Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 309

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 44 of the 44 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Mars aerosol studies with the MGS TES emission phase function observations: Optical depths, particle sizes, and ice cloud types versus latitude and solar longitude

Open access
Clancy, R. Todd, Wolff, Michael J., Christensen, Philip R.·2003·Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets

Abstract

Emission phase function (EPF) observations taken in 1999–2001 by Mars Global Surveyor Thermal Emission Spectrometer (MGS TES) support the broadest study of Martian aerosol properties to date. TES solar band and infrared (IR) spectral EPF sequences are analyzed to obtain first‐time seasonal/latitudinal distributions of visible optical depths, particle sizes, and single scattering phase functions. This combined angular and wavelength coverage enables identification of two distinct ice cloud types over 45°S–45°N. Type 1 ice clouds exhibit small particle sizes (reff = 1–2 μm) and a distinctive backscattering increase. They are most prevalent in the southern hemisphere during aphelion, but also appear more widely distributed in season and latitude as topographic and high‐altitude (≥20 km) ice hazes. Type 2 ice clouds exhibit larger particle sizes (reff = 3–4 μm), a distinct side‐scattering minimum at 90–100° phase angles (characteristic of a change in particle shape relative to the type 1), and appear most prominently in the northern subtropical aphelion cloud belt. The majority of retrieved dust visible‐to‐IR optical depth ratios are indicative of reff = 1.5 ± 0.1 μm, consistent with Pathfinder and Viking/Mariner 9 reanalyses. However, increased ratios (2.7 versus 1.7) appear frequently in the northern hemisphere over LS = 50–200°, indicating substantially smaller dust particles sizes (reff = 1.0 ± 0.2 μm) at this time. In addition, larger (reff = 1.8–2.5 μm) dust particles were observed locally in the southern hemisphere during the peak of the 2001 global dust storm. Detailed spectral modeling of the TES visible band pass indicates agreement of EPF‐derived dust single scattering albedos (0.92–0.94) with the spectrally resolved results from Pathfinder observations.

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 · 10.1029/2003je002058

Cites

44 of 44 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 44 references

Cited by

See all 309

Metadata

Authors
Clancy, R. T., Wolff, M. J., & Christensen, P. R.
Venue
Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets
Published
2003-09
Volume
108
Issue
E9
ISSN
0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2096857559
Cited by
309
References
44
FWCI
9.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Mars aerosol studies with the MGS TES emission phase function observations: Optical depths, particle sizes, and ice cloud types versus latitude and solar longitude. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/2003je002058
The paper
Clancy, R. T., Wolff, M. J., & Christensen, P. R. (2003). Mars aerosol studies with the MGS TES emission phase function observations: Optical depths, particle sizes, and ice cloud types versus latitude and solar longitude. Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets. https://doi.org/10.1029/2003je002058

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.