Articles | Volume 1, issue 2
https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-1-657-2020
© Author(s) 2020. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-1-657-2020
© Author(s) 2020. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Research article
| 
27 Oct 2020
Research article |
| 27 Oct 2020
| 27 Oct 2020
Mechanisms and predictability of sudden stratospheric warming in winter 2018
Finnish Meteorological Institute, 00560 Helsinki, Finland
Institute for Atmospheric and Earth System Research, Faculty of Science, University of Helsinki, 00014 Helsinki, Finland
Alexey Y. Karpechko
Finnish Meteorological Institute, 00560 Helsinki, Finland
Heikki J. Järvinen
Institute for Atmospheric and Earth System Research, Faculty of Science, University of Helsinki, 00014 Helsinki, Finland
Related authors
Chaim I. Garfinkel, Zachary D. Lawrence, Amy H. Butler, Etienne Dunn-Sigouin, Irene Erner, Alexey Y. Karpechko, Gerbrand Koren, Marta Abalos, Blanca Ayarzagüena, David Barriopedro, Natalia Calvo, Alvaro de la Cámara, Andrew Charlton-Perez, Judah Cohen, Daniela I. V. Domeisen, Javier García-Serrano, Neil P. Hindley, Martin Jucker, Hera Kim, Robert W. Lee, Simon H. Lee, Marisol Osman, Froila M. Palmeiro, Inna Polichtchouk, Jian Rao, Jadwiga H. Richter, Chen Schwartz, Seok-Woo Son, Masakazu Taguchi, Nicholas L. Tyrrell, Corwin J. Wright, and Rachel W.-Y. Wu
Weather Clim. Dynam., 6, 171–195, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-6-171-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-6-171-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Variability in the extratropical stratosphere and troposphere is coupled, and because of the longer timescales characteristic of the stratosphere, this allows for a window of opportunity for surface prediction. This paper assesses whether models used for operational prediction capture these coupling processes accurately. We find that most processes are too weak; however downward coupling from the lower stratosphere to the near surface is too strong.
Zachary D. Lawrence, Marta Abalos, Blanca Ayarzagüena, David Barriopedro, Amy H. Butler, Natalia Calvo, Alvaro de la Cámara, Andrew Charlton-Perez, Daniela I. V. Domeisen, Etienne Dunn-Sigouin, Javier García-Serrano, Chaim I. Garfinkel, Neil P. Hindley, Liwei Jia, Martin Jucker, Alexey Y. Karpechko, Hera Kim, Andrea L. Lang, Simon H. Lee, Pu Lin, Marisol Osman, Froila M. Palmeiro, Judith Perlwitz, Inna Polichtchouk, Jadwiga H. Richter, Chen Schwartz, Seok-Woo Son, Irene Erner, Masakazu Taguchi, Nicholas L. Tyrrell, Corwin J. Wright, and Rachel W.-Y. Wu
Weather Clim. Dynam., 3, 977–1001, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-3-977-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-3-977-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Forecast models that are used to predict weather often struggle to represent the Earth’s stratosphere. This may impact their ability to predict surface weather weeks in advance, on subseasonal-to-seasonal (S2S) timescales. We use data from many S2S forecast systems to characterize and compare the stratospheric biases present in such forecast models. These models have many similar stratospheric biases, but they tend to be worse in systems with low model tops located within the stratosphere.
Victoria Anne Sinclair, Jenna Ritvanen, Gabin Urbancic, Irene Erner, Yurii Batrak, Dmitri Moisseev, and Mona Kurppa
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 15, 3075–3103, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-3075-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-3075-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We investigate the boundary-layer (BL) height and surface stability in southern Finland using radiosondes, a microwave radiometer and ERA5 reanalysis. Accurately quantifying the BL height is challenging, and the diagnosed BL height can depend strongly on the method used. Microwave radiometers provide reliable estimates of the BL height but only in unstable conditions. ERA5 captures the BL height well except under very stable conditions, which occur most commonly at night during the warm season.
Maksym Vasiuta, Angel Navarro Trastoy, Sanam Motlaghzadeh, Lauri Tuppi, Torsten Mayer-Gürr, and Heikki Järvinen
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 5015–5030, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-5015-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-5015-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Propagation of electromagnetic signals in Earth's neutral atmosphere inflicts errors in space geodetic observations. To model these errors accurately, it is necessary to use a signal tracing algorithm which is informed of the state of the atmosphere. We developed such an algorithm and tested it by processing Global Navigation Satellite System network observations. Our algorithm's main advantage is lossless utilization of atmospheric information provided by numerical weather prediction models.
