Version of Record: https://www.sciencedirect.

com/science/article/pii/S0273117718308676
Manuscript_a1699880b0ced83ed13927e7bea379be

PLASMA TRANSPORT PROCESS IN THE EQUATORIAL/LOW-LATITUDE IONOSPHERE

Babatunde Olufemi Adebesin1, Bolarinwa John Adekoya2*, and Timothy Wemimo David2
1
Department of Physical Sciences, Landmark University, PMB 1001, Omu-Aran, Kwara State, Nigeria.
2
Department of Physics, Olabisi Onabanjo University, P.M.B. 2002, Ago Iwoye, Nigeria.

*Corresponding author: Bolarinwa J. Adekoya: adekoyabolarinwa@yahoo.com; adekoya.bolarinwa@oouagoiwoye.edu.ng

Abstract
The behaviour of the equatorial/low-latitude ionosphere and the transport processes during magnetic
disturbed and quiet periods of a high solar activity year, 2014, in the American sector are investigated.
Parameters used include vertical drift (Vz), transport term (W), NmF2, hmF2 and scale-height (H). The F2
plasma variations followed the diurnal local solar pattern, being higher at daytime. The sunset maximum and
sunrise minimum peaks of hmF2 were directly opposite to the scale height (H) pattern. The plasma
distribution was basically controlled by combined actions of the electrodynamic convection/thermospheric
composition, which is geomagnetic activity dependent. The annual, semi-annual and winter-anomalies of the
F2 parameters were higher at the dip equator in comparison with the low-latitude. The Vz pre-reversal peak
magnitude coincided with hmF2 peak and the effects are more pronounced during geomagnetic disturbed
conditions. The transport term pattern was similar to that of the scale height and it is suggested as a proxy
parameter for quantifying low-latitude plasma irregularities and distribution of thermospheric composition.

Keywords: NmF2; Chapman scale height; Vertical plasma drift; transport term; Magnetic activities

1. Introduction

1.1. Background to the study

This work discusses the ionospheric F2-layer behaviour and its transport processes at low-latitude in the
American sector. This has been generally taken to be the behaviour of electromagnetic convection dynamo
(i.e. interaction between zonal electric field and the horizontal magnetic field (vertical upward) dynamics
with the plasma E × B and global circulation of thermospheric components (Adekoya and Adebesin 2014).
Although vertical plasma drift is the dominant mechanism for the distribution of plasma, the contribution of
thermospheric composition cannot be overruled. The ionospheric vertical drift/electric-field and the
thermospheric circulation during disturbed time has been well studied (Fejer et al., 1990; Scherliess and
Fejer 1997; Rishbeth 1998; Fuller-Rowell et al., 2002). These mechanisms (vertical drift and thermospheric
composition) are more influenced during geomagnetic perturbed period due to some external processes
which are of magnetospheric origin (Shim et al., 2011; Adebesin et al, 2016a). The processes include prompt
penetration of electric field, thermospheric composition and wind circulation, and travelling wave
disturbances (de Jesus et al., 2011; Adebesin et al, 2013a; de Abreu et al., 2014), which differs from one
season and latitude to another due to their dynamic nature.

The behaviour of the F2-layer ionosphere had been broadly studied using global ionospheric and
thermospheric composition parameters. The monthly and seasonal variation of ionospheric F2 electron
density (NmF2) studied by Rishbeth et al. (2000), Zou et al. (2000), Liu et al. (2009) and Chen et al. (2015)
affirmed the irregularities of NmF2 and its dependency on local solar radiation and thermospheric
compositions. However, these aforementioned studies were observed at mid-/high-latitudes. In the
equatorial/low-latitude region, most observations find their explanation in the vertical E × B drift variation.
Fejer (1997), Adebesin et al. (2013b) and Adebesin et al., (2016b) studied the vertical plasma drift, related to
electric field movement as the dominant for plasma distribution in the low-latitude region. They further
reported the diurnal behaviour and asymmetry effects of the seasonal behaviour of Vz.

1
© 2018 published by Elsevier. This manuscript is made available under the Elsevier user license
https://www.elsevier.com/open-access/userlicense/1.0/
Several methods and techniques have been used (Bittencourt and Abdu, 1981; Maynard et al., 1995; Fejer et
al., 1995; Fejer, 1997; Anderson et al., 2006; Adebesin et al., 2013a, 2015) to explain the vertical transport
motion of the equatorial ionosphere as a seeding mechanism for equatorial ionization anomalies and are well
documented. However, the daily distribution of electron density in the F2-layer does not only depend on the
transport process, but also on the balance between the production, loss and transport processes, with regards
to the Chapman equation. The Chapman scale height (H) is very pertinent in the extrapolation of production
rate and vertical transport process of electron density (Bhargava and Subrahmanyam, 1960; Iheonu and
Oyekola, 2006; Chukwuma and Adekoya, 2016).

1.2. Present work

During episodes of magnetically quiet or disturbed periods, neutral composition contributed to the
distribution of the F2 plasma, whether at daytime or nighttime. This is brought about by the background
energy deposition into the thermosphere due to the absorption of solar energy by photoionization and photo-
dissociation (Ercha et al., 2012). At the low-latitude region, the distribution of charged particles is by
electrodynamics current system due to the increase in the electromagnetic process at the region. Although E×B
drift dominates the plasma convection, based on the aforementioned photoionization and dissociation processes, it
will be of significant advancement to produce by extrapolation, the transport term (W) in explaining the physical
mechanisms of the F2 plasma at the region. Using these to analyse the condition of the ionosphere during the
geomagnetic conditions make this paper of significant different from past work. The parameter W is
extrapolated from the Chapman equation. Both Vz and W are regarded as seeding mechanisms for the
explanation of the equatorial plasma instability and plasma distribution. The global thermospheric circulation
was introduced to overcome the shortcomings of explaining the relationship between the thermospheric
distribution and electrodynamics of the low-latitude region during magnetic disturbed and quiet conditions.
The spatial and temporal variation of the maximum electron density (NmF2) and F2 peak height (hmF2) is
investigated. The seasonal, annual and latitudinal asymmetry effect of the phenomena will also be
considered. The apparent Vz was calculated based on the documented methodology of Adebesin (2016b) and
Adekoya et al., (2015) using hmF2. This paper mainly studies the electrodynamic structures responsible for
the distribution of F2 plasma at low-latitude region, both during the daytime and nighttime periods
respectively. More stations would have been chosen for this study, but paucity ionosonde data restricted our
choice of stations for the year under consideration. Since the aim of this research is to observe the
electrodynamics behaviour of the plasma in the ionosphere at equatorial/low latitude, the limitation in the
number of stations has relatively little influence on the research goal.

