1 Introduction

An earthquake is a natural phenomenon that has been occurring for billions of years on our planet. Many reports from man's history demonstrate the significant impact they have had on human lives and property. Earthquakes are one of the most terrifying and destructive natural phenomena. The moment an earthquake occurs, the outermost layer of earth shakes, causing ground rupture, landslides, avalanches, fires, the destruction of forests, and significant building damage. Generally, the earthquake has effects on the geosphere, biosphere, hydrosphere, atmosphere and society (Al-Taie & Albusoda, 2019). The Mw 9.0 Tohoku earthquake that struck mainland Japan on March 11, 2011 caused a devastating tsunami due to active thrusting between the Pacific and North American Plates (Param et al. 2019). This event's hypocenter was at the juncture of four tectonic plates and comprehensive understanding is still a source of debate. Several models have been proposed and referred to (DeMets, 1992a, 1992b; Seno et al., 1996) regarding plate limits and their role in shaping regional kinematics following the Tohoku event, particularly the exact location of the limits around Honshu Island's focal zone (Seno et al., 1996).

What is still unknown is the impact of the Tohoku earthquake's atmospheric changes around on the epicentre. The operational and upper atmospheric research communities rely on empirical thermosphere and mesosphere models for data analysis, the initialization of detailed physics-based models, and mission and instrument design. The Mass Spectrometer Incoherent Scatter (MSIS-class) Radar model, which is derived from the Drag Temperature Model (DTM), is one of the most commonly used atmospheric empirical models. The MSIS-class model is being improved in various ways. Hedin et al. (1977) introduced the first version of MSIS-class models (MSIS-1) in 1977, using temperature and composition measurement data with a lower boundary of 120 km. The MSIS-1 model has flaws under high solar activity conditions because the data used to develop it were mostly collected under low to moderate solar activity conditions and only a few were collected under high solar activity conditions (F10.7 > 170 SFU). Furthermore, the MSIS-1 model's lower formal boundary is 120 km. In 1983, Hedin (1983) created the MSIS-83 model, which lowered the boundary to 90 km and included data from rocket flights, seven satellites, and five incoherent scatter radars, as well as data from high solar activity. In addition to the daily geomagnetic activity index, ap, the MSIS-83 model used an alternate representation of geomagnetic activity (three hourly ap indices). Hedin (1987) developed the MSIS-86 model to improve the representation of polar region morphology by adding or changing terms to better represent seasonal variations in the polar regions. The MSISE-90 model extended the lower limit of the MSIS-class model to the Earth's surface (Hedin, 1991). Picone et al. (2002) established the MSIS class model for the Naval Research Laboratory's MSIS Extension 2000 (NRLMSISE-00) model, which includes total mass density data from satellite accelerometers and orbit determination, recent temperature data from incoherent scatter radar, and molecular oxygen number density data from the Solar Maximum Mission's (SMM) solar ultraviolet occultation.

The NRLMSISE-00 model has an alternate representation of geomagnetic storm behaviors that uses a formula based on 3 h ap indices as well as the daily Ap geomagnetic index. The NRLMSISE-00 is an empirical model that extends from the ground to the exobase and is commonly used as a model comparison standard (Hedin, 1991; Picone et al., 2002). The Mass Spectrometer Incoherent Scatter model has been steadily improved as MSIS-1 (Hedin et al., 1977) in 1977, MSIS-83 (Hedin, 1983) in 1983, MSIS-86 (Hedin, 1987) in 1987, MSISE-90 (Hedin, 1991) in 1991, and NRLMSISE-00 (Picone et al., 2002) in 2001. Several studies and efforts on the NRLMSISE-00 model have been conducted over the last decade, including (Chen et al., 2013a, 2020; Mehta & Linares, 2017; Zhang et al., 2018; Perez & Bevilacqua, 2015; Xiong et al., 2018; Pederick & Cervera, 2014; Shi et al., 2015; Bruinsma & Boniface, 2021; Emmert, 2015; Nossal et al., 2012; Kotov et al., 2018; Calabia et al., 2019). In recent years, many researchers have focused their efforts on estimating and mitigating ionospheric time delays using standard models (Astafyeva, 2019; Conker et al., 1997; De Santis et al., 1994; Lejeune & El-Arini, 1999; Sahithi et al., 2019; Sparks et al., 2000; Walter et al., 2000).

Many studies on earthquake sequences and anomalies have been conducted using various methods of satellite and ground observations. Sano et al. (2014) evaluated the geochemical nature and behavior of pore fluids along the interface between the two plates of the Pacific and the Okhotsk. They concluded that the helium isotopes were useful in identifying the origin of fluids and may provide key information about the source of interplate fluids and a sudden emanation of mantle helium related to an interplate earthquake in the subduction zone, which may provide insight into the movement of mantle-derived fluids. Sahithi et al. (2019) used the Extended Single Layer Model (ESLM) with the planar fit (PF) and the spherical harmonic function (SHF) techniques to estimate ionospheric time delays from a regional network of TEC data over the equatorial Indian Sub- continental region. Afraimovich et al. (2006) proposed a secondary source above the epicenter and located it at the height of the maximum ionization by using the 2000 Mw 7.7 Sumatra earthquake. Liu et al. (2010) used a grid search to minimize the differences in apparent velocities between multiple satellite-station pairs' observed Co-seismic-Ionospheric-Disturbance (CID). They located the source of the 1999 Mw 7.6 Chi-Chi earthquake between 40 and 130 km north of the epicenter and demonstrated that the origin of the ionospheric disturbance is near the maximum of surface deformation, not at the epicenter. Lee et al. (2018) used the seismologically derived technique of back-projection to locate the acoustic source of the 2016 Mw 7.8 Kaikoura earthquake. Zedek et al. (2021) assessed TEC data from two earthquakes with different moment magnitudes: a Mw 7.1 in Turkey and a Mw 7.8 in New Zealand and they conclude that a sparse network of multi-GNSS stations can provide an independent estimation of the spatial distribution of large scale coseismic motions, including offshore areas 200–300 km from the coast. Ahmed et al. (2022) studied the ionospheric perturbation in the form of enhancement and depletion of the critical frequency of the F2 layer before the M5.6 magnitude earthquake in Pakistan. Parrot et al. (2006) investigated anomalies in ion composition, electron density, and ion temperature over seismic breeding regions in long-term DEMETER (Detection of Electro-Magnetic Emissions Transmitted from Earthquake Regions) satellite data. Similarly, Shah et al. (2019) investigated DEMETER satellite and in situ GNSS observations for monitoring large magnitude earthquakes for possible ionospheric perturbations in order to provide evidence for Lithosphere-Atmosphere–Ionosphere Coupling (LAIC). Maruyama et al. (2011) described the effect of earthquake on ionosphere disturbances using ionosonde stations. Similar observations of a sudden decrease in TEC as the ionosphere's response to the earthquake/tsunami were reported by Saito et al. (2011) and Tsugawa et al. (2011).

