4.6 Article

The influence of the Amundsen Sea Low on the winds in the Ross Sea and surroundings: Insights from a synoptic climatology

期刊

JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH-ATMOSPHERES
卷 120, 期 6, 页码 2167-2189

出版社

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1002/2014JD022830

关键词

Antarctica; Amundsen Sea Low; Ross Ice Shelf; surface wind; cyclone

资金

  1. New Zealand Antarctic Research Institute
  2. University of Canterbury Doctoral Scholarship
  3. New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade Ross Sea Dependency Scholarship

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Amundsen Sea Low (ASL) is an area of climatologically low atmospheric pressure situated over the Southern Ocean. The depth and location of this feature have significant effects on winds, temperature, moisture transport, and sea ice in its vicinity. In this article, we quantify the modulating effect of this feature on winds over the Ross Sea and Ross Ice Shelf. We examine composites of surface winds sampled according to extrema in ASL depth, longitude, and latitude. We employ the output of a previously developed synoptic climatology to identify the explanatory synoptic-scale forcings. In autumn, winter, and spring (AWS) we find that the impact of the depth of the ASL is smaller than that of its location. The ASL moves eastward when it is deep, thereby reducing its influence on Ross Sea winds. When the ASL is northward, we find strongly enhanced southerly flows over the Ross Sea and Ice Shelf, forced by greater cyclonic activity in the north of the Ross Sea. In summer, we find increased cyclonic flow coinciding with a deeper ASL, despite the ASL being located in the Bellingshausen Sea at this time. The responses to the ASL longitude and latitude are profoundly different to those in AWS, suggesting that relationships are strongly dependent on the varying seasonal location of the low. We examine two metrics of the ASL depth and identify that the absolute mean sea level pressure (MSLP) has a more widespread response than that of the relative MSLP.

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