4.6 Article

Response of North Pacific storm tracks to multiscale SST anomalies in a stable state of the Kuroshio extension system during the cold season

期刊

FRONTIERS IN EARTH SCIENCE
卷 10, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/feart.2022.986942

关键词

Kuroshio Extension; multiscale SSTAs; baroclinicity; storm tracks; atmospheric circulation

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China
  2. [42275169]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigates the response of North Pacific storm tracks to spatial multiscale sea surface temperature anomalies in the stable state of the Kuroshio Extension system. The results show that the storm tracks are significantly strengthened and cause increased rainfall in certain areas in response to large-scale temperature anomalies, while they shift to the north and strengthen in other areas in response to mesoscale temperature anomalies, with remote impact on precipitation along the west coast of North America.
In the present study, the response of North Pacific storm tracks to spatial multiscale (large-scale and mesoscale) sea surface temperature anomalies (SSTAs) in stable state of Kuroshio Extension (KE-related SSTAs) system are investigated. The results show that storm tracks are significantly strengthened with local enhanced rainfall in the central North Pacific and near the west coast of the North American continent in response to KE-related large-scale SSTAs, while they shift to the north and are significantly strengthened in the central-eastern North Pacific and Gulf of Alaska with remote impact on precipitation along west coast of North America continent in response to KE-related mesoscale SSTAs. The anomalous storm tracks influenced by KE-related SSTAs at different spatial scales are closely related to the locations of low-level baroclinicity. The response of horizontal advection of temperature to different scales of KE-related SSTAs in the lower atmosphere plays an important role in resulting baroclinicity anomalies.

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