Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Relation Between Arctic Moisture Flux and Tropical Temperature Biases in CMIP5 Simulations and Its Fingerprint in RCP8.5 Projections
Stockholm University, Faculty of Science, Department of Meteorology .
Stockholm University, Faculty of Science, Department of Meteorology .ORCID iD: 0000-0002-5507-9209
Number of Authors: 32019 (English)In: Geophysical Research Letters, ISSN 0094-8276, E-ISSN 1944-8007, Vol. 46, no 2, p. 1088-1096Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Arctic moisture intrusions have played an important role in warming the Arctic over the past few decades. A prior study found that Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) models exhibit large regional biases in the moisture flux across 70 degrees N. It is shown here that the systematic misrepresentation of the moisture flux is related to the models' overprediction of zonal wavenumber k = 2 contribution and underprediction of k = 1 contribution to the flux. Models with a warmer tropical upper troposphere and El-Nino-like tropical surface temperature tend to simulate stronger k = 2 flux, while k = 1 flux is uncorrelated with tropical upper tropospheric temperature and is associated with La-Nina-like surface temperature. The models also overpredict the transient eddy moisture flux while underpredicting the stationary eddy flux. Moreover, future projections in Representative Concentration Pathway 8.5 (RCP8.5) simulations show trends in moisture flux that is consistent with biases in historical simulations, suggesting that these CMIP5 projections reflect the same error(s) that cause the model biases. Plain Language Summary The Arctic is the region where climate change has been most rapid. A growing body of work indicates that moisture intrusions into Arctic have played an important role in warming the Arctic over the past decades. Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) models have served as a critical tool for projecting future climate changes. Therefore, it is imperative to evaluate whether the physical processes governing moisture intrusions are accurately represented by the models. It is shown here that there is a systematic misrepresentation of the moisture flux into the Arctic related to the models' biased representation of tropical temperatures. Moreover, future projections in Representative Concentration Pathway 8.5 (RCP8.5) simulations show moisture flux trends that are consistent with biases in historical simulations, suggesting that these CMIP5 projections reflect the same error(s) that cause the model biases. It is common practice to regard averages across climate model as being the true response to climate forcing. The findings here question this widespread assumption and underscore the need to pay close attention to model biases and their causes.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2019. Vol. 46, no 2, p. 1088-1096
National Category
Earth and Related Environmental Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:su:diva-166788DOI: 10.1029/2018GL080562ISI: 000458607400062OAI: oai:DiVA.org:su-166788DiVA, id: diva2:1295703
Available from: 2019-03-12 Created: 2019-03-12 Last updated: 2019-12-17Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Woods, CianCaballero, Rodrigo
By organisation
Department of Meteorology
In the same journal
Geophysical Research Letters
Earth and Related Environmental Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 52 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf