Search for: All records

Abstract The Oyashio Extension (OE) frontal zone in the northwest Pacific Ocean is associated with strong gradients of sea surface temperature (SST) and salinity. The OE front enhances baroclinicity and anchors the storm tracks; changes in its position and strength may impact atmospheric variability. North–south shifts in the OE front are often defined using the leading principal component for the latitude of the absolute maximum SST gradient in the northwest Pacific (145°–170°E), the so-called Oyashio Extension index (OEI). We show that the OEI is sensitive to the choice of SST dataset used in its construction, and that the significance of regressions of atmospheric fields onto the OEI also depends on the choice of SST datasets, leading to nonrobust results. This sensitivity primarily stems from the longitudinal domain used to define the OEI including a region with parallel or indistinct frontal zones in its central section (155°–164°E), leading to divergent results across datasets. We introduce a new index that considers the extent to which the SST front across this central section departs from climatology, the frontal disturbance index (FDI). For the months considered and over short time lags, the FDI produces more consistent results on air–sea interactions and associated high-frequency storm-track metrics than the conventional OEI, with a southward shift of the storm track for a more positive FDI. The FDI appears to be related to oceanic mesoscale eddy activity in the central OE region. There are significant asymmetric associations between the FDI and storm-track metrics dependent on the sign of the FDI. Significance StatementIn this study, we aim to understand how the choice of dataset may influence the interpretation of interactions between the ocean and the overlying atmosphere near sea surface temperature (SST) fronts. We find that using different SST datasets affects the results, due to slight differences in the representation of the location of the maximum SST gradient. To understand this, we develop a new index which relates to the degree of disturbance of the SST front. The new index produces regression results that are more consistent across the different datasets. We also identify some possible links between the frontal disturbance and the presence of ocean eddies. We advise that the sensitivity to dataset choice is given due consideration in regions near SST fronts. 

Abstract The models that participated in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) exhibit large biases in Arctic sea ice climatology that seem related to biases in seasonal atmospheric and oceanic circulations. Using historical runs of 34 CMIP6 models from 1979 to 2014, we investigate the links between the climatological sea ice concentration (SIC) biases in September and atmospheric and oceanic model climatologies. The main intermodel spread of September SIC is well described by two leading EOFs, which together explain ∼65% of its variance. The first EOF represents an underestimation or overestimation of SIC in the whole Arctic, while the second EOF describes opposite SIC biases in the Atlantic and Pacific sectors. Regression analysis indicates that the two SIC modes are closely related to departures from the multimodel mean of Arctic surface heat fluxes during summer, primarily shortwave and longwave radiation, with incoming Atlantic Water playing a role in the Atlantic sector. Local and global links with summer cloud cover, low-level humidity, upper or lower troposphere temperature/circulation, and oceanic variables are also found. As illustrated for three climate models, the local relationships with the SIC biases are mostly similar in the Arctic across the models but show varying degrees of Atlantic inflow influence. On a global scale, a strong influence of the summer atmospheric circulation on September SIC is suggested for one of the three models, while the atmospheric influence is primarily via thermodynamics in the other two. Clear links to the North Atlantic oceanic circulation are seen in one of the models. 

Abstract The observed winter Barents-Kara Sea (BKS) sea ice concentration (SIC) has shown a close association with the second empirical orthogonal function (EOF) mode of Eurasian winter surface air temperature (SAT) variability, known as Warm Arctic Cold Eurasia (WACE) pattern. However, the potential role of BKS SIC on this WACE pattern of variability and on its long-term trend remains elusive. Here, we show that from 1979 to 2022, the winter BKS SIC and WACE association is most prominent and statistically significant for the variability at the sub-decadal time scale for 5–6 years. We also show the critical role of the multi-decadal trend in the principal component of the WACE mode of variability for explaining the overall Eurasian winter temperature trend over the same period. Furthermore, a large multi-model ensemble of atmosphere-only experiments from 1979 to 2014, with and without the observed Arctic SIC forcing, suggests that the BKS SIC variations induce this observed sub-decadal variability and the multi-decadal trend in the WACE. Additionally, we analyse the model simulated first or the leading EOF mode of Eurasian winter SAT variability, which in observations, closely relates to the Arctic Oscillation (AO). We find a weaker association of this mode to AO and a statistically significant positive trend in our ensemble simulation, opposite to that found in observation. This contrasting nature reflects excessive hemispheric warming in the models, partly contributed by the modelled Arctic Sea ice loss. 