An earthquake is a natural phenomenon that has varied associations between different parts of the earth and the sun. For instance, with the lithosphere (Pulinets et al., 2006; Sharzehei et al., 2015), atmosphere (Bokov, 2004; Heki, 2011; Dimitar et al., 2011; Ohta et al., 2013; Hayakawa & Hobara, 2010; Maruyama et al., 2011; Freund et al., 2022; Kavanagh et al., 2018; Kutoglu et al., 2021), ionosphere (Le et al., 2011, 2013; Zhou et al., 2017; Liu et al., 2006; Ryu et al., 2016), solar magnetosphere (Khachikyan et al., 2012; Wang et al., 2022), internal and external of the Earth system (Chen et al., 2020; Akhoondzadeh & Santis, 2022), space weather phenomena (Temmer, 2021), solar activities (Odintsov et al., 2007; Le et al., 2013; Takla & Samwel, 2023), geomagnetic storm (Moldovan et al., 2012; Le et al., 2013; Love & Thomas, 2013; Yesugey, 2009; Guglielmi et al., 2020, 2021; Sobolev & Zakrzhevskaya, 2020; Sobolev, 2021); coronal mass ejection (Anagnostopoulos et al., 2021), cosmic ray intensity (Yanchukovsky, 2020), geomagnetic activities index (Urata et al., 2018; Guglielmi et al., 2020; Shah et al., 2020a), atmospheric waves (Guglielmi & Klain, 2020), sunspots numbers (Odintsov et al., 2006; Sukma & Dbidin, 2017), air temperature (Mahmood et al., 2017), underground pressure (Mahmood et al., 2017), air conductivity (Kavanagh et al., 2018), Earth's particle radiation (Vainio et al., 2009), atmospheric temperature (Alimov et al., 1989), infrared long-wave (Zhu et al., 2023), neutral temperature (Arai et al., 2011; Freund et al., 2022; Kakinami et al., 2021) and solar wind and interplanetary magnetic field (Guglielmi et al., 2020).

Earthquakes have an impact on the earth's environment, including but not limited to ionospheric perturbations in the lower ionosphere (Hayakawa & Hobara, 2010; Maruyama et al., 2011), upper ionosphere (Liu et al., 2006; Ryu et al., 2016), geomagnetic field variations (Khachikyan et al., 2008, 2012; Wang et al., 2022), TEC variations (Jin et al., 2015), and solar magnetosphere variations (Khachikyan et al., 2012; Wang et al., 2022). The majority of studies (Jin et al., 2015; Shah et al., 2020a) report ionospheric anomalies some days before and after the main shock of various earthquakes in the seismogenic zone. For instance, within 5–10 days after the primary shock, Shah et al. (2020b) investigated long-term ionosphere data over earthquake-preparation zones and found both positive and negative anomalies. Different reports on global and regional scales investigate earthquake-induced ionospheric and atmospheric anomalies by employing various methods for monitoring the epicentral regions (Tariq et al., 2020; Shah, 2022; Satti et al., 2022; Shah et al., 2020C; 2021; Shah & Jin, 2018; Perrone et al., 2010; Heki, 2011; Yang et al., 2019a).

A detailed analysis by Le et al. (2013) of the ionospheric anomalies was presented three days before the 9.0-magnitude Tohoku earthquake on March 11, 2011. They concluded that the solar and geomagnetic activities were not enough to cause the observed ionospheric increases for a long time, and these regional anomalies might be related to the greatest earthquake in Tohoku. Similarly, more investigation into atmosphere parameters related to this extreme earthquake is needed (Heki, 2011; Freund et al., 2022).On the basis of the atmospheric changes given for the 9.0 magnitude earthquake in the great Tohoku Earthquake that occurred on March 11, 2011, there is a limitation to the study of atmospheric parameters in the evaluation of earthquake hazard. As a result, it is crucial to study the atmospheric anomalies during the earthquake and the purpose of this paper is to investigate the effect of the earthquake on the Earth's atmosphere using one of the atmospheric models from the NRLMSISE-00 model.

1.1 The Atmospheric Parameter Anomalies and the NRLMSISE-00 Model

The NRLMSIS-00 atmospheric model estimates the average observed behavior of temperature, eight species densities (N2, O2, O, He, H, Ar, N, and anomalous O), and total mass density as a function of location, day of year, time of day, solar activity and geomagnetic activity (Kotov et al., 2023). Temperature: Atmospheric parameters and mass densities are highly sensitive to the entire thermospheric temperature profile, and any temperature measurements during periods of different disturbances are very important (Kotov et al., 2023). Because of these issues, the temperature behavior of the atmosphere during the earthquake period is included in this study. Molecular Nitrogen: Nearly eighty percent of the gases in the atmosphere are made up of molecular nitrogen (N2). Atomic nitrogen and its species are the most important in the Earth's atmosphere and have a significant role in determining the atmosphere's structure (Emmert et al., 2022). The mass density is significantly influenced by N2. Molecular Oxygen: Approximately 21% of the earth's atmosphere is made up of molecular oxygen (O2). And also, the density of atomic Oxygen (O) in the thermosphere and exosphere influences the flow of plasma into the plasmasphere after different disturbances (Krall et al., 2018). Atomic Oxygen: Atomic Oxygen (O) is likely the most essential and challenging species to represent in upper atmospheric applications. At thermospheric altitudes, O is the main neutral element of the atmosphere and the principal source atom for F region ionization. However, O is a minor element in the mesosphere and lower thermosphere and is subject to photochemical production and loss, dynamical movement, and diffusion. O is critical in calculating the energy budget at the mesopause (Mlynczak and Solomon, 1993). NRLMSISE-00 and previous versions accurately represented thermospheric O from mass spectrometer data (Emmert et al., 2020). The O +  + H reaction causes a somewhat decrease in O + density while increasing H density. This impact, however, is significantly less than the loss of H + caused by the upward flow. As a result, when the daytime H density increases, the difference between the H + and O + densities grows, resulting in a significant sensitivity of the daytime O + /H + transition height to the H density (Kotov et al., 2023; Qian et al., 2018).

