Effect of relative humidity and sea level pressure on electrical

conductivity of air over Indian Ocean

S. D. Pawar,
1
P. Murugavel,
1
and D. M. Lal
1
Received 17 December 2007; revised 10 October 2008; accepted 30 October 2008; published 24 January 2009.
[1] The electrical conductivity measured over the Indian Ocean (15N, 77E to
20S, 58E) during the Indian Ocean Experiment (INDOEX-1999) from 20 January to
12 March 1999 has been analyzed. The conductivity values over two oceanic regions, one
with very low aerosol concentration and another with very high aerosol concentration,
are studied in relation with meteorological parameters such as relative humidity and sea
level pressure. The average conductivity is as low as 0.295 10
14
Sm
1
in the region
of high aerosol concentration and it is 0.783 10
14
Sm
1
in the region of very low
aerosol concentration. In both the regions, conductivity shows an inverse relation
with relative humidity and this effect is more in the presence of high aerosol concentration.
The hydrate growth of aerosol particles in high-humidity condition may be responsible for
the inverse relation between conductivity and relative humidity. Size distributions of
aerosol particles measured in the same cruise during high-humid conditions are also
analyzed to show that sizes, rather than numbers, of aerosol particles increase with an
increase in humidity. The relationship between conductivity and sea level pressure in these
two regions is also studied and it shows good correlation in the region where the
background aerosol concentration is low and no correlation in the region where aerosol
concentration is high. The inverse relation between sea level pressure and electrical
conductivity is attributed to the possible transportation of ultrafine particles from free
troposphere, with subsiding motions associated with high pressure. The positive
correlation between ultrafine particles and sea level pressure supports this idea.
Citation: Pawar, S. D., P. Murugavel, and D. M. Lal (2009), Effect of relative humidity and sea level pressure on electrical
conductivity of air over Indian Ocean, J. Geophys. Res., 114, D02205, doi:10.1029/2007JD009716.
1. Introduction
[2] The main source of ionization over remote oceans is
cosmic rays and the intensity of cosmic rays is almost
constant in the lower latitudes. Therefore the variations in
conductivity of air over ocean are always linked with the
variations in background aerosol concentration because the
aerosols act as sinks for the small ions and reduce
the electrical conductivity. The electrical conductivity has
been used as an indicator for secular changes in background
air pollution over ocean [Misaki and Takeuti, 1970; Misaki
et al., 1972; Morita et al., 1973; Morita and Ishikawa, 1977;
Kamra and Deshpande, 1995; Kamra et al., 2001]. The
theoretical calculation of Hogan et al. [1973], however,
show that the conductivity variations over ocean can be
related either to the change in concentration or to the change
in size of the aerosol particles. The conductivity shows good
correlation with the total volume or surface area occupied
by aerosol particles rather than the total number concentration
[Cobb, 1973; Cobb and Pueschel, 1985]. Adlerman and
Williams [1996] studied the relationship between aerosol
particle concentration and electrical conductivity at different
places over land and found that such relation is highly
nonlinear over land surface. The observations of Kamra et
al. [1997] over ocean show that the relation between aerosol
and conductivity is also influenced by certain meteorolo-
gical parameters like relative humidity. Pawar et al. [2005]
measured the ion concentration of three categories, i.e.,
small, intermediate and large, and electrical conductivity
over Arabian Sea during SouthEast monsoon season and
found that the highly charged large ions generated by
bubble bursting can enhance the conductivity during high
wind conditions.
[3] Surface measurements of vertical electric field (E)
made over oceans have been used to study the global
electric circuit (GEC) since very long time [Parkinson
and Torreson, 1931; Paramonov, 1950]. The variations in
air conductivity near the ocean surface, due to various
meteorological conditions, could directly affect such mea-
surements of E and lead to errors in the estimation of GEC
parameters. Information on electrical conductivity and its
relation with the meteorological parameters in the remote
oceanic environment is useful in various studies such as
GEC, secular change in background air pollution and so on.
To study the variations of conductivity over ocean and their
relation with prevailing meteorological conditions, we have
analyzed the measurements of conductivity made onboard
JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH, VOL. 114, D02205, doi:10.1029/2007JD009716, 2009
1
I & OT Division, Indian Institute of Tropical Meteorology, Pune,
Maharashtra, India.
Copyright 2009 by the American Geophysical Union.
