Observational analysis reveals high-frequency type-II radio bursts in the corona, suggesting interactions with dense structures.
Type-II radio bursts are typically observed below ∼ 400 MHz and are characterized by the narrowband, slowly drifting fundamental and harmonic structures. Here we report an unusual high-frequency wide-band type-II burst with a starting frequency as high as 670 MHz and an instantaneous bandwidth as wide as ∼ 300 MHz. We used radio imaging from the Nançay Radio Heliograph, spectroscopic data from ORFEES, extreme-ultraviolet (EUV) observations from Solar Dynamics Observatory, and white-light observations from LASCO to determine the nature and origin of the observed radio burst as well as its propagation in the corona. The estimated average spectral drift is ∼ 2.18 MHz s^-1, its mean duration at each frequency is ∼ 3 min, and the maximum brightness temperature can exceed 10^11 to 10^12 K. According to the simultaneous EUV and radio imaging data, the radio sources are distributed over a relatively broad region centered on a dip in the nose front of the shock-like EUV wave structure. The dip is likely caused by the strong interaction of the eruption with the overlying closed dense loops that are enclosed by the large-scale streamer structure, indicating that the type-II burst originates from coronal mass ejection shocks interacting with dense, closed-loop structures. The observations suggest that the unusual wide-band high-frequency type-II radio burst originates from a dense streamer region in the corona; this is further evidenced by an EUV shock-like structure that steepens very close to the solar surface, at ∼ 1.23 R_⊙, and the fact that the type-II radio source coincides with the shock dip. The wide-band feature is due to the source stemming from a region with significant density variations and not due to the intensity variations across the shock structure.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Vasanth et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: