Mesonet

A weather map consisting of a station model plot of Oklahoma Mesonet data overlaid with WSR-88D weather radar data depicting possible horizontal convective rolls as a potential contributing factor in the incipient 3 May 1999 tornado outbreak^[1] A mobile mesonet also documented tornadic supercells and their immediate environments during this event.^[2]

In meteorology and climatology, a mesonet, portmanteau of mesoscale network, is a network of automated weather and, often also including environmental monitoring stations, designed to observe mesoscale meteorological phenomena and/or microclimates.^[3][4]

Dry lines, squall lines, and sea breezes are examples of phenomena observed by mesonets. Due to the space and time scales associated with mesoscale phenomena and microclimates, weather stations comprising a mesonet are spaced closer together and report more frequently than synoptic scale observing networks, such as the WMO Global Observing System (GOS) and US ASOS. The term mesonet refers to the collective group of these weather stations, which are usually owned and operated by a common entity. Mesonets generally record in situ surface weather observations but some involve other observation platforms, particularly vertical profiles of the planetary boundary layer (PBL).^[5] Other environmental parameters may include insolation and various variables of interest to particular users, such as soil temperature or road conditions (the latter notable in Road Weather Information System (RWIS) networks).

The distinguishing features that classify a network of weather stations as a mesonet are station density and temporal resolution with sufficiently robust station quality. Depending upon the phenomena meant to be observed, mesonet stations use a spatial spacing of 1 to 40 kilometres (0.6 to 20 mi)^[6] and report conditions every 1 to 15 minutes. Micronets (see microscale and storm scale), such as in metropolitan areas such as Oklahoma City,^[7] St. Louis, and Birmingham UK, are yet denser in spatial and sometimes temporal resolution.^[8]

Purpose

Thunderstorms and other atmospheric convection, squall lines, drylines,^[9] sea and land breezes, mountain breeze and valley breezes, mountain waves, mesolows and mesohighs, wake lows, mesoscale convective vortices (MCVs), tropical cyclone and extratropical cyclone rainbands, macrobursts, gust fronts and outflow boundaries, heat bursts, urban heat islands (UHIs), and other mesoscale phenomena, as well as topographical features, can cause weather and climate conditions in a localized area to be significantly different from that dictated by the ambient large-scale conditions.^[10][11] As such, meteorologists must understand these phenomena in order to improve forecast skill. Observations are critical to understanding the processes by which these phenomena form, evolve, and dissipate.

The long-term observing networks (ASOS, AWOS, COOP), however, are too sparse and report too infrequently for mesoscale research and forecasting. ASOS and AWOS stations are typically spaced 50 to 100 kilometres (30 to 60 mi) apart and report only hourly at many sites (though over time the frequency of reporting has increased, down to 5–15 minutes in the 2020s at major sites). The Cooperative Observer Program (COOP) database consists of only daily reports recorded manually. That network, like the more recent CoCoRaHS, is large but both are limited in reporting frequency and robustness of equipment. "Mesoscale" weather phenomena occur on spatial scales of a few to hundreds of kilometers and temporal (time) scales of minutes to hours. Thus, an observing network with finer temporal and spatial scales is needed for mesoscale research. This need led to the development of the mesonet.

Mesonet data is directly used by humans for decision making, but also boosts the skill of numerical weather prediction (NWP) and is especially beneficial for short-range mesoscale models. Mesonets, along with remote sensing solutions (data assimilation of weather radar, weather satellites, wind profilers), allow for much greater temporal and spatial resolution in a forecast model. As the atmosphere is a chaotic nonlinear dynamical system (i.e. subject to the Butterfly effect), this increase in data increases understanding of initial conditions and boosts model performance. In addition to meteorology and climatology users, hydrologists, foresters, wildland firefighters, transportation departments, energy producers and distributors, other utility interests, and agricultural entities are prominent in their need for fine scale weather information. These organizations operate dozens of mesonets within the US and globally. Environmental, outdoor recreational, emergency management and public safety, military, and insurance interests also are heavy users of mesonet information.

In many cases, mesonet stations may, by necessity or sometimes by lack of awareness, be located in positions where accurate measurements may be compromised. For instance, this is especially true of citizen science and crowdsourced data systems, such as the stations built for WeatherBug's network, many of which are located on school buildings. The Citizen Weather Observer Program (CWOP) facilitated by the US National Weather Service (NWS) and other networks such as those collected by Weather Underground help fill gaps with resolutions sometimes meeting or exceeding that of mesonets, but many stations also exhibit biases due to improper siting, calibration, and maintenance. These consumer grade "personal weather stations" (PWS) are also less sensitive and rigorous than scientific grade stations. The potential bias that these stations may cause must be accounted for when ingesting the data into a model, lest the phenomenon of "garbage in, garbage out" occur.

