigorov, I., Mattis, I., Mitev, V., Müller, D., Nickovic, S.,
Pérez, C., Pietruczuk, A., Pisani, G. L., Ravetta, F., Rizi, V., Sicard,
M., Trickl, T., Wiegner, M., Gerding, M., Mamouri, R. E., D'Amico, G., and Pappalardo, G.: Systematic lidar observations of Saharan dust
over Europe in the frame of EARLINET (2000–2002), J. Geophys. Res., 113,
D10204, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD009028" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2007JD009028</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib105"><label>105</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Pelon, J. and Mégie, G.: Ozone Monitoring in the Troposphere and Lower
Stratosphere: Evaluation and Operation of a Ground-Based Lidar Station, J.
Geophys. Res., 87, 4947–4955, 1982.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib106"><label>106</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Perrone, M. R. and Piccinno, V.: On the benefits of astigmatic focusing
configurations in stimulated Raman scattering processes, Opt. Comm., 133,
534–540, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib107"><label>107</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Proffitt, M. H. and Langford, A. O.: Ground-based differential-absorption
lidar system for day or night measurements of ozone throughout the free
troposphere, Appl. Opt., 36, 2568–2585, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib108"><label>108</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Ravetta, F., Ancellet, G., Kowol-Santen, J., Wilson, R., and Nedeljkovic,
D.: Ozone, Temperature, and Wind Field Measurements in a Tropopause Fold:
Comparison with a Mesoscale Model Simulation, Mon. Weather Rev., 127,
2641–2653, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib109"><label>109</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Ravetta, F., Ancellet, A., Colette, A., and Schlager, H.: Long-range
transport and tropospheric ozone variability in the western Mediterranean
region during the Intercontinental Transport of Ozone and Precursors
(ITOP-2004) campaign, J. Geophys. Res., 112, D10S46, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JD007724" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2006JD007724</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib110"><label>110</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Reichardt, J., Wandinger, U., Servazi, M., and Weitkamp, C.: Combined Raman
lidar for aerosol, ozone and moisture measurements, Opt. Eng., 35,
1457–1465, 1996.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib111"><label>111</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Roelofs, G. J., Kentarchos, A. S., Trickl, T., Stohl, A., Collins, W. J.,
Crowther, R. A., Hauglustaine, D., Klonecki, A., Law, K. S., Lawrence, M.
G., von Kuhlmann, R., and van Weele, M.: Intercomparison of tropospheric
ozone models: Ozone transport in a complex tropopause folding event, J.
Geophys. Res., 108, 8529, doi:10.1029/2003JD003462, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib112"><label>112</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Scheel, H. E.: Ozone Climatology Studies for the Zugspitze and Neighbouring
Sites in the German Alps, pp. 134–139 in: Tropospheric Ozone Research 2,
EUROTRAC-2 Subproject Final Report, A. Lindskog, Co-ordinator, EUROTRAC
Internationa<?pagebreak page6388?>l Scientific Secretariat, available at: <uri>http://www.trickl.de/scheel.pdf</uri> (last access: 19 November 2020), München, Germany, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib113"><label>113</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Seibert, P., Feldmann, H., Neininger, B., Bäumle, M., and Trickl, T.:
South foehn and ozone in the Eastern Alps – case study and climatological
aspect, Atmos. Environ., 34, 1379–1394, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib114"><label>114</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Senff, C. J., Hardesty, R. M., Alvarez II, R. J., and Mayor, S. D.: Airborne
lidar characterization of power plant plumes during the 1995 Southern
Oxidants Study, J. Geophys. Res., 103, 31173–31189, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib115"><label>115</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Senff, C. J., Alvarez II, R. J., Hardesty, R. M., Banta, R. M., and
Langford, A. O.: Airborne lidar measurements of ozone flux downwind of
Houston and Dallas, J. Geophys. Res., 115, D20307, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JD013689" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2009JD013689</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib116"><label>116</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Serdyuchenko, A., Gorshelev, V., Weber, M., Chehade, W., and Burrows, J. P.: High spectral resolution ozone absorption cross-sections – Part 2: Temperature dependence, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 7, 625–636, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-7-625-2014, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib117"><label>117</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Simeonov, V., Larcheveque, G., Quaglia, P., van den Bergh, H., and Calpini,
B.: Influence of the photomultiplier tube spatial uniformity on lidar
signals, Appl. Opt., 38, 5186–5190, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib118"><label>118</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Simeonov, V., Ristori, P., Taslakov, M., Dinoev, T., Molina, L. T., Molina,
M. J., and van den Bergh, H.: Proceedings of the Conference on “Lidar Technologies, Techniques, and Measurements for Atmospheric Remote Sensing”, Bruges,  Belgium, 19–20 September 2005, edited by: Singh, U. N. Singh, Proc. SPIE, 5984, 59840O, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1117/12.629429" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1117/12.629429</ext-link>, 8 pp., 2005</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib119"><label>119</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Stohl, A. and Trickl, T.: A textbook example of long-range transport:
Simultaneous observation of ozone maxima of stratospheric and North American
origin in the free troposphere over Europe, J. Geophys. Res., 104,
30445–30462, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib120"><label>120</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Stohl, A., Spichtinger-Rakowsky, N., Bonasoni, P., Feldmann, H.,
Memmesheimer, M., Scheel, H. E., Trickl, T., Hübener, S., Ringer, W.,
and Mandl, M.: The influence of stratospheric intrusions on alpine ozone
concentrations, Atmos. Environ., 34, 1323–1354, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib121"><label>121</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Stohl, A., Bonasoni, P., Cristofanelli, P., Collins, W., Feichter, J.,
Frank, A., Forster, C., Gerasopoulos, E., Gäggeler, H., James, P.,
Kentarchos, T., Kromp-Kolb, H., Krüger, B., Land, C., Meloen, J.,
Papayannis, A., Priller, A., Seibert, P., Sprenger, M., Roelofs, G. J.,
Scheel, H. E., Schnabel, C., Siegmund, P., Tobler, L., Trickl, T., Wernli,
H., Wirth, V., Zanis, P., and Zerefos, C.: Stratosphere-troposphere exchange
– a review, and what we have learned from STACCATO, J. Geophys. Res., 108,
8516, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002490" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2002JD002490</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib122"><label>122</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Strawbridge, K. B., Travis, M. S., Firanski, B. J., Brook, J. R., Staebler, R., and Leblanc, T.: A fully autonomous ozone, aerosol and nighttime water vapor lidar: a synergistic approach to profiling the atmosphere in the Canadian oil sands region, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 11, 6735–6759, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-6735-2018, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib123"><label>123</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Sullivan, J. T., McGee, T. J., Sumnicht, G. K., Twigg, L. W., and Hoff, R. M.: A mobile differential absorption lidar to measure sub-hourly fluctuation of tropospheric ozone profiles in the Baltimore–Washington, D.C. region, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 7, 3529–3548, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-7-3529-2014, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib124"><label>124</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Sullivan, J. T., McGee, T. J., Thompson, A. M., Pierce, R. B., Sumnicht, G.
K., Twigg, L. W., Eloranta, E. W., and Hoff, R. M.: Characterizing the
lifetime and occurrence of stratospheric-tropospheric exchange events in the
rocky mountain region using high-resolution ozone measurements, J. Geophys.
Res., 120, 12410–12424, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD023877" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2015JD023877</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib125"><label>125</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Sullivan, J. T., Rabenhorst, S. T., Dreessen, J., McGee, T. J, Delgado, R.,
Twigg, L., and Sumnicht, G.: Lidar observations revealing transport of
O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M227" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in the presence of a nocturnal low-level jet: Regional implications
for “next-day” pollution, Atmos. Environ., 158, 160–171, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib126"><label>126</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Sunesson, J. A., Apituley, A., and Swart, D. P. J.: Differential absorption
lidar system for routine monitoring of tropospheric ozone, Appl. Opt., 33,
7045–7058, 1994.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib127"><label>127</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Tarasick, D., Galbally, I. E., Cooper, O. R., Schultz, G. M., Ancellet, G.,
Leblanc, T., Wallington, T. J., Ziemke, J., Liu, X., Steinbacher, M.,
Staehelin, J., Vigouroux, C., Hannigan, J., García, O., Foret, G.,
Zanis, P., Weatherhead, E., Petropavlovskikh, I., Worden, H., Osman, M.,
Liu, J., Chang, K.-L., Gaudel, A., Lin, M., Granados-Muñoz, M.,
Thompson, A. M., Oltmans, S. J., Cuesta, J., Dufour, G., Thouret, V.,
Hassler, B., Trickl, T., and Neu, J. L.: Tropospheric Ozone
Assessment Report: Tropospheric ozone from 1877 to 2016, observed levels,
trends and uncertainties, Elem. Sci. Anth., 7,  39, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1525/elementa.376" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1525/elementa.376</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib128"><label>128</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
TESLAS: Tropospheric Environmental Studies by Laser Sounding (TESLAS), in:
Transport and Chemical Transformation of Pollutants in the Troposphere, Vol.
8, Instrument Development for Atmospheric Research and Monitoring, edited by: Bösenberg, J., Brassington, D., and Simon, P. C., Springer (Berlin,
Heidelberg, New York), ISBN 3-540-62516-X, 1–203, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib129"><label>129</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Thomasson, A., Geffroy, S., Frejafon, E., Weidauer, D., Fabian, R., Godet,
Y., Nominé, M., Ménard, T., Rairoux, P., Moeller, D., and Wolf, J.
P.: LIDAR mapping of ozone-episode dynamics and intercomparison with spot
analyzers, Appl. Phys. B, 74, 453–459, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib130"><label>130</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Trickl, T.: Lidar Studies of Tropospheric Transport, in: Tropospheric Ozone
Research 2, EUROTRAC-2 Subproject Final Report, A. Lindskog, Subproject
Co-ordinator, EUROTRAC-2 International Scientific Secretariat,  available at: <uri>http://www.trickl.de/TOR.pdf</uri> (last access: 19 November 2020), München,
Germany, 2003, 146–159, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib131"><label>131</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Trickl, T.: Upgraded 1.56-<inline-formula><mml:math id="M228" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>m lidar at IMK-IFU with 0.28 J/pulse, Appl.
