4.7 Article

Enlarged Asymmetry of Tropical Pacific Rainfall Anomalies Induced by El Nino and La Nina under Global Warming

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLIMATE
卷 30, 期 4, 页码 1327-1343

出版社

AMER METEOROLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0427.1

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Basic Research Program of China [2014CB953904]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41575088, 41461164005]
  3. Foundation of CUIT [KYTZ201602]
  4. Youth Innovation Promotion Association CAS

向作者/读者索取更多资源

El Nino-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) is one of the most important sources of climate interannual variability. A prominent characteristic of ENSO is the asymmetric, or so-called nonlinear, local rainfall response to El Nino (EN) and La Nina (LN), in which the maximum rainfall anomalies during EN are located farther east than those during LN. In this study, the changes in rainfall anomalies during EN and LN are examined based on the multimodel ensemble mean results of 32 CMIP5 models under the representative concentration pathway 8.5 (RCP8.5) scenario. It is found that robust EN-LN asymmetric changes in rainfall anomalies exist. The rainfall anomalies during EN and LN both shift eastward and intensify under global warming, but the eastward shift during EN is farther east than that during LN. A simplified moisture budget decomposition method is applied to study the mechanism of the asymmetric response. The results show that the robust increase in mean-state moisture can enlarge the EN-LN asymmetry of the rainfall anomalies, and the spatial relative changes in mean-state SST with an El Nino-like pattern can shift the rainfall anomalies farther east during EN than during LN, enlarging the difference in the zonal locations of the rainfall response to EN and LN. The role of the relative changes in mean-state SST can also be interpreted as follows: the decreased zonal gradient of mean-state SST due to El Nino-like warming leads to a larger EN-LN asymmetry of rainfall anomalies under a future warming climate.

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