Reanalysis intercomparisons of stratospheric polar processing diagnostics

Abstract

Abstract. We compare herein polar processing diagnostics derived from the four most recent “full-input” reanalysis datasets: the National Centers for Environmental Prediction Climate Forecast System Reanalysis/Climate Forecast System, version 2 (CFSR/CFSv2), the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts Interim (ERA-Interim) reanalysis, the Japanese Meteorological Agency's 55-year (JRA-55) reanalysis, and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Modern-Era Retrospective analysis for Research and Applications, version 2 (MERRA-2). We focus on diagnostics based on temperatures and potential vorticity (PV) in the lower-to-middle stratosphere that are related to formation of polar stratospheric clouds (PSCs), chlorine activation, and the strength, size, and longevity of the stratospheric polar vortex. Polar minimum temperatures (Tmin) and the area of regions having temperatures below PSC formation thresholds (APSC) show large persistent differences between the reanalyses, especially in the Southern Hemisphere (SH), for years prior to 1999. Average absolute differences of the reanalyses from the reanalysis ensemble mean (REM) in Tmin are as large as 3 K at some levels in the SH (1.5 K in the Northern Hemisphere – NH), and absolute differences of reanalysis APSC from the REM up to 1.5 % of a hemisphere (0.75 % of a hemisphere in the NH). After 1999, the reanalyses converge toward better agreement in both hemispheres, dramatically so in the SH: average Tmin differences from the REM are generally less than 1 K in both hemispheres, and average APSC differences less than 0.3 % of a hemisphere. The comparisons of diagnostics based on isentropic PV for assessing polar vortex characteristics, including maximum PV gradients (MPVGs) and the area of the vortex in sunlight (or sunlit vortex area, SVA), show more complex behavior: SH MPVGs showed convergence toward better agreement with the REM after 1999, while NH MPVGs differences remained largely constant over time; differences in SVA remained relatively constant in both hemispheres. While the average differences from the REM are generally small for these vortex diagnostics, understanding such differences among the reanalyses is complicated by the need to use different methods to obtain vertically resolved PV for the different reanalyses. We also evaluated other winter season summary diagnostics, including the winter mean volume of air below PSC thresholds, and vortex decay dates. For the volume of air below PSC thresholds, the reanalyses generally agree best in the SH, where relatively small interannual variability has led to many winter seasons with similar polar processing potential and duration, and thus low sensitivity to differences in meteorological conditions among the reanalyses. In contrast, the large interannual variability of NH winters has given rise to many seasons with marginal conditions that are more sensitive to reanalysis differences. For vortex decay dates, larger differences are seen in the SH than in the NH; in general, the differences in decay dates among the reanalyses follow from persistent differences in their vortex areas. Our results indicate that the transition from the reanalyses assimilating Tiros Operational Vertical Sounder (TOVS) data to advanced TOVS and other data around 1998–2000 resulted in a profound improvement in the agreement of the temperature diagnostics presented (especially in the SH) and to a lesser extent the agreement of the vortex diagnostics. We present several recommendations for using reanalyses in polar processing studies, particularly related to the sensitivity to changes in data inputs and assimilation. Because of these sensitivities, we urge great caution for studies aiming to assess trends derived from reanalysis temperatures. We also argue that one of the best ways to assess the sensitivity of scientific results on polar processing is to use multiple reanalysis datasets.

Temperature and tropopause characteristics from reanalyses data in the tropical tropopause layer

“…While the reanalyses assimilate different versions of these data, it is not certain that they reproduce the data within their uncertainty. For instance, discrepancies exist between reanalysis stratospheric temperatures and those derived from their radiance input data (Long et al, 2017). In fact, it is a subject of ongoing research how well reanalyses fit the data they assimilate (Simmons et al, 2014;Wright and Hindley, 2018).…”

“…The higher vertical resolution of measurements from the ATOVS suite (see Fig. 7 in Fujiwara et al, 2017) is known to reduce differences among the reanalysis with respect to stratospheric temperature (Long et al, 2017) and polar diagnostics (Lawrence et al, 2018). Within the TTL, temperature biases decrease from values of 1-2 K to around 0.5 K following the TOVS-to-ATOVS transition.…”

Is the subtropical jet shifting poleward?

“…The lifting of the tropopause with global warming will impact the line of constant 2 PVU. Reanalyses also have inherent inconsistency in their potential vorticity fields, due in part to data sources included at different times which impacts the trends (Lawrence et al 2018).…”

The tropical tropopause layer in reanalysis data sets

“…The higher vertical resolution of measurements from the ATOVS suite (see, e.g. Figure 7 in Fujiwara et al, 2017) is known to reduce differences among the reanalysis with respect to stratospheric temperature (Long et al, 2017) and polar diagnostics (Lawrence et al, 2018). Within the TTL, temperature biases improve from values of 1-2 K to around 0.5 K following the TOVS-to-ATOVS transition.…”