0148-0227/09/2007JD009716
D02205 1 of 8
Oceanographic Research Vessel (ORV) Sagarkanya over the
Indian Ocean during 20 January to 12 March 1999 and the
results are presented here.
2. Instrumentation
[4] The measurements of both polarities of conductivity
are made with a Gerdien apparatus having two identical
condensers connected to a common suction fan through a
U-tube. The details of the apparatus are given by Dhanorkar
and Kamra [1992]. The critical mobility of the apparatus is
adjusted at 3.6 10
4
m
2
V
1
s
1
. The signals from both
the condensers after amplification with IC AD549 are fed to
a data logger through a coaxial cable. The apparatus was
installed on Balloon Deck of the ship, which is at a height of
about 9 m from sea level, vertically with its air inlets facing
downward so as to avoid the effect of the winds and rain
drops falling directly into the condensers. The sensor rod is
cleaned periodically with alcohol to avoid any contamina-
tion. The data was recorded at 12 samples per minute and
then averaged for 3 hours, 6 hours, 12 hours and 24 hours.
We have used total conductivity in this study which is
calculated by adding both the polar conductivities (l
total
=
l
+
+ l

). Number and size distribution of aerosol particles

of 31000-nm diameter were measured in ten different size
ranges with an Electrical Aerosol Analyzer (EAA) system
of TSI, USA. More details of the instruments are given in
Kamra et al. [2003]. Observations are made using this
instrument aboard ORV Sagarkanya from Goa (India)
to Port Louise (Mauritius), i.e., from 20 January 1999 to
11 February 1999 and aboard ORV Ron Brown from Port
Louise to Male, i.e., from 22 February 1999 to 1 march
1999. Observations of meteorological parameters such as
relative humidity and sea level pressure were made onboard
ORV Sagarkanya after every 3 hour by India Meteorolo-
gical Department (IMD).
3. Observations
[5] Figure 1 shows the cruise track during INDOEX-1999.
The cruise of ORV Sagarkanya started on 20 January 1999
from Goa, India, and reached Port Louis, Mauritius on
11 February 1999. It departed Port Louis on 16 February
and arrived Goa on 12 March 1999, on return. The ORV
Ron Brown cruised from Port Louis to Male between
22 February and 1 March 1999. This period of the cruise
falls in the Asian winter monsoon season during which
northeasterly wind prevail over northern Indian Ocean and
these winds transport aerosols and trace gases from Asian
continent to the northern Indian Ocean. The transport of
aerosols from Asian continent and its effect on electrical
conductivity of air has been already discussed in detail by
Kamra et al. [2001]. Here we report the effect of meteoro-
logical conditions on electrical conductivity of the remote
marine air with different background aerosol concentrations.
We have chosen two regions, as shown in Figure 1, with
different aerosol concentrations and the prevailing winds
show that the immediate effect of continental air mass to
these regions is minimum. The position of Intertropical
Convergence Zone (ITCZ) during onward and return cruises
is also shown in Figure 1. The position of ITCZ is between
27S during this period [Madan et al., 1999] and Region
A and B are falling respectively south and north of the
ITCZ. The INDOEX measurements revealed that the
Arabian sea and northern Indian ocean were highly polluted
as compared to southern Indian ocean during that period
[Ramachandran and Jayaraman, 2002; Bates et al., 2002;
Hudson and Yum, 2002]. Kamra et al. [2003] reported
about 4000 to 6000 particles cm
3
along the cruise track
close to the Indian subcontinent (Figure 1) and only about
500 particles cm
3
in the south of the ITCZ which we have
chosen as Region A. As reported by Krishnamoorthy and
Saha [2000] from their optical depth measurements during
the same cruise, the aerosol concentration in the Region B
was comparable or even sometimes higher than the concen-
tration observed near the Indian coast. Quinn et al. [2002]
also reports the accumulation mode aerosol surface area of
about 12 mm
2
cm
3
, 44 mm
2
cm
3
and 120 mm
2
cm
3
in the
southern hemisphere Indian ocean, northern hemisphere
Indian ocean and Arabia Indian subcontinent regions
respectively. Therefore there was about an order of more
aerosol particles in the Region B than in the Region A during
the period of observation. Measurements are made over
Region A from 1 to 10 February 1999 and over Region B
from 1 to 11 March 1999. Figure 2 shows the six hourly
averaged relative humidity, air pressure and conductivity
during the period when the ship was in Region A. As seen
in Figure 2 the variations in conductivity are opposite to the
variations in pressure almost all the days. However the
variations in conductivity are opposite to the variations in
relative humidity only for first four days (14 February)
and again two days at the end (9 and 10 February). The
Figure 1. The cruise track of ORV Sagarkanya (solid line)
and ORV Ron Brown (dashed line) during INDOEX-1999
along with the regions of interest and the position of the
ITCZ.
