Research Article | | Peer-Reviewed

Ionospheric Response to November 5-6, 2023 Geomagnetic Storm over West African Sector

Received: 16 January 2025     Accepted: 22 April 2025     Published: 26 May 2025
Views:       Downloads:
Abstract

This paper investigates the response of the ionosphere to November 5-6, 2023 geomagnetic storm in West African sectors. The November 5-6, 2023 geomagnetic storm, a significant space weather event, had profound effects on the ionosphere over the West African sector, particularly in countries such as Ghana, Senegal, Benin, Cabo Verde, and Cote d’Ivoire. To investigate the ionospheric response during this storm, the study focused on key parameters such as Total Electron Content (TEC), solar wind conditions, and the horizontal component of Earth’s magnetic field. Using data from GNSS/GPS stations, thermospheric neutral composition measurements, and satellite observations, the analysis reveals marked variations in TEC and other ionospheric parameters, indicating a strong ionospheric response. The analysis of TEC revealed marked variations during the storm, with significant positive ionospheric storm phases observed in countries such as ACRG; Ghana and YKR; Cote d’Ivorie, with TEC values on both November 5 and 6 are significantly higher than the quiet day mean, especially during the early afternoon hours (10:00 UT to 18:00 UT). In contrast, the TEC variations in DAKR; Senegal, CPVG; Cabo Verde and BJC; Benin were less pronounced, suggesting a weaker storm influence in these regions. The relative proximity of these stations to the geomagnetic equator might account for the observed differences, as the equatorial ionosphere is known to respond differently to geomagnetic disturbances compared to higher latitudes. The results highlight the complex interactions between solar wind, geomagnetic activity, and ionospheric conditions in the West African region, providing valuable insights for understanding and predicting ionospheric disturbances. The storm also had a noticeable effect on the thermospheric composition, as indicated by changes in the O/N2 ratio. The result suggests that the thermosphere experienced a slight relaxation in storm effects by November 6, but with some residual disturbances. Additionally, the prompt penetration electric field model, (PPEFM) effectively captured the behavior of the prompt penetration electric field, PPEF, which intensified or suppressed the prereversal enhancement (PRE) during the postsunset period in the main phase of the March 5-6, 2023, storms.

Published in International Journal of Astrophysics and Space Science (Volume 13, Issue 2)
DOI 10.11648/j.ijass.20251302.13
Page(s) 49-62
Creative Commons

This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.

Copyright

Copyright © The Author(s), 2025. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Ionosphere, Geomagnetic Storm, West Africa, Total Electron Content (TEC), Thermospheric Composition