Francisco J. Doblas-Reyes, Jenni Kontkanen, Irina Sandu, Mario Acosta, Mohammed Hussam Al Turjmam, Ivan Alsina-Ferrer, Miguel Andrés-Martínez, Leo Arriola, Marvin Axness, Marc Batlle Martín, Peter Bauer, Tobias Becker, Daniel Beltrán, Sebastian Beyer, Hendryk Bockelmann, Pierre-Antoine Bretonnière, Sebastien Cabaniols, Silvia Caprioli, Miguel Castrillo, Aparna Chandrasekar, Suvarchal Cheedela, Victor Correal, Emanuele Danovaro, Paolo Davini, Jussi Enkovaara, Claudia Frauen, Barbara Früh, Aina Gaya Àvila, Paolo Ghinassi, Rohit Ghosh, Supriyo Ghosh, Iker González, Katherine Grayson, Matthew Griffith, Ioan Hadade, Christopher Haine, Carl Hartick, Utz-Uwe Haus, Shane Hearne, Heikki Järvinen, Bernat Jiménez, Amal John, Marlin Juchem, Thomas Jung, Jessica Kegel, Matthias Kelbling, Kai Keller, Bruno Kinoshita, Theresa Kiszler, Daniel Klocke, Lukas Kluft, Nikolay Koldunov, Tobias Kölling, Joonas Kolstela, Luis Kornblueh, Sergey Kosukhin, Aleksander Lacima-Nadolnik, Jeisson Javier Leal Rojas, Jonni Lehtiranta, Tuomas Lunttila, Anna Luoma, Pekka Manninen, Alexey Medvedev, Sebastian Milinski, Ali Omar Abdelazim Mohammed, Sebastian Müller, Devaraju Naryanappa, Natalia Nazarova, Sami Niemelä, Bimochan Niraula, Henrik Nortamo, Aleksi Nummelin, Matteo Nurisso, Pablo Ortega, Stella Paronuzzi, Xabier Pedruzo Bagazgoitia, Charles Pelletier, Carlos Peña, Suraj Polade, Himansu Pradhan, Rommel Quintanilla, Tiago Quintino, Thomas Rackow, Jouni Räisänen, Maqsood Mubarak Rajput, René Redler, Balthasar Reuter, Nuno Rocha Monteiro, Francesc Roura-Adserias, Silva Ruppert, Susan Sayed, Reiner Schnur, Tanvi Sharma, Dmitry Sidorenko, Outi Sievi-Korte, Albert Soret, Christian Steger, Bjorn Stevens, Jan Streffing, Jaleena Sunny, Luiggi Tenorio, Stephan Thober, Ulf Tigerstedt, Oriol Tinto, Juha Tonttila, Heikki Tuomenvirta, Lauri Tuppi, Ginka Van Thielen, Emanuele Vitali, Jost von Hardenberg, Ingo Wagner, Nils Wedi, Jan Wehner, Sven Willner, Xavier Yepes-Arbós, Florian Ziemen, and Janos Zimmermann
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2198, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2198, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Geoscientific Model Development (GMD).
Short summary
Short summary
The Climate Change Adaptation Digital Twin (Climate DT) pioneers the operationalisation of climate projections. The system produces global simulations with local granularity for adaptation decision-making. Applications are embedded to generate tailored indicators. A unified workflow orchestrates all components in several supercomputers. Data management ensures consistency and streaming enables real-time use. It is a complementary innovation to initiatives like CMIP, CORDEX, and climate services.
Alexey Yu. Karpechko, Amy H. Butler, and Frederic Vitart
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2556, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2556, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We study how the knowledge of future tropical and stratospheric conditions could improve forecasts in winter remotely, via teleconnections, 3–6 weeks ahead. We find that the tropics improve forecasts of sea level pressure in subtropics, Europe, and North America. The stratosphere improves forecasts in high latitudes and Europe. Improvements are small for temperature and precipitation. Larger forecast ensembles than usually available for research are needed to predict teleconnection signals.
Tereza Uhlíková, Timo Vihma, Alexey Yu Karpechko, and Petteri Uotila
The Cryosphere, 19, 1031–1046, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-19-1031-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-19-1031-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
To better understand the local, regional, and global impacts of the recent rapid sea-ice decline in the Arctic, one of the key issues is to quantify the effects of sea-ice concentration on the surface radiative fluxes. We analyse these effects utilising four data sets called atmospheric reanalyses, and we evaluate uncertainties in these effects arising from inter-reanalysis differences in the sensitivity of the surface radiative fluxes to sea-ice concentration.
Hans Segura, Xabier Pedruzo-Bagazgoitia, Philipp Weiss, Sebastian K. Müller, Thomas Rackow, Junhong Lee, Edgar Dolores-Tesillos, Imme Benedict, Matthias Aengenheyster, Razvan Aguridan, Gabriele Arduini, Alexander J. Baker, Jiawei Bao, Swantje Bastin, Eulàlia Baulenas, Tobias Becker, Sebastian Beyer, Hendryk Bockelmann, Nils Brüggemann, Lukas Brunner, Suvarchal K. Cheedela, Sushant Das, Jasper Denissen, Ian Dragaud, Piotr Dziekan, Madeleine Ekblom, Jan Frederik Engels, Monika Esch, Richard Forbes, Claudia Frauen, Lilli Freischem, Diego García-Maroto, Philipp Geier, Paul Gierz, Álvaro González-Cervera, Katherine Grayson, Matthew Griffith, Oliver Gutjahr, Helmuth Haak, Ioan Hadade, Kerstin Haslehner, Shabeh ul Hasson, Jan Hegewald, Lukas Kluft, Aleksei Koldunov, Nikolay Koldunov, Tobias Kölling, Shunya Koseki, Sergey Kosukhin, Josh Kousal, Peter Kuma, Arjun U. Kumar, Rumeng Li, Nicolas Maury, Maximilian Meindl, Sebastian Milinski, Kristian Mogensen, Bimochan Niraula, Jakub Nowak, Divya Sri Praturi, Ulrike Proske, Dian Putrasahan, René Redler, David Santuy, Domokos Sármány, Reiner Schnur, Patrick Scholz, Dmitry Sidorenko, Dorian Spät, Birgit Sützl, Daisuke Takasuka, Adrian Tompkins, Alejandro Uribe, Mirco Valentini, Menno Veerman, Aiko Voigt, Sarah Warnau, Fabian Wachsmann, Marta Wacławczyk, Nils Wedi, Karl-Hermann Wieners, Jonathan Wille, Marius Winkler, Yuting Wu, Florian Ziemen, Janos Zimmermann, Frida A.-M. Bender, Dragana Bojovic, Sandrine Bony, Simona Bordoni, Patrice Brehmer, Marcus Dengler, Emanuel Dutra, Saliou Faye, Erich Fischer, Chiel van Heerwaarden, Cathy Hohenegger, Heikki Järvinen, Markus Jochum, Thomas Jung, Johann H. Jungclaus, Noel S. Keenlyside, Daniel Klocke, Heike Konow, Martina Klose, Szymon Malinowski, Olivia Martius, Thorsten Mauritsen, Juan Pedro Mellado, Theresa Mieslinger, Elsa Mohino, Hanna Pawłowska, Karsten Peters-von Gehlen, Abdoulaye Sarré, Pajam Sobhani, Philip Stier, Lauri Tuppi, Pier Luigi Vidale, Irina Sandu, and Bjorn Stevens
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-509, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-509, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The nextGEMS project developed two Earth system models that resolve processes of the order of 10 km, giving more fidelity to the representation of local phenomena, globally. In its fourth cycle, nextGEMS performed simulations with coupled ocean, land, and atmosphere over the 2020–2049 period under the SSP3-7.0 scenario. Here, we provide an overview of nextGEMS, insights into the model development, and the realism of multi-decadal, kilometer-scale simulations.
Chaim I. Garfinkel, Zachary D. Lawrence, Amy H. Butler, Etienne Dunn-Sigouin, Irene Erner, Alexey Y. Karpechko, Gerbrand Koren, Marta Abalos, Blanca Ayarzagüena, David Barriopedro, Natalia Calvo, Alvaro de la Cámara, Andrew Charlton-Perez, Judah Cohen, Daniela I. V. Domeisen, Javier García-Serrano, Neil P. Hindley, Martin Jucker, Hera Kim, Robert W. Lee, Simon H. Lee, Marisol Osman, Froila M. Palmeiro, Inna Polichtchouk, Jian Rao, Jadwiga H. Richter, Chen Schwartz, Seok-Woo Son, Masakazu Taguchi, Nicholas L. Tyrrell, Corwin J. Wright, and Rachel W.-Y. Wu
Weather Clim. Dynam., 6, 171–195, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-6-171-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-6-171-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Variability in the extratropical stratosphere and troposphere is coupled, and because of the longer timescales characteristic of the stratosphere, this allows for a window of opportunity for surface prediction. This paper assesses whether models used for operational prediction capture these coupling processes accurately. We find that most processes are too weak; however downward coupling from the lower stratosphere to the near surface is too strong.
Xavier J. Levine, Ryan S. Williams, Gareth Marshall, Andrew Orr, Lise Seland Graff, Dörthe Handorf, Alexey Karpechko, Raphael Köhler, René R. Wijngaard, Nadine Johnston, Hanna Lee, Lars Nieradzik, and Priscilla A. Mooney
Earth Syst. Dynam., 15, 1161–1177, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-1161-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-1161-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
While the most recent climate projections agree that the Arctic is warming, differences remain in how much and in other climate variables such as precipitation. This presents a challenge for stakeholders who need to develop mitigation and adaptation strategies. We tackle this problem by using the storyline approach to generate four plausible and actionable realisations of end-of-century climate change for the Arctic, spanning its most likely range of variability.