Opt., 49, 3732–3740, 2010a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib132"><label>132</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Trickl, T.: Tropospheric trace-gas measurements with the
differential-absorption lidar technique, in: Recent Advances in Atmospheric
Lidars, edited by: Fiorani, L. and Mitev, V., INOE Publishing House, Bucharest
(Romania), Series on Optoelectronic Materials and Devices, Vol. 7, ISBN 978-973-88109-6-9; 87–147 (revised version available at: <uri>http://www.trickl.de/DIAL.pdf</uri> (last access: 19 November 2020), 2010b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib133"><label>133</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Trickl, T., Vrakking, M. J. J., Cromwell, E. F., Lee, Y. T., and Kung, A.
H.: Ultrahigh-resolution (1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M229" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1) photoionization spectroscopy of Kr I:
Hyperfine structures, isotope shifts and lifetimes for the n <inline-formula><mml:math id="M230" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 5, 6, 7 4p
5ns Rydberg levels, Phys. Rev. A, 39, 2948–2955, 1989.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib134"><label>134</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Trickl, T., Cooper, O. R., Eisele, H., James, P., Mücke, R., and Stohl,
A.: Intercontinental transport and its influence on the ozone concentrations
over central Europe: Three case studies, J. Geophys. Res., 108, 8530,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002735" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2002JD002735</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page6389?><ref id="bib1.bib135"><label>135</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Trickl, T., Kung, A. H., and Lee, Y. T.: Krypton atom and
testing the limits of extreme-ultraviolet tunable-laser spectroscopy, Phys.
Rev. A, 75, 022501, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.75.022501" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1103/PhysRevA.75.022501</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib136"><label>136</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Trickl, T., Feldmann, H., Kanter, H.-J., Scheel, H.-E., Sprenger, M., Stohl, A., and Wernli, H.: Forecasted deep stratospheric intrusions over Central Europe: case studies and climatologies, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 499–524, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-499-2010, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib137"><label>137</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Trickl, T., Bärtsch-Ritter, N., Eisele, H., Furger, M., Mücke, R., Sprenger, M., and Stohl, A.: High-ozone layers in the middle and upper troposphere above Central Europe: potential import from the stratosphere along the subtropical jet stream, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 9343–9366, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-9343-2011, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib138"><label>138</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Trickl, T., Vogelmann, H., Giehl, H., Scheel, H.-E., Sprenger, M., and Stohl, A.: How stratospheric are deep stratospheric intrusions?, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 9941–9961, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-9941-2014, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib139"><label>139</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Trickl, T., Vogelmann, H., Flentje, H., and Ries, L.: Stratospheric ozone in boreal fire plumes – the 2013 smoke season over central Europe, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 9631–9649, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-9631-2015, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib140"><label>140</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Trickl, T., Vogelmann, H., Fix, A., Schäfler, A., Wirth, M., Calpini, B., Levrat, G., Romanens, G., Apituley, A., Wilson, K. M., Begbie, R., Reichardt, J., Vömel, H., and Sprenger, M.: How stratospheric are deep stratospheric intrusions? LUAMI 2008, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 8791–8815, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-8791-2016, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib141"><label>141</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Trickl, T., Vogelmann, H., Ries, L., and Sprenger, M.: Very high stratospheric influence observed in the free troposphere over the northern Alps – just a local phenomenon?, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 243–266, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-243-2020, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib142"><label>142</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Uchino, O., Tokunaga, M., Maeda, M., and Miyazoe, Y.:
Differential-absorption-lidar measurements of tropospheric ozone with
excimer-Raman hybrid laser, Opt. Lett., 8, 347–349, 1983.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib143"><label>143</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Uchino, O., Sakai, T., Nagai, T., Morino, I., Maki, T., Deushi, M., Shibata, K., Kajino, M., Kawasaki, T., Akaho, T., Takubo, S., Okumura, H., Arai, K., Nakazato, M., Matsunaga, T., Yokota, T., Kawakami, S., Kita, K., and Sasano, Y.: DIAL measurement of lower tropospheric ozone over Saga (33.24° N, 130.29° E), Japan, and comparison with a chemistry–climate model, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 7, 1385–1394, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-7-1385-2014, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib144"><label>144</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
U.S. Standard Atmosphere:  National Oceanic and Atmospheric Organization
(NOAA), National Aeronautics and Space Administration, United States Air
Force, NOAA-S/T 76-1562, US Printing Office (Washington, D.C.), 227 pp.,
1976.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib145"><label>145</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Uthe, E. E. and Livingston, J. M.: Airborne Lidar Mapping of Ozone
Concentrations During the Lake Michigan Ozone Study, J. Air Waste Manage.
Assoc., 42, 1313–1318, 1992.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib146"><label>146</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Valente, R. J., Imhoff, R. E., Tanner, R. L., Meagher, J. F., Daum, P. H.,
Hardesty, R. M., Banta, R. M., Alvarez, R. J., McNider, R. T., and Gillani,
N. V.: Ozone production during an urban air stagnation episode over
Nashville, Tennessee, J. Geophys. Res., 103, 22555–22568, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib147"><label>147</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Vautard, R., Szopa, S., Beekmann, M., Menut, L., Hauglustaine, D. A., Rouil,
L., and Roemer, M.: Are decadal anthropogenic emission reductions in Europe
consistent with surface ozone observations? Geophys. Res. Lett., 33, L13810,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2006GL026080" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2006GL026080</ext-link>,  2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib148"><label>148</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
VDI: guide line 4210 Remote Sensing, Atmospheric Measurements with LIDAR,
Measuring gaseous air pollution with the DAS LIDAR, Verein Deutscher
Ingenieure, Düsseldorf, Germany, 47 pp., 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib149"><label>149</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Veselovskii, I. and Barchunov, B.: Excimer-laser-based lidar for
tropospheric ozone monitoring, Appl. Phys. B, 68, 1131–1137, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib150"><label>150</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Viallon, J., Lee, S., Moussay, P., Tworek, K., Petersen, M., and Wielgosz, R. I.: Accurate measurements of ozone absorption cross-sections in the Hartley band, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 8, 1245–1257, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-8-1245-2015, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib151"><label>151</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Völger, P., Bösenberg, J., and Schult, I.: Scattering Properties of
Selected Model Aerosols Calculated at UV-Wavelengths: Implications for DIAL
Measurements of Tropospheric Ozone, Beitr. Phys. Atmosph., 69, 177–187,
1996.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib152"><label>152</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Vogelmann, H. and Trickl, T.: Wide-Range Sounding of Free-Tropospheric Water
Vapor with a Differential-Absorption Lidar (DIAL) at a High-Altitude
Station, Appl. Opt., 47, 2116–2132, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib153"><label>153</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
VOTALP II: Vertical Ozone Transport in the Alps II, Final Report for the
European Union, Contract Nr.: ENV4 CT970413, Reporting Period
1/3/1998-29/2/2000, H. Kromp-Kolb, Co-ordinator, Universität für
Bodenkultur Wien (Austria), Institut für Meteorologie und Physik, 96
pp., 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib154"><label>154</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Wallinder, E., Edner, H., Ragnarson, P., and Svanberg, S.: Vertically
Sounding Ozone Lidar System based on a KrF Excimer Laser, Phys. Scripta,
55, 714–718, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib155"><label>155</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Wang, L., Newchurch, M. J., Alvarez II, R. J., Berkoff, T. A., Brown, S. S., Carrion, W., De Young, R. J., Johnson, B. J., Ganoe, R., Gronoff, G., Kirgis, G., Kuang, S., Langford, A. O., Leblanc, T., McDuffie, E. E., McGee, T. J., Pliutau, D., Senff, C. J., Sullivan, J. T., Sumnicht, G., Twigg, L. W., and Weinheimer, A. J.: Quantifying TOLNet ozone lidar accuracy during the 2014 DISCOVER-AQ and FRAPPÉ campaigns, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 10, 3865–3876, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-10-3865-2017, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib156"><label>156</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Weitkamp, C., Baumbach, G., Becker, K.-H., Braun-Schoen, S., Burger, H.,
Dinev, S., Fabian, R., Frey, S., Fritzsche, F., Glaser, K., Glauer, J.,
Herb, F., Immler, F., Junkermann, W., Kanter, H. J., Lindemann, C.,
Loescher, A., Mohnen, V. A., Möller, D., Neidhart, B., Olariu, R.,
Reimer, E., Schmidt, V., Schubert, G., Spittler, M., Vogt, U., Weidauer, D.,
Windholz, L., and Wöste, L.: Wie richtig sind Lidarmessungen der
Ozonverteilung?, Gefahrstoffe – Reinhaltung der Luft, 60, 279–284, 2000 (in
German).</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib157"><label>157</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Wotava, G. and Kromp-Kolb, H.: The research project VOTALP – general
objectives and main results, Atmos. Environ., 34, 1319–1322, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib158"><label>158</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Yates, E. L., Johnson, M. S., Iraci, L. T., Ryoo, J.-M., Pierce, R. B.,
Cullis, P. D., Gore, W., Ives, M. A., Johnson, B. J., Leblanc, T., Marrero,
J. E., Sterling, C. W., and Tanaka, T.: An Assessment of Ground Level and
Free Tropospheric Ozone Over California and Nevada, J. Geophys. Res., 122,
10089–10102, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD026266" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2016JD026266</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib159"><label>159</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Zanis, P., Trickl, T., Stohl, A., Wernli, H., Cooper, O., Zerefos, C., Gaeggeler, H., Schnabel, C., Tobler, L., Kubik, P. W., Priller, A., Scheel, H. E., Kanter, H. J., Cristofanelli, P., Forster, C., James<?pagebreak page6390?>, P., Gerasopoulos, E., Delcloo, A., Papayannis, A., and Claude, H.: Forecast, observation and modelling of a deep stratospheric intrusion event over Europe, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 3, 763–777, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-3-763-2003, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib160"><label>160</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zhao, Y., Howell, J. N., and Hardesty, R. M.: Transportable Lidar for the
Measurement of Ozone Concentration and Flux Profiles in the Lower
Troposphere, in: Proceedings of the 16th International Laser Radar
Conference, Cambridge, Massachussetts, USA, 20–24 July 1992, 185–187, 1992.
