Present-day and future Amazonian precipitation in global climate models: CMIP5 versus CMIP3

The present study aims at evaluating and comparing precipitation over the Amazon in two sets of historical and future climate simulations based on phase 3 (CMIP3) and 5 (CMIP5) of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project. Thirteen models have been selected in order to discuss (1) potential improvements in the simulation of present-day climate and (2) the potential reduction in the uncertainties of the model response to increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases. While several features of present-day precipitation—including annual cycle, spatial distribution and co variability with tropical sea surface temperature (SST)—have been improved, strong uncertainties remain in the climate projections. A closer comparison between CMIP5 and CMIP3 highlights a weaker consensus on increased precipitation during the wet season, but a stronger consensus on a drying and lengthening of the dry season. The latter response is related to a northward shift of the boreal summer intertropical convergence zone in CMIP5, in line with a more asymmetric warming between the northern and southern hemispheres. The large uncertainties that persist in the rainfall response arise from contrasted anomalies in both moisture convergence and evapotranspiration. They might be related to the diverse response of tropical SST and ENSO (El Niño Southern Oscillation) variability, as well as to spurious behaviours among the models that show the most extreme response. Model improvements of present-day climate do not necessarily translate into more reliable projections and further efforts are needed for constraining the pattern of the SST response and the soil moisture feedback in global climate scenarios.     

Uncertainty of ENSO-amplitude projections in CMIP5 and CMIP6 models

There is a long-standing debate on how the El Niño/Southern Oscillation (ENSO) amplitude may change during the twenty-first century in response to global warming. Here we identify the sources of uncertainty in the ENSO amplitude projections in models participating in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Phase 5 (CMIP5) and Phase 6 (CMIP6), and quantify scenario uncertainty, model uncertainty and uncertainty due to internal variability. The model projections exhibit a large spread, ranging from increasing standard deviation of up to 0.6 °C to diminishing standard deviation of up to − 0.4 °C by the end of the twenty-first century. The ensemble-mean ENSO amplitude change is close to zero. Internal variability is the main contributor to the uncertainty during the first three decades; model uncertainty dominates thereafter, while scenario uncertainty is relatively small throughout the twenty-first century. The total uncertainty increases from CMIP5 to CMIP6: while model uncertainty is reduced, scenario uncertainty is considerably increased. The models with “realistic” ENSO dynamics have been analyzed separately and categorized into models with too small, moderate and too large ENSO amplitude in comparison to instrumental observations. The smallest uncertainties are observed in the sub-ensemble exhibiting realistic ENSO dynamics and moderate ENSO amplitude. However, the global warming signal in ENSO-amplitude change is undetectable in all sub-ensembles. The zonal wind-SST feedback is identified as an important factor determining ENSO amplitude change: global warming signal in ENSO amplitude and zonal wind-SST feedback strength are highly correlated across the CMIP5 and CMIP6 models.

     

CMIP6的设计

正目前第六阶段耦合模式比较计划(Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6,简称CMIP6)正在紧张有序地进行中,这次参加对比的气候模式都是地球系统模式,其所有模式的全部计算结果将提供给各国科学家在研究全球和区域气候变化科学、影响和对策中使用。为便于大家了解和在未来的应用,这里简述CMIP6的设计~([1])。1 CMIP6设计考虑的科学焦点(1)科学背景。核心是生物地球化学强迫和反     