Tereza Uhlíková, Timo Vihma, Alexey Yu Karpechko, and Petteri Uotila
The Cryosphere, 18, 957–976, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-957-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-957-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
A prerequisite for understanding the local, regional, and hemispherical impacts of Arctic sea-ice decline on the atmosphere is to quantify the effects of sea-ice concentration (SIC) on the sensible and latent heat fluxes in the Arctic. We analyse these effects utilising four data sets called atmospheric reanalyses, and we evaluate uncertainties in these effects arising from inter-reanalysis differences in SIC and in the sensitivity of the latent and sensible heat fluxes to SIC.
Zachary D. Lawrence, Marta Abalos, Blanca Ayarzagüena, David Barriopedro, Amy H. Butler, Natalia Calvo, Alvaro de la Cámara, Andrew Charlton-Perez, Daniela I. V. Domeisen, Etienne Dunn-Sigouin, Javier García-Serrano, Chaim I. Garfinkel, Neil P. Hindley, Liwei Jia, Martin Jucker, Alexey Y. Karpechko, Hera Kim, Andrea L. Lang, Simon H. Lee, Pu Lin, Marisol Osman, Froila M. Palmeiro, Judith Perlwitz, Inna Polichtchouk, Jadwiga H. Richter, Chen Schwartz, Seok-Woo Son, Irene Erner, Masakazu Taguchi, Nicholas L. Tyrrell, Corwin J. Wright, and Rachel W.-Y. Wu
Weather Clim. Dynam., 3, 977–1001, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-3-977-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-3-977-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Forecast models that are used to predict weather often struggle to represent the Earth’s stratosphere. This may impact their ability to predict surface weather weeks in advance, on subseasonal-to-seasonal (S2S) timescales. We use data from many S2S forecast systems to characterize and compare the stratospheric biases present in such forecast models. These models have many similar stratospheric biases, but they tend to be worse in systems with low model tops located within the stratosphere.
Victoria Anne Sinclair, Jenna Ritvanen, Gabin Urbancic, Irene Erner, Yurii Batrak, Dmitri Moisseev, and Mona Kurppa
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 15, 3075–3103, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-3075-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-3075-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We investigate the boundary-layer (BL) height and surface stability in southern Finland using radiosondes, a microwave radiometer and ERA5 reanalysis. Accurately quantifying the BL height is challenging, and the diagnosed BL height can depend strongly on the method used. Microwave radiometers provide reliable estimates of the BL height but only in unstable conditions. ERA5 captures the BL height well except under very stable conditions, which occur most commonly at night during the warm season.
Angel Navarro Trastoy, Sebastian Strasser, Lauri Tuppi, Maksym Vasiuta, Markku Poutanen, Torsten Mayer-Gürr, and Heikki Järvinen
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 2763–2771, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-2763-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-2763-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Production of satellite products relies on information from different centers. By coupling a weather model and an orbit determination solver we eliminate the dependence on one of the centers. The coupling has proven to be possible in the first stage, where no formatting has been applied to any of the models involved. This opens a window for further development and improvement to a coupling that has proven to be as good as the predecessor model.
Adam A. Scaife, Mark P. Baldwin, Amy H. Butler, Andrew J. Charlton-Perez, Daniela I. V. Domeisen, Chaim I. Garfinkel, Steven C. Hardiman, Peter Haynes, Alexey Yu Karpechko, Eun-Pa Lim, Shunsuke Noguchi, Judith Perlwitz, Lorenzo Polvani, Jadwiga H. Richter, John Scinocca, Michael Sigmond, Theodore G. Shepherd, Seok-Woo Son, and David W. J. Thompson
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 2601–2623, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-2601-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-2601-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Great progress has been made in computer modelling and simulation of the whole climate system, including the stratosphere. Since the late 20th century we also gained a much clearer understanding of how the stratosphere interacts with the lower atmosphere. The latest generation of numerical prediction systems now explicitly represents the stratosphere and its interaction with surface climate, and here we review its role in long-range predictions and projections from weeks to decades ahead.
Nicholas L. Tyrrell, Juho M. Koskentausta, and Alexey Yu. Karpechko
Weather Clim. Dynam., 3, 45–58, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-3-45-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-3-45-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
El Niño events are known to effect the variability of the wintertime stratospheric polar vortex. The observed relationship differs from what is seen in climate models. Climate models have errors in their average winds and temperature, and in this work we artificially reduce those errors to see how that changes the communication of El Niño events to the polar stratosphere. We find reducing errors improves stratospheric variability, but does not explain the differences with observations.
Nicholas L. Tyrrell and Alexey Yu. Karpechko
Weather Clim. Dynam., 2, 913–925, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-2-913-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-2-913-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Tropical Pacific sea surface temperatures (El Niño) affect the global climate. The Pacific-to-Europe connection relies on interactions of large atmospheric waves with winds and surface pressure. We looked at how mean errors in a climate model affect its ability to simulate the Pacific-to-Europe connection. We found that even large errors in the seasonal winds did not affect the response of the model to an El Niño event, which is good news for seasonal forecasts which rely on these connections.
