<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" xml:lang="en" dtd-version="3.0"><?xmltex \makeatother\@nolinetrue\makeatletter?>
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">ANGEO</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>Annales Geophysicae</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">ANGEO</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Ann. Geophys.</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">1432-0576</issn><publisher>
    <publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
    <publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
  </publisher></journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/angeo-37-65-2019</article-id><title-group><article-title>Modeling of GPS total electron content over the African low-latitude region using empirical orthogonal functions</article-title><alt-title>Modeling of GPS total electron content over the African low-latitude region</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{Modeling of GPS total electron content over the African low-latitude region}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{G. Andima et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Andima</surname><given-names>Geoffrey</given-names></name>
          <email>geoffrey.andima@gmail.com</email>
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3285-8381</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff2">
          <name><surname>Amabayo</surname><given-names>Emirant B.</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Jurua</surname><given-names>Edward</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Cilliers</surname><given-names>Pierre J.</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3175-5134</ext-link></contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>Department of Physics, Mbarara University of Science and Technology, Mbarara, Uganda</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>Department of Physics, Busitema University, Tororo, Uganda</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>3</label><institution>South African National Space Agency (SANSA) Space Science, Hermanus, South Africa</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Geoffrey Andima (geoffrey.andima@gmail.com)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>30</day><month>January</month><year>2019</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>37</volume>
      <issue>1</issue>
      <fpage>65</fpage><lpage>76</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>18</day><month>July</month><year>2018</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>30</day><month>July</month><year>2018</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>14</day><month>January</month><year>2019</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>16</day><month>January</month><year>2019</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        
        
      <license license-type="open-access"><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ext-link></license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://angeo.copernicus.org/articles/37/65/2019/angeo-37-65-2019.html">This article is available from https://angeo.copernicus.org/articles/37/65/2019/angeo-37-65-2019.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://angeo.copernicus.org/articles/37/65/2019/angeo-37-65-2019.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://angeo.copernicus.org/articles/37/65/2019/angeo-37-65-2019.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract>
    <p id="d1e121">In this paper, an empirical total electron content (TEC) model and trends in
the TEC over the African low-latitude region are presented.
GPS-derived TEC data from Malindi, Kenya (geographic coordinates
40.194<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E, 2.996<inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S), and global ionospheric maps (GIMs)
were used. We employed an empirical orthogonal function (EOF) analysis method
together with least-squares regression to model the TEC. The EOF-based TEC
model was validated through comparisons with GIMs, the GPS-derived TEC and
the TEC derived from the International Reference Ionosphere 2016 (IRI-2016)
model for selected quiet and storm conditions. The single-station EOF-based
TEC model over Malindi satisfactorily reproduced the known diurnal,
semiannual and annual variations in the TEC. Comparison of the EOF-based TEC
model results with the TEC derived from the IRI-2016 model showed that the
EOF-based model predicted the TEC over Malindi with fewer errors than the
IRI-2016. For the selected storms, the EOF-based TEC model simulated the
storm time TEC response over Malindi better than the IRI-2016. In the case of
the regional model, the EOF-based TEC model was able to reproduce the TEC
characteristics in the equatorial ionization anomaly region. The EOF-based
TEC model was then used as a background for estimating TEC trends. A
latitudinal dependence in the trends was observed over the African
low-latitude region.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

      <?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e151">The features of the low-latitude ionosphere are quite unique. During the
daytime, a double-peaked ionization structure appears over the low-latitude
region, a phenomenon often referred to as the equatorial ionization anomaly
(EIA). The EIA is normally explained in terms of the plasma fountain theory
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx31 bib1.bibx33" id="paren.1"/>. The daytime E-region eastward electric field
in combination with the nearly horizontal magnetic field of Earth generate a
large vertically directed <inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">E</mml:mi><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">B</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> drift force at the dip
equator that raises the plasma to higher altitudes. The raised plasma
diffuses away from the geomagnetic equator under gravity and pressure
gradient forces along the equipotential magnetic field lines to form
ionization peaks at dip latitudes <inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">15</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and a trough that
extends over the dip equator <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx4" id="paren.2"/>. Prior to the electric
field turning westwards at night, it is enhanced (pre-reversal enhancement –
PRE), resulting in plasma uplift into regions of low recombination.
Associated with the electron density at the EIA enhancement is a density
gradient instability of the Rayleigh–Taylor (RT) type
which creates a spectrum of plasma irregularities that fill the post-sunset low-latitude ionosphere
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx23" id="paren.3"/>. The EIA and the PRE vary with location, solar activity
and season, even on daily basis. These variations make it difficult to
predict the characteristics of the low-latitude ionosphere.</p>
      <p id="d1e195">The state of the ionosphere is of great importance in space-based navigation
systems such as the global navigation satellite systems (GNSS). The total
electron content (TEC) is of particular interest to users of GNSS systems.
For many practical purposes in the GPS, the desired ionospheric parameter is
the TEC. This is because many of the effects on<?pagebreak page66?> transionospheric satellite
links (e.g., time delay, polarization, Faraday rotation and Doppler shift) are
related to the TEC in one way or another <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx24" id="paren.4"/>. The low-latitude
ionosphere exhibits the highest values of the TEC globally. Therefore, pronounced
ionospheric effects are experienced by radio signals transiting the low-latitude ionosphere. Understanding the low-latitude ionospheric dynamics in a
bid to forecast its day-to-day conditions is key for advancement of space
technology and the improvement of GNSS accuracy.</p>
      <p id="d1e201">Ionospheric variability over the low-latitude region of Africa, based on TEC
analysis, has been reported before (e.g., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx1 bib1.bibx34 bib1.bibx17 bib1.bibx3" id="altparen.5"/>). From these studies, the diurnal, seasonal,
disturbed and quiet-time TEC characteristics over the region have been
revealed. However, these analyses made use of TEC data of either the same
solar phase or the same solar cycle. Now with a relatively longer record of
data in the achieves, it is imperative to extend these studies to the
long-term TEC characteristics over the African low-latitude region for
practical applications.</p>
      <p id="d1e207">A common approach to TEC prediction is through modeling. Various TEC models
(e.g., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx2 bib1.bibx36 bib1.bibx37 bib1.bibx28 bib1.bibx18 bib1.bibx14 bib1.bibx9" id="altparen.6"/>) have been developed; however, many of these
models are limited in geographical extent. A widely used model to describe
the global TEC climatology is the International Reference Ionosphere (IRI)
model <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx7" id="paren.7"/>. The IRI is an empirical model synthesized from
global data sets comprised of ionosonde, radar and in situ measurements
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx7 bib1.bibx36" id="paren.8"/>. Averaging and smoothing applied when deriving
the model coefficients may limit its accuracy in capturing peculiar features
such as the TEC variability in the EIA region. Under such circumstances,
regional models are superior in characterizing the background TEC.</p>
      <p id="d1e220">Long term trends in ionospheric parameters are indicative of the deviation in
the ionospheric parameters from their background values. Ionospheric trends
are important in understanding the changes in Earth's energy balance
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx12" id="paren.9"/>. Various studies (e.g., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx21 bib1.bibx5 bib1.bibx6 bib1.bibx26 bib1.bibx10 bib1.bibx8" id="altparen.10"/>)
have reported on long-term trends in ionospheric parameters derived from
ionosonde data. A conclusion from these studies is that trends in the F2-layer critical frequency (<italic>fo</italic>F2) and F2-layer maximum electron
density height (<italic>hm</italic>F2) are negative. Some studies on ionospheric
trends have also revealed latitudinal dependence of these trends
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx10" id="paren.11"/>. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx28" id="text.12"/>, using a database of global ionospheric
maps (GIMs), reported that global TEC trends are positive and are dependent on
the geomagnetic latitude. Also cases of negligible or no trends in the TEC have
been observed. For instance, results obtained by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx27" id="text.13"/> show
a weak negative trend or no trend in ionospheric TEC. Despite the various studies
on trends of different ionospheric parameters, those relating to TEC remain
limited, hence the question on the nature of ionospheric TEC trends still
needs to be answered. There is a need to investigate whether TEC has a negative
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx27" id="paren.14"/>, positive <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx28" id="paren.15"/> or no
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx25" id="paren.16"/> trend. The objective of this paper is therefore twofold: first to attempt to model the low-latitude TEC, and second to estimate
trends in the variation of the ionospheric TEC over the African low-latitude
region using actual TEC measurements by means of regional GPS receivers and
data from the GIMs.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <title>Data sets used</title>
      <p id="d1e260">The International GNSS Service (IGS) operates a number of GPS ground-based
receivers over the African low-latitude region. In this study, data were
obtained from one of the IGS receivers located at Malindi, Kenya, which
archived data from 1995 to date (December 2017). Prior to 2008, the IGS
receiver (station code MALI) was installed at 40.19439<inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E,
2.99591<inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S, and was then replaced with another (station code MAL2)
installed at 40.19414<inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E, 2.99606<inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S. These receivers had
nearly the same location and therefore sampled the same geographical region
of the ionosphere. We obtained the receiver independent exchange (RINEX)
files from <uri>ftp://cddis.gsfc.nasa.gov/</uri> (last access: 15 June 2018) and
then extracted the TEC along the line-of-site, slant TEC (sTEC) from the
RINEX files using the GPS-TEC software of Boston College <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx39" id="paren.17"/>.
This software uses the thin shell mapping function to map the sTEC to be
vertical to obtain the vertical TEC (vTEC) at an assumed ionospheric height
of 350 km. The vTEC for the different viewing geometries for satellites with
elevation angles greater than 30<inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> were averaged epoch by epoch to
give a representation of the vTEC above the receiver. Due to data paucity
from 1995 to 1998, only data from 1999 to 2017 were used in this study.
Hourly averages of the daily TEC data were then calculated to minimize noise
in the data. The hourly averages were organized into a data matrix
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="bold">M</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mi>h</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (day <inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> hour) which was used to model and
estimate trends in the TEC over Malindi. To study the TEC over the African
low-latitude region, the TEC from the GIMs, a reliable source of ionospheric
data <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx20" id="paren.18"/>, was used. Though these maps have been
available since 1998, for comparison purposes with the GPS data, we have used
data from 1999–2017. It is worthy noting that the 2-hourly GIMs were
linearly interpolated to hourly data using a similar approach as in
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx22" id="text.19"/>.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e346">The first six basis functions <bold>(a)</bold> representing the diurnal
variation and their coefficients <bold>(b)</bold> which show the long-term
variation of TEC over MAL2. The red curves in the top left panels in
<bold>(a)</bold> and <bold>(b)</bold> compare the diurnal mean TEC with the first
basis vector <inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and the solar radio flux index measured at 10.7 cm
wavelength (F10.7) with coefficients <inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of the first EOF mode,
respectively. Inserted at the top of the top left panel of <bold>(b)</bold> is a
magnified section of the coefficients <inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in 2002–2003 to show the
semiannual and annual variations.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://angeo.copernicus.org/articles/37/65/2019/angeo-37-65-2019-f01.png"/>