Operations

Kentucky Mesonet station WSHT near Maysville in Mason County

Mesonets were born out of the need to conduct mesoscale research. The nature of this research is such that mesonets, like the phenomena they were meant to observe, were (and sometimes still are) short-lived and may change rapidly. Long-term research projects and non-research groups, however, have been able to maintain a mesonet for many years. For example, the U.S. Army Dugway Proving Ground in Utah has maintained a mesonet for many decades. The research-based origin of mesonets led to the characteristic that mesonet stations may be modular and portable, able to be moved from one field program to another. Nonetheless, most large contemporary mesonets or nodes within consist of permanent stations comprising stationary networks. Some research projects, however, utilize mobile mesonets. Prominent examples include the VORTEX projects.^[12][13] The problems of implementing and maintaining robust fixed stations are exacerbated by lighter, compact mobile stations and are further worsened by various issues related when moving, such as vehicle slipstream effects, and particularly during rapid changes in the ambient environment associated with traversing severe weather.^[14]

Whether the mesonet is temporary or semi-permanent, each weather station is typically independent, drawing power from a battery and solar panels. An on-board computer records readings from several instruments measuring temperature, humidity, wind speed and direction, and atmospheric pressure, as well as soil temperature and moisture, and other environmental variables deemed important to the mission of the mesonet, solar irradiance being a common non-meteorological parameter. The computer periodically saves these data to memory, typically using data loggers, and transmits the observations to a base station via radio, telephone (wireless, such as cellular or landline), or satellite transmission. Advancements in computer technology and wireless communications in recent decades made possible the collection of mesonet data in real-time. Some stations or networks report using Wi-Fi and grid powered with backups for redundancy.

The availability of mesonet data in real-time can be extremely valuable to operational forecasters, and particularly for nowcasting,^[15] as they can monitor weather conditions from many points in their forecast area. In addition to operational work, and weather, climate, and environmental research, mesonet and micronet data are often important in forensic meteorology.^[16]

History

Three-day barograph of the type used by the Meteorological Service of Canada

Early mesonets operated differently from modern mesonets. Each constituent instrument of the weather station was purely mechanical and fairly independent of the other sensors. Data were recorded continuously by an inked stylus that pivoted about a point onto a rotating drum covered by a sheath of graphed paper called a trace chart, much like a traditional seismograph station. Data analysis could occur only after the trace charts from the various instruments were collected.

One of the earliest mesonets operated in the summer of 1946 and 1947 and was part of a field campaign called The Thunderstorm Project.^[17] As the name implies, the objective of this program was to better understand thunderstorm convection. The earliest mesonets were typically funded and operated by government agencies for specific campaigns. In time, universities and other quasi-public entities began implementing permanent mesonets for a wide variety of uses, such as agricultural or maritime interests. Consumer grade stations added to the professional grade synoptic and mesoscale networks by the 1990s and by the 2010s professional grade station networks operated by private companies and public-private consortia increased in prominence. Some of these privately implemented systems are permanent and at fixed locations, but many also service specific users and campaigns/events so may be installed for limited periods, and may also be mobile.

The first known mesonet was operated by Germany from 1939 to 1941. Early mesonets with project based purposes operated for limited periods of time from seasons to a few years. The first permanently operating mesonet began in the United States in the 1970s with more entering operation in the 1980s-1990s as numbers gradually increased preceding a steeper expansion by the 2000s. By the 2010s there was also an increase in mesonets on other continents. Some wealthy densely populated countries also deploy observation networks with the density of a mesonet, such as the AMeDAS in Japan. The US was an early adopter of mesonets, yet funding has long been scattered and meager. By the 2020s declining funding atop the earlier scarcity and uncertainty of funding was leading to understaffing and problems maintaining stations, the closure of some stations, and the viability of entire networks threatened.^[18]

Mesonets capable of being moved for fixed station deployments in field campaigns came into use in the US by the 1970s^[19] and fully mobile vehicle-mounted mesonets became fixtures of large field research projects following the field campaigns of Project VORTEX in 1994 and 1995, in which significant mobile mesonets were deployed.

Significant mesonets

The following table is an incomplete list of mesonets operating in the past and present:

