Stratospheric ozone and the morphology of the northern hemisphere planetary waveguide

Albers, John R.; McCormack, J. P.; Nathan, Terrence R.

doi:10.1029/2012jd017937

Cited by 24 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 57 publications

(113 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…So it seems that when the SPW 1 can propagate upward in polar latitudes there is no longer the need to do so at lower latitudes. This stronger upward propagation of the SPWs in the northern channel of the PW guide compared to the southern channel is in accordance with the climatology (e.g., Albers et al, 2013).…”

Section: Why Does the Spw 2 Dominate In Period Ii?supporting

confidence: 69%

“…In midwinter the PWG is commonly split into a southern and a northern channel (e.g., Dickinson, 1968;Chapman and Miles, 1981;Li et al, 2007). While in the southern channel the SPWs preferably propagate equatorward towards the subtropical zero wind line and barely reach the upper stratosphere (Albers et al, 2013), the northern PWG channel in comparison follows the polar night jet (PNJ) sometimes even reaching up into the mesosphere (Lin, 1982).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

On the origin of the mesospheric quasi-stationary planetary waves in the unusual Arctic winter 2015/2016

Matthias

Ern²

2018

Atmos. Chem. Phys.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The midwinter 2015/2016 was characterized by an unusually strong polar night jet (PNJ) and extraordinarily large stationary planetary wave (SPW) amplitudes in the subtropical mesosphere. The aim of this study is, therefore, to find the origin of these mesospheric SPWs in the midwinter 2015/2016 study period. The study duration is split into two periods: the first period runs from late December 2015 until early January 2016 (Period I), and the second period from early January until mid-January 2016 (Period II). While the SPW 1 dominates in the subtropical mesosphere in Period I, it is the SPW 2 that dominates in Period II. There are three possibilities explaining how SPWs can occur in the mesosphere: (1) they propagate upward from the stratosphere, (2) they are generated in situ by longitudinally variable gravity wave (GW) drag, or (3) they are generated in situ by barotropic and/or baroclinic instabilities. Using global satellite observations from the Microwave Limb Sounder (MLS) and the Sounding of the Atmosphere using Broadband Emission Radiometry (SABER) the origin of the mesospheric SPWs is investigated for both time periods. We find that due to the strong PNJ the SPWs were not able to propagate upward into the mesosphere northward of 50 • N but were deflected upward and equatorward into the subtropical mesosphere. We show that the SPWs observed in the subtropical mesosphere are the same SPWs as in the mid-latitudinal stratosphere. Simultaneously, we find evidence that the mesospheric SPWs in polar latitudes were generated in situ by longitudinally variable GW drag and that there is a mixture of in situ generation by longitudinally variable GW drag and by instabilities at mid-latitudes. Our results, based on observations, show that the abovementioned three mechanisms can act at the same time which confirms earlier model studies. Additionally, the possible contribution from, or impact of, unusually strong SPWs in the subtropical mesosphere to the disruption of the quasi-biennial oscillation (QBO) in the same winter is discussed.

show abstract

Section: Why Does the Spw 2 Dominate In Period Ii?supporting

confidence: 69%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the origin of the mesospheric quasi-stationary planetary waves in the unusual Arctic winter 2015/2016

Matthias

Ern²

2018

Atmos. Chem. Phys.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…16c, f and a, d) but, interestingly, the structure of these temperature and ozone anomalies in the upper stratosphere is less accurate than in the nudged simulation. As well as SSWs influencing ozone, it is also the case that zonally asymmetric ozone can increase the frequency of simulated SSWs (Albers et al, 2013), thus creating the possibility for a feedback in models with interactive chemistry. Figure 15.…”

Section: High Latitudesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Met Office HadGEM3-ES chemistry–climate model: evaluation of stratospheric dynamics and its impact on ozone

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Free-running and nudged versions of a Met Office chemistry-climate model are evaluated and used to investigate the impact of dynamics versus transport and chemistry within the model on the simulated evolution of stratospheric ozone. Metrics of the dynamical processes relevant for simulating stratospheric ozone are calculated, and the free-running model is found to outperform the previous model version in 10 of the 14 metrics. In particular, large biases in stratospheric transport and tropical tropopause temperature, which existed in the previous model version, are substantially reduced, making the current model more suitable for the simulation of stratospheric ozone. The spatial structure of the ozone hole, the area of polar stratospheric clouds, and the increased ozone concentrations in the Northern Hemisphere winter stratosphere following sudden stratospheric warmings, were all found to be sensitive to the accuracy of the dynamics and were better simulated in the nudged model than in the free-running model. Whilst nudging can, in general, provide a useful tool for removing the influence of dynamical biases from the evolution of chemical fields, this study shows that issues can remain in the climatology of nudged models. Significant biases in stratospheric vertical velocities, age of air, water vapour, and total column ozone still exist in the Met Office nudged model. Further, these can lead to biases in the downward flux of ozone into the troposphere.

show abstract

“…(3), we use conventional formulae (e.g., Eq. (2) from Albers et al 2013). According to the theory, PWs propagate in atmospheric regions where n 2 m > 0 and should be evanescent in regions where n 2 m < 0.…”

Section: Eliassen-palm Fluxes and Refractivity Indexesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Matsuno (1970) introduced the refractive index for PWs and found that the strongest PW propagation is in areas of large positive values of this index. To find out the influence of OGW effects and QBO phases on the PW waveguide, in this study, we use the expression for the quasi-geostrophic zonal mean refractive index squared, n 2 m , for the PW mode with zonal wavenumber m (Andrews et al 1987;Karoly and Hoskins 1982;Li et al 2007;Albers et al 2013):…”

Section: Ogw and Qbo Influence On Planetary Wavesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Simulating influences of QBO phases and orographic gravity wave forcing on planetary waves in the middle atmosphere

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recently developed parameterization of stationary orographic gravity waves (OGWs) generated by the Earth's topography was implemented into a general circulation model of the middle and upper atmosphere. We performed numerical simulations of the zonal mean wind and amplitudes of stationary planetary waves and normal atmospheric modes with periods of 4-16 days at altitudes from the troposphere to the lower thermosphere in January for easterly and westerly phases of the quasi-biennial oscillation (QBO) including and excluding the stationary OGW parameterization. Simulations show that accounting dynamical and thermal effects of stationary OGWs can lead to substantial changes (up to 50-90 %) in the amplitudes of stationary planetary waves. Amplitudes of westward travelling normal atmospheric modes change (up to 50-90 %) at different altitudes and latitudes of the northern hemisphere due to OGW effects. Transitions from the easterly to westerly QBO phases can change planetary wave amplitudes up to ±30-90 % at middle and high latitudes. These changes in PW amplitudes are consistent with distributions of EP-flux and refractive index under different QBO phases simulated including our parameterization of stationary OGWs.

show abstract

Stratospheric ozone and the morphology of the northern hemisphere planetary waveguide

Cited by 24 publications

References 57 publications

On the origin of the mesospheric quasi-stationary planetary waves in the unusual Arctic winter 2015/2016

On the origin of the mesospheric quasi-stationary planetary waves in the unusual Arctic winter 2015/2016

The Met Office HadGEM3-ES chemistry–climate model: evaluation of stratospheric dynamics and its impact on ozone

Simulating influences of QBO phases and orographic gravity wave forcing on planetary waves in the middle atmosphere

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About