An updated model of atomic oxygen redline dayglow emission

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect Advances in Space Research 54 (2014) 939–945 www.elsevier.com/locate/asr

An updated model of atomic oxygen redline dayglow emission P. Thirupathaiah, Vir Singh ⇑ Department of Physics, Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee, Roorkee 247 667, Uttarakhand, India Received 17 January 2014; received in revised form 19 May 2014; accepted 20 May 2014 Available online 12 June 2014

Abstract A comprehensive model is developed using the updated rate coefficients and transition probabilities to study the redline dayglow emission of atomic oxygen. The solar EUV fluxes are obtained from the Solar Irradiance Platform (SIP), and incorporated into the model successfully. All possible production and loss mechanisms of O(1D) are considered in the model. The neutral number densities and temperature are adopted from the NRLMSISE-00 model. The ion and electron densities, and electron temperature are adopted from the IRI-07 model. The model results are validated with the help of measurements as provided by the Wind Imaging Interferometer (WINDII) on board Upper Atmosphere Research Satellite (UARS). The present results are found in better agreement with the measurements in comparison with the earlier model. The measured volume emission rate profiles are reproduced quite well by the present model. The model results show that the updated rate coefficients and transition probabilities are quite consistent and may be used in the aeronomical studies. Ó 2014 COSPAR. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Airglow and aurora; Thermosphere – composition and chemistry; Solar radiation

1. Introduction The redline dayglow emission is produced in the radiative transitions from the electronically excited O(1D) to the O(3P) ground state at 630.0 nm and 636.4 nm (Mantas, 1994; Kalogerakis et al., 2009). The redline dayglow emission can be observed at all latitudes (Kalogerakis et al., 2009), and it is a prominent feature at altitudes between 150 and 400 km (Zhang and Shepherd, 2004; Sunil Krishna and Singh, 2011). The study of redline dayglow emission provides a valuable source of information about the chemical and dynamical state of the upper atmosphere. A number of measurements of atomic oxygen redline dayglow have been reported in the literature (e.g., Zipf and Fastie, 1963; Hays et al., 1978; Narayanan et al., 1989; Sridharan et al., 1992; Torr et al., 1993). However, these measurements are limited ⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +91 9837084092; fax: +91 1332 273560.

E-mail addresses: [email protected] (P. Thirupathaiah), virphfph@ iitr.ac.in (V. Singh). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2014.05.022 0273-1177/Ó 2014 COSPAR. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

to a particular location with a fixed local time. Consequently, it is not possible to understand the global distribution of redline dayglow emission from these measurements. This problem has been resolved by Wind Imaging Interferometer (WINDII) which was launched on the NASA’s Upper Atmosphere Research Satellite (UARS) on 12 September 1991 (Shepherd et al., 1993; Shepherd et al., 2012). The WINDII has observed more than 130,000 emission rate profiles of the O(1D) dayglow during 1991–1995 (Zhang and Shepherd, 2004). The WINDII was the first experiment which provided the data on the global distribution of redline dayglow emission. The other approach that the researchers use to study the redline dayglow emission is theoretical modeling by utilizing the observational data. A number of modeling studies have been reported in the literature (e.g., Solomon and Abreu, 1989; Singh et al., 1996; Witasse et al., 1999; Singh and Tyagi, 2002; Culot et al., 2004; Sunil Krishna and Singh, 2011). The modeling of OI 630.0 nm redline dayglow requires the knowledge of solar EUV fluxes,

