Sign in to use this feature.

Years

Between: -

Subjects

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Journals

Article Types

Countries / Regions

Search Results (24)

Search Parameters:
Keywords = major sudden stratospheric warmings

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
14 pages, 6252 KiB  
Article
Influence of Satellite and Presatellite Periods on the Validation of Major Sudden Stratospheric Warmings in Historical CMIP5 Simulations
by Víctor Manuel Chávez-Pérez, Juan Antonio Añel, Citlalli Almaguer-Gómez and Laura de la Torre
Atmosphere 2025, 16(5), 628; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos16050628 - 21 May 2025
Viewed by 425
Abstract
This study assesses the ability of fourteen CMIP5 climate models to reproduce the main characteristics of major stratospheric sudden warmings (SSWp) in historical simulations. Model performance is evaluated through comparisons with three reanalysis datasets, considering two periods: the satellite era (1979–2005) and an [...] Read more.
This study assesses the ability of fourteen CMIP5 climate models to reproduce the main characteristics of major stratospheric sudden warmings (SSWp) in historical simulations. Model performance is evaluated through comparisons with three reanalysis datasets, considering two periods: the satellite era (1979–2005) and an extended period including pre-satellite years (1958–2005). Results show that model consistency with reanalyses is significantly higher during the satellite period, with up to seven models showing no statistically significant differences (p > 0.05) in at least eight out of ten key diagnostics. In contrast, performance decreases in the extended period, likely due to greater observational uncertainty. A systematic overrepresentation of displacement-type events (SSWD) was found in most models, compared to the split-type dominance in reanalysis data. These findings highlight the importance of the validation period and event classification in model evaluation and establish a robust framework for future comparisons using CMIP6 models and newer reanalysis products. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Climatology)
Show Figures

Figure 1

16 pages, 4124 KiB  
Article
An Explanation of the Poleward Mass Flux in the Stratosphere
by Aarnout J. van Delden
Atmosphere 2025, 16(3), 343; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos16030343 - 18 Mar 2025
Viewed by 331
Abstract
This paper offers a new perspective on the explanation of the poleward mass flux in the stratosphere. This mass flux represents the upper leg of the so-called Brewer–Dobson circulation. This new perspective is based on the following hypothesis. A positive potential vorticity anomaly, [...] Read more.
This paper offers a new perspective on the explanation of the poleward mass flux in the stratosphere. This mass flux represents the upper leg of the so-called Brewer–Dobson circulation. This new perspective is based on the following hypothesis. A positive potential vorticity anomaly, centered over the North Pole, exists in the stratosphere during the winter half-year. This positive potential vorticity anomaly is associated with a negative isentropic density anomaly, which forms due to cross-isentropic downwelling associated with radiative cooling. Isentropic potential vorticity mixing due to breaking planetary waves weakens this potential vorticity anomaly while zonal-mean thermal wind balance is maintained. This requires a weakening of the negative Polar cap isentropic density anomaly, which in turn requires a poleward isentropic mass flux. Support for this hypothesis is found in a case study of a major Sudden Stratospheric Warming event, as an example of intense potential vorticity mixing. It is shown that the stratosphere, both before and after this event, is very close to zonal-mean thermal wind balance, despite the disruptive potential vorticity mixing, while mass is shifted poleward during this event. Solutions of the potential vorticity-inversion equation, which is an expression of thermal wind balance, for zonal-mean potential vorticity distributions before and after the Sudden Stratospheric Warming, demonstrate that mass must shift poleward to maintain zonal-mean thermal wind balance when the positive potential vorticity anomaly is eliminated by mixing. This perspective on the reasons for the poleward stratospheric mass flux also explains the observed isobaric warming as well as the Polar cap zonal-mean zonal wind reversal during a major Sudden Stratospheric Warming. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue The 15th Anniversary of Atmosphere)
Show Figures

