Study of short-term periodicities in the occurrence of Forbush decreases: Wavelet analysis

Study of short-term periodicities in the occurrence of Forbush decreases: Wavelet analysis | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Study of short-term periodicities in the occurrence of Forbush decreases: Wavelet analysis Y. P. Singh, Badruddin Badruddin This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-3901995/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Under Review Version 1 posted 7 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract We utilized the Forbush decreases (magnitude >1.5%) detected in cosmic ray neutron monitor data during continuous five solar cycles, viz., 20, 21, 22, 23 and 24 (1965 to 2019) and subjected them to wavelet analysis in order to obtain the possible periodicities in their occurrence. We also studied the periodicities separately during the odd and even solar activity cycles. In addition to solar activity, the solar magnetic polarity and its extension into the interplanetary space makes significant difference in the cosmic ray modulation in the helisphere, we have also applied the wavelet analysis procedure separately during positive (A > 0) and negative (A < 0) polarity states of the heliospheric magnetic fields. Observed periodicities in Forbush decreases have been discussed and compared with earlier detected periodicities in solar and geomagnetic activity indices, e.g., sunspot numbers, sunspot areas, sunspot groups, solar flares, coronal mass ejections, and various geomagnetic activity indices. Significant short-term periodic behaviour detected in the occurrence of Forbush decreases, which in general, corroborates the observed behaviour in solar (in particular, solar eruptive activity) and geomagnetic activity. Understanding the quasi-periodic process in magnetic field emergence from solar active regions and solar eruptive activity, as well as solar-terrestrial coupling and space weather effects, requires comparing the quasi-periodic behaviour between parameters representing solar and geomagnetic activity along with cosmic ray variability. Cosmic ray Forbush decrease Solar activity Solar polarity Heliosphere Sun-Earth coupling Space weather Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Introduction The first asymmetrical change in cosmic rays’ intensity was observed in 1937, when Forbush (1937) studied the data of ion chambers located around the earth. He concluded that this change in the intensity was due to the geomagnetic disturbances. Later the same variations were observed by Simpson et. al. (1953) in neutron monitor and Meyer and Simpson (1955) at balloon altitudes and airplane altitudes data respectively. It was also observed that the amplitude of decrease is more during the enhanced solar activity. This temporal change in intensity was very sharp followed by slow recovery, such non-recurrent phenomena were termed as Forbush decreases (Fds) as classified by Simpson et. al., (1953). Simpsons and his co-investigators also pointed out that this temporal change could not be due to the geomagnetic disturbances. This modulation of cosmic rays’ intensity is the repercussion of solar activity. The solar modulation of galactic cosmic rays is of two types named recurrent as pointed out by Lockwood (1971) (e.g., daily variation, 27-day, 11-year) and non-recurrent decreases caused by transient interplanetary events caused by mass ejections (e.g., Forbush decreases). The recurrent decreases are gradual and have a more symmetrical profile caused by corotating interaction regions (CIRs). The diurnal variation, a symmetrical variation is due to the drift of the cosmic rays with respect to the earth, however other variations are due to the change in conditions of the interplanetary medium. Forbush decrease (Fd) is a large amplitude asymmetrical and random cosmic ray event of interplanetary space. In such events, cosmic rays’ counts decrease and reach a minimum value and then recovery of the profile takes place. In such profiles, the decreasing phase becomes very sharp (~occurs within a few hours) and after it slow recovery starts, which lasts a few days to a week. The major portion of the decreasing phase occurs within 12 to 24 hours. The early stage detailed experimental observations of Fds were discussed by Webber (1962), Dorman (1963) and theoretical presentations of Fds are suggested in the monograph by Parker (1963). However, a lot of progress has taken place in the study of this phenomenon since then, both from observational and theoretical point of view (e.g., see Lockwood (1971), Venkatesan and Badruddin (1990), Cane (2000), Belov et al., (2014), Lingri et al., 2016, Melkumyan et al., (2022) and references therein). Lockwood (1971) reported that the percentage change in intensity of cosmic rays’ during the solar cycle 19 was ~25%, however depression in several Forbush decreases were . Such sudden and rapid reduction in intensity modulates the interplanetary medium in many ways. The depression in an ideal Forbush decrease is mainly due to the turbulent field region formed ahead of fast ejecta followed by coronal mass ejection (CME) (e.g., Badruddin et al., 1986). Thus, to understand the Fds, it is important to understand the characteristic and topology of CMEs, as turbulent fields are the result of CME. Such larger amplitude, random, fast and asymmetrical events, whose occurrence rate may depend on the eruptive solar events rate. Thus, search for periodicities in Fds rate and its comparison with the periodicities in solar activity parameters is expected to provide further insight into these phenomena. ICME is the CME event of interplanetary space, which have very large structures. During a typical CME, about mass ejected from the solar surface. CME moves in interplanetary space with speed to km/sec and average kinetic energy is about Joule. The first image of CME was observed in coronagraphs in the early 1970s (Gosling et al., 1973). The occurrence rate of CMEs varies from solar minimum to solar maximum. During solar minimum about one CMEs eject in four days, however about three CMEs per day release in solar maximum periods. Richardson and Cane (1993) pointed out that depressed plasma proton temperature, bidirectional particle flows and strong magnetic field may be the typical signatures of ejecta. They identified these signatures from the available data of solar wind and cosmic ray intensity. However, time and energy modulation of the cosmic ray beam by the random diffusion of the particles through the turbulent clouds of the magnetised plasma is the main cause of Fds (Morrison, 1956). The CMEs also trigger the geomagnetic storms, but the mechanism behind the geomagnetic storms is different as compared to Fds. Therefore, the amplitude of Fds and geomagnetic storms are not proportional to each other in every event (Badruddin, Yadav and Yadav, 1986; Zhang and Burlaga, 1988; Ahluwalia and Fikani, 2007; Alania and Wawrzunczak, 2008; Badruddin and Singh, 2009; Kane, 2014 and reference therein). Modulation of the cosmic-ray intensity play a major role in understanding the interplanetary medium. The variations of cosmic ray particles are reported by Dhanju, and Sarabhai, (1967), Akioka et al. (1987), Hill et al. (2001), Rybak et al. (2001), Kudela et al. (2002), Mavromichalaki et al. (2003), Singh et al. (2012), Singh and Badruddin (2014, 2015a, 2015b), Aslam and Badruddin (2015), Badruddin and Kumar (2016), Chowdhury et al. (2015), Kudela and Sabbah (2016), and many others. Earth directed CMEs are mainly responsible for large-amplitude Fds, thus it is pertinent to know the characteristics of CMEs to learn Forbush decreases (e.g. see, Subramanim et al., 2009; Badruddin et al., 2021 and references therein), while high speed solar wind streams (HSS)/CIRs modulate the cosmic rays with smaller amplitude and larger duration, in general (e.g. see, Badruddin and Kumar, 2016 and references therein). The characteristics of CMEs in the heliosphere are discussed in detail by Gopalswamy (2006). Study of variability of solar activity, solar wind plasma and field, geomagnetic activity, and cosmic ray intensity could be the main areas of research to understand the Sun and its dynamics. These variations may be periodic and non-periodic, originating mainly from or within the Sun, and hence study of variations provides key inputs related to internal features of the Sun (Howe et al., 2000). To search for the variability of occurrence of Fds can be a challenging task, but such a study could play a significant role in understanding solar dynamo oscillations in a better way. Data and Analysis Technique In this study, we consider the Forbush decreases of magnitude \(\ge 1.5\%\) for continuous 55 years (covering five solar activity cycles) from 1965 to 2019. We utilize \(\) the catalogue of Fds and interplanetary disturbances ( http://spaceweather.izmiran.ru/eng/dbs.html ) (see, Belov et al., 2017 ; Abunin et al., 2019 and references therein). We did not consider the events with magnitude <1.5% in order to avoid any possible interference due to the presence of diurnal variation whose amplitude is usually <1.5% (Venkatesan and Badruddin, 1990 ; Singh and Baduddin, 2006). To find the occurrence rate of Fds, we applied wavelet analysis procedure to Fds during; (a) all five solar cycles period (1965–2019), (b) 1995–2019, in which better quality near-continues space-based data about solar wind and solar transients (e.g. CMEs) is available, (c) odd and even solar cycles, and (d) positive and negative polarity cycles. Last two groups (i.e., group c and d) were motivated by the fact that modulation of cosmic rays depends both on the solar activity cycles and magnetic polarity state of the interplanetary space (heliosphere). Cosmic ray modulation ‘peaked’ during odd solar cycles and during even solar cycles it is ‘flattened’ in shape (e.g. see, Jokipii and Kota, 2000; Potgieter, 2013 ). During positive polarity cycles (A > 0) and negative cycles (A < 0), the positively charged ions of cosmic rays drift in different directions in the heliosphere; during negative polarity cycles (A 0), positive particles drift inward through polar regions and drift outward along the equator (e.g., see Kotze, 2023 and references therein). We used the Morlet wavelet method (Torrence and Compo, 1998 ) to study the occurrence rate of Fds. Results were obtained using a single selected mother function and scaling parameters. Wavelet analysis studies actual time series that are non-stationary in nature because they hide extreme variations, and these fluctuations occur with high frequency. The method is most suitable to handle non-stationary time series and has advantages over traditional Fourier methods when the signal contains discontinuities. In this method, the wavelet power spectrum (WPS) and the global wavelet spectrum (GWS) provide exact temporal and spatial variations of the non-recurrent and recurrent signals of the time series. Any time series are expanded in terms of time-localized wavelets, and its two-dimensional representation (Morlet et al., 1982 ; Torrence and Compo, 1998 ) is $$f\left(t,{t}^{{\prime }},n\right)={exp}\left(2i\pi nt\right).exp\left\{-{n}^{2}\frac{{\left(t-t{\prime }\right)}^{2}}{2}\right\}$$ Where \(n\) is the frequency and \(t’\) is the delay time. The time-averaged wavelet spectrum over all the local wavelet spectra (i.e., the global wavelet spectrum) is given by $${\stackrel{-}{W}}^{2}\left(x\right)=\frac{1}{N}\sum _{n=0}^{N-1}{\left|{W}_{n}\left(x\right)\right|}^{2}$$ Where \({W}_{n}\left(x\right)\) is the wavelet power and \(N\) is the number of local wavelet spectra. Results and Discussion The mid-term quasi-periodicities in solar coronal mass ejections (CMEs) is suggested by Lou et al. ( 2003 ) during 1999 to 2003, and during cycle 23 by Lara et al. ( 2008 ). By using the Fourier power spectrum analyses, they reported significant periods in CMEs at 196, 272 and 358 days. The multiple periodicities in the time series of magnetic-flux emergence, solar flares and coronal mass ejection are reported by Choudhary et al. ( 2014 ) during the cycle 23–24. Based on this study they discussed activity sources of emerging flux. Authors reported 155-days period in the solar flares, sunspot area (SSA) and photospheric magnetic flux, which is confined to a part of the phase of the solar cycle 23–24. Chowdhury et al. ( 2013 ) observed 38-, 42-, 48- and 57-days variations in the coronal X-ray emission. In case of galactic cosmic rays, extended solar rotation period (~ 40-days) is observed at Haleakala and Climax stations in different time phases during the declining phase of cycle 22 (Caballero and Valdés-Galicia, 2001). Earlier Godart ( 1939 ) observed variations of the Earth's magnetic field and the intensity of cosmic radiation and Madden and Julian ( 1971 ) detected a 40–50-day oscillation in the zonal wind in the tropical pacific. Dependence of cosmic rays on solar activity for odd and even solar cycle was reported by Usoskin et al., ( 2001 ). Melkumyan, et. al., ( 2019 ) showed long-term changes in the number and magnitude of Forbush-Effects during six solar cycles. Authors reported the changes in the distribution of Forbush effects and the decrease in their average values from solar activity maximum to minimum are explained by the predominance of cosmic-ray variations due to the action of coronal holes at low activity. They also noted that the solar cycle 24 involves