2. Data and methodology

2.1 Data source
Data for the F2 region parameters (direct measurement; foF2 and hmF2, and ionogram derived scale height,
H) used were obtained from the Global Ionospheric Radio Observatory (GIRO) network of ionosondes for
four low latitude stations taken in 2014, a year of high solar activity. The digital Ionogram database
(DIDBase) is obtained from http://ulcar.uml.edu/DIDBase/ (Reinisch and Galkin 2011) and manually
validated. The digital Ionogram database (DIDBase) allows for the assimilation of the Ionogram-derived data in
real-time models with a minima latency such as the real-time extension planned for the International Reference
Ionosphere (Reinisch and Galkin, 2011). The detailed information about these stations is highlighted in Table
1. The map showing the geographic locations of these stations is depicted in fig. 1. The Geomagnetic
information was obtained from the International Geomagnetic Reference Field (IGRF) model
(www.ngdc.noaa.gov/geomag/magfield.shtm l) and the World Data Centre for Geomagnetism, Kyoto
(http://wdc.kugi.kyoto-u.ac.jp/index.html). The days employed are the respective five international quietest
(IQDs) and disturbed days (IDDs) in each month of the year, calculated from the daily average of Ap (i.e. Ap
≤ 7 for quiet and ≥ 8 for disturbed) and Kp (i.e. Kp ≤ 2 for quiet and ≥ 3 for disturbed) indices. See Adekoya
et al., (2015) for more classification, obtained from the International Service of Geomagnetic Indices (ISGI)
network’s http://wdc.kugi.kyoto-u.ac.jp/index.html. The maximum electron density (NmF2 (e/m3)) was
calculated from the obtained critical frequency, foF2 (Hz) using the relation in Eq. 1 (Rishbeth, 1988).

NmF2 = (foF2)2/80.5 (1)

2
The monthly variations were averaged from the respective daily parameters of NmF2 (e/m3), hmF2 and H.
Further, due to the seasonal asymmetry variation of the solar radiation, the seasons of the year were
classified into four categories, based on the Lloyd’s classification (e.g. Adebesin et al., 2015). These are the
March equinox/Spring (March, April), June solstice/Summer (May, June, July August), September
equinox/Autumn (September, October) and December solstice/Winter (November, December, January,
February). To study the latitudinal related effects, two stations, each, from both magnetic equator and EIA
region, were chosen. The hourly seasonal mean values of hmF2 was used to compute Vz by measuring its
time rate of change (e.g. Vz = d(hmF2)/dt). The concept of local time is used throughout the analysis.

2.2 Estimation of vertical transport term of the ionosphere

Relative to the geomagnetic disturbed and quiet conditions, we present the effects brought by the magnetic
activities on the transport processes in the ionosphere. In the F2-layer ionosphere, the ionospheric behaviour
appears to be more complex, the electron density variation depends on the production, loss (recombination)
and transport processes and obeys the continuity equation. The electron density, N at a fixed height h is of
the form
∂N
= q(t ) f ( χ , h) − β (h) N − W (h, t ) (2)
∂t
where q(t) is the production rate as a function of time, f (χ, h) represents the way in which production rate
depends on the solar zenith angle, χ and the height h. β is the recombinational rate as a function of height and
N is the electron density. The last term is the transport term (i.e. W (h, t) = V - D) which comprises of the
vertical drift velocity term (V) and the transport diffusion term (D) (Adekoya and Chukwuma, 2016). At the
low-latitude region, the contribution of diffusion mechanisms is insignificant due to the enhance nature of
the electromagnetic process in the ionosphere at the region. Therefore, if the oxygen atoms were taken to be
the only ionizable constituent, then the Chapman theory may be applied. In a stratified isothermal
atmosphere (Rishbeth, 1988), Chapman has shown that q(t, χ, h) is given as

q (t ) f ( χ , h ) = q o exp( 1 − z − e − z sec χ ) (3)

where qO is the maximum electron production for overhead sun, the reduce height (z) measured from a
hmF 2 − ho
datum level, ho is given as z = ; ho is the vertical height of the datum level (or the reference peak
H
height below any height), and H is the scale height of electron density. To further analyse the above
expression, q of Chapman’s expression can be computed when the production rate at datum level, qo is 620
cm-3s-1 (for a typical period of high solar activity), 445 cm-3s-1 (for moderate solar activity) and 270 cm-3s-1
(for low solar activity) (Chukwuma and Adekoya, 2016; Iheonu and Oyekola, 2006; Yonezawa, 1966), and
ho value was taken as 180km. However, it should be noted that the production rate depends on the solar
activity much and may be a possible influence on distributions of the transport terms. The electron loss
coefficient, β for the F2-region was computed using the existing model earlier proposed by Ratcliffe et al.
(1956) given as
 300 − hmF 2  −1
β = 10 − 4 exp  sec (4)
 50 
Taking into consideration all the terms in equations (3) and (4), the numerical values of production rate (q)
and loss coefficient (β) for the desired heights were estimated. The numerical values of N (i.e. NmF2) and
dN/dt were obtained from the N-t curve of Figs 1 and 2. Therefore, the magnitude of the transport term in
equation 5 was obtained by substituting all the calculated parameters for quiet and disturbed conditions. In

3
this way, the calculated magnitude of the transport term for both conditions will represent the apparent
electrodynamic nature of the equatorial ionosphere.
∂N
W (h, t ) = q(t ) f ( χ , h) − β (h) N − (5)
∂t

3. Results and Discussions

3.1 NmF2, hmF2 and H variation observations
In this section, the diurnal variation of the monthly average F2 parameters (NmF2, hmF2 and the Chapman
scale height, H) variation to the magnetic quiet and disturbed conditions during a maximum solar activity
year was presented. The analysis is for four stations, two stations each in the magnetic low-latitude region
and equatorial region. The figures explaining these ionospheric phenomena related to the magnetic
conditions were depicted in the plots of Figs. 2 and 3. From the figures, the monthly variations of NmF2 and
hmF2 per individual station (Boa Vista (fig. 2a), Ramey (fig. 2b), Jicamarca (fig. 3a), and Ascension Island
(fig. 3b)) shows some dissimilarities. There was a double peak variation of NmF2 observed during the
daytime, the first peak was registered within 1200 - 1400 LT, and the second, often larger, peaks around the
pre-sunset period (i.e. between 1600-1700LT). These ionospheric features are not commonly observed at all
the stations. Therefore, for progressive monthly and seasonal analysis of these features the trend lines were
used. The trend lines are the representative of the fifth-order polynomial for each month of the year, being
the best fit. These represented the continuous average behaviour of the ionospheric features during both
magnetic conditions. The trend line shows on average the higher NmF2 concentration during magnetic
disturbed periods in the equinoxes than during the quiet condition. The maximum peaks of NmF2 were
observed during the equinoctial months and lower in the months of June solstice.

Observations show that NmF2 variation is highest around the post-noon during equinoxes and lowest in the
solstices months, especially in June solstice. Similar observation has been reported by Adebesin et al.
(2013c) over Ilorin during the period of low solar activity. Concurrent increase in hmF2 was observed in the
second panel of each plot with peak registered around the sunset period. The notable point is that there was a
corresponding decrease in hmF2 over Boa Vista and Ramey stations during the post-noon peak. The
decrease in NmF2 after the post-noon peak, often, at the sunset period was associated with the increase in
hmF2 at both stations. However, at AS and JI, hmF2 variation fitted into the double peaks observed in the
NmF2 pattern during the daytime and was highest at sunset periods (1800-2100 LT). At sunset period, the
peak variation of hmF2 was observed, mostly few hours (i.e. about 2 - 3 hrs) after NmF2 peak magnitude is
attained. During the daytime, the EUV radiation from the sun changes the ionization directly, and the
recombination indirectly. This may be the causes of the observed increase in the concentration of electron
density during the daytime than it appears at sunset and midnight respectively. However, the peak electron
density occurs at a different level from that of peak electron production rate.