940

P. Thirupathaiah, V. Singh / Advances in Space Research 54 (2014) 939–945

photoelectron fluxes, neutral, ion and electron number densities and their temperatures, chemical rate coefficients, branching ratios and transition probabilities. The accuracy of the model results depends on these parameters and the reliability with which they are incorporated into the model. Singh et al. (1996) developed a model for redline dayglow emission and tested using the WINDII measurements. This model used the solar fluxes from the full F74113 reference solar spectrum of Hinteregger et al. (1981), and the neutral number densities and temperature were adopted from the MSIS-90 model (Hedin, 1991). The ion and electron densities and electron temperature were adopted from the IRI86 model (Bilitza, 1986). However, this model could not explain the measured emission rate of redline dayglow emission as observed by WINDII. The model of Singh et al. (1996) has been further modified by Sunil Krishna and Singh (2011) by incorporating the solar fluxes from the solar2000 model (Tobiska et al., 2000). In this model, the neutral number densities and temperature have been adopted from NRLMSISE-00 model (Picone et al., 2002). The ion and electron densities and electron temperature have been taken from IRI-07 model (Bilitza and Reinisch, 2008). The model of Sunil Krishna and Singh (2011) is the latest model reported in the literature for redline dayglow emission. However, this model also could not explain the measured emission rate profiles as observed by WINDII. The large discrepancies are found between modeled emission rate profiles by Sunil Krishna and Singh (2011) and those measured by WINDII. The main reason for these discrepancies may be due to the inconsistency in the rate coefficients, transition probabilities and branching ratios. In recent years, these parameters have been remeasured with new techniques. The recent experiments on O(1D)+O(3P) confirmed that the most important loss process for O(1D) over a large altitude range above 200 km is the relaxation of O(1D) by O(3P) (Kalogerakis et al., 2009). The experimental results show that O(1D) relaxation by O(3P) has a rate coefficient of (2.20.6)  1011 cm3 s1 at room temperature (Closser et al., 2005; Kalogerakis et al., 2005; Kalogerakis et al., 2006; Kalogerakis et al., 2009). Kalogerakis et al. (2009) have found the best agreement occurred between calculated and observed 630.0 nm emission lifetimes with the rate coefficient of 2.5  1011 cm3 s1 which is an order of magnitude higher than the rate coefficient of 2.5  1012 cm3 s1 which was used by Sunil Krishna and Singh (2011). Sheehan and St.-Maurice (2004) reviewed the rate of dissociative recombination (DR) of Oþ 2 with electrons, and recommended the rate coefficient of 1.95  107 (Te/300)0.70 cm3 s1 which is close to the DR rate coefficient determined by Mostefaoui et al. (1999), whereas Sunil Krishna and Singh (2011) have used a value of 1.6  107 (Te/300)0.5 cm3 s1 (Walls and Dunn, 1974) for this process. Wiese et al. (1996) have compiled the atomic transition probabilities of Carbon, Nitrogen and Oxygen. The transition probability for transition O(1S -1D) as given by Wiese et al. (1996) is 1.26 s1. On the other hand Sunil Krishna and

Singh (2011) have used a value of 1.18 s1 (Nicolaides et al., 1971) for the transition O(1S -1D). Atkinson et al. (2004) have presented the temperature dependent rate coefficient of 1.8  1011exp (107/Tn) cm3 s1 for relaxation of O(1D) by N2, whereas Sunil Krishna and Singh (2011) have used a temperature independent rate coefficient of 3  1011 cm3 s1 (Hays et al., 1978) for this process. The forbidden transition O(1D -3P) produces red-doublet lines at 630.0 nm and 636.4 nm. Froese Fischer and Tachiev (2004) have updated the transition probability for forbidden transition O(1D -3P) which is 6.478  103 s1 for 630.0 nm redline dayglow emission. On the other hand Sunil Krishna and Singh (2011) have used a value of 7.45  103 s1 (Link and Cogger, 1988) for 630.0 nm dayglow emission. In light of the above discussion one can draw a conclusion that the model of Sunil Krishna and Singh (2011) needs to be updated. In this paper we have developed a comprehensive model for redline dayglow emission by incorporating the updated rate coefficients and transition probabilities. The updated model is discussed in the following sections. 2. Model The radiative transition from O(1D) to O(3P) is responsible for the formation of redline dayglow emission at 630.0 nm and 636.4 nm. The possible production and loss mechanisms of O(1D) are identified by many researchers (e.g., Solomon and Abreu, 1989; Singh et al., 1996; Witasse et al., 1999; Singh and Tyagi, 2002; Sunil Krishna and Singh, 2011; Thirupathaiah et al., 2012) and are summarized below. Production mechanisms of O(1D): k1

3 1 Oþ 2 þ eth ! Oð P Þ þ Oð DÞ 3

ð1Þ

1

Oð P Þ þ eph ! Oð DÞ þ eph 3

ð2Þ

1

O2 þ hm ! Oð P Þ þ Oð DÞ

ð3Þ

A4

Oð1 SÞ ! Oð1 D; 3 P Þ þ hmð557:7 nm; 297:2 nmÞ k5

2

1

N ð DÞ þ O2 ! NO þ Oð DÞ

ð4Þ ð5Þ

1

Loss mechanisms of O( D): 1

k6

3

ð6Þ

1

k7

3

ð7Þ

Oð DÞ þ N 2 ! Oð P Þ þ N 2 Oð DÞ þ O2 ! Oð P Þ þ O2 1

3

k8

3

3

Oð DÞ þ Oð P Þ ! Oð P Þ þ Oð P Þ k9

Oð1 DÞ þ eth ! Oð3 P Þ þ eth

ð8Þ ð9Þ

1

A10

3

ð10Þ

1

A11

3

ð11Þ

Oð DÞ ! Oð P Þ þ hmð630:0 nmÞ Oð DÞ ! Oð P Þ þ hmð636:4 nmÞ

Several studies have confirmed that the reactions (1)–(3) are the main contributing sources of O(1D) in the earth’s thermosphere (Hays et al., 1978; Solomon and Abreu, 1989; Singh et al., 1996; Zhang and Shepherd, 2004;