Figure 1

12 pages, 3040 KiB  
Article
Role of QBO and MJO in Sudden Stratospheric Warmings: A Case Study
by Eswaraiah Sunkara, Kyong-Hwan Seo, Chalachew Kindie Mengist, Madineni Venkat Ratnam, Kondapalli Niranjan Kumar and Gasti Venkata Chalapathi
Atmosphere 2024, 15(12), 1458; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos15121458 - 5 Dec 2024
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 1276
Abstract
The impact of the quasi-biennial oscillation (QBO) and Madden–Julian oscillation (MJO) on the dynamics of major sudden stratospheric warmings (SSWs) observed in the winters of 2018, 2019, and 2021 is investigated. Using data from the MERRA-2 reanalysis, we analyze the daily mean variability [...] Read more.
The impact of the quasi-biennial oscillation (QBO) and Madden–Julian oscillation (MJO) on the dynamics of major sudden stratospheric warmings (SSWs) observed in the winters of 2018, 2019, and 2021 is investigated. Using data from the MERRA-2 reanalysis, we analyze the daily mean variability of critical atmospheric parameters at the 10 hPa level, including zonal mean polar cap temperature, zonal mean zonal wind, and the amplitudes of planetary waves 1 and 2. The results reveal dramatic increases in polar cap temperature and significant wind reversals during the SSW events, particularly in 2018. The analysis of planetary wave (PW) amplitudes demonstrates intensified wave activity coinciding with the onset of SSWs, underscoring the pivotal role of PWs in these stratospheric disruptions. Further examination of outgoing long-wave radiation (OLR) anomalies highlights the influence of QBO phases on tropical convection patterns. During westerly QBO (w-QBO) phases, enhanced convective activity is observed in the western Pacific, whereas the easterly QBO (e-QBO) phase shifts convection patterns to the maritime continent and central Pacific. This modulation by QBO phases influences the MJO’s role during SSWs, affecting tropical and extra-tropical weather patterns. The day-altitude variability of upward heat flux reveals distinct spatiotemporal patterns, with pronounced warming in the polar regions and mixed heat flux patterns in low latitudes. The differences observed between the SSWs of 2017–2018 and 2018–2019 are likely related to the varying QBO phases, emphasizing the complexity of heat flux dynamics during these events. The northern annular mode (NAM) index analysis shows varied responses to SSWs, with stronger negative anomalies observed during the e-QBO phase compared to the w-QBO phases. This variability highlights the significant role of the QBO in shaping the stratospheric and tropospheric responses to SSWs, impacting surface weather patterns and the persistence of stratospheric anomalies. Overall, the study demonstrates the intricate interactions between stratospheric dynamics, QBO, and MJO during major SSW events, providing insights into the broader implications of these atmospheric phenomena on global weather patterns. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Climatology)
Show Figures

Figure 1

11 pages, 7224 KiB  
Article
Connection between Winter East Asia Flow Patterns and Stratospheric Polar Vortex Anomalies
by Masakazu Taguchi
Atmosphere 2024, 15(7), 844; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos15070844 - 17 Jul 2024
Viewed by 1113
Abstract
Using a reanalysis dataset, this work investigates the possible connection of winter East Asia (EA) flow patterns to stratospheric polar vortex (SPV) anomalies. Cluster analysis is performed on the principal components of daily 500 hPa geopotential height fields to identify five distinct flow [...] Read more.
Using a reanalysis dataset, this work investigates the possible connection of winter East Asia (EA) flow patterns to stratospheric polar vortex (SPV) anomalies. Cluster analysis is performed on the principal components of daily 500 hPa geopotential height fields to identify five distinct flow patterns. SPV anomalies are considered in terms of the occurrence of major sudden stratospheric warmings (MSSWs). The results reveal that for the 15 days before the MSSWs, one of the five patterns occurs more frequently than usual, whereas another occurs less frequently. The former constructively interferes with the climatological EA trough in the troposphere and strengthens the planetary wave activity (heat flux) in the extratropical troposphere and stratosphere. It has a similar pattern in the 500 hPa height to the composite leading to the MSSWs, implying that such strengthening can contribute to the forcing of the MSSWs. The latter is in the opposite sense (destructive interference) and is disadvantageous before the MSSWs. Evidence of a stratospheric downward influence on the five flow patterns is relatively unclear. These results suggest a potential coupling between flow patterns or weather regimes in different regions through the SPV, as well as warrant further investigation of the downward influence on EA weather regimes. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Meteorology)
Show Figures