Further, the asymmetry in the peak height over the stations was further analysed using the trend lines. In the
low-latitude, the increase in hmF2 values corresponds to the June solstice months, but was slightly lowered
over RA. This was directly opposite to the trend observed over ASC and JI (Fig. 2 (a and b)). Although,
geomagnetically, it should be noted that RA falls out of the equatorial ionization anomaly region map, which
may be the reason for the slight decrease in hmF2 over RA. This difference in solsticial behaviour was
related to the effect of cross equatorial wind that was probably driven by solar heating, and thereafter, drives
the F2 plasma to higher altitudes through the magnetic field lines (Rishbeth 1998; Adekoya and Adebesin,
2015; Astafyeva et al., 2018). The asymmetric behaviour may indicate the role of thermospheric winds in the
plasma uplift in the regions. The thermospheric wind circulation is directed equatorward from the summer to
winter, that is, from the northern hemisphere to the southern hemisphere, driven by solar heating and
reinforced by the effect of summer auroral oval during geomagnetic perturbed period (Rishbeth 1998;
4
Astafyeva et al., 2018). This asymmetry causes the global circulation and subsequently affect the
thermospheric composition and hence NmF2 (Rishbeth and Müller-Wodarg, 2006). This can account for the
annual asymmetry as well.

The topside electron density profile was extrapolated using the Chapman scale height around the F2 peak
(H). In the continuity equation, the information from this parameter and the peak height helps in obtaining
the numerical values of the rate of production of ionization (Yonezawa, 1966). Liu et al. (2006) described
the information about this parameter with that of the electron density and peak height as key features of the
Chapman profiler and a good representation of the topside electron density profile. However, with a constant
scale height, Reinisch and Huang (2001) reported that the Chapman function fit the topside ionospheric
profile well at an altitude even above the F2-peak. Therefore, it is evident that the scale height is a key and
essential parameter in the continuity equation for deriving the production rate at different altitude
(Yonezawa, 1966), topside electron profiler (Belehaki et al., 2006; Reinisch et al., 2004) as well as
evaluating the transport term (Chukwuma and Adekoya, 2016). Therefore, this makes the role of the scale
height pertinent and a key parameter for observing the diurnal movement of F2 plasma relative to the
geomagnetic conditions and solar activity.

The monthly diurnal scale height records of the ionogram in the equatorial stations under investigation are
depicted in the third panel of Fig 2 and Fig. 3. The plots show that H has an obvious monthly diurnal
variation with the peak occurring around daytime period and nadir at midnight for the entire year. The
monthly variation is very evident, as the maximum peak variation was observed within May-Aug and
minimum around Nov - Feb, which represents the summer and winter seasons respectively. Liu et al. (2006)
investigated the temporal and seasonal variation of scale height in respect of its reliance on the solar activity
and reported that the scale height variation is higher in summer period. In the low latitude region, variation
in H was on the average higher during the perturbed period than the quiet period, especially at daytime. This
is opposite to the observation in the dip equator, where there is an increase in H during the quiet period
compared with the disturbed condition except for AS. This is suggested to be related to the latitudinal effect,
resulting from the redistribution of energy and heat. Also, it can be interpreted in terms of the irregularities
in the plasma currents flow, forming double hump (crests) of plasma in the EIA region and trough at the dip
equator (Hanson and Moffett, 1966; Horvath and Lovell, 2008; de Abreu et al., 2014; Fagundes et al., 2015).
Thermospheric heating may be another factor that increased variation of the scale height (Laundal and
Østgaard, 2009), especially during the daytime. Mosert et al. (2012) reported that this can be useful for
estimating the topside ionosphere from bottomside measurements and modelling. For a better estimation and
analysis of the vertical transport term, a better knowledge of the behaviour of H should be obtained.
Therefore, our objective here does not focus on the vivid study of the scale height, but its variation as a
parameter in estimating the production rate and vertical transport process in the continuity equation for the
F2 region plasma.

The variation in the F2 plasma follows the local time variation. Therefore, three typical time periods are
picked out, for this interpretation. This are the daytime (1200-1400 LT) (Fig. 4 a), sunset (1800-2100 LT)
(Fig. 4 b) and midnight (0000 LT) (Fig. 4 c) hours. The monthly peak variation of NmF2 and hmF2 for each
period are plotted in Fig. 4 for both magnetic conditions. The choice of distinguishing the sunset period from
the nighttime period is to basically monitor the morphology of the resurgence of nighttime irregularities
associated with the ionospheric F2 parameters during the period under investigation. However, detailed
understanding of the nighttime equatorial anomalies seeding mechanism and the seasonal and latitudinal
dependence is presented in the subsequent sections. In Figure 4 (a-c) it is generally observed that NmF2 and
hmF2 variation is higher during the geomagnetic disturbed conditions than the quiet conditions. Further, it is
observed that at a given period (i.e. Daytime, Sunset and Midnight) and month of the year the F2 plasma
5
variation was higher during the daytime and relatively decreases at sunset and midnight respectively. This
points to the fact that F2 plasma variation depends linearly or quadratically on the variation of local solar
ionizing radiation (Adekoya and Chukwuma 2016; Sapundjiev and Stankov, 2016). The disparity in the
peak variation and the likely causes had been explained in the forward sections. The double hump in the
monthly variations corresponds with the equinoctial months, the June solstice months recorded the lowest
variation followed by December solstice. This indicates the occurrence of seasonal anomaly. There is
asymmetry in the ionospheric plasma behaviour which is latitudinal dependence. It is lowest in the magnetic
equator.

3.2 Possible geomagnetic contributions and relative differences in ionospheric parameters

Many processes are involved in F2 plasma distribution during geomagnetic disturbed/quiet periods at
the equatorial/low-latitude region, this includes the thermospheric wind, atmospheric waves and electric
field transmitted/emanated from higher/lower altitudes (Prölss 2006), but electric field is the dominant
for equatorial charge particle distribution (Fejer, 1997; Zou et al., 2000; Rishbeth et al., 2000; Yu et al.,
2006; Tsurutani et al., 2008). However, the large and fast variations of the thermospheric winds and
atmospheric waves are associated with geomagnetic disturbances. Therefore, the contribution of
thermospheric composition during a magnetically disturbed condition may be another factor that
influenced the distribution of the F2 plasma, bearing in mind that the global distribution of electron
density depends on the thermospheric ratio (O/N2) (Buonsanto 1999; Shim et al., 2011; Adekoya and
Chukwuma 2016). The increase in the mean molecular mass manifesting from the decrease in (O/N2)
decreases NmF2, yielding upwelling, and increase in (O/N2) decreases the mean molecular mass and
tends to increase NmF2 yielding downwelling (Rishbeth, 1998). This decrease/increase in (O/N2)
corresponds to the increase/decrease in the plasma peak height. That is, at a region of reduced loss rate
(i.e. during the photoionization), the F2 peak height would be uplifted due to equatorward wind/increase
in thermospheric circulation and produce increases in the electron density and a drop in hmF2 due to
poleward winds/decrease in thermospheric circulation reduces NmF2.