 </mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib161"><label>161</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Zhao, Y., Marchbanks, R. D., Senff, C. J., and Johnson, H. D.: Lidar
Profiling of Ozone and Aerosol in the SCOS97-NARSTO Experiment, in:
Proceedings of the Ninetenth International Laser Radar Conference, Annapolis,
Maryland, USA, 6–10 July 1998, edited by: Singh, U. N., Ismail, S., and Schwemmer, G. K.,
NASA Langley Research Center, NASA/CP-1998-207671/PT1, 375–378, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Three decades of tropospheric ozone lidar development at Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany</article-title-html>
<abstract-html><p>Since 1988 two ozone lidar systems have been developed at IMK-IFU
(Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany). A stationary system, operated at the
institute, has yielded about 5000 vertical profiles of ozone from next to
the ground to typically 3&thinsp;km above the tropopause and has contributed data
for a large number of scientific investigations. A mobile system was
successfully operated in a number of field campaigns after its completion in
1996, before it was destroyed in major flooding in May 1999. Both systems
combine high data quality with high vertical resolution dynamically varied
between 50&thinsp;m in the lower troposphere and 250–500&thinsp;m below the tropopause
(stationary system). The stationary system has been gradually upgraded over
the years. The noise level of the raw data has reached about
±1×10<sup>−6</sup> of the input range of the transient digitizers
after minor smoothing. As a consequence, uncertainties in the ozone mixing
ratios of 1.5 to 4&thinsp;ppb have been achieved up to about 5&thinsp;km. The performance
in the upper troposphere, based on the wavelength pair 292–313&thinsp;nm, varies
between 5 and 15&thinsp;ppb depending on the absorption of the 292&thinsp;nm radiation by
ozone and the solar background. In summer it is therefore planned to
extend the measurement time from 41&thinsp;s to a few minutes in order to improve
the performance to a level that will allow us to trust automatic data
evaluation. As a result of the time needed for manual refinement the number of measurements per year has been restricted to under 600. For longer time
series automatic data acquisition has been used.</p></abstract-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
ACTRIS: Data Policy Disclaimer,  available at: <a href="http://actris.nilu.no/" target="_blank"/>, last access: 19 November 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
Amodeo, A., Bösenberg, J., Ansmann, A., Balis, D., Böckmann, C.,
Chaikovsky, A., Comeron, A., Mitev, V., Papayannis, A., Pappalardo, G.,
Perrone, M. R., Rizi, V., Simeonov, V., Sobolewski, P., Spinelli, N.,
Stoyanov, D. V., Trickl, T., and Wiegner, M.: EARLINET: the European Aerosol
Lidar Network, Optica Pura y Aplicada, 39, 1–10, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
Ancellet, A. and Ravetta, F.: The Airborne Lidar for Tropospheric Ozone
(ALTO), Advances in Atmospheric Remote Sensing with Lidar in Selected Papers
of the 18th International Laser Radar Conference, Berlin (Germany, 1996), edited by:
Ansmann, A., Neuber, R., Rairoux, P., and Wandinger, U., Springer, Berlin,
Heidelberg, New York, 22–26 July 1996, 399–402, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
Ancellet, A. and Ravetta, F.: Compact airborne lidar for tropospheric
ozone: description and field measurements, Appl. Opt., 37, 5509–5521, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
Ancellet, G., Papayannis, A., Pelon, J., and Mégie, G.: DIAL
Tropospheric Ozone Measurement Using a Nd:YAG Laser and the Raman Shifting
Technique, J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol., 6, 832–839, 1989.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
Ancellet, G., Pelon, J., Beekmann, M., Papayannis, A., and Mégie, G.:
Ground-Based Lidar Studies of Ozone Exchanges Between the Stratosphere and
the Troposphere, J. Geophys. Res., 96, 22401–22421, 1991.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
Ancellet, A., Beekmann, M., and Papayannis, A.: Impact of cutoff low
development on downward transport of ozone in the troposphere, J. Geophys.
Res., 99, 3451–3468, 1994.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
Ancellet, G., Pelon, J., Totems, J., Chazette, P., Bazureau, A., Sicard, M., Di Iorio, T., Dulac, F., and Mallet, M.: Long-range transport and mixing of aerosol sources during the 2013 North American biomass burning episode: analysis of multiple lidar observations in the western Mediterranean basin, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 4725–4742, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-4725-2016, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
Alvarez II, R. J., Senff, C. J., Hardesty, R. M., Parrish, D. D., Like, W.
T., Watson, T. B., Daum, P. H., and Gillani, N.: Comparisons of airborne
lidar measurements of ozone with airborne in situ measurements during the
1995 Southern Oxidants Study, J. Geophs. Res., 103, 31155–31171, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
Alvarez II, R. J., Senff, C. J., Langford, A. O., Weikmann, A. M., Law, D.
C., Machol, J. L., Merrit, D. A., Marchbanks, R. D., Sandberg, S. P.,
Brewer, W. A., Hardesty, R. M., and Banta, R. M.: Development and
application of a compact, tunable, solid-state airborne ozone lidar system
for boundary layer profiling, J. Atmos. Ocean. Technol., 28, 1258–1271,
2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
ATMOFAST: Atmosphärischer Ferntransport und seine Auswirkungen auf die
Spurengaskonzentrationen in der freien Troposphäre über Mitteleuropa
(Atmospheric Long-range Transport and its Impact on the Trace-gas
Composition of the Free Troposphere over Central Europe), Project Final
Report, T. Trickl, co-ordinator, M. Kerschgens, A. Stohl, and T. Trickl,
subproject co-ordinators, funded by the German Ministry of Education and
Research within the programme “Atmosphärenforschung 2000“,
Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe, IMK-IFU (Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany),
<a href="http://www.trickl.de/ATMOFAST.htm" target="_blank"/> (last access: 19 November 2020), 130 pp., 2005  (with revised
publication list 2012; in German).
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
Banta, R. M., Senff, C. J., White, A. B., Trainer, M., McNider, R. T.,
Valente, R. J., Mayor, S. D., Alvarez, R. J., Hardesty, R. M., Parrish, D.,
and Fehsenfeld, F. C.: Daytime buildup and nightime transport of urban ozone
in the boundary layer during a stagnation episode, J. Geophys. Res., 103,
22519–22544, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
Baray, J.-L., Leveau, J., Porteneuve, J., Ancellet, G., Keckhut, P., Posny,
F., and Baldy, S.: Description and and evaluation of a tropospheric ozone
lidar implemented on an existing lidar in the southern subtropics, Appl.
Opt., 38, 6808–6817, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
Baray, J.-L., Daniel, V., Ancellet, G., and Legras, B.: Planetary-scale
tropopause folds in the southern subtropics, Geophys. Res. Lett., 27,
353–356, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
Blackman, R. B. and Tukey, J. W.: in: The Measurement of Power Spectra,
From the Point of View of Communications Engineering, Dover, Publications,
New York, USA, 95–101, 1959.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
Bragg, S. L., Brault, J. W., and Smith, W. H.: Line Positions and Strengths
in the H<sub>2</sub> Quadrupole Spectrum, Astrophys. J., 263, 999–1004, 1982.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
Brenner, P., Reitebuch, O., Schäfer, K., Trickl, T., and Stichternath,
A.: A Novel Mobile Vertical-sounding System for Ozone Studies in the Lower
Troposphere”, Advances in Atmospheric Remote Sensing with Lidar, Selected
Papers of the 18th International Laser Radar Conference, Berlin (Germany,
1996), edited by: Ansmann, A., Neuber, R., Rairoux, P.,  and Wandinger, U., Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, 22–26 July 1996, 383–386, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
Browell, E. V.: Lidar measurements of tropospheric gases, Opt. Eng., 21,
128–132, 1982.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
Browell, E. V., Carter, A. F., Shipley, S. T., Allen, R. J., Butler, C. F.,
Mayo, M. N., Siviter, J. H., and Hall, W. M.: NASA multipurpose airborne
DIAL system and measurements of ozone and aerosol profiles, Appl. Opt., 22,
522–534, 1983.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
Browell, E. V., Danielsen, E. F., Ismail, S., Gregory, G. L., and Beck, S.
M.: Tropopause Fold Structure Determined From Airborne Lidar and in Situ
Measurements, J. Geophys. Res., 92, 2112–2120, 1987.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
Browell, E. V., Fenn, M. A., Butler, C. F., Grant, W. B., Merrill, J. T.,
Newell, R. E., Bradshaw, J. D., Sandholm, S. T., Anderson, B. E., Bandy, A.
R., Bachmeier, A. S., Blake, D. R., Davis, D. D., Gregory, G. L., Heikes, B.
G., Kondo, Y., Liu, S. C., Rowland, F. S., Sachse, G. W., Singh, H. B.,
Talbot, R. W., and Thornton, D. C.: Large-scale air mass characteristics
observed over the Western Pacific during summertime, J. Geophys. Res., 111,
1691–1712, 1996.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
Browell, E. V., Fenn, M. A., Butler, C. F., Grant, W. B., Ismail, S.,
Ferrare, R. A., Kooi, S. A., Brackett, V. G., Clayton, M. B., Avery, M. A.,
Barrick, J. D. W., Fuelberg, H. E., Maloney, J. C., Newell, R. E., Zhu, Y.,
Mahoney, M. J., Anderson, B. E., Blake, D. R., Brune, W. H., Heikes, B. G.,
Sachse, G. W., Singh, H. B., and Talbot, R. W.: Large-scale air mass
characteristics observed over the remote tropical Pacific Ocean during March–April 1999: Results from the PEM-Tropics B field experiment, J. Geophys.
