Compound auroral micromorphology: ground-based high-speed imaging
© Kataoka et al.; licensee Springer. 2015
Received: 24 August 2014
Accepted: 16 January 2015
Published: 15 February 2015
Auroral microphysics still remains partly unexplored. Cutting-edge ground-based optical observations using scientific complementary metal-oxide semiconductor (sCMOS) cameras recently enabled us to observe the fine-scale morphology of bright aurora at magnetic zenith for a variety of rapidly varying features for long uninterrupted periods. We report two interesting examples of combinations of fine-scale rapidly varying auroral features as observed by the sCMOS cameras installed at Poker Flat Research Range (PFRR), Alaska, in February 2014. The first example shows that flickering rays and pulsating modulation simultaneously appeared at the middle of a surge in the pre-midnight sector. The second example shows localized flickering aurora associated with growing eddies at the poleward edge of an arc in the midnight sector.
In the low-beta plasma condition of the magnetosphere-ionosphere (M-I) coupled region, Alfvén waves hold time varying electric field parallel to the ambient magnetic field (Hasegawa 1976; Goertz and Boswell 1979). This is a consequence of the electron inertia when the wavelength perpendicular to the ambient magnetic field is an order of electron skin depth. Since the spatial scale is typically approximately 1 km when mapped to the ionosphere, the inertial Alfvén waves (IAWs) are one of the most important theoretical bases to understand the diverse microstructures of rapidly varying aurora. Observations of fine-scale auroral morphology are therefore important to visualize the fundamental wave-particle interactions working in the M-I coupled region, which are also potentially useful to diagnose the local plasma environment.
Flickering aurora consists of small-scale columns (1 to 12 km width and 10 to 40 km height) with periodic intensity variations (3 to 15 Hz) in discrete auroral arcs and is often observed associated with auroral breakup events (Kunitake and Oguti 1984). Temerin et al. (1986, 1993) suggested that electromagnetic ion cyclotron (EMIC) waves that occur below the inverted-V acceleration region can accelerate and modulate the field-aligned electrons over a broad energy range to produce flickering aurora. The EMIC wave model is similar to the IAW model except that it includes finite frequency effects. A possible source of the EMIC waves is an instability in the double layer or electrostatic shock that produces the electron beam. The appearance of flickering aurora can be modeled as the interference of IAW or EMIC waves (Sakanoi et al. 2005). Gustavsson et al. (2008) showed that a variety of structures of flickering aurora can be modeled by varying the parameters of multiple interfering EMIC waves. Whiter et al. (2008) showed that flickering aurora is linked temporally to auroral activity, but not spatially on small scales, which is consistent with the interfering EMIC waves. Whiter et al. (2010) showed that the parallel phase velocity of the EMIC waves is the primary factor in determining the energy of wave-accelerated electrons responsible for flickering aurora, which is consistent with the resonant acceleration and deceleration model of IAW/EMIC waves in combination with inverted-V acceleration as suggested by Chen et al. (2005). Yaegashi et al. (2011) and Kataoka et al. (2011b) showed several examples that the observed spatiotemporal scale of monochromatic flickering events is consistent with the O+ EMIC waves. Michell et al. (2012) showed that there is a lack of flickering spectral power at perpendicular wavenumber of larger than 2 × 10−3 m−1, suggesting the existence of a minimum spatial scale for flickering auroral patches of approximately the O+ ion gyro-radius (approximately 1 km) at the interaction altitude. The expected altitude of modulation source (assuming the O+ EMIC waves) varies widely from 2,000 km to 7,000 km (e.g., Sakanoi et al. 2005; Whiter et al. 2010; Yaegashi et al. 2011).