Years of operation	Name of Network, Place	Spacing	No. of Stations (Year)	Objectives
1939-41	Lindenberger Böennetz [de], Lindenberg [de], Tauche, Germany	3–20 km (1.9–12.4 mi)	19-25	research on convective hazards, including squall lines and wind gusts, to aviation[11]
1940	Maebashi, Japan	8–13 km (5.0–8.1 mi)	20 (1940)	research on convective hazards to aviation, examined structure of thunderstorms[11]
1941	Muskingum basin, Ohio	10 km (6.2 mi)	131 (1941)	rainfall and runoff research[11]
1946	The Thunderstorm Project, Florida	1 mi (1.6 km)	50 (1946)	thunderstorm convection research[20]
1947	The Thunderstorm Project, Ohio	2 mi (3.2 km)	58 (1947)	thunderstorm convection research[20]
1960	New Jersey	10 km (6.2 mi)	23 (1960)	research on mesoscale pressure systems[11]
1960	Fort Huachuca, Arizona	20 km (12 mi)	28 (1960)	Army operations (military meteorology) research[11]
1961	Fort Huachuca, Arizona	3 km (1.9 mi)	17 (1961)	research on influence of orography[11]
1961–Present	Dugway Proving Ground, Utah	9 mi (14 km)	26	air quality modeling and other desert area research
1961	Flagstaff, Arizona	8 km (5.0 mi)	43 (1961)	cumulonimbus convection research[11]
1961	National Severe Storms Project (NSSP), Southern Plains US	20 km (12 mi)	36 (1961)	research on structure of severe storms[11][21]
1962	National Severe Storms Project (NSSP), Southern Plains US	60 km (37 mi)	210 (1962)	research on squall lines and pressure jumps[11]
1961–1980s[22]	NSSL mesonetwork and mesometeorological rawinsonde networks, Oklahoma	<6-17 mi (<9–28 km) surface, 18-53 mi (30–85 km) upper (1966-1970)	30-61 surface, 8-11 upper (1966-1970)	primarily convection and dryline research in partnership with AF and Army, with focus in some years on aviation and particularly airport operations; annual field projects included varying number and spatial density of seasonal surface and upper air stations combined with radar and aircraft observations plus instrumented tower, leading to evolution of storm scale networks[23][24] and automated networks (e.g. NSSL Surface Automated Mesonetwork); other research projects increasingly arose in 70s-80s
1972–Present	Enviro-Weather, Michigan (now also adjacent sections of Wisconsin)	Varies	81	agriculturally centered; archive, varies from 5-60 min observations[25]
1976-1982 1982-1987	NCAR Portable Automated Mesonet I NCAR Portable Automated Mesonet II		30[19] ≈200[26]	research networks
1981–Present	Nebraska Mesonet, Nebraska	Varies	69 (2018)	originally agriculturally centered now multipurpose; archive, near real-time observations[27][28][29]
1983–Present	South Dakota Mesonet, South Dakota	Varies	27	archive, real-time 5 min observations[30]
1984-1986+	FAA-Lincoln Laboratory Operational Weather Studies (FLOWS)		30	aviation research network focused on low-level wind shear and microburst hazards with radar (TDWR) and other detection systems that became LLWAS[31]
1986–Present	Kansas Mesonet, Kansas	Varies	72	archive, real-time observations[32]
1986–Present	Arizona Meteorological Network (AZMET), Arizona	Varies	27	agriculturally centered; archive, real-time observations, 15 min - 1 hr[33]
1988–Present	Washington Mesonet/AgWeatherNet, Washington	Varies	177	multi-network system (comprehensive monitoring, agricultural focused); archive, real-time observations, 5 and 15 min[34][35]
1989–Present	Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center (OARDC) Weather System, Ohio	Varies	17	agriculturally centered; archive, hourly observations[36]
1990–Present	North Dakota Agricultural Weather Network (NDAWN), North Dakota (also adjacent areas of NW-Minnesota and NE-Montana)	Varies	91	agriculturally centered; archive, real-time observations[37]
1991–Present	Oklahoma Mesonet, Oklahoma	Varies	121	comprehensive monitoring; archive, real-time observations[38][39]
1991–Present	Georgia Automated Weather Network (AEMN), Georgia	Varies	82	agriculture and hydrometeorology; archive, real-time observations, 15 min[40][41]
1992–Present[42]	Colorado Agricultural Meteorological Network (CoAgMet), Colorado			agriculturally centered; 5 min data, archived[43]
1993–Present	Missouri Mesonet, Missouri	Varies	35	agriculturally centered; archive, real-time observations at 21 stations[44][45]
1994–Present	WeatherBug (AWS), across United States	Varies	>8,000 **	real-time observations for schools and television stations; collection of multiple mesonets, each typically centered around a host television station's media market[46][47]