Atomic Hydrogen: One of the important aspects of the atmosphere is the variability of atomic Hydrogen (H). Mlynczak et al. (2014) highlight an inverse interaction between lower thermosphere H and solar activity, which is an interesting feature. Krall et al. (2018) investigated atomic Hydrogen's space weather consequences during the period of disturbance. They demonstrated that the ring current associated with a geomagnetic storm decays faster as H increases and that it has a close relationship with the geomagnetic field lines. As a result, there may be atomic Hydrogen abnormalities during earthquake times (Picone et al., 2002; Qin & Waldron, 2016; Qian et al., 2018). Understanding H and its fluctuation will help researchers understand more about the Earth's temperature, magnetosphere and plasmasphere, and water budget. As a result, it is critical to enhance our existing understanding of hydrogen variability and the empirical definition of hydrogen variability in NRLMSISE-00 (Kotov et al., 2023; Qian et al., 2018). This study assesses the significance of anomalies in H density for atmospheric dynamics, which will be of interest to scientists and program managers working on establishing the next generation of space weather prediction models.

Total mass density (ρ): The atmospheric total mass density (ρ) depends on its temperature, pressure, and the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere. Because of the gravity of the earth, air density decreases with height, and this vertical variation is significantly greater than the horizontal gradient. The molecules of nitrogen, oxygen, and other gases that constitute air move at high rates of speed, interacting with one another and all other objects. The faster the molecules move, the higher the temperature (Zhang et al., 2021; Seemala, 2023). Since the earthquake disturbance caused or effected anomalies in the atmospheric parameters (Heki, 2011; Mahmood et al., 2017; Yanchukovsky, 2020; Freund et al., 2022), there were also anomalies in the atmospheric total mass density during the earthquake period. One of the most significant factors influencing spacecraft orbital precision in low Earth orbit (LEO) is the accuracy of air mass density. While there are several empirical density models available for use in determining and predicting the orbits of LEO spacecraft, all of them include discrepancies of varying magnitudes. This parameter is better determined using the NRLMSISE-00 atmospheric model, based on densities obtained from space-borne accelerometer data (Zhang et al., 2021).

1.2 The Atmospheric Parameter Anomalies and Earthquake Precursors

Earthquake precursors tend to be found in three regions: the surface precursors, the atmosphere precursors, and the ionosphere precursors. This section analyzes the relationship between the atmospheric parameter anomalies and the precursors of the earthquake. Air temperature: This shows how seismic activity in the atmosphere reacts to atmospheric parameters and helps us understand the atmospheric phenomena related to the main shock (Draz et al. 2023; Heki, 2024). Refractivity: Radio refractivity is the bending of radio signals, and it is crucial to the point-to-point atmospheric electromagnetic propagation of microwave communication, television and radio broadcasts, WiFi signals, mobile communication systems, and the investigation of how satellite signals travel through the atmosphere. According to Emmanuel et al. (2017), Agbo et al. (2021), Abimbola et al. (2021), Cheloni et al. (2024), and other atmospheric factors, radio-refractivity and atmospheric temperature, pressure, and water vapor concentration are correlated with each other most of the time. Relative humidity: The term atmospheric relative humidity refers to the ratio between the vapor pressure of the air and its saturation vapor pressure. Additionally, relative humidity is required for the formation of meteorological disturbances (North et al., 2014; Sherwood et al., 2010). Relative humidity status is a key factor in global energy exchange, atmospheric dynamics, earthquake-related atmospheric reactivity, and troposphere-stratosphere interaction surrounding the epicenter (Heki, 2024). Water vapor: The primary component of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, water vapor, has highly variable distributions. The hydrological cycle, the climate system, and the global energy budget are all significantly impacted by the thermodynamic and radiative characteristics of water vapor. Increasing atmospheric water vapor is responsible for a considerable portion of the Earth's temperature rise brought on by increasing greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere (Price et al., 2023). Moreover, water vapor is essential to atmospheric chemistry because it facilitates several processes that purge the atmosphere of pollutants. Raising temperatures lead to a rise in the lower troposphere's concentration of water vapor, which in turn accelerates the rate of evaporation and increases the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere. This generally results in greater warming and has an additional impact on the atmospheric parameter anomalies (Shao et al., 2023).

Radon: The radioactive gas radon is colorless, odorless, and tasteless. The naturally occurring radioactive decay of uranium, which is present in all rocks, soils, and water, produces radon. Worldwide observations have shown that upcoming geophysical events, such as earthquakes or volcanic activity, might intensify radon emissions. The radon abnormalities that have been found in soil, gas, or groundwater are a symbol of earthquakes. It is simple to identify the presence as well as the amount of radon, which is a significant terrestrial gas. Radon concentration measurements in the earth's crust have long been conducted in the hopes of identifying distant sources or understanding the mechanisms underlying gas release. It is anticipated that the strain changes that take place within the earth's surface during an earthquake will increase the amount of radon in soil gas. But geological, geophysical, and atmospheric factors like rainfall and pressure have a significant impact on radon concentration levels. Because temperature, precipitation, and atmospheric pressure are all interrelated components of atmospheric parameters, the radon concentration also relates to these parameters (Ghosh et al., 2009). When radon departs the earth and enters the atmosphere, it decays and releases more radioactive particles. Seismic activity in a geothermal environment modifies fluid convective fluxes and rock pressures. Changes in gas transportation and the ascent of volatiles from the deep earth to the surface are caused by the stress strain that develops inside the crust of the earth prior to an earthquake. Because of this, radon leaks out of the pores and surface cracks of the rocks in unusually high amounts. Anomalous radon concentration anomalies and other short- and long-term precursory events are invariably linked to earthquake deformations. Both soil gas and groundwater have had their radon concentrations vary. However, it is also important to keep in mind that radon anomalies are influenced by a variety of meteorological parameters, including soil moisture, rainfall, temperature, air pressure, and others, and are not only determined by earthquakes (Ghosh et al., 2009). Radio waves: Waves that are borne via electromagnetic field sources are known as radio waves. They are generated by electric charges undergoing a change in velocity with respect to time. In the lower atmosphere, changes in the refractive index of air are key in the determination of radio wave propagation. Radio waves refract towards the earth’s surface with a curvature that exceeds the curvature of the earth (Cheloni et al., 2024). Precipitation: There are multiple links between precipitation and atmospheric parameters associated with precipitation. One popular method for dealing with precipitation is to merge snowfall and rainfall into one data type (Walsh et al., 2022). Atmospheric electric field: anomalies in the atmospheric electric field are seen after earthquakes. The probable reason for the observed anomalies in the atmospheric electric field is that internal gravity waves, which were produced in the vicinity of the EQ epicenter several hours before the EQ, crossed the field site and altered the atmospheric electric field by altering the density of space charges in the uppermost layer of the atmosphere. Seismo-electromagnetics, or electromagnetic phenomena related to earthquakes, have been observed to manifest as short-term EQ precursors before an earthquake. These phenomena are observed not only in the lithosphere but also in the atmosphere and ionosphere. Even in this scenario, there is still debate on short-term EQ precursors because there is insufficient evidence to link those anomalies to EQs (Hobara et al., 2022). Solar activity: There have been several known or postulated precursors to seismic risks, and more recently, the Sun’s solar activity has been mentioned as a potential influencing factor of the Earth’s seismicity (Junqueira & Hirata, 2022).

