• Delanoë, J., and Hogan R. J. , 2008: A variational scheme for retrieving ice cloud properties from combined radar, lidar, and infrared radiometer. J. Geophys. Res., 113, D07204, doi:10.1029/2007JD009000.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Protat, A., Delanoë J. , O’Connor E. , and L’Ecuyer T. , 2010: The evaluation of CloudSat and CALIPSO ice microphysical products using ground-based cloud radar and lidar observations. J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol., 27, 793810.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 67 30 18
PDF Downloads 57 41 0

CORRIGENDUM

A. ProtatCentre for Australian and Weather and Climate Research, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, and Laboratoire Atmosphère, Milieux, et Observations Spatiales, Vélizy, France

Search for other papers by A. Protat in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
J. DelanoëUniversity of Reading, Reading, United Kingdom

Search for other papers by J. Delanoë in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
E. J. O’ConnorUniversity of Reading, Reading, United Kingdom

Search for other papers by E. J. O’Connor in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
, and
T. S. L’EcuyerColorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado

Search for other papers by T. S. L’Ecuyer in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
Full access

Corresponding author address: Alain Protat, Centre for Australian Weather and Climate Research, 700 Collins St., Docklands, Melbourne, VIC 3008, Australia. E-mail: a.protat@bom.gov.au

Corresponding author address: Alain Protat, Centre for Australian Weather and Climate Research, 700 Collins St., Docklands, Melbourne, VIC 3008, Australia. E-mail: a.protat@bom.gov.au

An error in the labeling of Fig. 1 has been discovered in Protat et al. (2010). The labeling between the radar-only and radar–lidar parts of the ice cloud microphysical retrieval was inverted. The new figure and caption should be as in Fig. 1 below. The discussion of Fig. 1 also needs to be slightly revised, since it relies on the previous wrong labeling of Fig. 1 in Protat et al. (2010). The new Fig. 1 shows that the radar-only part of the Delanoë and Hogan (2008) retrieval actually dominates the statistics below 12-km height. However, we still believe that although the radar–lidar part of the retrieval is not the dominant part in the statistics below 12 km, the ground-based retrievals can be taken as the reference for the evaluation of the CloudSat ice microphysical products. The main reason for that is that the Delanoë and Hogan (2008) radar-only retrieval is an adaptive procedure, which makes use of the radar–lidar part of the retrieval to refine the radar-only retrieval on a cloud-to-cloud basis. It is also clearly obtained in Protat et al. (2010, see their Fig. 5) that the radar–lidar and radar-only parts of the Delanoë and Hogan (2008) retrieval methods do produce very similar statistical microphysical properties, in much better agreement than between the ground-based and CloudSat ice microphysics retrievals.

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.

Vertical profile of the percentage of radar–lidar (dashed) and radar-only (dotted) parts of the Delanoë and Hogan (2008) retrieval. This has been obtained from the 3 yr of Darwin radar–lidar observations used in Protat et al. (2010).

Citation: Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology 28, 5; 10.1175/2010JTECHA1504.1

REFERENCES

  • Delanoë, J., and Hogan R. J. , 2008: A variational scheme for retrieving ice cloud properties from combined radar, lidar, and infrared radiometer. J. Geophys. Res., 113, D07204, doi:10.1029/2007JD009000.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Protat, A., Delanoë J. , O’Connor E. , and L’Ecuyer T. , 2010: The evaluation of CloudSat and CALIPSO ice microphysical products using ground-based cloud radar and lidar observations. J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol., 27, 793810.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
Save