1997–Present	Florida Automated Weather Network (FAWN), Florida	Varies	42	agriculturally-centered; archive, real-time[48][49]
1999–Present	West Texas Mesonet, West Texas	Varies	63+	archive, real-time observations[50][51]
2001–Present	Iowa Environmental Mesonet, Iowa	Varies	469*	archive, real-time observations[52][53]
-Present	WeatherFlow, global but concentrated in US	Varies	450+ mesonet stations in proprietary network; 27,000 in total * **	real-time and archive for variety of purposes, proprietary but reports to public forecasters and numerical modeling systems; operates specialty mesonets and offers PWSs[54]
2002–Present	Solutions Mesonet, Eastern Canada	Varies	600+ *	archive, real-time observations[55]
2002–Present	Western Turkey Mesonet, Turkey	Varies	206+	nowcasting, hydrometeorology[56]
2003–Present	Delaware Environmental Observing System (DEOS), Delaware	Varies	57	archive, real-time observations[57][58]
2004–Present	South Alabama Mesonet (USA Mesonet), Alabama	Varies	26	archive, real-time observations[59]
2004-2010	Foothills Climate Array (FCA), southern Alberta	10 km (6.2 mi) average	300	research on spatial-temporal meteorological variation, and on weather and climate model performance, across adjoining mountain, foothills, and prairie topographies[60]
2007–Present	Kentucky Mesonet, Kentucky	Varies	82	archive, real-time observations[61][62][63]
2007–Present	Mount Washington Regional Mesonet, New Hampshire		18 (2022)	archive, near-real time observations primarily for orography, operated by Mount Washington Observatory[64][65][66]
2008–Present	Quantum Weather Mesonet, St. Louis metropolitan area, Missouri	Varies (average ~5 miles (8.0 km))	100 (proprietary)	utility and nowcasting; archive, real-time observations[67]
-Present	North Carolina ECONet, North Carolina	Varies	99	archive, real-time observations[68]
2010–Present	Weather Telenatics, North America	Varies	(proprietary)	real-time and archived, proprietary; operates micronets, focused on ground transportation and airports but also serves other uses[69]
2012–Present	Birmingham Urban Climate Laboratory (BUCL) Mesonet, Birmingham UK	3 per 1 km^2 (0.4 sq mi)	24	urban heat island (UHI) monitoring[70][71]
2015–Present	New York State Mesonet, New York	Varies, averages 20 miles (32 km)	126	real-time observations, improved forecasting[72]
2016–Present	TexMesonet, Texas	Varies	100 in network; 3,151 total * **	hydrometeorology and hydrology focused network operated by the Texas Water Development Board, plus network of networks; some real-time observations, archival[73]
-Present	New Jersey Weather & Climate Network (NJWxNet), New Jersey	Varies	66	real-time observations[74]
-Present	Keystone Mesonet, Pennsylvania	Varies		real-time observations, archived; variety of uses, network of networks[75]
-Present	Cape Breton Mesonet, Cape Breton Island, with some stations in Newfoundland, Prince Edward Island, and mainland Nova Scotia	Varies	141+	real-time observations, with archived data available.[76]
2019–present	COtL (Conditions Over the Landscape) Mesonet, South Australia			agriculturally focused with a particular emphasis on monitoring amenability of weather conditions for crop spraying; a merger of Mid North Mesonet that began operating in 2019 and Riverland & Mallee Mesonet which began in 2021 with additional networks anticipated[77]
≈2020–Present	Umbria region mesonet, Umbria, Central Italy	Varies		network of preexisting networks emerging since 2020 in part to monitor complex topography but with various purposes for constituent networks[78]
2022–Present	Maryland Mesonet, Maryland, USA	Varies	72 planned (2022) 9 operational (2024)	A network that will eventually total 72 stations across Maryland to promote: public safety,[79] transportation, agriculture, climate, and K-12 science. The program is managed by the University of Maryland,[80] with significant input from state and local government agencies, and local partner organizations.
2022–Present	Hawai'i Mesonet, Hawaiian Islands	Varies	>95 (2022)	near real-time observations with archives,[81] for a variety of weather and climate uses designed to measure the stark microclimates of Hawaii[82] and as an expansion to local micronets such as HaleNet, HavoNet, HIPPNET, and CraterNet[83]
In development	Wisconsin Environmental Mesonet (Wisconet), Wisconsin		90	near real-time observations with archives, agriculturally focused[84]

