4.8 Article

Steering of westerly storms over western North America at the Last Glacial Maximum

期刊

NATURE GEOSCIENCE
卷 8, 期 3, 页码 201-205

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/NGEO2365

关键词

-

资金

  1. CEA
  2. CNRS
  3. PNEDC
  4. US Department of Energy
  5. National Science Foundation [AGS1203701, EAR0921134]
  6. Directorate For Geosciences
  7. Div Atmospheric & Geospace Sciences [1203701] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The hydroclimate history of North America includes the formation and desiccation of large inland lakes and the growth and ablation of glaciers throughout the Quaternary period. At the Last Glacial Maximum, expanded pluvial lakes in the south(1,2) and aridity in the northwest(3) suggest that the winter westerly storm track was displaced southwards and migrated northwards as the Laurentide Ice Sheet waned(4). However, lake highstands do not occur synchronously along zonal bands(5), in conflict with this hypothesis. Here we compile a network of precipitation proxy reconstructions from lakes, speleothems, groundwater deposits, packrat middens and glaciers from the western and southwestern US, which we compare with an ensemble of climate simulations to identify the controls of regional hydroclimatic change. The proxy records suggest a precipitation dipole during the Last Glacial Maximum, with wetter than modern conditions in the southwest and drier conditions near the ice sheet, and a northwest-southeast trending transition zone across the northern Great Basin. The models that simulate a weaker and south-shifted Aleutian low-pressure system, a strong North Pacific high-pressure system, and a high above the ice sheet best reproduce this regional variation. We therefore conclude that rather than a uniformly south-shifted storm track, a stronger jet that is squeezed and steered across the continent by high-pressure systems best explains the observed regional hydroclimate patterns of the Last Glacial Maximum.

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

4.8
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