%AGarfinkel, Chaim [Fredy and Nadine Herrmann Institute of Earth Sciences Hebrew University Jerusalem Israel]%AWhite, Ian [Fredy and Nadine Herrmann Institute of Earth Sciences Hebrew University Jerusalem Israel]%AGerber, Edwin [Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences New York University New York NY USA]%AAdam, Ori [Fredy and Nadine Herrmann Institute of Earth Sciences Hebrew University Jerusalem Israel]%AJucker, Martin [Climate Change Research Center and ARC Centre of Excellence for Climate Extremes University of New South Wales Sydney NSW Australia]%BJournal Name: Geophysical Research Letters; Journal Volume: 48; Journal Issue: 14; Related Information: CHORUS Timestamp: 2023-08-25 03:13:35 %D2021%IDOI PREFIX: 10.1029 %JJournal Name: Geophysical Research Letters; Journal Volume: 48; Journal Issue: 14; Related Information: CHORUS Timestamp: 2023-08-25 03:13:35 %K %MOSTI ID: 10367813 %PMedium: X %TNonlinear Interaction Between the Drivers of the Monsoon and Summertime Stationary Waves %XAbstract

A moist General Circulation Model is used to investigate the forcing of the Asian monsoon and the associated upper level anticyclone by land‐sea contrast, net horizontal oceanic heat transport, and topography. The monsoonal pattern is not simply the linear additive sum of the response to each forcing; only when all three forcings are included simultaneously does the monsoonal circulation extend westward to India. This nonadditivity impacts the location of the upper level anticyclone, which is shifted eastward and weaker if the forcings are imposed individually. Sahelian precipitation, and also austral summer precipitation over Australia, southern Africa, and South America, are likewise stronger if all forcings are imposed simultaneously. The source of the nonlinearity can be diagnosed using gross moist stability, but appears inconsistent with the land‐sea breeze paradigm. This non‐additivity implies that the question of which forcing is most important may be ill‐posed in many regions.

%0Journal Article