Res., 106, 32481–32501, 2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
Bucreev, V. S., Vartapetov, S. K., Veselovskii, I. A., Galustov, A. S.,
Kovalev, Y. M., Prokhorov, A. M., Svetogorov, E. S., Khmelevtsov, S. S.,
and Lee, C. H.: Excimer-laser-based lidar system for stratospheric and
tropospheric ozone measurements, Quantum Electron+., 24, 546–551 (translated from Kvantovaya Electron+., 21, 591–596, 1994), 1994.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
Bucreev, V. S., Vartapetov, S. K., Veselovskii, I. A., Galustov, A. S.,
Kovalev, Y. M., Svetogorov, E. S., and Khmelevtsov, S. S.: Combined lidar
system for stratospheric and tropospheric ozone measurements, Appl. Phys. B,
62, 97–101, 1996.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
Burlakov, V. D., Dolgii, S. I., Makeev, A. P., Nevzorov, A. V., Romanovskii,
O. A., and Kharchenko, O. V.: A Differential-Absorption Lidar for Ozone
Sensing in the Upper Atmosphere – Lower Stratosphere, Instrum. exp. Tech+., 53, 886–889, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
Carnuth, W. and Trickl, T., Transport studies with the IFU three-wavelength
aerosol lidar during the VOTALP Mesolcina experiment, Atmos. Environ., 34,
1425–1434, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>
Carnuth, W., Kempfer, U., and Trickl, T.: Highlights of the tropospheric
lidar studies at IFU within the TOR project, Tellus B, 54, 163–185, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
Couach, O., Balin, I., Jiménez, R., Ristori, P., Perego, S., Kirchner, F., Simeonov, V., Calpini, B., and van den Bergh, H.: An investigation of ozone and planetary boundary layer dynamics over the complex topography of Grenoble combining measurements and modeling, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 3, 549–562, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-3-549-2003, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
Cristofanelli, P., Bonasoni, P., Collins, W., Feichter, J., Forster, C.,
James, P., Kentarchos, A., Kubik, P. W., Land, C., Meloen, J., Roelofs, G.
J., Siegmund, P., Sprenger, M., Schnabel, C., Stohl, A., Tobler, L.,
Tositti, L., Trickl, T., and Zanis, P.: Stratosphere to troposphere
transport: a model and method evaluation, J. Geophys. Res., 108, 8525, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002600" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002600</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>
Daumont, D., Brion, J., Charbonnier, J., and Malicet, J.: Ozone UV
Spectroscopy I: Absorption Cross-Sections at Room Temperature, J. Atmos.
Chem., 15, 145–155, 1992.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
De Schoulepnikoff, L., Mitev, V., Simeonov, V., Calpini, B., and van den
Bergh, H.: Experimental investigation of high-power single-pass Raman
shifters in the ultraviolet with Nd:YAG and KrF lasers, Appl. Opt., 36,
5026–5043, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
De Young, R., Carrion, W., Ganoe, R., Pliutau, D., Gronoff, G., Berkoff, T.,
and Kuang, S.: Langley mobile ozone lidar: ozone and aerosol atmospheric
profiling for air quality research, Appl. Opt., 56, 721–730, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
Dickensen, G. D., Niu, M. L., Salumbides, E. J., Komasa, J., Eikema, K. S.
E., Pachuki, K., and Ubachs, W.: Fundamental Vibration of Molecular
Hydrogen, Phys. Rev. Lett., 110, 193601, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.193601 " target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.193601 </a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
Draxler, R. and Hess, G.: An overview of the HYSPLIT_4
modelling system for trajectories, dispersion, and deposition, Aust.
Meteorol. Mag., 47, 295–308, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
Dreessen, J., Sullivan, J., and Delgado, R.: Observations and impacts of
transported Canadian wildfire smoke on ozone and aerosol air quality in the
Maryland region on June 9–12, 2015, J. Air  Waste Manage Assoc., 66,
842–862, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>
Duclaux, O., Frejafon, E., Thomasson, A., Yu, J., C., Puel, C., Savoie, F.,
Ritter, P., Boch, J. P., and Wolf, J. P.: 3D-air quality model evaluation
using the Lidar technique, Atmos. Environ., 36, 5081–5095, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
Dufour, A., Amodei, M., Ancellet, G., and Peuch, V.-H.: Observed and
modelled ”chemical weather” during ESCOMPTE, Atmos. Res., 74, 161–189,
2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>
Durieux, E., Fiorani, L., Calpini, B., Flamm, M., Jaquet, L., and van den
Bergh, H.: Tropospheric Ozone Measurements over the Great Athens Area during
the MEDCAPHOT-TRACE Campaign, Atmos. Environ., 32, 2141–2150, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>
Eisele, H.: Aufbau und Betrieb eines Dreiwellenlängen-Lidars für
Ozonmessungen in der gesamten Troposphäre und Entwicklung eines neuen
Auswerteverfahrens zur Aerosol-korrektur, Dissertation, Universität
Tübingen (Germany, 1997), published as Schriftenreihe des
Fraunhofer-Instituts für Atmosphärische Umweltforschung, Vol. 55,
Verlag Dr. W. Maraun, Frankfurt/Main, Germany, 1998, ISBN 3-932666-08-9,
107 pp., 1997 (in German).
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>
Eisele, H. and Trickl, T.: Second Generation of the IFU Stationary
Tropospheric Ozone Lidar, Advances in Atmospheric Remote Sensing with Lidar,
Selected Papers of the 18th International Laser Radar Conference (Berlin,
Germany, 1996), edited by: Ansmann, A., Neuber, R., Rairoux, P., and Wandinger, U.,  Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, 22–26 July 1996, 379–382, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>
Eisele, H. and Trickl, T.: Improvements of the aerosol algorithm in
ozone-lidar data processing by use of evolutionary strategies, Appl. Opt.,
44, 2638–2651, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>
Eisele, H., Scheel, H. E., Sladkovic, R., and Trickl, T.: High-Resolution
Lidar Measurements of Stratosphere-Troposphere Exchange, J. Atmos. Sci., 56,
319–330, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>
EUROTRAC: Transport and Chemical Transformation of Pollutants in the
Troposphere, Vol. 1, An Overview of the Work of EUROTRAC, edited by: Borrell, P. and Borrell, P.
M., Springer (Berlin, Heidelberg, New York), ISBN
3-540-66775-X, 474 pp., 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>
Fiorani, L., Calpini, B., Jaquet, L., van den Bergh, H., and Durieux, E.: A
Combined Determination of Wind Velocities and Ozone Concentration for a
First Measurement of Ozone Fluxes with a DIAL Instrument during the
MEDCAPHOT-TRACE Campaign, Atmos. Environ., 32, 2151–2159, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>
Fix, A., Wirth, M., Meister, A., Ehret, G., Pesch, M., and Weidauer, D.:
Tunable ultraviolet optical parametric oscillator for differential
absorption lidar measurements of tropospheric ozone, Appl. Phys. B., 75,
153–163, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>
Fix, A., Steinebach, F., Wirth, M., Schäfler, A., and Ehret, G.:
Development and application of an airborne differential absorption lidar for
the simultaneous measurement of ozone and water vapor profiles in the
tropopause region, Appl. Opt., 58, 5892–5900, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>
Freudenthaler, V.: The telecover test: A Quality assurance tool for the
optical part of a lidar system, in: Reviewed and Revised Papers Presented at
the 24th International Laser Radar Conference, Boulder, Colorado,
USA, 23–27 June 2008, Vol. II, edited by: Hardesty, M. and Mayor, S.,  ISBN 978-0-615-21489-4,
145–146, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>
Galani, E., Balis, D., Zanis, P., Zerefos, C., Papayannis, A., Wernli, H.,
and Gerasopoulos, E.: Observations of stratosphere-to-troposphere transport
events over the eastern Mediterranean using a ground-based lidar system, J.
Geophys. Res., 108, 8527, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002596" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002596</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>
Gaudel A., Ancellet G., and Godin-Beekmann S.: Analysis of 20 years of
tropospheric ozone vertical profiles by lidar and ECC at Observatoire de
Haute Provence (OHP) at 44° N, 6.7° E, Atmos. Environ.,
113, 78–89, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>
Giehl, H. and Trickl, T.: Testing the IFU High-Spectral-Resolution Lidar at
the 2009 Leipzig Field Campaign, in: Proceedings of the 25th
International Laser Radar Conference, St.-Petersburg (Russia), 5–9 July 2010,
2010, edited by: Matvienko, G. and Zemlyanov, A., V. E. Zuev Institute of Optics (Tomsk, Russia), 920–923, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation>
Gorshelev, V., Serdyuchenko, A., Weber, M., Chehade, W., and Burrows, J. P.: High spectral resolution ozone absorption cross-sections – Part 1: Measurements, data analysis and comparison with previous measurements around 293 K, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 7, 609–624, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-7-609-2014, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation>
Grabbe, G. C., Bösenberg, J., Dier, H., Görsdorf, U., Matthias, V.,
Peters, G., Schaberl, T., and Senff, C.: Intercomparison of Ozone
Measurements between Lidar and ECC Sondes, Contr. Atmos. Phys., 69, 189–203,
1996.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation>
Granados-Muñoz, M. J. and Leblanc, T.: Tropospheric ozone seasonal and long-term variability as seen by lidar and surface measurements at the JPL-Table Mountain Facility, California, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 9299–9319, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-9299-2016, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation>
Granados-Muñoz, M. J., Johnson, M. S., and Leblanc, T.: Influence of the
North American monsoon on Southern California tropospheric ozone levels
during summer in 2013 and 2014, Geophys. Res. Lett., 44, 6431–6439,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL073375" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL073375</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation>
Grant, W. B. and Hake, R. D.: Calibrated remote measurements of SO<sub>2</sub>
and O<sub>3</sub> using atmospheric backscatter, J. Appl. Phys., 46, 3019–3023,
1975.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><mixed-citation>
Grant, W. B., Browell, E. V., Butler, C. F., Fenn, M. A., Clayton, M. B.,
Hannan, J. R., Fuelberg, H. E., Blake, D. R., Blake, N. J., Gregory, G. L,
Heikes, B. G., Sachse, G. W., Singh, H. B., Snow, J., and Talbot, R. W.: A
case study of transport of tropical marine boundary layer and lower
tropospheric air masses to the northern midlatitude upper troposphere, J.
