4.6 Review

Importance of mean state in simulating different types of El Nino revealed by SNU coupled GCMs

期刊

PROGRESS IN OCEANOGRAPHY
卷 116, 期 -, 页码 130-141

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.pocean.2013.07.005

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Research Foundation of Korea
  2. Korean Government (MEST) [NRF-2009-C1AAA001-2009-0093]
  3. KIOST [PE98915, PE98991]
  4. Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information [KSC-2012-C2-25]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recent studies suggest that there are two types of El Nth events, which differ in terms of zonal distribution of sea-surface temperature (SST) anomalies. In this study, we investigate mechanisms in controlling simulation of two-types of El Nino using three different versions of the Seoul National University (SNU) air-sea coupled general circulation models. The occurrences of two types of El Nino are related to the simulated climatological SST over the eastern Pacific. It is found that a model with relatively less canonical (or frequent Warm Pool or Central Pacific) El Nino occurrence has colder cold tongue in the equatorial central Pacific. Due to the cold mean SST and associated dryness over the eastern Pacific, positive El Nino-related SST anomalies over the eastern Pacific cannot trigger local convection effectively. The eastern Pacific dryness leads to the confinement of anomalous convective activity in the western Pacific, which results in weak canonical El Nino and reduction in canonical El Nino occurrence. Instead, the confined convective activity in the western Pacific can lead to strong SST anomalies over western-central Pacific through local air-sea interaction, which can increase Warm Pool (WP) El Nino occurrence. In addition, we found that mean equatorial thermocline structure is also related to the occurrences of WP El Nino and canonical El Nino that is, a model with deep thermocline depth simulates less WP El Nino occurrence, consistent with Yeh et al. (2009). (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据