P. Thirupathaiah, V. Singh / Advances in Space Research 54 (2014) 939–945

Sunil Krishna and Singh, 2011). Further, these three mechanisms mainly contribute to O(1D) in the F2, F1 and E regions, respectively (Zhang and Shepherd, 2004). The O(1D) produced is mainly lost by radiative decay and quenched by N2 and O(3P) in the thermosphere. The quenching of O(1D) by N2 dominates below 200 km, O(3P) quenching dominates from 200 km to 300 km, and quenching of O(1D) by radiation dominates above 300 km (Kalogerakis et al., 2009). The production rate of O(1D) from the dissociative recombination of Oþ 2 with thermal electron (reaction (1)) can be calculated from the following expression. 1

RDR ½Oð DÞ ¼ gD k 1 ½Oþ 2 ½e

ð12Þ

here, gD is the quantum yield for the production of O(1D) atoms, k 1 is the recombination rate coefficient, [Oþ 2 ] is the density of Oþ ions and [e] is the electron density. The quan2 tum yield (gD ) is taken from Bates (1990). The rate coefficient (k1) is taken from Sheehan and St.-Maurice (2004). The electron and ion densities are obtained from the IRI07 model (Bilitza and Reinisch, 2008). The production rate of O(1D) from the photoelectron impact on atomic oxygen (reaction (2)) can be given by the following equation. Z 1 1 RPEI ½Oð DÞ ¼ ½O UðEs ; z; aÞrOð1 DÞ ðEs ÞdEs ð13Þ eth

here, [O] is the atomic oxygen density, U(Es, z, a) is the photoelectron flux as a function of photoelectron energy Es at an altitude z and solar zenith angle a. The photoelectron fluxes are calculated using the model of Richards and Torr (1983) with updates to the electron impact cross sections for O and O2. The rOð1 DÞ (Es) is the electron excitation cross section of atomic oxygen O(1D) state at energy Es. The total electron impact cross sections for O are taken from Laher and Gilmore (1990). The [O] is obtained from the NRLMSISE-00 model (Picone et al., 2002). The production rate of O(1D) associated with photodissociation of molecular oxygen (reaction (3)) can be expressed as follows. X 1 RPD ½Oð DÞ ¼ ½O2  I z ðk; aÞgk rab ðkÞ ð14Þ k

here, [O2] is the molecular oxygen density, Iz ðk; aÞ is the solar Extreme Ultra Violet flux at altitude z with wavelength k and at a solar zenith angle a; gk is the photodissociation efficiency and rab ðkÞ is the photoabsorption cross section at a wave length k. The photodissociation efficiencies are taken from Torr et al. (1990) and the photoabsorption cross section values in the Schumann–Runge continuum (135–175 nm) are taken from Fennelly and Torr (1992). The solar EUV fluxes are obtained from the Solar Irradiance Platform (SIP v2.36) (Tobiska et al., 2008; Bowman et al., 2008). The [O2] is taken from the NRLMSISE-00 model. The production rate of O(1D) from cascade of O(1S) (reaction (4)) is given by the following expression.

1

1

RC ½Oð DÞ ¼ V ½Oð SÞ

941

ð15Þ

here, V[O(1S)] is the volume emission rate of atomic oxygen greenline dayglow emission. The production rate of O(1D) from the reaction of 2 N( D) with O2 (reaction (5)) can be calculated by the following equation. 1

2

RN ð2 DÞ ½Oð DÞ ¼ gN ð2 DÞ k 5 ½N ð DÞ½O2 

ð16Þ

where, gN ð2 DÞ is the quantum yield of O(1D), k5 is the rate coefficient and [N(2D)] is the density of N(2D) atoms at a particular altitude. The N(2D) atoms are mainly produced through the following mechanisms under sunlit conditions (Singh et al., 1996). k 17

2

3

NOþ þ eth ! N ð D;4 SÞ þ Oð P Þ 4

2

N 2 þ eph ! N ð SÞ þ N ð D;2 P ;4 SÞ þ eph 4

2

N 2 þ hm ! N ð SÞ þ N ð D;2 P ;4 SÞ

ð17Þ ð18Þ ð19Þ

2

The production rates of N( D) from above sources are calculated by using the following expressions. RDR ½N ð2 DÞ ¼ ak 17 ½NOþ ½e Z 1 2 RPEI ½N ð DÞ ¼ b½N 2  UðE; z; aÞrN ð2 DÞ ðEÞdE

