Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 462

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 23 of the 23 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Contrasting convective regimes over the Amazon: Implications for cloud electrification

Open access
Williams, E., Rosenfeld, D., Madden, N., Gerlach, J., Gears, N., Atkinson, L., Dunnemann, N., Frostrom, G., Antonio, M., Biazon, B., Camargo, R., Franca, H., Gomes, A., Lima, M., Machado, R., Manhaes, S., Nachtigall, L., Piva, H., Quintiliano, W., Machado, L., Artaxo, P., Roberts, G., Renno, N., Blakeslee, R., Bailey, J., Boccippio, D., Betts, A., Wolff, D., Roy, B., Halverson, J., Rickenbach, T., Fuentes, J., Avelino, E.·2002·Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres

Abstract

Four distinct meteorological regimes in the Amazon basin have been examined to distinguish the contributions from boundary layer aerosol and convective available potential energy (CAPE) to continental cloud structure and electrification. The lack of distinction in the electrical parameters (peak flash rate, lightning yield per unit rainfall) between aerosol‐rich October and aerosol‐poor November in the premonsoon regime casts doubt on a primary role for the aerosol in enhancing cloud electrification. Evidence for a substantial role for the aerosol in suppressing warm rain coalescence is identified in the most highly polluted period in early October. The electrical activity in this stage is qualitatively peculiar. During the easterly and westerly wind regimes of the wet season, the lightning yield per unit of rainfall is positively correlated with the aerosol concentration, but the electrical parameters are also correlated with CAPE, with a similar degree of scatter. Here cause and effect are difficult to establish with available observations. This ambiguity extends to the “green ocean” westerly regime, a distinctly maritime regime over a major continent with minimum aerosol concentration, minimum CAPE, and little if any lightning.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1029/2001jd000380

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 23 references

Cited by

See all 462

Metadata

Authors
Williams, E., Rosenfeld, D., Madden, N., Gerlach, J., Gears, N., Atkinson, L., Dunnemann, N., Frostrom, G., Antonio, M., Biazon, B., Camargo, R., Franca, H., Gomes, A., Lima, M., Machado, R., Manhaes, S., Nachtigall, L., Piva, H., Quintiliano, W., Machado, L., Artaxo, P., Roberts, G., Renno, N., Blakeslee, R., Bailey, J., Boccippio, D., Betts, A., Wolff, D., Roy, B., Halverson, J., Rickenbach, T., Fuentes, J., & Avelino, E.
Venue
Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres
Published
2002-10-10
Volume
107
Issue
D20
ISSN
0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2163996120
Cited by
462
References
23
FWCI
9.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Contrasting convective regimes over the Amazon: Implications for cloud electrification. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/2001jd000380
The paper
Williams, E., Rosenfeld, D., Madden, N., Gerlach, J., Gears, N., Atkinson, L., Dunnemann, N., Frostrom, G., Antonio, M., Biazon, B., Camargo, R., Franca, H., Gomes, A., Lima, M., Machado, R., Manhaes, S., Nachtigall, L., Piva, H., Quintiliano, W., . . . Avelino, E. (2002). Contrasting convective regimes over the Amazon: Implications for cloud electrification. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres. https://doi.org/10.1029/2001jd000380

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.