Pirkka Ollinaho, Glenn D. Carver, Simon T. K. Lang, Lauri Tuppi, Madeleine Ekblom, and Heikki Järvinen
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 2143–2160, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-2143-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-2143-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
OpenEnsemble 1.0 is a novel dataset that aims to open ensemble or probabilistic weather forecasting research up to the academic community. The dataset contains atmospheric states that are required for running model forecasts of atmospheric evolution. Our capacity to observe the atmosphere is limited; thus, a single reconstruction of the atmospheric state contains some errors. Our dataset provides sets of 50 slightly different atmospheric states so that these errors can be taken into account.
Lauri Tuppi, Pirkka Ollinaho, Madeleine Ekblom, Vladimir Shemyakin, and Heikki Järvinen
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 5799–5812, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-5799-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-5799-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
This paper presents general guidelines on how to utilise computer algorithms efficiently in order to tune weather models so that they would produce better forecasts. The main conclusions are that the computer algorithms work most efficiently with a suitable cost function, certain forecast length and ensemble size. We expect that our results will facilitate the use of algorithmic methods in the tuning of weather models.
Janne Lampilahti, Hanna Elina Manninen, Katri Leino, Riikka Väänänen, Antti Manninen, Stephany Buenrostro Mazon, Tuomo Nieminen, Matti Leskinen, Joonas Enroth, Marja Bister, Sergej Zilitinkevich, Juha Kangasluoma, Heikki Järvinen, Veli-Matti Kerminen, Tuukka Petäjä, and Markku Kulmala
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 11841–11854, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-11841-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-11841-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
In this work, by using co-located airborne and ground-based measurements, we show that counter-rotating horizontal circulations in the planetary boundary layer (roll vortices) frequently enhance regional new particle formation or induce localized bursts of new particle formation. These observations can be explained by the ability of the rolls to efficiently lift low-volatile vapors emitted from the surface to the top of the boundary layer where new particle formation is more favorable.
Cited articles
Albers, J. R. and Birner, T.: Vortex Preconditioning due to Planetary and Gravity Waves prior to Sudden Stratospheric Warmings, J. Atmos. Sci., 71, 4028–4054, https://doi.org/10.1175/jas-d-14-0026.1, 2014.
Australian Bureau of Meteorology: Madden-Julian Oscillation (MJO), available at: http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/mjo/, last access: 23 October 2020.
Ayarzagüena, B., Barriopedro, D., Garrido-Perez, J. M., Abalos, M., de la Cámara, A., García-Herrera, R., Calvo, N., and Ordóñez, C.: Stratospheric Connection to the Abrupt End of the 2016/2017 Iberian Drought, Geophys. Res. Lett., 45, 12639–12646, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018GL079802, 2018.
Baldwin, M. P. and Dunkerton, T. J.: Propagation of the Arctic Oscillation from the stratosphere to the troposphere, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 104, 30937–30946, https://doi.org/10.1029/1999JD900445, 1999.
Barrett, B. S.: Connections between the Madden–Julian Oscillation and surface temperatures in winter 2018 over eastern North America, Atmos. Sci. Lett., 20, 1–8, https://doi.org/10.1002/asl.869, 2019.
Butler, A. H., Seidel, D. J., Hardiman, S. C., Butchart, N., Birner, T., and Match, A.: Defining sudden stratospheric warmings, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 96, 1913–1928, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-13-00173.1, 2015.
Castanheira, J. M. and Barriopedro, D.: Dynamical connection between tropospheric blockings and stratospheric polar vortex, Geophys. Res. Lett., 37, 1–5, https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GL043819, 2010.
Chang, E. K. M.: Downstream development of baroclinic waves as inferred from regression analysis, J. Atmos. Sci., 50, 2038–2053, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1993)050<2038:DDOBWA>2.0.CO;2, 1993.
Charlton, A. J. and Polvani, L. M.: A New Look at Stratospheric Sudden Warmings. Part I: Climatology and, Am. Meteorol. Soc., 20, 449–470, 2007.
Charney, J. G. and Drazin, P. G.: Propagation of planetary-scale disturbances from the lower into the upper atmosphere, J. Geophys. Res., 66, 83–109, https://doi.org/10.1029/jz066i001p00083, 1961.
Christiansen, B.: Downward propagation and statistical forecast of the near-surface weather, J. Geophys. Res., 110, 1–10, https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JD005431, 2005.
Coy, L. and Pawson, S.: The major stratospheric sudden warming of January 2013: Analyses and forecasts in the GEOS-5 data assimilation system, Mon. Weather Rev., 143, 491–510, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-14-00023.1, 2015.