fewer and generally weaker Forbush effects than in the previous five cycles. A comparison of Fds has been made between recurrent associated with high-speed streams and sporadic caused by interplanetary coronal mass ejections (ICMEs) in solar cycles 23 and 24. Kilcik, et. al. (2010) reported a 152 days period during cycle 21, 73 days during cycle 22, and 62 days for cycle 23 in the solar flare index. Interplanetary space behaves in different ways in the two polarity states of the heliosphere. Gil et al., ( 2012 ) observed 27-day variations of the galactic cosmic ray intensity in the minimum of the 23 solar activity cycle. Authors calculated the average amplitude of the 27-day variation of the galactic cosmic ray anisotropy during the minimum epoch of polarity states. They concluded that amplitude of this anisotropy is lesser during negative polarity state (A 0) as it is expected from the drift theory. Recently, Kotze (2023) reported stronger 27-day periodicity in cosmic ray intensity during A > 0 solar minimum periods in comparison to minima when A < 0. Currie ( 1966 ) took magnetic data for 27 observatories; the data had been digitized and computed the power spectrum. Author discussed the period greater than 40 days, and suggested that the coherence and phase for the continuum indicated in the spectrum from 40 days to 3.7 years is primarily due to solar storm modulations. Belov et al. ( 2001 ) studied Fds observed during 1978–1996 on the basis of their solar sources. Pap et al. ( 1990 ) used the FET time series and observed 51-days period in the data related to strong magnetic fields. Our main goal in this work is to identify the possible periods in Fd events that occurred in the interplanetary space and were observed at the Earth during 1965 to 2019. Figure 1 is time variation of yearly averaged sunspot number (upper panel), cosmic ray intensity (middle panel) and variation of number of Forbush decreases falling in each year (lower panel). From this figure, we see that the number of Fd events increases as the cycle progresses to solar maximum, which seems to be a direct correlation of the total number of Fds with the sunspot cycles. Variation of overall cosmic rays counts (%) on the other hand shows maximum counts near the solar minimum and vice versa, as expected from solar cycle modulation of cosmic rays, plotted from 1965 to 2019 using Moscow neutron monitor station (cut off rigidity \(2.43 GV\) , having geographic latitude \({55.47}^{o}N\) and longitude \({55.47}^{o}E\) ). Our main concentration in this work is to find and discuss possible periodicities in Fd occurrence mainly between the period of a solar rotation period (~ 25 days) and Rieger period (~ 154 days); this later period was detected in many solar activity indices (Sunspots (SS number and SS area), solar flares (Gamma-ray flares, X-ray flares, microwave flares), solar radio bursts (Type II and Type IV)), Production of energetic particle production (solar energetic proton, energetic electrons) geomagnetic (Ap index), interplanetary parameters (IMF Bz) and cosmic rays (e.g. see, Rieger et al., 1984 ; Ichimoto et al., 1985 ; Bai and Sturrock, 1991 ; Bai and Cliver, 1990 ; Droge et al., 1990 ; Verma et al., 1991 , 1992 ; Oliver et al., 1998 ; Hill et al. 2001 ; Krivova and Solanki, 2002 ; Lou et al., 2003 ; Özgüç et al., 2003 ; Richardson and Cane, 2005 ; Kudela et al., 2010 ; Zaqarashvili et al., 2010 ; Singh et al., 2012 ; Choudhary et al., 2014 ; Chowdhury et at., 2013, 2015; Singh and Badruddin, 2017 ; Tsichla et al. 2019 ; Lopez-Comazzi and Blanco, 2020, 2022, and referees therein). Figure 2 (a) shows WPS and GWS of the Fds time series having magnitude greater than \(1.5\%\) during the 1965 to 2019 (i.e., from solar cycle 19 to 24). From the global wavelet spectrum of the figure, we observe a significant 44.2-day period, which is dominant throughout the time span (also see Table-1). Lara et al ( 2008 ) a periodicity of 45.4 days in CME activity during solar cycle 23; which is in close correspondence to the periodicity in Fd occurrence detected in our analysis. Periodicity of the same period (42.16 days) in X-ray solar flares of class > M5.0 (Lou et al., ( 2003 ) and (~ 42 days) by Chowdhury et al ( 2013 ) in x-ray emissions from the solar corona were observed. Similar periodicity (~ 45 days) was also detected in sunspot number and sunspot area, 10.7 cm solar radio flux, interplanetary magnetic field component Bz and geomagnetic activity index Ap index (Chowdhury et al., 2014), and cosmic ray intensity (Singh and Badruddin, 2015b ; Lopez-Comazzi and Blanco, 2022) The wavelet power spectrum of Fds (magnitude \(>1.5\%\) ) for the period 1995 to 2019 shown in Fig. 2 (b). This later period was chosen due to the reason that better quality near-continues space-based data about solar and interplanetary parameters (e.g., CMEs, X-ray class solar flares, solar energetic particle events, solar wind and interplanetary magnetic field) is available for this period for comparison. From the GWS, we see a significant broad peak of period 24.7 day and a sharp peak at 52.2 days; earlier period is about 1/6 and later period is about 1/3 of the reported Rieger period of 154-days (Rieger et al., 1984 ) detected initially in energetic solar flares. The sharp 52.2 days peak has three times more power than the broad 24.7 days peak. Black contours of these significant peaks can be seen in the WPS and throughout the time series. Periodicity of 51 days was reported in various solar flare activities and in the sunspot areas/groups (Lou et al., 2000). Bai et al. (1994) also reported a 51-day periodicity in major solar flares (X-ray class >M3.0) which is 2 times of 25.5 days which has been proposed as the fundamental period of the Sun. It is interesting to note that we have observed a periodicity of 24.7 days, which is close to this fundamental period of the Sun, and close to a CME period of 25 days reported by Lara et al ( 2008 ) and Katsavias et al. (2016). A 25-day periodicity in photospheric magnetic field was reported by Knaack et al. ( 2005 ), ~ 25 day periodicity in 10.7 cm solar radio flux, ~ 27-day periodicity in sunspot numbers, sunspot areas, IMF, Bz and Ap index, X-ray emission from solar corona (Chowdhury et al., 2013 , 2014). This periodicity (~ 27 days) is prominently observed in many Solar, Interplanetary (solar wind and IMF), geomagnetic activity parameters and cosmic rays (e.g. see, Kudela et al., 2010 ; Singh et al., 2012 ; Katsavrias et al. 2012 ; 2016 ; Bazilevskaya et a., 2014; Chowdhury et al, 2013 ; Lopez-Comazzi and Blanco et al, 2022 and references therein. Periodicity ~ 51 days were also detected in the time series of sunspots, CMEs and energetic solar flares (e.g. see, Deluche et al., 1985, Özgüç and Atac, 1989; Bai, 2003 ; Kilcik, 2009; Lou et al., 2000; 2003 ; Chowdhury et al., 2014; Lopez-Comazzi and Blanco, 2022). Corresponding periodicities were also reported in geomagnetic activity; 51, 54 days (Fraser-Smith, 1972 ; Gonzalez et al., 1993 ; Chowdhury et al., 2014) in geomagnetic Ap index. The solar cycle based wavelet power spectrum and global wavelet spectrum of Fds of amplitude \(>1.5\%\) are shown in Fig. 3 ; solar cycles divided into groups of odd and even solar cycles. Figure 3 (a) and 3 (b) is WPS and GWS of even and odd cycles of the Fds time series, respectively. During the even cycles, two significant peaks at 41.8 and 62.5 days are observed in the Fds time series. During odd cycles, two significant periods at 30 day and 46.7 day are observed in the time series of Fds. The first period is broad while the second period is sharp and has about three times more power. Restricting their analysis to only CMEs with width wider than 15 o , Lara et al ( 2008 ) concluded that the 28 days periodicity observed in CMEs is due to real quasi-periodic processes in CME activity and is not an observational effect. Since cosmic ray modulation is governed not only through solar activity but also depends on the large-scale polarity of the Sun, alternating between positive (A > 0) polarity state to negative (A < 0) polarity state between one solar maximum to other maxima. Polarity wise wavelet power spectrum and global wavelet spectrum of Fds are shown in Fig. 4 . Figure 4 (a) is WPS and GWS of Fd events having magnitude greater than \(1.5\%\) during the positive polarity states of the heliosphere. Analysis suggested a significant 42.2-day period is observed in the time series of Fds. This period is dominant in the wavelet power spectrum and has a very intense contour in the spectrum. However, a 43.0-day significant period is observed in the Fds data during negative polarity states of the heliosphere as shown in Fig. 4 (b). These observed Fd periodicities are in proximity with the periodicities observed in the certain solar activity, interplanetary plasma and field parameters, geomagnetic activity parameters and cosmic ray intensity. Periodicities worth mentioning here are: 28, 31, 33, 43, 45, 46, 48, 57, 61, 64, 66 day periods in SSN, SSA, CME activity, X-ray emission from solar corona, energetic solar flares and 10.7 cm flux (see, Lou et al., 2003 ; Joshi et al., 2006 ; Lara et al, 2008 ; Chowdhury et al., 2013 , 2014; Kilcik et al, 2014 ; Lopez-Comazzi and Blanco, 2022 ; Özgüç and Atac, 1989; Özgüç et al., 2002; Bai, 1994 ; Atac et al., 2005; Kastavarias et al., 2012, 2016; Chowdhury et al., 2013 , 2014 ); 28, 42, 46, 64, 66 days in CRI (Kudela et al. 2010 ; Singh et al., 2012 ; Lopez-Comazzi and Blanco,2020, 2022); 28, 31, 45, 59, 61, 64 in Ap (Lou et al., 2003 : Katsarvias et al., 2012, 2016; Chowdhury et al.,2014); 28, 30, 44, 61 in solar wind velocity, IMF Bz (Katsarvias et al., 2012; Chowdhury et al.,2014). Our results provide a strong support to quasi-periodic processes in the sun and eruptive process in the solar atmosphere that can influence not only the geomagnetic activity in the megnetosphere but also solar wind plasma, magnetic field (IMF) and charge particle (cosmic ray) intensity in the heliosphere. Conclusions Wavelet analysis of the Forbush decreases during last five solar cycles (20–24) reveal that Period of duration 44.2 day is a prominent and significant variation of Fds during 1965 to 2019. However, two significant variations (24.7-day and 52.2-days) are observed in the Fd events during 1995 to 2019. During the examined even cycles, two significant variations, 41.8 days and 62.5 days were observed in the Fds. Periods of duration 30.0 days and 46.7 days are observed in the Fd events selected in odd cycles. Remarkable differences in periodicities in Fd occurrence during odd and even solar cycles is observed. In the positive polarity state of the heliosphere, significant 42.2 days period is found in the Fds, while 43.0 days period is observed in the negative polarity state of the heliosphere. This (~ 43 day) periodicity prominently observed in Fd occurrence rate is almost same during both the positive and negative polarities of the heliosphere. Notable correspondence between short-term periodicities in various solar eruptive activity (solar flares, CMEs etc.) and Fds in cosmic rays provides further support to possible existence a global process that gives rise to magnetic flux escape from sub-photospheric regions, through the solar atmosphere to the outer heliosphere. Declarations Author Contribution The manuscript is focusing on Study of short-term periodicities in the occurrence of Forbush decreases. The manuscript contains one table and eight figures.This manuscript is written by Y. P. Singh and Badruddin and both the authors reviewed the manuscript. Acknowledgments We gratefully acknowledge the use of catalogue of Forbush decreases and interplanetary disturbances from http://spaceweather.izmiran.ru/eng/dbs.html . We are thankful to the station manager of Moscow neutron monitor station, for the use of Moscow neutron monitor station data. Wavelet software provided by C. Torrence and G. Compo is also acknowledged with thanks. References Abunin, A. A., Abunina, M. A., Belov, A. V., Gaidash, S. P., Eroshenko, E. A., Pryamushkina, I. I., Trefilova, L. A., Gamza, E. I.: Database capabilities for studying Forbush-effects and interplanetary disturbances. J. Phys.: Conference Series, 1181, 012062 (2019) Ahluwalia, H.S., Fikani, M. M.: Cosmic ray detector response to transient solar modulation: Forbush decreases. J. Geophys. Res. 112(A8), A08105 (2007) Akioka, M., Kubota, J., Ichimoto, K., Tohmura, I., Suzuki, M.: The 17-month periodicity of sunspot activity. Sol. Phys. 112, 313 (1987) Alania, M. V., Wawrzynczak, A.: Forbush decrease of the galactic cosmic ray intensity: Experimental study and theoretical modelling. Astrophys. and Space Sci. Trans. 4, 59–63 (2008) Aslam, O. P. M., Badruddin: Study of cosmic-ray modulation during the recent unusual minimum and mini-maximum of solar cycle 24. Sol. Phys. 290, 2333 (2015). Ataç, T., Özgüç, A., Rybak, J.: Overview of the flare index during the maximum phase of the solar cycle 23. Adv. Space Res. 35, 400 (2005) Badruddin, Singh, Y. P.: Geoeffectiveness of magnetic cloud, shock/sheath, interaction region, high-speed stream and their combined occurrence. Planet. Space Sci. 57, 318 (2009) Bai, T.: The 51-DAY Periodicity in CYCLE-22. Solar Phys. 150, 385–388 (1994) Bai, T.: Periodicities in solar flare occurrence: analysis of cycles 19–23. Astrophys. J. 591, 406–415, (2003) Bai, T., Cliver, E. W.: A 154 day periodicity in the occurrence rate of proton flares, Astrophys. J. 363, 299–309 (1990) Bai T., Sturrock P. A.: The 154-day and related periodicities of solar activity as subharmonics of a fundamental period. Nat., 350, 141 (1991) Badruddin, Kumar, A.: Study of cosmic-ray modulation during the passage of ICMEs and CIRs. Sol. Phys. 291, 559 (2016) Badruddin, Yadav, R. S., and Yadav, N. R.: Influence of magnetic clouds on cosmic ray intensity variation. Sol. Phys. 105, 413 (1986) Badruddin, Aslam, O. P. M., Derouich, M., Qutub, S.: Study of the development and mechanism of large amplitude decreases in cosmic ray intensity during geomagnetic disturbances in the magnetosphere. Adv. Space Res. 68(11), 4702–4712 (2021) Bazilevskaya, G., Broomhall, A.