      </fig>

<?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
</sec>
<?pagebreak page67?><sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <title>Single-station model over Malindi</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <title>EOF decomposition of the TEC data</title>
      <p id="d1e417">Empirical orthogonal function (EOF) analysis is a well-known method that
dates back to the work of <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx35" id="text.20"/> and has been widely used in
climate <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx19" id="paren.21"/> and ionospheric
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx11 bib1.bibx40 bib1.bibx29" id="paren.22"/> data analysis. It involves reducing
the dimensionality of the data by finding a reduced set of variables (EOF
modes) that explain most of the variability in the data. This allows for the
original data (TEC(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>h</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)) to be expressed as a linear combination of a
small number of basis functions as

                <disp-formula id="Ch1.E1" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M17" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">TEC</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>h</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:munderover><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∑</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:munderover><mml:msub><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>h</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the coefficient of the basis vector <inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>h</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> with the
index <inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> running from 1 to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (the number of the retained EOF modes). We
used the method of singular value decomposition (svd) to determine the EOF
modes that explain most of the variability in the TEC data. The TEC data
matrix <inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold">M</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> was decomposed into <inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">U</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">V</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, the left and
right basis vectors respectively, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold">S</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is a matrix of singular
values of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold">M</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> according to the equation

                <disp-formula id="Ch1.E2" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M27" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:mi mathvariant="bold">M</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">U</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="bold">S</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">V</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

          The basis vectors of the first six EOF modes in matrix <inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold">U</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and their
corresponding coefficients obtained using Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E3"/>) are shown in
Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F1"/>. While Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T1"/> shows the percentage variability
in the data explained by the different EOF modes,

                <disp-formula id="Ch1.E3" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M29" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

          Figure 1a shows that the average diurnal TEC (red curve) over Malindi has a
pre-dawn minimum at about 03:00 UT, a maximum at about 11:30 UT and an
enhancement from 18:00 to 20:00 UT. The maximum at 11:30 UT is possibly due
to increased ionization, as the solar zenith angle is nearly zero over
Malindi around this time. The post-sunset increase in the TEC from 18:00 to
20:00 UT could be due to an enhancement in the eastward electric field
before its westward reversal at night. Though the physical interpretation of
the basis functions are normally difficult due to their geometric nature
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx19" id="paren.23"/>, the high correlation between the first basis mode <inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
with the mean TEC shows that <inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is replicating the diurnal characteristics
of the ionospheric TEC over Malindi. Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F1"/>b shows that the
semiannual and annual variations in the TEC have peaks during the equinoxes
and high solar activity years respectively. These coefficients are well
correlated with the solar radio flux measured at the 10.7 cm wavelength
(F10.7), confirming that the main driver of ionospheric variability over
Malindi is the changes in the extreme ultraviolet (EUV) radiation.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1"><caption><p id="d1e680">Variance of the TEC data explained by the different EOF modes</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><?xmltex \begin{scaleboxenv}{.95}[.95]?><oasis:tgroup cols="7">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">EOF mode</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">6</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Explained var. (%)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">96.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.20</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.1</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Cumulative (%)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">96.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">97.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">98.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">98.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">99.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">99.2</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup><?xmltex \end{scaleboxenv}?></oasis:table></table-wrap>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T2" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e787">Percentage correlation coefficients of some of the commonly used
solar and magnetic indices with the first six EOF coefficients.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="7">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col2" nameend="col4" align="center" colsep="1">Solar indices </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col5" nameend="col7" align="center">Magnetic indices </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">EOF coeff.</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Sunspot number</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">F10.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">F</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10.7</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">av</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Kp</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">AE</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">Dst</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">71.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">75.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">79.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">19.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">15.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">23.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">36.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">35.</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">37.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">9.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">12.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">16.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">16.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">16.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">4.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">4.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">4.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">7.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">8.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">17.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">20.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">13.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">6.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">7.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">3.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <title>Modeling of the coefficients</title>
      <p id="d1e1122">Due to the rapid convergence of the basis functions, we used only the first
six EOF modes, which accounted for 99.2 % of the explained variance in
the data, to model the observed regional TEC as derived from GNSS
measurements at<?pagebreak page68?> Malindi. For an effective TEC model, the choice of the input
parameters to model the solar and magnetic activity dependencies of the TEC
is important. Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T2"/> shows the correlation coefficients expressed
in percentages for some of the commonly used solar and magnetic indices
obtained from Omniweb (<uri>https://omniweb.gsfc.nasa.gov/</uri>, last access:
26 December 2018) with the first six EOF coefficients. Among the solar
indices, the first EOF coefficients showed a stronger correlation with the
solar activity factor <inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">F</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10.7</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">av</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx38 bib1.bibx30" id="paren.24"/> given by <inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">F</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10.7</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">av</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">F</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10.7</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">F</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10.7</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">81</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">F</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10.7</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">81</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the
81-day average of F10.7 centered on the day of interest. For the magnetic
indices, the first EOF coefficients showed the highest correlation with Dst,
followed by Kp and then AE. Based on the observations in Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T2"/>,
it was reasonable to use <inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">F</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10.7</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">av</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and Dst as inputs to
model the solar and magnetic dependences of TEC over Malindi. Since Dst and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">F</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10.7</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">av</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> vary with the day of the year (DOY), our third
input parameter was the DOY number. We then expressed the EOF coefficients as
a sum of linear and harmonic functions following the procedure of
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx40" id="text.25"/> as

                <disp-formula id="Ch1.E4" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M50" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

          The term <inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> accounts for the linear variation of the EOF
coefficients with solar and magnetic activities and is given by

                <disp-formula id="Ch1.E5" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M52" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">F</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10.7</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">av</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Dst</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

          The semiannual and annual variations in the EOF coefficients are represented
in Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E4"/>) by the harmonic terms <inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of
periods of half a year and 1 year (365.25 days) respectively, expressed as