D02205 PAWAR ET AL.: ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY OVER OCEAN
2 of 8
D02205
inverse relation between conductivity and relative humidity
in Region A is not observed for few days (i.e., 58 February)
mainly because the variations in relative humidity for those
days are very small compared to the variations in sea level
pressure. Figure 3 shows the variation of six hourly aver-
aged relative humidity, pressure and conductivity during the
period when the ship was in Region B. The inverse relation
between pressure and conductivity, as observed in the
Region A, is not observed in this region. However the
inverse relation between conductivity and relative humidity
is more consistent in this region compared to region A.
[6] Figure 4 shows the scattered diagram of six hourly
averaged conductivity versus relative humidity and pressure
in the Region A; the lines of best fit are also plotted. As
shown here the correlation coefficient (r) between conduc-
tivity and pressure is higher than the correlation coefficient
between conductivity and relative humidity. The inconsis-
tency of inverse relation between relative humidity and
conductivity in region A is also reflected in scatter diagram
and therefore the scatter is more in Figure 4b. Figure 5
shows the scattered diagram of six hourly averaged con-
ductivity versus pressure and relative humidity with best-fit
lines in the Region B. In this region, the correlation
coefficient of conductivity and relative humidity is signi-
ficantly higher compared to region A. However the corre-
lation coefficient between pressure and conductivity is very
small not only compared to region A but also compared to
correlation between conductivity and relative humidity in
the same region. As shown, the scatter in Figure 5b is small
because the effect of variations of pressure on conductivity
(Figure 5a) is almost negligible in this region.
4. Results
4.1. Effect of Relative Humidity on Electrical
Conductivity
[7] As shown by Pruppacher and Klett [1978] the radius
of aerosol particles can increase sharply when relative
humidity exceeds 7075% and the attachment coefficient
b between small ion and neutral aerosol particle is a
function of radius of aerosol particles [Hoppel, 1985].
Therefore the increase in humidity more than 7075%
can increase the size of aerosol particles and remove more
number of small ions even though the total number of
aerosol particles remains same. The measurements made
over equatorial Indian Ocean and Arabian Sea, as reported
by Kamra et al. [1997], show an inverse relation between
conductivity and relative humidity and these results were
explained on the basis of sharp increase in the sizes of ions
and marine aerosols when the relative humidity exceeds
7580%. Experimental study by Moore and Vonnegut
[1988] also shows that bipolar conductivity decreases with
increasing relative humidity. Our observations also show
inverse relation between conductivity and relative humidity
in both the regions, however, the correlation of conductivity
with relative humidity in the Region B is more than in the
Region A (Figures 4b and 5b). As described in section 3,
there is a large difference in aerosol concentration in these
two regions. This is also supported by the conductivity
Figure 2. Six hourly averaged relative humidity, sea level
pressure, and conductivity during the period when the ship
was in region A.
Figure 3. Six hourly averaged relative humidity, air
pressure, and conductivity during the period when the ship
was in region B.
D02205 PAWAR ET AL.: ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY OVER OCEAN
3 of 8
D02205
values, as the average value of conductivity in Region A is
about 0.783 10
14
Sm
1
, whereas in Region B it is only
about 0.295 10
14
Sm
1
. The difference in correlation
coefficients in these two regions indicates that the presence
of high aerosol concentration enhances the effect of relative
humidity on conductivity. It also suggests that the main
cause of inverse relation between conductivity and relative
humidity may be the increase of sizes of aerosol particles
when the relative humidity increases more than 7075%.
[8] The aerosol size distributions measured in the same
cruise (INDOEX-1999) are analyzed to study the effect of
relative humidity on growth of aerosols during high-humidity
conditions. Two of such cases on 24 and 26 February 1999,
during which the humidity increases to about 70% and
remains high for few hours, are presented in Figure 6.
