4.5 Article

Summer Land-Atmosphere Coupling Strength in the United States: Comparison among Observations, Reanalysis Data, and Numerical Models

Journal

JOURNAL OF HYDROMETEOROLOGY
Volume 13, Issue 3, Pages 1010-1022

Publisher

AMER METEOROLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1175/JHM-D-11-075.1

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NOAA CPPA [NA08OAR4310871]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study examines the land atmosphere coupling strength during summer over subregions of the United States based on observations [Climate Prediction Center (CPC) Variable Infiltration Capacity (VIC)], reanalysis data [North American Regional Reanalysis (NARR) and NCEP Climate Forecast System Reanalysis (CFSR)], and models [Community Atmosphere Model, version 3 (CAM3) Community Land Model, version 3 (CLM3) and CAM4-CLM4]. The probability density function of conditioned correlation between soil moisture and subsequent precipitation or surface temperature during the years of large precipitation anomalies is used as a measure for the coupling strength. There are three major findings: 1) among the eight subregions (classified by land cover types), the transition zone Great Plains (and, to a lesser extent, the Midwest and Southeast) are identified as hot spots for strong land atmosphere coupling; 2) soil moisture-precipitation coupling is weaker than soil moisture surface temperature coupling; and 3) the coupling strength is stronger in observational and reanalysis products than in the models examined, especially in CAM4-CLM4. The conditioned correlation analysis also indicates that the coupling strength in CAM4-CLM4 is weaker than in CAM3 CLM3, which is further supported by Global Land Atmosphere Coupling Experiments1 (GLACE1)-type experiments and attributed to changes in CAM rather than modifications in CLM. Contrary to suggestions in previous studies, CAM-CLM models do not seem to overestimate the land-atmosphere coupling strength.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available