You are on page 1of 1

European Space Agency

European Mars Science and Exploration Conference: Mars Express & ExoMars
ESTEC, Noordwijk, The Netherlands, 12 - 16 November, 2007


Girard1, A. Spiga2, F. Forget2, M. Vincendon1, Y. Langevin1, J.P. Bibring1, B. Gondet1. 1Institut
d’Astrophysique Spatiale, Université Paris-Sud, Orsay, France. 2Laboratoire de Météorologie Dynamique du
CNRS, Université-Paris 6, Paris, France. Contact :

Introduction: The imaging spectrometer Mars clouds). Fig. 1 reveals that the T mean value (for
Express / OMEGA observes the Martian surface in nominal data) is subject to periodic variations with
the near-infrared up to 5 m [1]. This gives the time. Their origin has not yet been determined;
opportunity to derive surface temperatures. Since they are either due to a physical variation not taken
OMEGA data cover a large part of the Martian into account by the MCD or to instrumental
surface, a systematic comparison can be performed variations not revealed by the OMEGA response to
with global numerical simulations. For that purpose the calibration lamp.
we use the results from the Global Circulation Results over OMEGA not-nominal data: The
Model of the Laboratoire de Météorologie measure of the OMEGA response to a calibration
Dynamique, released in the Martian Climate lamp reveals that the instrument absolute
Database (MCD) [2]. The goal of this work is to 1) calibration evolves with time (for the L channel)
test the accuracy of the OMEGA surface [6]. For data at a non nominal calibration level, the
temperature determination, 2) improve our nominal transfer function is not adapted and the
knowledge of the mechanisms influencing surface absolute radiances are corrupted [3]. Such defects
temperature, and 3) detect variations in OMEGA are clearly detected in the T (fig.1, red curve)
calibration and test the accuracy of new calibration during the calibration state transitions.
functions. New transfer functions have been derived for
Data Processing: The studied variables are the such calibration levels in previous works [6]. The
surface temperature TOMEGA measured by OMEGA, method is based on the comparison of two
the surface temperature TMCD calculated by the observations of a same area acquired close in time
MCD and their difference T. but at different calibration levels. New surface
To obtain the OMEGA temperature, reflective temperatures have been derived with these new
radiance is subtracted to OMEGA spectra thanks to transfer functions and the resulting T are more
an a priori knowledge of the 5 m reflectance consistent with the nominal data (fig.1, blue curve).
value. The resulting thermal part is fitted by the This validates the accuracy of the new transfer
best black body to retrieve the temperature [3]. functions and will enable us to derive new ones for
The spatial resolution of the MCD is much non nominal orbits greater than 1650.
lower than that of OMEGA data, therefore a linear
interpolation is performed to get MCD data for
each OMEGA pixel. Since the MCD is also
discretized in 12 months a year and in 12 periods a
day a linear interpolation is also performed to fit
the acquisition time of OMEGA results.
Global study: The Latitude – Solar longitude
(Lat-Ls) map of TOMEGA exhibits seasonal trends
that are very consistent with the TMCD Lat-Ls map.
Results from the 1650 first orbits reveal a mean
absolute difference of ~5K (for a mean surface
temperature of ~240K). This indicates that the
OMEGA calibration function is satisfactory. Figure 1. Value of T (surface temperature from
We expect lower OMEGA temperatures because OMEGA minus that from MCD) versus the orbit
cold dust in the atmosphere cools the flux emitted number. Red: using the nominal calibration function for
OMEGA. Blue: using new adapted calibration functions
from the surface and received by OMEGA.
when the calibration state is not nominal. Black:
However the proportion of lower TMCD is large and evolution of the OMEGA calibration state (the nominal
cannot be neglected. Moreover Lat–Ls maps for T level is 1500DN for the detector).
have also been plotted and compared to TES
measure of dust opacity [4] but no clear correlation References: [1] Bibring, J.P. et al. (2004), ESA sp1240.
was observed. This suggests that the effect of dust [2] Lewis, S. R. et al. (1999), JGR 104, 24,177-24,194.
at 5 m is low, which is consistent with a low [3] Jouglet, D. et al. (2007), JGR 112, DOI:
optical extinction at 5 m compared to that at 1 m 10.1029/2006JE002846. [4] Smith, M.D. (2006), 2nd
or 9 m [5]. workshop on Mars Atmosphere Modelling and
Observation, Granada. [5] Santee, M. L. and Crisp D.
We also notice that T exhibits slight variations
(1995), JGR 100, 5465-5484. [6] Jouglet, D. et al.
over single orbits, without any obvious dependence (2007), 7th Mars Conf. Pasadena, Abs. #3157.
with other parameters (albedo, altitude, presence of