ð20Þ ð21Þ

eth

2

RPD ½N ð DÞ ¼ c½N 2 

X I z ðk; aÞgk rðkÞ

ð22Þ

k

here, RDR[N(2D)], RPEI[N(2D)] and RPD[N(2D)] are the production rates of N(2D) due to dissociative recombination of NO+, photoelectron impact on N2, and photodissociation of N2, respectively. The quantities a; b and c are branching ratios for N(2D) production and are listed in Table 1. The cross sections rN ð2 DÞ (E) and r(k) are taken from Link (1982) and Fennelly and Torr (1992) respectively. The N(2D) produced is lost by radiative decay and quenched by O2 (reaction (5)), O and thermal electrons. 2

A23

4

N ð DÞ ! N ð SÞ þ hmð520:0 nmÞ k 24

N ð2 DÞ þ O ! N ð4 SÞ þ O 2

k 25

4

N ð DÞ þ eth ! N ð SÞ þ eth

ð23Þ ð24Þ ð25Þ

2

The density of N( D) atoms is obtained under photochemical equilibrium conditions and is given by the following equation. 2

½N ð DÞ ¼

RDR ½N ð2 DÞ þ RPEI ½N ð2 DÞ þ RPD ½N ð2 DÞ A23 þ k 5 ½O2  þ k 24 ½O þ k 25 ½e

ð26Þ

The problem of quantum yield (gN ð2 DÞ ) has not been resolved so far. Several researchers (e.g., Kennealy et al., 1978; Rusch et al., 1978; Torr et al., 1981; Fraser et al., 1988; Link and Cogger, 1988; Singh et al., 1996) have used different values of quantum yield (gN ð2 DÞ ) which varies from 0.1 to 0.87. In the present calculation, we have used a value

942

P. Thirupathaiah, V. Singh / Advances in Space Research 54 (2014) 939–945

Table 1 Reaction rate coefficients, branching ratios and transition probabilities. Rate coefficient (cm3 s1)

Reaction Oþ 2

k1

3

7

1

þ eth ! Oð P Þ þ Oð DÞ

References 0:70

k 1 ¼ 1:95  10 ðT e =300Þ

A4ð5577Þ

Oð1 SÞ A ! Oð1 DÞ þ hmð557:7 nmÞ 4ð2972Þ Oð1 SÞ ! Oð3 P Þ þ hmð297: nmÞ k 17 þ NO þ eth ! N ð2 D; 4 SÞ þ Oð3 P Þ N 2 þ eth ! N ð4 SÞ þ N ð2 D; 2 P ; 4 SÞ N 2 þ hm ! N ð4 SÞ þ N ð2 D; 2 P ; 4 SÞ k5 N ð2 DÞ þ O2 ! NO þ Oð1 DÞ k 24 N ð2 DÞ þ O ! N ð4 SÞ þ O k 25 N ð2 DÞ þ eth ! N ð4 SÞ þ eth A 23 N ð2 DÞ ! N ð4 SÞ þ hmð520:0 nmÞ k6 Oð1 DÞ þ N 2 ! Oð3 P Þ þ N 2 k 7 Oð1 DÞ þ O2 ! Oð3 P Þ þ O2 k8 1 3 Oð DÞ þ Oð P Þ ! Oð3 P Þ þ Oð3 P Þ k9 1 Oð DÞ þ eth ! Oð3 P Þ þ eth A10 Oð1 DÞ ! Oð3 P Þ þ hmð630:0 nmÞ A11 1 Oð DÞ ! Oð3 P Þ þ hmð636:4 nmÞ

A4ð5577Þ ¼ 1:26 s1 A4ð2972Þ ¼ 0:134 s1 k 17 ¼ 3:5  107 ð300=T e Þ0:69 a = 0.80 b = 0.76 c = 0.50 k 5 ¼ 9:7  1012 expð185=T n Þ k 24 ¼ 5:3  1013 k 25 ¼ 3:8  1012 T e0:81 A23 ¼ 5:765  106 s1 k 6 ¼ 1:8  1011 expð107=T n Þ k 7 ¼ 3:2  1011 expð67=T n Þ k 8 ¼ 2:5  1011 k 9 ¼ 8:3  1010 ðT e =1000Þ0:86 A10 ¼ 6:478  103 s1 A11 ¼ 2:097  103 s1

of 0.43 which is the averaged value of above quantum yields. The total production rate of O(1D) can be calculated from the following expression. RTotal ½Oð1 DÞ ¼ RDR þ RPEI þ RPD þ RC þ RN ð2 DÞ

Mostefaoui et al. (1999) Sheehan and St.-Maurice (2004) Wiese et al. (1996) Slanger et al. (2006) Sheehan and St.-Maurice (2004) Rusch et al. (1978) and Shepherd et al. (1996) Rawlins et al. (1989) and Herron (1999) Shepherd et al. (1996) and Ge´rard et al. (1990) Shihira et al. (1994) and Herron (1999) Shepherd et al. (1996) Shepherd et al. (1996) Wiese et al. (1996) Atkinson et al. (2004) Atkinson et al. (2004) Kalogerakis et al. (2009) Pavlov et al. (1999) Froese Fischer and Tachiev (2004) Froese Fischer and Tachiev (2004)

