Solar Radiation and Geomagnetic Contribution of

Consecutive 27-Day Recurrent Geomagnetic Storms

to Variations of Equatorial Ionospheric Parameters
and Spread F
THANA YEERAM (  [email protected] )
Mahasarakham University

Research Article

Keywords: Recurrent geomagnetic storm, Equatorial ionosphere, High speed solar wind, spread F

Posted Date: February 19th, 2024

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3958155/v1

License:   This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Read Full License

Additional Declarations: No competing interests reported.

Solar Radiation and Geomagnetic Contribution of Consecutive 27-Day
Recurrent Geomagnetic Storms to Variations of Equatorial Ionospheric
Parameters and Spread F

Thana Yeeram

Department of Physics, Faculty of Science, Mahasarakham University, Space Technology

and Geoinformatics Section, Maha Sarakham, Thailand,
Email: [email protected]

Abstract
This study investigates solar radiation and geomagnetic effects of consecutive 27-day
recurrent geomagnetic storms (RGSs) during 2007 on the variabilities in the equatorial
ionospheric F-region in American Peruvian sector. Results show correspondence of quasi-
periodic variations between geomagnetic activities and ionospheric responses in the F-region.
In High-Intensity Long-Duration Continuous AE Activity (HILDCAA) events, the
ionospheric responses are more variable than in non-HILDCAA. The critical frequency and
peak heights of the F-layer tend to increase during storm-time in summer months, but
decrease in response to enhanced equatorial electrojets. A new classification of daily
variations in the virtual height of the F-layer ( hF ) is proposed: (mode A) mixing of great
height before noon and low height before midnight, (mode B) moderate height before
midnight, and (mode C) mixing of low height before noon and great height before midnight.
These hF modes efficiently characterize ionospheric variabilities and processes. The great
uplifts of hF during night-time coincide with the presence of strong disturbance dynamo
electric fields and disturbed neutral winds generated by intensified Joule heating in the
summer months. The solar EUV plays a role in the uplifts during daytime. Zonal electric field
disturbances and perturbations in neutral meridional winds critically contribute to the
equatorial ionospheric responses and ESF variability. Most of inhibited/suppressed ESF
occurred in mode A and in overshielding conditions. The inhibited ESF in the recovery phase
is mainly contributed by a cooling state after great uplifts by daytime thermospheric winds.

Keywords Recurrent geomagnetic storm, Equatorial ionosphere, High speed solar wind,
spread F

1. Introduction

The Sun provides radiation fluxes and charged particles in the solar wind into interplanetary
space in which their variations greatly depend on solar magnetic activity. These variabilities
induce solar-terrestrial effects known as space weather that connects conditions on the Sun
and in the solar wind to magnetosphere, ionosphere, and thermosphere (Pulkkinen, 2007).
Space weather is critically important in the modern society relying on space technology.
During long declining and rising phases of the solar sunspot cycle, there are predominant
high speed solar wind streams (HSSs) emanating from low solar-latitude coronal holes (CHs).
When HSS encounters slow solar wind speed upstream, stream interaction regions (SIRs) are
formed near the ecliptic plane with intense magnetic field and plasma as observed near Earth.
Since CHs are quasi-stable for many solar rotations, HSSs and SIRs corotate with the Sun of
a period ~27 days. Repeated interactions of the magnetosphere with the corotating stream
structures produce recurrent geomagnetic storms (RGSs) those are typically responsible for
weak-to-moderate geomagnetic disturbance at Earth. RGSs can provide significant auroral
precipitation and energy input into the magnetosphere-ionosphere system. Particularly, great
solar wind energy is transferred into the magnetosphere by intermittent magnetic
reconnections between southward (negative) interplanetary magnetic field (IMF) Bz of large-
amplitude Alfvén waves within some HSSs and the Earth’s magnetic field. This leads to
High-Intensity Long-Duration Continuous AE Activity (HILDCAA) that can persist for a
few days to weeks (Tsurutani & Gonzalez, 1987).
The Earth’s upper atmosphere absorbs solar radiation, resulting in heating, dissociation
and ionization. Photoionization by solar X-rays and the extreme ultraviolet (EUV) is the main
process of forming the ionosphere (Liu et al., 2011). Solar EUV, a major source of ionization
and heating for the ionosphere-thermosphere (IT), drive various processes that modify
composition, temperature, and winds. The solar activity fluctuation in EUV flux within the
27 day solar rotation (Lean et al., 2011; Vaishnav et al., 2024) is a major driver that directly
provides strong modulation on the IT system, resulting in photochemical processes
(photoionization, photodissociation, recombination), and transport processes (the neutral
wind and diffusion). Furthermore, the variability of the IT is also caused by solar activity
modulation in the neutral atmosphere composition, solar wind and geomagnetic activity, and
electrodynamics (Rishbeth & Mendillo, 2001).
Magnetic (dip) equatorial ionosphere of the Earth is one of the most prominent and
distinctive regions because of its interactions, instabilities, and electrodynamics attributed to
the horizon orientation (north–south) of the geomagnetic field lines. During quiet magnetic
daytime, the wind dynamo mechanism causes charge separation between dawn and dusk at
the low-latitude ionosphere to generate intense eastward ionospheric electric fields flowing
along the magnetic equator called “equatorial electrojet” (EEJ) (e.g., Fang et al., 2008). The
eastward zonal electric field E and the horizontal geomagnetic field B produce the plasma
uplift from E region to F region by vertical E  B drift. During geomagnetic storm-time, the
EEJ is changed by electric field disturbances originated by the solar wind–magnetosphere
coupling. Two main types of the disturbances are prompt penetration electric fields (PPEFs)
propagating through the high latitude to equatorial ionosphere (Nishida, 1968; Kikuchi et al.,
1996) and disturbance dynamo electric fields (DDEFs) generated by the ionospheric
disturbance dynamo (Blanc & Richmond, 1980). When IMF Bz is southward, PPEF is dawn-
to-dusk or dayside eastward electric field thus enhancing the EEJ. Storm-enhanced
equatorward wind caused by high-latitude heating (known as Joule heating) and the Coriolis
force results in a strong westward wind at middle and low latitudes. This changes the global
electric circuit in the I-T through the dynamo mechanism to generate DDEFs.
In the dip equator and low latitudes, a steep upward plasma density gradient formed on
the bottomside of the ionospheric F layer in the postsunset times, together with rapid
destruction of the E region below due to recombination, lead to the growth of the Rayleigh-
Taylor (RT) instability (Ossakow, 1981). The instabilities generates equatorial spread F
(ESF) that is the nighttime irregularities of electron densities in the equatorial F region. A
night time ESF signature is indicated as scattered echo traces in high-frequency (HF) band
ionograms, discovered by Booker & Wells (1938). ESF induces rapid changes in both the
amplitude and phase of HF radio wave (2.31–25.82 MHz), generating scintillations that
seriously degrade trans-ionospheric radio communications. Therefore, ESF poses severe risks
to the highly dynamic satellite communication, navigation and tracking operations such as the
Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS). The generalized Rayleigh-Taylor (GRT)
instability is a basic mechanism for ESF forming (Sultan, 1996). The postsunset rise of the
equatorial F layer due to the evening zonal electric field pre-reversal enhancement (PRE) is
reproduced climatologically with the ESF (Fejer et al., 1999). However, the day-to-day
variability of ESF is not completely understood because of the complex interplay of various
processes modulated by solar activities, geomagnetic activities, and lower atmosphere
perturbation (e.g. Fang et al., 2018).
Day-to-day responses in the equatorial F region to 27-day RGS during prolonged low
solar activities are important in solar-terrestrial physics. Geomagnetic and solar EUV effects
of RGSs on the spatio-temporal variations of the critical parameters and ESF in the equatorial
ionosphere are not well understood. Sobral et al. (2006) found strong coupling processes
between the auroral zone and the equatorial ionosphere and remarked the complicated effects
on spread-F development processes during the HILDCAA events. de Siqueira Negreti, de
Paula, & Candido, (2017) analyzed the South America ionospheric Total Electron Content
(TEC) and reported noticeable intense TEC increases in the HILDCAAs. Silva et al. (2020)
identified a remarkable electron density increase and seasonal features as equinoctial
anomalies in HILDCAA intervals. Typically, ESF occurrence dominates the midnight-post
midnight/pre sunrise hours under solar minimum conditions (Abdu, 2012). For solar
radiation, the critical electron density linearly increases with solar proxies only at low and
moderate solar activity levels (e.g., Balan et al., 1994). The ionosonde peak height of F-layer
increases with solar activity (Liu et al. 2006; Liu, Wan, Ning, 2006).The purpose of this work
is to investigate effects of slowly evolved RGSs induced by recurrent HSSs and solar EUV
flux on the equatorial ionospheric variations over Peruvian longitude sector during 2007,
declining phase of solar activity.