Dee, D. P., Uppala, S. M., Simmons, A. J., Berrisford, P., Poli, P., Kobayashi, S., Andrae, U., Balmaseda, M. A., Balsamo, G., Bauer, P., Bechtold, P., Beljaars, A. C. M., van de Berg, L., Bidlot, J., Bormann, N., Delsol, C., Dragani, R., Fuentes, M., Geer, A. J., Haimberger, L., Healy, S. B., Hersbach, H., Hólm, E. V., Isaksen, L., Kållberg, P., Köhler, M., Matricardi, M., Mcnally, A. P., Monge-Sanz, B. M., Morcrette, J. J., Park, B. K., Peubey, C., de Rosnay, P., Tavolato, C., Thépaut, J. N., and Vitart, F.: The ERA-Interim reanalysis: Configuration and performance of the data assimilation system, Q. J. Rpy. Meteorol. Soc., 137, 553–597, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.828, 2011.
De La Cámara, A., Birner, T., and Albers, J. R.: Are sudden stratospheric warmings preceded by anomalous tropospheric wave activity?, J. Climate, 32, 7173–7189, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-19-0269.1, 2019.
Domeisen, D. I. V., Butler, A. H., Charlton-Perez, A. J., Ayarzagüena, B., Baldwin, M. P., Dunn-Sigouin, E., Furtado, J. C., Garfinkel, C. I., Hitchcock, P., Karpechko, A. Y., Kim, H., Knight, J., Lang, A. L., Lim, E., Marshall, A., Roff, G., Schwartz, C., Simpson, I. R., Son, S., and Taguchi, M.: The role of the stratosphere in subseasonal to seasonal prediction Part II: Predictability arising from stratosphere–troposphere coupling, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 125, 2019JD030923, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JD030923, 2019.
Domeisen, D. I. V., Butler, A. H., Charlton-Perez, A. J., Ayarzagüena, B., Baldwin, M. P., Dunn-Sigouin, E., Furtado, J. C., Garfinkel, C. I., Hitchcock, P., Karpechko, A. Y., Kim, H., Knight, J., Lang, A. L., Lim, E. P., Marshall, A., Roff, G., Schwartz, C., Simpson, I. R., Son, S. W., and Taguchi, M.: The Role of the Stratosphere in Subseasonal to Seasonal Prediction: 1. Predictability of the Stratosphere, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 125, 1–17, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JD030920, 2020.
ECMWF – European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecast: Public datasets, available at” https://apps.ecmwf.int/datasets/, last access: 23 October 2020.
Garfinkel, C. I., Feldstein, S. B., Waugh, D. W., Yoo, C., and Lee, S.: Observed connection between stratospheric sudden warmings and the Madden-Julian Oscillation, Geophys. Res. Lett., 39, 1–5, https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL053144, 2012.
Harada, Y., Goto, A., Hasegawa, H., Fujikawa, N., Naoe, H., and Hirooka, T.: A Major Stratospheric Sudden Warming Event in January 2009, J. Atmos. Sci., 67, 2052–2069, https://doi.org/10.1175/2009jas3320.1, 2010.
Holton, J. R. and Tan, H.-C.: The Influence of the Equatorial Quasi-Biennial Oscillation on the Global Circulation at 50 mb, J. Atmos. Sci., 37, 2200–2208, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1980)037<2200:tioteq>2.0.co;2, 1980.
Karpechko, A. Y.: Improvements in statistical forecasts of monthly and two-monthly surface air temperatures using a stratospheric predictor, Q. J. Roy. Meteorol. Soc., 141, 2444–2456, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.2535, 2015.
Karpechko, A. Y.: Predictability of sudden stratospheric warmings in the ECMWF extended-range forecast system, Mon. Weather Rev., 146, 1063–1075, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-17-0317.1, 2018.
Karpechko, A. Y., Charlton-Perez, A., Balmaseda, M., Tyrrell, N., and Vitart, F.: Predicting Sudden Stratospheric Warming 2018 and Its Climate Impacts With a Multimodel Ensemble, Geophys. Res. Lett., 45, 13538–13546, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018GL081091, 2018.
Kautz, L. A., Polichtchouk, I., Birner, T., Garny, H., and Pinto, J. G.: Enhanced extended-range predictability of the 2018 late-winter Eurasian cold spell due to the stratosphere, Q. J. Roy. Meteorol. Soc., 146, 1040–1055, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.3724, 2019.
Kuroda, Y. and Kodera, K.: Role of planetary waves in the stratosphere–troposphere coupled variability in the northern hemisphere winter, Geophys. Res. Lett., 26, 2375–2378, https://doi.org/10.1029/1999GL900507, 1999.
Lee, S. H., Charlton‐Perez, A. J., Furtado, J. C., and Woolnough, S. J.: Abrupt stratospheric vortex weakening associated with North Atlantic anticyclonic wave breaking, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 124, 8563–8575, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JD030940, 2019.
