The Lack of QBO-MJO Connection in CMIP6 Models

Hyemi Kim; Julie M. Caron; Jadwiga H. Richter; Isla R. Simpson

doi:10.1029/2020GL087295

The Lack of QBO-MJO Connection in CMIP6 Models

Hyemi Kim, Julie M. Caron, Jadwiga H. Richter, Isla R. Simpson

Department of Science Education

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

43 Scopus citations

Abstract

Observational analysis has indicated a strong connection between the stratospheric quasi-biennial oscillation (QBO) and tropospheric Madden-Julian oscillation (MJO), with MJO activity being stronger during the easterly phase than the westerly phase of the QBO. We assess the representation of this QBO-MJO connection in 30 models participating in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project 6. While some models reasonably simulate the QBO during boreal winter, none of them capture a difference in MJO activity between easterly and westerly QBO that is larger than that which would be expected from the random sampling of internal variability. The weak signal of the simulated QBO-MJO connection may be due to the weaker amplitude of the QBO than observed, especially between 100 to 50 hPa. This weaker amplitude in the models is seen both in the QBO-related zonal wind and temperature, the latter of which is thought to be critical for destabilizing tropical convection.

Original language	English
Article number	e2020GL087295
Journal	Geophysical Research Letters
Volume	47
Issue number	11
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL087295
State	Published - 16 Jun 2020

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
Constructive and valuable comments from anonymous reviewers are greatly appreciated. CMIP6 data are freely available from the Earth System Grid Federation (https://esgf-node.llnl.gov/). We acknowledge the World Climate Research Programme, which through its Working Group on Coupled Modeling coordinated and promoted CMIP6. We thank the climate modeling groups for producing and making available their model output, the ESGF for archiving the data and providing access, and the multiple funding agencies who support CMIP6 and ESGF. ERA-Interim data were obtained freely online (http://apps.ecmwf.int/datasets/data/interimfulldaily). This work was supported by the National Center for Atmospheric Research, which is a major facility sponsored by the National Science Foundation under Cooperative Agreement 1852977. Portions of this study were supported by the Regional and Global Model Analysis (RGMA) component of the Earth and Environmental System Modeling Program of the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Biological & Environmental Research (BER) via National Science Foundation IA 1844590. HK was supported by NSF Grant AGS-1652289 and KMA R&D Program Grant KMI2018-03110.

Funding Information:
Constructive and valuable comments from anonymous reviewers are greatly appreciated. CMIP6 data are freely available from the Earth System Grid Federation ( https://esgf-node.llnl.gov/ ). We acknowledge the World Climate Research Programme, which through its Working Group on Coupled Modeling coordinated and promoted CMIP6. We thank the climate modeling groups for producing and making available their model output, the ESGF for archiving the data and providing access, and the multiple funding agencies who support CMIP6 and ESGF. ERA‐Interim data were obtained freely online ( http://apps.ecmwf.int/datasets/data/interimfulldaily ). This work was supported by the National Center for Atmospheric Research, which is a major facility sponsored by the National Science Foundation under Cooperative Agreement 1852977. Portions of this study were supported by the Regional and Global Model Analysis (RGMA) component of the Earth and Environmental System Modeling Program of the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Biological & Environmental Research (BER) via National Science Foundation IA 1844590. HK was supported by NSF Grant AGS‐1652289 and KMA R&D Program Grant KMI2018‐03110.

Publisher Copyright:
© 2020. The Authors.

Keywords

CMIP6
MJO
QBO

Access to Document

10.1029/2020GL087295

Cite this

@article{af442d692f614b57b9a49911e8eabfad,

title = "The Lack of QBO-MJO Connection in CMIP6 Models",

abstract = "Observational analysis has indicated a strong connection between the stratospheric quasi-biennial oscillation (QBO) and tropospheric Madden-Julian oscillation (MJO), with MJO activity being stronger during the easterly phase than the westerly phase of the QBO. We assess the representation of this QBO-MJO connection in 30 models participating in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project 6. While some models reasonably simulate the QBO during boreal winter, none of them capture a difference in MJO activity between easterly and westerly QBO that is larger than that which would be expected from the random sampling of internal variability. The weak signal of the simulated QBO-MJO connection may be due to the weaker amplitude of the QBO than observed, especially between 100 to 50 hPa. This weaker amplitude in the models is seen both in the QBO-related zonal wind and temperature, the latter of which is thought to be critical for destabilizing tropical convection.",

keywords = "CMIP6, MJO, QBO",

author = "Hyemi Kim and Caron, {Julie M.} and Richter, {Jadwiga H.} and Simpson, {Isla R.}",