2. Observational Data and Methods of Analysis

This study characterized RGSs during year 2007 by using 1-minute-averaged data of solar
wind plasma parameters shifted to the Earth's bow shock nose already, including the solar
wind speed ( V ), ram pressure ( P ) and IMF Bz in Geocentric solar magnetospheric (GSM)
coordinate. The data of solar EUV flux are obtained from the SEM/SOHO experiment, which
measures EUV and X-ray fluxes integrated in the wavelength bands 26–34 nm and 0.1– 50
nm, respectively. This work employed the solar radio flux index at F10.7 cm (F10.7 index,
given in solar flux units (sfu); 1 sfu = 10-22 Wm-2 Hz-1), solar proxy for ionizing irradiance.
The geomagnetic indices include symmetric horizontal ( symH ) field, auroral electrojet ( AE
), and Thule polar cap (PC). The AE index is derived from the H-component observed at 10-
13 observatories along the auroral zone in the northern hemisphere to globally measure
strongest magnetic activity produced by enhanced ionospheric currents flowing below and
within the aurora oval. The main source of the PC index is the twin-vortice DP2-like current
system related to the merging solar wind convection electric field (Troshichev et al., 1988).
The Joule heating (JH) is calculated based on empirically quadratic relationship with the PC
index given by Chun et al. (1999) for equinox,

JH = 4.14 PC 2 + 25PC + 8.9 (1)

and for summer solstice,

JH = 14.39 PC 2 + 23.7 PC + 11.5 . (2)

The most three stably consecutive RGSs were selected for this study. This work examined the
critical ionospheric parameters and ESF by employing the digisonde and ionograms of
Jicamarca station (American Peruvian sector) obtained from digital ionogram database
(DIDBase), respectively. The ionospheric parameters include the critical frequency ( f o F2 )
referred to maximum electron density ( N m F2 ), height of the peak of the F-layer ( hm F2 ), and
virtual height of F-layer ( hF ) at temporal resolution of 15 min. The EEJ is represented by
H data calculated from the difference of horizontal (H) geomagnetic fields measured at
pairs of stations in Peru, Jicamarca (11.9° S, 76.8° W; magnetic dip 1° N) and Piura (5.2° S,
80° W; magnetic dip 6.8° N). The subtraction can eliminate both the global Solar quiet (Sq)
current system and the ring current component in H, that is only related to the EEJ.

3. Results and Interpretations

3.1 Solar Wind and Geomagnetic Conditions

Three selective events of consecutive RGSs occurred during year 2007, declining phase of
solar activity, were investigated. The geomagnetic responses of the RGSs in this study were
previously investigated by Yeeram (2019). Here we briefly describe and give some more
details about them. The three RGS events are assigned to be RGS1, RGS2, and RGS3 as seen
in Figure 1, representing October, November, and December events, respectively. In
overview, the RGSs exhibited slowly evolved with quasi-periodic variabilities in the solar
wind plasma and storm-time in association with two groups of HSSs with V  450 km s-1.
The first and second HSS groups (no.1 and 2) correspond to weak and moderate geomagnetic
activities, respectively. The initial phases of the storms coincided with the leading edges of
the HSSs impinge on the magnetosphere, result in a positive symH and increasing in the V,
P, IMF Bz , and AE . During main phases of the two SIR-induced storms in each RGS, the
symH minimum, IMF Bz , and AE reached the largest values as tabulated in Table 1. Note
the second storm of RGS2 is the strongest one since the minimum symH and the AE
reached the largest magnitudes corresponding to the largest IMF Bz . However, the strongest
values of IMF Bz in all RGS are comparable; the IMF Bz exhibited moderate intermittent
fluctuations within ±20 nT. Note during SIR-storm, RGS3 possessed the maximum value of
IMF Bz , but the maximum AE was weakest.
Yeeram (2019) reported the multifaceted and quasi-periodic variabilities in storm-times
of these RGSs and seasonal effects on the long-lasting and complex electrodynamics in the
equatorial ionosphere. From correlation analysis of reconnection electric field- AE and fast
Fourier analysis of the IMF Bz and AE , Yeeram (2019) remarked the solar wind-
magnetosphere-ionosphere coupling in the HILDCAAs is more effective than in the non-
HILDCAAs.

Figure 1 Three consecutive RGSs for this study ranging from 9 October to 29 December
2007 (Day of year 282–363) divided by vertical dashed lines. (a) The solar wind speed. (b)
North-south interplanetary magnetic field. (c) symH index. (d) AE index. (e) Joule heating
rate. (f) The solar EUV flux (blue stack) and F10.7 index (yellow bar).

Moderate fluctuations in the Bz and V are typical signature of the Alfvén wave train.
Intermittent magnetic reconnection between the southward Bz and geomagnetic field leads to
high AE intensity. Tsurutani & Gonzalez (1987) empirically defined HILDCAA as AE
index should not range below 200 nT, peak is  1 000 nT, and occurs outside the storm main
phase. This work relaxed one of the empirical criteria to AE index is smaller than 200 nT
less than 5 hours. The second HSS corresponds to HILDCAA because of the prolonged
fluctuations in Bz and high AE , and the first one is non-HILDCAA. Note that RGS2 is
strongest in corresponding to the highest AE as listed in Table 1.

Table 1 Data of storm time and extreme values of solar wind magnetic field, and ionospheric
parameters of the RGSs.
Storm Time intervals Max IMF Max AE Min Min EEJ Max EEJ
Bz (nT) (nT) symH (nT) (nT) (nT)
RGS1 2007 Oct. 9–Nov. 5 –16.97 1,281 –60 –48.5 114
RGS2 2007 Nov. 5–Dec. 2 –17.12 1,846 –67 –92.9 66.0
RGS3 2007 Dec. 2–Dec. 29 –18.73 1,245 –43 –66.9 93.7

3.2 Joule Heating

At high magnetic latitudes, thermospheric winds generated by enhanced auroral heating due
to dissipative Joule heating (JH) from magnetospheric energy input during the geomagnetic
storms modify the global circulation and generate DDEFs at middle and low latitudes. The
winds cause variations in thermospheric compositions and densities (Richmond, 2021) and
impulses through the ion-neutral collisions. The process sets up gravity waves and
equatorward thermospheric meridional winds. The JH rate at auroral zone is generally larger
in the summer than in the winter hemisphere because of higher electrical conductivity in the
summer high latitudes. The JH rate in the summer is about three times that in equinox (see
Equations (1) and (2)) as indicated in RGS2 and RGS3 in Figure 1 (e). The most intensive
JH presented in RGS2 with the values 878 GW. Note the JH is enhanced with increases in V
and southward IMF Bz in HSS. JH is roughly four times that of particle energy injection
during geomagnetic storms with positive PC (Chun et al., 2002).

Table 2 Correlation analysis results of the solar wind parameters and geomagnetic indices
for the consecutive RGSs.