Geophys. Res., 105, 3757–3769, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><mixed-citation>
Hoerling, M. P., Schaack, T. K., and Lenzen, A. J.: Global Objective
Tropopause Analysis, Mon. Weather Rev., 119, 1816–1831, 1991.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><mixed-citation>
Iarlori, M., Madonna, F., Rizi, V., Trickl, T., and Amodeo, A.: Effective resolution concepts for lidar observations, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 8, 5157–5176, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-8-5157-2015, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><mixed-citation>
Jäger, H., Carnuth, W., and Georgii, B.: Observations of Saharan dust at
a North Alpine mountain station, J. Aerosol Sci., 19, 1235–1238, 1988.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><mixed-citation>
Jennings, D. E., Weber, A., and Brault, J. W.: Raman spectroscopy of gases with a Fourier transform spectrometer: the spectrum of D<sub>2</sub>, Appl. Opt., 25, 284-290, 1986
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><mixed-citation>
Jeunouvrier, A., Mérienne, M.-F., Coquart, B., Carleer, M., Fally, S.,
Vandaele, A. C., Hermans, C., and Colin, R.: Fourier Transform Spectroscopy
of the O<sub>2</sub> Herzberg Bands – I. Rotational Analysis, J. Mol. Spectrosc.,
198, 136–162, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><mixed-citation>
Jonson, J. E., Simpson, D., Fagerli, H., and Solberg, S.: Can we explain the trends in European ozone levels?, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6, 51–66, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-51-2006, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib63"><label>63</label><mixed-citation>
Kalabokas, P., Papayannis, A., Tsaknakis, G., and Ziomas, I.: A
study on the atmospheric concentrations of primary and secondary air
pollutants in the Athens basin performed by DOAS and DIAL measuring
techniques, Sci. Total Environ., 414, 556–563, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib64"><label>64</label><mixed-citation>
Kempfer, U.: Entwicklung und Anwendung eines differentiellen
Absorptions-LIDAR-Systems zur Messung der troposphärischen
Ozonkonzentration, Dissertation, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München (Germany), 151 pp., 1992.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib65"><label>65</label><mixed-citation>
Kempfer, U., Carnuth, W., Lotz, R., and Trickl, T.: A wide range ultraviolet
lidar system for tropospheric ozone measurements: development and
application, Rev. Sci. Instrum., 65, 3145–3164, 1994.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib66"><label>66</label><mixed-citation>
Klanner, L., Höveler, K., Khordakova, D., Perfahl, M., Rolf, C., Trickl, T., and Vogelmann, H.: A powerful lidar system capable of one-hour measurements of water vapour in the troposphere and the lower stratosphere as well as the temperature in the upper stratosphere and mesosphere, Atmos. Meas. Tech. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-2020-90, in review, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib67"><label>67</label><mixed-citation>
Kley, D., Crutzen, P. J., Smit, H. G. J., Vömel, H., Oltmans, S. J.,
Grassl, H., and Ramanathan, V.: Observations of near-zero ozone
concentrations over the convective Pacific: effects of air chemistry,
Science, 274, 230–233, 1996.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib68"><label>68</label><mixed-citation>
Kley, D., Beck, J., Grennfelt, P. I., Hov, O., and Penkett, S. A.:
Tropospheric Ozone Research (TOR) A Sub-Project of EUROTRAC, J. Atmos.
Chem., 28, 1–9, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib69"><label>69</label><mixed-citation>
Kourtidis, K., Zerefos, C., Rapsomanikis, S., Simeonov, V., Balis, D.,
Perros, P. E., Thompson, A. M., Witte, J., Calpini, B., Sharobiem, W. M.,
Papayannis, A., Mihalopoulos, N., and Drakou, R.: Regional levels of ozone
in the troposphere over eastern Mediterranean, J. Geophys. Res., 107, 8140,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2000JD000140" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2000JD000140</a>, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib70"><label>70</label><mixed-citation>
Kowol-Santen, J. and Ancellet, G.: Mesoscale analysis of transport across
the subtropical tropopause, Geophys. Res. Lett., 27, 3345–3347, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib71"><label>71</label><mixed-citation>
Kreipl, S.: Messung des Aerosoltransports am Alpennordrand mittels
Laserradar (Lidar), Dissertation, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität
Erlangen-Nürnberg (Germany), 195 pp., 2006 (in German).
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib72"><label>72</label><mixed-citation>
Krupenie, P. H.: The Spectrum of Molecular Oxygen, J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data,
1, 423–534, 1972.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib73"><label>73</label><mixed-citation>
Kuang, S., Burris, J. F., Newchurch, M. J., Johnson, S., and Long, S.:
Differential Absorption Lidar to measure subhourly variation of tropospheric
ozone profiles, IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens., 49, 557–571, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib74"><label>74</label><mixed-citation>
Kuang, S., Newchurch, M. J., Burris, J., Wang, L., Knupp, K., and Huang, G.:
Stratosphere-to-troposphere transport revealed by ground-based lidar and
ozonesonde at a midlatitude site, J. Geophys. Res., 117, D18305, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JD017695" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JD017695</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib75"><label>75</label><mixed-citation>
Kuang, S., Newchurch, M. J., Burris, J. F., and Liu, X.: Ground-based lidar
for atmospheric boundary layer ozone measurements, Appl. Opt., 52,
3557–3566, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib76"><label>76</label><mixed-citation>
Kuang, S., Newchurch, M. J., Johnson, M. S., Wang, L., Burris, J. F.,
Pierce, R. B., Eloranta, E. W., Pollack, I. W., Graus, M., de Gouw, J.,
Warneke, C., Ryerson, T. B., Markovic, M. Z., Holloway, J. S., Pour-Biazar,
A., Huang, G., Liu, X., and Feng, N.: Summertime tropospheric ozone
enhancement associated with a cold front passage due to
stratosphere-to-troposphere transport and biomass burning: Simultaneous
ground-based lidar and airborne measurements, J. Geophys. Res., 122, 1293–1311,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD026078" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD026078</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib77"><label>77</label><mixed-citation>
Lamarque, J.-F., Langford, A. O., and Proffitt, M. H.: Cross-tropopause
mixing of ozone through gravity wave breaking: Observation and modelling, J.
Geophys. Res., 101, 22969–22976, 1996.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib78"><label>78</label><mixed-citation>
Langford, A. O.: Identification and correction of
analog-to-digital-converter nonlinearities and their implications for
differential absorption lidar measurements, Appl. Opt., 34, 8330–8340, 1995.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib79"><label>79</label><mixed-citation>
Langford, A. O., Masters, C. D., Proffitt, M. H., Hsie, E.-Y., and Tuck, A.
F.: Ozone measurements in a tropopause fold associated with a cut-off low
system, Geophys. Res. Lett., 23, 2501–2504, 1996.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib80"><label>80</label><mixed-citation>
Langford, A. O., Aikin, K. C., Eubank, C. S., and Williams, E. J.:
Stratospheric contribution to high surface ozone in Colorado during
springtime, Geophys. Res. Lett., 36, L12801, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GL038367" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GL038367</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib81"><label>81</label><mixed-citation>
Langford, A. O., Brioude, J., Cooper, O. R., Senff, C. J., Alvarez II, R.
J., Hardesty, R. M., Johnson, B. J., and Oltmans, S. J.: Stratospheric
influence on surface ozone in the Los Angeles area during late spring and
early summer of 2010, J. Geophys. Res., 117, D00V06, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD016766" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD016766</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib82"><label>82</label><mixed-citation>
Langford, A. O., Alvarez II, R. J., Brioude, J., Fine, R., Gustin, M. S.,
Lin, M. Y., Marchbanks, R. D., Pierce, R. B., Sandberg, S. P., Senff, C. J.,
Weickmann, A. M., and Williams, E. J.: Entrainment of stratospheric air and
Asian pollution by the convective boundary layer in the southwestern U.S.,
J. Geophys. Res., 122, 1312–1337, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD025987" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD025987</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib83"><label>83</label><mixed-citation>
Langford, A. O., Alvarez II, R. J., Brioude, Evan, S., Iraci, L. T., Kirgas,
G., Kuang, S., Leblanc, T., Newchurch, M. J., Pierce, R. B., Senff, C. J.,
and Yates, E. L.: Coordinated profiling of stratospheric intrusions and
transported pollution by the Tropospheric Ozone Lidar Network (TOLNet) and
NASA Alpha Jet experiment (AJAX): Observations and comparison to HYSPLIT,
RAQMS, and FLEXPART, Atmos. Environ., 174, 1–14, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib84"><label>84</label><mixed-citation>
Lazzarotto, B., Frioud, M., Larchevêque, G., Mitev, V., Quaglia, P.,
Simeonov, V., Thompson, A., van den Bergh, H., and Calpini, B.: Ozone and
water-vapor measurements by Raman lidar in the planetary boundary layer:
error sources and field measurements, Appl. Opt., 40, 2985–2997, 2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib85"><label>85</label><mixed-citation>
Leblanc, T., Sica, R. J., van Gijsel, J. A. E., Godin-Beekmann, S., Haefele, A., Trickl, T., Payen, G., and Gabarrot, F.: Proposed standardized definitions for vertical resolution and uncertainty in the NDACC lidar ozone and temperature algorithms – Part 1: Vertical resolution, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 9, 4029–4049, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-9-4029-2016, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib86"><label>86</label><mixed-citation>
Leblanc, T., Brewer, M. A., Wang, P. S., Granados-Muñoz, M. J., Strawbridge, K. B., Travis, M., Firanski, B., Sullivan, J. T., McGee, T. J., Sumnicht, G. K., Twigg, L. W., Berkoff, T. A., Carrion, W., Gronoff, G., Aknan, A., Chen, G., Alvarez, R. J., Langford, A. O., Senff, C. J., Kirgis, G., Johnson, M. S., Kuang, S., and Newchurch, M. J.: Validation of the TOLNet lidars: the Southern California Ozone Observation Project (SCOOP), Atmos. Meas. Tech., 11, 6137–6162, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-6137-2018, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib87"><label>87</label><mixed-citation>
Leclair De Bellevue, J., Réchou, A., Baray, J. L., Ancellet, G., and
Diab, R. D.: Signatures of stratosphere to troposphere transport near deep
convective events in the southern subtropics, J. Geophys Res., 111, D24107,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD006947" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD006947</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib88"><label>88</label><mixed-citation>
Liang, Q., Jaeglé, L., Hudman, R. C., Turquety, S., Jacob, D. J., Avery,
M. A., Browell, E. V., Sachse, G. W., Blake, D. R., Brune, W., Ren, X.,
Cohen, R. C., Dibb, J. E., Fried, A., Fuelberg, H., Porter, M., Heikes, B.
