Cloud Radiative Feedbacks during the ENSO Cycle Simulated by CAMS-CSM
Tóm tắt
This study evaluated the simulated cloud radiative feedbacks (CRF) during the El Nino-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) cycle in the latest version of the Chinese Academy of Meteorological Sciences climate system model (CAMS-CSM). We conducted two experimental model simulations: the Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project (AMIP), forced by the observed sea surface temperature (SST); and the preindustrial control (PIcontrol), a coupled run without flux correction. We found that both the experiments generally reproduced the observed features of the shortwave and longwave cloud radiative forcing (SWCRF and LWCRF) feedbacks. The AMIP run exhibited better simulation performance in the magnitude and spatial distribution than the PIcontrol run. Furthermore, the simulation biases in SWCRF and LWCRF feedbacks were linked to the biases in the representation of the corresponding total cloud cover and precipitation feedbacks. It is interesting to further find that the simulation bias originating in the atmospheric component was amplified in the PIcontrol run, indicating that the coupling aggravated the simulation bias. Since the PIcontrol run exhibited an apparent mean SST cold bias over the cold tongue, the precipitation response to the SST anomaly (SSTA) changes during the ENSO cycle occurred towards the relatively warmer western equatorial Pacific. Thus, the corresponding cloud cover and CRF shifted westward and showed a weaker magnitude in the PI-control run versus observational data. In contrast, the AMIP run was forced by the observational SST, hence representing a more realistic CRF. Our results demonstrate the challenges of simulating CRF in coupled models. This study also underscores the necessity of realistically representing the climatological mean state when simulating CRF during the ENSO cycle.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Bony, S., and J.-L. Dufresne, 2005: Marine boundary layer clouds at the heart of tropical cloud feedback uncertainties in climate models. Geophys. Res. Lett., 32, L20806, doi: https://doi.org/10.1029/2005GL023851.
Cess, R. D., G. L. Potter, J. P. Blanchet, et al., 1990: Intercomparison and interpretation of climate feedback processes in 19 atmospheric general circulation models. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos., 95, 16601–16615, doi: https://doi.org/10.1029/JD095iD10p16601.
Chen, L., and Y. Q. Yu, 2014: Preliminary evaluations of ENSO-related cloud and water vapor feedbacks in FGOALS. Flexible Global Ocean—Atmosphere—Land System Model: A Modeling Tool for the Climate Change Research Community, T. J. Zhou, Y. Q. Yu, Y. M. Liu, et al., Eds., Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 189–197, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41801-3_23.
Chen, L., Y. Q. Yu, and D.-Z. Sun, 2013: Cloud and water vapor feedbacks to the El Niño warming: Are they still biased in CMIP5 models? J. Climate, 26, 4947–4961, doi: https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00575.1.
Chen, L., Y. Q. Yu, and W. P. Zheng, 2016: Improved ENSO simulation from climate system model FGOALS-g1.0 to FGOALS-g2. Climate Dyn., 41, 2617–2634, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-016-2988-8.
Chen, L., T. Li, Y. Q. Yu, et al., 2017: A possible explanation for the divergent projection of ENSO amplitude change under global warming. Climate Dyn., 49, 3799–3811, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-017-3544-x.
Chen, L., D.-Z. Sun, L. Wang, et al., 2018a: A further study on the simulation of cloud-radiative feedbacks in the ENSO cycle in the tropical pacific with a focus on the asymmetry. Asia-Pacific J. Atmos. Sci., 55, 303–316, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13143-018-0064-5.
Chen, L., L. Wang, T. Li, et al., 2018b: Contrasting cloud radiative feedbacks during warm pool and cold tongue El Niños. SOLA, 14, 126–131, doi: https://doi.org/10.2151/sola.2018-022.
Chen, M. C., T. Li, X. Shen, et al., 2016: Relative roles of dynamic and thermodynamic processes in causing evolution asymmetry between El Niño and La Nina. J. Climate, 29, 2201–2220, doi: https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-15-0547.1.
Dai, Y. J., X. B. Zeng, R. E. Dickinson, et al., 2003: The common land model. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 84, 1013–1024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-84-8-1013.
Dee, D. P., S. M. Uppala, A. J. Simmons, et al., 2011: The ERA-Interim reanalysis: Configuration and performance of the data assimilation system. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 337, 553–597, doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.828.
Fang, X.-H., F. Zheng, and J. Zhu, 2015: The cloud-radiative effect when simulating strength asymmetry in two types of El Niño events using CMIP5 models. J. Geophys. Res. Oceans, 120, 4357–4369, doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JC010683.
Ferrett, S., and M. Collins, 2016: ENSO feedbacks and their relationships with the mean state in a flux adjusted ensemble. Climate Dyn., 52, 7189–7208, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-016-3270-9.