Pair of parameters Correlation Time

coeff. (r) lags
(minute)
V - AE 0.47 1 008
V - PC 0.38 1 590
V - symH –0.67 2 172
AE - symH –0.57 365
PC - symH –0.39 42

JH and particle heating are invoked to explain globally thermal expansion in the
thermosphere at all latitudes during RGSs (Lei et al., 2008a; Thayer et al., 2008; Tulasi Ram
et al., 2012). Calculated JH associated with HSSs from the Assimilative Mapping of
Ionospheric Electrodynamics (AMIE) outputs in 2005 indicates that the JH is more dominant
than particle precipitation (Deng et al., 2011). JH constitutes ~60% of the total energy budget
for the simulation of NOAA OP-Weimer driven during the storm main phases of CIR-HSS
event (Verkhoglyadova et al., 2016).
From Table 2, the solar wind speed (V) transferring to IT, contributes to AE first (16.8
hrs), then to PC (26.5 hrs), and finally to symH (36.2 hrs) with the highest correlation. This
means that PC may occur and extend to lower latitude than the AE -region. The moderate
correlations between V and the geomagnetic indices indicate storm-time effects of
convection electric fields on the high-latitude heating via JH. In addition, the delay of AE
from symH (6.08 hrs) is longer than PC from symH (0.7 hr), supporting that PC-region is
at lower latitude close the equatorial ring current-regions. From V-PC relation, JH delays
from V ~ 1 590 mins (26.5 hrs). JH takes ~ 42 mins (0.7 hr) for moving to equatorial region
during the passages of these RGSs.
The meridional neutral winds (trans-equatorward winds) control the vertical positions
of the F region by pushing ions along the magnetic field lines through neutral-ion interaction.
During solstices, the neutral winds are equatorward in the summer and poleward in the
winter hemisphere. The large-scale downward thermospheric circulation carries lighter
atomic oxygen-rich air from high latitude to low latitude across pressure levels thereby
enhancing O/N2 ratio (changes in thermospheric compositions) at equatorial region. The
picture is in agreement with the study of CIR storms in 2001–2008 conducted by Liu et al.
(2012a). Lei et al. (2011) found larger response of thermosphere density to HSSs at night
than in daytime, indicating the effect of the thermosphere response to storms in meridional
neutral winds. Recent observations confirmed the effects of meridional neutral winds on
O/N2 and reported complicated spatial distribution of O/N2 and temperature low latitudes,
which is highly longitudinal dependent (Gan et al., 2024). Neutral density is generally larger
in the summer than in the winter hemisphere and density was amplified with intensified
geomagnetic activity (Emmert, 2015). With CHAMP observations, Liu & Lühr (2005) found
that the meridional winds are faster in summer (southern) than in the winter (northern)
hemisphere on both dayside and nightside. N-S asymmetric energy input and the
composition changes may induce the N-S asymmetric electron density during RGSs.

3.3 Equatorial Electrojet and Disturbance Electric Fields

For EEJs as represented by H values as shown in Figures 2–4, their amplitudes were largest
in October event (RGS1), the time close to the equinoctial time when the Sq is dominated.
Before sunrise, quiet-daytime EEJ is typically close to the zero baseline of H . The shape of
the EEJ is pulse-like that rapidly increases at ~0700 LT to maximum magnitude at ~1100–
1200 LT then quickly declines to the base line in the evening. However, during storm times,
the EEJ profile was changed and peaked in the afternoon for several days. The amplitude of
EEJ is largest in RGS1 as listed in Table 1. Typically, EEJ tended to decrease in the recovery
phases and in HILDCAAs. For RGS1, the EEJs in DOY 282–284 were small may be due to
the persisted DDEF in the storm recovery phase. For RGS2 and RGS3, the EEJs were
smaller, while counter electrojets (CEJs) as indicated by negative H were larger and more
prominent than for RGS1. Strong DDEF is indicated by large CEJ at the times with greater
AE . In disturbed storm times, fluctuations in EEJ to positive and negative values were
apparent during storm main phase. CEJ sometimes appeared in the morning and afternoon
during the recovery phases of storms. This westward electric field caused daytime downward
 E  B drift in the equatorial region. The detailed analysis and discussion of EEJ variations in
all RGSs are presented by Yeeram (2019).
The PPEFs were present during the main and recovery phases of non-HILDCAA and
HILDCAA storms as indicated by the fluctuations of H (EEJ). The PPEFs during
CIR/SIR-induced geomagnetic storms are prominent and complicated (Yeeram, 2017), where
the southward IMF Bz corresponds to the undershielding of PPEFs, EEJ is enhanced and vice
versa for the northward Bz that corresponds to the overshielding. Superposition of PPEFs on
the disturbance winds during the HILDCAA events leads to the complicated ionospheric
effects in the HILDCAAs.

3.4 Ionospheric responses to RGSs

The ionospheric parameters, f o F2 , hm F2 , and hF during RGS1–RGS3 exhibited day-to-day

variabilities as shown in Figures 2–4. Observational results showed that their variabilities are
also quasi-periodic and slowly evolved in response to the storm-time variability of each RGS.
The results are described as follows.

3.4.1 Variability in critical frequency

In quiet-time, a fast increase in the critical frequency ( f o F2 ) typically occurred from 0600 LT
to 1100 LT. The higher electron density relates to the low chemical losses and the
photoionization during the daytime at the F layer heights (Lee & Reinisch, 2006). Later, the
daytime flat peak is formed, or peak decays for several hours known as a noon-bite because
of the poleward blown away of hot dip equatorial plasma, and starts to increase once again at
about 1500–1700 LT. During the noon-bite, the electrons concentrate at ~1100 LT. After the
evening peak, f o F2 decays steadily in the nighttime and reaches its minimum before sunrise.
The quiet-time variability of f o F2 is similar to statistical results of Jicamarca ionospheric
parameters for the years 2008–2009, deep solar minimum reported by Liu et al. (2012c).
Figure 2 Variations in RGS1 from 9 October 9 to 5 November 2007 (DOY 282-309). (a)
Solar wind speed. (b) Solar wind pressure. (c) North-south interplanetary magnetic field. (d)
Equatorial electrojet. (e) F-region critical frequency. (f) Height of the peak of the F-layer.
Green boxes represent the ESF duration. (g) Virtual height of the base of the F-layer. (h)
symH . (i) AE index. Note that LT=UT–5 at Jicamarca. Shaded regions show storm-time
when AE > 200 nT.

During the disturbed storm times, the increases in f o F2 were noticeable in all RGSs
during main and recovery phases of storms. For RGS1, the increments occurred from the
afternoon to evening in DOY 285, 288, 292, 296-298, 301-302. The fast and slight increases
in f o F2 occurred before and close to midnight were in DOY 290-292, 300, 302, 304, 306-307
and strong increases in DOY 294-296 and 301 resided in the storm recovery phases of both
non-HILDCAAs and non-HILDCAAs. The largest f o F2 is 11.4 MHz with the percentage
difference from the quiet peak is 32.56%. For RGS2, the fast and high increments of f o F2
occurred in afternoon and evening were in DOY 309, 312-313, 317, 321-322, 324-329, and
333-335 and increases in the prenoon were in DOY 310-311, 319-320, and 331. The highest
peak is 10.35 MHz that the percentage difference from the quiet peak is 33.12%. For RGS3,
the fast increments of f o F2 occurred in afternoon and evening with slight increase are in DOY
336-338, 340-343, 357-358 and with strong increase in DOY 344-348, 351-354, and 356.
The highest f o F2 is 10.50 MHz that the percentage difference from the quiet peak is 31.25%.
The results show that the percentage differences are comparable for all RGSs with RGS2
possessed the greatest increase in f o F2 corresponding to the strongest DDEF effects indicated
by the CEJ (reduction of H or −H ). Moreover, strong DDEFs and trans-equatorward
winds greatly increased the electron density during the noon-bite.

Figure 3 Same as Figure 2 but for RGS2 from 5 November to 2 December 2007 (DOY 309-
336).

