Rossby wave‐breaking analysis of explosive cyclones in the Euro‐Atlantic sector

Gómara, Íñigo; Pinto, Joaquim G.; Woollings, Tim; Masato, Giacomo; Zurita‐Gotor, Pablo; Rodríguez‐Fonseca, Belén

doi:10.1002/qj.2190

Cited by 46 publications

(69 citation statements)

References 81 publications

(102 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The definition of DWB adopted here is purposefully loose and inclusive, so as to provide a comprehensive overview of the phenomenon. More restrictive definitions such as that in Gómara et al [] requiring the RWB to exceed a minimum area threshold and to occur in specific geographical sectors have been tested, but it is found that they exclude a large number of events. Indeed, the discussion of DWB in Gómara et al [] focuses on an extremely limited number of cases (<1% of winter days).…”

Section: Geographical and Temporal Distribution Of Double Wave Breakingmentioning

confidence: 99%

On double Rossby wave breaking in the North Atlantic

Messori

Caballero

2015

JGR Atmospheres

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We discuss the dynamical features associated with double Rossby wave breaking (DWB, concurrent cyclonic and anticyclonic breakings) over the North Atlantic, with a focus on the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO), the midlatitude jet stream, and surface wind extremes over continental Europe. Objective automated algorithms for detecting wave breaking and determining the location, intensity, and direction of the jet are adopted. The analysis is performed on the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts ERA-Interim reanalysis and the Max Planck Institute Earth System Model (MPI-ESM). We find that DWB events can project onto both phases of the NAO, albeit showing no strong preference for either. Wave-breaking pairs occurring in the northern North Atlantic project onto the positive NAO, while the opposite holds for pairs occurring farther south. DWB also affects the direction and intensity of the jet stream. Events in the eastern half of the basin (EWB) intensify and zonalize the jet, while events farther to the west (WWB) weaken the westerly flow over Europe. An analysis of destructive wind storms over Europe in the last three decades suggests that these are typically associated with a very intense, zonal jet-similar to the case of EWB. Indeed, EWB corresponds to an enhanced likelihood of destructive windstorms over the continent, although there is not a one-to-one correspondence. The MPI-ESM model does not capture this statistical relationship. On the contrary, WWB corresponds to a decreased likelihood of destructive weather.

show abstract

Section: Geographical and Temporal Distribution Of Double Wave Breakingmentioning

confidence: 99%

On double Rossby wave breaking in the North Atlantic

Messori

Caballero

2015

JGR Atmospheres

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Pinto et al (2014) recently provided evidence that the occurrence of cyclone clusters is governed by a persistent, zonally orientated and extended eddy-driven polar jet stream over the eastern North Atlantic and Western Europe, which drives the North Atlantic cyclones towards the British Isles and sometimes further into Central Europe. The maintenance of these large-scale conditions is supported by two-sided Rossby wave breaking over the North Atlantic (Hanley and Caballero, 2012;Go´mara et al, 2014;Messori and Caballero, 2015). Pinto et al (2014) demonstrated for four selected stormy periods 1990, 1993, 1999 and 2007 that secondary cyclogenesis (new storms develop on the trailing fronts of previous storms, cf .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Robustness of serial clustering of extratropical cyclones to the choice of tracking method

Pinto

Ulbrich

Economou

et al. 2016

Tellus A: Dynamic Meteorology and Oceanography

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A B S T R A C T Cyclone clusters are a frequent synoptic feature in the Euro-Atlantic area. Recent studies have shown that serial clustering of cyclones generally occurs on both flanks and downstream regions of the North Atlantic storm track, while cyclones tend to occur more regulary on the western side of the North Atlantic basin near Newfoundland. This study explores the sensitivity of serial clustering to the choice of cyclone tracking method using cyclone track data from 15 methods derived from ERA-Interim data (1979Á2010). Clustering is estimated by the dispersion (ratio of variance to mean) of winter [December Á February (DJF)] cyclone passages near each grid point over the Euro-Atlantic area. The mean number of cyclone counts and their variance are compared between methods, revealing considerable differences, particularly for the latter. Results show that all different tracking methods qualitatively capture similar large-scale spatial patterns of underdispersion and overdispersion over the study region. The quantitative differences can primarily be attributed to the differences in the variance of cyclone counts between the methods. Nevertheless, overdispersion is statistically significant for almost all methods over parts of the eastern North Atlantic and Western Europe, and is therefore considered as a robust feature. The influence of the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) on cyclone clustering displays a similar pattern for all tracking methods, with one maximum near Iceland and another between the Azores and Iberia. The differences in variance between methods are not related with different sensitivities to the NAO, which can account to over 50% of the clustering in some regions. We conclude that the general features of underdispersion and overdispersion of extratropical cyclones over the North Atlantic and Western Europe are robust to the choice of tracking method. The same is true for the influence of the NAO on cyclone dispersion.