Ferrett, S., M. Collins, and H.-L. Ren, 2018: Diagnosing relationships between mean state biases and El Niño shortwave feedback in CMIP5 models. J. Climate, 31, 1315–1335, doi: https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0331.1.
Griffies, S. M., M. J. Harrison, P. C. Pacanowski, et al., 2004: A technical guide to MOM-4. GFDL Ocean Group Technical Report No. 5, Princeton, NJ, NOAA/Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory, 339 pp.
Guilyardi, E., P. Braconnot, F.-F. Jin, et al., 2009: Atmosphere feedbacks during ENSO in a coupled GCM with a modified atmospheric convection scheme. J. Climate, 22, 5698–5718, doi: https://doi.org/10.1175/2009JCLI2815.1.
Houghton, J. T., Y. Ding, D. J. Griggs, et al., 2001: Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 881 pp.
Hua, L. J., and L. Chen, 2019: ENSO asymmetry in the CAMS-CSM. Asia—Pacific J. Atmos. Sci., 55, 507–528, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13143-018-00102-9.
Hua, L. J., L. Chen, X. Y. Rong, et al., 2018: Impact of atmospheric model resolution on simulation of ENSO feedback processes: A coupled model study. Climate Dyn., 51, 3077–3092, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-017-4066-2.
Hua, L. J., L. Chen, X. Y. Rong, et al., 2019: An assessment of ENSO stability in CAMS climate system model simulations. J. Meteor. Res., 33, 80–88, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13351-018-8092-8.
Huffman, G. J., R. F. Adler, D. T. Bolvin, et al., 2009: Improving the global precipitation record: GPCP version 2.1. Geophys. Res. Lett., 36, L17808, doi: https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GL040000.
Kim, D., J. S. Kug, I. S. Kang, et al., 2008: Tropical Pacific impacts of convective momentum transport in the SNU coupled GCM. Climate Dyn., 31, 213–226, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-007-0348-4.
Kim, S. T., and F.-F. Jin, 2011a: An ENSO stability analysis. Part I: Results from a hybrid coupled model. Climate Dyn., 36, 1593–1607, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-010-0796-0.
Kim, S. T., and F.-F. Jin, 2011b: An ENSO stability analysis. Part II: Results from the twentieth and twenty-first century simulations of the CMIP3 model. Climate Dyn., 36, 1609–1627, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-010-0872-5.
Kim, S. T., W. J. Ca, F.-F. Jin, et al., 2014: ENSO stability in coupled climate models and its association with mean state. Climate Dyn., 42, 3313–3321, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-013-1833-6.
Li, G., and G. J. Zhang, 2008: Understanding biases in shortwave cloud radiative forcing in the National Center for Atmospheric Research Community Atmosphere Model (CAM3) during El Niño. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos., 113, D02103, doi: https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD008963.
Li, L. J., B. Wang, and G. J. Zhang, 2014: The role of nonconvective condensation processes in response of surface shortwave cloud radiative forcing to El Niño warming. J. Climate, 23, 6721–6736, doi: https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-13-00632.1.
Li, L. J., B. Wang, and G. J. Zhang, 2015: The role of moist processes in shortwave radiative feedback during ENSO in the CMIP5 models. J. Climate, 28, 9892–9908, doi: https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-15-0276.1.
Li, T. M., 1997: Phase transition of the El Niño—Southern oscillation: A stationary SST mode. J. Atmos. Sci., 54, 2872–2887, doi: https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1997)054<2872:PTOTEN>2.0.CO;2.
Lin, J.-L., 2007: The double-ITCZ problem in IPCC AR4 coupled GCMs: Ocean-atmosphere feedback analysis. J. Climate, 20, 4497–4525, doi: https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI4272.1.
Lloyd, J., E. Guilyardi, H. Weller, et al., 2009: The role of atmosphere feedbacks during ENSO in the CMIP3 models. Atmos. Sci. Lett., 10, 170–176, doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/asl.227.
Lloyd, J., E. Guilyardi, and H. Weller, 2011: The role of atmosphere feedbacks during ENSO in the CMIP3 models. Part II: Using AMIP runs to understand the heat flux feedback mechanisms. Climate Dyn., 37, 1271–1292, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-010-0895-y.
Lloyd, J., E. Guilyardi, and H. Weller, 2012: The role of atmosphere feedbacks during ENSO in the CMIP3 models. Part III: The shortwave flux feedback. J. Climate, 25, 4275–1293, doi: https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-11-00178.1.
Pu, Y., Y.-L. Tang, and L. J. Li, 2016: Effects of the coupling process on shortwave radiative feedback during ENSO in FGOALS-g. Atmos. Oceanic Sci. Lett., 9, 337–342, doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/16742834.2016.1192454.
Randall, D. A., R. A. Wood, S. Bony, et al., 2007: Climate Models and Their Evaluation. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, S. D. Solomon, D. Qin, M. Manning, et al., Eds., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 589–662.
