Vertical Structure of the Arctic Spring Transition in the Middle Atmosphere

Matthias, Vivien; Stober, Gunter; Kozlovsky, Alexander; Lester, M.; Belova, Evgenia; Kero, Johan

doi:10.1029/2020jd034353

Cited by 19 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, the characteristics of the two minor SSW events in the two winters are also different from the conventional minor SSW event. The wind reversal during the two minor SSW events occurs at higher altitudes (∼60–80 km) than usual, which makes it more difficult to detect so that they are missed in the previous studies (e.g., Matthias et al., 2021; Rao & Garfinkel, 2020). Their contributions to the wind anomaly are similar to the USLM disturbances, that is, the zonal mean flow is reversed only in the USLM, and the PNJ moves downward instead of being completely disrupted as during major SSW period.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Contributions of Early‐ and Middle‐Winter Perturbations at Higher Altitudes to Late‐Winter Anomalously Strong Arctic Polar Vortex in the Lower Stratosphere

Qin

Dou

et al. 2022

JGR Atmospheres

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Based on the Modern‐Era Retrospective analysis for Research Applications Version 2 reanalysis, an upper stratosphere/lower mesosphere (USLM) disturbance in early January and a sudden stratospheric warming (SSW) in early February are both coincidentally captured preceding the anomalously strong polar vortex during the late boreal winters of 2010/2011 and 2019/2020. Our analysis indicates that planetary wave breaking during the USLM disturbance and SSW decelerates the westerly polar night jet (PNJ) in the upper stratosphere, which leads to a continuous downward and poleward propagation of the PNJ during the early and middle winter. As the peak height of the PNJ descends, the region with negative vertical wind shear and negative waveguides also extends downward and reaches an altitude of ∼40 km during the late winter, which significantly limits the upward propagation of planetary waves, inducing a stable polar vortex in the lower stratosphere. In addition, the transformed Eulerian mean diagnostic results based on the specified dynamics simulation of the Whole Atmosphere Community Climate Model eXtended version confirm that the planetary wave‐induced downwelling is the main cause of the stratospheric warming during the two perturbations. More importantly, the simulation results indicate that the strength of the two upper stratospheric perturbations is appropriate to maintain the reflective configuration during the late winter, which suggests that such a specific sequence of perturbations during the early and middle winter, namely a USLM disturbance followed by a minor SSW, is favorable for the development of a late‐winter unusually strong Arctic polar vortex in the lower stratosphere.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Contributions of Early‐ and Middle‐Winter Perturbations at Higher Altitudes to Late‐Winter Anomalously Strong Arctic Polar Vortex in the Lower Stratosphere

Qin

Dou

et al. 2022

JGR Atmospheres

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The effects of vertical coupling are also seen up into the MLT. A study of the climatology and characteristic patterns of the springtime transition in the stratosphere and mesosphere showed 2019/2020 to be a key example of a springtime transition for a “no negative NAM” case (Matthias et al., 2021). In this class of spring transition, as in 2020, a minor warming in the upper stratosphere/lower mesosphere (USLM) in early spring is unable to propagate downward due to the strong winds in the mid‐stratosphere, thereby delaying the spring transition until late spring, when it progresses smoothly downward.…”

Section: Dynamical Features and Impacts Of The Stratospheric Vortex I...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition to Lawrence et al. (2020) and discussion in papers related to polar processing (see Section 3), several papers in the special collection discuss aspects of vertical dynamical coupling, including coupling to the troposphere and surface impacts (Dahlke et al., 2022; Lawrence et al., 2020; Rupp et al., 2022); connections to the upper stratosphere and mesosphere lower‐thermosphere (MLT) (Lukianova et al., 2021; Ma et al., 2022); and vertical coupling during the spring vortex breakup (Matthias et al., 2021).…”

Section: Dynamical Features and Impacts Of The Stratospheric Vortex I...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Introduction to Special Collection “The Exceptional Arctic Stratospheric Polar Vortex in 2019/2020: Causes and Consequences”

