4.7 Article

Last Glacial Maximum East Asian Monsoon: Results of PMIP Simulations

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLIMATE
Volume 23, Issue 18, Pages 5030-5038

Publisher

AMER METEOROLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1175/2010JCLI3526.1

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Chinese National Basic Research Program [2009CB421407]
  2. National Key Technologies RD Program [2007BAC03A01]
  3. National Natural Science Foundation [40975050, 40775052]
  4. CEA
  5. CNRS
  6. EU [EVK2-CT-2002-00153]
  7. Programme National d'Etude de la Dynamique du Climat (PNEDC)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

During glacial periods, the East Asian monsoon is typically thought to have been stronger in boreal winters and weaker in boreal summers. It is unclear, however, whether this view is true at larger scales and to what extent the East Asian monsoon responds to glacial conditions as a whole. Using all experiments conducted as part of the Paleoclimate Modeling Intercomparison Project (PMIP), this paper examines East Asian monsoon climatology during the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM), around 21 000 calendar years ago. In contrast to conclusions drawn from sparse proxy data, the intensity of the East Asian winter (December-February) monsoon (EAWM) during the LGM, as measured by regionally averaged meridional wind speed at 850 hPa, was found to vary both in sign and magnitude, with reference to baseline climate, across the PMIP simulations. It strengthened in 10 out of the 21 models but weakened in the remaining 11 models, with an average weakening of 4% for the 21-model ensemble mean (15% for the ensemble mean of the 14 models with computed sea surface temperatures). At the subregional scale, the LGM EAWM strengthened north of about 30 degrees N but weakened south of this region in East Asia, which can be explained by changes in surface temperature. On the other hand, all of the 14 models chosen in this study consistently simulated a weaker than baseline East Asian summer (June-August) monsoon during the LGM, with an average weakening of 25%.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available