Figures 6a and 6b show three hourly averaged size distri-
butions of number and surface concentration respectively
for a period of about 12 hours starting 1500 hours UTC
during which the humidity increased from 55% to 80% and
remained high. It is clearly seen from Figure 6 that the
smaller particles decrease and larger particles increase in
number as the humidity continues to be high. It can also be
seen that the surface area of larger particles systematically
increases during this period (Figure 6b). Similar features
can also be seen in Figures 6c and 6d on 26 February 1999
during which humidity increased from 65% to 75%. We
have also analyzed the aerosol size-distribution data pro-
vided by NCAR/EOL under sponsorship of the National
Science Foundation, http://data.eol.ucar.edu/ (data set name:
Ron Brown Aerosol Number Size Distributions - 55% RH
[Bates], URL: http://data.eol.ucar.edu/codiac/dss/id=22.073,
data set name: Ron Brown Aerosol Number Size Distribu-
tions - dry [Bates], URL: http://data.eol.ucar.edu/codiac/dss/
id=22.072), measured during the same cruise. In this data
set, the particles measured with controlled relative humidity
of 10% are referred as dry aerosols and with relative
humidity of 55% are referred as wet aerosols. More
details of the measurements and description of data sets
can be found in the URL. As shown in Figure 7, total
number concentration of wet aerosols smaller than 50-nm
diameter is less than dry aerosols of same size range and
however, the situation is reversed in the size range greater
than 50 nm. Figure 7 clearly suggests that aerosol particles
grow to bigger sizes when the humidity increases. Figures 6
and 7 clearly indicate that during high-humidity conditions,
considerable increase in the total surface area occupied by
aerosol particles can occur. This supports our idea that
relative humidity affects the conductivity mainly by increas-
ing the sizes of aerosol particles.
[9] Laboratory and theoretical studies by Tyndall and
Grindley [1926], Harrrison [1992], Sakata and Okada
[1994] and Harisson and Aplin [2007] show that the
mobility of small ions decreases with increase in relative
humidity. Such decrease in mobility of ions can also affect
the conductivity. The correlation coefficient of conductivity
and relative humidity, which is 0.37 in the Region A,
suggests that the reduction of mobility of ions by hydrate
growth of ions in moist air as hypothesized by Harrison and
Figure 4. Six hourly averaged conductivity versus (a) sea
level pressure and (b) relative humidity along with best-fit
lines and correlation coefficient (r) in region A.
Figure 5. Six hourly averaged conductivity versus (a) sea
level pressure and (b) relative humidity along with best-fit
lines and correlation coefficient (r) in region B.
D02205 PAWAR ET AL.: ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY OVER OCEAN
4 of 8
D02205
Aplin [2007], might be contributing to the reduction in the
conductivity.
[10] Our observations along with earlier observations and
experiments by Hogan et al. [1973], Kamra et al. [1997],
Tyndall and Grindley [1926], Harrrison [1992], Sakata and
Okada [1994] and Harisson and Aplin [2007] clearly
indicate that relative humidity affects the conductivity
mainly by increasing the sizes of aerosols and ions. There-
fore the variations in relative humidity persisting for longer
time scale is expected to affect the conductivity more than
short time variations of relative humidity. We have plotted
scattered diagram of conductivity versus relative humidity
in region B with different time averages in Figure 8. As
shown here the correlation coefficient between these two
parameters increases with increase in averaging period
(same was observed in region A, however not plotted here).
4.2. Relation Between Conductivity and Air Pressure
[11] The pressure and electrical conductivity of air are
inversely related because the mobility of small ion decreases
with increasing pressure. As shown in Figure 2, the varia-
tions in conductivity inversely follow the pressure varia-
tions in Region A, but it does not follow so in Region B.
The correlation coefficients between these two parameters
are 0.777 and 0.16 in the regions A and B respectively.
The inverse relation between air pressure and conductivity
in region A can be explained on the basis of ultrafine
particles transported from free troposphere in to the marine
boundary layer as reported by Covert et al. [1996] and
Kamra et al. [2003]. Raes [1995] also have shown from
their model calculations that entrainment from free tropo-
sphere is a source of the particles in nucleation mode in the
marine boundary layer. Such transport of aerosol particles
with subsidence from free troposphere to the marine bound-
ary layer is controlled by the sea level pressure. To confirm
this, we have plotted 3-hourly averaged aerosol number
concentration of 13-nm diameter with sea level pressure
(Figure 9). As shown in Figure 9, the aerosol concentration
show good positive correlation (r = 0.54) with the pressure.
Three hourly averaged aerosol data measured onboard
Sagarkanya from 31 January to 3 February 1999 and
onboard Ron Brown from 24 to 28 February are used in
Figure 9. Sometimes when the ship was stationary or the
wind speed relative to ship was low or wind direction was
Figure 6. Size distribution of aerosol number and surface concentration on 24 and 26 February 1999
showing the evolution of sizes of aerosol during high-humidity conditions.
D02205 PAWAR ET AL.: ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY OVER OCEAN
5 of 8
D02205
such that exhaust passed over instruments, the data collected
during such periods are not considered for analysis. Also to
avoid coastal effects, the data measured close to the coast is
not included in Figure 9. Figure 9 supports the idea that the
transport of ultrafine particles from free troposphere is
controlled by sea level pressure. Therefore we propose that
the inverse relation between conductivity and sea level
pressure may be due to the increased aerosol particles
transported by subsidence motions associated with high
sea level pressure. In region B, which is highly polluted
compared to region A, the possibility of new particle
formation by gas to particle conversion in presence of high
aerosol concentration is less [Covert et al., 1992; Gras,
1993; Raes, 1995]. Moreover the effect of ultrafine particles
transported from free troposphere on conductivity will be
small in presence of large background aerosol concentra-
tion. The correlation coefficient between pressure and
electrical conductivity, being very small in Region B
compared to Region A, supports this idea.
5. Discussion
[12] Adlerman and Williams [1996] have shown that the
relationship between air conductivity and background aero-
sol concentration is highly nonlinear over land surface. The
reason is that the strength of the sources and sinks of the
atmospheric small ions vary from place to place over land
surface. The main source of ionization over land surface is
the radioactive gases released from the earths crust and this
is highly variable over land. However over oceans, there is
no radioactive gases from the surface and hence the galactic
cosmic rays, which have been found almost constant in the
lower latitudes, are the only ionizing agent to influence the
conductivity. The aerosol particles act as sink for small ions
in the atmosphere over land as well as over oceans.
Therefore the relationship between conductivity and the
aerosol concentration can be nonlinear over land surfaces;
however it can be linear over ocean surface. The attachment
coefficient b is the function of size of aerosol particles
[Hoppel, 1985] and as suggested by Hogan et al. [1973] and
by Kamra et al. [1997], for the same aerosol number
concentration the conductivity can vary with variations in
the sizes of aerosol particles.
[13] Our observations support the results of Hogan et al.
[1973] and Kamra et al. [1997] which show how the change
in sizes of aerosol particles with increasing humidity can
affect the conductivity. The observations in both the regions
clearly show inverse relation between the conductivity and
relative humidity over ocean surface (Figures 4b and 5b).
The difference in the correlation coefficient between these
two parameters in the regions A and B shows how the
increased aerosol concentration can amplify this effect. We
might not rule out the possibility of hydrate growth of small
ions in the high-humidity conditions and subsequent reduc-
tion in the conductivity. It is possible that both the process-
es, i.e., hydrate growth of small ions and hydrate growth of
aerosol particles, may be combinely contributing for the
reduction in conductivity with increasing relative humidity.
[14] As far as the authors knowledge the inverse relation
of conductivity with pressure over ocean has been reported
here for the first time. Subsiding motion is found to be
associated with increased sea level pressure and this can
transport large number of ultrafine aerosol particles from
free troposphere in marine boundary layer [Covert et al.,
1996; Kamra et al., 2003]. In presence of large background
aerosol concentration, as found in Region B, the transport of
aerosols associated with subsiding motions may not have
significant effect on conductivity. The difference in corre-
lation coefficient between pressure and conductivity in
Region A and B supports this hypothesis. As shown in
Figures 4a and 5a the correlation between sea level pressure
and conductivity is almost negligible in Region B whereas it
is 0.777 in Region A. Therefore we propose that in the
presence of low background aerosol concentration the
downward transport of aerosols associated with high sea
level pressure amplify the effect of reducing electrical
conductivity.
