4.8 Article

Detection of human influences on temperature seasonality from the nineteenth century

期刊

NATURE SUSTAINABILITY
卷 2, 期 6, 页码 484-490

出版社

NATURE RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1038/s41893-019-0276-4

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Key R&D Program of China [2016YFA0600404]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41875113, 41471035]
  3. UK-China Research and Innovation Partnership Fund through the Met Office Climate Science for Service Partnership China as part of the Newton Fund
  4. Belmont Forum
  5. JPI Climate Collaborative Research Action 'INTEGRATE, an integrated data-model study of interactions between tropical monsoons and extratropical climate variability and extremes'
  6. ERC [EC-320691]
  7. NERC under the Belmont forum grant PacMedy [NE/P006752/1]
  8. Alexander von Humboldt Foundation
  9. NERC [NE/P006752/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

It has been widely reported that anthropogenic warming is detectable with high confidence after the 1950s. However, current palaeoclimate records suggest an earlier onset of industrial-era warming. Here, we combine observational data, multiproxy palaeo records and climate model simulations for a formal detection and attribution study. Instead of the traditional approach to the annual mean temperature change, we focus on changes in temperature seasonality (that is, the summer-minus-winter temperature difference) from the regional to whole Northern Hemisphere scales. We show that the detectable weakening of temperature seasonality, which started synchronously over the northern mid-high latitudes since the late nineteenth century, can be attributed to anthropogenic forcing. Increased greenhouse gas concentrations are the main contributors over northern high latitudes, while sulfate aerosols are the major contributors over northern mid-latitudes. A reduction in greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution is expected to mitigate the weakening of temperature seasonality and its potential ecological effects.

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