* Not all stations owned or operated by network.
** As these are private stations, although QA/QC measures may be taken, these may not be scientific grade, and may lack proper siting, calibration, sensitivity, durability, and maintenance.

Although not labeled a mesonet, the Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA) also maintains a nationwide surface observation network with the density of a mesonet. JMA operates AMeDAS, consisting of approximately 1,300 stations at a spacing of 17 kilometres (11 mi). The network began operating in 1974.^[85]

See also

• MesoWest
• Remote Automated Weather Station (RAWS)
• TAMDAR
• Surface weather analysis
• Automated airport weather station

References

1. Edwards, Roger; R. L. Thompson; J. G. LaDue (Sep 2000). "Initiation of Storm A (3 May 1999) along a Possible Horizontal Convective Roll". 20th Conference on Severe Local Storms. Orlando, FL: American Meteorological Society. Retrieved 2022-04-29.
2. Markowski, Paul M. (2002). "Mobile Mesonet Observations on 3 May 1999". Weather Forecast. 17 (3): 430–444. Bibcode:2002WtFor..17..430M. doi:10.1175/1520-0434(2002)017<0430:MMOOM>2.0.CO;2.
3. "Mesonet". National Weather Service Glossary. National Weather Service. Retrieved 2017-03-30.
4. Glickman, Todd S., ed. (2000). Glossary of Meteorology (2nd ed.). Boston: American Meteorological Society. ISBN 978-1-878220-34-9.
5. Marshall, Curtis H. (11 Jan 2016). "The National Mesonet Program". 22nd Conference on Applied Climatology. New Orleans, LA: American Meteorological Society.
6. Fujita, Tetsuya Theodore (1962). A Review of Researches on Analytical MesoMeteorology. SMRP Research Paper. Vol. #8. Chicago: University of Chicago. OCLC 7669634.
7. Basara, Jeffrey B.; Illston, B. G.; Fiebrich, C. A.; Browder, P. D.; Morgan, C. R.; McCombs, A.; Bostic, J. P.; McPherson, R. A. (2011). "The Oklahoma City Micronet". Meteorological Applications. 18 (3): 252–61. doi:10.1002/met.189.
8. Muller, Catherine L.; Chapman, L.; Grimmond, C. S. B.; Young, D. T.; Cai, X (2013). "Sensors and the City: A Review of Urban Meteorological Networks" (PDF). Int. J. Climatol. 33 (7): 1585–600. Bibcode:2013IJCli..33.1585M. doi:10.1002/joc.3678. S2CID 140648553.
9. Pietrycha, Albert E.; E. N. Rasmussen (2004). "Finescale Surface Observations of the Dryline: A Mobile Mesonet Perspective". Weather and Forecasting. 19 (12): 1075–88. Bibcode:2004WtFor..19.1075P. doi:10.1175/819.1.
10. Fujita, T. Theodore (1981). "Tornadoes and Downbursts in the Context of Generalized Planetary Scales". Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences. 38 (8): 1511–34. Bibcode:1981JAtS...38.1511F. doi:10.1175/1520-0469(1981)038<1511:TADITC>2.0.CO;2. ISSN 1520-0469.
11. Ray, Peter S., ed. (1986). Mesoscale Meteorology and Forecasting. Boston: American Meteorological Society. ISBN 978-0933876668.
12. Straka, Jerry M.; E. N. Rasmussen; S. E. Fredrickson (1996). "A Mobile Mesonet for Finescale Meteorological Observations". Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology. 13 (10): 921–36. Bibcode:1996JAtOT..13..921S. doi:10.1175/1520-0426(1996)013<0921:AMMFFM>2.0.CO;2. ISSN 1520-0426.
13. Wurman, Joshua; D. Dowell; Y. Richardson; P. Markowski; E. Rasmussen; D. Burgess; L. Wicker; H. Bluestein (2012). "The Second Verification of the Origins of Rotation in Tornadoes Experiment: VORTEX2". Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society. 93 (8): 1147–70. Bibcode:2012BAMS...93.1147W. doi:10.1175/BAMS-D-11-00010.1.
14. Waugh, Sean M. (2021). "The "U-Tube": An Improved Aspirated Temperature System for Mobile Meteorological Observations, Especially in Severe Weather". J. Atmos. Ocean. Technol. 38 (9): 1477–1489. Bibcode:2021JAtOT..38.1477W. doi:10.1175/JTECH-D-21-0008.1. hdl:11244/24679. S2CID 134944456.
15. Mueller, Cynthia K.; J. W. Wilson; N. A. Crook (1993). "The Utility of Sounding and Mesonet Data to Nowcast Thunderstorm Initiation". Weather Forecast. 8 (1): 132–146. Bibcode:1993WtFor...8..132M. doi:10.1175/1520-0434(1993)008<0132:TUOSAM>2.0.CO;2.
16. Brotzge, Jerald A.; C. A. Fiebrich (2021). "Mesometeorological Networks". In Foken, Thomas (ed.). Springer Handbook of Atmospheric Measurements. Springer. pp. 1233–1245. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-52171-4_45. ISBN 978-3-030-52170-7. S2CID 243969231.
17. "Overview of The Thunderstorm Project". NOAA. Retrieved 16 June 2017.
18. Rembert, Elizabeth (21 February 2023). "Weather stations that provide critical climate data are threatened by unstable funding". St. Louis Public Radio. Harvest Public Media. Retrieved 2023-02-21.
19. Brock, F. V.; P. K. Govind (1977). "Portable Automated Mesonet in Operation". Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology. 16 (3): 299–310. Bibcode:1977JApMe..16..299B. doi:10.1175/1520-0450(1977)016<0299:PAMIO>2.0.CO;2.
20. Byers, Horace R.; R. R. Braham Jr. (1949). The Thunderstorm: Final Report of the Thunderstorm Project. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. OCLC 7944529.
21. Fujita, Tetsuya Theodore (1961). "Index to the NSSP Surface Network". Mesoscale Meteorology Project (Research Paper #2). University of Chicago for US Weather Bureau.