(a)

ð27Þ

The O(1D) produced is quenched in the atmosphere by the loss processes (reactions (6)–(11)). The quenching factor (Q) of O(1D) can be calculated as follows. Q¼

A10 A10 þ A11 þ k 6 ½N 2  þ k 7 ½O2  þ k 8 ½O þ k 9 ½e

ð28Þ

The values of reaction rate coefficients (ki) and transition probabilities (Ai) incorporated in the present model are listed in Table 1. The neutral number densities and neutral temperature are adopted from the NRLMSISE-00 model. The electron densities and electron temperature are adopted from the IRI-07 model. Now the total volume emission rate of O(1D) can be written as follows. 1

1

V Total ½Oð DÞ ¼ Q:RTotal ½Oð DÞ

(b)

ð29Þ

3. Results and discussion The volume emission rate profiles of redline dayglow emission are computed for some specific cases for which the WINDII data is available. The present model results are compared with the WINDII observations in Fig. 1. The earlier model results of Sunil Krishna and Singh (2011) are also shown in Fig. 1. It is noticeable from Fig. 1 that the present results are in better agreement with the WINDII data in comparison with the results of Sunil Krishna and Singh (2011) in the region of peak emission rate between 180 and 250 km. Further it is noticeable from Fig. 1 that the model of Sunil Krishna and Singh (2011)

Fig. 1. A comparison of volume emission rate of redline dayglow emission amongst the present results, the model results of Sunil Krishna and Singh (2011) and WINDII measurements for (a) 20.85°S, 206°E, LT = 15.35 h and sza = 50° on 1 February 1993, and (b) 2.8°S, 216°E and sza = 65° on 1 February 1993.

overestimates quite significantly the WINDII measurements below 180 km. One can notice from Fig. 1 that the modeled emission rates of Sunil Krishna and Singh (2011) are 60 to 65% higher than the WINDII measurements in the vicinity of 160 km. On the other hand the present model also overestimates the WINDII measurements below 180 km, and the present emission rates are about

P. Thirupathaiah, V. Singh / Advances in Space Research 54 (2014) 939–945

20 to 25% higher than the WINDII measurements in the vicinity of 160 km. It is also noticeable from Fig. 1 that the model of Sunil Krishna and Singh (2011) overestimates the WINDII measurements about 15 to 25% in the vicinity of 270 km. However the present results are within 5 to 7% agreement with the WINDII measurements in the vicinity of 270 km. It is worth mentioning here that the quenching of O(1D) by O(3P) dominates over the altitude range above 200 km and the relative contribution of this mechanism to the removal of O(1D) between 120 and 200 km is about 20 to 50% (Kalogerakis et al., 2009). The increased magnitude of the reaction rate coefficient (k8) (Kalogerakis et al., 2009) modifies the results of Sunil Krishna and Singh (2011) quite significantly at all altitudes. Therefore, the present model with k 8 ¼ 2:5  1011 cm3 s1 reproduces the WINDII measurements very well in comparison with the earlier model by Sunil Krishna and Singh (2011). Further, the other updated parameters also play an important role in the modification of the results of Sunil Krishna and Singh (2011). For example, the increased value of rate coefficient (k1) in dissociative recombination of Oþ 2 also gives

(a)

(b)

Fig. 2. Comparison of volume emission rate of redline dayglow emission obtained from the present model with the WINDII measurements for (a) 35.18°S, 197°E and LT = 15.21 h on 1 February 1993, and (b) 1.29°N, 139°E and LT = 11.50 h on 11 February 1993.

943

higher values of emission rates in comparison with the model of Sunil Krishna and Singh (2011) above 180 km. The model is further validated with the WINDII measurements for several emission rate profiles. We have chosen five more cases for this purpose. A comparison is made between the present results and the WINDII measurements in Figs. 2–4. It is evident from these figures that the present model reproduces the measured profiles very well. Figs. 2–4 show that the present results are in very good agreement (within 5%) with the WINDII data in the peak emission rate region. It is noticeable from these figures that the model emission rate profiles are in good agreement with the WINDII data. Further we have chosen the case of 9 April 1993 (52.9°S, 207°E, LT = 15.76 h) to compute the contributions of individual sources to the total production of O(1D) atoms. The individual contributions of each production source of O(1D) to the total volume emission rate are also shown in Fig. 4. It is noticeable from Fig. 4 that photodissociation of O2 is dominant source below 180 km, and dissociative recombination of Oþ 2 and photoelectron impact excitation of O are dominant sources above 180 km. It is evident from this figure that the

(a)

(b)

Fig. 3. Comparison of volume emission rate of redline dayglow emission obtained from the present model with the WINDII measurements for (a) 1.29°N, 139°E and LT = 7.56 h on 3 April 1993, and (b) 26.28°S, 100.39°E and LT = 7.56 h on 2 April 1993.