3.3 Seasonal, semi-annual and annual behaviour of F2 plasma

As explained earlier, it is well known that NmF2 is closely related to the O/N2 of the ambient neutral air,
which varies seasonally because of the prevailing summer-to-winter global thermospheric circulation. The
upwelling of air in the summer decreases the O/N2, while downwelling at winter increases it. This is the
basic cause of the F2-layer seasonal anomaly, which is driven by the heating due to solar radiation and
energy from the solar wind deposited at high latitude. It is well known that F2-layer is dominated locally by
photochemistry and globally by dynamics. To buttress this, the GUVI maps in Figure 5 highlights the global
circulation of the thermospheric composition during the quiet and disturbed conditions. For each of the
season, the most geomagnetically active period of a day in any month of each season was used to represent
the seasonal variation of the global circulation of thermospheric ratio. Therefore, O/N2 ratio during
geomagnetic quiet and disturbed conditions for December solstice was in Figure 5a (i-ii). Similarly, in figure
5(b-d) are the seasonal thermospheric ratios for June solstice, March equinox and September equinox for
quiet (i) and disturbed (ii) periods respectively. Thus, the increase/decrease in the thermospheric ratio
(O/N2), tends to increase/decrease NmF2. Looking through the plots in Figure 5, the asymmetry behaviour
of the thermospheric composition is evident. The increase in the thermospheric composition increases the
global distribution of the F2 plasma, which varies from one geomagnetic activity to the other. The
circulation was higher in equinoxes (see Fig 5 c & d), with the highest in March equinox, which signified the
semi-annual anomalies. However, the thermospheric ratio was lower in solsticial seasons with the minimum
observed in June solstice in both regions (i.e. equatorial and low latitude region). Therefore, semi-annual

6
variation of the ionosphere increases the ionization at the equinoxes and decreases it during solstices; thereby
making NmF2 to be increased during the equinoxes.

Also, the annual anomaly of ionization with maxima in December solstice and minima in June solstice may
have resulted from the changes in solar irradiance between the solstice seasons and to a lesser extent, the
solar tide that originates from lower altitudes (Potula et al., 2011). Similar semi-annual, annual and seasonal
anomaly was also observed during magnetic quiet period, but of lesser contribution of the energy and heating
process brought by solar wind deposition. This follow the fact that during geomagnetic quiet periods, the
behaviour of the ionospheric F2 plasma may be of less importance compared to the disturbed periods due to
the injection of high levels of magnetospheric energy (Shim et al., 2011).

3.4 F2 layer vertical transport and electrodynamic processes

The eastward and westward electric field current during the daytime and nighttime period was related to the
upward and downward vertical transport process of the F2-plasma. This equatorial electric field control the
dynamic process and ionospheric plasma distribution in the low latitude region through the equatorial
electrojet and the F2 plasma drift, which control the development/inhibition of equatorial ionization anomaly
(EIA) and ionospheric plasma instabilities (Fejer, 1997). This effect of equatorial electric field on the vertical
transport process of the plasma is felt on the Vz plot in Fig. 6b and Fig. 7b.

The vertical transport processes of electrons and ions were investigated by considering Vz and the
contribution of the photoionization that involves the production and recombination effects, since the
electromagnetic field motion prohibited the diffusion processes at the region. Therefore, the obtained vertical
transport process here will account for the distribution of the electron density under the influence of drift
motion of electrons and ions for isothermal ionosphere. Thus, considering from the foregoing F2 plasma
distribution explanation, it seems that at first sight the derived vertical plasma drift follows the diurnal
distribution of F2 plasma (Figs. 6b (i-iv) and 7b (i-iv) for magnetic quiet and disturbed conditions), with
upward motion increasing with an increase in solar radiation, reaches the peak around 1100-1400 LT at
daytime and downward motion corresponding to the nighttime equatorial ionospheric instabilities. These
deductions agree with the result of Adebesin et al. (2013a). However, the transport term (W), as an alternate
parameter for the measurement of equatorial instability, Figs. 6a and 7b depicts opposite variation, showing
the following three features: (i) the upward motion with a peak at sunrise period, (ii) the downward motion
following the peak enhancement at sunrise through the daytime period and (iii) the pre-sunset impulse (i.e.
the small increase in W at pre-sunset period) basically occurring around 1600-1700 LT.

Although, the upward/downward motion of the F2 plasma is related to the eastward/westward electric field
with peak eastward field during the daytime, around 1100 - 1400 LT and at sunset period, around 1800 -
2100 LT. Several reports have confirmed the dependence of the PRE magnitude with the incidence of post-
sunset ESF (e.g. Fejer and Scherliess, 1997), which was interpreted as the effect of westward movement of
equatorial electric field. This is due to the fact that PRE always triggers irregularities in the ionosphere,
especially at nighttime. However, looking at Figs. 6a and 7a, the W morphology negate this, thus, the
impulse/downward motion occurs typically 2 hours before the sunset PRE peak of Vz at pre-sunset periods.
And the maximum upward motion of the transport term at sunrise occurs 2-3 hours before the daytime
plasma vertical drift peak. That is, W may be another parameter to measure the morphology of the equatorial
ionosphere irregularities.

3.4.1 Vertical plasma drift (Vz) and seasonal behaviour

In Fig. 2, hmF2 increases with the time of the day, reaching maximum altitude at sunset period, before it
drastically decreases at night following the resurgence of the loss coefficient. The increase in hmF2 started
7
from sunrise period, around 0700 LT as the recombination coefficient enters the region of loss decrease.
However, hmF2 excursion boundedly varies with Vz. In Fig 6d and Fig. 7d, hmF2 started increasing from a
lower altitude at sunrise with peak value ranging from 250 - 280 km for all seasons, with the lowest in June
solstice. This indicates the level of preparedness of irregularities at the region throughout the day, but higher
at sunset time than it appeared during the daytime and nighttime periods. However, the peak vertical
transport term of the electron density at the sunrise corresponds with the lowest hmF2 peak. The
maximum/minimum drifting of plasma was uplifted to the higher/lower altitude of the F2 plasma during the
daytime and nighttime periods respectively. The maximum peak of hmF2 variation at sunset period
coincides with the PRE peak, thus, the resurgence of irregularities.

From Fig. 6 and 7, the seasonal asymmetry pattern of the transport process is evident. However, little
contribution of the geomagnetic perturbation electrodynamic cannot be completely overruled. This is due to
the simultaneous changes in the ionospheric drivers, which differ from one geomagnetic activity to the other,
depending on the energy input from the magnetosphere (Shim et al., 2011). Therefore, we highlighted in
Table 2 and 3 the seasonal peak variation of the plasma vertical drift during the daytime and sunset periods
and the transport term during the sunrise and pre-sunset periods of magnetic perturbed and quiet conditions.
Quantitatively, at the equator the upward plasma drift was larger in September equinox than it appeared in
March equinox, while in solstices the velocity was averagely higher in December Solstice during the
daytime. This observation agrees with that of Adebesin et al. (2013c) result over Ilorin ionosphere, as well as
Scherliess and Fejer (1999) at Jicamarca. However, the overall plasma drift appears to be higher in
equinoxes than in the solstices which indicates the effect of semi-annual asymmetry.

The overall seasonal maximum upward Vz was observed in equinoxes, mostly around September equinox
and lowest in June Solstice during both magnetic conditions. On the average, Vz variation during the quiet
geomagnetic condition was higher than during disturb condition with maximum generally recorded at sunset
period. The seasonal Vz peak magnitude of the stations in the magnetic low-latitude is directly opposite to
that at the magnetic dip, which describes the latitudinal anomaly. The equinoctial and solsticial maximum
was recorded in the spring and summer periods respectively, during both the magnetic quiet and disturbed
conditions. It is however more significant at sunset in equinoctial seasons than in the solsticial periods during
magnetic quiet condition. A critical view of the seasonal peak variation of the Vz reveals puzzling behaviour
in the seasonal variations at RA and BV, especially during the daytime period compared to JI and AS. These
discernible changes may be linked to the magnetic conjugate mapping effects (Oguti, 1969). Although, the
stations are in the same region (i.e. BV and RA), but they were not magnetically aligned, hence, the outliers
in Vz variation between the two stations. Moreover, in Table 1 the magnetic coordinate and dip angle
information shows that RA magnetic field line is outlier to that of BV.