References
[1] Golubkov, G. V., M. I. Manzhelii, and I. V. Karpov. “Chemical physics of the upper atmosphere.” Russian Journal of Physical Chemistry B 5 (2011): 406-411.
[2] Buonsanto, M. Ji. “Ionospheric storms-A review.” Space Science Reviews 88.3 (1999): 563-601.
[3] Sorokin, Valery M., Vitaly M. Chmyrev, and Masashi Hayakawa. “A review on electrodynamic influence of atmospheric processes to the ionosphere.” Open Journal of Earthquake Research 9.2 (2020): 113-141.
[4] Achilleos, Nicholas, Licia Ray, and Japheth Yates. “Magnetosphere-Ionosphere Coupling.” Oxford University Press, 2021.
[5] Tsagouri, Ioanna, et al. “Ionosphere variability I: Advances in observational, monitoring and detection capabilities.” Advances in Space Research (2023).
[6] Kintner Jr, Paul M., et al., eds. Midlatitude ionospheric dynamics and disturbances. Vol. 181. John Wiley & Sons, 2013.
[7] Tasic, Mirjana, et al. “Atmospheric aerosols and their influence on air quality in urban areas.” Facta universitatis-series: Physics, Chemistry and Technology 4.1 (2006): 83-91.
[8] Koshovyy, V., et al. “Influence of active cosmic factors on the dynamics of natural infrasound in the Earth’s atmosphere.” Romanian Journal of Physics 65 (2020): 813.
[9] Alex, S., S. Mukherjee, and G. S. Lakhina. “Geomagnetic signatures during the intense geomagnetic storms of 29 October and 20 November 2003.” Journal of atmospheric and solar-terrestrial physics 68.7 (2006): 769-780.
[10] Gonzalez, W. D., et al. “What is a geomagnetic storm.” Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics 99. A4 (1994): 5771-5792.
[11] Kumar, Sushil, and Vickal V. Kumar. “Ionospheric response to the St. Patrick’s Day space weather events in March 2012, 2013, and 2015 at southern low and middle latitudes.” Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics 124.1 (2019): 584-602.
[12] Davis, C. J., et al. “Ionospheric and geomagnetic responses to changes in IMF B z: a superposed epoch study.” Annales Geophysicae. Vol. 15. Springer-Verlag, 1997.
[13] Ariyibi, Emmanuel A., Emanuel O. Joshua, and Babatunde A. Rabiu. “Studies of ionospheric variations during geomagnetic activities at the low-latitude station, Ile-Ife, Nigeria.” Acta Geophysica 61 (2013): 223-239.
[14] Baker, D. N., Niescja E. Turner, and T. I. Pulkkinen. “Energy transport and dissipation in the magnetosphere during geomagnetic storms.” Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics 63.5 (2001): 421-429.
[15] Schmieder, Brigitte. “Extreme solar storms based on solar magnetic field.” Journal of Atmospheric and Solar- Terrestrial Physics 180 (2018): 46-51.
[16] Wood, Brian E., et al. “Comparative ionospheric impacts and solar origins of nine strong geomagnetic storms in 2010-2015.” Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics 121.6 (2016): 4938-4965.
[17] Mansilla, Gustavo A., and Marta M. Zossi. “Ionospheric response to the 26 August 2018 geomagnetic storm along 280 E and 316 E in the South American sector.” Advances in Space Research 69.1 (2022): 48-58.
[18] Davies, K. “onospheric Radio, IEE Electromagn.” Waves Ser 31 (1990): 476-483.
[19] Sobral, J. H. A., et al. “Effects of intense storms and substorms on the equatorial ionosphere/thermosphere system in the American sector from ground-based and satellite data.” Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics 102. A7 (1997): 14305-14313.
[20] Olawepo, A. O. “Response of ionospheric N (h) profiles over Ilorin to moderate geomagnetic storms, Ife J.” Sci 15.3 (2013): 509-521.
[21] Olawepo, A. O., and J. O. Adeniyi. “Ionosphere’s F2-layer response to 2006 geomagnetic storm at Ilorin, Nigeria.” The African Review of Physics 7 (2012).
[22] Omojola, Joseph, and Taiwo Adewumi. “Effects of St Patrick’s day intervals geomagnetic storms on the accuracy of GNSS positioning and total electron content over nigeria.” J Earth Space Phys 45.4 (2020): 181-188.
[23] Astafyeva, Elvira, Irina Zakharenkova, and Matthias Forster. “Ionospheric response to the 2015 St. Patrick’s Day storm: A global multi-instrumental overview.” Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics 120.10 (2015): 9023-9037.
[24] Zolotukhina, N., et al. “Ionospheric effects of St. Patrick’s storm over Asian Russia: 17-19 March 2015.” Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics 122.2 (2017): 2484-2504.
[25] Pathy, Nyanasegari Bhoo, et al. “Near real time ionospheric monitoring system over Malaysia using GPS Data: My-Iono Service.” Journal of Physics: Conference Series. Vol. 1152. No. 1. IOP Publishing, 2019.
[26] Seemala, G. K., and C. E. Valladares. “Statistics of total electron content depletions observed over the South American continent for the year 2008.” Radio Science 46.05 (2011): 1-14.
[27] Christensen, A. B., et al. “Initial observations with the Global Ultraviolet Imager (GUVI) in the NASA TIMED satellite mission.” Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics 108. A12 (2003).
[28] Amaechi, Paul O., et al. “Geomagnetic activity control of irregularities occurrences over the crests of the African EIA.” Earth and Space Science 7.7 (2020): e2020EA001183.
[29] Blanc, M., and A. D. Richmond. “The ionospheric disturbance dynamo.” Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics 85. A4 (1980): 1669-1686.
[30] Fejer, Bela G., John W. Jensen, and Shin Yi Su. “Quiet time equatorial F region vertical plasma drift model derived from ROCSAT-1 observations.” Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics 113. A5 (2008).
[31] Fuller-Rowell, T. J., et al. “Response of the thermosphere and ionosphere to geomagnetic storms.” Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics 99. A3 (1994): 3893-3914.
[32] Danilov, A. D., et al. “Positive phase of ionospheric storms and its connection with the dayside cusp.” Advances in space research 7.8 (1987): 81-88.
[33] Rishbeth, H., T. J. Fuller-Rowell, and Alan S. Rodger. ”F-layer storms and thermospheric composition.” Physica Scripta 36.2 (1987): 327.
[34] Prolss, Gerd W. “Ionospheric F-region storms.” Handbook of Atmospheric Electrodynamics (1995). CRC press, 2017. 195-248.
[35] Strickland, D. J., R. E. Daniell, and J. D. Craven. “Negative ionospheric storm coincident with DE 1-observed thermospheric disturbance on October 14, 1981.” Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics 106. A10 (2001): 21049-21062.
[36] Liou, K., et al. “Neutral composition effects on ionospheric storms at middle and low latitudes.” Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics 110. A5 (2005).
[37] Lissa, D., et al. “Ionospheric response to the 26 August 2018 geomagnetic storm using GPS-TEC observations along 80 E and 120 E longitudes in the Asian sector.” Advances in Space Research 66.6 (2020): 1427-1440.
[38] Liu, Libo, et al. “New aspects of the ionospheric behavior over Millstone Hill during the 30-day incoherent scatter radar experiment in October 2002.” Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics 124.7 (2019): 6288-6295.
[39] Nayak, Chinmaya, et al. “Suppression of ionospheric scintillation during St. Patrick’s Day geomagnetic super storm as observed over the anomaly crest region station Pingtung, Taiwan: A case study.” Advances in Space Research 60.2 (2017): 396-405.
Cite This Article
  • APA Style

    Kalute, G., Ambisa, D., Sisay, S., Teferi, T. (2025). Ionospheric Response to November 5-6, 2023 Geomagnetic Storm over West African Sector. International Journal of Astrophysics and Space Science, 13(2), 49-62. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijass.20251302.13

    Copy | Download

    ACS Style

    Kalute, G.; Ambisa, D.; Sisay, S.; Teferi, T. Ionospheric Response to November 5-6, 2023 Geomagnetic Storm over West African Sector. Int. J. Astrophys. Space Sci. 2025, 13(2), 49-62. doi: 10.11648/j.ijass.20251302.13

    Copy | Download

    AMA Style

    Kalute G, Ambisa D, Sisay S, Teferi T. Ionospheric Response to November 5-6, 2023 Geomagnetic Storm over West African Sector. Int J Astrophys Space Sci. 2025;13(2):49-62. doi: 10.11648/j.ijass.20251302.13

    Copy | Download

  • @article{10.11648/j.ijass.20251302.13,
      author = {Gebre Kalute and Dejene Ambisa and Selemon Sisay and Tegegn Teferi},
      title = {Ionospheric Response to November 5-6, 2023 Geomagnetic Storm over West African Sector
    },
      journal = {International Journal of Astrophysics and Space Science},
      volume = {13},
      number = {2},
      pages = {49-62},
      doi = {10.11648/j.ijass.20251302.13},
      url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijass.20251302.13},
      eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijass.20251302.13},
      abstract = {This paper investigates the response of the ionosphere to November 5-6, 2023 geomagnetic storm in West African sectors. The November 5-6, 2023 geomagnetic storm, a significant space weather event, had profound effects on the ionosphere over the West African sector, particularly in countries such as Ghana, Senegal, Benin, Cabo Verde, and Cote d’Ivoire. To investigate the ionospheric response during this storm, the study focused on key parameters such as Total Electron Content (TEC), solar wind conditions, and the horizontal component of Earth’s magnetic field. Using data from GNSS/GPS stations, thermospheric neutral composition measurements, and satellite observations, the analysis reveals marked variations in TEC and other ionospheric parameters, indicating a strong ionospheric response. The analysis of TEC revealed marked variations during the storm, with significant positive ionospheric storm phases observed in countries such as ACRG; Ghana and YKR; Cote d’Ivorie, with TEC values on both November 5 and 6 are significantly higher than the quiet day mean, especially during the early afternoon hours (10:00 UT to 18:00 UT). In contrast, the TEC variations in DAKR; Senegal, CPVG; Cabo Verde and BJC; Benin were less pronounced, suggesting a weaker storm influence in these regions. The relative proximity of these stations to the geomagnetic equator might account for the observed differences, as the equatorial ionosphere is known to respond differently to geomagnetic disturbances compared to higher latitudes. The results highlight the complex interactions between solar wind, geomagnetic activity, and ionospheric conditions in the West African region, providing valuable insights for understanding and predicting ionospheric disturbances. The storm also had a noticeable effect on the thermospheric composition, as indicated by changes in the O/N2 ratio. The result suggests that the thermosphere experienced a slight relaxation in storm effects by November 6, but with some residual disturbances. Additionally, the prompt penetration electric field model, (PPEFM) effectively captured the behavior of the prompt penetration electric field, PPEF, which intensified or suppressed the prereversal enhancement (PRE) during the postsunset period in the main phase of the March 5-6, 2023, storms.
    },
     year = {2025}
    }
    

    Copy | Download

  • TY  - JOUR
    T1  - Ionospheric Response to November 5-6, 2023 Geomagnetic Storm over West African Sector
    
    AU  - Gebre Kalute
    AU  - Dejene Ambisa
    AU  - Selemon Sisay
    AU  - Tegegn Teferi
    Y1  - 2025/05/26
    PY  - 2025
    N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijass.20251302.13
    DO  - 10.11648/j.ijass.20251302.13
    T2  - International Journal of Astrophysics and Space Science
    JF  - International Journal of Astrophysics and Space Science
    JO  - International Journal of Astrophysics and Space Science
    SP  - 49
    EP  - 62
    PB  - Science Publishing Group
    SN  - 2376-7022
    UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijass.20251302.13
    AB  - This paper investigates the response of the ionosphere to November 5-6, 2023 geomagnetic storm in West African sectors. The November 5-6, 2023 geomagnetic storm, a significant space weather event, had profound effects on the ionosphere over the West African sector, particularly in countries such as Ghana, Senegal, Benin, Cabo Verde, and Cote d’Ivoire. To investigate the ionospheric response during this storm, the study focused on key parameters such as Total Electron Content (TEC), solar wind conditions, and the horizontal component of Earth’s magnetic field. Using data from GNSS/GPS stations, thermospheric neutral composition measurements, and satellite observations, the analysis reveals marked variations in TEC and other ionospheric parameters, indicating a strong ionospheric response. The analysis of TEC revealed marked variations during the storm, with significant positive ionospheric storm phases observed in countries such as ACRG; Ghana and YKR; Cote d’Ivorie, with TEC values on both November 5 and 6 are significantly higher than the quiet day mean, especially during the early afternoon hours (10:00 UT to 18:00 UT). In contrast, the TEC variations in DAKR; Senegal, CPVG; Cabo Verde and BJC; Benin were less pronounced, suggesting a weaker storm influence in these regions. The relative proximity of these stations to the geomagnetic equator might account for the observed differences, as the equatorial ionosphere is known to respond differently to geomagnetic disturbances compared to higher latitudes. The results highlight the complex interactions between solar wind, geomagnetic activity, and ionospheric conditions in the West African region, providing valuable insights for understanding and predicting ionospheric disturbances. The storm also had a noticeable effect on the thermospheric composition, as indicated by changes in the O/N2 ratio. The result suggests that the thermosphere experienced a slight relaxation in storm effects by November 6, but with some residual disturbances. Additionally, the prompt penetration electric field model, (PPEFM) effectively captured the behavior of the prompt penetration electric field, PPEF, which intensified or suppressed the prereversal enhancement (PRE) during the postsunset period in the main phase of the March 5-6, 2023, storms.
    
    VL  - 13
    IS  - 2
    ER  - 

    Copy | Download

Author Information
  • Sections