6. Conclusions
[15] Our observations showan inverse relationship between
conductivity and relative humidity. Comparison of the
correlation of these two parameters in two different regions
with different background aerosol concentrations strongly
supports that the hydrate growth of aerosol particles in high-
humidity conditions might be the cause of such inverse
relationship. We also have reported the inverse relationship
between sea level pressure and conductivity for the first
time and it has been explained on the basis of transportation
of ultrafine particles from free troposphere associated with
high sea level pressure. Comparison of correlation coeffi-
Figure 7. Total concentration of dry and wet aerosols.
(a) Particles larger than 50 nm and less than 1000-nm
diameter. (b) Particles between 20- and 50-nm diameter.
D02205 PAWAR ET AL.: ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY OVER OCEAN
6 of 8
D02205
Figure 8. Scatter diagram of conductivity versus relative humidity in region B with different averaging
period: (a) 3 hourly, (b) 6 hourly, (c) 12 hourly, and (d) 24 hourly with line of best fit.
Figure 9. Scatter diagram of pressure versus aerosol particles of 13-nm diameter with line of best fit.
D02205 PAWAR ET AL.: ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY OVER OCEAN
7 of 8
D02205
cients shows that such effect is more significant in the
regions where the background aerosol concentration is very
lowas compared to the regions of high aerosol concentration.
[16] Acknowledgments. Data were provided by NCAR/EOLunder the
sponsorship of the National Science Foundation (http://data.eol.ucar.edu/).
References
Adlerman, J. E., and E. R. Williams (1996), Seasonal variation of the global
electrical circuit, J. Geophys. Res., 101, 29,67929,688.
Bates, T. S., D. J. Coffman, D. S. Covert, and P. K. Quinn (2002), Regional
marine boundary layer aerosol size distributions in the Indian, Atlantic,
and Pacific Oceans: A comparison of INDOEX measurements with
ACE-1, ACE-2, and Aerosols99, J. Geophys. Res., 107(D19), 8026,
doi:10.1029/2001JD001174.
Cobb, W. E. (1973), Reply, J. Atmos. Sci., 30, 14601462.
Cobb, W. E., and R. F. Pueschel (1985), Atmospheric electric conductivity:
Measuring particulate pollution levels in atmosphere, WMOSpec. Environ.
Rep., 16, pp. 590601, World Meteorol. Organ., Geneva, Switzerland.
Covert, D. S., V. N. Kapustin, P. K. Quinn, and T. S. Bates (1992), New
particle formation in the marine boundary layer, J. Geophys. Res., 97,
20,58120,590.
Covert, D. S., V. N. Kapustin, T. S. Bates, and P. K. Quinn (1996), Physical
properties of marine boundary layer aerosol particles of the mid-pacific in
relation to sources and meteorological transport, J. Geophys. Res., 101,
69196930.
Dhanorkar, S., and A. K. Kamra (1992), Relation between conductivity and
small ions in the presence of intermediate and large ion in lower atmo-
sphere, J. Geophys. Res., 97, 20,34520,360.
Gras, J. L. (1993), Condensation nucleus size distribution at Mawson,
Antarctica: Microphysics and chemistry, Atmos. Environ. A, 27, 1427
1434.
Harrrison, R. G. (1992), Aerosol charging and radioactivity, Ph.D. thesis,
Univ. of London, U.K.
Harisson, R. G., and K. L. Aplin (2007), Water vapour changes and atmo-
spheric cluster ions, Atmos. Res., 85, 199208.
Hogan, A. W., V. A. Mohnen, and V. J. Schaefer (1973), Comments on
Oceanic aerosol levels deduced from measurements of the electrical
conductivity of the atmosphere, J. Atmos. Sci., 30, 14551460.
Hoppel, A. W. (1985), Ion aerosol attachment coefficient, ion depletion,
and the charge distribution on aerosol, J. Geophys. Res., 90, 59175923.
Hudson, J. G., and S. S. Yum (2002), Cloud condensation nuclei spectra
and polluted and clean clouds over the Indian ocean, J. Geophys. Res.,
107(D19), 8022, doi:10.1029/2001JD000829.
Kamra, A. K., and C. G. Deshpande (1995), Possible secular change and
land to ocean extension of air pollution from measurement of atmo-
spheric electrical conductivity over the Bay of Bengal, J. Geophys.
Res., 100, 71057110.
Kamra, A. K., C. G. Deshpande, and V. Gopalakrishnan (1997), Effect of
relative humidity on the electrical conductivity of marine air, Q. J. R.
Meteorol. Soc., 123, 12951305.