show abstract

“…Variations in the UTLS jets influence influence surface weather patterns (e.g., see reviews by Lucas et al, 2014;Harnik et al, 2016) such as rainfall changes (e.g., Price et al, 1998;Raible et al, 2004;Karnauskas and Ummenhofer, 2014;Huang et al, 2015;Xie et al, 2015;Delworth and Zeng, 2014;Bai et al, 2016), destructive wind storms (e.g., Pinto et al, 2009Pinto et al, , 2014Gómara et al, 2014;Messori and Caballero, 2015), and extreme temperature events (e.g., Francis and Vavrus, 2012;Harnik et al, 2016). Moreover, transport processes that alter the extent and consequences of extratropical stratosphere-troposphere exchange (STE) are closely linked to the tropopause and jets, which are themselves sensitive to climate change and ozone depletion (e.g., Seidel and Randel, 2006;Lorenz and DeWeaver, 2007;Polvani et al, 2011;WMO, 2011;Hudson, 2012;Grise et al, 2013;Waugh et al, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reanalysis comparisons of upper tropospheric–lower stratospheric jets and multiple tropopauses

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The representation of upper tropospheric–lower stratospheric (UTLS) jet and tropopause characteristics is compared in five modern high-resolution reanalyses for 1980 through 2014. Climatologies of upper tropospheric jet, subvortex jet (the lowermost part of the stratospheric vortex), and multiple tropopause frequency distributions in MERRA (Modern-Era Retrospective analysis for Research and Applications), ERA-I (ERA-Interim; the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts, ECMWF, interim reanalysis), JRA-55 (the Japanese 55-year Reanalysis), and CFSR (the Climate Forecast System Reanalysis) are compared with those in MERRA-2. Differences between alternate products from individual reanalysis systems are assessed; in particular, a comparison of CFSR data on model and pressure levels highlights the importance of vertical grid spacing. Most of the differences in distributions of UTLS jets and multiple tropopauses are consistent with the differences in assimilation model grids and resolution – for example, ERA-I (with coarsest native horizontal resolution) typically shows a significant low bias in upper tropospheric jets with respect to MERRA-2, and JRA-55 (the Japanese 55-year Reanalysis) a more modest one, while CFSR (with finest native horizontal resolution) shows a high bias with respect to MERRA-2 in both upper tropospheric jets and multiple tropopauses. Vertical temperature structure and grid spacing are especially important for multiple tropopause characterizations. Substantial differences between MERRA and MERRA-2 are seen in mid- to high-latitude Southern Hemisphere (SH) winter upper tropospheric jets and multiple tropopauses as well as in the upper tropospheric jets associated with tropical circulations during the solstice seasons; some of the largest differences from the other reanalyses are seen in the same times and places. Very good qualitative agreement among the reanalyses is seen between the large-scale climatological features in UTLS jet and multiple tropopause distributions. Quantitative differences may, however, have important consequences for transport and variability studies. Our results highlight the importance of considering reanalyses differences in UTLS studies, especially in relation to resolution and model grids; this is particularly critical when using high-resolution reanalyses as an observational reference for evaluating global chemistry–climate models.

show abstract

Rossby wave‐breaking analysis of explosive cyclones in the Euro‐Atlantic sector

Cited by 46 publications

References 81 publications

On double Rossby wave breaking in the North Atlantic

On double Rossby wave breaking in the North Atlantic

Robustness of serial clustering of extratropical cyclones to the choice of tracking method

Reanalysis comparisons of upper tropospheric–lower stratospheric jets and multiple tropopauses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About