944

P. Thirupathaiah, V. Singh / Advances in Space Research 54 (2014) 939–945

References

Fig. 4. Comparison of volume emission rate of redline dayglow emission obtained from the present model with the WINDII measurements for 52.9°S, 207°E and LT = 15.76 h on 9 April 1993. Individual contributions of each production source to total volume emission rate are also shown.

reaction of N(2D) with O2 contributes about 10% to total volume emission rate in the region of peak emission rate. This indicates that the reaction of N(2D) with O2 is not a significant source of O(1D). We would like to mention here that even if we choose a value of 0.87 which is the upper limit of quantum yield (gN ð2 DÞ ), then the maximum contribution of this mechanism would be about 20%. The good agreement between the present model results and the WINDII observations shows that the updated parameters are quite consistent. Thus, the present model may be used to study the global distribution of redline dayglow emission. 4. Conclusions A comprehensive model is developed with the updated input parameters to study the redline dayglow emission of atomic oxygen. The present model is validated with the help of observations as provided by WINDII. It has been found that the present model is in good agreement (within 5%) with the measurements in the region of peak emission rate. However the present model still overestimates the WINDII measurements about 20 to 25% in the vicinity of 160 km. The volume emission rate profiles obtained from the present model are in better agreement with the WINDII data in comparison with the earlier model of Sunil Krishna and Singh (2011). The agreement between the present modeled results and the measurements is as good as possible in the light of all relevant possible errors in the measurements, the model neutral atmosphere, the model ionosphere, reaction rate coefficients and transition probabilities. The present model may be used to study the global distribution of redline dayglow emission. Acknowledgments One of the authors, P. Thirupathaiah, is thankful to Ministry of Human Resource Development, New Delhi for financial support.

Atkinson, R., Baulch, D.L., Cox, R.A., Crowley, J.N., Hampson, R.F., Hynes, R.G., Jenkin, M.E., Rossi, M.J., Troe, J., 2004. Evaluated kinetic and photochemical data for atmospheric chemistry: volume I – gas phase reactions of Ox, HOx, NOx and SOx species. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 4, 1461–1738. Bates, D.R., 1990. Oxygen greenline and redline emission and Oþ 2 dissociative recombination. Planet. Space Sci. 38, 889–902. Bilitza, D., 1986. IRI: recent developments. Radio Sci. 21, 343. Bilitza, D., Reinisch, B.W., 2008. International reference ionosphere 2007: improvements and new parameters. Adv. Space Res. 42, 599–609. Bowman, Bruce R., Kent Tobiska, W., Frank A. Marcos., Cheryl Y. Huang., Chin S. Lin., William J. Burke., 2008. A new empirical thermospheric density model JB2008 using new solar and geomagnetic indices. In: AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conference, Honolulu, Hawaii, pp. 18–21. Closser, K.D., Pejakovic, D.A., Kalogerakis, K.S., 2005. O(1D) relaxation by O(3P). EOS Trans. AGU 86 (52), Fall Meet. Suppl., Abstract SA11A-0215. Culot, F., Lathuillere, C., Lilensten, J., Witasse, O., 2004. The OI 630.0 and 557.7 nm dayglow measured by WINDII and modeled by TRANSCAR. Ann. Geophys. 22, 1947–1960. Fennelly, J.A., Torr, D.G., 1992. Photoionization and photoabsorption cross section of O, N2 and N for aeronomic calculations. At. Data Nucl. Data Tables 51, 321–363. Fraser, M.E., Rawlins, W.T., Miller, S.M., 1988. Auroral chemiexcitation and infrared branching ratios for the fundamental and first overtone vibrational transitions of NO(X2 p; p  12). Eos Trans. AGU 69, 419. Froese Fischer, C., Tachiev, G., 2004. Breit-Pauli energy levels, lifetimes, and transition probabilities for the beryllium-like to neon-like sequences. At. Data Nucl. Data Tables 87, 1–184. Ge´rard, J.C., Fesen, C.G., Rusch, D.W., 1990. Solar cycle variation of thermospheric nitric oxide at solstice. J. Geophys. Res. 95, 12235– 12242. Hays, P.B., Rusch, D.W., Roble, R.G., Walker, J.C.G., 1978. The OI ˚ airglow. Rev. Geophys. Space Phys. 16, 225–232. (6300 A) Hedin, A.E., 1991. Extension of the MSIS thermosphere model into the middle and lower atmosphere. J. Geophys. Res. 96, 1159. Herron, J.T., 1999. Evaluated P chemical kinetics data for reactions of N(2D), N(2P) and N2(A3 þ u ) in the gas phase. J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data 28 (5), 1453–1483. Hinteregger, H.E., Fukui, K., Gilson, B., 1981. Observational, reference and model data on solar EUV, from measurements on AE-E. Geophys. Res. Lett. 8, 1147–1150. Kalogerakis, K.S., Pejakovic, D.A., Copeland, R.A., Slanger, T.G., 2005. The rate coefficient of O(1D) relaxation by O(3P). In: CEDAR-GEM Workshop, Santa Fe, New Mexico, 26 June-1. Kalogerakis, K.S., Pejakovic, D.A., Closser, K.D., 2006. O(1D) relaxation by O(3P). Geophys. Res. Abstracts 8, 9689. Kalogerakis, K.S., Slanger, T.G., Kendall, E.A., Pedersen, T.R., Kosch, M.J., Gustavsson, B., Rietveld, M.T., 2009. Remote oxygen sensing by ionosphere excitation (ROSIE). Ann. Geophys. 27, 2183–2189. Kennealy, J.P., Del Greco, F.P., Caledonia, G.E., Green, B.D., 1978. Nitric oxide chemiexcitation occurring in the reaction between metastable nitrogen and oxygen molecules. J. Chem. Phys. 69, 1574– 1584. Laher, R.R., Gilmore, F.R., 1990. Updated excitation and ionization cross sections for electron impact on atomic oxygen. J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data 19, 277–305. ˚ nightglow. Link, R., Cogger, L.L., 1988. A reexamination of the OI 6300 A J. Geophys. Res. 93, 9883–9892. Link, R., 1982. Dayside magnetospheric cleft auroral processes (Ph.D. Thesis). York University, Canada. ˚ airglow intensity enhancements Mantas, G.P., 1994. Large 6300 A observed in ionosphere heating experiments are excited by thermal electrons. J. Geophys. Res. 99, 8993–9002.