Limpasuvan, V., Thompson, D. W. J., and Hartmann, D. L.: The life cycle of the Northern Hemisphere sudden stratospheric warmings, J. Climate, 17, 2584–2596, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(2004)017<2584:TLCOTN>2.0.CO;2, 2004.
Lu, H., Pancheva, D., Mukhtarov, P., and Cnossen, I.: QBO modulation of traveling planetary waves during northern winter, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 117, 1–15, https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD016901, 2012.
Martius, O., Polvani, L. M., and Davies, H. C.: Blocking precursors to stratospheric sudden warming events, Geophys. Res. Lett., 36, 1–5, https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GL038776, 2009.
Matsuno, T.: A Dynamical Model of the Stratospheric Sudden Warming, J. Atmos. Sci., 28, 1479–1494, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1971)028<1479:admots>2.0.co;2, 1971.
McIntyre, M. E.: Well do we Understand the Dynamics of Stratospheric Warmings?, J. Meteorol. Soc. Jpn., 60, 37–65, https://doi.org/10.2151/jmsj1965.60.1_37, 1982.
Nath, D., Chen, W., Zelin, C., Pogoreltsev, A. I., and Wei, K.: Dynamics of 2013 Sudden Stratospheric Warming event and its impact on cold weather over Eurasia: Role of planetary wave reflection, Sci. Rep., 6, 1–12, https://doi.org/10.1038/srep24174, 2016.
Newman, P. A., Nash, E. R., and Rosenfield, J. E.: What controls the temperature of the Arctic stratosphere during the spring?, J. Geophys. Res., 106, 19999–20010, 2001.
Nishii, K. and Nakamura, H.: Lower-stratospheric Rossby wave trains in the southern hemisphere: A case-study for late winter of 1997, Q. J. Roy. Meteorol. Soc., 130, 325–345, https://doi.org/10.1256/qj.02.156, 2004.
Nishii, K. and Nakamura, H.: Three-dimensional evolution of ensemble forecast spread during the onset of a stratospheric sudden warming event in January 2006, Q. J. Roy. Meteorol. Soc., 136, 894–905, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.607, 2010.
Nishii, K., Nakamura, H., and Takafumi, M.: Modulations in the planetary wave field induced byupward-propagating Rossby wave packets prior tostratospheric sudden warming events: A case-study, Q. J. Roy. Meteorol. Soc., 135, 39–52, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.359, 2009.
Peters, D. H. W., Vargin, P., Gabriel, A., Tsvetkova, N., and Yushkov, V.: Tropospheric forcing of the boreal polar vortex splitting in January 2003, Ann. Geophys., 28, 2133–2148, https://doi.org/10.5194/angeo-28-2133-2010, 2010.
Polvani, L. M. and Saravanan, R.: The three-dimensional structure of breaking Rossby waves in the polar wintertime stratosphere, J. Atmos. Sci., 57, 3663–3685, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(2000)057<3663:TTDSOB>2.0.CO;2, 2000.
Quiroz, R. S.: The association of stratospheric warmings with tropospheric blocking, J. Geophys. Res., 91, 5277, https://doi.org/10.1029/jd091id04p05277, 1986.
Rao, J., Ren, R., Chen, H., Yu, Y., and Zhou, Y.: The Stratospheric Sudden Warming Event in February 2018 and its Prediction by a Climate System Model, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 123, 13332–13345, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018JD028908, 2018.
Scaife, A. A., Karpechko, A. Y., Baldwin, M. P., Brookshaw, A., Butler, A. H., Eade, R., Gordon, M., Maclachlan, C., Martin, N., Dunstone, N., and Smith, D.: Seasonal winter forecasts and the stratosphere, Atmos. Sci. Lett., 17, 51–56, https://doi.org/10.1002/asl.598, 2016.
Schwartz, C. and Garfinkel, C. I.: Relative roles of the MJO and stratospheric variability in North Atlantic and European winter climate, J. Geophys. Res., 122, 4184–4201, https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD025829, 2017.
Sigmond, M., Scinocca, J. F., Kharin, V. V., and Shepherd, T. G.: Enhanced seasonal forecast skill following stratospheric sudden warmings, Nat. Geosci., 6, 98–102, https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo1698, 2013.
Smith, A. K.: Observation of Wave-Wave Interactions in the Stratosphere, J. Atmos. Sci., 40, 2484–2496, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1983)040<2484:OOWWII>2.0.CO;2, 1983.
Song, K. and Son, S. W.: Revisiting the ENSO – SSW Relationship, Am. Meteorol. Soc., 1, 2133–2143, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0078.1, 2018.
Subseasonal-to-Seasonal Prediction Project: S2S, available at: http://s2sprediction.net/, last access: 23 October 2020.
