4.6 Article

Interannual variations in upper-ocean heat content and heat transport convergence in the western North Atlantic

期刊

JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL OCEANOGRAPHY
卷 37, 期 11, 页码 2682-2697

出版社

AMER METEOROLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1175/2007JPO3645.1

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Subsurface temperature data in the western North Atlantic Ocean are analyzed to study the variations in the heat content above a fixed isotherm and contributions from surface heat fluxes and oceanic processes. The study region is chosen based on the data density; its northern boundary shifts with the Gulf Stream position and its southern boundary shifts to contain constant volume. The temperature profiles are objectively mapped to a uniform grid (0.5 degrees latitude and longitude, 10 m in depth, and 3 months in time). The interannual variations in upper-ocean heat content show good agreement with the changes in the sea surface height from the Ocean Topography Experiment (TOPEX)/Poseidon altimeter; both indicate positive anomalies in 1994 and 1998-99 and negative anomalies in 1996-97. The interannual variations in surface heat fluxes cannot explain the changes in upper-ocean heat storage rate. On the contrary, a positive anomaly in heat released to the atmosphere corresponds to a positive upper-ocean heat content anomaly. The oceanic heat transport, mainly owing to the geostrophic advection, controls the interannual variations in heat storage rate, which suggests that geostrophic advection plays an important role in the air-sea heat exchange. The 18 degrees C isotherm depth and layer thickness also show good correspondence to the upper-ocean heat content; a deep and thin 18 C layer corresponds to a positive heat content anomaly. The oceanic transport in each isotherm layer shows an annual cycle, converging heat in winter, and diverging in summer in a warm layer; it also shows interannual variations with the largest heat convergence occurring in even warmer layers during the period of large ocean-to-atmosphere flux.

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