                <disp-formula specific-use="align" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M55" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><?xmltex \hack{\hbox\bgroup\fontsize{9.2}{9.2}\selectfont$\displaystyle}?><mml:msub><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><?xmltex \hack{$\egroup}?></mml:mrow></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><?xmltex \hack{\hbox\bgroup\fontsize{9.2}{9.2}\selectfont$\displaystyle}?><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mfenced close="]" open="["><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">F</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10.7</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">av</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Dst</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mi>cos⁡</mml:mi><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi><mml:mi>d</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">365.25</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced><?xmltex \hack{$\egroup}?></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E6"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><?xmltex \hack{\hbox\bgroup\fontsize{9.2}{9.2}\selectfont$\displaystyle}?><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mfenced open="[" close="]"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">F</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10.7</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">av</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Dst</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mi>sin⁡</mml:mi><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi><mml:mi>d</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">365.25</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced><?xmltex \hack{$\egroup}?><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><?xmltex \hack{\hbox\bgroup\fontsize{9.2}{9.2}\selectfont$\displaystyle}?><mml:msub><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><?xmltex \hack{$\egroup}?></mml:mrow></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><?xmltex \hack{\hbox\bgroup\fontsize{9.2}{9.2}\selectfont$\displaystyle}?><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mfenced open="[" close="]"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">F</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10.7</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">av</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Dst</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mi>cos⁡</mml:mi><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi><mml:mi>d</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">365.25</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced><?xmltex \hack{$\egroup}?></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E7"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><?xmltex \hack{\hbox\bgroup\fontsize{9.2}{9.2}\selectfont$\displaystyle}?><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mfenced open="[" close="]"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">F</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10.7</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">av</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Dst</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mi>sin⁡</mml:mi><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi><mml:mi>d</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">365.25</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced><?xmltex \hack{$\egroup}?><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>

            The coefficients <inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in Eqs. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E5"/>)–(<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E7"/>) were
determined using a least-squares fit to the EOF coefficients <inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in
Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E3"/>) obtained from GPS-derived TEC values measured at Malindi.
The modeled TEC was then obtained using Eq. ( <xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E1"/>) by replacing the
coefficients with their modeled values. The variation of the observed
GPS-derived TEC, the reconstructed TEC from the first six EOF modes and the
modeled TEC is shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F2"/>. It can be seen from
Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F2"/>a and b that the six EOF modes were sufficient for
reproducing the variation in the TEC. Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F2"/>c shows that the
model captured the diurnal, seasonal and the solar activity variations quite
well in the observed TEC over Malindi. Correlation analysis between the
observed and the modeled TEC show a high positive correlation
(Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F2"/>d), with a correlation coefficient of 0.9225 and
root-mean-square error (RMSE) of 3.703 TEC units (TECU), with 1 TECU
equivalent to 10<inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">16</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> electrons per m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. This high correlation is an
indication of the EOF decomposition method being capable of reproducing the
inherent features of the dynamic ionosphere at the crest of the anomaly
region. The reason for the positive bias of 3.2 TECU in the modeled TEC is
not known.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e1871"><bold>(a)</bold> GPS TEC, <bold>(b)</bold> reconstructed TEC and
<bold>(c)</bold> modeled TEC over Malindi. <bold>(d)</bold> Correlation between EOF-modeled TEC and GPS-derived TEC over Malindi from 1999 to 2017.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=412.564961pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://angeo.copernicus.org/articles/37/65/2019/angeo-37-65-2019-f02.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3">
  <title>Model validation</title>
      <p id="d1e1897">To asses the performance of the EOF-based TEC model, we compared the model
results with the TEC derived from the IRI-2016 model and GIMs obtained from
the website (<uri>ftp://ftp.aiub.unibe.ch/CODE/</uri>, last access: 20 April 2018)
of the Center for Orbit Determination in Europe (CODE). From here onwards,
the TEC from the EOF-based TEC model will be referred to as the EOF TEC, the
TEC derived from the GPS receiver in Malindi as the GPS TEC, the TEC from
CODE's GIMs as CODE's TEC and the TEC from the IRI-2016 model as the IRI TEC.
We used both Kp and Dst to characterize the days into quiet and disturbed. A
day was considered to be quiet if Kp <inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 3 for all 3 h periods of the
day.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3.SSS1">
  <title>Quiet days</title>
      <p id="d1e1915">Quiet days were selected from the equinox (March and September) and solstice
(June and December) months of a high (2002) and low (2009) solar activity
phases in order to validate the EOF-based TEC model. The data for the
selected quiet days were excluded from the matrix used to generate the model
coefficients, and the same procedure for<?pagebreak page69?> model construction was repeated. The
IRI TEC for the selected days was obtained from the web interface of the
IRI-2016 model hosted at Omniweb
(<uri>https://omniweb.gsfc.nasa.gov/vitmo/iri2016_vitmo.html</uri>, last access:
26 July 2018). To retrieve the IRI TEC, the location was specified to
coincide with the geographic coordinates of the MAL2 GPS receiver, and the
top-side boundary was set to its maximum value of 2000 km. The NeQuick
option was used as the top-side electron density model, and ABT-2009 was used
for the bottom-side thickness. Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/> shows hourly diurnal
variation of the GPS TEC, IRI TEC, EOF TEC and CODE's TEC over Malindi for
some selected quiet days. As expected, TEC values were higher in 2002 than in
2009. The IRI-2016 model overestimated the diurnal TEC over Malindi during
the low solar activity year 2009 and during the winter solstice of the high
solar activity year 2002. The overestimate of the GPS TEC by the IRI TEC is
similar to what <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx34" id="text.26"/> observed when they compared GPS TEC
measurements over Kenya with the TEC from the IRI-2007 model. During the
equinox months of higher solar activity years, IRI TEC values were higher and
lower than the GPS TEC at about 03:00–09:00 and 11:00–13:00 UT
respectively. The CODE's TEC overestimated the GPS TEC, especially during the
high solar activity year 2002. The overestimate of the GPS TEC by CODE's TEC
was not reflected much during the low solar activity year 2009. The EOF TEC,
in contrast, replicated the diurnal TEC quite well, except on DOY 066 and DOY
339 in 2009. In general, the highest correlation was observed between the GPS
TEC and CODE's TEC, followed by the correlation of the GPS TEC with the EOF
TEC. It is worth noting that CODE's TEC mainly overestimated the TEC over
Malindi, especially during higher solar activity years. Meanwhile, the
IRI-2016 model overestimated the GPS TEC over MAL2 between 03:00 and
07:00 UT during high solar activity periods and throughout the day during
lower solar activity years. This may be due to inadequate ingestion of
ground-based data from the East African region in to the IRI model. As
mentioned earlier, measurements from ionosondes were used to provide ground
data during IRI model construction, and such data are currently limited over
East Africa.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e1928">GPS TEC, IRI TEC, CODE's TEC and EOF TEC over Malindi for some
selected quiet days. Included in each plot are the maximum Kp and the minimum
Dst index for the day.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=369.885827pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://angeo.copernicus.org/articles/37/65/2019/angeo-37-65-2019-f03.png"/>

          </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e1939">GPS TEC, IRI TEC, CODE's TEC and EOF TEC over Malindi for some
selected storms. In these plots, the GPS TEC values are taken as a true
representation of the ionosphere over Malindi. However, in the absence of GPS
TEC (as in the case of the storm of 29–31 October 2003 shown in <bold>a</bold>),
CODE's TEC was taken as the correct description of the ionospheric response
to the storm.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://angeo.copernicus.org/articles/37/65/2019/angeo-37-65-2019-f04.png"/>

