
AbstractAerosol‐cloud interactions are an important source of uncertainty in current climate models. To understand and quantify the influence of ice‐nucleating particles in cloud glaciation, it is crucial to have a reliable estimation of the hemispheric and seasonal contrast in cloud top phase, which is believed to result from the higher dust aerosol loading in boreal spring. For this reason, we locate and quantify these contrasts by combining three different A‐Train cloud‐phase products for the period 2007–2010. These products rely on a spaceborne lidar, a lidar‐radar synergy, and a radiometer‐polarimeter synergy. We show that the cloud‐phase from the product combination is more reliable and that the estimation of the hemispheric and seasonal contrast has a lower error compared to the individual products. To quantify the contrast in cloud‐phase, we use the hemispheric difference in ice cloud frequency normalized by the liquid cloud frequency in the southern hemisphere between −42 °C and 0 °C. In the midlatitudes, from −15 to −30 °C, the hemispheric contrasts increase with decreasing temperature. At −30 °C, the hemispheric contrast varies from 29% to 39% for the individual cloud‐phase products and from 52% to 73% for the product combination. Similarly, in the northern hemisphere, we assess the seasonal contrast between spring and fall normalized by the liquid cloud frequency during fall. At −30 °C, the seasonal contrast ranges from 21% to 39% for the individual cloud‐phase products and from 54% to 75% for the product combination.
cloud glaciation, ddc:551.5, hemispheric contrast, cloud‐phase, 550, heterogeneous freezing, ice particles, INP, cloud-phase
cloud glaciation, ddc:551.5, hemispheric contrast, cloud‐phase, 550, heterogeneous freezing, ice particles, INP, cloud-phase
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 14 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
