4.7 Article

Natural climate variability and teleconnections to precipitation over the Pacific-North American region in CMIP3 and CMIP5 models

期刊

GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS
卷 40, 期 10, 页码 2296-2301

出版社

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1002/grl.50491

关键词

natural climate variability; ENSO; PDO; CMIP5; North American hydroclimate; southwest USA hydroclimate

资金

  1. DOI via the Southwest Climate Science Center
  2. NOAA via the RISA program through the California and Nevada Applications Center
  3. California Energy Commission PIER Program via the California Climate Change Center at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography
  4. Division Of Graduate Education
  5. Direct For Education and Human Resources [1239797] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Natural climate variability will continue to be an important aspect of future regional climate even in the midst of long-term secular changes. Consequently, the ability of climate models to simulate major natural modes of variability and their teleconnections provides important context for the interpretation and use of climate change projections. Comparisons reported here indicate that the CMIP5 generation of global climate models shows significant improvements in simulations of key Pacific climate mode and their teleconnections to North America compared to earlier CMIP3 simulations. The performance of 14 models with simulations in both the CMIP3 and CMIP5 archives are assessed using singular value decomposition analysis of simulated and observed winter Pacific sea surface temperatures (SSTs) and concurrent precipitation over the contiguous United States and northwestern Mexico. Most of the models reproduce basic features of the key natural mode and their teleconnections, albeit with notable regional deviations from observations in both SST and precipitation. Increasing horizontal resolution in the CMIP5 simulations is an important, but not a necessary, factor in the improvement from CMIP3 to CMIP5.

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