Figure 1

17 pages, 6269 KiB  
Article
The Influence of Sudden Stratospheric Warming on the Development of Ionospheric Storms: The Alma-Ata Ground-Based Ionosonde Observations
by Galina Gordiyenko, Artur Yakovets, Yuriy Litvinov and Alexey Andreev
Atmosphere 2024, 15(6), 626; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos15060626 - 23 May 2024
Viewed by 1009
Abstract
This paper examines the response of the ionosphere to the impact of two moderate geomagnetic storms observed on January 17 and 26–27, 2013, under conditions of strong sudden stratospheric warming. The study uses data from ground-based ionosonde measurements at the Alma-Ata ionospheric station [...] Read more.
This paper examines the response of the ionosphere to the impact of two moderate geomagnetic storms observed on January 17 and 26–27, 2013, under conditions of strong sudden stratospheric warming. The study uses data from ground-based ionosonde measurements at the Alma-Ata ionospheric station (43.25 N, 76.92 E) combined with optical observation data (The Spectral Airglow Temperature Imager (SATI)). Ionosonde data showed that the geomagnetic storms under consideration do not generate ionospheric storms but demonstrate some unusual types of diurnal foF2 variations with large (up to 60%) deviations in foF2 from median values observed during the night/morning periods on 13–15 and 20–23 January, which do not have any relation to solar or geomagnetic activity. Wave-like disturbances in ΔfoF2, Δh’F, and daily averaged foF2 values with a quasi-period of 5–8 days and peak-to-peak amplitude from about 1 MHz to 2 MHz (~from 20% to ~40%) and ~40 km are observed during the period 9–28 January, after registration of the occurrence of the major SSW event on 6–7 January. The observed variations in the OH emission rate are found to be quite similar to those observed in the ionospheric parameters that assume a community of processes in the stratosphere/mesosphere/ionosphere system. The study shows that the F region of the ionosphere is influenced by processes in the lower ionosphere, in this case by processes associated with sudden stratospheric warming SSW-2013, which led to modification of the structure of the ionosphere and compensation of processes associated with the development of the ionospheric storms. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Effect of Solar Activities to the Earth's Atmosphere)
Show Figures

Figure 1

14 pages, 11121 KiB  
Article
Influence of Sudden Stratospheric Warmings on the Migrating Diurnal Tide in the Equatorial Middle Atmosphere Observed by Aura/Microwave Limb Sounder
by Klemens Hocke
Atmosphere 2023, 14(12), 1743; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos14121743 - 27 Nov 2023
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 1584
Abstract
The Microwave Limb Sounder (MLS) onboard the satellite Aura measures the temperature at 01:44 LST (after midnight) and at 13:44 LST after noon in the equatorial middle atmosphere. The signatures of the migrating solar diurnal tide (DW1) show up in the difference between [...] Read more.
The Microwave Limb Sounder (MLS) onboard the satellite Aura measures the temperature at 01:44 LST (after midnight) and at 13:44 LST after noon in the equatorial middle atmosphere. The signatures of the migrating solar diurnal tide (DW1) show up in the difference between the night-time and the daytime temperature profiles. We find a good agreement between the equatorial DW1 proxy of the Aura/MLS observations and the migrating diurnal tide estimated by the Global Scale Wave Model (GSWM) in March. The equatorial DW1 proxy is shown for the time interval from 2004 to 2021 reaching a temporal resolution of 1 day. The amplitude modulations of the DW1 proxy are correlated at several altitudes. There are indications of a semi-annual and annual oscillation (SAO and AO) of the DW1 proxy. The composite of 17 events of major sudden stratospheric warmings (SSWs) shows that the equatorial, mesospheric DW1 proxy is reduced by about 10% during the first week after the SSW event. The nodes and bellies of the equatorial DW1 proxy are shifted downward by about 1–2 km in the first week after the SSW. The 14 day-oscillation of the DW1 proxy in the equatorial mesosphere is enhanced from 25 days before the SSW onset to 5 days after the SSW onset. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Observations and Analysis of Upper Atmosphere)
Show Figures