3.4.2 Vertical transport term and seasonal behaviour

From Table 3, one can see that on the average, the low-latitude and magnetic equator peaks of W are not
always equal, and this is thought to be due to equatorward neutral wind. In the equatorial region, the
transport term motion is greater in June solstice than in the December solstice. The equinoctial variation was
different in both regions; being greater in September equinox than in March equinox at the equator, and vice-
versa in the low-latitude. This observation fitted into the pattern of the scale height variation, indicating that
any alteration in the seasonal and latitudinal anomalies of the Chapman scale height may subsequently affect
the movement term of the F2 plasma. This shows that the spatial and temporal distribution of the transport
term may also be adopted for the diurnal analysis of the equatorial/low-latitude plasma distribution. To some
extent, the result suggests that ionosonde-based derivation of transport term may, indeed, be comparable
with the distribution thermospheric composition or use as a proxy parameter for neutral ratio.

8
4.0 Summary and Conclusions
The equatorial/low-latitude ionospheric F2 variations during geomagnetic quiet and disturbed conditions
were investigated and explained based on the thermospheric composition changes and electromagnetic
convection dynamo action. The electromagnetic convection was related to the interaction between electric
field and magnetic field, which was monitored by the vertical transport process. The ionospheric F2
processes balances between the production and loss rate and transport process of the plasma. Therefore, the
transport term (W), which considered all these factors in the distribution of the plasma in the ionized layer
was extrapolated. It was found that the transport term relates well and in conformity with the electromagnetic
variation and the thermospheric composition in explaining the equatorial/low-latitude F2 plasma behaviour
during magnetic quiet and disturb period. Their seasonal and magnetic latitudinal asymmetry was also
considered. The main results are summarized as follows:

The NmF2 variation follows the local solar variation, with maximum/minimum during the daytime/nighttime
periods, whereas hmF2 variations were highest at sunset period than at daytime. The diurnal variation of the
Chapman scale height is opposite in variation to the hmF2 pattern, having a peak enhancement around 0800-
1000 LT. The role of plasma scale height was seen to be pertinent in the extrapolation of the electron density
profile and the transport process of the F2 layer. The spatial and temporal distribution of F2 plasma was
basically by combined forces of the electrodynamic convection dynamo action and thermospheric circulation
but depended on geomagnetic activity. However, the F2 plasma during magnetic quiet period was dominated
by dynamical mechanisms driving the quiet time ionosphere. Both the NmF2 and hmF2 variation was higher
in the equinoctial months than in the solstitial months, and were higher in the magnetic low-latitude. The
imbalance in the seasonal and magnetic latitudinal behaviour was attributed to the electrodynamics and
thermospheric composition differences. The asymmetry in the seasonal variation was suggested to be the
consequence of the annual, semi-annual and winter anomalies. These relative changes agree well with the
recent study by Sai Gowtan and Tulasi Ram (2017), though, their study was for low solar activity year. The
diurnal variation of the scale height is higher at daytime than at nighttime, and exhibits seasonal variation,
being highest in summer.

The eastward and westward movement of electric field corresponds with the up-current and down-current of
the apparent vertical plasma drift (Vz) during the daytime, sunset and nighttime periods respectively. The
maximum/minimum Vz was lifted to the higher/lower altitude of the F2 plasma during the daytime/nighttime
periods. The outliers in the seasonal and latitudinal variations of Vz observed indicated that Vz excursion
experiences semi-annual and winter asymmetry effects and magnetic latitudinal anomaly (i.e. EIA). The
effect was more pronounced during geomagnetic disturbed condition.

The study also revealed that the extrapolated vertical transport term can be used as an alternative parameter
for measuring low-latitude plasma irregularities and thermospheric composition. This is because the
transport term followed the variation of the scale height, indicating that any changes in the Chapman scale
height subsequently affect the movement term of the F2 plasma. The sunrise increase and pre-sunset (1600-
1700 LT) impulse may signal the extent of the resurgence of EIA and nighttime ionospheric irregularities,
which was observed ~2 hours before the PRE peak magnitude. An upward transport term at sunrise and a
small impulse at pre-sunset were also observed, and the cause was well captured. This provides new insights
to the equatorial/low-latitude mechanisms responsible for F2-plasma distribution and it is well comparable
with the past work on the electrodynamics processes of the ionospheric F2 layer.

Acknowledgment
The authors acknowledge the management team of the Global ionospheric Radio Observatory (GIRO)
network’s with web portal access at http://ulcar.uml.edu/DIDBase/ and International Service of Geomagnetic
Indices (ISGI) network http://swdcwww.kugi.kyoto-u.ac.jp/. We would also like to thank the International
Geomagnetic Reference Field (IGRF) model (www.ngdc.noaa.gov/geomag/magfield. shtml) and World Data
Centre for Geomagnetism, Kyoto (http://wdc.kugi.kyoto-u.ac.jp/index.html) for the Geomagnetic
information. One of the authors, Dr. Adekoya, B. J. appreciate Dr. O. S. Bolaji of the Department of Physics,
University of Lagos, Lagos, Nigeria/Department of Physics, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania,
9
Australia, for his advised and contribution through discussion. The authors also appreciate the reviewers for
the constructive comments on the structure of the paper and for their useful suggestion. This has
tremendously improved the quality of the paper.