          </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3.SSS2">
  <title>Disturbed days</title>
      <p id="d1e1957">To study the storm time performance of the EOF-based TEC model, we simulated
the TEC for some selected geomagnetic storms. As stated earlier, the test days
were excluded in the process of generating the model coefficients. The IRI
TEC for the storm days was obtained with the storm model turned on. The
bottom panels of Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/> show variation of the hourly diurnal TEC,
while the top panels show variation of Dst index during some selected major
geomagnetic storms. In Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/>a, TEC variation for a storm that
occurred from 29–30 October 2003 is shown. No continuous GPS TEC
measurements were available from MAL2 IGS receiver during this storm period.
As can be seen in CODE's TEC, the storm had negative effect on the peak value
of the TEC. The same negative storm effect was replicated by the EOF and IRI
models, especially on 30–31 October 2003. Another major geomagnetic storm
occurred in December 2006, with the main phase on 15 December 2006
(Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/>b). The EOF TEC, CODE's TEC and the IRI TEC on the day of the
main phase of the storm showed negative storm effects, consistent with the
GPS TEC. A case of a positive storm time effect on the ionosphere is shown in
Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/>c, where the EOF TEC and CODE's TEC showed similar positive
storm time effects to the GPS TEC. This was not reflected in the TEC
derived from the IRI-2016 model. Shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/>d is the TEC
response to the geomagnetic storm that occurred in March 2015. During the
recovery period, which lasted for many days, the GPS TEC showed negative storm
effects compared to its value during the time of storm commencement. The EOF
TEC, CODE's TEC and the IRI TEC all showed negative storm effects during the
recovery period.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e1972">Diurnal variation of root-mean-square error (RMSE) of IRI TEC,
CODE's TEC and EOF TEC relative to GPS TEC over Malindi.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=369.885827pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://angeo.copernicus.org/articles/37/65/2019/angeo-37-65-2019-f05.png"/>

          </fig>

<?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
</sec>
<?pagebreak page70?><sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3.SSS3">
  <title>Statistical analysis</title>
      <p id="d1e1989">From the EOF-based TEC model, we have simulated the TEC for the months of
March, June, September and December for low (2009) and high (2013) solar
activity years. In each of these simulations, the data for the selected
months were excluded from the data used to generate the model coefficients.
It is worthy noting that in generating the model coefficients, say for March
2009, only the data of March 2009 were excluded. The monthly median values
for the EOF TEC, IRI TEC and CODE's TEC were used to compute the RMSE of the
predicted TEC from the GPS TEC for every hour of the day. The diurnal
variation of the RMSE values in 2009 and 2013 are shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F5"/>.
From Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F5"/>, the uncertainty in predicting the observed TEC was
higher in 2013 than in 2009. This could be due to intensification of
equatorial electrodynamic processes and the associated effects, such as TEC
perturbations during higher solar activity years <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx3" id="paren.27"/>. These
secondary effects of the equatorial dynamo processes are probably not well captured by the models. A
comparison of the performance of the different models has shown that CODE's
GIMs predicted the TEC over MAL2 with the least RMSE values, followed by the
EOF model in 2009. The greatest uncertainty in predicting the TEC over MAL2
in the same year was observed in the IRI-2016 TEC. Similarly in 2013, the IRI
TEC had higher RMSE values compared to the EOF TEC. CODE's<?pagebreak page71?> GIMs showed the
largest uncertainty in predicting the TEC over MAL2 during the December
solstice of the high solar activity year 2013. The diurnal uncertainties in
the ability of IRI-2016 to predict the TEC over MAL2 exhibited two peaks in
March, June and September in 2009. The maximum RMSE values in the
IRI-2016-predicted TEC were observed between 11:00 and 13:00 UT in March and
June and between 13:00–14:00 UT in September in 2009. The December solstice
showed a single peak in the RMSE values from 06:00–07:00 UT in 2009. Both
the EOF TEC and CODE's TEC had the largest RMSE values from 11:00–14:00 UT
in the same year. The RMSE values from 16:00–18:00 UT in March and
September 2009 were much higher than those in June and December of the same
year. In 2013, the RMSE in the IRI-2016-predicted TEC in the months of March
and September had only single peaks which occurred at about 06:00 UT.
However, two peaks, one between 04:00 and 07:00 UT and a second one between
13:00 and 14:00 UT, were observed in June and December 2013. The smallest
error in the IRI TEC and the EOF TEC was observed after midnight local
time to about 03:00 UT in both
2009 and 2013.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F6" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e2001"><bold>(a)</bold> The first basis modes of the first four first-layer
expansion coefficients. <bold>(b)</bold> The expansion coefficients (blue) and
their modeled values (red) for the basis modes in <bold>(a)</bold>.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=412.564961pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://angeo.copernicus.org/articles/37/65/2019/angeo-37-65-2019-f06.png"/>

          </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F7" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e2020">EOF TEC <bold>(a)</bold>, CODE's TEC <bold>(b)</bold> and the IRI
TEC <bold>(c)</bold> for the DOY 070 in 2015. Shown on the plots are the local
times in hours. The horizontal curved solid white lines show the geomagnetic
dip equator. The dashed white lines show the anomaly region at <inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">15</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> geomagnetic latitude from the dip equator.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=497.923228pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://angeo.copernicus.org/articles/37/65/2019/angeo-37-65-2019-f07.png"/>

          </fig>

</sec>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4">
  <title>Modeling the TEC over African low latitudes</title>
      <p id="d1e2065">The first step in the regional TEC modeling was to extract the TEC for the
African low-latitude region from CODE's GIMs. The daily GIMs were organized
into bins of
2.5<inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 5<inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1 h
(latitude <inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> longitude <inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> LT). The binned data were then
decomposed into the spatial and temporal components according to the equation

              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E8" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M70" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">TEC</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">lat</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">lon</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">LT</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>m</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:munderover><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∑</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:munderover><mml:msub><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">lon</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">lat</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">LT</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>m</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

        In Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E8"/>), <inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">lon</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">lat</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the basis modes
representing the spatial TEC variability, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">LT</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>m</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is
the coefficients that describe the temporal TEC variations
in terms of local time (LT) and month (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:mi>m</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>). The temporal component in
Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E8"/>) was further broken into the diurnal and long-term (seasonal,
annual and solar cycle) variations by another decomposition which we refer to
here as the second-layer decomposition expressed as

              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E9" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M74" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">LT</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:munderover><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∑</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mi>m</mml:mi></mml:munderover><mml:msub><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">LT</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

        In Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E9"/>), <inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">LT</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the basis functions of the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>th first-layer coefficients, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the coefficients of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">LT</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F6"/>a shows the first basis modes for
each of the first four expansion coefficients in the first-layer decomposition.
Equations (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E5"/>)–(<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E7"/>) were then used to model the coefficients
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F6"/>b shows the coefficients <inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
together with their model-predicted values. Using the modeled values of the
coefficients, the regional TEC was then reconstructed in a reverse order. We
first used Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E9"/>) to obtain the coefficients for the first-layer
decomposition and then applied Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E8"/>) to determine the TEC in each
grid cell. Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F7"/> shows the modeled TEC, CODE's TEC and the IRI
TEC for DOY 070 in 2015. It can be seen from Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F7"/> that<?pagebreak page72?> the model
has reproduced the main features of the EIA region quite well. Higher
correlations are observed between the EOF-modeled TEC and CODE's TEC
(Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F7"/>a and b). This high correlation is an indication that the
model-predicted results could offer a good alternative to estimating the
background TEC, since CODE's TEC is derived from GNSS measurements.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F8" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e2464">The yearly median residual TEC after removing the solar and magnetic
activity variations for the periods 1999–2017 <bold>(a)</bold> and
2003–2017 <bold>(b)</bold>. The upper panels are for the TEC derived from MAL2
IGS receiver, the middle panels are for TEC from CODE's GIMs and the lower
panels are for TEC from IGS GIMs corresponding to the location of MAL2 IGS
receiver. The straight lines in these plots are the first-degree polynomial
fits used to estimate the trends.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://angeo.copernicus.org/articles/37/65/2019/angeo-37-65-2019-f08.png"/>

      </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F9" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e2481">Trends in TEC over the African low-latitude region derived from
CODE's <bold>(a, b)</bold> and IGS <bold>(c, d)</bold> GIMs. Panels <bold>(a)</bold>
and <bold>(c)</bold> are for the period 1999–2017 while <bold>(b)</bold> and
<bold>(d)</bold> are for the period 2003–2017. The horizontal curved white lines
are same as described in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F7"/>.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://angeo.copernicus.org/articles/37/65/2019/angeo-37-65-2019-f09.png"/>

      </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5">
  <title>TEC trends</title>
      <p id="d1e2517">In the past, few studies (e.g., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx28 bib1.bibx27" id="altparen.28"/>) have derived
long-term TEC trends, and these mainly used TEC data from GIMs. In this work,
we have used the GPS-derived TEC and GIMs to study TEC trends over the low-latitude region of Africa. A key aspect in trend studies is the art of
suppressing the solar and magnetic activity influences on these trends. We
used the EOF-modeled TEC as background the TEC to remove the solar and magnetic
effects in influencing the TEC trends. First, the monthly median TEC values
were calculated from the daily TEC. The median TEC values were then modeled
using similar equations as in Eqs. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E5"/>)–(<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E7"/>). In these
equations, the daily inputs were replaced with their monthly averages. The
modeled TEC values were then subtracted from the monthly medians to obtain
the TEC residuals. The monthly TEC residuals from 10:00–14:00 LT were
averaged for each year to give a representation of the noontime annual TEC
residuals (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>TEC). The trend was then determined using the equation
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx26 bib1.bibx8" id="paren.29"/>