Figure 1

20 pages, 5618 KiB  
Article
Intriguing Aspects of Polar-to-Tropical Mesospheric Teleconnections during the 2018 SSW: A Meteor Radar Network Study
by Sunkara Eswaraiah, Kyong-Hwan Seo, Kondapalli Niranjan Kumar, Andrey V. Koval, Madineni Venkat Ratnam, Chalachew Kindie Mengist, Gasti Venkata Chalapathi, Huixin Liu, Young-Sil Kwak, Eugeny Merzlyakov, Christoph Jacobi, Yong-Ha Kim, Sarangam Vijaya Bhaskara Rao and Nicholas J. Mitchell
Atmosphere 2023, 14(8), 1302; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos14081302 - 17 Aug 2023
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1908
Abstract
Using a network of meteor radar observations, observational evidence of polar-to-tropical mesospheric coupling during the 2018 major sudden stratosphere warming (SSW) event in the northern hemisphere is presented. In the tropical lower mesosphere, a maximum zonal wind reversal (−24 m/s) is noted and [...] Read more.
Using a network of meteor radar observations, observational evidence of polar-to-tropical mesospheric coupling during the 2018 major sudden stratosphere warming (SSW) event in the northern hemisphere is presented. In the tropical lower mesosphere, a maximum zonal wind reversal (−24 m/s) is noted and compared with that identified in the extra-tropical regions. Moreover, a time delay in the wind reversal between the tropical/polar stations and the mid-latitudes is detected. A wide spectrum of waves with periods of 2 to 16 days and 30–60 days were observed. The wind reversal in the mesosphere is due to the propagation of dominant intra-seasonal oscillations (ISOs) of 30–60 days and the presence and superposition of 8-day period planetary waves (PWs). The ISO phase propagation is observed from high to low latitudes (60° N to 20° N) in contrast to the 8-day PW phase propagation, indicating the change in the meridional propagation of winds during SSW, hence the change in the meridional circulation. The superposition of dominant ISOs and weak 8-day PWs could be responsible for the delay of the wind reversal in the tropical mesosphere. Therefore, this study has strong implications for understanding the reversed (polar to tropical) mesospheric meridional circulation by considering the ISOs during SSW. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Atmospheric Techniques, Instruments, and Modeling)
Show Figures

Figure 1

14 pages, 4285 KiB  
Article
On the Different Quasi-2-Day Wave Behaviors during Sudden Stratospheric Warming Periods
by Liang Tang, Sheng-Yang Gu, Chen-Ke-Min Teng, Zhen-Lin Yang, Shu-Yue Zhao, Hui Huang and Dong Wang
Atmosphere 2023, 14(3), 521; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos14030521 - 8 Mar 2023
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 1678
Abstract
The temporal variations in the sudden stratospheric warming (SSW) events in the winter stratosphere always coincide with the quasi-2-day wave (Q2DW) in the summer mesosphere, and the impact of SSW on Q2DW is interesting but still a mystery. Major SSWs occurred in both [...] Read more.
The temporal variations in the sudden stratospheric warming (SSW) events in the winter stratosphere always coincide with the quasi-2-day wave (Q2DW) in the summer mesosphere, and the impact of SSW on Q2DW is interesting but still a mystery. Major SSWs occurred in both 2006 and 2009, while the Q2DW activity was quite different. The Second Modern Era-Retrospective Analysis for Research and Applications (MERRA-2) reanalysis dataset was used to comparatively analyze these two major SSW events and elucidate the reasons for the different Q2DW behaviors. We noticed that the summer easterly jet shows a large interannual variability. We conclude that the summer mesospheric Q2DWs are modulated by the winter SSW, whereas the modulation process is also affected by the interannual variability of the summer easterly flow itself. The effects of the SSW on the Q2DWs may differ from year to year due to the variability of the summer easterly flow itself, resulting in different anomalous Q2DW behavior. This conclusion may also be true for the interannual variability of other phenomena during the SSW period. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Upper Atmosphere)
Show Figures