P. Thirupathaiah, V. Singh / Advances in Space Research 54 (2014) 939–945 Mostefaoui, T., Laube, S., Gautier, G., Rebrion-Rowe, C., Rowe, B.R., Mitchell, J.B.A., 1999. The dissociative recombination of NO+: the influence of the vibrational excitation state. J. Phys. B At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 32, 5247–5256. Narayanan, R., Desai, J.N., Modi, N.K., Raghavarao, R., Sridharan, R., 1989. Dayglow photometry: a new approach. Appl. Opt. 28, 2138– 2142. Nicolaides, C., Sinanoglu, O., Westhouse, P., 1971. Theory of atomic structure including electron correlation. IV. Method for forbidden transition probabilities with results for [OI], [OII], [OII], [NI], [NII] and [CI]. Phys. Rev. A4, 1400–1410. Pavlov, A.V., Pavlova, N.M., Drozdov, A.B., 1999. Production rate of O(1D), O(1S) and N(2D) in the subauroral red arc region. Geomag. Aeron. 39, 201–205. Picone, J.W., Hedin, A.E., Drob, D.P., Aikin, A.C., 2002. NRLMSISE-00 empirical model of the atmosphere: statistical comparisons and scientific issues. J. Geophys. Res. 107, 1468–1484. Rawlins, W.T., Fraser, M.E., Miller, S.M., 1989. Rovibrational excitation of nitric oxide in the reaction of O2 with metastable atomic nitrogen. J. Phys. Chem. 93, 1097–1107. Richards, P.G., Torr, D.G., 1983. A simple theoretical model for calculating and parameterizing the ionospheric photoelectron flux. J. Geophy. Res. 88, 2155–2162. Rusch, D.W., Gerard, J.C., Sharp, W.E., 1978. The reaction of N(2D) with O2 as a source of O(1D) atoms in aurorae. Geophys. Res. Lett. 5, 1043–1046. Sheehan, C.H., St.-Maurice, J.P., 2004. Dissociative recombination of N+ 2, + O+ 2 , and NO : rate coeffecients for ground state and vibrationallly excited ions. J. Geophys. Res. 109, A03302. Shepherd, G.G., Thuillier, G., Gault, W., Solheim, B., Hersom, J., Alunni, J., Brun, J., Brune, S., Charlot, P., Cogger, L., Desaulniers, D., Evans, W., Gattinger, R., Girod, F., Harvie, D., Hum, R., Kendall, D., Llewellyn, E., Lowe, R., Ohrt, J., Pasternak, F., Peillet, O., Powell, I., Rochon, Y., Ward, W., Hiens, R., Wimperis, J., 1993. WINDII, the wind imaging interferometer on the upper atmosphere research satellite. J. Geophys. Res. 98, 10725–10750. Shepherd, M.G., Gattinger, R.L., Jones, A.V., 1996. Observation and analysis of NI 520.0 nm auroral emissions. J. Atm. Terr. Phys. 58, 579–599. Shepherd, G.G., Thuillier, G., Cho, Y.M., Duboin, M.L., Evans, W.F.J., Gault, W.A., Hersom, C., Kendall, D.J.W., LathuillFre, C., Lowe, R.P., McDade, I.C., Rochon, Y.J., Shepherd, M.G., Solheim, B.H., Wang, D.Y., Ward, W.E., 2012. The WIND imaging interferometer (WINDII) on the upper atmosphere research satellite: a 20 year perspective. Rev. Geophys. 50, RG2007. Shihira, Y., Suzuki, T., Unayama, S., Umemoto, H., Tsunashima, S., 1994. Reaction of N(2D) and N(22P) with O2. J. Chem. Soc. Faraday Trans. 90, 549–552. ˚, Singh, V., Tyagi, S., 2002. Testing of solar EUV flux models using 5577 A ˚ and 7320 A ˚ dayglow emissions. Adv. Space Res. 30, 6300 A 2557–2562.