2 Data and Method of Analysis

In this study, the anomalies of the atmosphere are studied by using one of the atmospheric models of the NRLMSISE-00 model data to analyse the atmospheric anomalies of the Tohoku Earthquake on March 11, 2011. The atmospheric parameters of atomic oxygen (O), hydrogen (H), atomic nitrogen (N), helium (He), argon (Ar), molecular oxygen (O2), molecular nitrogen (N2), total mass density (ρ), neutral temperature (Tn), exospheric temperature (Tex) and anomalous oxygen (AO) are used for analysis during the earthquake disturbance. The epicenter of the Tohoku Earthquake, with a geographical location of latitude 38.30° N and longitude 142.37° E, is used for the NRLMSISE-00 model as input parameters to analyze the output of atmospheric parameters. To compare the atmospheric changes caused by the earthquake, five days before and after the earthquake are considered. To detect where the atmospheric parameters are increased or decreased from the earthquake day, the percentage deviation of the NRLMSISE-00 model is applied. The anomalies of the atmospheric parameters are estimated by the following formula:

$${\text{Anomalies}}\;{\text{deviation}}\;\left( \% \right) = \frac{EQ - EQbf/af}{{EQ}} \times 100,$$
(1)

where, EQ-Earthquake parameters on March 11, 2011 and EQbf/af—days before or after the earthquake parameters from March 11, 2011 The anomaly percentage deviation is the value of the difference between before or after the main earthquake parameter and the main earthquake parameter divided by the main earthquake parameter values times 100. The positive anomaly percentage deviation indicates the values of the atmospheric parameters during the main earthquake on March 11, 2011 were higher than days before or after the main earthquake parameter values. The inverse is true for the negative anomalies percentage deviation. Five days before (March 06–10, 2011) and after (March 12–16, 2011), the main earthquake shock of the March 11, 2011 earthquake is used as the hourly and daily average (calculated from the hourly percentage deviation of each day) of anomalies percentage deviation. According to the description of Picone et al. (2002), in the NRLMSISE-00 model, all eleven atmospheric parameters are fully available at high altitudes, and in this study, an altitude of 500 km is selected (Picone et al., 2002; Piscini et al., 2017; Reber et al., 1973). The year, month, day, time (UT/LT), altitude, geographic/geomagnetic location, and solar and geomagnetic activities are used as the model input variables (Ahmed et al., 2022; Picone et al., 2002).

3 Results

During the earthquake preparation period, there are various methods for detecting ionospheric and atmospheric anomalies before and after the main shock. These anomalies have been classified as either positive/increase or negative/decrease on a given day based on the background data (Shah and Jin 2018). An anomaly beyond upper confidence bounds can be positive, while an anomaly below lower confidence bounds is negative (Perrone et al., 2010). On March 11, 2011, a megathrust off the east coast of Honshu, Japan, reported a significant deviation in total electron content data from the GPS approximately 40 min before the event (Heki, 2011). As shown in the figures below, to compare the atmospheric parameter changes caused by the earthquake, five days before and after the earthquake are considered. From Fig. 1, the atomic oxygen (O) starts increasing from March 06 to March 11, 2011 and then decreases after March 11, 2011, so O got its highest value of 2.957E + 07 at 5:00 UT during the March 11, 2011 earthquake and its lowest value of 4.377E + 06 at 18:50 UT during the March 16, 2011. The percentage deviation in O variation on the March 11, 2011 earthquake is shown in Fig. 1 and Table 2. The molecular oxygen shows a similar pattern as the atomic oxygen and has a percentage deviation value variation from the March 11, 2011 earthquake. The highest and lowest values of molecular oxygen are 1.032E + 04 at 5:50 UT on March 11, 2011 and 1.469E + 02 at 19:00 UT on March 16, 2011, respectively. According to Fig. 1 and Table 2, the hydrogen (H) has a percentage deviation variations on March 11, 2011, decreases in value before and after the main earthquake shock. The H has a maximum value of 2.637E + 05 at 17:00 UT on March 16, 2011 and a minimum value of 8.532E + 04 at 7:00 UT on March 11, 2011. The helium (He) atom shows greater values in the days before and after the main earthquake shock, especially in the hours from 2:00 UT to 18:00 UT. The highest and lowest values of the He atom are 4.170E + 06 at 22:00 UT on March 09, 2011 and 1.865E + 06 at 10:00 UT on March 16, 2011, respectively. The atomic nitrogen (N) exhibits variability with values on March 11, 2011, the major earthquake shock, with five days before and decreasing with values after the main earthquake days. In Fig. 1 and Table 2, the percentage deviation values for the March 11, 2011 earthquake and non-earthquake events are presented. The N has a maximum value of 1.297E + 06 at 04:00 UT on March 11, 2011 and a minimum value of 1.025E + 05 at 22:50 UT on March 16, 2011. Similarly, molecular nitrogen (N2) shows the same trend with values of the percentage deviation and got its highest value of 5.979E + 05 at 5:50 UT on March 11, 2011 and its lowest value of 1.493E + 04 at 19:00 UT on March 16, 2011.