References
Adebesin, B. O., A. Pulkkinen, and C. M. Ngwira (2016a), The Interplanetary and Magnetospheric Causes of
Extreme dB/dt at Equatorial Locations, Geophys. Res. Lett., 43, doi:10.1002/2016GL071526.
Adebesin, B. O. (2016b), The 300km threshold value for vertical drifts inferred from F-region heights: Past
observations, Present developments, and future works, NRIAG J. Astrono. Geophys., 5, 30-34,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nrjag.2016.04.001.
Adebesin, B. O., A. B. Rabiu, J. O. Adeniyi, and C. Amory-Mazaudier (2015), Nighttime morphology of vertical
plasma drifts at Ouagadougou during different seasons and phases of sunspot cycles 20-22, J. Geophys.
Res.- Space Physics, 120 (11), 10020-10038, doi:10.1002/2015JA021737.
Adebesin, B.O., J. O. Adeniyi, I. A. Adimula, and B. W. Reinisch (2013a). Equatorial vertical plasma drift
velocities and electron densities inferred from ground-based ionosonde measurements during low solar
activity. J. Atmos. Sol. Terr. Phys., 97, 58-64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jastp.2013.02.010.
Adebesin B. O., J. O. Adeniyi, I. A. Adimula, B. W. Reinisch, and K. Yumoto (2013b), F2 layer characteristics
and electrojet strength over an Equatorial station, Adv. Space Res., 52 (5), 791-800, doi:
10.1016/j.asr.2013.05.025.
Adebesin B.O., J. O. Adeniyi, I. A. Adimula, and B. W. Reinisch (2013c), Low latitude Nighttime
Ionospheric vertical E × B drifts at African Region, Adv. Space Res., 52 (12), 2226-2237, doi:
10.1016/j.asr.2013.09.033.
Adekoya, B. J. and B. O. Adebesin (2014), Hemispheric, seasonal and latitudinal dependence of storm-time
ionosphere during low solar activity period, Adv. Space Res., 54, 2184-2193,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2014.08.013.
Adekoya, B. J. and B. O. Adebesin (2015), Ionospheric and Solar Wind Variation during Magnetic
Storm Onset and Main Phase at Low- and Mid-latitudes, Acta Geophysica, 63 (4), 1150-1180, doi:
10.1515/acgeo-2015-0020.
Adekoya, B. J., V. U. Chukwuma, and B. W. Reinisch (2015), Ionospheric vertical plasma drift and electron
density variation during total solar eclipses at equatorial/low latitude, J. Geophys. Res. Space Physics,
120, 8066–8084, doi:10.1002/2015JA021557.
Adekoya, B. J., and V. U. Chukwuma (2016), Ionospheric F2 layer response to total solar eclipses at low- and
mid-latitude, J. Atmos. Sol. Terr. Phys., 138-139, 136-160, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jastp.2016.01.006.
Anderson, D., A. Anghel, J. Chau, and K. Yumoto (2006), Global, low-latitude, vertical E×B drift velocities
inferred from daytime magnetometer observations, Space Weather, 4, S08003,
doi:10.1029/2005SW000193.
Astafyeva, E., I. Zakharenkova, K. Hozumi, P. Alken, P. Coïsson, M. R. Hairston, and W. R. Coley (2018), Study
of the equatorial and low-latitude electrodynamic and ionospheric disturbances during the 22–23 June
2015 geomagnetic storm using ground-based and spaceborne techniques. J. Geophys. Res. - Space
Physics, 123, 2424-2440, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JA024981.
Belehaki, A., P. Marinov, I. Kutiev, N. Jakowski, and S. Stankov (2006), Comparison of the topside ionosphere
scale height determined by topside sounders model and bottomside digisonde profiles, Adv. Space Res.,
doi:10.1016/j.asr.2005.09.015.
Bhargava, B. N., and R. V. Subrahmanyam (1960), Movements in the F region of the Ionosphere during solar
eclipses, Indian J. Meteorol. Geophys., 11 (4), 363-370,
Bittencourt, J. A. and M. A. Abdu (1981), A theoretical comparison between apparent and real vertical ionization
drift velocities in the equatorial F-region, J. Geophys. Res., 86, 2451–2454,
https://doi.org/10.1029/JA086iA04p02451
Buonsanto, M. J., (1999), Ionospheric storms – A review, Space Sci. Rev., 88, 563-601.
Chen, Y., L. Liu, H. Le, W. Wan, and H. Zhang (2015), Dusk-to-nighttime enhancement of mid-latitude NmF2 in
local summer: inter-hemispheric asymmetry and solar activity dependence, Ann. Geophys., 33, 711-718.
Chukwuma, V. U. and B. J. Adekoya (2016), The effects of March 20, 2015 solar eclipse on the F2
layer in the mid-latitude, Adv. Space Res., 58, 1720-1731.
de Abreu, A. J., Fagundes, P. R., Gende, M., Bolaji, O. S., de Jesus, R., & Brunini, C. (2014), Investigation

10
 of ionospheric response to two moderate geomagnetic storms using GPS–TEC measurements in the South
American and African sectors during the ascending phase of solar cycle 24. Adv. Space Res., 53 (9),
1313-1328. doi:10.1016/j.asr.2014.02.011
de Jesus, R., Y. Sahai, F. L. Guarnieri P. R. Fagundes, A. J. de Abreu, J. A. Bittencourt, T. Nagatsuma, C.-S.
Huang, H. T. Lan, V. G. Pillat (2012), Ionospheric response of equatorial and low latitude F-region
during the intense geomagnetic storm on 24-25 August 2005, Adv. Space Res., 49 (3), 518–529, doi:
10.1016/j.asr.2011.10.020
Ercha, A., A. J. Ridley, D. Zhang, and Z. Xiao (2012), Analyzing the hemispheric asymmetry in the
thermospheric density response to geomagnetic storms, J. Geophys. Res., 117, A08317,
doi:10.1029/2011JA017259.
Fagundes, P. R., F. A. Cardoso, B. G. Fejer, K. Venkatesh, B. A. G. Ribeiro, and V. G. Pillat (2016), Positive and
negative GPS-TEC ionospheric storm effects during the extreme space weather event of March 2015 over
the Brazilian sector, J. Geophys. Res. Space Physics, 121, 5613–5625, doi:10.1002/2015JA022214
Fejer, B. G. (1997), The electrodynamics of the low-latitude ionosphere: recent results and future
Challenges, J. Atmos. Sol. Terr. Phys., 59 (13), 1465-1482.
Fejer, B. G. M. C. Kelley, C. Senior, O. de la Beaujardiere, J. A. Holt, C. A. Tepley, R. Burnside, M. A.
Abdu, J. H. A. Sobral, R. F. Woodman, Y. Kamide, and R. Lepping (1990), Low- and Mid-Latitude
Ionospheric Electric Fields During the January 1984 GISMOS Campaign, J. Geophys. Res. 95 (A3), 2367
- 2377.
Fejer, B.G., E. R. de Paula, R. A. Heelis, and W. B. Hanson (1995), Global equatorial ionosphere vertical plasma
drifts measured by the AE-E Satellite, J. Geophys. Res., 100, 5769-5776.
Fejer, B.G., and L. Scherliess (1997), Empirical models of storm-time equatorial zonal electric fields, J.
Geophys. Res., 102, 24,047-24,056.
Fuller-Rowell, T. J. (1998), The “thermospheric spoon”: A mechanism for the semiannual density variation, J.
Geophys. Res., 103, 3951–3956, doi:10.1029/97JA03335.
Fuller-Rowell, T. J., G. H. Millward, A. D. Richmond and M. V. Codrescu (2002), Storm-time changes in the
upper atmosphere at low latitudes, J. Atmos. Solar-Terr. Phys., 64 (12-14), 1383 – 1391, doi:
S1364-6826(02)00101-3, 2002.
Hanson W. B. and R. J. Moffett (1966), Ionization transport effects in the Equatorial F region, J. Geophys., Res.,
71 (23), 5559-5572.
Horvath, I., and B. C. Lovell (2008), Formation and evolution of the ionospheric plasma density shoulder and its
relationship to the superfountain effects investigated during the 6 November 2001 great storm, J.
Geophys. Res., 113, A12315, doi:10.1029/2008JA013153.
Iheonu, E. E., and O. S. Oyekola (2006), Vertical drift velocity in the daytime F region at Ibadan estimated from
ionosonde data, Indian J. Radio Space Sci. Phys., 35, 9-13.
Laundal K. M., and N. Østgaard, 2009), Asymmetric auroral intensities in the Earth’s Northern and Southern
hemispheres, Nature, 460, doi:10.1038/nature08154.
Liu, L., W. Wan, and B. Ning (2006), A study of the ionogram derived effective scale height around the
ionospheric hmF2, Ann. Geophys., 24, 851-860, www.ann-geophys.net/24/851/2006/.
Liu, L., B. Zhao, W. Wan, B. Ning, M.-L. Zhang, and M. He (2009), Seasonal variations of the ionospheric
electron densities retrieved from Constellation Observing System for Meteorology, Ionosphere, and
Climate mission radio occultation measurements, J. Geophys. Res., 114, A02302,
doi:10.1029/2008JA013819.
Maynard, N. C., T. L. Aggson, F. A. Herrero, M. C. Liebrecht, and J. L. Saba (1995), Average equatorial zonal
and vertical ion drifts determined from San Marco D electric field measurements, J. Geophys. Res., 100,
17465-17479.
Mosert, M., D. Buresova, S. Magdaleno, B. de la Morena, D. Altadill, R. G. Ezquer, and L. Scida (2012), An
analysis of the scale height at the F2-layer peak over three middle-latitude stations in the European sector,
Earth Planets Space, 64, 493-503.
Oguti, T. (1969), Conjugate point problems, Space Sci. Review, 9, 745-804.
Potula, B. S., Y.‐H. Chu, G. Uma, H.‐P. Hsia, and K.‐H. Wu (2011), A global comparative study on the
ionospheric measurements between COSMIC radio occultation technique and IRI model, J. Geophys.
Res., 116, A02310, doi:10.1029/2010JA015814.
Ratcliffe, J. A., A. R. Robbins, J. O. Thomas (1956), Movement in the quiet F-layer over Slough, J. Atmos. Terr.
Phys., 15, 21.
Reinisch, B. W. and X. Huang (2001), Deducing topside profiles and total electron content from bottomside
ionograms, Adv. Space Res., 27 (1), 23-30.

