The formulation and implementation of LEAF-2, the Land Ecosystem-Atmosphere Feedback model, which comprises the representation of land-surface processes in the Regional Atmospheric Modeling System (RAMS), is described. LEAF-2 is a prognostic model for the temperature and water content of soil, snow cover, vegetation, and canopy air, and includes turbulent and radiative exchanges between these components and with the atmosphere. Subdivision of a RAMS surface grid cell into multiple areas of distinct land-use types is allowed, with each subgrid area, or patch, containing its own LEAF-2 model, and each patch interacts with the overlying atmospheric column with a weight proportional to its fractional area in the grid cell. A description is also given of TOPMODEL, a land hydrology model that represents surface and subsurface downslope lateral transport of groundwater. Details of the incorporation of a modified form of TOPMODEL into LEAF-2 are presented. Sensitivity tests of the coupled system are presented that demonstrate the potential importance of the patch representation and of lateral water transport in idealized model simulations. Independent studies that have applied LEAF-2 and verified its performance against observational data are cited. Linkage of RAMS and TOPMODEL through LEAF-2 creates a modeling system that can be used to explore the coupled atmosphere-biophysicalhydrologic response to altered climate forcing at local watershed and regional basin scales.

[1] An evaluation is undertaken of the statistics of daily precipitation as simulated by five regional climate models using comprehensive observations in the region of the European Alps. Four limited area models and one variable-resolution global model are considered, all with a grid spacing of 50 km. The 15-year integrations were forced from reanalyses and observed sea surface temperature and sea ice (global model from sea surface only). The observational reference is based on 6400 rain gauge records (10-50 stations per grid box). Evaluation statistics encompass mean precipitation, wet-day frequency, precipitation intensity, and quantiles of the frequency distribution. For mean precipitation, the models reproduce the characteristics of the annual cycle and the spatial distribution. The domain mean bias varies between À23% and +3% in winter and between À27% and À5% in summer. Larger errors are found for other statistics. In summer, all models underestimate precipitation intensity (by 16-42%) and there is a too low frequency of heavy events. This bias reflects too dry summer mean conditions in three of the models, while it is partly compensated by too many low-intensity events in the other two models. Similar intermodel differences are found for other European subregions. Interestingly, the model errors are very similar between the two models with the same dynamical core (but different parameterizations) and they differ considerably between the two models with similar parameterizations (but different dynamics). Despite considerable biases, the models reproduce prominent mesoscale features of heavy precipitation, which is a promising result for their use in climate change downscaling over complex topography.

[1] The evaluation of the quality and usefulness of climate modeling systems is dependent upon an assessment of both the limited predictability of the climate system and the uncertainties stemming from model formulation. In this study a methodology is presented that is suited to assess the performance of a regional climate model (RCM), based on its ability to represent the natural interannual variability on monthly and seasonal timescales. The methodology involves carrying out multiyear ensemble simulations (to assess the predictability bounds within which the model can be evaluated against observations) and multiyear sensitivity experiments using different model formulations (to assess the model uncertainty). As an example application, experiments driven by assimilated lateral boundary conditions and sea surface temperatures from the ECMWF Reanalysis Project (ERA-15, 1979(ERA-15, -1993 were conducted. While the ensemble experiment demonstrates that the predictability of the regional climate varies strongly between different seasons and regions, being weakest during the summer and over continental regions, important sensitivities of the modeling system to parameterization choices are uncovered. In particular, compensating mechanisms related to the long-term representation of the water cycle are revealed, in which summer dry and hot conditions at the surface, resulting from insufficient evaporation, can persist despite insufficient net solar radiation (a result of unrealistic cloud-radiative feedbacks). INDEX TERMS: 3309

The analysis presented in this paper suggests that the larger heating over the boreal forest in the spring and summer, as contrasted with weaker heating over the adjacent tundra, results in a preferred position of the polar front along the northern edge of the boreal forest. This positioning is well documented in the literature (see, for example, Bryson, 1966; Barry and Hare, 1974; Kreps and Barry, 1970). This heating results from the lower albedo of the boreal forest which is not compensated by an increase in transpiration, even with the larger leaf area index of the forest. The warmer temperatures are mixed upward by the deep boundary layer over the forest and mesoscale circulations which result from the patchiness of heating associated with the heterogeneous landscapes of the forest. Thus in contrast to previous assumptions in which the arctic front position in the summer determines the northern limit of the boreal tree line, our study suggests the boreal forest itself significantly influences the preferred position of the front. This conclusion reinforces the findings of Bonan et al. (1992) and Foley et al. (1994) on the important role of boreal forest‐tundra interactions with climate.