The observational characteristics of the f o F2 responses as described above could be

explained. The f o F2 that refers to the peak electron density, decreases (increases) with an
increase of the upward (downward) vertical E  B drift (in proportional to EEJ) with more
depletion (enhancement) of plasma than on the quiet day at the equatorial station. The
vertical drift elevates the F-layer to higher altitudes and distributes/removes plasma by
diffusion due to gravity and gradient pressure forces to form the plasma density enhancement
called the equatorial ionization anomaly (EIA) in the low-latitude F-region. In addition, the
quiet time meridional wind component in equinoxes at equatorial region is disturbed during
geomagnetic activity. The trans-equatorward winds can increase the ionization at low
latitudes (Balan et al. 2009, Batista et al., 2017). The DDEF is more slowly varying and long
lived (2–30 hrs) even after magnetic activity and auroral heating have declined (Blanc &
Richmond, 1980). The aspect should be prominent and applicable in HILDCAAs since the
auroral heating is long lasting.
The enhancements of ionospheric electron density during storm times are in agreement
with previous papers (de Siqueira et al., 2017; Candido et al., 2018, Li et al., 2021). da Silva
et al. (2020) found great variability in the TEC from one interval to another of 10 HILDCAA
intervals during 2015–2016 obtained from two Brazilian GNSS stations. About 60-70 % of
all intervals showed enhanced electron density. Molina et al. (2020) suggests that a CIR-
induced storm produces positive ionospheric storm (increased density) with combine effects
of PPEFs and DDEF. The variations in the electron density in HILDCAAs have been
examined (e.g. Koga et al., 2011; Silva et al., 2017; Verkhoglyadova et al., 2013).
Consequently, the vertical plasma drift involves effects of the zonal electric field E and the
thermospheric winds (Katamzi, Habarulema, Giday, 2016).

3.4.2 Variability in the height of the peak of the F-layer

We found that the quiet-time hm F2 increases for ~2 hours before sunrise and peaks at
postsunset during the equinoctial and summer months over Jicamarca (Bello et al., 2019).
The presunrise increase is controlled by the electron density production processes by the
combination of solar radiation at a high altitude near sunrise and solar zenith angle (Lee et
al., 2008). The hm F2 is lowest at ~ 0600-0800 LT and around 190 – 240 km in equinox as
seen in Figure 2 and 0600-0800 LT and around 207 – 270 km in summer months as seen in
Figure 3 and Figure 4. Therefore, the minimum values of hm F2 are higher in the solstice
months than in the equinox month. The hm F2 , tended to increase during the main phases of
each storm when AE index was high. The 27-day moving average of hm F2 increases during
storm times, which is highest during main phase and maintain till the end of storm. These
features suggest to the uplift of the F-layer due to the heating by equatorward disturbance
winds of auroral origin during the CIRs/HILDCAAs. This uplift occurs several hours before
the intensification of f o F2 , for example DOY 294–297.
Bello et al. (2019) found significant positive correlations of EEJ and hm F2 and of EEJ
and electron density for low solar activities. This suggests the combined effect of the wind
and E  B drift from E layer. Periodic thermal heating/cooling driven by RGS is crucial in the
periodic variability in ionospheric F layer (Liu et al., 2012b) signifying the effects of DDEFs.
During the non-HILDCAA storm, DDEF is not strong due to the weak JH, while the strong
JH in HILDCAA induces stronger DDEFs that lead to anti-correlation
between hm F2 and f o F2 as seen in Figures 2–4. The anti-correlation is more prominent
during solstice seasons (RGS2 and RGS3) because the DD effects are stronger during these
times and coincide with inhibited daytime equatorial ionization anomaly (EIA) configuration
(Liu et al., 2012b). Downward drift due to the DDEFs in daytime together with enhanced
poleward winds from hot dip equatorial plasma decrease the hm F2 (Liu et al., 2011) and hF as
observed in Figures 2–4. On the other hand, due to strong DDEFs and trans-equatorward
winds during night-time, the hm F2 and hF were uplifted to more than 400 km in some days
because of the intensified JH in the solstice months indicated by Figure 1(e). Negrea,
Munteanu, Echim (2021) investigated 10 CIR/HSS events between 2007 December and 2008
April and reported that the hm F2 spectra is more correlated to the solar wind parameters and
geomagnetic activity spectra than the N m F2 is.
In all RGSs, most of hm F2 rapidly upraised after ~1900 LT and reached a maximum a
few hours later. For RGS1, maximum hm F2 was in DOY 297 with 433.9 km gives a
percentage difference of 21.88% from the quiet value. For RGS2, maximum hm F2 was in
DOY 328 with 473.6 km gives a percentage difference of 38.56%. For RGS3, the maximum
was in DOY 354 with 508.3 km gives a percentage difference of 35.98%. Silva et al. (2023)
study responses of South America’s ionospheric parameters to case studies of HILDCAA and
found that mean variation of hm F2 in comparison to quiet time is about 20% in equatorial and
mid-latitudes. The hm F2 keeps rising from 1800 to 2200 LT in coincidence with the
increasing neutral wind component (Tian et al., 2021) as often occurred during the storm
disturbances and during solstice seasons when the zonal electric field is weak. This is
consistent with our results that the nighttime electron density and height were highly variable
when RGSs impact the magnetosphere during the December solstice (RGS2 and RGS3).
 Figure 4 Same as Figure 2 but from 2–29 December 2007 (DOY 336-363).

3.4.3 Variability in the virtual height

Three types of noticeable variations in the virtual height of the F-layer ( hF ) are indicated in
Figures 2–4 as follows: Mode A represents mixing of great height before noon and low
height before midnight, mode B shows moderate height near post sunset before midnight, and
mode C shows mixing of low height before noon and great height before midnight. Remark
that mode A and C present the uplifting of hF in the pre-noon times. The great uplifts of the
virtual height correspond to the presence of strong upward vertical drift. In addition, in some
storm days both hm F2 and hF were lifted to noticeably higher than the quiet time in the
premidnight period, suggesting the role of disturbed equatorward winds. This effect occurred
in every event (in LT): (1) RGS1 in DOY 298. (2) RGS 2 in DOY 320, 325, 327, and 335. (3)
RGS3 in DOY 346-347, 353, 354, 357, and 360-361. Remark that the great uplifts occurred
in the recovery phases of storms; except for RGS1when the EEJ was largest and the
westward DDEFs were not significant comparing to RGS2 and RGS3.
For RGS1 as seen in Figure 2, mode B extends along the non-HILDCAA. The values of
f o F2 and hm F2 slightly increased from the quiet values in the extended main phase. The
peaks of f o F2 were around 11-12 MHz near midnight during the recovery phase of the storm.
The patterns of hF were regular and the peaks of hF were low that may associate with
trans-equatorward wind due to large scale atmospheric gravity waves (AGWs) (Sastri et al.,
1993). For the HILDCAA, mode A of hF extended along the long recovery phase of storm
to the next non-HILDCAA as shown in Figure 3. The aspect indicates the persistence of
PPEFs and DDEFs for long times.
For RGS2, from Figure 3, the overall variations are quasi-periodic. In non-HILDCAA,
mode B still persisted and the hm F2 and f o F2 were close to the quiet time values. However,
mode C mainly covered the HILDCAA period instead of mode A. Note mode C and B are
quite similar except for hF of C-mode that is uplifted near midnight and rises to lower level
near noon. The hm F2 uplifted to  400 km and f o F2 increased to ~ 10 MHz for several days
in the HILDCAA, signifying the role of DDEFs. For RGS3, Figure 4 indicates that B-mode
was present in quiet days, while C-mode was presented when hm F2 was obviously uplifted
four days during storm-time of non-HILDCAA. Mode C indicates rising of hF during
morning to noon time due to strong DDEFs. Modes A and C were simultaneously presented
for a long period, exhibiting complex ionospheric responses. Remark that the levels of hF
were highly elevated near midnight in DOY 354–355, signifying effects of strong
thermospheric winds. Significant uplifts near noon time for several days were observed in
mode A. Note the anti-correlation between hm F2 and f o F2 is mainly found in C-mode during
storm-times.

