4.7 Article

Tropical Clouds and Circulation Changes during the 2006/07 and 2009/10 El Ninos

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLIMATE
卷 26, 期 2, 页码 399-413

出版社

AMER METEOROLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00152.1

关键词

-

资金

  1. NASA

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Changes in tropical cloud vertical structure, cloud radiative forcing (CRF), and circulation exhibit distinctly different characteristics during the 2006/07 and 2009/10 El Ninos, revealed by CloudSat and Cloud-Aerosol Lidar and Infrared Pathfinder Satellite (CALIPSO) observations and reanalysis data. On the tropical average, the 2009/10 has a decrease of clouds from 2 to 14 km, an increase of clouds in the boundary layer, and an increase of cirrus clouds above 14 km. The tropical-mean cloud anomalies in the middle to upper troposphere (6-14 km) for the 2006/07 El Nino are nearly opposite to those in 2009/10 El Nino. The tropical averaged net CRF anomaly at the top of the atmosphere (TOA) is 0.6-0.7 W m(-2) cooling (0.02-0.5 W m(-2) warming) for the 2009/10 (2006/07) El Nino. The 2009/10 El Nino is associated with a strengthening of tropical circulation, increased high (low) clouds in extremely strong ascending (descending) regimes, and decreased clouds in the middle and high altitudes in a broad range of moderate circulation regimes. The strengthening of tropical circulation is primarily caused by the enhancement of the Hadley circulation. The 2006/07 El Nino is associated with a weakening of the tropical circulation, primarily caused by the reduction of the Walker circulation. The cloud anomalies in each circulation regime are approximately opposite for these two El Ninos. The analysis herein suggests that both the magnitude and pattern of sea surface temperature anomalies in the two events contribute to the differences in clouds and circulation anomalies, with magnitude playing a dominant role. The contrasting behaviors of the two El Ninos highlight the nonlinear response of tropical clouds and circulation to El Nino SST forcing.

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

4.7
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