Figure 1
figure 1

Anomalies of the atmospheric parameters of atomic oxygen (O), oxygen (O2), hydrogen (H), helium (He), atomic nitrogen (N) and nitrogen (N2) with percentage deviation (right side of each parameter) of five days before and after the main earthquake shock on March 11, 2011. The vertical line on each atmospheric parameter indicates the times of significant earthquakes, the green line indicates major foreshock activity on March 09, 2011 at 02:45:20 UT with magnitude M7.3 and depth 32 km; the yellow line indicates the major earthquakes on March 11, 2011 at 05:46:24 UT with magnitude M9.0 and depth 29 km; the red line indicates the aftershocks on March 11, 2011 at 06:15:40 UT with magnitude M7.9 and depth 42.6 km) and the blue line on March 11, 2011 at 06:25:50 UT with magnitude M7.7 and depth 18.6 km

Full size image

As shown in Fig. 2, the argon (Ar) value on March 09, 2011 was the highest of all days, especially before around 8:00 UT with its peak value of 1.064E + 01 at 5:50 UT and its lowest value of 4.282E-02 at 19:00 UT on March 16, 2011. The neutral temperature (Tn) varies in values from the days prior, during and after the earthquake on March 11, 2011, as shown in Fig. 2 and Table 2, with its highest value of 1081.8 at 6:50 UT on March 09, 2011 and its lowest value of 752.1 at 18:50 UT on March 16, 2011. In a similar trend, the exospheric temperature (Tex) has similar values with percentage deviations shown in Fig. 2 and Table 2, with its highest value of 1083 at 6:50 UT on March 09, 2011 and its lowest value of 752 at 18:50 UT on March 16, 2011. This could be because several authors have suggested that the earthquake preparation process can generate variations in temperature that can affect the energy released in the earthquake (Qin et al., 2021). There could be a fascinating link between radon emissions and thermal anomalies. The most current investigations of earthquake precursors share the assumption of multi-parameter coupling mechanisms (Conti et al., 2021; Picozza et al., 2021; Qin et al., 2021; Tronin, 2006). The total mass density (ρ) value on March 11, 2011 (earthquake day) shows the highest values of all before and after days of the main earthquake day, with 8.637E-16 at 5:00 UT and the lowest value of 1.399E-16 at 18:00 UT on March 16, 2011. The value decreases after the earthquake day, and the percentage deviation of each day is shown in Fig. 2 and Table 2. Unlike the other atmospheric parameters, anomalous oxygen (AO) shows constant variation through all hours of the day. The AO shows a high value of anomalous on the main earthquake day, with a percentage deviation as indicated in Fig. 2 and Table 2. The highest and lowest values of the AO are 1.371E + 04 on March 11, 2011 and 5.413E + 03 on March 15, 2011, respectively. Generally, from Figs. 1 and 2 and Table 2, the average daily and hourly percentage deviation values of the atmospheric parameters for the days of March 06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16, 2011 are presented in Tables 1 and 2.

Figure 2
figure 2

Values of the atmospheric parameters of argon (Ar), total mass density (ρ), neutral temperature (Tn), exospheric temperature (Tex) and anomalous oxygen (AO) with percentage deviation (right side of each parameter) of five days before and after the main earthquake shock on March 11, 2011. The vertical lines on each atmospheric parameter indicate the times of significant earthquakes: the green line (on March 09, 2011 at 02:45:20 UT with magnitude M7.3 and depth 32 km); the yellow line (on March 11, 2011 at 05:46:24 UT with magnitude M9.0 and depth 29 km); the red line (on March 11, 2011 at 06:15:40 UT with magnitude M7.9 and depth 42.6 km) and the blue line (on March 11, 2011 at 06:25:50 UT with magnitude M7.7 and depth 18.6 km)

Full size image
Table 1 The mean daily percentage deviation values of atmospheric parameter anomalies with respect to the main earthquake shock on March 11, 2011, which are calculated from the diurnal values of percentage deviation of each day
Full size table
Table 2 The hourly percentage deviation values of atmospheric parameter anomalies with respect to the main earthquake shock on March 11, 2011, which are calculated from the hourly values of percentage deviation from minimum values to maximum values of each day
Full size table

Figure 3a shows this relation of earthquake with the disturbance index ap value and the solar activity variations, which are also indicators of the atmospheric behavior on each day before and after the major earthquake on March 11, 2011. It has recently been established that large earthquakes and the energy produced by the world's seismic activity are influenced by solar activity and the ensuing space weather (Anagnostopoulos, 2021). The comparison of the atmospheric parameter values of the five days before and after the major earthquake on March 11, 2011 with the same position (the major earthquake epicenter), year (2011) and time (05:46:24 UT). The atmospheric parameters of atomic oxygen (O), atomic nitrogen (N), helium (He), molecular oxygen (O2), molecular nitrogen (N2), total mass density (ρ), neutral temperature (Tn), exospheric temperature (Tex) and anomalous oxygen (AO) had their highest values during the major earthquake on March 11, 2011. On the other hand, the hydrogen atom has the lowest value on the major earthquake day of March 11, 2011, and the highest value on the non-earthquake day of March 16, 2011. Argon (Ar) had the highest value on the major foreshock activity day of March 09, 2011. This may be due to the chemical potential of the atmosphere for monitoring atmospheric abnormalities before powerful earthquakes caused by a series of processes starting with air ionization brought on by radon radiation from the Earth's crust. Because the last step of radon release before the main shock is modified, atmospheric chemical potential anomalies are produced. Initiating the thermodynamic instability is the ionization of the near-ground layer of the atmosphere by radon, which results in the release of latent heat and changes to the meteorological parameters (air temperature, relative humidity, and air pressure) (Pulinets et al., 2018; Pulinets & Budnikov, 2022). Figure 4 shows that the comparison of the atmospheric parameter values of the five years before the major earthquake on March 11, 2011 with the same position (the major earthquake epicenter), day of the year (March 11) and time (05:46:24 UT), which is a significant earthquake, was not present. The values of most atmospheric parameters during the major earthquake on March 11, 2011, were higher than on non-earthquake days. On the other hand, the hydrogen atom has the lowest value on the major earthquake day of March 11, 2011, and the highest value on the non-earthquake day of March 11, 2009 (Inchin et al., 2021).