Kamra, A. K., P. Murugavel, S. D. Pawar, and V. Gopalakrishnan (2001),
Background aerosol concentration derived from the atmospheric electric
conductivity measurements made over the Indian Ocean during INDOEX,
J. Geophys. Res., 106, 28,64328,652.
Kamra, A. K., P. Murugavel, and S. D. Pawar (2003), Measured size dis-
tribution of aerosols over the Indian ocean during INDOEX, J. Geophys.
Res., 108(D3), 8000, doi:10.1029/2002JD002200.
Krishnamoorthy, K., and A. Saha (2000), Aerosol study during INDOEX:
Observation of enhanced aerosol activity over mid Arabian Sea during
northern winter, J. Atmos. Sol. Terr. Phys., 62, 6572.
Madan, O. P., et al. (1999), Meteorological Analysis During INDOEX
Intensive Field Phase-1999, vol. II and III, INDOEX Ind. Prog., Cent.
for Atmos. Sci., New Delhi.
Misaki, M., and J. Takeuti (1970), The extension of air pollution from land
over ocean as related in the variation of atmospheric conductivity,
J. Meteorol. Soc. Jpn., 48, 263269.
Misaki, M., M. Ikegami, and J. Kanazawa (1972), Atmospheric electrical
conductivity measurement in the Pacific Ocean, exploring the back-
ground level of global pollution, J. Meteorol. Soc. Jpn., 50, 497500.
Moore, C. B., and B. Vonnegut (1988), Measurements of the electrical
conductivities of air over hot water, J. Atmos. Sci., 45(5), 885890.
Morita, Y., and H. Ishikawa (1977), On recent measurement of electric
parameter and aerosol in the ocean atmosphere, in Electrical Process
in Atmosphere, edited by H. Dolezalec and R. Reiter, pp. 126130,
Springer, New York.
Morita, Y., H. Ishikawa, J. Nagasaka, and M. Kanada (1973), Land-to-
ocean transitional behavior of atmospheric electrical parameter and their
relation to atmospheric pollution, J. Meteorol. Soc. Jpn., 51, 294306.
Parkinson, W. C., and O. W. Torreson (1931), The diurnal variation of the
electric potential of atmosphere over the ocean, UGGI Bull., 8, 340341.
Paramonov, N. A. (1950), The unitary variation of the potential gradient of
atmospheric electricity (in Russia), Dokl. Akad. Nauk, 70, 3738.
Pawar, S. D., Devendraa Siingh, V. Gopalakrishnan, and A. K. Kamra
(2005), Effect of the onset of southwest monsoon on the atmospheric
electric conductivity over the Arabian Sea, J. Geophys. Res., 110,
D10204, doi:10.1029/2004JD005689.
Pruppacher, H. R., and J. D. Klett (1978), Microphysics of Clouds and Pre-
cipitation, 714 pp., H.D. Reidal, Dordrecht, Germany.
Quinn, P. K., D. J. Coffman, T. S. Bates, T. L. Miller, J. E. Johnson, E. J.
Welton, C. Neususs, M. Miller, and P. J. Sheridan (2002), Aerosol optical
properties during INDOEX 1999: Means, variability, and controlling
factors, J. Geophys. Res., 107(D19), 8020, doi:10.1029/2000JD000037.
Ramachandran, S., and A. Jayaraman (2002), Premonsoon aerosol mass
loadings and size distributions over the Arabian Sea and the tropical
Indian Ocean, J. Geophys. Res., 107(D24), 4738, doi:10.1029/
2002JD002386.
Raes, F. (1995), Entrainment of free tropospheric aerosols as a regulating
mechanism for cloud condensation nuclei in the remote marine boundary
layer, J. Geophys. Res., 100, 28932903.
Sakata, S., and T. Okada (1994), Effect of humidity on hydrate cluster-ion
formation in the clean room corona discharge neutralizer, J. Aerosol Sci.,
25(5), 879893.
Tyndall, A. M., and G. C. Grindley (1926), The mobility of ions in air. part I:
Negative ions in moist air, Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. A, 110(754), 341
358.

D. M. Lal, P. Murugavel, and S. D. Pawar, I & OT Division, Indian

Institute of Tropical Meteorology, Dr. Homi Bhabha Road, NCL Post,
Pune, Maharashtra 411 008, India. ([email protected])
D02205 PAWAR ET AL.: ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY OVER OCEAN
8 of 8
D02205