It has been suggested for a long time that dynamic aurora structures are energetic. Hallinan (1976) suggested that ‘spirals’ of >50 km imply upward current, and the threshold current density for distortion of an auroral arc was estimated as 2.5 × 10−6 A m−2. Electrostatic shear-induced instability of a thin current sheet (Wagner et al. 1983) can explain the formation of auroral ‘folds’ (10 to 50 km) and ‘curls’ (approximately 5 km) (Hallinan and Davis 1970). The threshold current for the double-layer formation associated with curls and folds may also be assumed as the same order of magnitude as required for spirals. Ivchenko et al. (2005) showed that curls are caused by the precipitation of energetic electrons with a lack of low-energy precipitation, while in the ‘rays’ both high- and low-energy precipitation were present simultaneously, suggesting that curls are caused by the electrostatic instability of the precipitating electron sheet, while rays are likely to be a result of IAW. Chaston and Seki (2010) suggested that the formation of curls and folds may indicate the existence of a resistive layer which may be considered as the auroral acceleration region, while absence of resistive layer may be consistent with the recently found rapidly varying boundary features known as ‘ruffs’ (Dahlgren et al. 2010). The smallest-size distortions of auroral arcs are the ‘filaments’ of approximately 100 m width, and the rapidly varying very narrow auroral elements are associated with the precipitation of mono-energetic electrons (Lanchester et al. 1997). It is important to note that curls and filaments are more energetic or associated with higher electron fluxes than surrounding aurora structures (Lanchester et al. 2009). Dahlgren et al. (2008a) reported that some auroral filaments are caused by higher energy precipitation within regions of lower energy precipitation, whereas other filaments are the results of a higher flux compared to the surroundings. It was also found that high-energy precipitation corresponds to discrete and dynamic features, including curls, and low-energy precipitation corresponds to auroral signatures that were dominated by rays (Dahlgren et al. 2008b). Further, Dahlgren et al. (2012) identified that mono-energetic approximately 8 keV electron precipitation caused extremely narrow (approximately 70 m) and highly dynamic auroral filaments.
Some other fine-scale rapidly varying auroras were reviewed by Sandahl et al. (2008). However, it has been rare that both dynamic spatial variations, such as curls and folds, and rapid time variation of flickering are discussed together, although both features are complementary to diagnose the plasma environment of the M-I coupled region. Also, to the authors' knowledge, there are no examples showing the coexistence of flickering aurora and pulsating aurora especially with its fast ‘3 ± 1 Hz’ modulations (Royrvik and Davis 1977) at the same time. Note that flickering and pulsating auroras are the results of two completely separate particle precipitation mechanisms. Flickering aurora is associated with particle acceleration of IAW/EMIC waves, whereas pulsations are associated with pitch-angle scattering of chorus waves. Also, flickering aurora is usually associated with breakup in the evening hours, whereas pulsations are more common in the post-midnight early morning. In this letter, we report two interesting examples of fine-scale compound auroral structures and interpret the simultaneous observations of the auroral features with respect to the known morphological categories to understand the source mechanisms acting concurrently in the magnetosphere-ionosphere coupled system.
In February 2014, a new high-speed camera system (NIPR-CMOS) was installed at Poker Flat Research Range (PFRR), Fairbanks, Alaska, and was operated until April 2014. The magnetic latitude is 65.7° at PFRR, and magnetic midnight is approximately at 11:30 UT. The Hamamatsu scientific complementary metal-oxide semiconductor (sCMOS) camera (ORCA-Flash 4.0, Hamamatsu Photonics, Hamamatsu, Japan) is equipped with NIKKOR 50 mm F1.2 lens (Nikon, Tokyo, Japan) without an optical filter. While the fastest sampling rate of 100 frames per second (fps) is possible with the original pixel array size of 2,048 by 2,048, we applied 4 by 4 binning and an exposure time of 0.02 s (50 fps) to enhance the photon count. The camera system was designed to obtain significant counts for bright aurora of >10 kR at green line. The field-of-view (FOV) is 15° by 15° which corresponds to 26.6 km by 26.6 km at 100 km altitude. The camera was oriented so that the FOV captured the magnetic zenith at the center. The relatively larger FOV as used by Kataoka et al. (2011a, 2011b) is one important factor for us to find simultaneous compound features.
In this letter, we show NIPR-CMOS data alone because these particular events did not show any features clearly faster than 25 Hz, which is the Nyquist frequency of NIPR-CMOS. A full-color DSLR camera (Nikon D4 with NIKKOR fish-eye 8 mm F2.8 lens, Nikon, Tokyo, Japan) was also installed alongside the CMOS cameras to provide an all-sky image every 10 s.
Two interesting examples are summarized in real-time playing (Additional files 1 and 2). The quality of the obtained images is high enough to make the differential movies (Additional files 3 and 4), which are created by subtracting the previous image at each frame to emphasize the rapidly varying faint features. The differential movie technique is used to investigate the rapid variations in the auroral morphology, and it is another important factor for investigating auroral features as it draws attention to the flickering aurora events.
Event 1 (19 February 2014 09:30 UT) contains flickering rays and pulsating modulation at the middle of a surge in the pre-midnight sector, during the expansion phase of an intense substorm with the AE index >1,200 nT just after the storm peak of the Dst index = −112 nT. Event 2 (21 February 2014 12:01 UT) contains growing eddies at the poleward boundary of multiple arcs with localized flickering in the midnight sector, during the expansion phase of a moderate substorm with the AE index <500 nT in the storm recovery phase.
Event 1: flickering rays with pulsating modulation
Event 2: growing eddies with localized flickering
In this report, we have briefly reported on observations of compound auroral microstructures using high-resolution optical instrumentation. In event 1, flickering rays appeared at the middle of surge beside a region of typical pulsating modulation, while in event 2, localized flickering aurora appeared associated with the growing eddies at the poleward edge of an arc system. We discuss the source mechanisms and the possible meanings of these two different compound microstructures.
For event 1, there is little doubt that the modulation region of the flickering aurora is in the magnetosphere-ionosphere coupled region as described in the ‘Introduction’ section, but the closely associated region of pulsating patches was not expected. Many recent studies have confirmed that post-midnight pulsating aurora and their fast modulations during the recovery phase of substorms originate from pitch-angle scattered energetic electrons from the magnetosphere by chorus waves (e.g., Miyoshi et al. 2010; Nishiyama et al. 2012, 2014). Different possible mechanisms of pulsating aurora also exist. For example, Sato et al. (2004) suggested that the modulation of the field-aligned potential drop may cause pulsating aurora. Because the observed pulsating aurora in this study appeared during the expansion phase of a substorm in the pre-midnight sector, the generation mechanism may be different from the typical post-midnight pulsating aurora during the recovery phase of substorms. It is therefore possible in this case that the source mechanisms of both flickering and pulsating modulation are common or closely involved to achieve the efficient way to dissipate the energy in the M-I coupled region. Further high-speed observations will be important to clarify whether such a coexistence of the flickering aurora and pulsating aurora is a common feature during the expansion phase of substorms.
Event 1 showed the flickering rays, which is consistent with the IAW-accelerated relatively low-energy electrons as suggested by Ivchenko et al. (2005). On the other hand, pulsating aurora, and especially the fast modulation, is the result of more energetic electrons (Sandahl et al. 1980). The simplest interpretation of the coexistence would therefore be that both IAW and also energetic particles of pulsating modulation are enhanced during the expansion phase of the substorm to be launched all together into the ionosphere from the nearby locations in the magnetosphere.
Event 2 is consistent with the local source scenario of IAW (Asamura et al. 2009), associated with the inverted-V type settings as inferred from the evolution of curls and folds (Chaston and Seki 2010). Asamura et al. (2009) showed that vortical discrete auroral forms of approximately 8 km counter-stream at 14 to 18 km/s during the excitation of inertial Alfven waves at approximately 3,000 km altitude associated with the observed inverted-V electrons. It is therefore possible that the electrostatic shear-induced instability forming the curls and folds (Wagner et al. 1983) is capable of launching IAWs (Asamura et al. 2009) and thereby cause the observed localized flickering aurora. Relatively faint appearance of the localized flickering may be different from typical EMIC-related single-frequency flickering.
It is noteworthy that the growing eddies show counterclockwise rotation (tilted to the east), which is in the wrong direction as expected from the standard Kelvin-Helmholtz instability if we assume negligibly slow flow at poleward side with the fast eastward bulk flow in the arc. The flow shear within the arc is counterclockwise, i.e., the poleward part moves eastward faster than the equatorial part as described in the ‘Event 2: growing eddies with localized flickering’ section. The counterclockwise shear setting is consistent with the upward field-aligned current system associated with the locally converging electric field toward the arc. Nonlinear numerical simulations to reproduce the observed features of growing eddies are awaited in order to offer meaningful interpretation.
