The Lack of QBO‐MJO Connection in CMIP6 Models

Kim, Hye‐Mi; Caron, Julie M.; Richter, Jadwiga H.; Simpson, Isla R.

doi:10.1029/2020gl087295

Cited by 45 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The biased QBO‐MJO relationship in MetUM‐GOML1 is considered to be associated with weak QBO‐induced temperature anomalies in the tropical tropopause or to errors in MJO vertical structure (J. C. K. Lee & Klingaman, 2018). By comparing the 30 CMIP6 models, it is shown that none of the models are able to capture the observed QBO‐MJO connection (H. Kim, Caron, et al, 2020).…”

Section: Recent Progress In Understanding Modeling and Predicting Tmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fifty Years of Research on the Madden‐Julian Oscillation: Recent Progress, Challenges, and Perspectives

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since its discovery in the early 1970s, the crucial role of the Madden‐Julian Oscillation (MJO) in the global hydrological cycle and its tremendous influence on high‐impact climate and weather extremes have been well recognized. The MJO also serves as a primary source of predictability for global Earth system variability on subseasonal time scales. The MJO remains poorly represented in our state‐of‐the‐art climate and weather forecasting models, however. Moreover, despite the advances made in recent decades, theories for the MJO still disagree at a fundamental level. The problems of understanding and modeling the MJO have attracted significant interest from the research community. As a part of the AGU's Centennial collection, this article provides a review of recent progress, particularly over the last decade, in observational, modeling, and theoretical study of the MJO. A brief outlook for near‐future MJO research directions is also provided.

show abstract

Section: Recent Progress In Understanding Modeling and Predicting Tmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fifty Years of Research on the Madden‐Julian Oscillation: Recent Progress, Challenges, and Perspectives

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This relationship provides an additional pathway for sources of predictability on seasonal to subseasonal time scales (Lim et al, 2019;Liu et al, 2014;Marshall et al, 2017). However, it is a major challenge to exploit this source because current general circulation models (GCM) often struggle to simulate both the MJO and QBO (Jiang et al, 2015;H. Kim et al, 2020;Scaife et al, 2014) and the physical mechanism behind their relationship is not well understood.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This relationship provides an additional pathway for sources of predictability on seasonal to subseasonal time scales (Lim et al., 2019; Liu et al., 2014; Marshall et al., 2017). However, it is a major challenge to exploit this source because current general circulation models (GCM) often struggle to simulate both the MJO and QBO (Jiang et al., 2015; H. Kim et al., 2020; Scaife et al., 2014) and the physical mechanism behind their relationship is not well understood. Previous studies show that the QBO‐MJO relationship is peculiar for the following reasons: (i) it is only observed during boreal winter (Densmore et al., 2019; Hendon & Abhik, 2018; Nishimoto & Yoden, 2017; Son et al., 2017; Yoo & Son, 2016), (ii) an analogous relationship between the QBO and other modes of tropical variability, such as convectively coupled equatorial waves (CCEWs), is less clear (Abhik et al., 2019), and (iii) the relationship only appears after around 1980 (Klotzbach et al., 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Unique Characteristics and Potential Mechanisms of the MJO‐QBO Relationship

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous studies have shown that Madden‐Julian oscillation (MJO) convective activity increases when quasi‐biennial oscillation (QBO) easterlies appear in the lower stratosphere, and that this relationship is seen only during boreal winter. However, the physical mechanism behind this relationship is not fully understood. Building upon previous literature on the MJO‐QBO relationship, this study first tests whether the relationship between the QBO and MJO extends to other modes of organized tropical convection. Our analysis shows that the QBO does not have any significant relationship with other modes of variability such as convectively coupled equatorial waves (CCEWs). An extended analysis for periods prior to 1979 also shows that the boreal winter QBO‐MJO relationship substantially weakens prior to 1979. These results imply that, in addition to the seasonal dependence, any proposed mechanisms for the relationship between the QBO and MJO must be able to explain the uniqueness of this relationship with respect to other CCEWs, as well as the reason for its strengthening after 1979. Among the analyzed modes of tropical convection, the MJO is the most sensitive to the modulation of high cloud fraction and associated radiative feedback by the QBO and this sensitivity may weaken prior to 1979. These results indicate that the strong top‐heaviness of vertical motion and cloud‐radiative feedback associated with the MJO are important to explain its unique relationship with the QBO.

show abstract

“…However, climate models struggle to capture the prominent features of either the MJO or QBO, or both (e.g., Ahn et al, 2017; Butchart et al, 2018). For instance, both Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) and Phase 6 (CMIP6) models fail to reproduce the QBO‐MJO connection (Kim et al, 2020; Lim & Son, 2020). Unlike climate models, S2S prediction models show a hint of the QBO‐MJO connection.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modeling Evidence of QBO‐MJO Connection: A Case Study

Back

Han

Son

2020

Geophysical Research Letters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The boreal winter Madden-Julian Oscillation (MJO) is modulated by the Quasi-Biennial Oscillation (QBO). The MJO becomes relatively strong during the easterly QBO (EQBO) winters but weak during the westerly QBO (WQBO) winters. To better understand their relationship, a set of WRF model experiments is conducted with varying lateral boundary conditions. The MJO event in December 2007, during EQBO winter, is chosen as a reference case. The control experiment qualitatively reproduces the observed MJO. When the lateral boundary conditions are switched with those of WQBO or strong WQBO winters, the MJO becomes weak over the Maritime Continent. All eight ensemble members exhibit enhanced outgoing longwave radiation and reduced precipitation from EQBO to WQBO, and to strong WQBO conditions, although the magnitude of changes is smaller than observations. This result, one of the first mesoscale modeling evidences of the QBO-MJO connection, suggests that the MJO is at least partly modulated by the QBO.

show abstract

The Lack of QBO‐MJO Connection in CMIP6 Models

Cited by 45 publications

References 24 publications

Fifty Years of Research on the Madden‐Julian Oscillation: Recent Progress, Challenges, and Perspectives

Fifty Years of Research on the Madden‐Julian Oscillation: Recent Progress, Challenges, and Perspectives

The Unique Characteristics and Potential Mechanisms of the MJO‐QBO Relationship

Modeling Evidence of QBO‐MJO Connection: A Case Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About