Figure 1

8 pages, 4776 KiB  
Communication
Response of Total Column Ozone at High Latitudes to Sudden Stratospheric Warmings
by Klemens Hocke, Eric Sauvageat and Leonie Bernet
Atmosphere 2023, 14(3), 450; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos14030450 - 23 Feb 2023
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1421
Abstract
The total column ozone (TCO) at northern high latitudes is increased over a course of 1–2 months after a major sudden stratospheric warming as a consequence of enhanced ozone eddy transport and diffusive ozone fluxes. We analyzed ground-based measurements of TCO from Oslo, [...] Read more.
The total column ozone (TCO) at northern high latitudes is increased over a course of 1–2 months after a major sudden stratospheric warming as a consequence of enhanced ozone eddy transport and diffusive ozone fluxes. We analyzed ground-based measurements of TCO from Oslo, Andøya and Ny Ålesund from 2000 to 2020. During this time interval, 15 major sudden stratospheric warmings (SSWs) occurred. The observed TCO variations are in a good agreement with those of ECMWF Reanalysis v5 (ERA5), showing that TCO from ERA5 is reliable, even during dynamically active periods. ERA5 has the advantage that it has no data gaps during the polar night. We found that TCO was increased by up to 190 DU after the SSW of February 2010, over one month. The composite analysis of the 15 SSWs provided the result that TCO is increased on average by about 50 DU over one month after the central date of the SSW. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Air Quality)
Show Figures

Figure 1

21 pages, 10894 KiB  
Article
Arctic Stratosphere Dynamical Processes in the Winter 2021–2022
by Pavel N. Vargin, Andrey V. Koval and Vladimir V. Guryanov
Atmosphere 2022, 13(10), 1550; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos13101550 - 22 Sep 2022
Cited by 15 | Viewed by 2475
Abstract
The Arctic stratosphere winter season of 2021–2022 was characterized by a stable, cold stratospheric polar vortex with a volume of polar stratospheric clouds (PSC) close to the maximum values since 1980, before the beginning of minor sudden stratospheric warming (SSW) events in the [...] Read more.
The Arctic stratosphere winter season of 2021–2022 was characterized by a stable, cold stratospheric polar vortex with a volume of polar stratospheric clouds (PSC) close to the maximum values since 1980, before the beginning of minor sudden stratospheric warming (SSW) events in the late February and early March and major SSW on 20 March. Analysis of dynamical processes of the Arctic stratosphere using reanalysis data indicates that the main reasons for the strengthening of the stratospheric polar vortex in January–February are the minimum propagation of planetary wave activity from the troposphere to the stratosphere over the past 40 years and its reflection in the upper stratosphere–lower mesosphere in the second half of January. The first minor SSW was limited to the upper polar stratosphere, whereas the second one propagated to the middle and lower stratosphere and led to the disappearance of the PSC, which prevented significant ozone depletion. Both minor and major SSW events led to a weakening of the residual meridional circulation in the upper Arctic stratosphere and its intensification in the middle and lower stratosphere, which contributed to additional warming of the subpolar region and weakening of the polar vortex. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Meteorology)
Show Figures

Figure 1

17 pages, 13906 KiB  
Article
Features of Winter Stratosphere Small-Scale Disturbance during Sudden Stratospheric Warmings
by Anna S. Yasyukevich, Marina A. Chernigovskaya, Boris G. Shpynev, Denis S. Khabituev and Yury V. Yasyukevich
Remote Sens. 2022, 14(12), 2798; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs14122798 - 10 Jun 2022
Cited by 5 | Viewed by 1975
Abstract
We analyzed the characteristics of small-scale wave disturbances emerging during the evolution and transformation of the jet stream (JS) in the winter stratosphere and the lower mesosphere of the northern hemisphere, including the periods of sudden stratospheric warming (SSW) events. Continuous generation of [...] Read more.
We analyzed the characteristics of small-scale wave disturbances emerging during the evolution and transformation of the jet stream (JS) in the winter stratosphere and the lower mesosphere of the northern hemisphere, including the periods of sudden stratospheric warming (SSW) events. Continuous generation of small-scale wave disturbances is shown to occur over quiet geomagnetic winter periods in the region of a steady jet stream in the strato–mesosphere. We studied spatial spectra for the vertical velocity variations, determined by the parameters of emerging wave disturbances. The greatest intensities of disturbances are recorded in the regions corresponding to the high velocities of the JS (from 100 m/s and higher). In the northern hemisphere, those latitudes encompass ~40–60° N. When a steady jet stream forms, the horizontal length and periods of the most intensive wavelike disturbances are shown to vary within 300–1000 km and 50–150 min correspondingly (which match the characteristic scales of internal gravity waves, or IGWs). During the SSW prewarming stage, the JS transforms substantially. Over the same periods, a disturbance intensification is recorded, as well as the emergence of larger-scale disturbances with 3000–5000-km horizontal wavelengths, and even higher. After the SSW peak and during the stratosphere circulation recovery, the velocity in the JS substantially decreases and an essential reduction in wave-disturbance generation occurs. There are decreases in the average amplitude values (by factors of 1.8–6.7). The strongest amplitude drop was observed for short waves (zonal wavelength λU = 300 km). The maximum attenuation for all wavelengths was observed for the strongest 2008/2009 winter SSW. For the analyzed events, such attenuation was observed for up to about a month after the SSW peak. Thus, JS disruption during major SSWs leads to deactivating the source for generating small-scale wave disturbances in the stratosphere. This may affect disturbances in higher atmospheric layers. The results obtained are the experimental evidence that JS itself is the primary source for the generation of IGWs in the stratosphere–lower mesosphere. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Infrasound, Acoustic-Gravity Waves, and Atmospheric Dynamics)
Show Figures