3.5 Solar EUV radiation effects

The daily solar index F10.7 and EUV flux of all RGSs are shown in Figure 1. Linear
regression analysis gives the best correlation coefficient r = 0.92 with zero time lag. The
good correlation suggests that the solar F10.7 index is a good proxy of the EUV flux for this
time interval even the peak of F10.7 index may slightly lead the peak of EUV flux. In RGS1,
the F10.7 and EUV flux slightly decreased, and then F10.7 index more or less increased,
while EUV flux increased then decreased in RGS2, and both parameters rapidly increased as
a pulse-like in RGS3. Both indices in RGS3 are enhanced in comparison to RGS2, starting
from DOY 335 to 353. The percentages of the increments with respect to the base lines of
solar F10.7 index and EUV flux are ~31.6% and ~16.0%, respectively; the increment of solar
F10.7 is twice of the EUV flux. The increase can be used to determine effect on the
variability in the F-layer during RGS2 and RGS3, the solstice time.
Interestingly, by considering Figure 3 and Figure 4, it is found that hF modes are
different in some intervals. In RGS3, mode A intervened mode C in the HILDCAA,
indicating that the great uplifts of hF and hm F2 during daytime in mode A, are incorporated
by the enhanced solar EUV radiation. Another remarkable point is that when the
geomagnetic effect was weak during the non-HILDCAA, the solar radiation effect must be
seen in RGS3. We found that during non-HILDCAA, occurrences of mode C in RGS3
clearly replaced mode B in RGS2. As mode C satisfies the conditions of great uplifts near
noon, the uplifts during DOY 344-349 therefore contributed by the solar EUV increase
during DOY 339–355. Both aspects signify the effects of solar radiation even the solar EUV
and F10.7 index are quite small comparing to the solar maximum conditions, the solar
irradiation effects are still be observed.
The absorption of solar EUV radiation leads to thermospheric heating. An increase in
thermospheric temperature and pressure gradient leads to thermospheric adiabatic expansion
and drives thermospheric winds (King & Kohl, 1965). The EUV flux has high coherence with
27-day variation of the ionosphere (Yao et al., 2017) with time delay of daytime
thermospheric temperature (ionospheric response) ~16–17 hours or almost 1 day (Schmölter
et al., 2018; Ren et al., 2019) in agreement with the observations. This time delay is the time
when the thermospheric total heating rate is exactly balanced by the total cooling rate.

3.6 ESF occurrences

From investigating the ionograms we found that the ESF occurrences at Jicamarca on the
quiet days lasted from pre-to-post midnight about 7–8 hrs, starting from 1900 LT to 0200 LT,
while on storm days they were delayed about 2 hrs as shown in Figure 5 and lasted in shorter
times about 1–4.5 hrs. The peak times of ESF are close to the evening PRE time in quiet
days. Typically, when hF was greatly uplifted the ESF was initiated and persisted for a long
time. From the classification done in Sec. 3.4.3, mode B conforms to a rising of hF near
midnight and sustained ESF for a long time. Remark that when hF in postsunset was not
much high in HILDCAA, the ESF was not formed such as DOY 298–300 in mode A. This
corresponds to effects of strong DDEFs as indicated by the CEJs.
We suggest that the inhibited ESFs in recovery phases are affected by 1–3 day delayed
thermospheric winds by JH initiated before and during daytime (also by the solar radiation)
and by the subsequent DDEFs. This behavior agrees with delay effects of high latitude
heating. The inhibited ESF is mainly contributed by a cooling state after large uplifts by
strong daytime thermospheric winds generated by Joule heating where hF cannot be raised.
Zesta & Oliveira (2019) found decreasing in heating and cooling (thermospheric regulation)
times when storm intensity increases and more pronounced effects for the cooling times. For
symH ~ 50 nT in this work, the heating and cooling times are ~27 hrs and 60 hrs,
respectively (Zesta & Oliveira, 2019) long enough for affecting the ESF. Over Jicamarca
ionosphere, in quiet conditions, ESF predominantly occurs during equinox when the PRE is
well developed and secondary in December solstice (Fejer, Scherliess, de Paula, 1999; Smith
et al., 2016). However, during disturbed times, this feature is modified. The ESF is inhibited
by reduction of PRE by thermospheric winds and DDEFs during evening.
Sometimes, ESF was suppressed nearby the end of recovery phases when the Bz turned
to the North and trans-equatorward winds were low. Abdu et al. (2012) found that the PRE-
and ESF-suppression (enhancement) during two magnetic storms of moderate intensity result
from PPEF originating from over-shielding (under-shielding) conditions. We found that this
effect is apparent in DOY 285-286, 287, 303, and 305 of RGS1, DOY 309, 312-313, 323,
328, 331-332 of RGS2, and DOY 350, 355 and 360-361 of RGS3.
During quiet periods the ambient eastward electric field in the equatorial F region
immediately following sunset undergoes a PRE before it turns westward. A largest PRE of
the upward drift is observed in most longitude sectors during equinoctial months (RGS1)
(e.g., Gentile, Burke, Rich., 2006) since the sunset terminator is aligned with the geomagnetic
field lines (Tsunoda, 1985). PRE and its enhanced fluctuations are factors initiating the
Rayleigh-Taylor plasma instability growth. The primary sources for the driving force and
seed are neutral winds (Maruyama, 1988) and AGWs (e.g., Abdu et al., 2009). In addition,
stronger plasma densities just before the onset of irregularities resulted in stronger plasma
irregularities as observed by satellite and a ground-based GPS station (Balan et al., 2018;
Beshir, Nigussie, Moldwin, 2020).
Interplanetary Alfvén waves in HILDCAAs may be associated with the AGWs and
their ionospheric signatures – travelling ionospheric disturbances (TIDs). Pulsed magnetic
reconnection in Alfvén waves are effective in modulating dayside solar wind-magnetosphere
coupling to generate pulsed ionospheric flows (PIFs) (Prikryl et al. 2002). Consequently,
Alfvén waves could be an important solar-interplanetary driver of the global thermospheric
disturbances as observed by CHAMP satellite (Guo et al., 2016). This topic needs to be
further investigated.

4. Discussion
This work supports that storm-time variations of ionospheric plasma in the equatorial regions
are majorly caused by disturbance electric fields, disturbed wind fields, and neutral
composition changes (Lin et al., 2005, Imtiaz, Hammou Ali & Rizvi, 2021). During storm
recovery phase, the electron density distribution in the low-latitude region relates to
thermospheric wind (Ambili & Choudhary, 2023; Richmond, 2021). Substantial storm time
DDEFs are apparent in the late night sector with timescales from ∼2 h to 30 hrs (Fejer &
Scherliess, 1997). Liu et al. (2012b) found that variabilities in the AE index, f o F2 , hm F2 ,
total upward drifts, and disturbance electric field drift over Jicamarca during RGSs in solar
minimum year 2008 display a striking 9 day period, in phase with DDEFs. The 7- and 9-day
periodicities in electric fields or neutral winds are modulated by RGSs and cause the
corresponding periodicities in electron density (Lei et al., 2008b). DDEFs are more effective
particularly in the morning-to-prenoon time in the summer than in equinoctial months when
the meridional winds are symmetric and in winter months due to restriction of the
equatorward motion. This makes the October event gains less DD effects, leading to
reduction in the hF and f o F2 . In similar to severe storms, significant variations in TEC over
the Indian longitude sector during the main and recovery phases influenced by westward
DDEFs (Rajana et al., 2024).
Liu et al. (2012b) found remarkable 13.5 day periods in the ionospheric responses in
2008, consecutive times from this work. The 13.5 day periodicity is also indicated in the X-
ray, extreme ultraviolet, and ultraviolet (Hocke, 2008). Thus the influences of the solar
ionization oscillation of 13.5 day period play a role on the ionospheric variability during
recurrent geomagnetic activity.
Solar EUV and geomagnetic effects on equatorial ionosphere revealed in this
observational study agree with simulation results. Fang et al. (2018) used coupled Whole
Atmosphere Model and Global Ionosphere Plasmasphere and found that geomagnetic activity
is the main driver of the electron and equatorial vertical drift variabilities, particularly during
the postmidnight. At the low-latitude region, solar radiation EUV is the main contributor for
ionospheric variability with greater effects in the day than at night. They found comparable
contribution of lower atmosphere perturbation and geomagnetic perturbations throughout the
day. At high latitudes, they found that the daytime contributions from solar activity and
geomagnetic activity are compatible, while at night the geomagnetic activity is the main
contributor. In addition, the geomagnetic storm effects tend to develop initially in the
nighttime sector where the neutral winds are preferably equatorward
(Prölss, 1993). Therefore, larger ionospheric responses such as the great uplifts of hF and
hm F2 are expected at the nightside longitudes where the auroral heating occurs.
The sources and degrees of the short-term variability of ESF depend on level of solar
activity and geomagnetic activity. Geomagnetic storm can either trigger or inhibit the
postsunset ESF and initiate the postmidnight ESF. (Abdu, 1997, Ogwala et al., 2022)
indicated that disturbance winds and electric fields triggering or inhibiting of ESF depend on
the phase of the geomagnetic storm. This study also found that the DDEFs limits the rise of
the hm F2 during the post-sunset thus reduces the ESF probability. The suppression of ESF by
DDEFs during the storm main phases in RGS1 is in agreement with Kassa & Damtie (2017).
Persistence of strong DDEFs and thermospheric winds (Seba, Nigussie, Moldwin, 2018;
Yeeram & Paratrasri, 2018) during main and recover phases, respectively can suppress the
ESF as also found in this study. In summer events when fast varying PRE is absent, the slow
varying gravity waves including large scale waves (LSW) may act as both driver and seed for
weak nighttime irregularities (Balan, Liu, Le., 2018). AGWs from lower atmosphere loose
energy by interaction with the background eastward zonal wind to reduce PRE, causing
slowing down of the post-sunset instability to reach the F-layer topside; the spread F onset
could be delayed.