-M., Elsworth, Y., Nakariakov, V.M.: A combined analysis of the observational aspects of the quasibiennial oscillation in solar magnetic activity. Space Sci. Rev. 186(1–4) 359–386 (2014) Belov, A. V., Ero*shenko, E.A., Oleneva, V. A., Struminsky, A. B., Yanke, V. G.: What determines the magnitude of Forbush decreases? Adv. Space Res. 27(3), 625–630 (2001) Belov, A., Abunin, A., Abunina, M. et al.: Coronal Mass Ejections and Non-recurrent Forbush Decreases. Sol. Phys. 289, 3949–3960 (2014) Belov, A.V., Abunina, M.A., Abunin, A.A. et al. Cosmic-ray vector anisotropy and local characteristics of the interplanetary medium. Geomagn. Aeron. 57, 389–397 (2017) Cane H.V.: Coronal Mass Ejections and Forbush Decreases. Space Sci. Rev. 93, 55 (2000) Caballero, R., Valdes-Galicia, J.: Galactic cosmic ray fluctuations during solar cycles 22 and 23 at high altitude neutron monitors. Adv. Space Res. doi: 10.1016/S0273-1177(01)00099-0 (2001) Choudhary, D.P., Lawrence, J. K., Norris, M. and Cadavid, A. C.: Different periodicities in the Sunspot Area and the occurrence of solar flares and coronal mass ejections in solar cycle 23–24. Sol. Phys., 289, 649–656 (2014) Chowdhury, P., Jain, R., Awasthi, K.: Peridicity in the X-ray emission from the solar corona. Astrophys. J. 778:28, (2013) Chowdhury, P., Choudhary, D. P., Gosain, S., Moon, Y. -J.: Short-term periodicities in interplanetary, geomagnetic and solar phenomena during solar cycle 24. Astrophys. Space Sci. 356, 7–18 (2015) Currie, R. G.: The geomagnetic spectrum 40 days to 5.5 years. J. Geophys. Res. 71 (19), 4579–4598 (1966) Delache, P., Laclare, F. & Sadsaoud, H.: Long period oscillations in solar diameter measurements. Nat. 317, 416–418 (1985) Dhanju, M. S., Sarabhai, V. A.: Short-period variations of cosmic-ray intensity. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1967, 19(5), 252 (1967). Droge, W., Gibbs, K., Grunsfeld, J. M.,Meyer, P., & Newport, B. J.: A 153 day periodicity in the occurrence of solar flares producing energetic interplanetary electrons. Astrophys. J. 73, 279 (1990) Dorman, L.I.: Cosmic Rays Variations and Space Exploration. Nauka, Moscow, 197 (1963) Fraser-Smith, A. C.: Spectrum of the geomagnetic activity index Ap. Journal of Geophysical Research, 77(22), 4209–4220 (1972) Forbush, S. E.: On the Effects in the Cosmic-Ray Intensity Observed During the Recent Magnetic Storm, Phys. Rev. 51, 1108–1109 (1937) Gil, A., Modzelewska, R., and Alania, M. V., (2012), 27-day variations of the galactic cosmic ray intensity and anisotropy in the minimum of the 23rd solar activity cycle. Adv. Space Res. 50(6),712–715 (2012) Godart, O.: World-Wide Variations of the Earth's Magnetic Field and the Intensity of Cosmic Radiation, Phys. Rev., 56, 1074 (1939) Gonzalez, A.L., Gonzalez, W.D., Dutra, S.L.G., Tsurutani, B.T.: Periodic variation in the geomagnetic activity: a study based on the Ap index. J. Geophys. Res. 98, 9215–9232 (1993) Gopalswamy, N.: Properties of interplanetary coronal mass ejections. Space Sci. Rev. 124, 145–168 (2006) Gosling, J. T., Pizzo, V., and Bame, S. J.: Anomalously low proton temperatures in the solar wind following interplanetary shock waves: Evidence for magnetic bottles? J. Geophys. Res., 78, 2001 (1973) Hill, M. E., Hamilton, D. C., Krimigis, S. M.: Periodicity of 151 days in outer heliosphere anomalous cosmic ray fluxes. J. Geophys. Res. 106, 8315 (2001) Howe, R., Christensen-Dalsgaard, J., Hill, F., et al.: Dynamic variations at the base of the solar convection zone. Science 287, 2456 (2000) Ichimoto, K., Kubota, J., Suzuki, M., Tohmura, I., & Kurokawa, H.: Periodic behaviour of solar flare activity. Nature, 316, 422 (1985) Jokipii, J. R., & Kóta, J.: Galactic and Anomalous Cosmic Rays in the Heliosphere. Astrophys. Space. Sci. 274, 77 (2000) Joshi, B., Pant, P., Manoharan, P. K.: Periodicities in sunspot activity during solar cycle 23. A&A, 452, 647 (2006) Kane, R.P.: Evolution of Cosmic-Ray Intensities While the Earth Was Engulfed by the Interplanetary Storm (Blob) of 1–3. Sol Phys 289, 2669–2675 (2014). Katsavrias, C., Preka-Papadema, P., Moussas, X.: Wavelet analysis on solar wind parameters and geomagnetic indices. Sol. Phys. 280, 623–640 (2012) Kilcik, A., Özgüç, A., Yurchyshyn, V., & Rozelot, J.: Sunspot Count Periodicities in Different Zurich Sunspot Group Classes Since 1986. Sol. Phys. 289, 4365 (2014) Knaack, R., Stenflo, J., & Berdyugina, S.: Evolution and rotation of large-scale photospheric magnetic fields of the sun during cycles 21–23: Periodicities, north-south asymmetries and r-mode signatures. A&A, 438, 1067 (2005) Kotzé, P.: Behaviour of 27-Day and 13.5-Day Periodicities in Galactic Cosmic Particles as Observed by Spacecraft and Neutron Monitors During Different Solar Polarity Cycles. Sol. Phys. 298:107 (2023) Krivova, N.A., Solanki, S.K.: The 1.3-year and 156-day periodicities in sunspot data: Wavelet analysis suggests a common origin. Astron. Astrophys. 394, 701–706 (2002) Kudela, K., Rybak, J., Antalova, A., Storini, M.: Time evolution of the low frequency periodicities in cosmic ray intensity. Sol. Phys. 205, 165–175 (2002) Kudela, K., Sabbah, I.: Quasi-periodic variations of low energy cosmic rays. Sci. China, Technol. Sci. 59(1), 1–11 (2016) Kudela, K., Sabbah, I.: Quasi-periodic variations of low energy cosmic rays. Science 59, 547 (2016) Kudela, K., Mavromichalaki, H., Papaioannou, A., Gerontidou, M.: On Mid-Term Periodicities in Cosmic Rays. Solar Phys. 266, 173–180 (2010) Katsavrias, C., Hillaris, A., Preka-Papadema, P.: A wavelet-based approach to Solar–Terrestrial Coupling, Adv. Space Res. 57, 2234–2244 (2016) López-Comazzi, A., & Blanco, J.: Short-Term Periodicities Observed in Neutron Monitor Counting Rates. Sol. Phys. 295, 81 (2020). Lou, Y.-Q., Wang, Y.-M., Fan, Z., Wang, S., Wang, J.X.: Periodicities in solar coronal mass ejections. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron., Soc. 345, 809–818 (2003) Lou Y. Q.: Rossby-Type Wave–Induced Periodicities in Flare Activities and Sunspot Areas or Groups during Solar Maxima. Astrophys. J. 540, 1102 (2000) López-Comazzi, A. and J. J. Blanco, J. J.: Short- and Mid-term Periodicities Observed in Neutron Monitor Counting Rates throughout Solar Cycles 20–24. Astrophys. J. 927:155, (2022) Lara, A., Andrea Borgazzi, A., Mendes Jr. O., Rosa, R. R., Margarete Oliveira Domingues, M. O.: Short-Period Fluctuations in Coronal Mass Ejection Activity during Solar Cycle 23. Sol. Phys. 248, 155 (2008) Lockwood, J. A.: Forbush decreases in the cosmic radiations, Space Sci. Rev. 12, 658–715 (1971) Lingri, D., Mavromichalaki, H., Belov, A. et al.: Solar Activity Parameters and Associated Forbush Decreases During the Minimum Between Cycles 23 and 24 and the Ascending Phase of Cycle 24. Sol. Phys. 291, 1025–1041 (2016) Lou, Y., Wang, Y., Fan, Z., Wang, S. and Wang, J. X.: Periodicity in solar coronal mass ejections, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 345, 809–818 (2003) Madden, R. A., Julian, P. R.: Detection of a 40–50-day oscillation in the zonal wind in the Tropical Pacific. J. Atmos. Sci. 28, 702–708 (1971) Mavromichalaki, H., Preka-Papadema, P., Liritzis, I., Petropoulos, B., Kurt, V.: Short-term variations of cosmic-ray intensity and flare related data in 1981–1983, New Astron. 8, 777 (2003) Meyer, P. and Simpson, J. A.: Changes in the Low Energy Particle Cut-Off and Primary Spectrum of Cosmic Radiation, I', Phys. Rev. 99, 1517 (1955) Melkumyan, A. A., Belov A. V., Mariya, A., Artem, A., Evgeniya, E., Viktoria, O., Viktor, Y.: Recurrent and sporadic Forbush decreases during solar cycles 23–24, Sol. Terr. Phys. 5(1), 28–34, (2019) Melkumyan, A. A., Belov, A. V., Abunina, M. A., Abunin, A. A., Shlyk, N. S., Oleneva, V. A., and Yanke, V. G.: Forbush decreases associated with coronal mass ejections from active and non-active regions: statistical comparison. MNRAS 515, 4430–4444 (2022) Morlet, J., Arens, G., Forgeau, I., Giard, D.: Wave propagation and sampling theory—Part I: Complex signal and scattering in multilayered media, Geophysics 47, 203 (1982) Morrison, P.: Solar Origin of cosmic-ray Time Variations. Phys. Rev. 101, 1397 (1956) Oliver, R., Ballester, J. L., & Baudin, F.: Emergence of magnetic flux on the Sun as the cause of a 158-day periodicity in sunspot areas. Nature, 394, 552 (1998) Özgüç, A., Ataç, T.,: Periodic Behaviour of Solar Flare Index during SOLAR-CYCLE-20 and SOLAR-CYCLE-21. Solar Phys. 123, 357–365 (1989) Özgüç, A., Ataç, T., Rybák, J.: Temporal variability of the flare index (1966–2001). Sol. Phys. 214, 375–396 (2003) Özgüç, A., Ataç, T.: Periodic behavior of solar flare index during solar cycles 20 and 21. Sol Phys 123, 357–365 (1989) Pap, J., Tobiska, W.K., Bouwer, S.D.: Periodicity of solar irradiance and solar activity indices, I. Solar Phys. 129, 165 (1990) Parker, E. N.: 1963, Interplanetary Dynamical Processes, Interscience, John Wiley and Sons (1963) Potgieter, M.S.: Solar modulation of cosmic rays. Living Rev. Solar Phys. 10, 3 (2013) Rieger, E., Kanbach, G., Reppin, C., Share, G. H., Forrest, D. J., Chupp, E. L.: A 154- day periodicity in the occurrence of hard solar flares. Nature 312, 623 (1984) Richardson, G., Cane, H.: The 150 day quasi-periodicity in interplanetary and solar phenomena duringcycle 23. Geophys. Res. Lett. 32, 2104–2107 (2005) Richardson, I. G., and Cane, H. V.: Signatures of Shock Drivers in the Solar Wind and Their Dependence on the Solar Source Location, J. Geophys. Res. 98, 15295 (1993) Rybak, J., Antalova, A., Storini, M.: The wavelet analysis of the solar and cosmic ray data. Space Sci. Rev. 97, 359–362 (2001) Singh, Y.P., Badruddin: Effects of the polarity states of the heliospheric magnetic field and particle drifts in cosmic radiation. Solar Phys. 234: 339–352 (2006) Singh, Y.P., Gautam, S., Badruddin: Temporal variations of short- and mid-term periodicities in solar wind parameters and cosmic ray intensity. J. Atmos. Sol. Terr. Phys. 89, 48 (2012) Singh, Y.P., Badruddin: Short- and mid-term oscillations of solar, geomagnetic activity and cosmic ray intensity during the last two solar magnetic cycles. Planet. Space Sci. 138, 1–6 (2017) Singh, Y.P., Badruddin: Prominent short-, mid-, and long-term periodicities in solar and geomagnetic activity: wavelet analysis. Planet. Space Sci. 96, 120 (2014) Singh, Y.P., Badruddin: Short-term variations of cosmic ray particles during the recent deep solar minimum and the previous four solar minima: a wavelet analysis. Sol. Phys. 290, 3071 (2015a) Singh, Y.P., Badruddin: Solar-rotational oscillation and its harmonics in the solar wind, geomagnetic and cosmic ray particles during the last two solar minima. Astrophys. Space Sci. 359, 60 (2015b) Simpson, J. A., Fonger, W., and Treiman, S. B.: Cosmic Radiation Intensity-Time Variations and Their Origin. I. Neutron Intensity Variation Method and Meteorological Factors, Phys. Rev. 90, 934 (1953) Subramanian, P., Antia, H. M., Dugad, S. R., Goswami, U. D., Gupta, S. K., Hayashi, Y., Ito, N., S. Kawakami, S., Kojima, H., Mohanty, P. K., Nayak, P. K., Nonaka, T., Oshima, A., Sivaprasad, K., Tanaka, H., and S. C. Tonwar, S. C.: Forbush decreases and turbulence levels at coronal mass ejection fronts. A&A 494, 1107–1118, (2009) Torrence, C., Compo, G.P.: A practical guide to wavelet analysis. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 79(1), 61–78 (1998) Tsichla, M., Gerontidou, M., & Mavromichalaki, H.: Spectral Analysis of Solar and Geomagnetic Parameters in Relation to Cosmic-ray Intensity for the Time Period 1965–2018. Sol. Phys. 294, 15 (2019) Usoskin, I.G., Mursula, K., Kananen, H., Kovaltsov, G.A.: Dependence of cosmic rays on solar activity for odd and even solar cycle. Adv. Space Res. 27(3), 571–576 (2001) Venkatesan, D., and Badruddin: Cosmic-ray intensity variations in the 3-dimensional heliosphere. Space Sci. Rev. 52, 121–194, (1990) Verma, V. K., Joshi, G. C., & Paliwal, D. C.: Study of periodicities of solar nuclear gamma ray flares and sunspots. Sol. Phys., 138, 205 (1992) Verma, V. K., Joshi, G. C., Wahab Uddin, & Paliwal, D. C. 1991, A&AS, 90, 83. Webber, W. R.: Elementary Particles and Cosmic Ray Physics 6, 77 (1962) Zhang, G., Burlaga, L.F.: Magnetic clouds, geomagnetic disturbances, and cosmic ray decreases. J. Geophys. Res. 93, 2511 (1998) Zaqarashvili, T. V., Carbonell, M., Oliver, R., & Ballester, J. L.: Magnetic rossby waves in the solar tachocline and Rieger-type periodicities. Astrophys. J. 709, 749 (2010) Tables Table 1 FDs different durations and classifications (amplitude > 1.5), no of data points, significant periods and observed corresponding power in GWS Duration No. of data points Period Power FD > 1.5 (1965–2019) N = 1643 44.2 day 1.91*10^5 FD > 1.5 (1995–2019) 607 24.7 day 0.58*10^5 52.2 day 1.82*10^5 FD > 1.5 (1965–2019) Even cycle 927 41.8 day 1.73*10^5 62.5 day 1.21*10^5 FD > 1.5 (1965–2019) Odd cycle 716 30.0 day 0.78*10^5 46.7 day 2.42*10^5 FD > 1.5 (1965–2019) A > 0 875 42.2 day 1.68*10^5 FD > 1.5 (1965–2019) A < 0 751 43.0 day 1.92*10^5 Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Under Review Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Revision requested 07 Apr, 2024 Reviews received at journal 27 Mar, 2024 Reviewers agreed at journal 11 Mar, 2024 Reviewers invited by journal 29 Jan, 2024 Editor assigned by journal 29 Jan, 2024 Submission checks completed at journal 29 Jan, 2024 First submitted to journal 27 Jan, 2024 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-3901995","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":269936861,"identity":"db8aeb67-df1e-4352-9618-723d6987dfad","order_by":0,"name":"Y. P. Singh","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Mangalayatan University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Y.","middleName":"P.","lastName":"Singh","suffix":""},{"id":269936862,"identity":"4db61254-e535-4963-9918-0223a804402b","order_by":1,"name":"Badruddin Badruddin","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"King Abdulaziz University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Badruddin","middleName":"","lastName":"Badruddin","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2024-01-27 05:29:11","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-3901995/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3901995/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":50416123,"identity":"07531601-b9df-4840-890a-0221255fc658","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-01-31 08:16:51","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":539933,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(a): \u003c/strong\u003eYearly averaged sunspot number (SSN), cosmic rays counts (CRI %) and number of Forbush decreases (Fds) during 1965 to 2019\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(b): \u003c/strong\u003eDaily averaged cosmic rays counts (%) monitored at Moscow NM during 1965 to 2019\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-3901995/v1/bcebbbca0ee15946c783ac1d.png"},{"id":50416121,"identity":"51450677-6ff5-4437-959a-6ce0dacd84bb","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-01-31 08:16:51","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":335394,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(a)\u003c/strong\u003e Wavelet Power Spectrum (WPS) and Global Wavelet Spectrum (GWS) of FD events (having amplitude greater than 1.5) for the period 1965 to 2019.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(b)\u003c/strong\u003e Wavelet Power Spectrum (WPS) and Global Wavelet Spectrum (GWS) of FD events (having amplitude greater than 1.5) for the period 1995 to 2019.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-3901995/v1/6ed069bc5f917059c39b56f9.png"},{"id":50416124,"identity":"f6d50b3c-dd47-4d5f-833a-45c97b2ee9ed","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-01-31 08:16:51","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":341442,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(a)\u003c/strong\u003e Wavelet Power Spectrum (WPS) and Global Wavelet Spectrum (GWS) of FD events (having amplitude greater than 1.5) for the even cycles during the period 1965 to 2019.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(b)\u003c/strong\u003e Wavelet Power Spectrum (WPS) and Global Wavelet Spectrum (GWS) of FD events (having amplitude greater than 1.5) for the odd cycles during the period 1965 to 2019.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-3901995/v1/1c01d1ecde34d9c66dbb8fbf.png"},{"id":50416469,"identity":"3c276d5e-190d-4b20-aec2-8d5db6a5d1c7","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-01-31 08:24:51","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":340337,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(a)\u003c/strong\u003e Wavelet Power Spectrum (WPS) and Global Wavelet Spectrum (GWS) of FD events (having amplitude greater than 1.5) for A\u0026gt;0 during the period 1965 to 2019.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(b)\u003c/strong\u003e Wavelet Power Spectrum (WPS) and Global Wavelet Spectrum (GWS) of FD events (having amplitude greater than 1.5) for A\u0026lt;0 during the period 1965 to 2019.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"4.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-3901995/v1/7ca0cb139ef275f784e7b8bf.png"},{"id":50417000,"identity":"0000e365-10f4-4349-b38e-4c4f375cdf5a","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-01-31 08:32:53","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1450793,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-3901995/v1/93ca3714-f63e-4db8-9297-dbc187d948d8.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Study of short-term periodicities in the occurrence of Forbush decreases: Wavelet analysis","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe first asymmetrical change in cosmic rays\u0026rsquo; intensity was observed in 1937, when Forbush (1937) studied the data of ion chambers located around the earth. He concluded that this change in the intensity was due to the geomagnetic disturbances. Later the same variations were observed by Simpson et. al. (1953) in neutron monitor and Meyer and Simpson (1955) at balloon altitudes and airplane altitudes data respectively. It was also observed that the amplitude of decrease is more during the enhanced solar activity. This temporal change in intensity was very sharp followed by slow recovery, such non-recurrent phenomena were termed as Forbush decreases (Fds) as classified by Simpson et. al., (1953). Simpsons and his co-investigators also pointed out that this temporal change could not be due to the geomagnetic disturbances. This modulation of cosmic rays\u0026rsquo; intensity is the repercussion of solar activity. The solar modulation of galactic cosmic rays is of two types named recurrent as pointed out by Lockwood (1971) (e.g., daily variation, 27-day, 11-year) and non-recurrent decreases caused by transient interplanetary events caused by mass ejections (e.g., Forbush decreases). The recurrent decreases are gradual and have a more symmetrical profile caused by corotating interaction regions (CIRs). The diurnal variation, a symmetrical variation is due to the drift of the cosmic rays with respect to the earth, however other variations are due to the change in conditions of the interplanetary medium.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eForbush decrease (Fd) is a large amplitude asymmetrical and random cosmic ray event of interplanetary space. In such events, cosmic rays\u0026rsquo; counts decrease and reach a minimum value and then recovery of the profile takes place. In such profiles, the decreasing phase becomes very sharp (~occurs within a few hours) and after it slow recovery starts, which lasts a few days to a week. The major portion of the decreasing phase occurs within 12 to 24 hours. The early stage detailed experimental observations of Fds were discussed by Webber (1962), Dorman (1963) and theoretical presentations of Fds are suggested in the monograph by Parker (1963). However, a lot of progress has taken place in the study of this phenomenon since then, both from observational and theoretical point of view (e.g., see Lockwood (1971), Venkatesan and Badruddin (1990), Cane (2000), Belov et al., (2014), Lingri et al., 2016, Melkumyan et al., (2022) and references therein).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLockwood (1971) reported that the percentage change in intensity of cosmic rays\u0026rsquo; during the solar cycle 19 was ~25%, however depression in several Forbush decreases were . Such sudden and rapid reduction in intensity modulates the interplanetary medium in many ways. The depression in an ideal Forbush decrease is mainly due to the turbulent field region formed ahead of fast ejecta followed by coronal mass ejection (CME) (e.g., Badruddin et al., 1986). Thus, to understand the Fds, it is important to understand the characteristic and topology of CMEs, as turbulent fields are the result of CME. Such larger amplitude, random, fast and asymmetrical events, whose occurrence rate may depend on the eruptive solar events rate. Thus, search for periodicities in Fds rate and its comparison with the periodicities in solar activity parameters is expected to provide further insight into these phenomena.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eICME is the CME event of interplanetary space, which have very large structures. During a typical CME, about mass ejected from the solar surface. CME moves in interplanetary space with speed to km/sec and average kinetic energy is about Joule. The first image of CME was observed in coronagraphs in the early 1970s (Gosling et al., 1973). The occurrence rate of CMEs varies from solar minimum to solar maximum. During solar minimum about one CMEs eject in four days, however about three CMEs per day release in solar maximum periods. Richardson and Cane (1993) pointed out that depressed plasma proton temperature, bidirectional particle flows and strong magnetic field may be the typical signatures of ejecta. They identified these signatures from the available data of solar wind and cosmic ray intensity. However, time and energy modulation of the cosmic ray beam by the random diffusion of the particles through the turbulent clouds of the magnetised plasma is the main cause of Fds (Morrison, 1956). The CMEs also trigger the geomagnetic storms, but the mechanism behind the geomagnetic storms is different as compared to Fds. Therefore, the amplitude of Fds and geomagnetic storms are not proportional to each other in every event (Badruddin, Yadav and Yadav, 1986; Zhang and Burlaga, 1988; Ahluwalia and Fikani, 2007; Alania and Wawrzunczak, 2008; Badruddin and Singh, 2009; Kane, 2014 and reference therein).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eModulation of the cosmic-ray intensity play a major role in understanding the interplanetary medium. The variations of cosmic ray particles are reported by Dhanju, and Sarabhai, (1967), Akioka et al. (1987), Hill et al. (2001), Rybak et al. (2001), Kudela et al. (2002), Mavromichalaki et al. (2003), Singh et al. (2012), Singh and Badruddin (2014, 2015a, 2015b), Aslam and Badruddin (2015), Badruddin and Kumar (2016), Chowdhury et al. (2015), Kudela and Sabbah (2016), and many others. Earth directed CMEs are mainly responsible for large-amplitude Fds, thus it is pertinent to know the characteristics of CMEs to learn Forbush decreases (e.g. see, Subramanim et al., 2009; Badruddin et al., 2021 and references therein), while high speed solar wind streams (HSS)/CIRs modulate the cosmic rays with smaller amplitude and larger duration, in general (e.g. see, Badruddin and Kumar, 2016 and references therein). The characteristics of CMEs in the heliosphere are discussed in detail by Gopalswamy (2006).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eStudy of variability of solar activity, solar wind plasma and field, geomagnetic activity, and cosmic ray intensity could be the main areas of research to understand the Sun and its dynamics. These variations may be periodic and non-periodic, originating mainly from or within the Sun, and hence study of variations provides key inputs related to internal features of the Sun (Howe et al., 2000). To search for the variability of occurrence of Fds can be a challenging task, but such a study could play a significant role in understanding solar dynamo oscillations in a better way.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Data and Analysis Technique","content":"\u003cp\u003eIn this study, we consider the Forbush decreases of magnitude \u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\\ge 1.5\\%\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e for continuous 55 years (covering five solar activity cycles) from 1965 to 2019. We utilize\u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003ethe catalogue of Fds and interplanetary disturbances (\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttp://spaceweather.izmiran.ru/eng/dbs.html\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e) (see, Belov et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Abunin et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e and references therein). We did not consider the events with magnitude \u0026lt;1.5% in order to avoid any possible interference due to the presence of diurnal variation whose amplitude is usually \u0026lt;1.5% (Venkatesan and Badruddin, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1990\u003c/span\u003e; Singh and Baduddin, 2006). To find the occurrence rate of Fds, we applied wavelet analysis procedure to Fds during; (a) all five solar cycles period (1965\u0026ndash;2019), (b) 1995\u0026ndash;2019, in which better quality near-continues space-based data about solar wind and solar transients (e.g. CMEs) is available, (c) odd and even solar cycles, and (d) positive and negative polarity cycles. Last two groups (i.e., group c and d) were motivated by the fact that modulation of cosmic rays depends both on the solar activity cycles and magnetic polarity state of the interplanetary space (heliosphere). Cosmic ray modulation \u0026lsquo;peaked\u0026rsquo; during odd solar cycles and during even solar cycles it is \u0026lsquo;flattened\u0026rsquo; in shape (e.g. see, Jokipii and Kota, 2000; Potgieter, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). During positive polarity cycles (A\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0) and negative cycles (A\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0), the positively charged ions of cosmic rays drift in different directions in the heliosphere; during negative polarity cycles (A\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0) these positively charged particle drift inward along the heliospheric equator and outward through the polar regions. However, during positive polarity cycles (A\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0), positive particles drift inward through polar regions and drift outward along the equator (e.g., see Kotze, 2023 and references therein).