ENSO representation in climate models: from CMIP3 to CMIP5

We analyse the ability of CMIP3 and CMIP5 coupled ocean–atmosphere general circulation models (CGCMs) to simulate the tropical Pacific mean state and El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO). The CMIP5 multi-model ensemble displays an encouraging 30 % reduction of the pervasive cold bias in the western Pacific, but no quantum leap in ENSO performance compared to CMIP3. CMIP3 and CMIP5 can thus be considered as one large ensemble (CMIP3 + CMIP5) for multi-model ENSO analysis. The too large diversity in CMIP3 ENSO amplitude is however reduced by a factor of two in CMIP5 and the ENSO life cycle (location of surface temperature anomalies, seasonal phase locking) is modestly improved. Other fundamental ENSO characteristics such as central Pacific precipitation anomalies however remain poorly represented. The sea surface temperature (SST)-latent heat flux feedback is slightly improved in the CMIP5 ensemble but the wind-SST feedback is still underestimated by 20–50 % and the shortwave-SST feedbacks remain underestimated by a factor of two. The improvement in ENSO amplitudes might therefore result from error compensations. The ability of CMIP models to simulate the SST-shortwave feedback, a major source of erroneous ENSO in CGCMs, is further detailed. In observations, this feedback is strongly nonlinear because the real atmosphere switches from subsident (positive feedback) to convective (negative feedback) regimes under the effect of seasonal and interannual variations. Only one-third of CMIP3 + CMIP5 models reproduce this regime shift, with the other models remaining locked in one of the two regimes. The modelled shortwave feedback nonlinearity increases with ENSO amplitude and the amplitude of this feedback in the spring strongly relates with the models ability to simulate ENSO phase locking. In a final stage, a subset of metrics is proposed in order to synthesize the ability of each CMIP3 and CMIP5 models to simulate ENSO main characteristics and key atmospheric feedbacks.     

ENSO phase-locking to the boreal winter in CMIP3 and CMIP5 models

In this study, the El Nino-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) phase-locking to the boreal winter in CMIP3 and CMIP5 models is examined. It is found that the models that are poor at simulating the winter ENSO peak tend to simulate colder seasonal-mean sea-surface temperature (SST) during the boreal summer and associated shallower thermocline depth over the eastern Pacific. These models tend to amplify zonal advection and thermocline depth feedback during boreal summer. In addition, the colder eastern Pacific SST in the model can reduce the summertime mean local convective activity, which tends to weaken the atmospheric response to the ENSO SST forcing. It is also revealed that these models have more serious climatological biases over the tropical Pacific, implying that a realistic simulation of the climatological fields may help to simulate winter ENSO peak better. The models that are poor at simulating ENSO peak in winter also show excessive anomalous SST warming over the western Pacific during boreal winter of the El Nino events, which leads to strong local convective anomalies. This prevents the southward shift of El Nino-related westerly during boreal winter season. Therefore, equatorial westerly is prevailed over the western Pacific to further development of ENSO-related SST during boreal winter. This bias in the SST anomaly is partly due to the climatological dry biases over the central Pacific, which confines ENSO-related precipitation and westerly responses over the western Pacific.     

Understanding the sources of Caribbean precipitation biases in CMIP3 and CMIP5 simulations

We assess the ability of Global Climate Models participating in phases 3 and 5 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP3 and CMIP5) to simulate observed annual precipitation cycles over the Caribbean. Compared to weather station records and gridded observations, we find that both CMIP3 and CMIP5 models can be grouped into three categories: (1) models that correctly simulate a bimodal distribution with two rainfall maxima in May–June and September–October, punctuated by a mid-summer drought (MSD) in July–August; (2) models that reproduce the MSD and the second precipitation maxima only; and (3) models that simulate only one precipitation maxima, beginning in early summer. These categories appear related to model simulation of the North Atlantic Subtropical High (NASH) and sea surface temperature (SST) in the Caribbean Sea and Gulf of Mexico. Specifically, models in category 2 tend to anticipate the westward expansion of the NASH into the Caribbean in early summer. Early onset of NASH results in strong moisture divergence and MSD-like conditions at the time of the May–June observed precipitation maxima. Models in category 3 tend to have cooler SST across the region, particularly over the central Caribbean and the Gulf of Mexico, as well as a weaker Caribbean low-level jet accompanying a weaker NASH. In these models, observed June-like patterns of moisture convergence in the central Caribbean and the Central America and divergence in the east Caribbean and the Gulf of Mexico persist through September. This analysis suggests systematic biases in model structure may be responsible for biases in observed precipitation variability over the Caribbean and more confidence may be placed in the precipitation simulated by the GCMs that are able to correctly simulate seasonal cycles of SST and NASH.     