22. Barnes, Stanley L. (1974). "Mesonetwork Array: Its Effect on Thunderstorm Flow Resolution". NOAA Technical Memorandum (ERL NSSL 74). Norman, OK: NOAA National Severe Storms Laboratory. Retrieved 2024-03-16.
23. Barnes, Stanley L.; James H. Henderson; Robert J. Ketchum (1971). "Rawinsonde observation and processing techniques at the National Severe Storms Laboratory". NOAA Technical Memorandum (ERL NSSL 53). Norman, OK: ESSA National Severe Storms Laboratory. Retrieved 2024-03-16.
24. Fankhauser, J. C. (1969). "Convective Processes Resolved by a Mesoscale Rawinsonde Network". Journal of Applied Meteorology. 8 (5): 778–798. doi:10.1175/1520-0450(1969)008<0778:CPRBAM>2.0.CO;2.
25. "Enviroweather". msu.edu. Retrieved 12 April 2017.
26. Brock, Fred V.; George H. Saum; Steven R. Semmer (1986). "Portable Automated Mesonet II". Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology. 3 (4): 573–582. doi:10.1175/1520-0426(1986)003<0573:PAMI>2.0.CO;2.
27. "Mesonet by NSCO". unl.edu. Retrieved 12 April 2017.
28. Hubbard, Kenneth G.; N. J. Rosenberg; D. C. Nielsen (1983). "Automated Weather Data Network for Agriculture". Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management. 109 (3): 213–222. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9496(1983)109:3(213).
29. Shulski, Martha; S. Cooper; G. Roebke; A. Dutcher (2018). "The Nebraska Mesonet: Technical Overview of an Automated State Weather Network". Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology. 35 (11): 2189–2200. Bibcode:2018JAtOT..35.2189S. doi:10.1175/JTECH-D-17-0181.1.
30. "South Dakota Mesonet". sdstate.edu. Retrieved 12 June 2017.
31. Wolfson, Marilyn M. (1989). "The FLOWS Automatic Weather Station Network". Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology. 6 (2): 307–326. doi:10.1175/1520-0426(1989)006<0307:TFAWSN>2.0.CO;2.
32. "Kansas Mesonet". k-state.edu. Retrieved 12 April 2017.
33. "AZMET: The Arizona Meteorological Network". arizona.edu. Retrieved 12 April 2017.
34. "AgWeatherNet at Washington State University". wsu.edu. Retrieved 12 April 2017.
35. Elliot, T.V. (2008). "Regional and on-farm wireless sensor networks for agricultural systems in Eastern Washington". Comput. Electron. Agr. 61 (1): 32–43. doi:10.1016/j.compag.2007.05.007.
36. "OARDC Weather System". ohio-state.edu. Retrieved 12 April 2017.
37. "NDAWN Current Weather". ndsu.nodak.edu. Retrieved 24 March 2017.
38. "Mesonet". mesonet.org. Retrieved 7 February 2017.
39. McPherson, Renee A.; C.A. Fiebrich; K.C. Crawford; J.R. Kilby; D.L. Grimsley; J.E. Martinez; J.B. Basara; B.G. Illston; D.A. Morris; K.A. Kloesel; A.D. Melvin; H. Shrivastava; J. Wolfinbarger; J.P. Bostic; D.B. Demko; R.L. Elliott; S.J. Stadler; J.D. Carlson; A.J. Sutherland (2007). "Statewide Monitoring of the Mesoscale Environment: A Technical Update on the Oklahoma Mesonet". Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology. 24 (3): 301–21. Bibcode:2007JAtOT..24..301M. doi:10.1175/JTECH1976.1. S2CID 124213569.
40. "Georgia Weather - Automated Environmental Monitoring Network Page". uga.edu. Retrieved 12 April 2017.
41. Hoogenboom, Gerrit; D.D. Coker; J.M. Edenfield; D.M. Evans; C. Fang (2003). "The Georgia Automated Environmental Monitoring Network: Ten Years of Weather Information for Water Resources Management". Proceedings of the 2003 Georgia Water Resources Conference. Athens, GA: University of Georgia.
42. Tucker, Donna F. (1997). "Surface Mesonets of the Western United States". Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 78 (7): 1485–1496. Bibcode:1997BAMS...78.1485T. doi:10.1175/1520-0477(1997)078<1485:SMOTWU>2.0.CO;2. hdl:1808/15914.
43. Schumacher, Russ. "COAgMET". Colorado State University. Retrieved 2023-02-24.
44. "Missouri Mesonet". missouri.edu. Retrieved 12 April 2017.
45. Guinan, Patrick (2008-08-11). "Missouri's transition to a near real-time mesonet". 17th Conference on Applied Climatology. Whistler, BC, Canada: American Meteorological Society.
46. "Extensive Weather Observations & Analytics". earthnetworks.com. Retrieved 12 April 2017.
47. Anderson, James E.; J. Usher (2010). "Mesonet Programs" (PDF). WMO Technical Conference on Meteorological and Environmental Instruments and Methods of Observation (TECO-2010). Helsinki: World Meteorological Organization.
48. "FAWN - Florida Automated Weather Network". ufl.edu. Retrieved 12 April 2017.
49. Lusher, William R.; Jackson, John L.; Morgan, Kelly T. (2008). "The Florida Automated Weather Network: Ten Years of Providing Weather Information to Florida Growers". Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc. 121: 69–74.
50. "West Texas Mesonet". Texas Tech University. Retrieved 7 February 2017.
51. Schroeder, John L.; W.S. Burgett; K.B. Haynie; I.I. Sonmez; G.D. Skwira; A.L. Doggett; J.W. Lipe (2005). "The West Texas Mesonet: A Technical Overview". Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology. 22 (2): 211–22. Bibcode:2005JAtOT..22..211S. doi:10.1175/JTECH-1690.1.
52. Herzmann, Daryl. "Iowa Environmental Mesonet". iastate.edu. Retrieved 7 February 2017.
53. Todey, Dennis P.; E. S. Takle; S. E. Taylor (2002-05-13). "The Iowa Environmental Mesonet". 13th Conference on Applied Climatology and 10th Conference on Aviation, Range, and Aerospace Meteorology. Portland, Oregon: American Meteorological Society.