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWe used the Morlet wavelet method (Torrence and Compo, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1998\u003c/span\u003e) to study the occurrence rate of Fds. Results were obtained using a single selected mother function and scaling parameters. Wavelet analysis studies actual time series that are non-stationary in nature because they hide extreme variations, and these fluctuations occur with high frequency. The method is most suitable to handle non-stationary time series and has advantages over traditional Fourier methods when the signal contains discontinuities. In this method, the wavelet power spectrum (WPS) and the global wavelet spectrum (GWS) provide exact temporal and spatial variations of the non-recurrent and recurrent signals of the time series. Any time series are expanded in terms of time-localized wavelets, and its two-dimensional representation (Morlet et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1982\u003c/span\u003e; Torrence and Compo, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1998\u003c/span\u003e) is\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Equa\" class=\"Equation\"\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"FileID_Equa\" class=\"mathdisplay\"\u003e$$f\\left(t,{t}^{{\\prime }},n\\right)={exp}\\left(2i\\pi nt\\right).exp\\left\\{-{n}^{2}\\frac{{\\left(t-t{\\prime }\\right)}^{2}}{2}\\right\\}$$\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhere \u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(n\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e is the frequency and \u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(t\u0026rsquo;\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e is the delay time.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe time-averaged wavelet spectrum over all the local wavelet spectra (i.e., the global wavelet spectrum) is given by\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Equb\" class=\"Equation\"\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"FileID_Equb\" class=\"mathdisplay\"\u003e$${\\stackrel{-}{W}}^{2}\\left(x\\right)=\\frac{1}{N}\\sum _{n=0}^{N-1}{\\left|{W}_{n}\\left(x\\right)\\right|}^{2}$$\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhere \u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\({W}_{n}\\left(x\\right)\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e is the wavelet power and \u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(N\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e is the number of local wavelet spectra.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Results and Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe mid-term quasi-periodicities in solar coronal mass ejections (CMEs) is suggested by Lou et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e) during 1999 to 2003, and during cycle 23 by Lara et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e). By using the Fourier power spectrum analyses, they reported significant periods in CMEs at 196, 272 and 358 days. The multiple periodicities in the time series of magnetic-flux emergence, solar flares and coronal mass ejection are reported by Choudhary et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e) during the cycle 23\u0026ndash;24. Based on this study they discussed activity sources of emerging flux. Authors reported 155-days period in the solar flares, sunspot area (SSA) and photospheric magnetic flux, which is confined to a part of the phase of the solar cycle 23\u0026ndash;24. Chowdhury et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e) observed 38-, 42-, 48- and 57-days variations in the coronal X-ray emission. In case of galactic cosmic rays, extended solar rotation period (~\u0026thinsp;40-days) is observed at Haleakala and Climax stations in different time phases during the declining phase of cycle 22 (Caballero and Vald\u0026eacute;s-Galicia, 2001). Earlier Godart (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1939\u003c/span\u003e) observed variations of the Earth's magnetic field and the intensity of cosmic radiation and Madden and Julian (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR60\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1971\u003c/span\u003e) detected a 40\u0026ndash;50-day oscillation in the zonal wind in the tropical pacific. Dependence of cosmic rays on solar activity for odd and even solar cycle was reported by Usoskin et al., (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR88\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2001\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMelkumyan, et. al., (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR63\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e) showed long-term changes in the number and magnitude of Forbush-Effects during six solar cycles. Authors reported the changes in the distribution of Forbush effects and the decrease in their average values from solar activity maximum to minimum are explained by the predominance of cosmic-ray variations due to the action of coronal holes at low activity. They also noted that the solar cycle 24 involves fewer and generally weaker Forbush effects than in the previous five cycles.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eA comparison of Fds has been made between recurrent associated with high-speed streams and sporadic caused by interplanetary coronal mass ejections (ICMEs) in solar cycles 23 and 24. Kilcik, et. al. (2010) reported a 152 days period during cycle 21, 73 days during cycle 22, and 62 days for cycle 23 in the solar flare index.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eInterplanetary space behaves in different ways in the two polarity states of the heliosphere. Gil et al., (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e) observed 27-day variations of the galactic cosmic ray intensity in the minimum of the 23 solar activity cycle. Authors calculated the average amplitude of the 27-day variation of the galactic cosmic ray anisotropy during the minimum epoch of polarity states. They concluded that amplitude of this anisotropy is lesser during negative polarity state (A\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0) than during the positive polarity period (A\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0) as it is expected from the drift theory. Recently, Kotze (2023) reported stronger 27-day periodicity in cosmic ray intensity during A\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0 solar minimum periods in comparison to minima when A\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eCurrie (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1966\u003c/span\u003e) took magnetic data for 27 observatories; the data had been digitized and computed the power spectrum. Author discussed the period greater than 40 days, and suggested that the coherence and phase for the continuum indicated in the spectrum from 40 days to 3.7 years is primarily due to solar storm modulations. Belov et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2001\u003c/span\u003e) studied Fds observed during 1978\u0026ndash;1996 on the basis of their solar sources. Pap et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR71\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1990\u003c/span\u003e) used the FET time series and observed 51-days period in the data related to strong magnetic fields.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOur main goal in this work is to identify the possible periods in Fd events that occurred in the interplanetary space and were observed at the Earth during 1965 to 2019. Figure\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e is time variation of yearly averaged sunspot number (upper panel), cosmic ray intensity (middle panel) and variation of number of Forbush decreases falling in each year (lower panel). From this figure, we see that the number of Fd events increases as the cycle progresses to solar maximum, which seems to be a direct correlation of the total number of Fds with the sunspot cycles. Variation of overall cosmic rays counts (%) on the other hand shows maximum counts near the solar minimum and vice versa, as expected from solar cycle modulation of cosmic rays, plotted from 1965 to 2019 using Moscow neutron monitor station (cut off rigidity \u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(2.43 GV\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e, having geographic latitude \u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\({55.47}^{o}N\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e and longitude \u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\({55.47}^{o}E\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e). Our main concentration in this work is to find and discuss possible periodicities in Fd occurrence mainly between the period of a solar rotation period (~\u0026thinsp;25 days) and Rieger period (~\u0026thinsp;154 days); this later period was detected in many solar activity indices (Sunspots (SS number and SS area), solar flares (Gamma-ray flares, X-ray flares, microwave flares), solar radio bursts (Type II and Type IV)), Production of energetic particle production (solar energetic proton, energetic electrons) geomagnetic (Ap index), interplanetary parameters (IMF Bz) and cosmic rays (e.g. see, Rieger et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR74\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1984\u003c/span\u003e; Ichimoto et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1985\u003c/span\u003e; Bai and Sturrock, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1991\u003c/span\u003e; Bai and Cliver, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1990\u003c/span\u003e; Droge et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1990\u003c/span\u003e; Verma et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR91\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1991\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR90\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1992\u003c/span\u003e; Oliver et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR67\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1998\u003c/span\u003e; Hill et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2001\u003c/span\u003e; Krivova and Solanki, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2002\u003c/span\u003e; Lou et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e; \u0026Ouml;zg\u0026uuml;\u0026ccedil; et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR69\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e; Richardson and Cane, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR75\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e; Kudela et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e; Zaqarashvili et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR94\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e; Singh et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR79\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Choudhary et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Chowdhury et at., 2013, 2015; Singh and Badruddin, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR80\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Tsichla et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR87\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Lopez-Comazzi and Blanco, 2020, 2022, and referees therein).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFigure \u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e (a) shows WPS and GWS of the Fds time series having magnitude greater than \u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(1.5\\%\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e during the 1965 to 2019 (i.e., from solar cycle 19 to 24). From the global wavelet spectrum of the figure, we observe a significant 44.2-day period, which is dominant throughout the time span (also see Table-1). Lara et al (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e) a periodicity of 45.4 days in CME activity during solar cycle 23; which is in close correspondence to the periodicity in Fd occurrence detected in our analysis. Periodicity of the same period (42.16 days) in X-ray solar flares of class\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;M5.0 (Lou et al., (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e) and (~\u0026thinsp;42 days) by Chowdhury et al (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e) in x-ray emissions from the solar corona were observed. Similar periodicity (~\u0026thinsp;45 days) was also detected in sunspot number and sunspot area, 10.7 cm solar radio flux, interplanetary magnetic field component Bz and geomagnetic activity index Ap index (Chowdhury et al., 2014), and cosmic ray intensity (Singh and Badruddin, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR83\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015b\u003c/span\u003e; Lopez-Comazzi and Blanco, 2022)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe wavelet power spectrum of Fds (magnitude\u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\u0026gt;1.5\\%\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e) for the period 1995 to 2019 shown in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e (b). This later period was chosen due to the reason that better quality near-continues space-based data about solar and interplanetary parameters (e.g., CMEs, X-ray class solar flares, solar energetic particle events, solar wind and interplanetary magnetic field) is available for this period for comparison. From the GWS, we see a significant broad peak of period 24.7 day and a sharp peak at 52.2 days; earlier period is about 1/6 and later period is about 1/3 of the reported Rieger period of 154-days (Rieger et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR74\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1984\u003c/span\u003e) detected initially in energetic solar flares. The sharp 52.2 days peak has three times more power than the broad 24.7 days peak. Black contours of these significant peaks can be seen in the WPS and throughout the time series. Periodicity of 51 days was reported in various solar flare activities and in the sunspot areas/groups (Lou et al., 2000). Bai et al. (1994) also reported a 51-day periodicity in major solar flares (X-ray class \u0026gt;M3.0) which is 2 times of 25.5 days which has been proposed as the fundamental period of the Sun. It is interesting to note that we have observed a periodicity of 24.7 days, which is close to this fundamental period of the Sun, and close to a CME period of 25 days reported by Lara et al (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e) and Katsavias et al. (2016). A 25-day periodicity in photospheric magnetic field was reported by Knaack et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e), ~\u0026thinsp;25 day periodicity in 10.7 cm solar radio flux, ~\u0026thinsp;27-day periodicity in sunspot numbers, sunspot areas, IMF, Bz and Ap index, X-ray emission from solar corona (Chowdhury et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e, 2014). This periodicity (~\u0026thinsp;27 days) is prominently observed in many Solar, Interplanetary (solar wind and IMF), geomagnetic activity parameters and cosmic rays (e.g. see, Kudela et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e; Singh et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR79\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Katsavrias et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; \u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Bazilevskaya et a., 2014; Chowdhury et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Lopez-Comazzi and Blanco et al, 2022 and references therein. Periodicity ~\u0026thinsp;51 days were also detected in the time series of sunspots, CMEs and energetic solar flares (e.g. see, Deluche et al., 1985, \u0026Ouml;zg\u0026uuml;\u0026ccedil; and Atac, 1989; Bai, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e; Kilcik, 2009; Lou et al., 2000; \u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e; Chowdhury et al., 2014; Lopez-Comazzi and Blanco, 2022). Corresponding periodicities were also reported in geomagnetic activity; 51, 54 days (Fraser-Smith, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1972\u003c/span\u003e; Gonzalez et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1993\u003c/span\u003e; Chowdhury et al., 2014) in geomagnetic Ap index.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe solar cycle based wavelet power spectrum and global wavelet spectrum of Fds of amplitude \u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\u0026gt;1.5\\%\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e are shown in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e; solar cycles divided into groups of odd and even solar cycles. Figure\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e (a) and 3 (b) is WPS and GWS of even and odd cycles of the Fds time series, respectively. During the even cycles, two significant peaks at 41.8 and 62.5 days are observed in the Fds time series. During odd cycles, two significant periods at 30 day and 46.7 day are observed in the time series of Fds. The first period is broad while the second period is sharp and has about three times more power. Restricting their analysis to only CMEs with width wider than 15\u003csup\u003eo\u003c/sup\u003e, Lara et al (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e) concluded that the 28 days periodicity observed in CMEs is due to real quasi-periodic processes in CME activity and is not an observational effect.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSince cosmic ray modulation is governed not only through solar activity but also depends on the large-scale polarity of the Sun, alternating between positive (A\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0) polarity state to negative (A\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0) polarity state between one solar maximum to other maxima.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ePolarity wise wavelet power spectrum and global wavelet spectrum of Fds are shown in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig8\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e. Figure\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig8\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e (a) is WPS and GWS of Fd events having magnitude greater than \u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(1.5\\%\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e during the positive polarity states of the heliosphere. Analysis suggested a significant 42.2-day period is observed in the time series of Fds. This period is dominant in the wavelet power spectrum and has a very intense contour in the spectrum. However, a 43.0-day significant period is observed in the Fds data during negative polarity states of the heliosphere as shown in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig8\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e (b). These observed Fd periodicities are in proximity with the periodicities observed in the certain solar activity, interplanetary plasma and field parameters, geomagnetic activity parameters and cosmic ray intensity. Periodicities worth mentioning here are: 28, 31, 33, 43, 45, 46, 48, 57, 61, 64, 66 day periods in SSN, SSA, CME activity, X-ray emission from solar corona, energetic solar flares and 10.7 cm flux (see, Lou et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e; Joshi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e; Lara et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e; Chowdhury et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e, 2014; Kilcik et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Lopez-Comazzi and Blanco, 2022 ; \u0026Ouml;zg\u0026uuml;\u0026ccedil; and Atac, 1989; \u0026Ouml;zg\u0026uuml;\u0026ccedil; et al., 2002; Bai, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1994\u003c/span\u003e; Atac et al., 2005; Kastavarias et al., 2012, 2016; Chowdhury et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e, 2014 ); 28, 42, 46, 64, 66 days in CRI (Kudela et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e; Singh et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR79\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Lopez-Comazzi and Blanco,2020, 2022); 28, 31, 45, 59, 61, 64 in Ap (Lou et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e: Katsarvias et al., 2012, 2016; Chowdhury et al.,2014); 28, 30, 44, 61 in solar wind velocity, IMF Bz (Katsarvias et al., 2012; Chowdhury et al.,2014). Our results provide a strong support to quasi-periodic processes in the sun and eruptive process in the solar atmosphere that can influence not only the geomagnetic activity in the megnetosphere but also solar wind plasma, magnetic field (IMF) and charge particle (cosmic ray) intensity in the heliosphere.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusions","content":"\u003cp\u003eWavelet analysis of the Forbush decreases during last five solar cycles (20\u0026ndash;24) reveal that\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003col\u003e \u003cspan\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003ePeriod of duration 44.2 day is a prominent and significant variation of Fds during 1965 to 2019. However, two significant variations (24.7-day and 52.2-days) are observed in the Fd events during 1995 to 2019.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003cspan\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eDuring the examined even cycles, two significant variations, 41.8 days and 62.5 days were observed in the Fds. Periods of duration 30.0 days and 46.7 days are observed in the Fd events selected in odd cycles. Remarkable differences in periodicities in Fd occurrence during odd and even solar cycles is observed.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003cspan\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn the positive polarity state of the heliosphere, significant 42.2 days period is found in the Fds, while 43.0 days period is observed in the negative polarity state of the heliosphere. This (~\u0026thinsp;43 day) periodicity prominently observed in Fd occurrence rate is almost same during both the positive and negative polarities of the heliosphere.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003cspan\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eNotable correspondence between short-term periodicities in various solar eruptive activity (solar flares, CMEs etc.) and Fds in cosmic rays provides further support to possible existence a global process that gives rise to magnetic flux escape from sub-photospheric regions, through the solar atmosphere to the outer heliosphere.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003c/ol\u003e \u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe manuscript is focusing on Study of short-term periodicities in the occurrence of Forbush decreases. The manuscript contains one table and eight figures.This manuscript is written by Y. P. Singh and Badruddin and both the authors reviewed the manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAcknowledgments\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eWe gratefully acknowledge the use of catalogue of Forbush decreases and interplanetary disturbances from \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttp://spaceweather.izmiran.ru/eng/dbs.html\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"http://spaceweather.izmiran.ru/eng/dbs.html\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e. We are thankful to the station manager of Moscow neutron monitor station, for the use of Moscow neutron monitor station data. Wavelet software provided by C. Torrence and G. Compo is also acknowledged with thanks.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAbunin, A. A., Abunina, M. A., Belov, A. V., Gaidash, S. P., Eroshenko, E. A., Pryamushkina, I. I., Trefilova, L. A., Gamza, E. I.: Database capabilities for studying Forbush-effects and interplanetary disturbances. J. Phys.: Conference Series, 1181, 012062 (2019)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAhluwalia, H.S., Fikani, M. M.: Cosmic ray detector response to transient solar modulation: Forbush decreases. J. Geophys. Res. 112(A8), A08105 (2007)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAkioka, M., Kubota, J., Ichimoto, K., Tohmura, I., Suzuki, M.: The 17-month periodicity of sunspot activity. Sol. Phys. 112, 313 (1987)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAlania, M. V., Wawrzynczak, A.: Forbush decrease of the galactic cosmic ray intensity: Experimental study and theoretical modelling. Astrophys. and Space Sci. Trans. 4, 59\u0026ndash;63 (2008)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAslam, O. P. M., Badruddin: Study of cosmic-ray modulation during the recent unusual minimum and mini-maximum of solar cycle 24. Sol. Phys. 290, 2333 (2015).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAta\u0026ccedil;, T., \u0026Ouml;zg\u0026uuml;\u0026ccedil;, A., Rybak, J.: Overview of the flare index during the maximum phase of the solar cycle 23. Adv. Space Res. 35, 400 (2005)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBadruddin, Singh, Y. P.: Geoeffectiveness of magnetic cloud, shock/sheath, interaction region, high-speed stream and their combined occurrence. Planet. Space Sci. 57, 318 (2009)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBai, T.: The 51-DAY Periodicity in CYCLE-22. Solar Phys. 150, 385\u0026ndash;388 (1994)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBai, T.: Periodicities in solar flare occurrence: analysis of cycles 19\u0026ndash;23. Astrophys. J. 591, 406\u0026ndash;415, (2003)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBai, T., Cliver, E. W.: A 154 day periodicity in the occurrence rate of proton flares, Astrophys. J. 363, 299\u0026ndash;309 (1990)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBai T., Sturrock P. A.: The 154-day and related periodicities of solar activity as subharmonics of a fundamental period. Nat., 350, 141 (1991)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBadruddin, Kumar, A.: Study of cosmic-ray modulation during the passage of ICMEs and CIRs. Sol. Phys. 291, 559 (2016)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBadruddin, Yadav, R. S., and Yadav, N. R.: Influence of magnetic clouds on cosmic ray intensity variation. Sol. Phys. 105, 413 (1986)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBadruddin, Aslam, O. P. M., Derouich, M., Qutub, S.: Study of the development and mechanism of large amplitude decreases in cosmic ray intensity during geomagnetic disturbances in the magnetosphere. Adv. Space Res. 68(11), 4702\u0026ndash;4712 (2021)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBazilevskaya, G., Broomhall, A.-M., Elsworth, Y., Nakariakov, V.M.: A combined analysis of the observational aspects of the quasibiennial oscillation in solar magnetic activity. Space Sci. Rev. 186(1\u0026ndash;4) 359\u0026ndash;386 (2014)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBelov, A. V., Ero*shenko, E.A., Oleneva, V. A., Struminsky, A. B., Yanke, V. G.: What determines the magnitude of Forbush decreases? Adv. Space Res. 27(3), 625\u0026ndash;630 (2001)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBelov, A., Abunin, A., Abunina, M. et al.: Coronal Mass Ejections and Non-recurrent Forbush Decreases. Sol. Phys. 289, 3949\u0026ndash;3960 (2014)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBelov, A.V., Abunina, M.A., Abunin, A.A. et al. Cosmic-ray vector anisotropy and local characteristics of the interplanetary medium. Geomagn. Aeron. 57, 389\u0026ndash;397 (2017)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCane H.V.: Coronal Mass Ejections and Forbush Decreases. Space Sci. Rev. 93, 55 (2000)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCaballero, R., Valdes-Galicia, J.: Galactic cosmic ray fluctuations during solar cycles 22 and 23 at high altitude neutron monitors. Adv. Space Res. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/S0273-1177(01)00099-0\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/S0273-1177(01)00099-0\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e (2001)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChoudhary, D.P., Lawrence, J. K., Norris, M. and Cadavid, A. C.: Different periodicities in the Sunspot Area and the occurrence of solar flares and coronal mass ejections in solar cycle 23\u0026ndash;24. Sol. Phys., 289, 649\u0026ndash;656 (2014)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChowdhury, P., Jain, R., Awasthi, K.: Peridicity in the X-ray emission from the solar corona. Astrophys. J. 778:28, (2013)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChowdhury, P., Choudhary, D. P., Gosain, S., Moon, Y. -J.: Short-term periodicities in interplanetary, geomagnetic and solar phenomena during solar cycle 24. Astrophys. Space Sci. 356, 7\u0026ndash;18 (2015)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCurrie, R. G.: The geomagnetic spectrum 40 days to 5.5 years. J. Geophys. Res. 71 (19), 4579\u0026ndash;4598 (1966)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDelache, P., Laclare, F. \u0026amp; Sadsaoud, H.: Long period oscillations in solar diameter measurements. Nat. 317, 416\u0026ndash;418 (1985)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDhanju, M. S., Sarabhai, V. A.: Short-period variations of cosmic-ray intensity. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1967, 19(5), 252 (1967).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDroge, W., Gibbs, K., Grunsfeld, J. M.,Meyer, P., \u0026amp; Newport, B. J.: A 153 day periodicity in the occurrence of solar flares producing energetic interplanetary electrons. Astrophys. J. 73, 279 (1990)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDorman, L.I.: Cosmic Rays Variations and Space Exploration. Nauka, Moscow, 197 (1963)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFraser-Smith, A. C.: Spectrum of the geomagnetic activity index Ap. Journal of Geophysical Research, 77(22), 4209\u0026ndash;4220 (1972)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eForbush, S. E.: On the Effects in the Cosmic-Ray Intensity Observed During the Recent Magnetic Storm, Phys. Rev. 51, 1108\u0026ndash;1109 (1937)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGil, A., Modzelewska, R., and Alania, M. V., (2012), 27-day variations of the galactic cosmic ray intensity and anisotropy in the minimum of the 23rd solar activity cycle. Adv. Space Res. 50(6),712\u0026ndash;715 (2012)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGodart, O.: World-Wide Variations of the Earth's Magnetic Field and the Intensity of Cosmic Radiation, Phys. Rev., 56, 1074 (1939)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGonzalez, A.L., Gonzalez, W.D., Dutra, S.L.G., Tsurutani, B.T.: Periodic variation in the geomagnetic activity: a study based on the Ap index. J. Geophys. Res. 98, 9215\u0026ndash;9232 (1993)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGopalswamy, N.: Properties of interplanetary coronal mass ejections. Space Sci. Rev. 124, 145\u0026ndash;168 (2006)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGosling, J. T., Pizzo, V., and Bame, S. J.: Anomalously low proton temperatures in the solar wind following interplanetary shock waves: Evidence for magnetic bottles? J. Geophys. Res., 78, 2001 (1973)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHill, M. E., Hamilton, D. C., Krimigis, S. M.: Periodicity of 151 days in outer heliosphere anomalous cosmic ray fluxes. J. Geophys. Res. 106, 8315 (2001)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHowe, R., Christensen-Dalsgaard, J., Hill, F., et al.: Dynamic variations at the base of the solar convection zone. Science 287, 2456 (2000)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eIchimoto, K., Kubota, J., Suzuki, M., Tohmura, I., \u0026amp; Kurokawa, H.: Periodic behaviour of solar flare activity. Nature, 316, 422 (1985)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJokipii, J. R., \u0026amp; K\u0026oacute;ta, J.: Galactic and Anomalous Cosmic Rays in the Heliosphere. Astrophys. Space. Sci. 274, 77 (2000)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJoshi, B., Pant, P., Manoharan, P. K.: Periodicities in sunspot activity during solar cycle 23. A\u0026amp;A, 452, 647 (2006)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKane, R.P.: Evolution of Cosmic-Ray Intensities While the Earth Was Engulfed by the Interplanetary Storm (Blob) of 1\u0026ndash;3. Sol Phys 289, 2669\u0026ndash;2675 (2014).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKatsavrias, C., Preka-Papadema, P., Moussas, X.: Wavelet analysis on solar wind parameters and geomagnetic indices. Sol. Phys. 280, 623\u0026ndash;640 (2012)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKilcik, A., \u0026Ouml;zg\u0026uuml;\u0026ccedil;, A., Yurchyshyn, V., \u0026amp; Rozelot, J.: Sunspot Count Periodicities in Different Zurich Sunspot Group Classes Since 1986. Sol. Phys. 289, 4365 (2014)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKnaack, R., Stenflo, J., \u0026amp; Berdyugina, S.: Evolution and rotation of large-scale photospheric magnetic fields of the sun during cycles 21\u0026ndash;23: Periodicities, north-south asymmetries and r-mode signatures. A\u0026amp;A, 438, 1067 (2005)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKotz\u0026eacute;, P.: Behaviour of 27-Day and 13.5-Day Periodicities in Galactic Cosmic Particles as Observed by Spacecraft and Neutron Monitors During Different Solar Polarity Cycles. Sol. Phys. 298:107 (2023)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKrivova, N.A., Solanki, S.K.: The 1.3-year and 156-day periodicities in sunspot data: Wavelet analysis suggests a common origin. Astron. Astrophys. 394, 701\u0026ndash;706 (2002)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKudela, K., Rybak, J., Antalova, A., Storini, M.: Time evolution of the low frequency periodicities in cosmic ray intensity. Sol. Phys. 205, 165\u0026ndash;175 (2002)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKudela, K., Sabbah, I.: Quasi-periodic variations of low energy cosmic rays. Sci. China, Technol. Sci. 59(1), 1\u0026ndash;11 (2016)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKudela, K., Sabbah, I.: Quasi-periodic variations of low energy cosmic rays. Science 59, 547 (2016)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKudela, K., Mavromichalaki, H., Papaioannou, A., Gerontidou, M.: On Mid-Term Periodicities in Cosmic Rays. Solar Phys. 266, 173\u0026ndash;180 (2010)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKatsavrias, C., Hillaris, A., Preka-Papadema, P.: A wavelet-based approach to Solar\u0026ndash;Terrestrial Coupling, Adv. Space Res. 57, 2234\u0026ndash;2244 (2016)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eL\u0026oacute;pez-Comazzi, A., \u0026amp; Blanco, J.: Short-Term Periodicities Observed in Neutron Monitor Counting Rates. Sol. Phys. 295, 81 (2020).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLou, Y.-Q., Wang, Y.-M., Fan, Z., Wang, S., Wang, J.X.: Periodicities in solar coronal mass ejections. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron., Soc. 345, 809\u0026ndash;818 (2003)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLou Y. Q.: Rossby-Type Wave\u0026ndash;Induced Periodicities in Flare Activities and Sunspot Areas or Groups during Solar Maxima. Astrophys. J. 540, 1102 (2000)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eL\u0026oacute;pez-Comazzi, A. and J. J. Blanco, J. J.: Short- and Mid-term Periodicities Observed in Neutron Monitor Counting Rates throughout Solar Cycles 20\u0026ndash;24. Astrophys. J. 927:155, (2022)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLara, A., Andrea Borgazzi, A., Mendes Jr. O., Rosa, R. R., Margarete Oliveira Domingues, M. O.: Short-Period Fluctuations in Coronal Mass Ejection Activity during Solar Cycle 23. Sol. Phys. 248, 155 (2008)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLockwood, J. A.: Forbush decreases in the cosmic radiations, Space Sci. Rev. 12, 658\u0026ndash;715 (1971)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLingri, D., Mavromichalaki, H., Belov, A. et al.: Solar Activity Parameters and Associated Forbush Decreases During the Minimum Between Cycles 23 and 24 and the Ascending Phase of Cycle 24. Sol. Phys. 291, 1025\u0026ndash;1041 (2016)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLou, Y., Wang, Y., Fan, Z., Wang, S. and Wang, J. X.: Periodicity in solar coronal mass ejections, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 345, 809\u0026ndash;818 (2003)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMadden, R. A., Julian, P. R.: Detection of a 40\u0026ndash;50-day oscillation in the zonal wind in the Tropical Pacific. J. Atmos. Sci. 28, 702\u0026ndash;708 (1971)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMavromichalaki, H., Preka-Papadema, P., Liritzis, I., Petropoulos, B., Kurt, V.: Short-term variations of cosmic-ray intensity and flare related data in 1981\u0026ndash;1983, New Astron. 8, 777 (2003)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMeyer, P. and Simpson, J. A.: Changes in the Low Energy Particle Cut-Off and Primary Spectrum of Cosmic Radiation, I', Phys. Rev. 99, 1517 (1955)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMelkumyan, A. A., Belov A. V., Mariya, A., Artem, A., Evgeniya, E., Viktoria, O., Viktor, Y.: Recurrent and sporadic Forbush decreases during solar cycles 23\u0026ndash;24, Sol. Terr. Phys. 5(1), 28\u0026ndash;34, (2019)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMelkumyan, A. A., Belov, A. V., Abunina, M. A., Abunin, A. A., Shlyk, N. S., Oleneva, V. A., and Yanke, V. G.: Forbush decreases associated with coronal mass ejections from active and non-active regions: statistical comparison. MNRAS 515, 4430\u0026ndash;4444 (2022)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMorlet, J., Arens, G., Forgeau, I., Giard, D.: Wave propagation and sampling theory\u0026mdash;Part I: Complex signal and scattering in multilayered media, Geophysics 47, 203 (1982)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMorrison, P.: Solar Origin of cosmic-ray Time Variations. Phys. Rev. 101, 1397 (1956)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eOliver, R., Ballester, J. L., \u0026amp; Baudin, F.: Emergence of magnetic flux on the Sun as the cause of a 158-day periodicity in sunspot areas. Nature, 394, 552 (1998)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u0026Ouml;zg\u0026uuml;\u0026ccedil;, A., Ata\u0026ccedil;, T.,: Periodic Behaviour of Solar Flare Index during SOLAR-CYCLE-20 and SOLAR-CYCLE-21. Solar Phys. 123, 357\u0026ndash;365 (1989)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u0026Ouml;zg\u0026uuml;\u0026ccedil;, A., Ata\u0026ccedil;, T., Ryb\u0026aacute;k, J.: Temporal variability of the flare index (1966\u0026ndash;2001). Sol. Phys. 214, 375\u0026ndash;396 (2003)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u0026Ouml;zg\u0026uuml;\u0026ccedil;, A., Ata\u0026ccedil;, T.: Periodic behavior of solar flare index during solar cycles 20 and 21. Sol Phys 123, 357\u0026ndash;365 (1989)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePap, J., Tobiska, W.K., Bouwer, S.D.: Periodicity of solar irradiance and solar activity indices, I. Solar Phys. 129, 165 (1990)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eParker, E. N.: 1963, Interplanetary Dynamical Processes, Interscience, John Wiley and Sons (1963)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePotgieter, M.S.: Solar modulation of cosmic rays. Living Rev. Solar Phys. 10, 3 (2013)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRieger, E., Kanbach, G., Reppin, C., Share, G. H., Forrest, D. J., Chupp, E. L.: A 154- day periodicity in the occurrence of hard solar flares. Nature 312, 623 (1984)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRichardson, G., Cane, H.: The 150 day quasi-periodicity in interplanetary and solar phenomena duringcycle 23. Geophys. Res. Lett. 32, 2104\u0026ndash;2107 (2005)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRichardson, I. G., and Cane, H. V.: Signatures of Shock Drivers in the Solar Wind and Their Dependence on the Solar Source Location, J. Geophys. Res. 98, 15295 (1993)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRybak, J., Antalova, A., Storini, M.: The wavelet analysis of the solar and cosmic ray data. Space Sci. Rev. 97, 359\u0026ndash;362 (2001)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSingh, Y.P., Badruddin: Effects of the polarity states of the heliospheric magnetic field and particle drifts in cosmic radiation. Solar Phys. 234: 339\u0026ndash;352 (2006)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSingh, Y.P., Gautam, S., Badruddin: Temporal variations of short- and mid-term periodicities in solar wind parameters and cosmic ray intensity. J. Atmos. Sol. Terr. Phys. 89, 48 (2012)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSingh, Y.P., Badruddin: Short- and mid-term oscillations of solar, geomagnetic activity and cosmic ray intensity during the last two solar magnetic cycles. Planet. Space Sci. 138, 1\u0026ndash;6 (2017)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSingh, Y.P., Badruddin: Prominent short-, mid-, and long-term periodicities in solar and geomagnetic activity: wavelet analysis. Planet. Space Sci. 96, 120 (2014)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSingh, Y.P., Badruddin: Short-term variations of cosmic ray particles during the recent deep solar minimum and the previous four solar minima: a wavelet analysis. Sol. Phys. 290, 3071 (2015a)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSingh, Y.P., Badruddin: Solar-rotational oscillation and its harmonics in the solar wind, geomagnetic and cosmic ray particles during the last two solar minima. Astrophys. Space Sci. 359, 60 (2015b)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSimpson, J. A., Fonger, W., and Treiman, S. B.: Cosmic Radiation Intensity-Time Variations and Their Origin. I. Neutron Intensity Variation Method and Meteorological Factors, Phys. Rev. 90, 934 (1953)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSubramanian, P., Antia, H. M., Dugad, S. R., Goswami, U. D., Gupta, S. K., Hayashi, Y., Ito, N., S. Kawakami, S., Kojima, H., Mohanty, P. K., Nayak, P. K., Nonaka, T., Oshima, A., Sivaprasad, K., Tanaka, H., and S. C. Tonwar, S. C.: Forbush decreases and turbulence levels at coronal mass ejection fronts. A\u0026amp;A 494, 1107\u0026ndash;1118, (2009)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTorrence, C., Compo, G.P.: A practical guide to wavelet analysis. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 79(1), 61\u0026ndash;78 (1998)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTsichla, M., Gerontidou, M., \u0026amp; Mavromichalaki, H.: Spectral Analysis of Solar and Geomagnetic Parameters in Relation to Cosmic-ray Intensity for the Time Period 1965\u0026ndash;2018. Sol. Phys. 294, 15 (2019)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eUsoskin, I.G., Mursula, K., Kananen, H., Kovaltsov, G.A.: Dependence of cosmic rays on solar activity for odd and even solar cycle. Adv. Space Res. 27(3), 571\u0026ndash;576 (2001)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVenkatesan, D., and Badruddin: Cosmic-ray intensity variations in the 3-dimensional heliosphere. Space Sci. Rev. 52, 121\u0026ndash;194, (1990)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVerma, V. K., Joshi, G. C., \u0026amp; Paliwal, D. C.: Study of periodicities of solar nuclear gamma ray flares and sunspots. Sol. Phys., 138, 205 (1992)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVerma, V. K., Joshi, G. C., Wahab Uddin, \u0026amp; Paliwal, D. C. 1991, A\u0026amp;AS, 90, 83.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWebber, W. R.: Elementary Particles and Cosmic Ray Physics 6, 77 (1962)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZhang, G., Burlaga, L.F.: Magnetic clouds, geomagnetic disturbances, and cosmic ray decreases. J. Geophys. Res. 93, 2511 (1998)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZaqarashvili, T. V., Carbonell, M., Oliver, R., \u0026amp; Ballester, J. L.: Magnetic rossby waves in the solar tachocline and Rieger-type periodicities. Astrophys. J. 709, 749 (2010)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"},{"header":"Tables","content":" \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"SimplePara\"\u003eFDs different durations and classifications (amplitude\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;1.5), no of data points, significant periods and observed corresponding power in GWS\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"SimplePara\"\u003eDuration\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"SimplePara\"\u003eNo. of data points\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"SimplePara\"\u003ePeriod\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"SimplePara\"\u003ePower\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"SimplePara\"\u003e\u003cspan type=\"Bold\" class=\"Bold\" name=\"Emphasis\"\u003eFD\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;1.5 (1965\u0026ndash;2019)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"SimplePara\"\u003eN\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1643\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"SimplePara\"\u003e44.2 day\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"SimplePara\"\u003e1.91*10^5\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"SimplePara\"\u003e\u003cspan type=\"Bold\" class=\"Bold\" name=\"Emphasis\"\u003eFD\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;1.5 (1995\u0026ndash;2019)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"SimplePara\"\u003e607\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"SimplePara\"\u003e24.7 day\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"SimplePara\"\u003e0.58*10^5\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"SimplePara\"\u003e52.2 day\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"SimplePara\"\u003e1.82*10^5\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"SimplePara\"\u003e\u003cspan type=\"Bold\" class=\"Bold\" name=\"Emphasis\"\u003eFD\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;1.5 (1965\u0026ndash;2019) Even cycle\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"SimplePara\"\u003e927\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"SimplePara\"\u003e41.8 day\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"SimplePara\"\u003e1.73*10^5\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"SimplePara\"\u003e62.5 day\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"SimplePara\"\u003e1.21*10^5\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"SimplePara\"\u003e\u003cspan type=\"Bold\" class=\"Bold\" name=\"Emphasis\"\u003eFD\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;1.5 (1965\u0026ndash;2019) Odd cycle\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"SimplePara\"\u003e716\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"SimplePara\"\u003e30.0 day\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"SimplePara\"\u003e0.78*10^5\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"SimplePara\"\u003e46.7 day\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"SimplePara\"\u003e2.42*10^5\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"SimplePara\"\u003e\u003cspan type=\"Bold\" class=\"Bold\" name=\"Emphasis\"\u003eFD\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;1.5 (1965\u0026ndash;2019) A\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"SimplePara\"\u003e875\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"SimplePara\"\u003e42.2 day\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"SimplePara\"\u003e1.68*10^5\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"SimplePara\"\u003e\u003cspan type=\"Bold\" class=\"Bold\" name=\"Emphasis\"\u003eFD\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;1.5 (1965\u0026ndash;2019) A\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"SimplePara\"\u003e751\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"SimplePara\"\u003e43.0 day\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"SimplePara\"\u003e1.92*10^5\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cbr/\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":true,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"astrophysics-and-space-science","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"astr","sideBox":"Learn more about [Astrophysics and Space Science](https://www.springer.com/journal/10509)","snPcode":"10509","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/10509/3","title":"Astrophysics and Space Science","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"Springer Hybrid","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":false},"keywords":"Cosmic ray, Forbush decrease, Solar activity, Solar polarity, Heliosphere, Sun-Earth coupling, Space weather","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-3901995/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3901995/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eWe utilized the Forbush decreases (magnitude \u0026gt;1.5%) detected in cosmic ray neutron monitor data during continuous five solar cycles, viz., 20, 21, 22, 23 and 24 (1965 to 2019) and subjected them to wavelet analysis in order to obtain the possible periodicities in their occurrence. We also studied the periodicities separately during the odd and even solar activity cycles. In addition to solar activity, the solar magnetic polarity and its extension into the interplanetary space makes significant difference in the cosmic ray modulation in the helisphere, we have also applied the wavelet analysis procedure separately during positive (A \u0026gt; 0) and negative (A \u0026lt; 0) polarity states of the heliospheric magnetic fields. Observed periodicities in Forbush decreases have been discussed and compared with earlier detected periodicities in solar and geomagnetic activity indices, e.g., sunspot numbers, sunspot areas, sunspot groups, solar flares, coronal mass ejections, and various geomagnetic activity indices. Significant short-term periodic behaviour detected in the occurrence of Forbush decreases, which in general, corroborates the observed behaviour in solar (in particular, solar eruptive activity) and geomagnetic activity. Understanding the quasi-periodic process in magnetic field emergence from solar active regions and solar eruptive activity, as well as solar-terrestrial coupling and space weather effects, requires comparing the quasi-periodic behaviour between parameters representing solar and geomagnetic activity along with cosmic ray variability.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Study of short-term periodicities in the occurrence of Forbush decreases: Wavelet analysis","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2024-01-31 08:16:46","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-3901995/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2024-04-07T19:09:45+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2024-03-27T09:07:11+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"8198dd39-d210-45c4-ad90-5ab53b2e03dc","date":"2024-03-11T07:32:33+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2024-01-29T19:46:46+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2024-01-29T17:14:19+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2024-01-29T06:33:11+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Astrophysics and Space Science","date":"2024-01-27T05:22:14+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"astrophysics-and-space-science","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"astr","sideBox":"Learn more about [Astrophysics and Space Science](https://www.springer.com/journal/10509)","snPcode":"10509","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/10509/3","title":"Astrophysics and Space Science","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"Springer Hybrid","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":false}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"651f3c74-573d-41f6-a838-bd810841abe4","owner":[],"postedDate":"January 31st, 2024","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"under-review","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2024-06-18T08:14:18+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2024-01-31 08:16:46","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-3901995","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-3901995","identity":"rs-3901995","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"qtupq5eGEP_6zYnWcrvyt","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}