note = "Funding Information: Constructive and valuable comments from anonymous reviewers are greatly appreciated. CMIP6 data are freely available from the Earth System Grid Federation (https://esgf-node.llnl.gov/). We acknowledge the World Climate Research Programme, which through its Working Group on Coupled Modeling coordinated and promoted CMIP6. We thank the climate modeling groups for producing and making available their model output, the ESGF for archiving the data and providing access, and the multiple funding agencies who support CMIP6 and ESGF. ERA-Interim data were obtained freely online (http://apps.ecmwf.int/datasets/data/interimfulldaily). This work was supported by the National Center for Atmospheric Research, which is a major facility sponsored by the National Science Foundation under Cooperative Agreement 1852977. Portions of this study were supported by the Regional and Global Model Analysis (RGMA) component of the Earth and Environmental System Modeling Program of the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Biological & Environmental Research (BER) via National Science Foundation IA 1844590. HK was supported by NSF Grant AGS-1652289 and KMA R&D Program Grant KMI2018-03110. Funding Information: Constructive and valuable comments from anonymous reviewers are greatly appreciated. CMIP6 data are freely available from the Earth System Grid Federation ( https://esgf-node.llnl.gov/ ). We acknowledge the World Climate Research Programme, which through its Working Group on Coupled Modeling coordinated and promoted CMIP6. We thank the climate modeling groups for producing and making available their model output, the ESGF for archiving the data and providing access, and the multiple funding agencies who support CMIP6 and ESGF. ERA‐Interim data were obtained freely online ( http://apps.ecmwf.int/datasets/data/interimfulldaily ). This work was supported by the National Center for Atmospheric Research, which is a major facility sponsored by the National Science Foundation under Cooperative Agreement 1852977. Portions of this study were supported by the Regional and Global Model Analysis (RGMA) component of the Earth and Environmental System Modeling Program of the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Biological & Environmental Research (BER) via National Science Foundation IA 1844590. HK was supported by NSF Grant AGS‐1652289 and KMA R&D Program Grant KMI2018‐03110. Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2020. The Authors.",

year = "2020",

month = jun,

day = "16",

doi = "10.1029/2020GL087295",

language = "English",

volume = "47",

journal = "Geophysical Research Letters",

issn = "0094-8276",

publisher = "John Wiley and Sons Inc.",

number = "11",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Lack of QBO-MJO Connection in CMIP6 Models

AU - Kim, Hyemi

AU - Caron, Julie M.

AU - Richter, Jadwiga H.

AU - Simpson, Isla R.

N1 - Funding Information: Constructive and valuable comments from anonymous reviewers are greatly appreciated. CMIP6 data are freely available from the Earth System Grid Federation (https://esgf-node.llnl.gov/). We acknowledge the World Climate Research Programme, which through its Working Group on Coupled Modeling coordinated and promoted CMIP6. We thank the climate modeling groups for producing and making available their model output, the ESGF for archiving the data and providing access, and the multiple funding agencies who support CMIP6 and ESGF. ERA-Interim data were obtained freely online (http://apps.ecmwf.int/datasets/data/interimfulldaily). This work was supported by the National Center for Atmospheric Research, which is a major facility sponsored by the National Science Foundation under Cooperative Agreement 1852977. Portions of this study were supported by the Regional and Global Model Analysis (RGMA) component of the Earth and Environmental System Modeling Program of the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Biological & Environmental Research (BER) via National Science Foundation IA 1844590. HK was supported by NSF Grant AGS-1652289 and KMA R&D Program Grant KMI2018-03110. Funding Information: Constructive and valuable comments from anonymous reviewers are greatly appreciated. CMIP6 data are freely available from the Earth System Grid Federation ( https://esgf-node.llnl.gov/ ). We acknowledge the World Climate Research Programme, which through its Working Group on Coupled Modeling coordinated and promoted CMIP6. We thank the climate modeling groups for producing and making available their model output, the ESGF for archiving the data and providing access, and the multiple funding agencies who support CMIP6 and ESGF. ERA‐Interim data were obtained freely online ( http://apps.ecmwf.int/datasets/data/interimfulldaily ). This work was supported by the National Center for Atmospheric Research, which is a major facility sponsored by the National Science Foundation under Cooperative Agreement 1852977. Portions of this study were supported by the Regional and Global Model Analysis (RGMA) component of the Earth and Environmental System Modeling Program of the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Biological & Environmental Research (BER) via National Science Foundation IA 1844590. HK was supported by NSF Grant AGS‐1652289 and KMA R&D Program Grant KMI2018‐03110. Publisher Copyright: © 2020. The Authors.

PY - 2020/6/16

Y1 - 2020/6/16

N2 - Observational analysis has indicated a strong connection between the stratospheric quasi-biennial oscillation (QBO) and tropospheric Madden-Julian oscillation (MJO), with MJO activity being stronger during the easterly phase than the westerly phase of the QBO. We assess the representation of this QBO-MJO connection in 30 models participating in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project 6. While some models reasonably simulate the QBO during boreal winter, none of them capture a difference in MJO activity between easterly and westerly QBO that is larger than that which would be expected from the random sampling of internal variability. The weak signal of the simulated QBO-MJO connection may be due to the weaker amplitude of the QBO than observed, especially between 100 to 50 hPa. This weaker amplitude in the models is seen both in the QBO-related zonal wind and temperature, the latter of which is thought to be critical for destabilizing tropical convection.

AB - Observational analysis has indicated a strong connection between the stratospheric quasi-biennial oscillation (QBO) and tropospheric Madden-Julian oscillation (MJO), with MJO activity being stronger during the easterly phase than the westerly phase of the QBO. We assess the representation of this QBO-MJO connection in 30 models participating in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project 6. While some models reasonably simulate the QBO during boreal winter, none of them capture a difference in MJO activity between easterly and westerly QBO that is larger than that which would be expected from the random sampling of internal variability. The weak signal of the simulated QBO-MJO connection may be due to the weaker amplitude of the QBO than observed, especially between 100 to 50 hPa. This weaker amplitude in the models is seen both in the QBO-related zonal wind and temperature, the latter of which is thought to be critical for destabilizing tropical convection.

KW - CMIP6

KW - MJO

KW - QBO

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85086474466&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1029/2020GL087295

DO - 10.1029/2020GL087295

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85086474466

SN - 0094-8276

VL - 47

JO - Geophysical Research Letters

JF - Geophysical Research Letters

IS - 11

M1 - e2020GL087295

ER -

The Lack of QBO-MJO Connection in CMIP6 Models

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this