G., Huey, G., Singh, H. B., and Wennberg, P. O.: Summertime influence of
Asian pollution in the free troposphere over North America, J. Geophys.
Res., 112, D12S11, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JD007919" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JD007919</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib89"><label>89</label><mixed-citation>
Machol, J. L., Marchbanks, R. D., Senff, C. J., McCarty, B. J., Eberhard, W.
L., Brewer, W. A., Richter, R. A., Alvarez II, R. J., Law, D. C., Weickmann,
A. M., and Sandberg, S. P.: Scanning tropospheric ozone and aerosol lidar
with double-gated photomultipliers, Appl. Optics, 48, 512–524, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib90"><label>90</label><mixed-citation>
Malicet, J., Daumont, D., Charbonnier, J., Parisse, C., Chakir, A., and
Brion, J.: Ozone UV Spectroscopy I: Absorption Cross-Sections and
Temperature Dependence, J. Atmos. Chem., 21, 263–273, 1995.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib91"><label>91</label><mixed-citation>
Marenco, A., Thouret, V., Nédélec, P., Smit, H., Helten, M., Kley,
D., Karcher, F., Simon, P., Law, K., Pyle, J., Poschmann, G., von Wrede, R.,
Hume, C., and Cook, T.: Measurement of ozone and water vapor by Airbus
in-service aircraft: The MOZAIC airborne program, An overview, J. Geophys.
Res., 103, 25631–25642, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib92"><label>92</label><mixed-citation>
Matthias, M.: Vertikalmessungen der Aerosolextinktion und des Ozons mit
einem UV-Raman-Lidar, Dissertation, Universität Hamburg, published as
Examensarbeit Nr. 80, Max-Planck-Institut für Meteorologie (Hamburg,
Germany), ISSN 0938-5177, 143 pp., 2000 (in German).
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib93"><label>93</label><mixed-citation>
McDermid, I. S., Haner, D. A., Kleiman, M. M., Walsh, T. D., and White, M.
L.: Differential absorption lidar systems for tropospheric and stratospheric
ozone measurements, Opt. Engin., 30, 22–30, 1991.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib94"><label>94</label><mixed-citation>
McDermid, I. S., Beyerle, G., Haner, D. A., and Leblanc, T.: Redesign and
improved performance of the tropospheric ozone lidar at the Jet Propulsion
Laboratory Table Mountain Facility, Appl. Opt., 41, 7550–7555, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib95"><label>95</label><mixed-citation>
Milton, M. J. T., Ancellet, G., Apituley, A., Bösenberg, J., Carnuth,
W., Castagnoli, F., Trickl, T., Edner, H., Stefanutti, L., Schaberl, T.,
Sunesson, A., and Weitkamp, C.: Raman-shifted laser sources suitable for
differential-absorption lidar measurements of ozone in the troposphere,
Appl. Phys. B, 66, 105–113, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib96"><label>96</label><mixed-citation>
Mytilinaios, M., Papayannis, A., and Tsaknakis, G.: Lower-free tropospheric
ozone DIAL measurements over Athens, Greece, EPJ Web of Conferences, 28th International Laser Radar Conference, Bucharest, Romania,  25–30 June 2017, 176,
05025, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1051/epjconf/201817605025" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1051/epjconf/201817605025</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib97"><label>97</label><mixed-citation>
Nakazato, M., Nagai, T., Sakai, T., and Hirose, Y.: Tropospheric ozone
differential-absorption lidar using stimulated Raman scattering in carbon
dioxide, Appl. Opt., 46, 2269–2279, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib98"><label>98</label><mixed-citation>
Newchurch, M. J., Kuang, S., Leblanc, T., Alvarez II, R. J., Langford, A.
O., Senff, C. J., Burris, J. F., McGee, T. J., Sullivan, J. T., DeYoung, R.
J., Al-Saadi, J., Johnson, M., and Pszenny, A.: TOLNet – A Tropospheric
Ozone Lidar Profiling Network for Satellite Continuity and Process Studies,
Proc. 27th International Laser Radar Conference, New York, USA,
2015, 5–10 July 2015, EPJ Web of Conferences, 119, 20001, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib99"><label>99</label><mixed-citation>
Newell, R. E., Browell, E. V., Davis, D. D., and Liu, S. C.: Western Pacific
ozone and potential vorticity: Implications for Asian pollution, Geophys.
Res. Lett., 24, 2733–2736, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib100"><label>100</label><mixed-citation>
Ordoñez, C., Brunner, D., Staehelin, J., Hadjinicolaou, P., Pyle, J. A.,
Jonas, M., Wernli, H., and Prévôt, A. S. H.: Strong influence of
lowermost stratospheric ozone on lower tropospheric background ozone changes
over Europe, Geophys. Res. Lett., 34, L07805, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2006GL029113" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2006GL029113</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib101"><label>101</label><mixed-citation>
Pan, L. L., Randel, W. J., Gary, B. L., Mahoney, M. J., and Hintsa, E. J.:
Definitions and sharpness of the extratropical tropopause: A trace gas
perspective, J. Geophys. Res., 109, D23103, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JD004982" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JD004982</a>, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib102"><label>102</label><mixed-citation>
Papayannis, A., Ancellet, G., Pelon, J., and Mégie, G.: Multiwavelength
lidar for ozone measurements in the troposphere and the lower stratosphere,
Appl. Opt., 29, 467–476, 1990.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib103"><label>103</label><mixed-citation>
Papayannis, A., Balis, D., Zanis, P., Galani, E., Wernli, H., Zerefos, C., Stohl, A., Eckhardt, S., and Amiridis, V.: Sampling of an STT event over the Eastern Mediterranean region by lidar and electrochemical sonde, Ann. Geophys., 23, 2039–2050, https://doi.org/10.5194/angeo-23-2039-2005, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib104"><label>104</label><mixed-citation>
Papayannis, A., Amiridis, V., Mona, L.,
Tsaknakis, G., Balis, D., Bösenberg, J., Chaikovsky, A., De Tomasi, F.,
Grigorov, I., Mattis, I., Mitev, V., Müller, D., Nickovic, S.,
Pérez, C., Pietruczuk, A., Pisani, G. L., Ravetta, F., Rizi, V., Sicard,
M., Trickl, T., Wiegner, M., Gerding, M., Mamouri, R. E., D'Amico, G., and Pappalardo, G.: Systematic lidar observations of Saharan dust
over Europe in the frame of EARLINET (2000–2002), J. Geophys. Res., 113,
D10204, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD009028" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD009028</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib105"><label>105</label><mixed-citation>
Pelon, J. and Mégie, G.: Ozone Monitoring in the Troposphere and Lower
Stratosphere: Evaluation and Operation of a Ground-Based Lidar Station, J.
Geophys. Res., 87, 4947–4955, 1982.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib106"><label>106</label><mixed-citation>
Perrone, M. R. and Piccinno, V.: On the benefits of astigmatic focusing
configurations in stimulated Raman scattering processes, Opt. Comm., 133,
534–540, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib107"><label>107</label><mixed-citation>
Proffitt, M. H. and Langford, A. O.: Ground-based differential-absorption
lidar system for day or night measurements of ozone throughout the free
troposphere, Appl. Opt., 36, 2568–2585, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib108"><label>108</label><mixed-citation>
Ravetta, F., Ancellet, G., Kowol-Santen, J., Wilson, R., and Nedeljkovic,
D.: Ozone, Temperature, and Wind Field Measurements in a Tropopause Fold:
Comparison with a Mesoscale Model Simulation, Mon. Weather Rev., 127,
2641–2653, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib109"><label>109</label><mixed-citation>
Ravetta, F., Ancellet, A., Colette, A., and Schlager, H.: Long-range
transport and tropospheric ozone variability in the western Mediterranean
region during the Intercontinental Transport of Ozone and Precursors
(ITOP-2004) campaign, J. Geophys. Res., 112, D10S46, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JD007724" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JD007724</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib110"><label>110</label><mixed-citation>
Reichardt, J., Wandinger, U., Servazi, M., and Weitkamp, C.: Combined Raman
lidar for aerosol, ozone and moisture measurements, Opt. Eng., 35,
1457–1465, 1996.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib111"><label>111</label><mixed-citation>
Roelofs, G. J., Kentarchos, A. S., Trickl, T., Stohl, A., Collins, W. J.,
Crowther, R. A., Hauglustaine, D., Klonecki, A., Law, K. S., Lawrence, M.