5. Concluding Remarks

This study investigates the responses in the equatorial ionospheric F-region to three
consecutive 27-day RGSs in the Peruvian sector during low solar activity in 2007. We
present observational results that reveal the geomagnetic and solar EUV effects of theses
RGSs on the ionospheric variabilities. The main results of this study are as follows:
• The storm-times and equatorial ionospheric responses exhibited quasi-periodical
variabilities in each RGS.
• The f o F2 and hm F2 tended to increase in response to the suppressed EEJ during the
main and recovery phases of the RGSs when AE index and DDEF were large.
• Three modes of variations in the hF are proposed: (mode A) mixing of great height
before noon and low height before midnight, (mode B) moderate height before
midnight, and (mode C) mixing of low height before noon and great height before
midnight.
• The equinoctial event (RGS1) showed less DD effects that cause lower increments in
hF and f o F2 in the equatorial region.
 • The substantial DDEFs in summer are caused by the storm time effects of enhanced
thermospheric wind in the late night sector due to the summer-to-winter winds.
• The potential JH in HILDCAA induces strong DDEFs that lead to anti-correlation
between hm F2 and f o F2 mainly found in C-mode.
• Strong DDEFs and trans-equatorward winds greatly increased the electron density
during the noon-bite and caused the uplifts of hm F2 and hF to > 400 km during
night-time in some storm days by intensified Joule heating in the solstice months.
• Intervening of mode A in mode C in the HILDCAA of RGS3 indicate that the great
uplifts of hF and hm F2 during daytime are contributed by the enhanced solar EUV.
• Occurrences of mode C in RGS3 that replaced mode B in RGS2 satisfy the conditions
of great uplifts near noon contributed by the solar EUV increase.
• Most inhibited/suppressed ESF occurred in RGS1 (equinox) when the post-sunset
hF was low in mode A and in overshielding conditions.
• The inhibited ESF in the recovery phase is mainly contributed by a cooling state after
great uplifts by strong daytime thermospheric winds generated by Joule heating.
• The nighttime variabilities of electrons and ESF were highly variable during the
solstice (RGS2 and RGS3) due to effects of DDEFs, meridional winds, and AGWs.
The contribution of RGS and solar radiation to the variabilities in the equatorial
ionosphere is important for modelling and forecasting the related space weather.
Comprehensive study and statistical analysis are required for thorough understanding these
effects.

Acknowledgment This work was financially supported by Mahasarakham University. The

author is grateful to the Jicamarca Radio Observatory which is a facility of the Instituto
Geofisico del Peru operated with support from the NSF AGS-0905448 through Cornell
University. The digisonde data are kindly provided by Global Ionosphere Radio Observatory
(giro.uml.edu). The ionograms were taken from Lowell Digisonde International. The OMNI
data were obtained from the GSFC/SPDF OMNIWeb interface
(https://omniweb.gsfc.nasa.gov/). Geomagnetic indices are provided by the World Data
Center for Geomagnetisms, Kyoto (http://wdc.kugi.kyoto-u.ac.jp). The data of solar EUV flux
are obtained from the SEM/SOHO experiment.

Statements & Declarations

Competing interests The author declares no competing interests.

References

Abdu, M.A. 1997, Major phenomena of the equatorial ionosphere-thermosphere system

under disturbed conditions. J. Atmos. Sol. Terr. Phys. 59, 1505.
Abdu, M.A. 2012, Equatorial spread F development and quiet time variability under solar
minimum conditions. Indian J. Radio Space Phys. 41, 168.
Abdu, M.A., Batista, I.S., Bertoni, F., Reinisch, B.W., Kherani, E.A., Sobral, J.H.A.
2012, Equatorial ionosphere responses to two magnetic storms of moderate intensity
from conjugate point observations in Brazil, J. Geophys. Res. 117, A05321.
Abdu, M.A., Kherani, E.A., Batista, I.S., de Paula, E.R., Fritts, D.C., Sobral, J.H.A. 2009,
Gravity wave initiation of equatorial spread F/plasma bubble irregularities based on
observational data from the SpreadFEx campaign. Ann. Geophys. 27, 1.
Ambili, K.M., Choudhary, R.K. 2023, The role of the storm-time prompt penetrating electric
field on the net distribution of plasma density over the low latitude ionospheric regions.
Adv. Space Res. 72, 1644.
Balan, N, Bailey, G J, Jenkins, B, Rao, P.B., Moffett, R.J. 1994, Variations of ionospheric
ionization and related solar fluxes during an intense solar cycle. J. Geophys. Res. 99:
2243.
Balan, N., Liu, L., Le, H.J. 2018, A brief review of equatorial ionization anomaly and
ionospheric irregularities. Earth Planet. Phys. 2, 257.
Balan, N., Shiokawa, K., Otsuka, Y., Watanabe, S., Bailey, G.J.: 2009, Super plasma
fountain and equatorial ionization anomaly during penetration electric field. J.
Geophys. Res. 114, A03310.
Batista, I.S., Candido, C.M.N., Souza, J.R., Abdu M.A., de Araujo, R.C., Resende, L.C.A., et
al. 2017, F3 layer development during quiet and disturbed periods as observed at
conjugate locations in Brazil: the role of the meridional wind. J. Geophys. Res. Space.
Phys. 122, 2361.
Bello, S. A., Abdullah, M., Hamid, N. S. A., Reinisch, B. W., Yoshikawa, A., Fujimoto, A.
2019, Response of ionospheric profile parameters to equatorial electrojet over Peruvian
station. Earth Space Sci., 6, 617.
Beshir, E., Nigussie, M., Moldwin, M.B. 2020, Characteristics of equatorial nighttime spread
F – An analysis on season-longitude, solar activity and triggering causes. Adv.Space
Res. 65, 95.
Blanc, M., Richmond, A.D. 1980, The ionospheric disturbance dynamo. J. Geophys. Res. 85,
1669.
Booker, H., Wells, H. 1938, Scattering of radio waves by the f-region of the ionosphere.
Terrest. Magnet. Atmos. Electric. 43, 249.
Candido, C.M.N., Batista, I.S., Klausner, V., de Siqueira Negreti, P.M., Becker-Guedes, F.,
de Paula, E.R., et al. 2018, Response of the total electron content at Brazilian low
latitudes to corotating interaction region and high-speed streams during solar minimum
2008. Earth Planets Space. 70, 104.
Chun, F.K., Knipp, D.J., McHarg, M.G., Lacey, G. Lu, J.R., Emery, B.A. 2002, Joule heating
patterns as a function of polar cap index. J. Geophys. Res. 107, A7.
Chun, F.K., Knipp, D.J., McHarg, M.G., Lu, G., Emery, B.A., Vennerstrøm, S., Troshichev,
O.A. 1999, Polar cap index as a proxy for hemispheric Joule heating, Geophys. Res.
Lett., 26, 1101.
da Silva, R. P., Denardini, C. M., Marques, M. S., Resende, L. C. A., Moro, J., da Silva
Picanço, G. A., Borba, G. L., and Santos, M. A. F. D. 2020, Ionospheric total electron
content responses to HILDCAA intervals, Ann. Geophys., 38, 27.
de Siqueira Negreti, P.M., de Paula, E.R., and Candido, C.M.N. 2017, Total electron content
responses to HILDCAAs and geomagnetic storms over South America, Ann. Geophys.,
35, 1309.
Deng, Y., Fuller-Rowell, T.J., Akmaev, R.A., Ridley, A.J. 2011, Impact of the altitudinal
Joule heating distribution on the thermosphere, J. Geophys. Res. 116, A05313.
Emmert, J.T. 2015, Thermospheric mass density: a review. Adv. Space Res. 56, 773.
Fang, T.W., Fuller-Rowell, T., Yudin, V., Matsuo, T., Viereck, R. 2018, Quantifying the
sources of ionosphere day-to-day variability. J. Geophys. Res. 123, 9682.
Fang, T.W., Richmond, A., Liu, J., Maute, A. 2008, Wind dynamo effects on ground
magnetic perturbations and vertical drifts. J. Geophys. Res. 113, A11313.
Fejer, B.G., Scherliess, L. 1997, Empirical models of storm time equatorial zonal electric
fields. J. Geophys. Res. 102, 24047.
Fejer, B.G., Scherliess, L, de Paula, E.R. 1999, Effects of the vertical plasma drift velocity on
the generation and evolution of equatorial spread F, J. Geophys. Res. 104, 19854.
Gan, Q., Eastes, R. W., Wu, Y.-J., Qian, L., Cai, X., Wang, W., et al. 2024, Thermospheric
responses to the 3 and 4 November 2021 geomagnetic storm during the main and
recovery phases as observed by NASA's GOLD and ICON missions. Geophys. Res.
Lett. 51, e2023GL106529.
Gentile, L.C., Burke, W.J., Rich, F.J. 2006, A climatology of equatorial plasma bubbles from
DMSP 1989-2004. Radio Sci., 41, RS5S21.
Guo, J., Wei, F., Feng, X., Liu, H., Wan, W., Yang, Z. et al. 2016, Alfvén waves as a solar-
interplanetary driver of the thermospheric disturbances. Sci Rep. 6, 18895.
Hocke, K. 2008, Oscillations of global mean TEC, J. Geophys. Res. 113, A04302.
Huba, J.D. 2023, Resolution of the equatorial spread F problem: Revisited. Front. Astron.
Space Sci. 9, 1098083.
Imtiaz, N., Hammou Ali, O. & Rizvi, H. 2021, Impact of the intense geomagnetic storm of
August 2018 on the equatorial and low latitude ionosphere. Astrophys. Space Sci. 366,
106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10509-021-04009-2
Kassa, T., Damtie, B. 2017, Ionospheric irregularities over Bahir Dar, Ethiopia during
selected geomagnetic storms. Adv. Space Res. 60, 121.
Katamzi, Z.T., Habarulema, J.B., Giday, N.M. 2016, Daytime twin-peak structures observed
at southern African and European middle latitudes on 8–13 April 2012. Ann.
Geophys., 34, 581.
Kikuchi, T., Lühr, H., Kitamura, T., Saka, O., Schlegel, K. 1996, Direct penetration of the
polar electric field to the equator during a DP 2 event as detected by the auroral and
equatorial magnetometer chains and the EISCAT radar. J. Geophys. Res. 101, 17161.
King, J. W., Kohl, H. 1965, Upper atmospheric winds and ionospheric drifts caused by
neutral air pressure gradients. Nature 206, 699.
Koga, D., Sobral, J., Arruda, D.C.S., Abdu, M., Castilho, V.M., Mascarenhas, M., Gonzalez,
A., Tsurutani, B.T., Denardini, C.. 2011, Electrodynamic coupling processes between
the magnetosphere and the equatorial ionosphere during a 5-day HILDCAA event. J.
Atmos. Solar-Terr. Phys. 73, 148.
Lean, J.L., Woods, T.N., Eparvier, F.G., Meier, R.R., Strickland, D.J., Correira, J.T., Evans,
J.S. 2011, Solar extreme ultraviolet irradiance: Present, past, and future, J. Geophys.
Res. 116, A01102.

Lee, C.C., Reinisch, B.W. 2006, Quiet-condition hm F2 , N m F2 , and B0 variations at Jicamarca

and comparison with IRI-2001during solar maximum. J. Atmos. Solar-Terrer.
Phys. 68, 2138.
Lee, C.C., Reinisch, B.W., Su, S.Y., Chen, W.S. 2008, Quiet-time variations of F2-layer
parameters at Jicamarca and comparison with IRI-2001 during solar minimum, J.
Atmos. Sol. Terr. Phys., 70, 184.
Lei, J., Thayer, J.P., Forbes, J.M., Sutton, E.K., Nerem, R.S., Temmer, M., Veronig,
A.M. 2008a, Global thermospheric density variations caused by high-speed solar wind
streams during the declining phase of solar cycle 23, J. Geophys. Res. 113, A11303.
Lei, J., Thayer, J.P., Forbes, J.M., Wu, Q., She, C., Wan, W., Wang, W. 2008b. Ionosphere
response to solar wind high-speed streams. Geophys. Res. Lett. 35, L19105.
Lei, J., Thayer, J.P., Wang, W., McPherron, R.L. 2011, Impact of CIR storms on
thermosphere density variability during the solar minimum of 2008. Solar Phys. 274,
427.
Li, J., Wang, S., Li, S., Xu, Z., Yang, J. 2021, Analysis of ionosphere response during high-
speed solar wind stream in early August 2020. Astrophys. Space Sci. 366, 73.
Lin, C.H., Richmond, A.D., Heelis, R.A., Bailey, G.J., Lu, G., Liu, J.Y., Yeh, H. C., Su, S.-
Y. 2005, Theoretical study of the low- and midlatitude ionospheric electron density
enhancement during the October 2003 superstorm: Relative importance of the neutral
wind and the electric field, J. Geophys. Res. 110, A12312.
Liu, J., Liu, L., Zhao, B., Lei, J., Thayer, J.P., McPherron, R.L. 2012a, Superposed epoch
analyses of thermospheric response to CIRs: solar cycle and seasonal dependencies. J.
Geophys. Res. 117, A00L10.
Liu, J., Liu, L., Zhao, B., Wei, Y., Hu, L., Xiong, B. 2012b, High-speed stream impacts on
the equatorial ionization anomaly region during the deep solar minimum year 2008. J.
Geophys. Res. 117, A10304.
Liu, H., Lühr, H. 2005, Strong disturbance of the upper thermospheric density due to
magnetic storms: CHAMP observations. J. Geophys. Res. 110, A09S29.
Liu, L., Wan, W., Chen, Y., Le, H. 2011, Solar activity effects of the ionosphere: A brief
review. Chinese Sci. Bull. 56, 1202.
Liu, L., Wan., W, Ning., B, Pirog, O.M., Kurkin, V. I.. 2006, Solar activity variations of the
ionospheric peak electron density. J Geophys Res. 111, A08304.
Liu, L., Yang. J., Le, H., Chen, Y., Wan, W., Lee, C.-C. 2012c, Comparative study of the
equatorial ionosphere over Jicamarca during recent two solar minima. J. Geophys. Res.
117, A01315.
Maruyama, T. 1988, A diagnostic model for equatorial spread F 1. Model description and
applications to the electric field and neutral wind effects, J. Geophys. Res. 93, 14611.
Molina, M.G., Dasso, S., Mansilla, G., Namour, J.H., Cabrera, M.A., Zuccheretti, E. 2020,
Consequences of a solar wind stream interaction region on the low latitude ionosphere:
event of 7 October 2015. Solar Phys. 295, 173.
Negrea, C., Munteanu, C., Echim, M.M. 2021, Global ionospheric response to a periodic
sequence of HSS/CIR events during the 2007–2008 solar minimum. J. Geophys.
Res. 126, e2020JA029071.
Nishida, A. 1968, Coherence of geomagnetic DP2 fluctuations with interplanetary magnetic
variations. J. Geophys. Res. 73, 5549.
Ogwala, A., Oyedokun, O.J., Akala, A.O. et al. 2022, Characterization of ionospheric
irregularities over the equatorial and low latitude Nigeria region. Astrophys. Space
Sci .367, 79. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10509-022-04110-0
Ossakow, S. L. 1981, Spread-F theories—A review, J. Atmos. Solar-Terres. Phys. 43, 437.
Prikryl, P., Provan, G., McWilliams, K.A., Yeoman, T.K. 2002, Ionospheric cusp flows
pulsed by solar wind Alfvén waves. Ann. Geophys. 20, 161.
Prölss, G.W. 1993, On explaining the local time variation of ionospheric storm effects. Ann.
Geophys., 11, 19.
Pulkkinen, T. 2007, Space weather: terrestrial perspective. Living Rev. Sol. Phys. 4, 1.
Rajana, S.S.K., Panda, S.K., Jade, S., Vivek, C.G., Upadhayaya, A.K., Bhardwaj, A., et
al. 2024, Impact of two severe geomagnetic storms on the ionosphere over Indian
longitude sector during March-April 2023. Astrophys. Space Sci. 369, 3.
Ren, D., Lei, J., Wang, W., Burns, A., Luan, X., Dou, X. 2019, A simulation study on the
time delay of daytime thermospheric temperature response to the 27-day solar EUV
flux variation. J. Geophys. Res. 124, 9184.
Richmond, A.D. 2021, Joule heating in the thermosphere. in upper atmosphere dynamics and
energetics (eds W. Wang, Y. Zhang and L.J. Paxton).
Rishbeth, H., Mendillo, M. 2001, Patterns of F2-layer variability. J. Atmos. Solar-Terrer.
Phys. 63, 1661.
Sastri, J.H., Jyoti, N., Somayajulu, V.V., Chandha, H., Devasia, C.V. 2000, Ionospheric
storm of early November 1993 in the Indian equatorial region. J. Geophys. Res. 105,
18443.
Schmölter, E., Berdermann, J., Jakowski, N., Jacobi, C., and Vaishnav, R. 2018, Delayed
response of the ionosphere to solar EUV variability, Adv. Radio Sci., 16, 149.
Seba, E. B., Nigussie, M., and Moldwin, M. B. 2018, The relationship between equatorial
ionization anomaly and nighttime equatorial spread F in East Africa, Adv. Space Res.
62, 1737.
Silva, R.P., Borba, G.L., Campelo, J.F.B., Carmo, C. de S. do, Chen, S.S, Denardini, C.M. et
al. 2023, Latitudinal responses of the ionosphere over South America during
HILDCAA intervals: Case studies, Adv. Space Res. 71, 5185.
Silva, R.P., Denardini, C.M., Marques, M.S., Resende, L.C.A., Moro, J., Silva Picanço,
G.A.D., Santos, M.A.F.D. 2020, Ionospheric total electron content responses to
HILDCAA intervals. Ann. Geophys. 38, 27.
Silva, R.P., Sobral, J.H.A., Koga, D., Souza, J.R. 2017, Evidence of prompt penetration
electric fields during HILDCAA events. Ann. Geophys. 35, 1165.
Smith, J.M., Rodrigues, F.S., Fejer, B.G., Milla, M.A. 2016, Coherent and incoherent scatter
radar study of the climatology and day-to-day variability of mean F region vertical
drifts and equatorial spread F. J. Geophys. Res. 121, 1466.
Sobral, J.H.A., Abdu, M.A., Barbosa, I.G., Daniela, D.C.S., da Silva, R.R.L., Denardini,
A.C.M., Gonzalez, A.C., et al.. 2006, Equatorial ionospheric reponses to high-intensity
long-duration auroral electrojet activity (HILDCAA). J. Geophys. Res. 111, A07S02.
Sultan, P.J. 1996, Linear theory and modeling of the Rayleigh-Taylor instability leading to
the occurrence of equatorial spread F. J. Geophys. Res. 101, 26,875–26,891.
Thayer, J.P., Lei, J., Forbes, J.M., Sutton, E.K., Nerem, R.S. 2008, Thermospheric density
oscillations due to periodic solar wind high-speed streams. J. Geophys. Res. 113,
A06307.
Tian, Y., Hao, Y., Li, Q., Guo, J., Zhang, X., Zhang, D., Xiao, Z. 2021, The role of strong
meridional neutral winds in the formation of deep equatorial ionization trough in
CHAMP observations. J. Geophys. Res. 126, e2021JA029319.
Troshichev, O., Andrezen, V., Vennerstrøm, S., Friis-Christensen, E. 1988, Magnetic activity
in the polar cap—a new index. Planet. Space Sci. 36, 1095.
Tsunoda, R.T. 1985, Control of the seasonal and longitudinal occurrence of equatorial
scintillations by the longitudinal gradient in integrated E region Pedersen
conductivity. J. Geophys. Res. 90, 447.
Tsurutani, B.T., Gonzalez, W.D. 1987, The cause of high-intensity long-duration continuous
AE activity (HILDCAAS) - Interplanetary Alfvén wave trains. Plan. Space Sci. 35,
405.
Tulasi Ram, S., Yamamoto, M., Veenadhari, B., Kumar, S., Gurubaran, S. 2012, Corotating
Interaction Regions (CIRs) at sub-harmonic solar rotational periods and their impact on
Ionosphere and thermoshere system during the extreme low solar activity year 2008.
Indian J. Radio Space Phys. 41, 294.
Vaishnav, R., Jacobi, C., Berdermann, J., Schmölter, E., Dühnen, H., Codrescu, M. 2024,
Ionospheric response to solar EUV radiation variations using GOLD observations and
the CTIPe model. J. Geophys. Res. 129, e2022JA030887.
Verkhoglyadova, O., Emery, B.A., Hajra, R., Hunt, L., Mannucci, A., Meng, X., et al. 2016,
Estimation of energy budget of ionospherethermosphere system during two CIR-HSS
events: observations and modeling. J. Space Weather Space Clim., 6, A20.
Verkhoglyadova, O.P., Tsurutani, B.T., Mannucci, A.J., Mlynczak, M.G., Hunt, L.A., Runge,
T. 2013, Variability of ionospheric TEC during solar and geomagnetic minima (2008
and 2009): external high speed stream drivers, Ann. Geophys., 31, 263.
Yao, Y., Zhai, C., Kong, J. Liu, L. 2017, Contribution of solar radiation and geomagnetic
activity to global structure of 27-day variation of ionosphere. J. Geod. 91, 1299.
Yeeram, T. 2017, Interplanetary drivers of daytime penetration electric field into equatorial
ionosphere during CIR-induced geomagnetic storms. J. Atmos. Sol. Terres. Phys 6, 157.
Yeeram, T. 2019, The solar wind-magnetosphere coupling and daytime disturbance electric
fields in equatorial ionosphere during consecutive recurrent geomagnetic storms, J.
Atmos. Sol.-Terr. Phys. 187, 40.
Yeeram, T., Paratrasri, A. 2018, Recurrent geomagnetic storms and equinoctial ionospheric
F-region in the low magnetic latitude: a case study. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 012024.
Zesta, E., Oliveira, D.M. 2019, Thermospheric heating and cooling times during geomagnetic
storms, including extreme events. Geophys. Res. Lett. 46, 12739.