              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E10" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M82" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">TEC</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">time</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">year</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

        where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:mi>A</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the constant part, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M84" display="inline"><mml:mi>B</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the slope (trend) of the
time-dependent TEC residuals. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx27" id="text.30"/> attributed the positive
global TEC trends reported in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx28" id="text.31"/> to lower TEC values in CODE's
GIMs, especially prior to 2003. To test this assertion, we have estimated the
long-term trends in the TEC for the periods 1999–2017 and 2003–2017 using
the GPS-derived TEC, CODE's TEC and the TEC from IGS GIMs. Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F8"/>
shows the TEC trends obtained from the GPS-derived TEC and the TEC from GIMs
of CODE and IGS over Malindi. Trends of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M85" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.139</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.063</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M86" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.119</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.061</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M87" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.057</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.042</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> TECU yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M88" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> were obtained using the GPS TEC,
CODE's GIMs and IGS GIMs over Malindi respectively. Though the trend values
in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F8"/>a were slightly different, their 95 % confidence
bounds reveal a slight positive TEC trend for the period 1999–2017. For the
period 2003–2017, the trend estimates from the three data sets show that TEC
trends over MAL2 are positive. To study the trends in the TEC over the
African low-latitude region, we used the GIMs and estimated the trends in
each of the 2.5<inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 5<inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
(latitude <inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> longitude) grids. The trends are shown in
Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F9"/>a and c for the period 1999-2017 and in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F9"/>b and
d for the period 2003–2017. The trends in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F9"/> show a
latitudinal dependence, with the trends in the vicinity of the crest of the
EIA region being more positive than those near the magnetic equator, where
the trend was negative over most of the African equatorial region. Analysis
of the data from<?pagebreak page74?> 1999–2017 revealed higher average values of TEC trends than
that from 2003–2017 for both CODE's and IGS GIMs, though the general pattern
of the trends remained unchanged. The trend pattern observed in this study
confirms the latitudinal variation in TEC trends reported in
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx28" id="text.32"/>. The difference in the trend magnitudes for the periods
1999–2017 and 2003–2017 could be as pointed out earlier due to a bias
towards lower values of GIMs prior to 2002 <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx27 bib1.bibx13" id="paren.33"/>.
If so, the trends in the TEC over African low latitudes are therefore mainly
negative, though cases of slight positive trends are also possible,
especially at the crest of the EIA region. Geomagnetic or anthropogenic
factors are often the plausible physical mechanisms for explaining trends in
upper atmospheric parameters. The anthropogenic contributions to trends arise
through the accumulation of greenhouse gases, which result in a decrease of
atomic oxygen in the upper atmosphere. While the geomagnetic control of the
trends is either due to the long-term changes in geomagnetic activity
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx10 bib1.bibx32" id="paren.34"/> or to Earth's magnetic field secular
variations <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx15 bib1.bibx16" id="paren.35"/>, the latter view may explain the
latitudinal dependence in the trends over the African low-latitude region.
However, a detailed study is required to quantify the relative contribution
of the different trend drivers over the African low latitudes.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S6" sec-type="conclusions">
  <title>Summary and conclusion</title>
      <p id="d1e2705">We have used EOF expansion together with least-squares regression to model the TEC
over the African low-latitude region. We first developed a single-station
model over MAL2, a station at the southern crest of the EIA, and then
constructed a regional model to predict the TEC over the African low latitudes.
Despite the complicated nature of the low-latitude ionosphere, the model over
MAL2 was able to satisfactorily reproduce the diurnal, seasonal and solar
activity variations in the observed TEC. Comparison of the model results with
IRI-2016-derived TEC showed that the EOF-based TEC model was more accurate in
predicting the daytime TEC over Malindi than IRI-2016. In contrast,
CODE's GIMs were better correlated with GPS TEC than the TEC from the
EOF-based model, though CODE's GIMs mainly overestimated the GPS TEC over
MAL2 during higher solar activity years. The large discrepancy of the
IRI-2016-predicted daytime TEC from the observed TEC over MAL2 during periods
of low solar activity and during the winter solstice could be due to the overrepresentation of the effects of the low-latitude <inline-formula><mml:math id="M93" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">E</mml:mi><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">B</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
plasma drifts and thermospheric winds in the model. The regional model
reproduced the known features of the low-latitude ionosphere quite well.
Using the TEC from the EOF-based model as the background TEC to suppress solar
and magnetic activity dependence of the TEC, we estimated trends in the TEC over the
African low-latitude<?pagebreak page75?> region. The regional trends showed a latitudinal
dependence, with the trends in the vicinity of the magnetic equator being more
negative than those at the crest of the EIA.</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><notes notes-type="dataavailability">

      <p id="d1e2724">The data used in this study were obtained from
<uri>ftp://cddis.gsfc.nasa.gov/</uri> (last accessed: 15 June 2018),
<uri>https://omniweb.gsfc.nasa.gov/</uri> (last accessed: 26 December 2018) and
<uri>ftp://ftp.aiub.unibe.ch/CODE/</uri> (last accessed: 20 April 2018).</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests">

