The Intraseasonal Oscillation in Eastern Pacific Sea Levels: How Is It Forced?

Enfield, David B.

doi:10.1175/1520-0485(1987)017<1860:tioiep>2.0.co;2

Cited by 99 publications

(74 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These latter variations are likely JS driven, because it has been shown that there is a variance peak in the JS ISO activity in the northern hemisphere at Ϸ2 weeks (6). Wind-driven sea level variations with periods in the 40-to 60-day band have been found along the Pacific coast of North America (19,20), again consistent with Madden-Julian forcing. However, these studies also did not consider fluctuations with periods of Ͻ30 days.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 64%

Jet stream intraseasonal oscillations drive dominant ecosystem variations in Oregon's summertime coastal upwelling system

Bane

Spitz

Letelier

et al. 2007

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 64%

Jet stream intraseasonal oscillations drive dominant ecosystem variations in Oregon's summertime coastal upwelling system

Bane

Spitz

Letelier

et al. 2007

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several authors have shown poleward propagation of coastal-trapped waves (CTWs) along the eastern tropical Pacific coast and into the GC using tide gauges, moored observations, and numerical models [e.g., Christensen et al, 1983;Enfield and Allen, 1983;Enfield, 1987;Spillane et al, 1987;Merrifield and Winant, 1989;Merrifield, 1992;Gjevik and Merrifield, 1993;Allen, 2004a, 2004b;Zamudio et al, 2007Zamudio et al, , 2008Zamudio et al, , 2010. For the range of periods of 4-20 days (synoptic band), these CTWs are generated by the alongshore wind stress generally associated with hurricanes and tropical storms that travel close to the Pacific coast of Mexico [Enfield and Allen, 1983;Gjevik and Merrifield, 1993;Zamudio et al, 2010].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For the range of periods of 4-20 days (synoptic band), these CTWs are generated by the alongshore wind stress generally associated with hurricanes and tropical storms that travel close to the Pacific coast of Mexico [Enfield and Allen, 1983;Gjevik and Merrifield, 1993;Zamudio et al, 2010]. For periods of 30-90 days (intraseasonal band), the CTWs are generated in the western and central equatorial Pacific Ocean by atmospheric oscillations of similar periods [Enfield, 1987;Spillane et al, 1987;Zamudio et al, 2007Zamudio et al, , 2008. Using a numerical model, Mart ınez and Allen [2004a, 2004b] showed that CTWs propagate into the GC along the mainland coast toward the sill zone where they split into two waves: one that propagates rapidly into the Northern Gulf and dissipates as a result of bottom friction, and a second wave, which reflects from the mid-riff islands and propagates along the peninsular side of the GC that carries most of the energy of the incident wave.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Intraseasonal CTWs have longer wavelengths, are more energetic, and are known to propagate into the GC, as well as poleward of the entrance of the GC along the western coast of the American continent up to the coast of California [Enfield, 1987;Spillane et al, 1987]. The mechanism by which these waves propagate Similarly, there is little evidence of propagation or the possible effects of CTWs in the Northern Gulf, north of Tibur on Island (see Figure 1).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effect of coastal‐trapped waves and wind on currents and transport in the Gulf of California

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Subsurface pressure (SsP) observations from stations inside and outside of the Gulf of California (GC) are used to analyze the relationship between low-frequency currents, temperature, and transport inside the GC and intraseasonal coastal-trapped waves (CTWs), which propagate poleward along the coast toward the GC. Correlation functions and coherences of SsP stations were consistent with intraseasonal CTWs splitting in two at the mouth of the gulf: one part enters the gulf, propagates around the gulf, and eventually, toward the mouth, and another part that appears to ''jump'' the mouth of the gulf and travels poleward along the west coast of the peninsula. The correlation and coherence estimates of SsP at Manzanillo with currents showed that downwelling CTWs generated along-gulf current anomalies toward the head of the gulf at the mainland shelf of the mouth, whereas at Ballenas Channel sill (San Lorenzo sill) these waves generated current anomalies toward the mouth near the surface (bottom). At the San Lorenzo (SL) sill, downwelling CTWs increased the near-bottom (400 m) temperature and reduced the bottom transport of deep, fresher, and colder water that flows toward the head of the gulf. Cross-Calibrated Multiplatform winds were used to investigate their relationship with currents. The first empirical orthogonal function of the along-gulf wind stress showed that wind blowing toward the head of the gulf generated a reduction of bottom transport toward the head of the gulf through the SL sill, and intensified surface geostrophic current fluctuations toward the head of the gulf. There was also significant correlation between inflow bottom transport and outflow surface geostrophic velocities averaged across the gulf, consistent with the exchange pattern for the Northern Gulf.

show abstract

“…The planetary waves may have periods greater than the seasonal one, but also greater than the intraseasonal periods as well. Enfield (1987) and McPhaden and Taft (1988) have documented sea level propagating fluctuations of 40-90 days across the equatorial Pacific. Regarding the Indian Basin, Sengupta et al (2001) have recorded current velocity oscillation of 20-60 day periods in the western Indian Ocean which seem to be related to baroclinic planetary waves.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evidence of different ocean responses to atmospheric pressurevariations in the Atlantic, Indian and Pacific Basins as deduced fromERS-2 altimetric data

et al. 2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The exponential increase in the use of altimeter data in oceanographic studies in the past two decades has improved the knowledge of the processes that govern the interaction between the ocean and the atmosphere. One of these processes is the response of the ocean to atmospheric pressure variations, which has been deeply analysed in the past. That response is based on the isostatic assumption used to establish a standard correction for altimetric purposes, the Inverse Barometer Correction (IBC). As a general rule, the ocean goes up/down 1 cm when the atmospheric pressure goes down/up 1 mbar. However, in light of recent works in some oceanic regions, discrepancies arise when the real response is compared to the hypothetical one. It is important to quantify this discrepancy, in order to improve the accuracy of the correction, which is one of the most significant geophysical corrections applied to altimeter records. Some aspects of this response remain unclear, such as the real space-temporal scales where IBC can be applied, the influence of wind, nonisostatic atmospheric pressure-driven signals, and the effect of aliasing from high frequency signals. This paper is an attempt to gain insight into this phenomenon. The data used are the residuals obtained between sea surface heights from the ERS-2 altimeter and the outputs of a global barotropic ocean model. Significant departures from the hypothetical isostatic response in all data series (spatial and temporal domain) have been found, especially in the case of altimeter records. By applying the collinear track method, we observe that the estimated Atlantic Ocean response is quite similar to the one deduced from the isostatic assumption at all latitudinal bands. Nonetheless, the Indian and Pacific Oceans show important departures from the hypothetical value at low latitudes. Results obtained with the crossover track method show important deviations at low latitudes in the three basins. In order to understand why the Atlantic Ocean response is different from the one obtained in the other two, we can infer some explanations based on the interaction of seasonal and intraseasonal signals with the isostatic one.

show abstract

The Intraseasonal Oscillation in Eastern Pacific Sea Levels: How Is It Forced?

Cited by 99 publications

References 0 publications

Jet stream intraseasonal oscillations drive dominant ecosystem variations in Oregon's summertime coastal upwelling system

Jet stream intraseasonal oscillations drive dominant ecosystem variations in Oregon's summertime coastal upwelling system

Effect of coastal‐trapped waves and wind on currents and transport in the Gulf of California

Evidence of different ocean responses to atmospheric pressurevariations in the Atlantic, Indian and Pacific Basins as deduced fromERS-2 altimetric data

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About