23 Oct 2023
 | 23 Oct 2023
Status: this preprint is currently under review for the journal AMT.

Derivation of aerosol fluorescence and water vapor Raman depolarization ratios from lidar measurements

Igor Veselovskii, Qiaoyun Hu, Philippe Goloub, Thierry Podvin, William Boissiere, Mikhail Korenskiy, Nikita Kasianik, Sergey Khaykyn, and Robin Miri

Abstract. Polarization properties of the fluorescence induced by polarized laser radiation are widely considered in laboratory studies. In lidar observations, however, only the total scattered power of fluorescence is analyzed. In this paper we present results obtained with a modified Mie-Raman-Fluorescence lidar operated at the ATOLL observatory, Laboratoire d’Optique Atmosphérique, University of Lille, France, allowing to measure depolarization ratios of fluorescence at 466 nm (δF) and of water vapor Raman backscatter. Measurements were performed in May–June 2023 during Alberta forest fires season when smoke plumes were almost continuously transported over the Atlantic Ocean towards Europe. During the same period, smoke plumes from the same sources were also detected and analyzed in Moscow, at General Physics Institute (GPI), with a 5-channel fluorescence lidar able to measure fluorescence backscattering at 438, 472, 513, 560 and 614 nm. Results demonstrate that, inside the boundary layer (BL), urban aerosol fluorescence is maximal at 438 nm, then it gradually decreases with wavelength. Results also show that the maximum of the smoke fluorescence spectrum shifted towards longer wavelengths. The smoke layers observed within 4–6 km present a maximum of fluorescence at 513 nm while, in the upper troposphere (UT), the maximum shifts to 560 nm. Regarding fluorescence depolarization, its value typically varies inside the 45–55 % range, however several smoke plume layers detected above 10 km were characterized by a δF increasing up to 70 %. Inside the BL, the fluorescence depolarization ratio was higher than that of smoke and varied inside the 50–70 % range. Moreover, in the BL, δF appears to vary with atmospheric relative humidity (RH) and, in contrast to the elastic scattering, fluorescence depolarization increases with RH.

The depolarization ratio of the water vapor Raman backscattering is shown to be quite low (2±0.5 %) in the absence of fluorescence, because the narrowband interference filter in the water vapor channel selects only strongest vibrational lines of the Raman spectrum. As a result, depolarization of the water vapor Raman backscattering is sensitive to the presence of strongly depolarized fluorescence backscattering. The fluorescence contamination into the water vapor Raman channel can be calculated from the water vapor Raman depolarization ratio with the only assumption that δF remains constant within the 408–466 nm range.

Igor Veselovskii et al.

Status: final response (author comments only)

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
  • RC1: 'Comment on amt-2023-210', Anonymous Referee #2, 14 Nov 2023
  • RC2: 'Comment on amt-2023-210', Anonymous Referee #1, 26 Nov 2023

Igor Veselovskii et al.

Igor Veselovskii et al.


Total article views: 198 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total BibTeX EndNote
151 40 7 198 3 4
  • HTML: 151
  • PDF: 40
  • XML: 7
  • Total: 198
  • BibTeX: 3
  • EndNote: 4
Views and downloads (calculated since 23 Oct 2023)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 23 Oct 2023)

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 197 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 197 with geography defined and 0 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
Latest update: 29 Nov 2023
Short summary

Measurements of the transported smoke layers in 2023 were performed with a lidar in Lille and a 5-channel fluorescence lidar in Moscow. Results show in boundary layer, the peak of fluorescence is at 438 nm while in smoke layer it shifts to longer wavelengths. The fluorescence depolarization is typically 45% to 55%. The depolarization ratio of the water vapor channel is low (2±0.5%) in the absence of fluorescence and can be used to evaluate the contribution of fluorescence to water vapor signal.