Lake and climate models linkage: a 3-D hydrodynamic contribution

León, Luis F. De; Lam, David; Schertzer, William M.; Swayne, David A.

doi:10.5194/adgeo-4-57-2005

Cited by 18 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The streams and rivers flow FIG. We know, from sat-ellite images and from model results (Leon et al 2005;Schertzer et al 2008), that most of the water entering GSL from the Slave River flows in a counterclockwise gyre through the central basin including Inner Whaleback Island before exiting into the Mackenzie River at the lake's western end. Comparative midlake heat storage in GSL and GBL for the years of measurement ( Table 2).…”

Section: B Significance Of Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Investigation of the Thermal and Energy Balance Regimes of Great Slave and Great Bear Lakes

Rouse

Blanken

Bussières³

et al. 2008

Journal of Hydrometeorology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Great Slave Lake and Great Bear Lake have large surface areas, water volumes, and high latitudinal positions; are cold and deep; and are subject to short daylight periods in winter and long ones in summer. They are dissimilar hydrologically. Great Slave Lake is part of the Mackenzie Basin flowthrough system. Great Bear Lake is hydrologically isolated in its own relatively small drainage basin and all of its inflow and outflow derive from its immediate watershed. Great Slave Lake's outflow into the Mackenzie River is more than 8 times that from Great Bear Lake. Input from the south via the Slave River provides 82% of this outflow volume. These hydrological differences exert pronounced effects on the thermodynamics, hydrodynamics, and surface climates of each lake. The quantitative results in this study are based on limited datasets from different years that are normalized to allow comparison between the two lakes. They indicate that both lakes have regional annual air temperatures within 2°C of one another, but Great Slave Lake exhibits a much longer open-water period with higher temperatures than Great Bear Lake. During the period when the lakes are warming, each lake exerts a substantial overlake atmospheric cooling, and in the period when the lakes are cooling, each exerts a strong overlake warming. This local cooling and warming cycle is greatest over Great Bear Lake. Temperature and humidity inversions are frequent early in the lake-warming season and very strong lapse gradients occur late in the lake-cooling season. Annually, for both lakes, early ice breakup is matched with late freeze-up. Conversely, late breakup is matched with early freeze-up. The magnitudes of midlake latent heat fluxes (evaporation) and sensible heat fluxes from Great Slave Lake are substantially larger than those from Great Bear Lake during their respective open-water periods. The hypothesis that because they are both large and deep, and are located in high latitudes, Great Slave Lake and Great Bear Lake will exhibit similar surface and near-surface climates that are typical of large lakes in the high latitudes proves invalid because their different hydrological systems impose very different thermodynamic regimes on the two lakes. Additionally, such an extensive north-flowing river system as the Mackenzie is subjected to latitudinally variable meteorological regimes that will differentially influence the hydrology and energy balance of these large lakes. Great Slave Lake is very responsive to climatic variability because of the relation between lake ice and absorbed solar radiation in the high sun season and we expect that Great Bear Lake will be affected in a similar fashion.

show abstract

Section: B Significance Of Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Investigation of the Thermal and Energy Balance Regimes of Great Slave and Great Bear Lakes

Rouse

Blanken

Bussières³

et al. 2008

Journal of Hydrometeorology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is particularly relevant in a future perspective, since lake temperatures are expected to be affected by warming trends as a result of climate change [e.g., Mortsch and Quinn, 1996;Stefan et al, 1998]. Some studies investigated the effect of varying meteorological forcing (including air temperature) on lake thermal dynamics by means of process-based one-dimensional, two-dimensional, and three-dimensional numerical models [Leon et al, 2005;Yamashiki et al, 2010;Wahl and Peeters, 2014]. Three-dimensional (3-D) models are especially designed to describe the individual processes, but require large computational times and are usually applied for short-term simulations.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of stratification on lakes' thermal response: The case of Lake Superior

Piccolroaz

Toffolon

Majone

2015

Water Resources Research

106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During the last several decades, the Great Lakes region has been experiencing a significant rise in temperatures, with the extraordinary summer warming that affected Lake Superior in 1998 as an example of the marked response of the lake to increasingly warmer atmospheric conditions. In this work, we combine the analysis of this exceptional event with some synthetic scenarios, to achieve a deeper understanding of the main processes driving the thermal dynamics of surface water temperature in Lake Superior. The analysis is performed by means of the lumped model air2water, which simulates lake surface temperature as a function of air temperature alone. The model provides information about the seasonal stratification dynamics, suggesting that unusual warming events can result from two factors: anomalously high summer air temperatures, and increased strength of stratification resulting from a warm spring. The relative contribution of the two factors is quantified using the model by means of synthetic scenarios, which provide a simple but effective description of the positive feedback between the thermal behavior and the stratification dynamics of the lake.

show abstract

“…Sensitivity analysis could be conducted for any set of the model inputs, such as the model boundary conditions (Trolle et al, 2008), meteorological (Hondzo and Stefan, 1992; Arhonditsis and Brett, 2005; Leon et al, 2005), hydrodynamic (Romero et al, 2004; Hurtado, 2007), and field‐measured data. In previous work, the boundary conditions used for this study were carefully reviewed, corrected with few modifications, and proved accurate.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Three-Dimensional Lake Water Quality Modeling: Sensitivity and Uncertainty Analyses

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two sensitivity and uncertainty analysis methods are applied to a three-dimensional coupled hydrodynamic-ecological model (ELCOM-CAEDYM) of a morphologically complex lake. The primary goals of the analyses are to increase confidence in the model predictions, identify influential model parameters, quantify the uncertainty of model prediction, and explore the spatial and temporal variabilities of model predictions. The influence of model parameters on four model-predicted variables (model output) and the contributions of each of the model-predicted variables to the total variations in model output are presented. The contributions of predicted water temperature, dissolved oxygen, total phosphorus, and algal biomass contributed 3, 13, 26, and 58% of total model output variance, respectively. The fraction of variance resulting from model parameter uncertainty was calculated by two methods and used for evaluation and ranking of the most influential model parameters. Nine out of the top 10 parameters identified by each method agreed, but their ranks were different. Spatial and temporal changes of model uncertainty were investigated and visualized. Model uncertainty appeared to be concentrated around specific water depths and dates that corresponded to significant storm events. The results suggest that spatial and temporal variations in the predicted water quality variables are sensitive to the hydrodynamics of physical perturbations such as those caused by stream inflows generated by storm events. The sensitivity and uncertainty analyses identified the mineralization of dissolved organic carbon, sediment phosphorus release rate, algal metabolic loss rate, internal phosphorus concentration, and phosphorus uptake rate as the most influential model parameters.

show abstract

Lake and climate models linkage: a 3-D hydrodynamic contribution

Cited by 18 publications

References 11 publications

An Investigation of the Thermal and Energy Balance Regimes of Great Slave and Great Bear Lakes

An Investigation of the Thermal and Energy Balance Regimes of Great Slave and Great Bear Lakes

The role of stratification on lakes' thermal response: The case of Lake Superior

Three-Dimensional Lake Water Quality Modeling: Sensitivity and Uncertainty Analyses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About