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper introduces the special collection in Geophysical Research Letters and Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres on the exceptional stratospheric polar vortex in 2019/2020. Papers in this collection show that the 2019/2020 stratospheric polar vortex was the strongest, most persistent, and coldest on record in the Arctic. The unprecedented Arctic chemical processing and ozone loss in spring 2020 have been studied using numerous satellite and ground‐based data sets and chemistry‐transport models. Quantitative estimates of chemical loss are broadly consistent among the studies and show profile loss of about the same magnitude as in the Arctic in 2011, but with most loss at lower altitudes; column loss was comparable to or larger than that in 2011. Several papers show evidence of dynamical coupling from the mesosphere down to the surface. Studies of tropospheric influence and impacts link the exceptionally strong vortex to reflection of upward propagating waves and show coupling to tropospheric anomalies, including extreme heat, precipitation, windstorms, and marine cold air outbreaks. Predictability of the exceptional stratospheric polar vortex in 2019/2020 and related predictability of surface conditions are explored. The exceptionally strong stratospheric polar vortex in 2019/2020 highlights the extreme interannual variability in the Arctic winter/spring stratosphere and the far‐reaching consequences of such extremes.

show abstract

“…However, the uppermost level of the negative NAM index only has a small descent (Figure 8c), so the eastward zonal mean flow reverses to westward at almost all altitudes simultaneously in the stratosphere and mesosphere (Figure 1c). The 2015 SSFW is classified as the "mid-spring SSW" type by Matthias et al (2021).…”

Section: Ssfw Typesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Southern Hemisphere Response to the Secondary Planetary Waves Generated During the Arctic Sudden Stratospheric Final Warmings: Influence of the Quasi‐Biennial Oscillation

Qin

Dou

et al. 2022

JGR Atmospheres

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Based on the Modern‐Era Retrospective analysis for Research and Applications version 2 reanalysis and Aura Microwave Limb Sounder geopotential height observations, the anomalously strong secondary planetary waves (PWs) with westward zonal wavenumber 1 and periods of 10–16 days are unexpectedly captured in the Southern (summer) Hemisphere (SH) during the Arctic sudden stratospheric final warmings (SSFWs) in 2015 and 2022, while no distinct secondary PW signal occurs in the SH during the 2005, 2014, and 2016 Arctic SSFWs. The Eliassen‐Palm (EP) flux diagnostics show that the secondary PWs during the 2015 and 2022 SSFWs have strong trans‐equatorial components at ∼35–60 km, but the southward EP flux from the Northern Hemisphere during the other three SSFWs decays dramatically around the equator. Further diagnostic results on the background conditions indicate that the phase of the quasi‐biennial oscillation (QBO) in the middle stratosphere plays a crucial role in the SH response to the secondary PW during SSFW. The strong equatorial westward winds at ∼32–42 km result in the critical layers and negative waveguides for the secondary W1 PW during the 2005, 2014, and 2016 SSFWs, which significantly block the trans‐equatorial propagation of PW. Such PW suppression is not observed during the 2015 and 2022 SSFWs since the middle stratospheric QBO is in the eastward phase. Moreover, the strong secondary PW in the SH during the 2015 and 2022 SSFWs can additionally induce the poleward residual circulation to facilitate the mesospheric total residual circulation transition from summer pattern to winter pattern in the SH.

show abstract

Vertical Structure of the Arctic Spring Transition in the Middle Atmosphere

Cited by 19 publications

References 56 publications

Contributions of Early‐ and Middle‐Winter Perturbations at Higher Altitudes to Late‐Winter Anomalously Strong Arctic Polar Vortex in the Lower Stratosphere

Contributions of Early‐ and Middle‐Winter Perturbations at Higher Altitudes to Late‐Winter Anomalously Strong Arctic Polar Vortex in the Lower Stratosphere

Introduction to Special Collection “The Exceptional Arctic Stratospheric Polar Vortex in 2019/2020: Causes and Consequences”

Southern Hemisphere Response to the Secondary Planetary Waves Generated During the Arctic Sudden Stratospheric Final Warmings: Influence of the Quasi‐Biennial Oscillation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About