A Tale of Two Spicy Seas

MacKinnon, Jennifer A.; Nash, Jonathan D.; Alford, Matthew H.; Lucas, Andrew J.; Mickett, John B.; Shroyer, Emily L.; Waterhouse, Amy F.; Tandon, Amit; Sengupta, Debasis; Mahadevan, Amala; Ravichandran, M.; Pinkel, Robert; Rudnick, Daniel L.; Whalen, Caitlin B.; Alberty, M. S.; Lekha, Sree J; Fine, Elizabeth C.; Chaudhuri, Dipanjan; Wagner, Gregory LeClaire

doi:10.5670/oceanog.2016.38

Cited by 42 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Furthermore, mesoscale fronts can strengthen or weaken the submesoscale restratification effects (Ramachandran et al, 2014;Stamper et al, 2018). Seasonality of these effects has been observed to be significant in some models and observations (Mensa et al, 2013;Callies et al, 2015;Rocha et al, 2016b), but not in the same way in other locations (Luo et al, 2016;MacKinnon et al, 2016;Viglione et al, 2018). It is not clear if these more complex scenarios can be robustly parameterized, but it remains useful to collect observations of a wide variety of submesoscale events to assess the basic and sophisticated versions seen in models.…”

Section: Submesoscalementioning

confidence: 99%

Challenges and Prospects in Ocean Circulation Models

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We revisit the challenges and prospects for ocean circulation models following Griffies et al. (2010). Over the past decade, ocean circulation models evolved through improved understanding, numerics, spatial discretization, grid configurations, parameterizations, data assimilation, environmental monitoring, and process-level observations and modeling. Important large scale applications over the last decade are simulations of the Southern Ocean, the Meridional Overturning Circulation and its variability, and regional sea level change. Submesoscale variability is now routinely resolved in process models and permitted in a few global models, and submesoscale effects are parameterized in most global models. The scales where nonhydrostatic effects become important are beginning to be resolved in regional and process models. Coupling to sea ice, ice shelves, and high-resolution atmospheric models has stimulated new ideas and driven improvements in numerics. Observations have provided insight into turbulence and mixing around the globe and its consequences are assessed through perturbed physics models. Relatedly, parameterizations of the mixing and overturning processes in boundary layers and the ocean interior have improved. New diagnostics being used for evaluating models Fox-Kemper et al. Ocean Circulation Models alongside present and novel observations are briefly referenced. The overall goal is summarizing new developments in ocean modeling, including: how new and existing observations can be used, what modeling challenges remain, and how simulations can be used to support observations.

show abstract

Section: Submesoscalementioning

confidence: 99%

Challenges and Prospects in Ocean Circulation Models

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The results presented here may be of relevance for other regions of the ocean. A similar profile of vertical stratification is seen in the Bay of Bengal, for example, where there is also a shallow mixed layer overlying a strong halocline (MacKinnon et al 2016). The northern Bay of Bengal experiences a sustained upfront stress each year as steady monsoon winds lead to the Ekman transport of fresher water from the western side of the bay over more saline water in the interior of the bay.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 67%

Generation of Subsurface Anticyclones at Arctic Surface Fronts due to a Surface Stress

Brannigan

Johnson

Ligue

et al. 2017

Journal of Physical Oceanography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Isolated anticyclones are frequently observed below the mixed layer in the Arctic Ocean. Some of these subsurface anticyclones are thought to originate at surface fronts. However, previous idealized simulations with no surface stress show that only cyclone-anticyclone dipoles can propagate away from baroclinically unstable surface fronts. Numerical simulations of fronts subject to a surface stress presented here show that a surface stress in the same direction as the geostrophic flow inhibits dipole propagation away from the front. On the other hand, a surface stress in the opposite direction to the geostrophic flow helps dipoles to propagate away from the front. Regardless of the surface stress at the point of dipole formation, these dipoles can be broken up on a time scale of days when a surface stress is applied in the right direction. The dipole breakup leads to the deeper anticyclonic component becoming an isolated subsurface eddy. The breakup of the dipole occurs because the cyclonic component of the dipole in the mixed layer is subject to an additional advection because of the Ekman flow. When the Ekman transport has a component oriented from the anticyclonic part of the dipole toward the cyclonic part then the cyclone is advected away from the anticyclone and the dipole is broken up. When the Ekman transport is in other directions relative to the dipole axis, it also leads to deviations in the trajectory of the dipole. A scaling is presented for the rate at which the surface cyclone is advected that holds across a range of mixed layer depths and surface stress magnitudes in these simulations. The results may be relevant to other regions of the ocean with similar near-surface stratification profiles.

show abstract

“…Ten to one hundred kilometer transects were obtained parallel to R/V Roger Revelle and ORV Sagar Nighi, capturing near-surface dynamics and upper-ocean vorticity (MacKinnon et al, 2016). Here, we describe one specific part of the system, a rapid-profiling CTD designed to acquire profiles from the surface down to 150 m depth while underway at up to four knots (Figure 2).…”

Section: Technology Reportmentioning

confidence: 99%