11
Reinisch, B.W., X. Huang, A. Belehaki, J. Shi, M. Zhang, and R. Ilma (2004), Modeling the IRI topside profile
using scale heights from ground-based ionosonde measurements, Adv. Space Res., 34, 2026–2031.
Rishbeth, H. (1988), Basic physics of the ionosphere: A tutorial review, J. Inst. Electron. Radio Eng. 58 (6),
S207-S223.
Rishbeth, H. (1998), How the thermospheric circulation affects the ionospheric F2-layer, J. Atmos. Terr. Phys.,
60, 1385-1402.
Rishbeth, H., and I. C. F. Müller-Wodarg (2006), Why is there more ionosphere in January than in July? The
annual asymmetry in the F2-layer, Ann. Geophysicae 124 3293-3311
Rishbeth, H., I. C. F. Müller-Wodarg, L. Zou, T. J Fuller-Rowell, G. H. Milward, R. J. Moffett, D. W. Idenden,
A. D., and Aylward (2000), Annual and Semiannual variations in the ionosphere F2-layer. II. Physical
discussion, Ann. Geophysicae, 18, 945-956.
Sai Gowtam V., and S. Tulasi Ram (2017), Ionospheric annual anomaly-New insights to the physical
mechanisms, J. Geophys. Res. Space Physics, 122, doi:10.1002/2017JA024170.
Sapundjiev, D and Stankov, S. M. (2016), Statistical Analysis and Modeling of the Local Ionospheric
Critical Frequency: A Mid-Latitude Single-Station Model for Use in Forecasting, Acta Geophysica, 64,
doi: 10.1515/acgeo-2016-0029.
Scherliess, L., and B. G. Fejer, (1997), Storm Time Dependence of Equatorial Disturbance Dynamo Zonal
Electric Fields', J. Geophys. Res. 102, 24,037- 24,046.
Scherliess. L., and B. G. Fejer (1999), Radar and satellite global equatorial F-region vertical drift model. J.
Geophys. Res., 104 (4), 6829-6842.
Shim, J. S., M. Kuznetsova, L. Rastätter, M. Hesse, D. Bilitza, M. Butala, M. Codrescu, B. Emery, B. Foster, T.
Fuller‐Rowell, J. Huba, A. J. Mannucci, X. Pi, A. Ridley, L. Scherliess, R. W. Schunk, P. Stephens, D. C.
Thompson, L. Zhu, D. Anderson, J. L. Chau, J. J. Sojka, and B. Rideout (2011), CEDAR
Electrodynamics Thermosphere Ionosphere (ETI) Challenge for systematic assessment of
ionosphere/thermosphere models: NmF2, hmF2, and vertical drift using ground-based observations,
Space Weather, 9, S12003, doi:10.1029/2011SW000727.
Tsurutani, B. T., O. P. Verkhoglyadova, A. J. Mannucci, A. Saito, T. Araki, K. Yumoto, T. Tsuda, M. A. Abdu, J.
H. A. Sobral, W. D. Gonzalez, H. McCreadie, G. S. Lakhina, and V. M. Vasyliunas (2008), Prompt
penetration electric fields (PPEFs) and their ionospheric effects during the great magnetic storm of 30–31
October 2003, J. Geophys. Res., 113, A05311, doi:10.1029/2007JA012879.
Yonezawa, T. (1966), Theory of formation of the ionosphere, Space Sci. Rev. 5, 3-56.
Zou, L. H Rishbeth, I. C. F. Müller-Wodarg, A. D. Aylward, G. H. Milward, T. J Fuller-Rowell, D. W., Idenden,
and R. J. Moffett (2000), Annual and Semiannual variations in the ionosphere F2-layer. I. Modelling,
Ann. Geophys., 18, 927-944.

12
Fig. 1: The map showing the geographic locations of the stations used

1
 BV
a 3.5 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
NmF2 × 10¹² (e/m³) 3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
500

450
hmF2 (km)

400

350

300

250

200
120

100

80
H (km)

60

40

20

0
0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12
LT (hr)
RA
b 3.0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
NmF2 × 10¹² (e/m³)

2.5

2.0

1.5

1.0

0.5

0.0
550
500
450
hmF2 (km)

400
350
300
250
200
90
80
70
60
H (km)

50
40
30
20
10
0
0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12
LT (hr)

Fig. 2: Monthly average (five most magnetically quiet and disturbed days) NmF2, hmF2 and Scale height (H)
observations for (a) Boa Vista (BV) and (b) Ramey (RA) in the northern hemisphere for the year 2014. The trend
lines (dotted line for quiet and continuous line for disturbed) are the fifth-order polynomial, which is the best fit for
the patterns.

2
 JI
a 2.5 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC

NmF2 × 10¹² (e/m³)

2.0

1.5

1.0

0.5

0.0
600
550
500
hmF2 (km)

450
400
350
300
250
200
120

100

80
H (km)

60

40

20

0
0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12
LT (hr)

AS JUN
b 3.5 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
NmF2 × 10¹² (e/m³)

3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
450

400
hmF2 (km)

350

300

250

200
120

100

80
H (km)

60

40

20

0
0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12
LT (hr)
Fig. 3: Same as Fig. 2 but for (a) Jicamarca (JI) and (b) Ascension Island (AS) in the southern hemisphere.