Abstract. The main drivers of the continental Northern Hemisphere snow cover are investigated in the 1979–2014 period. Four observational datasets are usedas are two large multi-model ensembles of atmosphere-only simulations with prescribed sea surface temperature (SST) and sea ice concentration (SIC). Afirst ensemble uses observed interannually varying SST and SIC conditions for 1979–2014, while a second ensemble is identical except for SIC witha repeated climatological cycle used. SST and external forcing typically explain 10 % to 25 % of the snow cover variance in modelsimulations, with a dominant forcing from the tropical and North Pacific SST during this period. In terms of the climate influence of the snow coveranomalies, both observations and models show no robust links between the November and April snow cover variability and the atmospheric circulation1 month later. On the other hand, the first mode of Eurasian snow cover variability in January, with more extended snow over western Eurasia, isfound to precede an atmospheric circulation pattern by 1 month, similar to a negative Arctic oscillation (AO). A decomposition of the variabilityin the model simulations shows that this relationship is mainly due to internal climate variability. Detailed outputs from one of the modelsindicate that the western Eurasia snow cover anomalies are preceded by a negative AO phase accompanied by a Ural blocking pattern and astratospheric polar vortex weakening. The link between the AO and the snow cover variability is strongly related to the concomitant role of thestratospheric polar vortex, with the Eurasian snow cover acting as a positive feedback for the AO variability in winter. No robust influence of theSIC variability is found, as the sea ice loss in these simulations only drives an insignificant fraction of the snow cover anomalies, with fewagreements among models. 

Abstract Arctic Ocean warming and sea ice loss are closely linked to increased ocean heat transport (OHT) into the Arctic and changes in surface heat fluxes. To quantitatively assess their respective roles, we use the 100-member Community Earth System Model, version 2 (CESM2), Large Ensemble over the 1920–2100 period. We first examine the Arctic Ocean warming in a heat budget framework by calculating the contributions from heat exchanges with atmosphere and sea ice and OHT across the Arctic Ocean gateways. Then we quantify how much anomalous heat from the ocean directly translates to sea ice loss and how much is lost to the atmosphere. We find that Arctic Ocean warming is driven primarily by increased OHT through the Barents Sea Opening, with additional contributions from the Fram Strait and Bering Strait OHTs. These OHT changes are driven mainly by warmer inflowing water rather than changes in volume transports across the gateways. The Arctic Ocean warming driven by OHT is partially damped by increased heat loss through the sea surface. Although absorbed shortwave radiation increases due to reduced surface albedo, this increase is compensated by increasing upwelling longwave radiation and latent heat loss. We also explicitly calculate the contributions of ocean–ice and atmosphere–ice heat fluxes to sea ice heat budget changes. Throughout the entire twentieth century as well as the early twenty-first century, the atmosphere is the main contributor to ice heat gain in summer, though the ocean’s role is not negligible. Over time, the ocean progressively becomes the main heat source for the ice as the ocean warms. Significance StatementArctic Ocean warming and sea ice loss are closely linked to increased ocean heat transport (OHT) into the Arctic and changes in surface heat fluxes. Here we use 100 simulations from the same climate model to analyze future warming and sea ice loss. We find that Arctic Ocean warming is primarily driven by increased OHT through the Barents Sea Opening, though the Fram and Bering Straits are also important. This increased OHT is primarily due to warmer inflowing water rather than changing ocean currents. This ocean heat gain is partially compensated by heat loss through the sea surface. During the twentieth century and early twenty-first century, sea ice loss is mainly linked to heat transferred from the atmosphere; however, over time, the ocean progressively becomes the most important contributor. 