Figure 1

20 pages, 6091 KiB  
Article
Intra-Seasonal Variations and Frequency of Major Sudden Stratospheric Warmings for Northern Winter in Multi-System Seasonal Hindcast Data
by Masakazu Taguchi
Atmosphere 2022, 13(5), 831; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos13050831 - 19 May 2022
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 1945
Abstract
This study investigates intra-seasonal variations and frequency of major sudden stratospheric warmings (MSSWs) in Northern winter seasonal hindcasts of six systems from 1993/1994 to 2016/2017, in comparison to the Japanese 55-year Reanalysis data. Results show that, over all, all systems reproduce precursory signals [...] Read more.
This study investigates intra-seasonal variations and frequency of major sudden stratospheric warmings (MSSWs) in Northern winter seasonal hindcasts of six systems from 1993/1994 to 2016/2017, in comparison to the Japanese 55-year Reanalysis data. Results show that, over all, all systems reproduce precursory signals to the MSSWs well, such as the increase in the planetary wave heat flux in the extratropical lower stratosphere and the anomalous planetary wave patterns in the troposphere. Some systems are suggested to underestimate or overestimate the mean MSSW frequency. Such differences in the frequency of the MSSWs among the systems are related to those in the mean strength of the stratospheric polar vortex, and also may be partly contributed by those in the frequency of notable heat flux events. The hindcast data exhibit a weaker mean vortex and an increased MSSW frequency for a warm phase than for a cold phase of El Niño/Southern Oscillation, and for an easterly phase than for a westerly phase of the Quasi-Biennial Oscillation. These are qualitatively consistent with reanalysis results, except for a lower MSSW frequency for the warm phase in the reanalysis data. The reanalysis teleconnection results are larger in magnitude than the hindcast results for most ensemble members, although they are included near the edge of the distributions of the ensemble members. The changes in the MSSW frequency with the two external factors are correlated to those in the mean vortex strength among the ensemble members and also the ensemble means for some systems. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Meteorology)
Show Figures

Figure 1

16 pages, 6955 KiB  
Article
Impact of Increased Vertical Resolution in WACCM on the Climatology of Major Sudden Stratospheric Warmings
by Víctor M. Chávez, Juan A. Añel, Rolando R. Garcia, Petr Šácha and Laura de la Torre
Atmosphere 2022, 13(4), 546; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos13040546 - 29 Mar 2022
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 3090
Abstract
Sudden stratospheric warmings (SSWs) are a major mode of variability of the winter stratosphere. In recent years, climate models have improved their ability to simulate SSWs. However, the representation of the frequency and temporal distribution of SSWs in models depends on many factors [...] Read more.
Sudden stratospheric warmings (SSWs) are a major mode of variability of the winter stratosphere. In recent years, climate models have improved their ability to simulate SSWs. However, the representation of the frequency and temporal distribution of SSWs in models depends on many factors and remains challenging. The vertical resolution of a model might be one such factor. Therefore, here we analyse the impact of increased vertical resolution on the simulation of major sudden stratospheric warmings (SSWs) in the Whole Atmosphere Community Climate Model (WACCM). We compare two versions of the model, WACCM3.5 and WACCM4. We find that the frequency of occurrence of SSWs is improved in the newer version and closer to that obtained using reanalysis. Furthermore, simulations with a coupled ocean best reproduce the behaviour of temperature during these events. Increasing vertical resolution increases the number of occurrences; however, it does not produce significantly different results than standard resolution. WACCM4 also does not reproduce vortex split events well, generating far fewer of these than observed. Finally, the ratio between polar vortex splits and displacement events in the model is slightly better for non-ocean-coupled simulations. We conclude that, at least for WACCM4, the use of the high vertical resolution configuration is not cost-effective for the study of SSWs. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Climatology)
Show Figures