G., von Kuhlmann, R., and van Weele, M.: Intercomparison of tropospheric
ozone models: Ozone transport in a complex tropopause folding event, J.
Geophys. Res., 108, 8529, doi:10.1029/2003JD003462, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib112"><label>112</label><mixed-citation>
Scheel, H. E.: Ozone Climatology Studies for the Zugspitze and Neighbouring
Sites in the German Alps, pp. 134–139 in: Tropospheric Ozone Research 2,
EUROTRAC-2 Subproject Final Report, A. Lindskog, Co-ordinator, EUROTRAC
International Scientific Secretariat, available at: <a href="http://www.trickl.de/scheel.pdf" target="_blank"/> (last access: 19 November 2020), München, Germany, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib113"><label>113</label><mixed-citation>
Seibert, P., Feldmann, H., Neininger, B., Bäumle, M., and Trickl, T.:
South foehn and ozone in the Eastern Alps – case study and climatological
aspect, Atmos. Environ., 34, 1379–1394, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib114"><label>114</label><mixed-citation>
Senff, C. J., Hardesty, R. M., Alvarez II, R. J., and Mayor, S. D.: Airborne
lidar characterization of power plant plumes during the 1995 Southern
Oxidants Study, J. Geophys. Res., 103, 31173–31189, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib115"><label>115</label><mixed-citation>
Senff, C. J., Alvarez II, R. J., Hardesty, R. M., Banta, R. M., and
Langford, A. O.: Airborne lidar measurements of ozone flux downwind of
Houston and Dallas, J. Geophys. Res., 115, D20307, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JD013689" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JD013689</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib116"><label>116</label><mixed-citation>
Serdyuchenko, A., Gorshelev, V., Weber, M., Chehade, W., and Burrows, J. P.: High spectral resolution ozone absorption cross-sections – Part 2: Temperature dependence, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 7, 625–636, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-7-625-2014, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib117"><label>117</label><mixed-citation>
Simeonov, V., Larcheveque, G., Quaglia, P., van den Bergh, H., and Calpini,
B.: Influence of the photomultiplier tube spatial uniformity on lidar
signals, Appl. Opt., 38, 5186–5190, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib118"><label>118</label><mixed-citation>
Simeonov, V., Ristori, P., Taslakov, M., Dinoev, T., Molina, L. T., Molina,
M. J., and van den Bergh, H.: Proceedings of the Conference on “Lidar Technologies, Techniques, and Measurements for Atmospheric Remote Sensing”, Bruges,  Belgium, 19–20 September 2005, edited by: Singh, U. N. Singh, Proc. SPIE, 5984, 59840O, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1117/12.629429" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1117/12.629429</a>, 8 pp., 2005
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib119"><label>119</label><mixed-citation>
Stohl, A. and Trickl, T.: A textbook example of long-range transport:
Simultaneous observation of ozone maxima of stratospheric and North American
origin in the free troposphere over Europe, J. Geophys. Res., 104,
30445–30462, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib120"><label>120</label><mixed-citation>
Stohl, A., Spichtinger-Rakowsky, N., Bonasoni, P., Feldmann, H.,
Memmesheimer, M., Scheel, H. E., Trickl, T., Hübener, S., Ringer, W.,
and Mandl, M.: The influence of stratospheric intrusions on alpine ozone
concentrations, Atmos. Environ., 34, 1323–1354, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib121"><label>121</label><mixed-citation>
Stohl, A., Bonasoni, P., Cristofanelli, P., Collins, W., Feichter, J.,
Frank, A., Forster, C., Gerasopoulos, E., Gäggeler, H., James, P.,
Kentarchos, T., Kromp-Kolb, H., Krüger, B., Land, C., Meloen, J.,
Papayannis, A., Priller, A., Seibert, P., Sprenger, M., Roelofs, G. J.,
Scheel, H. E., Schnabel, C., Siegmund, P., Tobler, L., Trickl, T., Wernli,
H., Wirth, V., Zanis, P., and Zerefos, C.: Stratosphere-troposphere exchange
– a review, and what we have learned from STACCATO, J. Geophys. Res., 108,
8516, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002490" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002490</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib122"><label>122</label><mixed-citation>
Strawbridge, K. B., Travis, M. S., Firanski, B. J., Brook, J. R., Staebler, R., and Leblanc, T.: A fully autonomous ozone, aerosol and nighttime water vapor lidar: a synergistic approach to profiling the atmosphere in the Canadian oil sands region, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 11, 6735–6759, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-6735-2018, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib123"><label>123</label><mixed-citation>
Sullivan, J. T., McGee, T. J., Sumnicht, G. K., Twigg, L. W., and Hoff, R. M.: A mobile differential absorption lidar to measure sub-hourly fluctuation of tropospheric ozone profiles in the Baltimore–Washington, D.C. region, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 7, 3529–3548, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-7-3529-2014, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib124"><label>124</label><mixed-citation>
Sullivan, J. T., McGee, T. J., Thompson, A. M., Pierce, R. B., Sumnicht, G.
K., Twigg, L. W., Eloranta, E. W., and Hoff, R. M.: Characterizing the
lifetime and occurrence of stratospheric-tropospheric exchange events in the
rocky mountain region using high-resolution ozone measurements, J. Geophys.
Res., 120, 12410–12424, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD023877" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD023877</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib125"><label>125</label><mixed-citation>
Sullivan, J. T., Rabenhorst, S. T., Dreessen, J., McGee, T. J, Delgado, R.,
Twigg, L., and Sumnicht, G.: Lidar observations revealing transport of
O<sub>3</sub> in the presence of a nocturnal low-level jet: Regional implications
for “next-day” pollution, Atmos. Environ., 158, 160–171, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib126"><label>126</label><mixed-citation>
Sunesson, J. A., Apituley, A., and Swart, D. P. J.: Differential absorption
lidar system for routine monitoring of tropospheric ozone, Appl. Opt., 33,
7045–7058, 1994.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib127"><label>127</label><mixed-citation>
Tarasick, D., Galbally, I. E., Cooper, O. R., Schultz, G. M., Ancellet, G.,
Leblanc, T., Wallington, T. J., Ziemke, J., Liu, X., Steinbacher, M.,
Staehelin, J., Vigouroux, C., Hannigan, J., García, O., Foret, G.,
Zanis, P., Weatherhead, E., Petropavlovskikh, I., Worden, H., Osman, M.,
Liu, J., Chang, K.-L., Gaudel, A., Lin, M., Granados-Muñoz, M.,
Thompson, A. M., Oltmans, S. J., Cuesta, J., Dufour, G., Thouret, V.,
Hassler, B., Trickl, T., and Neu, J. L.: Tropospheric Ozone
Assessment Report: Tropospheric ozone from 1877 to 2016, observed levels,
trends and uncertainties, Elem. Sci. Anth., 7,  39, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1525/elementa.376" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1525/elementa.376</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib128"><label>128</label><mixed-citation>
TESLAS: Tropospheric Environmental Studies by Laser Sounding (TESLAS), in:
Transport and Chemical Transformation of Pollutants in the Troposphere, Vol.
8, Instrument Development for Atmospheric Research and Monitoring, edited by: Bösenberg, J., Brassington, D., and Simon, P. C., Springer (Berlin,
Heidelberg, New York), ISBN 3-540-62516-X, 1–203, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib129"><label>129</label><mixed-citation>
Thomasson, A., Geffroy, S., Frejafon, E., Weidauer, D., Fabian, R., Godet,
Y., Nominé, M., Ménard, T., Rairoux, P., Moeller, D., and Wolf, J.
P.: LIDAR mapping of ozone-episode dynamics and intercomparison with spot
analyzers, Appl. Phys. B, 74, 453–459, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib130"><label>130</label><mixed-citation>
Trickl, T.: Lidar Studies of Tropospheric Transport, in: Tropospheric Ozone
Research 2, EUROTRAC-2 Subproject Final Report, A. Lindskog, Subproject
Co-ordinator, EUROTRAC-2 International Scientific Secretariat,  available at: <a href="http://www.trickl.de/TOR.pdf" target="_blank"/> (last access: 19 November 2020), München,
Germany, 2003, 146–159, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib131"><label>131</label><mixed-citation>
Trickl, T.: Upgraded 1.56-<i>μ</i>m lidar at IMK-IFU with 0.28 J/pulse, Appl.
Opt., 49, 3732–3740, 2010a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib132"><label>132</label><mixed-citation>
Trickl, T.: Tropospheric trace-gas measurements with the
differential-absorption lidar technique, in: Recent Advances in Atmospheric
Lidars, edited by: Fiorani, L. and Mitev, V., INOE Publishing House, Bucharest
(Romania), Series on Optoelectronic Materials and Devices, Vol. 7, ISBN 978-973-88109-6-9; 87–147 (revised version available at: <a href="http://www.trickl.de/DIAL.pdf" target="_blank"/> (last access: 19 November 2020), 2010b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib133"><label>133</label><mixed-citation>
Trickl, T., Vrakking, M. J. J., Cromwell, E. F., Lee, Y. T., and Kung, A.
H.: Ultrahigh-resolution (1 + 1) photoionization spectroscopy of Kr I:
Hyperfine structures, isotope shifts and lifetimes for the n  =  5, 6, 7 4p
5ns Rydberg levels, Phys. Rev. A, 39, 2948–2955, 1989.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib134"><label>134</label><mixed-citation>
Trickl, T., Cooper, O. R., Eisele, H., James, P., Mücke, R., and Stohl,
A.: Intercontinental transport and its influence on the ozone concentrations
over central Europe: Three case studies, J. Geophys. Res., 108, 8530,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002735" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002735</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib135"><label>135</label><mixed-citation>
Trickl, T., Kung, A. H., and Lee, Y. T.: Krypton atom and
testing the limits of extreme-ultraviolet tunable-laser spectroscopy, Phys.
