Decadal Current Variations in the Southwestern Japan/East Sea

Abstract

The public importing burden for This collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, inducing suggestions for reducing the burden, to the Department of Defense, Executive Services and Communications Directorate 10704-0188). Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ORGANIZATION.REPORT DATE (DD-MM-YYYY) SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)Office of Naval Research 800 N. Quincy St. Arlington, VA 22217-5660 SPONSOR/MONITOR'S ACRONYM(S) ONR SPONSOR/MONITOR'S REPORT NUMBER(S) DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENTApproved for public release, distribution is unlimited. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES ABSTRACTAbsolute geostropbic velocities were calculated along TOPEX/Poseidon (T/P) groundtracks located in the Ulleung Basin of the southwestern Japan/East Sea (JES) from a combined analysis of nearly a decade of T/P data.and two years of pressure-gauge-equipped inverted echo sounder (PIES) data obtained during the United States Office of Naval Research's JES Program^ Geostrophic velocities have been calculated daily for the Ulleung Basin from June 1999 to July 2001 from a three-dimensional mapping of temperature and salinity produced by PIES data interpreted via ' the Gravest Empirical Mode (GEM) technique combined with the Navy's Modular Ocean Data Assimilation System (MODAS). These velocities were then used to convert T/P velocity anomalies to absolute velocities for the T/P time period of 1993 to 2002. Current intensities and variabilities associated with the East Korean Warm Current, Ulleung Warm Eddy, and Offshore Branch are examined. Spatial and temporal variations of the sea surface circulation are strong. Intensification of the currents generally occurred during the fall season. The flow pattern in individual years differed greatly from year to year and differed from climatology in important qualitative ways. SUBJECT TERMS

Impacts of wind forcing on sea level variations in the East China Sea: Local and remote effects

“…Wang et al (2001) pointed out that the spatial patterns of the principal components of the interannual sea level variation in the ECS correlate closely with the change of oceanic currents. The geotropic transport of the Kuroshio causes the dynamic sea level variation in the ECS and the Japanese East Sea (Ichikawa and Chaen, 2000;Teague et al, 2004;Zuo et al, 2012;Stammer et al, 2013), a weaker Kuroshio would increase the inflow of subtropical water to the Japanese East Sea, accounting for higher sea surface height in the Japan Sea (Gordon and Giulivi, 2004).…”

Application of the Geostationary Ocean Color Imager (GOCI) to estimates of ocean surface currents

“…Two mesoscale currents, i.e., the East Korea Warm Current (EKWC; Figure b) and the Offshore Branch (OB; Figure c), are separated from the TWC. In general, the EKWC tends to flow northward along the east coast of Korea and then turns eastward at about 38°N [ Chang et al ., ; Teague et al ., ]. Frequently, the OB flows along the southeastern coast of Korea and then turns eastward around Pohang [ Lee and Niiler , ].…”

Impact of Shifting Subpolar Front on Phytoplankton Dynamics in the Western Margin of East/Japan Sea

“…The SPF is generally stronger and located further south during winter, but becomes weaker and moves northward during summer. The position of the SPF also varies at interannual and longer time scales (Teague et al, 2004;Park et al, 2007), and this variability appears stronger in the western segment of the front due to a more direct influence of EKWC variability (Park et al, 2007).…”