Uncertainty in land surface temperature simulation over China by CMIP3/CMIP5 models

In this paper, China-based observations are used to evaluate the performance of 24 CMIP3 (phase 3 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project) and 10 CMIP5 models in simulating land surface temperature (LST). It is found that all models can generally reproduce the climatology patterns of LST averaged during the period from 1960 to 1999. Further analyses of the regional features of LST show that the discrepancies between the observations and the simulations are smaller in Southwest and East China. Moreover, these models overestimate the temperatures in almost all areas, particularly in July. Although many models have large biases relative to the observations, the spread of the model results is large (i.e., >22 °C in Northwest and Northeast China). For the interannual variations, neither the individual models nor the multi-model mean has a remarkable positive correlation to the observations in the selected subregions. However, most models can capture geographic features during trend evaluations. A multi-model ensemble is believed to be an effective way to limit uncertainties, but the results suggest that its efficiency is restricted to simulating the LST trend. Examination of the surface energy budget indicated that the modeled discrepancies of net shortwave radiation and surface sensible heat flux may be responsible for the LST results, especially in July. It is concluded that the ability of current models in simulating LST over China is still a significant challenge. The spread of the models is large in simulating the climatology, interannual variation, and trend of LSTs. In general, the magnitudes of the spread may be as large as the magnitudes of the observations. Additionally, it is found that multi-model ensembles do not simulate LST with any more skill. Therefore, more work must focus on the limitations of the models' uncertainties in land surface research.     

Relative performance of CMIP5 and CMIP6 models in simulating rainfall in Peninsular Malaysia

Theoretical and Applied Climatology - This study evaluated the skills of global climate models (GCMs) of the fifth and sixth Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5 and CMIP6) in simulating...     

Uncertainty in Projection of Climate Extremes: A Comparison of CMIP5 and CMIP6

Climate projections by global climate models(GCMs) are subject to considerable and multi-source uncertainties.This study aims to compare the uncertainty in projection of precipitation and temperature extremes between Coupled Model Intercomparison Project(CMIP) phase 5(CMIP5) and phase 6(CMIP6), using 24 GCMs forced by 3 emission scenarios in each phase of CMIP. In this study, the total uncertainty(T) of climate projections is decomposed into the greenhouse gas emission scenario uncertainty(S, mean inter-scenario variance of the signals over all the models), GCM uncertainty(M, mean inter-model variance of signals over all emission scenarios), and internal climate variability uncertainty(V, variance in noises over all models, emission scenarios, and projection lead times); namely,T = S + M + V. The results of analysis demonstrate that the magnitudes of S, M, and T present similarly increasing trends over the 21 st century. The magnitudes of S, M, V, and T in CMIP6 are 0.94–0.96, 1.38–2.07, 1.04–1.69, and 1.20–1.93 times as high as those in CMIP5. Both CMIP5 and CMIP6 exhibit similar spatial variation patterns of uncertainties and similar ranks of contributions from different sources of uncertainties. The uncertainty for precipitation is lower in midlatitudes and parts of the equatorial region, but higher in low latitudes and the polar region. The uncertainty for temperature is higher over land areas than oceans, and higher in the Northern Hemisphere than the Southern Hemisphere. For precipitation, T is mainly determined by M and V in the early 21 st century, by M and S at the end of the 21 st century; and the turning point will appear in the 2070 s. For temperature, T is dominated by M in the early 21 st century, and by S at the end of the 21 st century, with the turning point occuring in the 2060 s. The relative contributions of S to T in CMIP6(12.5%–14.3% for precipitation and 31.6%–36.2% for temperature) are lower than those in CMIP5(15.1%–17.5% for precipitation and 38.6%–43.8% for temperature). By contrast, the relative contributions of M in CMIP6(50.6%–59.8% for precipitation and 59.4%–60.3% for temperature) are higher than those in CMIP5(47.5%–57.9% for precipitation and 51.7%–53.6% for temperature). The higher magnitude and relative contributions of M in CMIP6 indicate larger difference among projections of various GCMs. Therefore, more GCMs are needed to ensure the robustness of climate projections.     

Robustness of Precipitation Projections in China:Comparison between CMIP5 and CMIP3 Models

Three sources of uncertainty in model projections of precipitation change in China for the 21st century were separated and quantified: internal variability,inter-model variability,and scenario uncertainty.Simulations from models involved in the third phase and the fifth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project(CMIP3 and CMIP5) were compared to identify improvements in the robustness of projections from the latest generation of models.No significant differences were found between CMIP3 and CMIP5 in terms of future precipitation projections over China,with the two datasets both showing future increases.The uncertainty can be attributed firstly to internal variability,and then to both inter-model and internal variability.Quantification analysis revealed that the uncertainty in CMIP5 models has increased by about 10%–60% with respect to CMIP3,despite significant improvements in the latest generation of models.The increase is mainly due to the increase of internal variability in the initial decades,and then mainly due to the increase of inter-model variability thereafter,especially by the end of this century.The change in scenario uncertainty shows no major role,but makes a negative contribution to begin with,and then an increase later.     