Taguchi, M.: Predictability of major stratospheric sudden warmings: Analysis results from JMA operational 1-month ensemble predictions from 2001/02 to 2012/13, J. Atmos. Sci., 73, 789–806, https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS-D-15-0201.1, 2016.
Taguchi, M. and Hartmann, D. L.: Increased occurrence of stratospheric sudden warmings during El Niño as simulated by WACCM, J. Climate, 19, 324–332, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI3655.1, 2006.
Takaya, K. and Nakamura, H.: A Formulation of a Phase-Independent Wave-Activity Flux for Stationary and Migratory Quasigeostrophic Eddies on a Zonally Varying Basic Flow, J. Atmos. Sci., 58, 608–627, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(2001)058<0608:afoapi>2.0.co;2, 2001.
Thompson, D. W. J., Baldwin, M. P., and Wallace, J. M.: Stratospheric connection to Northern Hemisphere wintertime weather: Implications for prediction, J. Climate, 15, 1421–1428, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(2002)015<1421:SCTNHW>2.0.CO;2, 2002.
Tripathi, O. P., Baldwin, M., Charlton-Perez, A., Charron, M., Cheung, J. C. H., Eckermann, S. D., Gerber, E., Jackson, D. R., Kuroda, Y., Lang, A., McLay, J., Mizuta, R., Reynolds, C., Roff, G., Sigmond, M., Son, S.-W., and Stockdale, T.: Examining the Predictability of the Stratospheric Sudden Warming of January 2013 Using Multiple NWP Systems, Mon. Weather Rev., 144, 1935–1960, https://doi.org/10.1175/mwr-d-15-0010.1, 2016.
Uppala, S. M., Kållberg, P. W., Simmons, A. J., Andrae, U., da Costa Bechtold, V., Fiorino, M., Gibson, J. K., Haseler, J., Hernandez, A., Kelly, G. A., Li, X., Onogi, K., Saarinen, S., Sokka, N., Allan, R. P., Andersson, E., Arpe, K., Balmaseda, M. A., Beljaars, A. C. M., van de Berg, L., Bidlot, J., Bormann, N., Caires, S., Chevallier, F., Dethof, A., Dragosavac, M., Fisher, M., Fuentes, M., Hagemann, S., Hólm, E., Hoskins, B. J., Isaksen, L., Janssen, P. A. E. M., Jenne, R., McNally, A. P., Mahfouf, J. F., Morcrette, J. J., Rayner, N. A., Saunders, R. W., Simon, P., Sterl, A., Trenberth, K. E., Untch, A., Vasiljevic, D., Viterbo, P., and Woollen, J.: The ERA-40 re-analysis, Q. J. Roy. Meteorol. Soc., 131, 2961–3012, https://doi.org/10.1256/qj.04.176, 2005.
Vitart, F.: Evolution of ECMWF sub-seasonal forecast skill scores, Q. J. Roy. Meteorol. Soc., 140, 1889–1899, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.2256, 2014.
Vitart, F.: Madden–Julian Oscillation prediction and teleconnections in the S2S database, Q. J. Roy Meteorol. Soc., 143, 2210–2220, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.3079, 2017.
Vitart, F., Ardilouze, C., Bonet, A., Brookshaw, A., Chen, M., Codorean, C., Déqué, M., Ferranti, L., Fucile, E., Fuentes, M., Hendon, H., Hodgson, J., Kang, H. S., Kumar, A., Lin, H., Liu, G., Liu, X., Malguzzi, P., Mallas, I., Manoussakis, M., Mastrangelo, D., MacLachlan, C., McLean, P., Minami, A., Mladek, R., Nakazawa, T., Najm, S., Nie, Y., Rixen, M., Robertson, A. W., Ruti, P., Sun, C., Takaya, Y., Tolstykh, M., Venuti, F., Waliser, D., Woolnough, S., Wu, T., Won, D. J., Xiao, H., Zaripov, R., and Zhang, L.: The subseasonal to seasonal (S2S) prediction project database, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 98, 163–173, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-16-0017.1, 2017.
Wheeler, M. C. and Hendon, H. H.: An All-Season Real-Time Multivariate MJO Index: Development of an Index for Monitoring and Prediction, Mon. Weather Rev., 132, 1917–1932, 2004.
Woollings, T., Charlton-Perez, A., Ineson, S., Marshall, A. G., and Masato, G.: Associations between stratospheric variability and tropospheric blocking, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 115, 1–17, https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JD012742, 2010.
Short summary
In this paper we investigate the role of the tropospheric forcing in the occurrence of the sudden stratospheric warming (SSW) that took place in February 2018, its predictability and teleconnection with the Madden–Julian oscillation (MJO) by analysing the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) ensemble forecast. The purpose of the paper is to present the results of the analysis of the atmospheric circulation before and during the SSW and clarify the driving mechanisms.
In this paper we investigate the role of the tropospheric forcing in the occurrence of the...