54. "WeatherFlow Networks". WeatherFlow. Retrieved 2022-04-24.
55. "Solutions Mesonet". Solutions Mesonet. 2019-04-12.
56. Sönmez, İbrahim (2013). "Quality control tests for western Turkey Mesonet". Meteorological Applications. 20 (3): 330–7. Bibcode:2013MeApp..20..330S. doi:10.1002/met.1286.
57. "DEOS Home". udel.edu. Retrieved 7 February 2017.
58. Legates, David R.; D. J. Leathers; T. L. DeLiberty; G. E. Quelch; K. Brinson; J. Butke; R. Mahmood; S. A. Foster (2005-01-13). "DEOS: The Delaware Environmental Observing System". 21st International Conference on Interactive Information Processing Systems (IIPS) for Meteorology, Oceanography, and Hydrology. San Diego: American Meteorological Society.
59. "CHILI - Center for Hurricane Intensity and Landfall Investigation". chiliweb.southalabama.edu. Retrieved 2019-09-14.
60. Roberts, David R.; W. H, Wood; S. J. Marshall (2019). "Assessments of downscaled climate data with a high-resolution weather station network reveal consistent but predictable bias". Int. J. Climatol. 39 (6): 3091–3103. Bibcode:2019IJCli..39.3091R. doi:10.1002/joc.6005. S2CID 134732294.
61. "Kentucky Mesonet". kymesonet.org. Retrieved 7 February 2017.
62. Grogan, Michael; S. A. Foster; R. Mahmood (2010-01-21). "The Kentucky Mesonet". 26th Conference on Interactive Information and Processing Systems (IIPS) for Meteorology, Oceanography, and Hydrology. Atlanta, Georgia: American Meteorological Society.
63. Mahmood, Rezaul; M. Schargorodski; S. Foster; A. Quilligan (2019). "A Technical Overview of the Kentucky Mesonet". Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology. 36 (9): 1753–1771. Bibcode:2019JAtOT..36.1753M. doi:10.1175/JTECH-D-18-0198.1.
64. "Mount Washington Regional Observatory". Mount Washington Observatory. Retrieved 2022-05-28.<
65. Garrett, Keith (2020). "Robust Solutions to Maintaining the Mount Washington Regional Mesonet through Extreme Weather Conditions". 20th Symposium on Meteorological Observation and Instrumentation Joint Session with the National Network of Networks Committee. Boston, MA: American Meteorological Society.
66. Fitzgerald, Brian J.; J. Broccolo; K. Garrett (2023). "The Mount Washington Observatory Regional Mesonet: A Technical Overview of a Mountain-Based Mesonet". J. Atmos. Ocean. Technol. 40 (4): 439–453. doi:10.1175/JTECH-D-22-0054.1.
67. "Ameren website". ameren.com. Archived from the original on 16 March 2014. Retrieved 7 February 2017.
68. "North Carolina Environment and Climate Observing Network". State Climate Office of North Carolina. Retrieved 7 February 2017.
69. "Weather Telematics". Weather Telematics. Retrieved 2022-04-24.
70. Chapman, Lee; Muller, C.L.; Young, D.T.; Warren, E.L.; Grimmond C.S.B.; Cai, X.-M.; Ferranti, J.S. (2015). "The Birmingham Urban Climate Laboratory: An Open Meteorological Test Bed and Challenges of the Smart City" (PDF). Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society. 96 (9): 1545–60. Bibcode:2015BAMS...96.1545C. doi:10.1175/BAMS-D-13-00193.1. S2CID 26884748.
71. Warren, Elliot L.; D. T. Young; L. Chapman; C. Muller; C.S.B. Grimmond; X.-M. Cai (2016). "The Birmingham Urban Climate Laboratory—A high density, urban meteorological dataset, from 2012–2014". Scientific Data. 3 (160038): 160038. Bibcode:2016NatSD...360038W. doi:10.1038/sdata.2016.38. PMC 4896132. PMID 27272103.
72. "NYS Mesonet". nysmesonet.org. Retrieved 7 February 2017.
73. "TexMesonet". Retrieved 23 February 2020.
74. "New Jersey Weather and Climate Network". njweather.org. Retrieved 12 April 2017.
75. "Keystone Mesonet". Retrieved 21 February 2020.
76. "Cape Breton Mesonet". Retrieved 22 January 2022.
77. "COtL". Retrieved 2023-02-24.
78. Silvestri, Lorenzo; M. Saraceni; P. B. Cerlini (2022). "Quality management system and design of an integrated mesoscale meteorological network in Central Italy". Meteorol. Appl. 29 (2): e2060. doi:10.1002/met.2060. S2CID 248221267.
79. "https://news.maryland.gov/mdem/2023/10/30/maryland-celebrates-unveiling-of-its-first-mesonet-tower/". news.maryland.gov. Retrieved 2024-04-06. {{cite web}}: External link in |title= (help)
80. "Maryland Celebrates Unveiling of its First Mesonet Tower". College of Computer, Mathematical, and Natural Sciences | University of Maryland. 2024-04-04. Retrieved 2024-04-06.
81. "Hawai'i Mesonet". Hawai'i Climate Data Portal. University of Hawai'i. 2022. Retrieved 2022-04-24.
82. Longman, Ryan J.; A. G. Frazier; A. J. Newman; T. W. Giambelluca; D. Schanzenbach; A. Kagawa-Viviani; H. Needham; J. R. Arnold; M. P. Clark (2019). "High-Resolution Gridded Daily Rainfall and Temperature for the Hawaiian Islands (1990–2014)". J. Hydrometeorol. 20 (3): 489–508. Bibcode:2019JHyMe..20..489L. doi:10.1175/JHM-D-18-0112.1. S2CID 134742459.
83. "Climate Monitoring History". Hawai'i Climate Data Portal. University of Hawai'i. 2022. Retrieved 2022-04-24.
84. Kremer, Rich (16 December 2022). "Federal grant to spur construction of weather, soil monitoring network to aid Wisconsin farmers". Wisconsin Public Radio. Retrieved 2023-02-24.
85. "Japan Meteorological Agency". jma.go.jp. Retrieved 7 February 2017.

