Shortwave cloud radiative forcing on major stratus cloud regions in AMIP-type simulations of CMIP3 and CMIP5 models

被引:24
作者
Zhang Yi [1 ,2 ]
Li Jian [3 ]
机构
[1] Chinese Acad Sci, Inst Atmospher Phys, State Key Lab Numer Modeling Atmospher Sci & Geop, Beijing 100029, Peoples R China
[2] Univ Chinese Acad Sci, Beijing 100049, Peoples R China
[3] China Meteorol Adm, Chinese Acad Meteorol Sci, State Key Lab Severe Weather, Beijing 100081, Peoples R China
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
shortwave cloud radiative forcing; CMIP; stratus clouds; IPCC; CLIMATE FEEDBACKS; LAYER CLOUDS; CIRCULATION; FRACTION; CYCLE;
D O I
10.1007/s00376-013-2153-9
中图分类号
P4 [大气科学(气象学)];
学科分类号
0706 ; 070601 ;
摘要
Cloud and its radiative effects are major sources of uncertainty that lead to simulation discrepancies in climate models. In this study, shortwave cloud radiative forcing (SWCF) over major stratus regions is evaluated for Atmospheric Models Intercomparison Project (AMIP)-type simulations of models involved in the third and fifth phases of the Coupled Models Intercomparison Project (CMIP3 and CMIP5). Over stratus regions, large deviations in both climatological mean and seasonal cycle of SWCF are found among the models. An ambient field sorted by dynamic (vertical motion) and thermodynamic (inversion strength or stability) regimes is constructed and used to measure the response of SWCF to large-scale controls. In marine boundary layer regions, despite both CMIP3 and CMIP5 models being able to capture well the center and range of occurrence frequency for the ambient field, most of the models fail to simulate the dependence of SWCF on boundary layer inversion and the insensitivity of SWCF to vertical motion. For eastern China, there are large differences even in the simulated ambient fields. Moreover, almost no model can reproduce intense SWCF in rising motion and high stability regimes. It is also found that models with a finer grid resolution have no evident superiority than their lower resolution versions. The uncertainties relating to SWCF in state-of-the-art models may limit their performance in IPCC experiments.
引用
收藏
页码:884 / 907
页数:24
相关论文
共 30 条
  • [1] Shortwave Cloud Radiative Forcing on Major Stratus Cloud Regions in AMIP-type Simulations of CMIP3 and CMIP5 Models
    张祎
    李建
    AdvancesinAtmosphericSciences, 2013, 30 (03) : 884 - 907
  • [2] Shortwave cloud radiative forcing on major stratus cloud regions in AMIP-type simulations of CMIP3 and CMIP5 models
    Yi Zhang
    Jian Li
    Advances in Atmospheric Sciences, 2013, 30 : 884 - 907
  • [3] Improved Representation of Marine Stratocumulus Cloud Shortwave Radiative Properties in the CMIP5 Climate Models
    Engstroem, Anders
    Bender, Frida A-M.
    Karlsson, Johannes
    JOURNAL OF CLIMATE, 2014, 27 (16) : 6175 - 6188
  • [4] Understanding the sources of Caribbean precipitation biases in CMIP3 and CMIP5 simulations
    Ryu, Jung-Hee
    Hayhoe, Katharine
    CLIMATE DYNAMICS, 2014, 42 (11-12) : 3233 - 3252
  • [5] An evaluation of the CMIP3 and CMIP5 simulations in their skill of simulating the spatial structure of SST variability
    Wang, Gang
    Dommenget, Dietmar
    Frauen, Claudia
    CLIMATE DYNAMICS, 2015, 44 (1-2) : 95 - 114
  • [6] On the Relationships between Subtropical Clouds and Meteorology in Observations and CMIP3 and CMIP5 Models
    Myers, Timothy A.
    Norris, Joel R.
    JOURNAL OF CLIMATE, 2015, 28 (08) : 2945 - 2967
  • [7] An evaluation of the CMIP3 and CMIP5 simulations in their skill of simulating the spatial structure of SST variability
    Gang Wang
    Dietmar Dommenget
    Claudia Frauen
    Climate Dynamics, 2015, 44 : 95 - 114
  • [8] Double ITCZ in Coupled Ocean-Atmosphere Models: From CMIP3 to CMIP5
    Zhang, Xiaoxiao
    Liu, Hailong
    Zhang, Minghua
    GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, 2015, 42 (20) : 8651 - 8659
  • [9] Do CMIP5 simulations of Indian summer monsoon rainfall differ from those of CMIP3?
    Shashikanth, K.
    Salvi, Kaustubh
    Ghosh, Subimal
    Rajendran, K.
    ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCE LETTERS, 2014, 15 (02): : 79 - 85
  • [10] Present-day and future Amazonian precipitation in global climate models: CMIP5 versus CMIP3
    Joetzjer, E.
    Douville, H.
    Delire, C.
    Ciais, P.
    CLIMATE DYNAMICS, 2013, 41 (11-12) : 2921 - 2936