      <p id="d1e2739">The authors declare that they have no conflict of
interest.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e2745">This study was made possible by financial support from the International Science
Programme (ISP) of Uppsala University in Sweden. We acknowledge the
administration and staff of the Space Science Directorate of the South
African National Space Agency (SANSA) for the support during the research
visit of the first author to the institution. The authors acknowledge topical
editor Ana G. Elias and the anonymous reviewers for their constructive
comments and suggestions.<?xmltex \hack{\newline}?><?xmltex \hack{\newline}?> Edited by: Ana G.
Elias<?xmltex \hack{\newline}?> Reviewed by: three anonymous referees</p></ack><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bibx1"><label>Adewale et al.(2011)Adewale, Oyeyemi, Adeloye, Ngwira, and Athieno</label><mixed-citation>Adewale, A. O., Oyeyemi, E. O., Adeloye, A. B., Ngwira, C. M., and Athieno,
R.: Responses of equatorial F region to different geomagnetic storms
observed by GPS in the African sector, J. Geophys. Res., 116, A12319,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JA016998" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2011JA016998</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx2"><label>Anderson et al.(1987)Anderson, Mendillo, and Herniter</label><mixed-citation>
Anderson, D. N., Mendillo, M., and Herniter, B.: A semi-empirical low-latitude ionospheric model, Radio Sci., 22, 292–306, 1987.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx3"><label>Andima et al.(2015)Andima, Jurua, Amabayo, and Habarulema</label><mixed-citation>
Andima, G., Jurua, E., Amabayo, E. B., and Habarulema, J. B.: Statistical
analysis of TEC perturbations over a low latitude region during 2009-2013
ascending solar activity phase, Adv. Space Res., 56, 2542–2551, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx4"><label>Appleton(1946)</label><mixed-citation>Appleton, E. V.: Two Anomalies in the Ionosphere, Nature, 157, 691,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/157691a0" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/157691a0</ext-link>, 1946.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx5"><label>Bencze(2002)</label><mixed-citation>
Bencze, P.: Some results referring to the long-term change of ionospheric
parameters, Acta Geod. Geophys. Hu., 37, 403–408, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx6"><label>Bencze(2005)</label><mixed-citation>
Bencze, P.: On the long-term change of ionospheric parameters, J. Atmos.
Sol.-Terr. Phy., 67, 1298–1306, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx7"><label>Bilitza(1990)</label><mixed-citation>
Bilitza, D.: International reference ionosphere 1990, National Space Science
Data Center, Science Applications Research Lanham, Maryland 20706, USA, 1990.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx8"><label>Bremer et al.(2012)Bremer, Damboldt, Mielich, and Suessmann</label><mixed-citation>
Bremer, J., Damboldt, T., Mielich, J., and Suessmann, P.: Comparing long-term
trends in the ionospheric F2-region with two different methods, J. Atmos.
Sol.-Terr. Phy., 77, 174–185, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx9"><label>Chen et al.(2015)Chen, Zhang, Coster, and Fang</label><mixed-citation>
Chen, Z., Zhang, S.-R., Coster, A. J., and Fang, G.: EOF analysis and
modeling of GPS TEC climatology over North America, J. Geophys. Res.-Space,
120, 3118–3129, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx10"><label>Danilov and Mikhailov(1999)</label><mixed-citation>Danilov, A. D. and Mikhailov, A. V.: Letter to the Editor: Spatial and
seasonal variations of the <italic>fo</italic>F2 long-term trends, Ann. Geophys., 17,
1239–1243, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00585-999-1239-2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s00585-999-1239-2</ext-link>, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx11"><label>Dvinskikh(1988)</label><mixed-citation>
Dvinskikh, N. I.: Expansion of ionospheric characteristics fields in
empirical orthogonal functions, Adv. Space Res., 8, 179–187, 1988.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx12"><label>Elias(2011)</label><mixed-citation>
Elias, A. G.: Possible Sources of Long-Term Variations in the Mid-Latitude Ionosphere, J. Open Atmos. Sci., 5, 9–15, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx13"><label>Emmert et al.(2017)Emmert, Mannucci, McDonald, and Vergados</label><mixed-citation>
Emmert, J. T., Mannucci, A. J., McDonald, S. E., and Vergados, P.:
Attribution of interminimum changes in global and hemispheric total electron
content, J. Geophys. Res.-Space, 122, 2424–2439, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx14"><label>Ercha et al.(2012)Ercha, Zhang, Ridley, Xiao, and Hao</label><mixed-citation>Ercha, A., Zhang, D., Ridley, A. J., Xiao, Z., and Hao, Y.: A global model:
Empirical orthogonal function analysis of total electron content 1999–2009
data, J. Geophys. Res., 117, A03328, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JA017238" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2011JA017238</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx15"><label>Foppiano et al.(1999)Foppiano, Cid, and Jara</label><mixed-citation>
Foppiano, A., Cid, L., and Jara, V.: Ionospheric long-term trends for South
American mid-latitudes, J. Atmos. Sol.-Terr. Phy., 61, 717–723, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx16"><label>Gnabahou et al.(2013)Gnabahou, Elias, and Ouattara</label><mixed-citation>Gnabahou, D. A., Elias, A. G., and Ouattara, F.: Long-term trend of
<italic>fo</italic>F2 at a West African equatorial station linked to greenhouse gas
increase and dip equator secular displacement, J. Geophys. Res., 118,
3909–3913, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx17"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{Habarulema et~al.({2013})Habarulema, McKinnell, Bure\v{s}ov\`{a}, Zhang, Seemala, Ngwira, Chum, and Opperman}}?><label>Habarulema et al.(2013)Habarulema, McKinnell, Burešovà, Zhang, Seemala, Ngwira, Chum, and Opperman</label><mixed-citation>
Habarulema, J. B., McKinnell, L.-A., Burešovà, D., Zhang, Y.,
Seemala, G., Ngwira, C., Chum, J., and Opperman, B.: A comparative study of
TEC response for the African equatorial and mid-latitudes during storm
conditions, J. Atmos. Sol.-Terr. Phy., 102, 105–114, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx18"><label>Hajra et al.(2016)Hajra, Chakraborty, Tsurutani, DasGupta, Echer, Gonzalez, and Sobral</label><mixed-citation>Hajra, R., Chakraborty, S. K., Tsurutani, B. T., DasGupta, A., Echer, E.,
Gonzalez, C. G. B. A. W. D., and Sobral, J. H. A.: An empirical model of
ionospheric total electron content (TEC) near the crest of the equatorial
ionization anomaly (EIA), J. Space Weather Spac., 6, A29,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1051/swsc/2016023" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1051/swsc/2016023</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx19"><label>Hannachi et al.(2007)Hannachi, Jolliffe, and Stephenson</label><mixed-citation>
Hannachi, A., Jolliffe, I. T., and Stephenson, D. B.: Empirical orthogonal
functions and related techniques in atmospheric science: A review, Int. J.
Climatol., 27, 1119–1152, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx20"><label>Hernandez-Pajares et al.(2009)Hernandez-Pajares, Juan, Sanz, Orus, Garcia-Rigo, Feltens, Komjathy, Schaer, and
Krankowski</label><mixed-citation> Hernandez-Pajares, M., Juan, J. M., Sanz,
J., Orus, R., Garcia-Rigo, A., Feltens, J., Komjathy, A., Schaer, S. C., and
Krankowski, A.: The IGS VTEC maps: a reliable source of ionospheric
information since 1998, J. Geodesy, 83, 263–275, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx21"><label>Jarvis et al.(1998)Jarvis, Jenkins, and Rodgers</label><mixed-citation>
Jarvis, M. J., Jenkins, B., and Rodgers, G. A.: Southern hemisphere
observations of a long-term decrease in F region altitude and thermospheric
wind providing possible evidence for global thermospheric cooling, J.
Geophys. Res., 103, 20774–20787, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx22"><label>Jee et al.(2010)Jee, Lee, Kim, Chung, and Cho</label><mixed-citation>Jee, G., Lee, H. B., Kim, Y. H., Chung, J. K., and Cho, J.: Assessment of GPS
global ionosphere maps (GIM) by comparison between CODE GIM and TOPEX/Jason
TEC data: Ionospheric perspective, J. Geophys. Res., 115, A10319,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JA015432" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2010JA015432</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx23"><label>Kelley(2009)</label><mixed-citation>
Kelley, M. C.: The Earth's ionosphere: Plasma Physics and Electrodynamics,
2nd Edn., Amsterdam, Academic Press, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx24"><label>Kersley et al.(2004)Kersley, Malan, Pryse, Cander, Bamford, Belehaki, Leitinger, Radicella, Mitchell, and Spencer</label><mixed-citation>
Kersley, L., Malan, D., Pryse, S. E., Cander, L. R., Bamford, R. A.,
Belehaki, A., Leitinger, R., Radicella, S. M., Mitchell, C. N., and Spencer,
P. S.: Total electron content – A key parameter in propagation: measurement
and use in ionospheric imaging, Ann. Geophys., 47, 1067–1091, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page76?><ref id="bib1.bibx25"><label>Lastovicka(2013)</label><mixed-citation>
Lastovicka, J.: Are trends in total electron content (TEC) really positive,
J. Geophys. Res.-Space, 118, 3831–3835, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx26"><label>Lastovicka et al.(2006)Lastovicka, Mikhailov, Ulich, Bremer, Elias, de Adler, Jara, del Rio, Foppiano, Ovalle, and Danilov</label><mixed-citation>Lastovicka, J., Mikhailov, A., Ulich, T., Bremer, J., Elias, A., de Adler,
N. O., Jara, V., del Rio, R. A., Foppiano, A., Ovalle, E., and Danilov, A.:
Long-term trends in <italic>fo</italic>F2: A comparison of various methods, J. Atmos.