Rayner, N. A., D. E. Parker, E. B. Horton, et al., 2003: Global analyses of sea surface temperature, sea ice, and night marine air temperature since the late nineteenth century. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos., 108, 4407, doi: https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002670.
Roeckner, E., G. Bäuml, L. Bonaventura, et al., 2003: The Atmospheric General Circulation Model ECHAM5. Part I: Model Description. Max-Planck-Institut for Meteorologie, Rep. 349. Max Planck Institute for Meteorology, Hamburg, 127 pp.
Rong, X. Y., J. Li, H. M. Chen, et al., 2018: The CAMS climate system model and a basic evaluation of its climatology and climate variability simulation. J. Meteor. Res., 32, 839–861, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13351-018-8058-x.
Soden, B. J., and I. M. Held, 2006: An assessment of climate feedbacks in coupled ocean-atmosphere models. J. Climate, 19, 3354–3360, doi: https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI3799.1.
Soden, B. J., and G. A. Vecchi, 2011: The vertical distribution of cloud feedback in coupled ocean-atmosphere models. Geophys. Res. Lett., 38, L12704, doi: https://doi.org/10.1029/2011GL047632.
Stephens, G. L., 2005: Cloud feedbacks in the climate system: A critical review. J. Climate, 18, 237–273, doi: 10.1175JJCLI-3243.1.
Su, J. Z., R. H. Zhang, T. Li, et al., 2010: Causes of the El Niño and La Nina amplitude asymmetry in the equatorial eastern Pacific. J. Climate, 23, 605–617, doi: https://doi.org/10.1175/2009JCLI2894.1.
Sun, D.-Z., J. Fasullo, T. Zhang, et al., 2003: On the radiative and dynamical feedbacks over the equatorial Pacific cold tongue. J. Climate, 16, 2425–2432, doi: https://doi.org/10.1175/2786.1.
Sun, D.-Z., T. Zhang, C. Covey, et al., 2006: Radiative and dynamical feedbacks over the equatorial cold tongue: Results from nine atmospheric GCMs. J. Climate, 19, 4059–4074, doi: https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI3835.1.
Sun, D.-Z., Y. Q. Yu, and T. Zhang, 2009: Tropical water vapor and cloud feedbacks in climate models: A further assessment using coupled simulations. J. Climate, 22, 1287–1304, doi: https://doi.org/10.1175/2008JCLI2267.1.
Tang, Y. L., L. J. Li, W. J. Dong, et al., 2016: Tracing the source of ENSO simulation differences to the atmospheric component of two CGCMs. Atmos. Sci. Lett., 17, 155–161, doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/asl.637.
Toniazzo, T., M. Collins, and J. Brown, 2008: The variation of ENSO characteristics associated with atmospheric parameter perturbations in a coupled model. Climate Dyn., 30, 643–656, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-007-0313-2.
Wang, L., T. J. Zhou, J. Li, et al., 2019: Convectively coupled equatorial waves simulated by CAMS-CSM model. J. Meteor. Res., 33, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13351-019-9021-1. (in press)
Winton, M., 2000: A reformulated three-layer sea ice model. J. Atmos. Ocean. Technol., 17, 525–531, doi: https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0426(2000)017<0525:ARTLSI>2.0.CO;2.
Wu, C. Q., T. J. Zhou, D.-Z. Sun, et al., 2011: Water vapor and cloud radiative forcings over the Pacific Ocean simulated by the LASG/IAP AGCM: Sensitivity to convection schemes. Atmos. Adv. Sci., 28, 80–98, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00376-010-9205-1.
Xie, S.-P., C. Deser, G. A. Vecchi, et al., 2010: Global warming pattern formation: Sea surface temperature and rainfall. J. Climate, 23, 966–986, doi: https://doi.org/10.1175/2009JCLI3329.1.
Zhang, T., and D.-Z. Sun, 2006: Response of water vapor and clouds to El Niño warming in three National Center for Atmospheric Research atmospheric models. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos., 111, D17103, doi: https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD006700.
Zhang, T., and D.-Z. Sun, 2008: What causes the excessive response of clear-sky greenhouse effect to El Niño warming in Community Atmosphere Models? J. Geophys. Res. Atmos., 113, D02108, doi: https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD009247.
Zhang, Y. C., W. B. Rossow, A. A. Lacis, et al., 2004: Calculation of radiative fluxes from the surface to top of atmosphere based on ISCCP and other global data sets: Refinements of the radiative transfer model and the input data. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos., 109, D19105, doi: https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD004457.
Zheng, F., X.-H. Fang, J.-Y. Yu, et al., 2014: Asymmetry of the Bjerknes positive feedback between the two types of El Niño. Geophys. Res. Lett., 11, 7651–7657, doi: https://doi.org/10.1022/0014GL062125.