% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Kunz:1411,
author = {Kunz, A. and Schiller, C. and Rohrer, F. and Smit, H. G. J.
and Nedelec, P. and Spelten, N.},
title = {{S}tatistical analysis of water vapour and ozone in the
{UT}/{LS} observed during {SPURT} and {MOZAIC}},
journal = {Atmospheric chemistry and physics},
volume = {8},
issn = {1680-7316},
address = {Katlenburg-Lindau},
publisher = {EGU},
reportid = {PreJuSER-1411},
pages = {6603 - 6615},
year = {2008},
note = {Record converted from VDB: 12.11.2012},
abstract = {A statistical analysis for the comparability of water (H2O)
and ozone (O-3) data sets sampled during the SPURT aircraft
campaigns and the MOZAIC passenger aircraft flights is
presented. The Kolmogoroff-Smirnoff test reveals that the
distribution functions from SPURT and MOZAIC trace gases
differ from each other with a confidence of $95\%.$ A
variance analysis shows a different variability character in
both trace gas data sets. While the SPURT H2O data only
contain atmospheric processes variable on a diurnal or
synoptical timescale, MOZAIC H2O data also reveal processes,
which vary on inter-seasonal and seasonal timescales. The
SPURT H2O data set does not represent the full MOZAIC H2O
variance in the UT/LS for climatological investigations,
whereas the variance of O-3 is much better represented.
SPURT H2O data are better suited in the stratosphere, where
the MOZAIC RH sensor looses its sensitivity.},
keywords = {J (WoSType)},
cin = {ICG-1 / ICG-2},
ddc = {550},
cid = {I:(DE-Juel1)VDB790 / I:(DE-Juel1)VDB791},
pnm = {Atmosphäre und Klima},
pid = {G:(DE-Juel1)FUEK406},
shelfmark = {Meteorology $\&$ Atmospheric Sciences},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
UT = {WOS:000262077000004},
url = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/1411},
}