Rev. A, 75, 022501, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.75.022501" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.75.022501</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib136"><label>136</label><mixed-citation>
Trickl, T., Feldmann, H., Kanter, H.-J., Scheel, H.-E., Sprenger, M., Stohl, A., and Wernli, H.: Forecasted deep stratospheric intrusions over Central Europe: case studies and climatologies, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 499–524, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-499-2010, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib137"><label>137</label><mixed-citation>
Trickl, T., Bärtsch-Ritter, N., Eisele, H., Furger, M., Mücke, R., Sprenger, M., and Stohl, A.: High-ozone layers in the middle and upper troposphere above Central Europe: potential import from the stratosphere along the subtropical jet stream, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 9343–9366, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-9343-2011, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib138"><label>138</label><mixed-citation>
Trickl, T., Vogelmann, H., Giehl, H., Scheel, H.-E., Sprenger, M., and Stohl, A.: How stratospheric are deep stratospheric intrusions?, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 9941–9961, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-9941-2014, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib139"><label>139</label><mixed-citation>
Trickl, T., Vogelmann, H., Flentje, H., and Ries, L.: Stratospheric ozone in boreal fire plumes – the 2013 smoke season over central Europe, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 9631–9649, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-9631-2015, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib140"><label>140</label><mixed-citation>
Trickl, T., Vogelmann, H., Fix, A., Schäfler, A., Wirth, M., Calpini, B., Levrat, G., Romanens, G., Apituley, A., Wilson, K. M., Begbie, R., Reichardt, J., Vömel, H., and Sprenger, M.: How stratospheric are deep stratospheric intrusions? LUAMI 2008, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 8791–8815, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-8791-2016, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib141"><label>141</label><mixed-citation>
Trickl, T., Vogelmann, H., Ries, L., and Sprenger, M.: Very high stratospheric influence observed in the free troposphere over the northern Alps – just a local phenomenon?, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 243–266, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-243-2020, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib142"><label>142</label><mixed-citation>
Uchino, O., Tokunaga, M., Maeda, M., and Miyazoe, Y.:
Differential-absorption-lidar measurements of tropospheric ozone with
excimer-Raman hybrid laser, Opt. Lett., 8, 347–349, 1983.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib143"><label>143</label><mixed-citation>
Uchino, O., Sakai, T., Nagai, T., Morino, I., Maki, T., Deushi, M., Shibata, K., Kajino, M., Kawasaki, T., Akaho, T., Takubo, S., Okumura, H., Arai, K., Nakazato, M., Matsunaga, T., Yokota, T., Kawakami, S., Kita, K., and Sasano, Y.: DIAL measurement of lower tropospheric ozone over Saga (33.24° N, 130.29° E), Japan, and comparison with a chemistry–climate model, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 7, 1385–1394, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-7-1385-2014, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib144"><label>144</label><mixed-citation>
U.S. Standard Atmosphere:  National Oceanic and Atmospheric Organization
(NOAA), National Aeronautics and Space Administration, United States Air
Force, NOAA-S/T 76-1562, US Printing Office (Washington, D.C.), 227 pp.,
1976.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib145"><label>145</label><mixed-citation>
Uthe, E. E. and Livingston, J. M.: Airborne Lidar Mapping of Ozone
Concentrations During the Lake Michigan Ozone Study, J. Air Waste Manage.
Assoc., 42, 1313–1318, 1992.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib146"><label>146</label><mixed-citation>
Valente, R. J., Imhoff, R. E., Tanner, R. L., Meagher, J. F., Daum, P. H.,
Hardesty, R. M., Banta, R. M., Alvarez, R. J., McNider, R. T., and Gillani,
N. V.: Ozone production during an urban air stagnation episode over
Nashville, Tennessee, J. Geophys. Res., 103, 22555–22568, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib147"><label>147</label><mixed-citation>
Vautard, R., Szopa, S., Beekmann, M., Menut, L., Hauglustaine, D. A., Rouil,
L., and Roemer, M.: Are decadal anthropogenic emission reductions in Europe
consistent with surface ozone observations? Geophys. Res. Lett., 33, L13810,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2006GL026080" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2006GL026080</a>,  2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib148"><label>148</label><mixed-citation>
VDI: guide line 4210 Remote Sensing, Atmospheric Measurements with LIDAR,
Measuring gaseous air pollution with the DAS LIDAR, Verein Deutscher
Ingenieure, Düsseldorf, Germany, 47 pp., 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib149"><label>149</label><mixed-citation>
Veselovskii, I. and Barchunov, B.: Excimer-laser-based lidar for
tropospheric ozone monitoring, Appl. Phys. B, 68, 1131–1137, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib150"><label>150</label><mixed-citation>
Viallon, J., Lee, S., Moussay, P., Tworek, K., Petersen, M., and Wielgosz, R. I.: Accurate measurements of ozone absorption cross-sections in the Hartley band, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 8, 1245–1257, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-8-1245-2015, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib151"><label>151</label><mixed-citation>
Völger, P., Bösenberg, J., and Schult, I.: Scattering Properties of
Selected Model Aerosols Calculated at UV-Wavelengths: Implications for DIAL
Measurements of Tropospheric Ozone, Beitr. Phys. Atmosph., 69, 177–187,
1996.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib152"><label>152</label><mixed-citation>
Vogelmann, H. and Trickl, T.: Wide-Range Sounding of Free-Tropospheric Water
Vapor with a Differential-Absorption Lidar (DIAL) at a High-Altitude
Station, Appl. Opt., 47, 2116–2132, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib153"><label>153</label><mixed-citation>
VOTALP II: Vertical Ozone Transport in the Alps II, Final Report for the
European Union, Contract Nr.: ENV4 CT970413, Reporting Period
1/3/1998-29/2/2000, H. Kromp-Kolb, Co-ordinator, Universität für
Bodenkultur Wien (Austria), Institut für Meteorologie und Physik, 96
pp., 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib154"><label>154</label><mixed-citation>
Wallinder, E., Edner, H., Ragnarson, P., and Svanberg, S.: Vertically
Sounding Ozone Lidar System based on a KrF Excimer Laser, Phys. Scripta,
55, 714–718, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib155"><label>155</label><mixed-citation>
Wang, L., Newchurch, M. J., Alvarez II, R. J., Berkoff, T. A., Brown, S. S., Carrion, W., De Young, R. J., Johnson, B. J., Ganoe, R., Gronoff, G., Kirgis, G., Kuang, S., Langford, A. O., Leblanc, T., McDuffie, E. E., McGee, T. J., Pliutau, D., Senff, C. J., Sullivan, J. T., Sumnicht, G., Twigg, L. W., and Weinheimer, A. J.: Quantifying TOLNet ozone lidar accuracy during the 2014 DISCOVER-AQ and FRAPPÉ campaigns, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 10, 3865–3876, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-10-3865-2017, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib156"><label>156</label><mixed-citation>
Weitkamp, C., Baumbach, G., Becker, K.-H., Braun-Schoen, S., Burger, H.,
Dinev, S., Fabian, R., Frey, S., Fritzsche, F., Glaser, K., Glauer, J.,
Herb, F., Immler, F., Junkermann, W., Kanter, H. J., Lindemann, C.,
Loescher, A., Mohnen, V. A., Möller, D., Neidhart, B., Olariu, R.,
Reimer, E., Schmidt, V., Schubert, G., Spittler, M., Vogt, U., Weidauer, D.,
Windholz, L., and Wöste, L.: Wie richtig sind Lidarmessungen der
Ozonverteilung?, Gefahrstoffe – Reinhaltung der Luft, 60, 279–284, 2000 (in
German).
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib157"><label>157</label><mixed-citation>
Wotava, G. and Kromp-Kolb, H.: The research project VOTALP – general
objectives and main results, Atmos. Environ., 34, 1319–1322, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib158"><label>158</label><mixed-citation>
Yates, E. L., Johnson, M. S., Iraci, L. T., Ryoo, J.-M., Pierce, R. B.,
Cullis, P. D., Gore, W., Ives, M. A., Johnson, B. J., Leblanc, T., Marrero,
J. E., Sterling, C. W., and Tanaka, T.: An Assessment of Ground Level and
Free Tropospheric Ozone Over California and Nevada, J. Geophys. Res., 122,
10089–10102, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD026266" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD026266</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib159"><label>159</label><mixed-citation>
Zanis, P., Trickl, T., Stohl, A., Wernli, H., Cooper, O., Zerefos, C., Gaeggeler, H., Schnabel, C., Tobler, L., Kubik, P. W., Priller, A., Scheel, H. E., Kanter, H. J., Cristofanelli, P., Forster, C., James, P., Gerasopoulos, E., Delcloo, A., Papayannis, A., and Claude, H.: Forecast, observation and modelling of a deep stratospheric intrusion event over Europe, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 3, 763–777, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-3-763-2003, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib160"><label>160</label><mixed-citation>
Zhao, Y., Howell, J. N., and Hardesty, R. M.: Transportable Lidar for the
Measurement of Ozone Concentration and Flux Profiles in the Lower
Troposphere, in: Proceedings of the 16th International Laser Radar
Conference, Cambridge, Massachussetts, USA, 20–24 July 1992, 185–187, 1992.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib161"><label>161</label><mixed-citation>
Zhao, Y., Marchbanks, R. D., Senff, C. J., and Johnson, H. D.: Lidar
Profiling of Ozone and Aerosol in the SCOS97-NARSTO Experiment, in:
Proceedings of the Ninetenth International Laser Radar Conference, Annapolis,
Maryland, USA, 6–10 July 1998, edited by: Singh, U. N., Ismail, S., and Schwemmer, G. K.,
NASA Langley Research Center, NASA/CP-1998-207671/PT1, 375–378, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