• Dahlia, John (2013). "The National Mesonet Program: Filling in the Gaps". Weatherwise. 66 (4): 26–33. doi:10.1080/00431672.2013.800418. S2CID 192090710.
• Mahmood, Rezaul (2017). "Mesonets: Meso-Scale Weather and Climate Observations for the U.S." Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society. 98 (7): 1349. Bibcode:2017BAMS...98.1349M. doi:10.1175/BAMS-D-15-00258.1.
• Horel, John D.; M.M. Splitt; L.L. Dunn; J.J. Pechmann; B.B. White; C.C. Ciliberti; S.S. Lazarus; J.J. Slemmer; D.D. Zaff; J.J. Burks (2002). "Mesowest: Cooperative Mesonets in the Western United States". Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society. 83 (2): 211–24. Bibcode:2002BAMS...83..211H. doi:10.1175/1520-0477(2002)083<0211:MCMITW>2.3.CO;2.
• Fiebrich, Christopher A.; C.R. Morgan; A.G. McCombs; P.K. Hall; R.A. McPherson (2010). "Quality Assurance Procedures for Mesoscale Meteorological Data". Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology. 27 (10): 1565–82. Bibcode:2010JAtOT..27.1565F. doi:10.1175/2010JTECHA1433.1.
• Committee on Developing Mesoscale Meteorological Observational Capabilities to Meet Multiple National Needs, Board on Atmospheric Sciences and Climate, Division on Earth and Life Studies, National Research Council of the National Academies (2009). Observing Weather and Climate from the Ground Up: A Nationwide Network of Networks. Washington: National Academies Press. doi:10.17226/12540. ISBN 978-0-309-12986-2.
• Fiebrich, Christopher A. (2009). "History of surface weather observations in the United States". Earth-Science Reviews. 93 (3–4): 77–84. Bibcode:2009ESRv...93...77F. doi:10.1016/j.earscirev.2009.01.001.
• Tyndall, Daniel P.; J. D. Horel (2013). "Impacts of Mesonet Observations on Meteorological Surface Analyses". Weather and Forecasting. 28 (2): 254–69. Bibcode:2013WtFor..28..254T. doi:10.1175/WAF-D-12-00027.1.
• Dabberdt, Walter F.; W. Schlatter; F.H. Carr; E.W. Joe Friday; D. Jorgensen; S. Koch; M. Pirone; F. Ralph; J. Sun; P. Welsh; J.W. Wilson; X. Zou (2005). "Multifunctional Mesoscale Observing Networks". Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society. 86 (8): 961–82. Bibcode:2005BAMS...86..961D. doi:10.1175/BAMS-86-7-961.
• Meyer, Steven J.; K. G. Hubbard (1992). "Nonfederal Automated Weather Stations and Networks in the United States in the United States and Canada: A Preliminary Survey". Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society. 73 (4): 449–57. Bibcode:1992BAMS...73..449M. doi:10.1175/1520-0477(1992)073<0449:NAWSAN>2.0.CO;2. ISSN 1520-0477.
• Barth, Michael F.; P. A. Miller; D. Helms (2010-01-18). "Enhancing metadata available from MADIS for the National Mesonet". 26th Conference on Interactive Information and Processing Systems (IIPS) for Meteorology, Oceanography, and Hydrology. Atlanta, GA: American Meteorological Society.

External links

• National Mesonet Program
• MADIS Meteorological Surface Integrated Mesonet Data Providers (MADIS)
  • National Mesonet/UrbaNet Data Overview (NCEP Central Operations)
• Hydrometeorological Networks in the United States
• MesoWest
• Synoptic Data PBC's Station Networks & Providers
• Personal Weather Station Network (Weather Underground)
• Citizen Weather Observer Program (CWOP) (wxqa.com)
  • FindU.com (APRS)
• Midwest Mesonets and Specialized Instrumented Sites (Midwestern Regional Climate Center)
• FAESR: Surface In-Situ Networks (NCAR's Facilities for Atmospheric and Earth Science Research)
  • Surface Remote and Emerging Technologies