Figure 3
figure 3

Variation values of the daily ap index and solar activities (a) and anomalies of the atmospheric parameters from March 06 to March 16, 2011 (b-l) at 05:46:24 UT, five days before and after the main earthquake shock with magnitude M 9.0 on March 11, 2011

Full size image
Figure 4
figure 4

Variation values of the atmospheric parameters and comparison of the values of the 5 years before the major earthquake on March 11, 2011 with the same position (the major earthquake epicenter), day of the year (March 11) and time (05:46:24 UT) without a significant earthquake

Full size image

4 Discussion

The Pacific plate and the Okhotsk plate met at Tohoku to produce the great Tohoku earthquake (Ozawa et al., 2011; Hirose et al., 2011; Hayes et al., 2017). A temporal change in the stress field and an increase in the wave amplitude of the seismic reflection properties that point landward indicate the existence of higher pore-fluid pressure in the megathrust zone (Sano et al., 2014). Precursors of the earthquake are generally found in three different sources: surface precursors (land and sea surface temperature), atmospheric precursors (air temperature, relative humidity, outgoing long-wave radiation), and ionospheric precursors (electron densities, electric field disturbances, and high energy particle flux). Mostly, the atmospheric precursors are responsible for the atmospheric parameter anomalies. An earthquake happens when the lithosphere suddenly releases energy. This significant quantity of energy may be released into the atmosphere in the form of acoustic gravity waves and Rayleigh waves that can travel through the atmosphere and into the ionosphere, where they cause changes in the ionosphere and create an extra electric field in the atmosphere. By means of ion-neutral collisions, the energetic particles transported by solar winds settle into the upper thermosphere across the open field lines during the exchange of energy between the geomagnetic field and solar winds. This results in changes to the neutral temperature and electric field (Haider et al., 2024; Heki, 2024), which make the atmospheric parameters anomalies. The seismic reflection in the geological and geophysical interpretation estimates the subsurface acoustic impedance at high and low frequencies (Muhsan et al., 2024). Different reports have been discussed regarding the great 2011 Tohohu earthquake precursors of anomalies: Seismicity (Nagao et al., 2014), pre-seismic land movement (Chen et al., 2013b; Kamiyama et al., 2014), electromagnetic phenomena on the lithosphere (Kopytenko et al., 2011; Xu et al., 2013) and on the atmosphere (Hayakawa, 2018; Ohta et al., 2013), which are the major responsible for the atmospheric parameter anomalies. The results revealed that all of the included atmospheric parameters had contemporary anomalies, as shown in Table 1 and Figs. 1, 2, 3, and 4. The earthquake precursors, such as groundwater level changes, seismicity, surface deformation, temperature change, electric and magnetic fields, and gas emissions, are credible scientific evidence for anomalies in the atmospheric parameters (Cicerone et al., 2009). On the other hand, lithospheric variations (Lin et al., 2023); the ultra-low-frequency magnetic field emissions associated with the earthquake (Han et al., 2011, 2015; Xu et al., 2013; Swati et al., 2020; Zhou et al., 2021; Anagnostopoulos, 2021); the waveforms of underground currents increasing due to earthquakes (Simpson, 2008); atmospheric gravity waves (Swati et al., 2020); atmospheric chemical potential (Oikonomou et al., 2021); and atmospheric pressure (Sano et al., 2014; Carpinteri et al., 2019; Inchin et al., 2021) result in both positive and negative atmospheric parameters during the main earthquake shock on March 11, 2011. Orihara et al. (2014) presented the anomalies of groundwater change and temperature level on the M 9.0 Pacific Coast of the Tohoku Earthquake. They observed the anomalies in parameters before the main shock of the Tohoku earthquake on March 11, 2011, which is equivalent to the result obtained in this study.

As shown in Figs. 1 and 2, there are clear diurnal variations between the main earthquake day and non-earthquake days. As indicated in the study by Reber et al. (1973), atmospheric parameters show different densities peaking hours around an altitude of 450 km. Other parameters, such as hydrogen (which has peak values around 18:00 UT), helium (which has peak values around 22:00 UT), and anomalous oxygen (which has a constant value through a day), show their peak values around 5:00 UT during the diurnal variations each day. Except for hydrogen (H), all atmospheric parameters increased during the March 11, 2011 earthquake. Hydrogen (H) decreases during the earthquake day on March 11, 2011 rather than the days before (March 06, 07, 08, 09 and 10) and after (12, 13, 14, 15 and 16). This is probably due to the strong linkages (covalent bonds) with the increased elements of oxygen, helium, nitrogen and others to release energy in the processes (Bar-Nun et al. 1985; Gomis et al., 2004a, 2004b; Mavroyannis & Winicler, 1962). The release of energy during the earthquake is supported by the work of Draz et al. (2021), who analyzed the possibility of precursors from the 2021 Mw 7.1 Japan earthquake from the land surface to the ionosphere and found anomalies as a result of the massive energy release that occurred during the main shock days and the outflow of this seismic energy into the atmosphere. And also, there is a reaction mechanism between hydrogen and oxygen, both in their atomic and molecular forms (Clyne & Thrush, ; Gomis et al., 2004a). On the other hand, there is a reaction mechanism between hydrogen and active nitrogen (Mavroyannis & Winicler, 1962). The atomic oxygen caused chemical reactions in the Earth’s mesosphere and lower thermosphere regions. This may be one of the causes of the reduction of atomic hydrogen during the earthquake on March 11, 2011 (Mlynczak & Solomon, 1993; Mlynczak et al. 2013). As shown in Fig. 1, hydrogen and helium in general show similar trends in the hourly variability of their values. This trend may be due to the fact that both helium and hydrogen have similar sizes and are absorbed by other atmospheric parameters and different agents, as reported by different researchers: Kidnay and Hiza (1967); Paine and Seidel (1994); Calvo (2012); Shin and Kwon (2012); and Calvo and Yurtsever (2016). But during the main earthquake shock on March 11, 2011, the helium had higher values than in the five days before and after the major earthquake shock, especially before 18:00 UT. It is generally known that helium may spread more quickly and widely than heat near the main earthquake shock (Sano et al., 1984, 2014).

Most atmospheric parameters show increments during the pre-earthquake period five days before and decreases after the main earthquake shock on March 11, 2011. This is because, as Wallace and Hobbs (2006), Huang et al. (2017) and Wang and Hocke (2022) show, there are strong fundamental linkages between the nature of the precursor and the EQ event. And the anomalies of the atmospheric parameters are due to this linkage, mainly the temperature profile, relative humidity, radio refractivity and infrared emissions, just a few days prior to the event and their repercussions in the low atmospheric profile (Pulinets & Boyarchuk 2004; Pulinets et al., 2006; Huang et al., 2017; Mukherjee & Nandi 2020). In order to comprehend the atmospheric phenomena associated with the main shock, air temperature is used to demonstrate the reaction of seismic activity in the atmosphere with atmospheric parameters (Draz et al., 2021; Heki, 2024). The ratio of the air’s vapor pressure to its saturation vapor pressure is commonly referred to as atmospheric relative humidity. Since the atmospheric relative humidity is a function of moisture content and temperature, its variability is dependent on the temperature variability, partial pressure of water vapor, and total water-holding capabilities (North et al., 2014). Humidity affects surface fluxes, soil moisture, and the planetary radiative balance both directly and indirectly through cloud formation. The global energy exchange, atmospheric dynamics, earthquake-related atmospheric reaction, and troposphere-stratosphere interaction around the epicenter are also primarily related to the relative humidity status (Heki, 2024). It is also necessary for the development of disturbed weather (Sherwood et al., 2010). Another important linkage among atmospheric parameter anomalies is radio refractivity, which is the bending of radio signals. Radio-refractivity has correlations mostly with atmospheric relative humidity and other atmospheric parameters like atmospheric temperature, atmospheric pressure, and atmospheric water vapor content (Abimbola et al., 2021; Agbo et al., 2021). The refractivity categorization of anomalous propagation situations makes use of the gradient of changed atmospheric refractivity with altitude. The impact of the atmosphere causes undesirable effects when electromagnetic waves propagate through it. The variability of atmospheric refractivity depends on the atmospheric temperature variability in the atmosphere (Emmanuel et al., 2017). Temperature, pressure, and relative humidity are the independent factors that affect radio-refractivity, and they have a direct relationship with the variation in refractivity (Cheloni et al., 2024). Additionally, infrared emission may also have an impact on atmospheric parameter anomalies. This could be attributed to the Earth warming, as some of the incoming solar radiation is absorbed by the surface and atmosphere, and the Earth emits this infrared radiation in the form of heat. The infrared radiation is emitted by clouds, carbon dioxide, and air molecules in the atmosphere, and this mechanism makes the atmospheric parameters anomalies (Smirnov, 2017).

Another important parameter is that the strong gravity waves that are associated with EQ events disrupt the troposphere's normal temperature profile. These gravity waves have a propensity to ascend in the lower atmosphere, which results in an unanticipated deviation in the lower tropospheric temperature profile. This change in temperature could be a sign of a coming EQ event. The temperature rise on the ground surface is immediately noticeable as radon gas is released from underground and this finally leads to atmospheric parameter anomalies. It is important to remember that variations in the tropospheric temperature profile can result from a variety of sources, including convection, meteorological fronts, and instability of jet streams in the troposphere, in addition to gravity waves caused by the underground release of radon gas. Meteorological fronts are a boundary of between two air masses, where warm air in one side and the cold air on the other side. As warm air meets colder air across a front, during this a significant atmospheric temperature changes may occur. On the other hand the strong jet streams are typically found in upper level fronts and makes this the air surface disturbances. Seismicity creates an environment in which large-scale electric charge separation occurs in the crust of the earth during earthquake development. As the electron temperature rises, so does the atmospheric temperature (Alimov et al., 1989). This may also lead to the atmospheric parameter anomalies. Measurements of temperature, composition, and winds in the neutral atmosphere are essential to answering many scientific issues. Temperature is the most significant atmospheric parameter that influences the radon concentration both directly and indirectly by altering the lithosphere air flows. There is the highest and most direct correlation between the radon concentration and the external temperature (Pinault et al., 1996; Garavaglia et al., 2000). Numerous seismo-related parameters, including electromagnetic field, temperature fluctuation, exhalation of gases and aerosols, and lithospheric deformation, may be observed from space to ground (Conti et al., 2021; Picozza et al., 2021) during the earthquake. But different scholars agree that the earthquake preparation process stage could generate temperature variability that may be caused by the flow or exhalation of geochemical fluids on the deep lithosphere, and temperature variability may have an impact on the energy budget in the lithosphere-atmosphere–ionosphere coupling system of the sequences of the earthquake (Conti et al., 2021; Picozza et al., 2021; Qin et al., 2021, and references therein).

The molecular oxygen (O2) and molecular nitrogen (N2) also showed high values during the earthquake on March 09, 2011, as shown in Fig. 1. Reactive trace gases like nitrogen oxides can transform into different chemical species like fine particle matter and ozone (Rey-Pommier et al., 2023) to increase the reaction mechanisms in the atmospheric parameters. This may be due to the March 11, 2011 earthquake that generated acoustic waves and disrupted atmospheric pressure, which resulted in concentrations of N2 and O2 oxidation (Carpinteri & Niccolini, 2019; Fikeraddis & Endeshaw, 2020; Oikonomou et al., 2021; Lin et al., 2023). Additionally, this could be because, as stated by Pulinets et al. (2015), gaseous radon produces huge hydrated ion clusters that result in the formation of preseismic thermal anomalies before an earthquake due to latent heat emission as well as preseismic atmospheric abnormalities. The only radioactive gas that may travel underground from the earth's surface to its surface origin, uranium, is radon, which is naturally occurring and is released into the atmosphere (Pulinets et al., 2022). The total mass density (ρ), neutral temperature (Tn) and exospheric temperature (Tex) as shown in Fig. 2, had high values during the earthquake starting on March 09, 2011. This is due to the fact that several authors have suggested that the earthquake preparation process can generate variations in temperature that can affect the energy released in the earthquake (Qin et al., 2021). There could be a fascinating link between radon emissions and thermal anomalies. The most current investigations of earthquake precursors share the assumption of multi-parameter coupling mechanisms (Conti et al., 2021; Picozza et al., 2021; Qin et al., 2021; Tronin, 2006). Since the atmospheric temperature is a measure of the average speed of all molecules in the atmosphere, the earthquake-generated acoustic waves and the earth's pressure warm the surface of the entire atmosphere, resulting in a disturbance of the density of electrons in the atmosphere. The related work by Liu et al. (2023b) analyzed the oxygen ion density and the vertical ion drift velocity under earthquake condition and foundings show that the increase in oxygen ion density, electron density and electron temperature within 1 to 15 days before strong earthquake. The combination of gases that envelops the Earth has been referred to as the atmosphere. This mass of air contributes to the possibility of life by giving us air to breathe, protecting us from the sun’s damaging ultraviolet radiation, retaining heat to warm the planet, and reducing drastic temperature swings between night and day. On the other hand, our environment's most vulnerable geophysical shell is the atmosphere. The chemical potential of the atmosphere for monitoring anomalies in the atmosphere before powerful earthquakes caused by a series of processes started by air ionization brought on by radon emissions from the Earth's crust. Forecasting for the short term using atmospheric chemical potential is possible in the event of earthquakes and volcano eruptions (Pulinets & Budnikov, 2022). Based on the temperature variability, the atmosphere can be divided into the troposphere, stratosphere, mesosphere, thermosphere, and exosphere (a further area that starts around 500 km above the surface of the Earth). All these regions of the atmosphere may be affected by the sequence of the earthquake. The Earth’s atmosphere is deposited with energy by energetic particles from space, which also affect changes in the concentration of neutral components like ozone, which regulates the balance of atmospheric temperature and also affects the variability of other atmospheric compositions. The ionization of the atmosphere is one of the most interesting mechanisms for establishing a link between space weather events and the terrestrial environment (Murase et al., 2023). Gravity waves, which develop in different fluids, are balanced by buoyancy and gravity forces. This atmospheric gravity wave may be seen in the Earth's atmosphere at different altitudes, extending from the troposphere into the thermosphere (Gunzkofer et al., 2023; Horváth et al., 2024). The occurrence and propagation of the traveling ionization disturbances are primarily effects of acoustic and gravitational waves on the thermosphere. One of the major causes of atmospheric gravity waves is earthquakes. This wave can also affect the overall thermospheric circulations (Zawdie et al., 2022) and be responsible for anomalies in the atmospheric parameters. Generally, in this study on the atmospheric parameters, there were anomalies observed with positive and negative percentage deviations, which is in agreement with the studies presented by Liu et al. (2004), Shah et al. (2020b), Oikonomou et al. (2021) and Lin et al. (2023).