Sol.-Terr. Phy., 68, 1854–1870, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx27"><label>Lastovicka et al.(2017)Lastovicka, Urbar, and Kozubek</label><mixed-citation>Lastovicka, J., Urbar, J., and Kozubek, M.: Long-term trends in the total
electron content, Geophys. Res. Lett., 44, 8168–8172,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL075063" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2017GL075063</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx28"><label>Lean et al.(2011)Lean, Emmert, Picone, and Meier</label><mixed-citation>Lean, J. L., Emmert, J. T., Picone, J. M., and Meier, R. R.: Global and
regional trends in ionospheric total electron content, J. Geophys. Res., 116,
A00H04, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JA016378" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2010JA016378</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx29"><label>Liu et al.(2008)Liu, Zhang, Wan, Liu, and Ning</label><mixed-citation>Liu, C., Zhang, M.-L., Wan, W., Liu, L., and Ning, B.: Modeling M(3000)F2
based on empirical orthogonal function analysis method, Radio Sci., 43,
RS1003, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2007RS003694" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2007RS003694</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx30"><label>Liu et al.(2006)Liu, Wan, Ning, Pirog, and Kurkin</label><mixed-citation>Liu, L., Wan, W., Ning, B., Pirog, O. M., and Kurkin, V. I.: Solar activity
variations of the ionospheric peak electron density, J. Geophys. Res., 111,
A08304, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JA011598" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2006JA011598</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx31"><label>Martyn(1947)</label><mixed-citation>Martyn, D. F.: Atmospheric Tides in the Ionosphere. I. Solar Tides in the F2
Region, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser.-A, 189, 241–260,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1947.0037" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1098/rspa.1947.0037</ext-link>, 1947.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx32"><label>Mikhailov and Marin(2000)</label><mixed-citation>Mikhailov, A. V. and Marin, D.: Geomagnetic control of the <italic>fo</italic>F2
long-term trends, Ann. Geophys., 18, 653–665,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00585-000-0653-2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s00585-000-0653-2</ext-link>, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx33"><label>Moffett(1979)</label><mixed-citation>Moffett, R. J.: The equatorial anomaly in the electron distribution of the terrestrial F-region, Fund. Cos. Phy., 4, 313–391, 1979.
 </mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx34"><label>Olwendo et al.(2012)Olwendo, Cilliers, Baki, and Mito</label><mixed-citation>
Olwendo, O., Cilliers, P., Baki, P., and Mito, C.: Using GPS-SCINDA
observations to study the correlation between scintillation, total electron
content enhancement and depletions over the Kenyan region, Adv. Space
Res., 49, 1363–1372, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx35"><label>Pearson(1901)</label><mixed-citation>
Pearson, K.: On lines and planes of closest fit to systems of points in
space, Philos. Mag., 2, 559–572, 1901.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx36"><label>Rawer and Bilitza(1990)</label><mixed-citation>
Rawer, K. and Bilitza, D.: International reference ionosphere-plasma
densities: status 1988, Adv. Space Res., 10, 5–14, 1990.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx37"><label>Reinisch et al.(2004)Reinisch, Huang, Belehaki, Shi, Zhang, and Ilma</label><mixed-citation>
Reinisch, B. W., Huang, X., Belehaki, A., Shi, J. K., Zhang, M. L., and Ilma,
R.: Modeling the IRI topside profile using scale heights from ground-based
ionosonde measurements, Adv. Space Res., 34, 2026–2031, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx38"><label>Richards et al.(1994)Richards, Fennelly, and Torr</label><mixed-citation>
Richards, P. G., Fennelly, J. A., and Torr, D. G.: IEUVAC: A solar EUV flux
model for aeronomic calculations, J. Geophys. Res., 26, 8981–8992, 1994.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx39"><label>Seemala and Valladares(2011)</label><mixed-citation>Seemala, G. K. and Valladares, C.: Statistics of total electron content
depletions observed over the South American continent for the year 2008,
Radio Sci., 46, RS5019, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011RS004722" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2011RS004722</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx40"><label>Zhang et al.(2009)Zhang, Liu, Wan, Liu, and Ning</label><mixed-citation>Zhang, M.-L., Liu, C., Wan, W., Liu, L., and Ning, B.: A global model of the
ionospheric F2 peak height based on EOF analysis, Ann. Geophys., 27,
3203–3212, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/angeo-27-3203-2009" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/angeo-27-3203-2009</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Modeling of GPS total electron content over the African low-latitude region using empirical orthogonal functions</article-title-html>
<abstract-html><p>In this paper, an empirical total electron content (TEC) model and trends in
the TEC over the African low-latitude region are presented.
GPS-derived TEC data from Malindi, Kenya (geographic coordinates
40.194°&thinsp;E, 2.996°&thinsp;S), and global ionospheric maps (GIMs)
were used. We employed an empirical orthogonal function (EOF) analysis method
together with least-squares regression to model the TEC. The EOF-based TEC
model was validated through comparisons with GIMs, the GPS-derived TEC and
the TEC derived from the International Reference Ionosphere 2016 (IRI-2016)
model for selected quiet and storm conditions. The single-station EOF-based
TEC model over Malindi satisfactorily reproduced the known diurnal,
semiannual and annual variations in the TEC. Comparison of the EOF-based TEC
model results with the TEC derived from the IRI-2016 model showed that the
EOF-based model predicted the TEC over Malindi with fewer errors than the
IRI-2016. For the selected storms, the EOF-based TEC model simulated the
storm time TEC response over Malindi better than the IRI-2016. In the case of
the regional model, the EOF-based TEC model was able to reproduce the TEC
characteristics in the equatorial ionization anomaly region. The EOF-based
TEC model was then used as a background for estimating TEC trends. A
latitudinal dependence in the trends was observed over the African
low-latitude region.</p></abstract-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>Adewale et al.(2011)Adewale, Oyeyemi, Adeloye, Ngwira, and Athieno</label><mixed-citation>
Adewale, A. O., Oyeyemi, E. O., Adeloye, A. B., Ngwira, C. M., and Athieno,
R.: Responses of equatorial F region to different geomagnetic storms
observed by GPS in the African sector, J. Geophys. Res., 116, A12319,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JA016998" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JA016998</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>Anderson et al.(1987)Anderson, Mendillo, and Herniter</label><mixed-citation>
Anderson, D. N., Mendillo, M., and Herniter, B.: A semi-empirical low-latitude ionospheric model, Radio Sci., 22, 292–306, 1987.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>Andima et al.(2015)Andima, Jurua, Amabayo, and Habarulema</label><mixed-citation>
Andima, G., Jurua, E., Amabayo, E. B., and Habarulema, J. B.: Statistical
analysis of TEC perturbations over a low latitude region during 2009-2013
ascending solar activity phase, Adv. Space Res., 56, 2542–2551, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>Appleton(1946)</label><mixed-citation>
Appleton, E. V.: Two Anomalies in the Ionosphere, Nature, 157, 691,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/157691a0" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/157691a0</a>, 1946.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>Bencze(2002)</label><mixed-citation>
Bencze, P.: Some results referring to the long-term change of ionospheric
parameters, Acta Geod. Geophys. Hu., 37, 403–408, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>Bencze(2005)</label><mixed-citation>
Bencze, P.: On the long-term change of ionospheric parameters, J. Atmos.
Sol.-Terr. Phy., 67, 1298–1306, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>Bilitza(1990)</label><mixed-citation>
Bilitza, D.: International reference ionosphere 1990, National Space Science
Data Center, Science Applications Research Lanham, Maryland 20706, USA, 1990.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>Bremer et al.(2012)Bremer, Damboldt, Mielich, and Suessmann</label><mixed-citation>
Bremer, J., Damboldt, T., Mielich, J., and Suessmann, P.: Comparing long-term
trends in the ionospheric F2-region with two different methods, J. Atmos.
Sol.-Terr. Phy., 77, 174–185, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>Chen et al.(2015)Chen, Zhang, Coster, and Fang</label><mixed-citation>
Chen, Z., Zhang, S.-R., Coster, A. J., and Fang, G.: EOF analysis and
modeling of GPS TEC climatology over North America, J. Geophys. Res.-Space,
120, 3118–3129, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>Danilov and Mikhailov(1999)</label><mixed-citation>
Danilov, A. D. and Mikhailov, A. V.: Letter to the Editor: Spatial and
seasonal variations of the <i>fo</i>F2 long-term trends, Ann. Geophys., 17,
1239–1243, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00585-999-1239-2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s00585-999-1239-2</a>, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>Dvinskikh(1988)</label><mixed-citation>
Dvinskikh, N. I.: Expansion of ionospheric characteristics fields in
empirical orthogonal functions, Adv. Space Res., 8, 179–187, 1988.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>Elias(2011)</label><mixed-citation>
Elias, A. G.: Possible Sources of Long-Term Variations in the Mid-Latitude Ionosphere, J. Open Atmos. Sci., 5, 9–15, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>Emmert et al.(2017)Emmert, Mannucci, McDonald, and Vergados</label><mixed-citation>