945

Singh, V., McDade, I.C., Shepherd, G.G., Solheim, B.H., Ward, W.E., 1996. The O(1D) dayglow emission as observed by the wind imaging interferometer on UARS. Adv. Space Res. 17, 11–14. Slanger, T.G., Cosby, P.C., Sharpee, B.D., Minschwaner, K.R., Siskind, D.E., 2006. O(1S!1D, 3P) branching ratio as measured in the terrestrial nightglow. J. Geophys. Res. 111, A12318. Solomon, S.C., Abreu, V.J., 1989. The 630 nm dayglow. J. Geophy. Res. 94, 6817–6824. Sridharan, R., Haider, S.A., Gurubaran, S., Sekar, R., Narayanan, R., 1992. OI 630.0 nm dayglow in the region of equatorial ionization anomaly; temporal variability and its causative mechanism. J. Geophys. Res. 97, 13715–13721. Sunil Krishna, M.V., Singh, V., 2011. Solar influence on the redline dayglow emission under equinox conditions. J. Atmos. Sol. Terr. Phys. 73, 499–506. Thirupathaiah, P., Sunil Krishna, M.V., Singh, V., 2012. Effect of solar activity on the latitudinal variation of peak emission rate of 557.7 nm dayglow emission under equinox conditions. J. Atmos. Sol. Terr. Phys. 77, 209–218. Tobiska, W.K., Woods, T., Eparvier, F., Viereck, R., Floyd, L., Bouwer, D., Rottman, G., White, O.R., 2000. The SOLAR2000 empirical solar irradiance model and forecast tool. J. Atmos. Sol. Terr. Phys. 62, 1233–1250. Tobiska, W.K., Bouwerb, S.D., Bowman, B.R., 2008. The development of new solar indices for use in thermospheric density modeling. J. Atmos. Sol. Terr. Phys. 70, 803–819. Torr, D.G., Richards, P.G., Torr, M.R., Abreu, V.J., 1981. Further quantification of the sources and sinks of thermospheric O(1D) atoms. Planet. Space Sci. 29, 595–600. Torr, M.R., Torr, D.G., Richards, P.G., Yung, S.P., 1990. Mid and low ˚ and N(2P) latitude model of thermospheric emissions 1. O+(2P) 7320 A ˚ 3377 A. J. Geophy. Res. 95, 21147–21168. Torr, D.G., Torr, M.R., Richards, P.G., 1993. Thermospheric airglow emissions: a comparison of measurements from Atlas 1 and theory. Geophys. Res. Lett. 20, 519–522. Walls, F.L., Dunn, G.H., 1974. Measurement of total cross sections for electron recombination with NO+ and O+ 2 using ion storage techniques. J. Geophys. Res. 79, 1911–1915. Wiese, W.L., Fuhr, J.R., Deters, T.M., 1996. Atomic transition probabilities of carbon, nitrogen, and oxygen: a critical data compilation. J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data Monograph 7. Witasse, O., Lilensten, J., LathuillFre, C., Blelly, P.L., 1999. Modeling the OI 630.0 and 557.7 nm thermospheric dayglow during EISCATWINDII coordinated measurements. J. Geophys. Res. 104, 24639– 24655. Zhang, S.P., Shepherd, G.G., 2004. Solar influence on the O(1D) dayglow emission rate: global-scale measurements by WINDII on UARS. Geophys. Res. Lett. 31, L07804. Zipf, E.C., Fastie, W.G., 1963. An observation of day airglow emission at ˚ . J. Geophys. Res. 68, 6208–6209. 6300 A