Figure 1

16 pages, 3525 KiB  
Article
Possible Causes of the Occurrence of a Rare Antarctic Sudden Stratospheric Warming in 2019
by Chenming Ma, Pengkun Yang, Xin Tan and Ming Bao
Atmosphere 2022, 13(1), 147; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos13010147 - 17 Jan 2022
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 3872
Abstract
A minor Antarctic sudden stratospheric warming (SSW) with the strongest circulation changes since the first major SSW over the Antarctic was recorded in 2002 occurred in early September 2019. The diagnosis demonstrates two possible causes of this SSW. First, the tropical central Pacific [...] Read more.
A minor Antarctic sudden stratospheric warming (SSW) with the strongest circulation changes since the first major SSW over the Antarctic was recorded in 2002 occurred in early September 2019. The diagnosis demonstrates two possible causes of this SSW. First, the tropical central Pacific warming is identified, which enhanced the amplitude of tropospheric planetary wavenumber 1 (W1) in the extratropics on the seasonal time scale. Second, the impact of intraseasonal convection anomalies similar to previous studies is also suggested here. The enhanced deep convection over the South Pacific Convergence Zone (SPCZ) in late August–early September excited a Rossby wave train to deepen an anomalous ridge, which significantly and persistently strengthened the tropospheric W1. The central Pacific warming and intraseasonal convection anomalies jointly provided the conditions for the occurrence of the Antarctic SSW in 2019 on different time scales. On the other hand, the difference of the stratospheric state between the Antarctic SSWs in 2019 and 2002 may be an important reason why the 2019 event did not meet the major SSW criteria. The stratospheric state before the 2019 SSW event is somewhat not as ideal as that of the 2002 event. Vertical planetary waves are, hence, more difficult to enter into the polar stratosphere, making it more difficult to trigger major events. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Climatology)
Show Figures

Figure 1

19 pages, 8309 KiB  
Article
Mid-Latitude Mesospheric Zonal Wave 1 and Wave 2 in Recent Boreal Winters
by Yu Shi, Oleksandr Evtushevsky, Valerii Shulga, Gennadi Milinevsky, Andrew Klekociuk, Yulia Andrienko and Wei Han
Remote Sens. 2021, 13(18), 3749; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs13183749 - 18 Sep 2021
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 2508
Abstract
Planetary waves in the mesosphere are studied using observational data and models to establish their origin, as there are indications of their generation independently of waves in the stratosphere. The quantitative relationships between zonal wave 1 and wave 2 were studied with a [...] Read more.
Planetary waves in the mesosphere are studied using observational data and models to establish their origin, as there are indications of their generation independently of waves in the stratosphere. The quantitative relationships between zonal wave 1 and wave 2 were studied with a focus on the mid-latitude mesosphere at 50°N latitude. Aura Microwave Limb Sounder measurements were used to estimate wave amplitudes in geopotential height during sudden stratospheric warmings in recent boreal winters. The moving correlation between the wave amplitudes shows that, in comparison with the anticorrelation in the stratosphere, wave 2 positively correlates with wave 1 and propagates ahead of it in the mesosphere. A positive correlation r = 0.5–0.6, statistically significant at the 95% confidence level, is observed at 1–5-day time lag and in the 75–91 km altitude range, which is the upper mesosphere–mesopause region. Wavelet analysis shows a clear 8-day period in waves 1 and 2 in the mesosphere at 0.01 hPa (80 km), while in the stratosphere–lower mesosphere, the period is twice as long at 16 days; this is statistically significant only in wave 2. Possible sources of mesospheric planetary waves associated with zonal flow instabilities and breaking or dissipation of gravity waves are discussed. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Atmospheric Remote Sensing)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop