Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35136405›Full record

ArticleAtmospheric chemistry and physics2022

Opportunistic experiments to constrain aerosol effective radiative forcing.

Matthew W Christensen, Andrew Gettelman, Jan Cermak, Guy Dagan, Michael Diamond, Alyson Douglas, Graham Feingold, Franziska Glassmeier, Tom Goren, Daniel P Grosvenor and 23 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Atmospheric chemistry and physics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
14.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 138 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Competition response of cloud supersaturation explains diminished Twomey effect for smoky aerosol in the tropical Atlantic.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Assessing effective radiative forcing from aerosol-cloud interactions over the global ocean.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
  10. Shipping regulations lead to large reduction in cloud perturbations.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

33 authors at 20 institutions in 6 countries.

Matthew W ChristensenAtmospheric, Oceanic and Planetary Physics, Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX1 3PU, UK.
Andrew GettelmanNational Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO, USA.
Jan CermakKarlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Institute of Meteorology and Climate Research, Karlsruhe, Germany.
Guy DaganInstitute of Earth Sciences, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.
Michael DiamondDepartment of Atmospheric Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, USA.
Alyson DouglasAtmospheric, Oceanic and Planetary Physics, Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX1 3PU, UK.
Graham FeingoldNOAA Chemical Sciences Laboratory (CSL), Boulder, Colorado, USA.
Franziska GlassmeierDepartment Geoscience and Remote Sensing, Delft University of Technology, P.O. Box 5048, 2600GA Delft, the Netherlands.
Tom GorenInstitute for Meteorology, Universität Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Daniel P GrosvenorNational Centre for Atmospheric Sciences, School of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK.
Edward GryspeerdtSpace and Atmospheric Physics Group, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Ralph KahnEarth Science Division, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD, USA.
Zhanqing LiDepartment of Atmospheric and Oceanic Science, University of Maryland, College Park, USA.
Po-Lun MaAtmospheric Science & Global Change Division, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WA 99354, Washington, USA.
Florent MalavelleMet Office, Atmospheric Dispersion and Air Quality, Fitzroy Rd, Exeter, EX1 3PB, UK.
Isabel L McCoyRosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science, University of Miami, Miami, FL, USA.
Daniel T McCoyDepartment of Atmospheric Sciences, University of Wyoming, Laramie, USA.
Greg McFarquharCooperative Institute for Severe and High Impact Weather Research and Operations (CIWRO) and School of Meteorology, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA.
Johannes MülmenstädtAtmospheric Science & Global Change Division, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WA 99354, Washington, USA.
Sandip PalDepartment of Geosciences, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX, USA.
Anna PossnerInstitute for Atmospheric and Environmental Sciences, Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Adam PoveyAtmospheric, Oceanic and Planetary Physics, Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX1 3PU, UK.
Johannes QuaasInstitute for Meteorology, Universität Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Daniel RosenfeldInstitute of Earth Sciences, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.
Anja SchmidtDepartment of Geography, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Roland SchrödnerLeibniz Institute for Tropospheric Research, Leipzig, Germany.
Armin SorooshianDepartment of Chemical and Environmental Engineering, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA.
Philip StierAtmospheric, Oceanic and Planetary Physics, Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX1 3PU, UK.
Velle TollInstitute of Physics, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.
Duncan Watson-ParrisAtmospheric, Oceanic and Planetary Physics, Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX1 3PU, UK.
Robert WoodDepartment of Atmospheric Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, USA.
Mingxi YangPlymouth Marine Laboratory, Prospect Place, Plymouth, PL1 3DH, UK.
Tianle YuanJoint Center for Earth Systems Technologies, University of Maryland, Baltimore County, Baltimore, MD, USA.
University of Oxford · GBPacific Northwest National Laboratory · USGoddard Space Flight Center · USHebrew University of Jerusalem · ILLeipzig University · DECooperative Institute for Mesoscale Meteorological Studies · USCooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences · USDelft University of Technology · NLGoethe University Frankfurt · DEImperial College London · GBKarlsruhe Institute of Technology · DELeibniz Institute for Tropospheric Research · DEMet Office · GBNOAA Chemical Sciences Laboratory · USNSF National Center for Atmospheric Research · USPlymouth Marine Laboratory · GBTexas Tech University · USUniversity of Arizona · USUniversity of Cambridge · GBUniversity of Leeds · GB

Funding

Shared Services Center NASA 80NSSC19K0442
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aerosol-cloud interactions (ACIs) are considered to be the most uncertain driver of present-day radiative forcing due to human activities. The nonlinearity of cloud-state changes to aerosol perturbations make it challenging to attribute causality in observed relationships of aerosol radiative forcing. Using correlations to infer causality can be challenging when meteorological variability also drives both aerosol and cloud changes independently. Natural and anthropogenic aerosol perturbations from well-defined sources provide "opportunistic experiments" (also known as natural experiments) to investigate ACI in cases where causality may be more confidently inferred. These perturbations cover a wide range of locations and spatiotemporal scales, including point sources such as volcanic eruptions or industrial sources, plumes from biomass burning or forest fires, and tracks from individual ships or shipping corridors. We review the different experimental conditions and conduct a synthesis of the available satellite datasets and field campaigns to place these opportunistic experiments on a common footing, facilitating new insights and a clearer understanding of key uncertainties in aerosol radiative forcing. Cloud albedo perturbations are strongly sensitive to background meteorological conditions. Strong liquid water path increases due to aerosol perturbations are largely ruled out by averaging across experiments. Opportunistic experiments have significantly improved process-level understanding of ACI, but it remains unclear how reliably the relationships found can be scaled to the global level, thus demonstrating a need for deeper investigation in order to improve assessments of aerosol radiative forcing and climate change.

Identifiers

PMID35136405
PMCPMC8819675
OpenAlexW4221040734

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.