3
 Daytime (1200 -1400 LT) 400
Sunset (1800 -2100 LT) 550 Mid-night (0000 LT) 400
3.0 2.5 1.8
a b 500 c
350 1.5 350
2.5 2.0 450
300 400 300
1.3

hmF2 (km)

hmF2 (km)
2.0 350
250 1.5 250
1.0
RA

300
1.5 200 200
250 0.8
150 1.0 200 150
1.0 NmF2d NmF2d NmF2d
NmF2q 100 NmF2q 150 0.5 NmF2q 100
0.5 100
0.5 hmF2d hmF2d 0.3 hmF2d
50 50 50
hmF2q hmF2q hmF2q
0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC

3.5 400 3.0 500 3.5 400

a b 450 c
3.0 350 3.0 350
2.5 400
300 300
2.5 350 2.5

hmF2 (km)

hmF2 (km)
2.0
250 300 250
2.0 2.0
BV

200 1.5 250 200

NmF2 × 10¹² (e/m³)
1.5 200 1.5
150 150
1.0 150
1.0 100 1.0 100
NmF2 × 10¹² (e/m³)

100
0.5
hmF2 (km)

0.5 50 0.5 50

hmF2 (km)
50
0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC

hmF2 (km)
2.5 450 1.8 600 1.3 500
a 400 b 550 c 450
1.5

NmF2 × 10¹² (e/m³)

500 400
2.0 350 1.0
450
1.3 350
hmF2 (km)

hmF2 (km)
300 400
1.5 1.0 350 0.8 300
250
300 250
200
JI

1.0 0.8 250 0.5 200

150 200 150
0.5 150
0.5 100 0.3 100
0.3 100
50 50 50
0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC

3.0 400 3.5 400 2.0 350

a b c
350 3.0 350 1.8 300
2.5
300 300 1.5
2.5 250
hmF2 (km)
hmF2 (km)

2.0
250 250 1.3
2.0 200
AS

1.5 200 200 1.0

1.5 150
150 150 0.8
1.0
100 1.0 100 100
0.5
0.5 0.5 50
50 50 0.3
0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC

Fig. 4: Monthly average peak variation of NmF2 and hmF2 during disturbed (NmF2d and hmF2d) and quiet
(NmF2q and hmF2q) periods for daytime (a), sunset (b) and mid-night (c) of each station in the northern and
southern hemispheric stations.

4
Fig. 5: Global thermospheric composition during some selected magnetically disturbed and quiet days of any month
of the season. (a) is for December solstice, (b) June solstice, (c) March equinox and (d) September equinox,
respectively.

5
 250 15 3.0 400
ai bi di DEC SOL
DEC SOL
10
DEC SOL ci JUN SOL
200 JUN SOL 2.5 JUN SOL
350 MAR EQU
MAR EQU 5 MAR EQU
2.0 SEP EQU
150 SEP EQU SEP EQU
RA

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 1.5 300
100 -5
DEC SOL 1.0
-10
JUN SOL 250
50 0.5
-15 MAR EQU
SEP EQU
0 -20 0.0 200
160 20 3.5 500
140 aii 15 bii cii dii
3.0 450
120 10
2.5
5 400
100
0 2.0
BV

80 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 350
-5

NmF2q × 10¹² (e/m³)

1.5
60
-10 300
Wq (cm⁻ ³ s⁻ ¹)

1.0
40
Vzq (ms⁻ ¹)

-15

hmF2 (km)
0.5 250
20 -20
0 -25 0.0 200
140 25 2.0 550
aiii 20 biii ciii diii
120 500
15
1.5
100 10 450

80 5 400
JI

0 1.0
60 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 350
-5
40 -10 300
0.5
-15
20 250
-20
0 -25 0.0 200
180 15 3.5 400
160 aiv biv civ div
10 3.0
140 350
5 2.5
120
100 0 2.0
AS

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 300
80 -5 1.5
60
-10 1.0
40 250

20 -15 0.5

0 -20 0.0 200

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Time, LT
Time, LT Time, LT Time, LT
Fig. 6: Seasonal variation of the vertical F region transport term (W) (a), vertical plasma drift (Vz) (b), maximum
peak response of NmF2 (c) and hmF2 (d) during magnetic quiet period.

6
 500 20 2.5 400
450
ai DEC SOL bi DEC SOL ci di DEC SOL
15 JUN SOL
JUN SOL JUN SOL
400 10 2.0 MAR EQU
MAR EQU MAR EQU 350
350 5 SEP EQU
SEP EQU SEP EQU
300 1.5
RA

0
250 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 300
-5
200 1.0
150 -10 DEC SOL
-15 JUN SOL 250
100 0.5
-20 MAR EQU
50
SEP EQU
0 -25 0.0 200
400 15 3.0 500
aii bii cii dii
350 10
2.5 450
300 5
2.0 400
250 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
BV

200 -5 1.5 350

NmF2d × 10¹² (e/m³)

150 -10
1.0 300
Wd (cm⁻ ³ s⁻ ¹)

100 -15
Vzd (ms⁻ ¹)

hmF2 (km)
0.5 250
50 -20
0 -25 0.0 200
300 30 2.5 550
aiii 25 biii ciii diii
250 500
20 2.0
15 450
200 10
1.5 400
5
JI

150
0 350
1.0
100 -5 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
-10 300
50 -15 0.5
250
-20
0 -25 0.0 200
400 15 3.0 400
aiv biv civ div
350
10 2.5
300 350
5 2.0
250
AS

200 0 1.5 300

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
150
-5 1.0
100 250
-10 0.5
50
0 -15 0.0 200
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Time, LT
Time, LT Time, LT Time, LT
Fig. 7: Same as Fig. 6 but for magnetic disturbed conditions.

7
Table 1: List of ionosonde station with their geographical and geomagnetic coordinates

Geographic Coordinate Geomagnetic Coordinate Difference

STATION between
Lat. Long. Lat. Long.
LT and UT
Boa Vista (BV) 2.80 299.30 12.32 12.11 -4
Ramey (RA) 18.50 292.90 28.09 5.87 -4
Jicamarca (JI) -12.00 283.20 -2.20 -4.17 -5
Ascension Is. (AS) -7.95 345.60 -2.69 57.37 -1

Table 2: Seasonal peak response of the vertical plasma drift (Vz (m/s)) during the daytime and sunset period for
magnetic quiet and disturb periods.

Vz FOR MAGNETIC QUIET CONDITION Vz FOR MAGNETIC DISTURB CONDITION

STATION
M.EQU J.SOL S. EQU D. SOL M.EQU J.SOL S. EQU D. SOL
CODE
D S D S D S D S D S D S D S D S
BV 5.3 16.1 8.3 5.6 5.9 11.7 5.9 4.0 5.8 11.7 8.0 11.4 5.8 6.9 6.1 2.3
RA 6.9 7.0 5.2 13.4 6.6 9.9 4.6 13.2 6.4 8.0 8.5 14.3 5.8 8.9 4.4 3.3
JI 6.1 14.2 7.4 10.8 7.2 21.3 7.9 20.5 6.0 22.9 6.6 8.2 8.5 15.8 8.6 14.5
AS 5.7 3.2 4.7 6.2 11.5 8.9 7.8 7.4 4.3 2.8 3.7 8.9 5.5 7.9 10.6 5.3
*D and S are the Daytime and Sunset peak response, M.EQU, J.SOL. S. EQU, and D. SOL represents March
equinox, June solstice September equinox and December solstice

Table 3: The approximated seasonal peak response of the transport term (W cm-3s-1)) during the daytime and the
sunset period for magnetic quiet and disturb period.

STATION W FOR MAGNETIC QUIET CONDITION W FOR MAGNETIC DISTURB CONDITION

CODE M.EQU J.SOL S. EQU D. SOL M.EQU J.SOL S. EQU D. SOL
SR PS SR PS SR PS SR PS SR PS SR PS SR PS SR PS
BV 112 26 142 36 102 23 90 21 214 87 341 112 201 49 195 47
RA 135 81 213 97 136 51 119 96 312 201 474 202 337 150 278 249
JI 99 44 118 86 93 65 92 42 204 94 226 179 215 94 221 99
AS 127 43 164 102 134 58 150 41 274 99 321 185 324 110 336 88
*SR and PS are the Sunrise and Pre-sunset peak response. M.EQU, J.SOL. S. EQU, and D. SOL represents
March equinox, June solstice September equinox and December solstice