There are other potentially IAW-related auroras which should be discussed in some detail. Semeter and Blixt (2006) and Semeter et al. (2008) showed that ‘arc packets’ can be interpreted by the parallel electric field of IAW within the resonance cone. The arc packets occur especially at intense aurora with intense geomagnetic activity. It is noteworthy that Alfven wave propagation on sharp density gradients in a direction transverse to the static magnetic field leads to the formation of a significant parallel electric field (Genot et al. 2004), which gives a spatiotemporal pattern similar to the arc packets. The relationship between arc packets and flickering has not been elucidated yet. It has been measured that field-aligned electron bursts (FABs) are superposed on mono-energetic inverted-V electrons (e.g., McFadden et al. 1987), especially at the edge of the inverted-V, and the whole characteristics is similar to those of flickering aurora. Dahlgren et al. (2013) recently showed that ‘flaming’ aurora during auroral breakup is consistent with the FABs and is also consistent with 2.4 Hz flickering. In event 1, it is still difficult to tell the phase difference of flickering rays with altitude, which might be like flaming or time-of-flight dispersion. It is therefore important to further investigate the occurrence distribution of flaming, flickering, arc packets, and their compound features to distinguish the exact mechanisms and to identify their meaning via high-speed imaging observations. Continuous ground-based high-speed imaging observation of aurora at >100 fps is possible now (Kataoka et al. 2011a, 2011b; Yaegashi et al. 2011; Nishiyama et al. 2012, 2014). It would be important to pursue the meanings via the occurrence distribution of the fine-scale rapidly varying aurora against meso-scale and global-scale auroral dynamics.
The next important challenge of high-speed optical observations would be the systematic survey of the fastest variation appearing in aurora including the helium and hydrogen cyclotron frequency. Yaegashi et al. (2011) suggested that existence of flickering aurora is related to helium ion EMIC waves. Temerin et al. (1986) originally suggested that what appears to be a steady field-aligned flux of auroral electrons can also be produced by hydrogen cyclotron waves since modulation at the hydrogen cyclotron frequency is hardly resolved by current typical sampling rate of 40 ms (25 Hz) of particle detectors onboard Reimei satellite, for example. In fact, McFadden et al. (1987) reported the in situ observational results of wave-particle interactions between H+ EMIC waves (at approximately 120 Hz) and down-going field-aligned electron fluxes in inverted V arcs at approximately 3,700 km altitude. McHarg et al. (1998) reported up to 180 Hz variation of aurora using ground-based high-speed photometer observations.
R. K. thanks Kevin Abnett, Naoki Sunagawa, and Ayumi Hashimoto for their help to installing the sCMOS camera systems. RK thanks Tomonao Harada and Nikon professional services for their support by providing Nikon cameras for our observations. This work is supported by Yamada Science Foundation and Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research (19403010; 25302006) from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan.
