4.6 Article

Relationships between autumn precipitation anomalies in southeastern South America and El Nino event classification

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLIMATOLOGY
卷 29, 期 5, 页码 719-727

出版社

JOHN WILEY & SONS LTD
DOI: 10.1002/joc.1734

关键词

South America; precipitation; El Nino; tropical Pacific Ocean

资金

  1. Agencia Nacional de Promocion Cientifica y Tecnologica [PICT BID 1728 OC-AR 14202]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The classification of El Nino events was performed based on the time evolution of sea surface warming in the tropical Pacific Ocean during the period 1950-2000. Two sets of events were constructed: one in which the warming core migrates eastward along the tropical Pacific until April-June of the following year, and another one in which it evolves westward until November-January. The first type has associated positive precipitation anomalies over southeastern South America during April-June. It results from a favourable combination of cyclonic vorticity advection and humidity convergence. At high levels, cyclonic vorticity advection is explained in terms of an eastward extension of the subtropical jet. Enhanced humidity advection takes place by an increased low-level northwesterly flow to the east of the Andes. It provides enough moisture availability that, in combination with the upper-level cyclonic vorticity advection, supports heavy precipitation during April-June. The second type of event exhibits slight negative or near-normal precipitation anomalies over the same region. Both low and high-level circulation anomalies are also weaker in this case. The 1997-1998 El Nino is analysed separately because it cannot be classified into any of the previously described event types. The observed distribution of both types of events along the analysed period changes after the 1970s. Comparison with other authors' results suggests the influence of low-frequency processes such as the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO). Copyright (C) 2008 Royal Meteorological Society

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