Pulsar glitches are sudden spin-ups in pulsar spin frequency ($\nu$). The glitch size, $\Delta\nu/\nu$, is a key parameter in any mechanism puts across towards the understanding of the events.However, the distribution of the glitch sizes has persistently been bimodal.This bimodal nature could be intrinsic or otherwise. In this paper, the glitch size distribution is bisected at $\Delta\nu/\nu = 10^{-7}$ with $\Delta\nu/\nu < 10^{-7}$ being regarded as small size glitches (SSG), while those of $\Delta\nu/\nu > 10^{-7}$ are taken as large size glitches (LSG).The magnitude of SSGis scaled to that of LSG and tested for similarity.In pulsars with mixture of glitch sizes, Lilliefore test is used to identify the distribution pattern of SSGs and LSGs in such pulsars. The result indicates that each half of the size distribution is fundamentally different from one another. LSGs are seen to be normally distributed, while the SSGs are lognormal.

Strange Nuggets are believed to be among the relics of the early universe. They appear as dark matter due to their low charge-to-mass ratio. Their distribution is believed to be the same as that of dark matter. As such, they could be accreted by high magnetic field objects and their collisions with pulsars are inevitable. Pulsar glitches are commonly seen as sudden spin-ups in pulsar frequency. It is still an open debate with regard to mechanisms giving rise to such a phenomenon. However, there is a class of sudden changes in pulsar spin frequency known as microglitches. These event are characterized by sudden small change in pulsar spin frequency ($ \delta \nu/\nu \approx \pm 10^{-9}$). Clearly, the negative signature seen in some of the events is inconsistent with the known glitch mechanisms. In this analysis, we suggest that accretion of strange nuggets with pulsars could readily give rise to microglitch events. The signature of the events depends on the energy of the strange nuggets and line of interaction.

The superfluid in the inner crust of neutron star is assumed to be the reservoir of momentum released in pulsar glitch. Recently, due to crustal entrainment, it is debatable whether the magnitude of the inner crust is sufficient to contain superfluid responsible for large glitches. This paper calculates the fractional moment of inertia (FMI)(i.e. the ratio of the inner crust superfluid moment of inertia to that of the coupled components) associated with individual glitches. It is shown that the effective moment of inertia associated with the transferred momentum is that of the entrained neutrons. The FMI for glitches in three pulsars, which exhibit the signature of exhausting their momentum reservoir were calculated and scaled with entrainment factor. Some of the glitches require inner crust superfluid with moment of inertia larger than the current suggested values of 7-10 % of the stellar moment of inertia.

The glitch size, $ \Delta\nu/\nu $, inter-glitch time interval, $ t_{i} $ and frequency of glitches in pulsars are key parameters in discussing glitch phenomena. In this paper, the glitch sizes and inter-glitch time intervals were statistically analysed in a sample of 168 pulsars with a total of 483 glitches. The glitches were broadly divided into two groups. Those with $ \Delta\nu/\nu < 10^{-7} $ are regarded as small size glitches, while those with $ \Delta\nu/\nu \geq 10^{-7} $ are regarded as relatively large size glitches. In the ensemble of glitches, the distribution of $ \Delta\nu/\nu $ is seen to be bimodal as usual. The distribution of inter-glitch time intervals is unimodal and the inter-glitch time intervals between small and large size glitches are not significantly different from each other. This observation shows that inter-glitch time intervals are size independent. In addition, the distribution of the ratio $ \Delta\nu/\nu:t_{i} $ in both small and large size glitches has the same pattern. This observation suggests that a parameter which depends on time, which could be the spin-down rate of a pulsar plays a similar role in the processes that regulate both small and large size glitches. Equally this could be an indication that a single physical mechanism, which could produce varying glitch sizes at similar time-intervals could be responsible for both classes of glitch sizes.