Impact of increasing CO2 on monthly-to-annual precipitation extremes: analysis of the CMIP2 experiments

The impact of increasing atmospheric CO₂ on high and low extremes of monthly-to-annual precipitation is studied using 20 model experiments participating in the second phase of the coupled model intercomparison project (CMIP2). In marked contrast with previous research on daily precipitation extremes, the simulated changes in extremes on these longer time scales are well correlated with the changes in the long-term mean precipitation: wet extremes become more severe especially where the mean precipitation increases, and dry extremes where the mean precipitation decreases. Changes in relative variability play a smaller but discernible role. In an ensemble-mean sense, the variability increases slightly in most areas, so that the contrast between the high and low precipitation extremes grows larger with increasing CO₂. The changes in the frequency of extremes (fraction of cases with precipitation above a high or below a low predefined threshold) are much larger than the changes in their magnitude. Most of the ensemble-averaged changes in the frequency of extremes can be reconstructed by using the changes in time mean precipitation alone, provided that the variation in time mean precipitation change between different models is taken into account. The nonlinear relationship between the mean precipitation and the frequency of extremes complicates the interpretation of the frequency changes, especially when averaging frequencies over different models.     

Evaluation of spring persistent rainfall over East Asia in CMIP3/CMIP5 AGCM simulations

The progress made fi＇om Phase 3 to Phase 5 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project （CMIP3 to CMIP5） in simulating spring persistent rainfall （SPR） over East Asia was examined from the outputs of nine atmospheric general circulation models （AGCMs）. The majority of the models overestimated the precipitation over the SPR domain, with the mean latitude of the SPR belt shifting to the north. The overestimation was about 1mm d-1 in the CMIP3 ensemble, and the northward displacement was about 3°, while in the CMIP5 ensemble the overestimation was suppressed to 0.7 mm d-i and the northward shift decreased to 2.5°. The SPR features a northeast-southwest extended rain belt with a slope of 0.4°N/°E. The CMIP5 ensemble yielded a smaller slope （0.2°N/°E）, whereas the CMIP3 ensemble featured an unre- alistic zonally-distributed slope. The CMIP5 models also showed better skill in simulating the interannual variability of SPR. Previous studies have suggested that the zonal land-sea thermal contrast and sensible heat flux over the southeastern Tibetan Plateau are important for the existence of SPR. These two ther- mal factors were captured well in the CMIP5 ensemble, but underestimated in the CMIP3 ensemble. The variability of zonal land-sea thermal contrast is positively correlated with the rainfall amount over the main SPR center, but it was found that an overestimated thermal contrast between East Asia and South China Sea is a common problem in most of the CMIP3 and CMIP5 models. Simulation of the meridional thermal contrast is therefore important for the future improvement of current AGCMs.     

Climate change hotspots over South America: from CMIP3 to CMIP5 multi-model datasets

This study identifies possible hotspots of climate change in South America through an examination of the spatial pattern of the Regional Climate Change Index (RCCI) over the region by the end of the twenty-first century. The RCCI is a qualitative index that can synthesize a large number of climate model projections, and it is suitable for identifying those regions where climate change could be more pronounced in a warmer climate. The reliability and uncertainties of the results are evaluated by using numerous state-of-the-art general circulation models (GCMs) and forcing scenarios from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phases 3 and 5. The results show that southern Amazonia and the central-western region and western portion of Minas Gerais state in Brazil are persistent climate change hotspots through different forcing scenarios and GCM datasets. In general, as the scenarios vary from low- to high-level forcing, the area of high values of RCCI increase and the magnitude intensify from central-western and southeast Brazil to northwest South America. In general, the climatic hotspots identified in this study are characterized by an increase of mean surface air temperature, mainly in the austral winter; by an increase of interannual temperature variability, predominantly in the austral summer; and by a change in the mean and interannual variability of precipitation during the austral winter.     