At the time of the Tohoku earthquake, solar activity and geomagnetic activity were also much disturbed (Le et al., 2013). To validate this explanation, it is necessary to determine to what extent solar activity and geomagnetic activity can cause atmospheric anomalies in the atmosphere. Seismicity creates an environment in which large-scale electric charge separation occurs in the crust of the earth during earthquake development. As the electron temperature rises, so does the atmospheric temperature (Alimov et al., 1989). This may also lead to whole atmospheric parameter anomalies. On the other hand, during the major shock day, when geomagnetic activity remained quiet, Shah et al. (2020a) detected abnormalities in atmospheric and ionospheric parameters within the seismologic zone. Even if additional investigation is needed in this regard, the observed anomalies are due to the earthquake or the geomagnetic storm during the Tohoku earthquake. A detailed analysis by Le et al. (2013) of the ionospheric anomalies was presented three days before the 9.0-magnitude Tohoku earthquake on March 11, 2011. They concluded that the solar and geomagnetic activities were not enough to cause the observed ionospheric increases for a long time, and these regional anomalies might be related to the greatest earthquake in Tohoku. Additionally, Le et al. (2011) used GPS TEC data to study statistically the pre-earthquake ionospheric anomaly for a total of 736 earthquakes with a magnitude higher or equal to 6 from 2002 to 2010. The results of their study suggest that the prevalence of anomalies within several days before the earthquakes is higher than during the background days, particularly for larger magnitude and low-depth earthquakes. This conclusion implies that there may also be atmospheric anomalies; although earthquakes originate in the lithosphere, they can also interact with the lower atmosphere and ionosphere, and following that, the Lithosphere-Atmosphere–Ionosphere Coupling Mechanism of the Great Tohoku Earthquake on March 11, 2011.

To conclude, the atmospheric anomalies observed on the model measurement imply that, in addition to the Tohoku earthquake, these anomalies may be related to the solar and geomagnetic activities during the period (Le et al., 2013). In this scenario, satellite observations of the atmosphere play an important role in determining the possibility of detecting abnormalities in atmospheric parameters as short-lived precursors of earthquakes (Pulinets et al., 2006; Sharzehei et al., 2015). Some authors used this empirical model for the investigation of atmospheric anomalies during the Great Tohoku Earthquake on March 11, 2011 and other earthquakes. For example: The study by Kakinami et al. (2021) calculated the vertical profile of neutral temperature given by the NRLMSISE-00 model during the Great Tohoku earthquake. Arai et al. (2011) observed certain atmospheric parameter abnormalities in their investigation of the 9.0-magnitude Tohoku earthquake on March 11, 2011. According to Freund et al. (2022), atmospheric parameter anomalies during earthquakes are caused by the lithosphere-atmosphere coupling mechanism. The study identifies an expected relationship between atmospheric processes and subsequent earthquakes (M > 6) throughout a large region of Japan. However, doubts exist about how the NRLMSISE-00 model is adapted to assess seismic disturbances in the atmosphere. An empirical model, also known as a statistical model, is based on observation rather than theory (Liu et al., 2023a). So the ability of the NRLMSISE-00 model to capture the atmospheric parameter anomalies during the period of the earthquake may be due to the considerable number of real observations for atmospheric parameter measurement. In the future, this issue will be analyzed in detail with the help of additional observations in another work.

5 Conclusion

The shaking of the Earth’s surface due to the passage of seismic waves in the Earth’s outermost layer is known as an earthquake and the tectonic plates bordering the earth are where the majority of earthquakes occur (Nagamatsu et al., 2011; Pulinets et al., 2015; Chandrappa & Umesh, 2016; Manisalidis et al., 2020; Fawzy et al., 2020). Numerous factors, such as the emission of latent heat of evaporation during the condensation of water vapor, temperature of groundwater chemistry, changes in the rock's magnetic and electric fields, the thermal anomalies near the Earth’s surface, the emission of radon and other ionized gases, the electromagnetic fluctuations at various frequencies, the horizontal gradients of the temperature and pressure triggered, the formation of the linear cloud structures, the energetic electrons radiation belts and the precipitation, atmospheric conductivity and atmospheric gravity wave leading to the anomalies in the atmospheric parameters (Hayakawa, 2018; Oyama et al., 2019; Pulinets et al., 2015, 2022; Woith, 2015). The precursory nature of radon variations before earthquakes plays a crucial role in the lithosphere-atmosphere mechanism coupling and as do geoelectric, electromagnetic emission, apparent, geodetic, gravity, ground fluid and earthquake hydrology precursors. The most reliable seems to be the atmospheric gravity wave (Pulinets, 2011; Yang et al. 2019b). So one can conclude that a multi-parameter precursor approach provides anomalies in the atmospheric parameters during the study of different earthquake behaviors (Yang et al. 2019b). In this study, the anomalies of the atmosphere are studied by using one of the atmospheric models of the NRLMSISE-00 model data to analyze the atmospheric anomalies of the Tohoku Earthquake on March 11, 2011. In conclusion, the findings, which are shown in Figs. 1, 2, 3, and 4 and Tables 1 and 2, confirm the existence of contemporary anomalies in all of the included atmospheric parameters. Except for hydrogen (H), all atmospheric parameters increased during the March 11, 2011 earthquake. Hydrogen (H) decreases during the earthquake day on March 11, 2011 rather than the days before and after. The Tohoku Earthquake atmospheric parameter anomalies are well captured by the NRLMSISE-00 model. The NRLMSISE-00 model's ability to capture atmospheric parameter anomalies during the earthquake may be due to the enormous number of real observations for atmospheric parameter measurement.