Abstract This study uses observational and reanalysis datasets in 1980–2016 to show a close connection between a boreal autumn sea ice dipole in the Arctic Pacific sector and sea ice anomalies in the Barents Sea (BS) during the following spring. The September–October Arctic Pacific sea ice dipole variations are highly correlated with the subsequent April–May BS sea ice variations ( r = 0.71). The strong connection between the regional sea ice variabilities across the Arctic uncovers a new source of predictability for spring BS sea ice prediction at 7-month lead time. A cross-validated linear regression prediction model using the Arctic Pacific sea ice dipole with 7-month lead time is demonstrated to have significant prediction skills with 0.54–0.85 anomaly correlation coefficients. The autumn sea ice dipole, manifested as sea ice retreat in the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas and expansion in the East Siberian and Laptev Seas, is primarily forced by preceding atmospheric shortwave anomalies from late spring to early autumn. The spring BS sea ice increases are mostly driven by an ocean-to-sea ice heat flux reduction in preceding months, associated with reduced horizontal ocean heat transport into the BS. The dynamical linkage between the two regional sea ice anomalies is suggested to involve positive stratospheric polar cap anomalies during autumn and winter, with its center slowly moving toward Greenland. The migration of the stratospheric anomalies is followed in midwinter by a negative North Atlantic Oscillation–like pattern in the troposphere, leading to reduced ocean heat transport into the BS and sea ice extent increase. 

Abstract To examine the atmospheric responses to Arctic sea-ice variability in the Northern Hemisphere cold season (October to following March), this study uses a coordinated set of large-ensemble experiments of nine atmospheric general circulation models (AGCMs) forced with observed daily-varying sea-ice, sea-surface temperature, and radiative forcings prescribed during the 1979-2014 period, together with a parallel set of experiments where Arctic sea ice is substituted by its climatology. The simulations of the former set reproduce the near-surface temperature trends in reanalysis data, with similar amplitude, and their multi-model ensemble mean (MMEM) shows decreasing sea-level pressure over much of the polar cap and Eurasia in boreal autumn. The MMEM difference between the two experiments allows isolating the effects of Arctic sea-ice loss, which explain a large portion of the Arctic warming trends in the lower troposphere and drives a small but statistically significant weakening of the wintertime Arctic Oscillation. The observed interannual co-variability between sea-ice extent in the Barents-Kara Seas and lagged atmospheric circulation is distinguished from the effects of confounding factors based on multiple regression, and quantitatively compared to the co-variability in MMEMs. The interannual sea-ice decline followed by a negative North Atlantic Oscillation-like anomaly found in observations is also seen in the MMEM differences, with consistent spatial structure but much smaller amplitude. This result suggests that the sea-ice impacts on trends and interannual atmospheric variability simulated by AGCMs could be underestimated, but caution is needed because internal atmospheric variability may have affected the observed relationship. 

Abstract This study investigates the stratospheric response to Arctic sea ice loss and subsequent near-surface impacts by analyzing 200-member coupled experiments using the Whole Atmosphere Community Climate Model version 6 (WACCM6) with preindustrial, present-day, and future sea ice conditions specified following the protocol of the Polar Amplification Model Intercomparison Project. The stratospheric polar vortex weakens significantly in response to the prescribed sea ice loss, with a larger response to greater ice loss (i.e., future minus preindustrial) than to smaller ice loss (i.e., future minus present-day). Following the weakening of the stratospheric circulation in early boreal winter, the coupled stratosphere–troposphere response to ice loss strengthens in late winter and early spring, projecting onto a negative North Atlantic Oscillation–like pattern in the lower troposphere. To investigate whether the stratospheric response to sea ice loss and subsequent surface impacts depend on the background oceanic state, ensemble members are initialized by a combination of varying phases of Atlantic multidecadal variability (AMV) and interdecadal Pacific variability (IPV). Different AMV and IPV states combined, indeed, can modulate the stratosphere–troposphere responses to sea ice loss, particularly in the North Atlantic sector. Similar experiments with another climate model show that, although strong sea ice forcing also leads to tighter stratosphere–troposphere coupling than weak sea ice forcing, the timing of the response differs from that in WACCM6. Our findings suggest that Arctic sea ice loss can affect the stratospheric circulation and subsequent tropospheric variability on seasonal time scales, but modulation by the background oceanic state and model dependence need to be taken into account. Significance StatementThis study uses new-generation climate models to better understand the impacts of Arctic sea ice loss on the surface climate in the midlatitudes, including North America, Europe, and Siberia. We focus on the stratosphere–troposphere pathway, which involves the weakening of stratospheric winds and its downward coupling into the troposphere. Our results show that Arctic sea ice loss can affect the surface climate in the midlatitudes via the stratosphere–troposphere pathway, and highlight the modulations from background mean oceanic states as well as model dependence.