Scale-dependent regional climate predictability over North America inferred from CMIP3 and CMIP5 ensemble simulations

Through the analysis of ensembles of coupled model simulations and projections collected from CMIP3 and CMIP5, we demonstrate that a fundamental spatial scale limit might exist below which useful additional refinement of climate model predictions and projections may not be possible. That limit varies among climate variables and from region to region. We show that the uncertainty (noise) in surface temperature predictions (represented by the spread among an ensemble of global climate model simulations) generally exceeds the ensemble mean (signal) at horizontal scales below 1000 km throughout North America, implying poor predictability at those scales. More limited skill is shown for the predictability of regional precipitation. The ensemble spread in this case tends to exceed or equal the ensemble mean for scales below 2000 km. These findings highlight the challenges in predicting regionally specific future climate anomalies, especially for hydroclimatic impacts such as drought and wetness.     

Reproducibility of precipitation distribution over the tropical oceans in CMIP5 multi-climate models compared to CMIP3

Reproducibility of precipitation distribution over the tropical oceans for the recent dataset of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 5 (CMIP5) is investigated and compared to CMIP3. The Taylor skill score for the reproducibility of the CMIP5 multi-model ensemble mean (0.64) is slightly higher than that of CMIP3 (0.60), but the difference is not statistically significant. Still, there is some evidences that the double intertropical convergence zone (ITCZ) bias is mitigated from CMIP3 to CMIP5, whereas the cold tongue bias remains similar. An inter-model empirical orthogonal function analysis shows that these two biases are closely related to the dominant inter-model discrepancies of precipitation patterns. The two biases are attributed to two factors, respectively. In the CMIP5 models with the prominent double ITCZ, the deep convection is not sensitive enough to environmental air humidity at the lower-mid troposphere, as is in CMIP3. Thus, the deep convection is not suppressed even over the dry subsidence region of the southeastern Pacific, forming the double ITCZ bias. Conversely, models with the severe cold tongue bias have lower ocean model resolution with too strong equatorial trades. Therefore, proper representation of the sensitivity of deep convection to humidity and higher resolution of the ocean models with better equatorial trades are important for reducing the double ITCZ and the cold tongue biases.     

Regional and seasonal intercomparison of CMIP3 and CMIP5 climate model ensembles for temperature and precipitation

Regional and seasonal temperature and precipitation over land are compared across two generations of global climate model ensembles, specifically, CMIP5 and CMIP3, through historical twentieth century skills and multi-model agreement, and twenty first century projections. A suite of diagnostic and performance metrics, ranging from spatial bias or model-consensus maps and aggregate time series plots, to measures of equivalence between probability density functions and Taylor diagrams, are used for the intercomparisons. Pairwise and multi-model ensemble comparisons were performed for 11 models, which were selected based on data availability and resolutions. Results suggest little change in the central tendency or variability or uncertainty of historical skills or consensus across the two generations of models. However, there are regions and seasons, at different levels of aggregation, where significant changes, performance improvements, and even degradation in skills, are suggested. The insights may provide directions for further improvements in next generations of climate models, and in the meantime, help inform adaptation and policy.     

CMIP3及CMIP5模式对冬季和春季北极涛动变率模拟的比较

结合NCEP再分析资料,评估了28个参加第五次耦合模式比较计划（CMIP5）的耦合模式对1950-2000年冬、春季北极涛动（AO）变率的模拟能力,并与CMIP3模式模拟结果进行了对比。结果表明,尽管CMIP5模式没能模拟出冬、春季AO指数前30年处于显著的负位相期而后20年处于显著的正位相期的特征,但是基本能够模拟出冬、春季AO指数1950-2000年显著的增强趋势以及振荡周期,多模式集合改进了模拟效果。同样,CMIP3模式没能模拟出冬、春季AO指数前30年处于显著的负位相而后20年处于显著的正位相的特征,而且1950-2000年冬、春季AO指数的增强趋势在CMIP3模式模拟结果中也没有表现出来,多模式集合没有改进模式模拟效果。不仅如此,CMIP3模式对AO指数的长期变化周期模拟不好,只是模拟出了冬季周期为2～3 a的振荡,没有模拟出春季AO指数的4～5 a振荡周期。尽管CMIP5模式对冬、春季AO指数的模拟能力还不够理想,没有完全模拟出AO指数的变化特征,但是相对于CMIP3模式,无论是对AO指数变化趋势的模拟还是对其变化周期的模拟,CMIP5模式都有所提高。