Emmert, J. T., Mannucci, A. J., McDonald, S. E., and Vergados, P.:
Attribution of interminimum changes in global and hemispheric total electron
content, J. Geophys. Res.-Space, 122, 2424–2439, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>Ercha et al.(2012)Ercha, Zhang, Ridley, Xiao, and Hao</label><mixed-citation>
Ercha, A., Zhang, D., Ridley, A. J., Xiao, Z., and Hao, Y.: A global model:
Empirical orthogonal function analysis of total electron content 1999–2009
data, J. Geophys. Res., 117, A03328, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JA017238" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JA017238</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>Foppiano et al.(1999)Foppiano, Cid, and Jara</label><mixed-citation>
Foppiano, A., Cid, L., and Jara, V.: Ionospheric long-term trends for South
American mid-latitudes, J. Atmos. Sol.-Terr. Phy., 61, 717–723, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>Gnabahou et al.(2013)Gnabahou, Elias, and Ouattara</label><mixed-citation>
Gnabahou, D. A., Elias, A. G., and Ouattara, F.: Long-term trend of
<i>fo</i>F2 at a West African equatorial station linked to greenhouse gas
increase and dip equator secular displacement, J. Geophys. Res., 118,
3909–3913, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>Habarulema et al.(2013)Habarulema, McKinnell, Burešovà, Zhang, Seemala, Ngwira, Chum, and Opperman</label><mixed-citation>
Habarulema, J. B., McKinnell, L.-A., Burešovà, D., Zhang, Y.,
Seemala, G., Ngwira, C., Chum, J., and Opperman, B.: A comparative study of
TEC response for the African equatorial and mid-latitudes during storm
conditions, J. Atmos. Sol.-Terr. Phy., 102, 105–114, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>Hajra et al.(2016)Hajra, Chakraborty, Tsurutani, DasGupta, Echer, Gonzalez, and Sobral</label><mixed-citation>
Hajra, R., Chakraborty, S. K., Tsurutani, B. T., DasGupta, A., Echer, E.,
Gonzalez, C. G. B. A. W. D., and Sobral, J. H. A.: An empirical model of
ionospheric total electron content (TEC) near the crest of the equatorial
ionization anomaly (EIA), J. Space Weather Spac., 6, A29,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1051/swsc/2016023" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1051/swsc/2016023</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>Hannachi et al.(2007)Hannachi, Jolliffe, and Stephenson</label><mixed-citation>
Hannachi, A., Jolliffe, I. T., and Stephenson, D. B.: Empirical orthogonal
functions and related techniques in atmospheric science: A review, Int. J.
Climatol., 27, 1119–1152, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>Hernandez-Pajares et al.(2009)Hernandez-Pajares, Juan, Sanz, Orus, Garcia-Rigo, Feltens, Komjathy, Schaer, and
Krankowski</label><mixed-citation> Hernandez-Pajares, M., Juan, J. M., Sanz,
J., Orus, R., Garcia-Rigo, A., Feltens, J., Komjathy, A., Schaer, S. C., and
Krankowski, A.: The IGS VTEC maps: a reliable source of ionospheric
information since 1998, J. Geodesy, 83, 263–275, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>Jarvis et al.(1998)Jarvis, Jenkins, and Rodgers</label><mixed-citation>
Jarvis, M. J., Jenkins, B., and Rodgers, G. A.: Southern hemisphere
observations of a long-term decrease in F region altitude and thermospheric
wind providing possible evidence for global thermospheric cooling, J.
Geophys. Res., 103, 20774–20787, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>Jee et al.(2010)Jee, Lee, Kim, Chung, and Cho</label><mixed-citation>
Jee, G., Lee, H. B., Kim, Y. H., Chung, J. K., and Cho, J.: Assessment of GPS
global ionosphere maps (GIM) by comparison between CODE GIM and TOPEX/Jason
TEC data: Ionospheric perspective, J. Geophys. Res., 115, A10319,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JA015432" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JA015432</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>Kelley(2009)</label><mixed-citation>
Kelley, M. C.: The Earth's ionosphere: Plasma Physics and Electrodynamics,
2nd Edn., Amsterdam, Academic Press, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>Kersley et al.(2004)Kersley, Malan, Pryse, Cander, Bamford, Belehaki, Leitinger, Radicella, Mitchell, and Spencer</label><mixed-citation>
Kersley, L., Malan, D., Pryse, S. E., Cander, L. R., Bamford, R. A.,
Belehaki, A., Leitinger, R., Radicella, S. M., Mitchell, C. N., and Spencer,
P. S.: Total electron content – A key parameter in propagation: measurement
and use in ionospheric imaging, Ann. Geophys., 47, 1067–1091, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>Lastovicka(2013)</label><mixed-citation>
Lastovicka, J.: Are trends in total electron content (TEC) really positive,
J. Geophys. Res.-Space, 118, 3831–3835, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>Lastovicka et al.(2006)Lastovicka, Mikhailov, Ulich, Bremer, Elias, de Adler, Jara, del Rio, Foppiano, Ovalle, and Danilov</label><mixed-citation>
Lastovicka, J., Mikhailov, A., Ulich, T., Bremer, J., Elias, A., de Adler,
N. O., Jara, V., del Rio, R. A., Foppiano, A., Ovalle, E., and Danilov, A.:
Long-term trends in <i>fo</i>F2: A comparison of various methods, J. Atmos.
Sol.-Terr. Phy., 68, 1854–1870, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>Lastovicka et al.(2017)Lastovicka, Urbar, and Kozubek</label><mixed-citation>
Lastovicka, J., Urbar, J., and Kozubek, M.: Long-term trends in the total
electron content, Geophys. Res. Lett., 44, 8168–8172,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL075063" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL075063</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>Lean et al.(2011)Lean, Emmert, Picone, and Meier</label><mixed-citation>
Lean, J. L., Emmert, J. T., Picone, J. M., and Meier, R. R.: Global and
regional trends in ionospheric total electron content, J. Geophys. Res., 116,
A00H04, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JA016378" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JA016378</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>Liu et al.(2008)Liu, Zhang, Wan, Liu, and Ning</label><mixed-citation>
Liu, C., Zhang, M.-L., Wan, W., Liu, L., and Ning, B.: Modeling M(3000)F2
based on empirical orthogonal function analysis method, Radio Sci., 43,
RS1003, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2007RS003694" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2007RS003694</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>Liu et al.(2006)Liu, Wan, Ning, Pirog, and Kurkin</label><mixed-citation>
Liu, L., Wan, W., Ning, B., Pirog, O. M., and Kurkin, V. I.: Solar activity
variations of the ionospheric peak electron density, J. Geophys. Res., 111,
A08304, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JA011598" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JA011598</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>Martyn(1947)</label><mixed-citation>
Martyn, D. F.: Atmospheric Tides in the Ionosphere. I. Solar Tides in the F2
Region, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser.-A, 189, 241–260,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1947.0037" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1947.0037</a>, 1947.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>Mikhailov and Marin(2000)</label><mixed-citation>
Mikhailov, A. V. and Marin, D.: Geomagnetic control of the <i>fo</i>F2
long-term trends, Ann. Geophys., 18, 653–665,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00585-000-0653-2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s00585-000-0653-2</a>, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>Moffett(1979)</label><mixed-citation>
Moffett, R. J.: The equatorial anomaly in the electron distribution of the terrestrial F-region, Fund. Cos. Phy., 4, 313–391, 1979.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>Olwendo et al.(2012)Olwendo, Cilliers, Baki, and Mito</label><mixed-citation>
Olwendo, O., Cilliers, P., Baki, P., and Mito, C.: Using GPS-SCINDA
observations to study the correlation between scintillation, total electron
content enhancement and depletions over the Kenyan region, Adv. Space
Res., 49, 1363–1372, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>Pearson(1901)</label><mixed-citation>
Pearson, K.: On lines and planes of closest fit to systems of points in
space, Philos. Mag., 2, 559–572, 1901.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>Rawer and Bilitza(1990)</label><mixed-citation>
Rawer, K. and Bilitza, D.: International reference ionosphere-plasma
densities: status 1988, Adv. Space Res., 10, 5–14, 1990.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>Reinisch et al.(2004)Reinisch, Huang, Belehaki, Shi, Zhang, and Ilma</label><mixed-citation>
Reinisch, B. W., Huang, X., Belehaki, A., Shi, J. K., Zhang, M. L., and Ilma,
R.: Modeling the IRI topside profile using scale heights from ground-based
ionosonde measurements, Adv. Space Res., 34, 2026–2031, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>Richards et al.(1994)Richards, Fennelly, and Torr</label><mixed-citation>
Richards, P. G., Fennelly, J. A., and Torr, D. G.: IEUVAC: A solar EUV flux
model for aeronomic calculations, J. Geophys. Res., 26, 8981–8992, 1994.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>Seemala and Valladares(2011)</label><mixed-citation>
Seemala, G. K. and Valladares, C.: Statistics of total electron content
depletions observed over the South American continent for the year 2008,
Radio Sci., 46, RS5019, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011RS004722" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2011RS004722</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>Zhang et al.(2009)Zhang, Liu, Wan, Liu, and Ning</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, M.-L., Liu, C., Wan, W., Liu, L., and Ning, B.: A global model of the
ionospheric F2 peak height based on EOF analysis, Ann. Geophys., 27,
3203–3212, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/angeo-27-3203-2009" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/angeo-27-3203-2009</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