- Asamura K, Chaston CC, Itoh Y, Fujimoto M, Sakanoi T, Ebihara Y, Yamazaki A, Hirahara M, Seki K, Kasaba Y, Okada M (2009) Sheared flows and small-scale Alfven wave generation in the auroral acceleration region. Geophys Res Lett 36:L05105, doi:10.1029/2008GL036803View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Chaston CC, Seki K (2010) Small-scale auroral current sheet structuring. J Geophys Res 115:A11221, doi:10.1029/2010JA015536View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Chen L-J, Kletzing CA, Hu S, Bounds SR (2005) Auroral electron dispersion below inverted-V energies: resonant deceleration and acceleration by Alfven waves. J Geophys Res 110:A10S13, doi:10.1029/2005JA011168View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Dahlgren H, Ivchenko N, Lanchester BS, Sullivan J, Marklund G, Whiter D (2008a) Morphology and dynamics of aurora at fine scale: first results from the ASK instrument. Ann Geophys 26:1041–1048, doi:10.5194/angeo-26-1041-2008View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Dahlgren H, Ivchenko N, Lanchester BS, Sullivan BSJ, Whiter D, Marklund G, Stromme A (2008b) Using spectral characteristics to interpret auroral imaging in the 731.9 nm O+ line. Ann Geophys 26:1905–1917, doi:10.5194/angeo-26-1905-2008View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Dahlgren H, Aikio A, Kaila K, Ivchenko N, Lanchester BS, Whiter DK, Marklund GT (2010) Simultaneous observations of small multi-scale structures in an auroral arc. J Atmos Sol Terr Phys 72:633, doi:10.1016/j.jastp.2010.01.014View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Dahlgren H, Ivchenko N, Lanchester BS (2012) Monoenergetic high-energy electron precipitation in thin auroral filaments. Geophys Res Lett 39:L20101, doi:10.1029/2012GL053466View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Dahlgren H, Semeter JL, Marshall RA, Zettergren M (2013) The optical manifestation of dispersive field-aligned bursts in auroral breakup arcs. J Geophys Res Space Physics 118:4572–4582, doi:10.1002/jgra.50415View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Genot V, Louarn P, Mottez F (2004) Alfven wave interaction with inhomogeneous plasmas: acceleration and energy cascade towards small-scales. Ann Geophys 22:2081–2096View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Goertz CK, Boswell RW (1979) Magnetosphere-ionosphere coupling. J Geophys Res 84(A12):7239–7246, doi:10.1029/JA084iA12p07239View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Gustavsson B, Lunde J, Blixt EM (2008) Optical observations of flickering aurora and its spatiotemporal characteristics. J Geophys Res 113:A12317, doi:10.1029/2008JA013515View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Hallinan TJ (1976) Auroral Spirals 2. Theory J Geophys Res 81(22):3959–3965View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Hallinan TJ, Davis TN (1970) Small-scale auroral arc distortions. Planet Space Sci 18:1735–1744View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Hasegawa A (1976) Particle acceleration by MHD surface wave and formation of aurora. J Geophys Res 81(28):5083–5090, doi:10.1029/JA081i028p05083View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Ivchenko N, Blixt EM, Lanchester BS (2005) Multispectral observations of auroral rays and curls. Geophys Res Lett 32:L18106, doi:10.1029/2005GL022650View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Kataoka R, Miyoshi Y, Sakanoi T, Yaegashi A, Shiokawa K, Ebihara Y (2011a) Turbulent microstructures and formation of folds in auroral breakup arc. J Geophys Res 116:A00K02, doi:10.1029/2010JA016334Google Scholar
- Kataoka R, Miyoshi Y, Sakanoi T, Yaegashi A, Ebihara Y, Shiokawa K (2011b) Ground-based multispectral high-speed imaging of flickering aurora. Geophys Res Lett 38:L14106, doi:10.1029/2011GL048317View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Kataoka R, Miyoshi Y, Hampton D, Ishii T, Kozako H (2012) Pulsating aurora beyond the ultra-low-frequency range. J Geophys Res 117:A08336, doi:10.1029/2012JA017987View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Kunitake M, Oguti T (1984) Spatial-temporal characteristics of flickering spots in flickering auroras. J Geomagn Geoelectr 36:121View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Lanchester BS, Rees MH, Lummerzheim D, Otto A, Frey HU, Kaila KU (1997) Large fluxes of auroral electrons in filaments of 100 m width. J Geophys Res 102(A5):9741–9748, doi:10.1029/97JA00231View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Lanchester BS, Ashrafi M, Ivchenko N (2009) Simultaneous imaging of aurora on small scale in OI (777.4 nm) and N21P to estimate energy and flux of precipitation. Ann Geophys 27:2881–2891, doi:10.5194/angeo-27-2881-2009View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- McFadden JP, Carlson CW, Boehm MH, Hallinan TJ (1987) Field-aligned electron flux oscillations that produce flickering aurora. J Geophys Res 92(A10):11133–11148, doi:10.1029/JA092iA10p11133View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- McHarg MG, Hampton DL, Stenbaek-Nielsen HC (1998) Fast photometry of flickering in discrete auroral arcs. Geophys Res Lett 25(14):2637–2640View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Michell RG, McHarg MG, Samara M, Hampton DL (2012) Spectral analysis of flickering aurora. J Geophys Res 117:A03321, doi:10.1029/2011JA016703View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Miyoshi Y, Katoh Y, Nishiyama T, Sakanoi T, Asamura K, Hirahara M (2010) Time of flight analysis of pulsating aurora electrons, considering wave‐particle interactions with propagating whistler mode waves. J Geophys Res 115:A10312, doi:10.1029/2009JA015127View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Nishiyama T, Sakanoi T, Miyoshi Y, Kataoka R, Hampton D, Katoh Y, Asamura K, Okano S (2012) Fine scale structures of pulsating auroras in the early recovery phase of substorm using ground-based EMCCD camera. J Geophys Res 117:A10229, doi:10.1029/2012JA017921View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Nishiyama T, Sakanoi T, Miyoshi Y, Hampton D, Katoh Y, Kataoka R, Okano S (2014), Multi-scale temporal variations of pulsating auroras: on-off pulsation and a few-Hz modulation, J Geophys Res, 119, doi:10.1002/2014JA019818.Google Scholar
- Royrvik O, Davis TN (1977) Pulsating aurora: local and global morphology. J Geophys Res 82(29):4720–4740View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Sakanoi K, Fukunishi H, Kasahara Y (2005) A possible generation mechanism of temporal and spatial structures of flickering aurora. J Geophys Res 110:A03206, doi:10.1029/2004JA010549View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Sandahl I, Eliasson L, Lundin R (1980) Rocket observations of precipitating electrons over a pulsating aurora. Geophys Res Lett 7:309–312, doi:10.1029/GL007i005p00309View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Sandahl I, Sergienko T, Brandstrom U (2008) Fine structure of optical aurora. J Atmos Sol Terr Phys 70:2275–2292, doi:10.1016/j.jastp.2008.08.016View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Sato N, Wright DM, Carlson CW, Ebihara Y, Sato M, Saemundsson T, Milan SE, Lester M (2004) Generation region of pulsating aurora obtained simultaneously by the FAST satellite and a Syowa‐Iceland conjugate pair of observatories. J Geophys Res 109:A10201, doi:10.1029/2004JA010419View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Semeter J, Blixt EM (2006) Evidence for Alfven wave dispersion identified in high-resolution auroral imagery. Geophys Res Lett 33:L13106, doi:10.1029/2006GL026274View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Semeter J, Zettergren M, Diaz M, Mende S (2008) Wave dispersion and the discrete aurora: new constraints derived from high-speed imagery. J Geophys Res 113:A12208, doi:10.1029/2008JA013122View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Temerin M, McFadden J, Boehm M, Carlson CW, Lotko W (1986) Production of flickering aurora and field-aligned electron flux by electromagnetic ion cyclotron waves. J Geophys Res 91(A5):5769–5792, doi:10.1029/JA091iA05p05769View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Temerin M, Carlson C, McFadden JP (1993) The acceleration of electrons by electromagnetic ion cyclotron waves, ‘Auroral Plasma Dynamics’, Geophys. Monogr. Ser., 80, Lysak RL (ed) AGU, Washington, D. C. pp. 155–161, doi:10.1029/GM080p0155Google Scholar
- Wagner JS, Sydora RD, Tajima T, Hallinan T, Lee LC, Akasofu S-I (1983) Small-scale auroral arc deformations. J Geophys Res 88(A10):8013–8019, doi:10.1029/JA088iA10p08013View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Whiter DK, Lanchester BS, Gustavsson B, Ivchenko N, Sullivan JM, Dahlgren H (2008) Small-scale structures in flickering aurora. Geophys Res Lett 35:L23103, doi:10.1029/2008GL036134View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Whiter DK, Lanchester BS, Gustavsson B, Ivchenko N, Dahlgren H (2010) Using multispectral optical observations to identify the acceleration mechanism responsible for flickering aurora. J Geophys Res 115:A12315, doi:10.1029/2010JA015805View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Yaegashi A, Sakanoi T, Kataoka R, Asamura K, Miyoshi Y, Sato M, Okano S (2011) Spatial-temporal characteristics of flickering aurora as seen by high-speed EMCCD imaging observations. J Geophys Res 116:A00K04, doi:10.1029/2010JA016333View ArticleGoogle Scholar
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited.