Articles | Volume 2, issue 3
https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-2-913-2021
© Author(s) 2021. 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-2-913-2021
© Author(s) 2021. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Research article
| 
24 Sep 2021
Research article |
| 24 Sep 2021
| 24 Sep 2021
Minimal impact of model biases on Northern Hemisphere El Niño–Southern Oscillation teleconnections
Nicholas L. Tyrrell
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Meteorological Research Unit, Finnish Meteorological Institute, Helsinki, 00500, Finland
Alexey Yu. Karpechko
Meteorological Research Unit, Finnish Meteorological Institute, Helsinki, 00500, 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Irene Erner, Alexey Y. Karpechko, and Heikki J. Järvinen
Weather Clim. Dynam., 1, 657–674, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-1-657-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-1-657-2020, 2020
Short summary
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.
Cited articles
Abid, M. A., Kucharski, F., Molteni, F., Kang, I. S., Tompkins, A. M., and
Almazroui, M.: Separating the Indian and Pacific Ocean impacts on the
Euro-Atlantic response to ENSO and its transition from early to late winter,
J. Climate, 34, 1531–1548, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-20-0075.1, 2021.
Ayarzagüena, B., Ineson, S., Dunstone, N. J., Baldwin, M. P., and Scaife,
A. A.: Intraseasonal effects of el niño–southern oscillation on North
Atlantic climate, J. Climate, 31, 8861–8873, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-18-0097.1, 2018.
Bayr, T., Latif, M., Dommenget, D., Wengel, C., Harlaß, J., and Park,
W.: Mean-state dependence of ENSO atmospheric feedbacks in climate models,
Clim. Dynam., 50, 3171–3194, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-017-3799-2, 2018.
Bayr, T., Domeisen, D. I. V., and Wengel, C.: The effect of the equatorial
Pacific cold SST bias on simulated ENSO teleconnections to the North Pacific
and California, Clim. Dynam. 53, 3771–3789,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-019-04746-9, 2019.
Bell, C. J., Gray, L. J., Charlton-Perez, A. J., Joshi, M. M., and Scaife,
A. A.: Stratospheric communication of El Niño teleconnections to
European winter, J. Climate, 22, 4083–4096, https://doi.org/10.1175/2009JCLI2717.1,
2009.
Bell, B., Hersbach, H., Berrisford, P., Dahlgren, P., Horányi, A., Muñoz Sabater, J., Nicolas, J., Radu, R., Schepers, D., Simmons, A., Soci, C., and Thépaut, J.-N.: ERA5 monthly averaged data on pressure levels from 1950 to 1978 (preliminary version), Copernicus Climate Change Service (C3S) Climate Data Store (CDS), [data set], available at: https://cds.climate.copernicus.eu/cdsapp#!/dataset/reanalysis-era5-pressure-levels-monthly-means-preliminary-back-extension?tab=overview (last access: 11 May 2021), 2020.
Brönnimann, S.: Impact of El Niño–southern oscillation on European
climate, Rev. Geophys., 45, 8755–1209, https://doi.org/10.1029/2006RG000199, 2007.
Butler, A. H., Polvani, L. M., and Deser, C.: Separating the stratospheric
and tropospheric pathways of El Niño–Southern Oscillation
teleconnections, Environ. Res. Lett., 9, 024015,
https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/9/2/024014, 2014.
Cagnazzo, C. and Manzini, E.: Impact of the stratosphere on the winter
tropospheric teleconnections between ENSO and the North Atlantic and
European region, J. Climate, 22, 1223–1238, https://doi.org/10.1175/2008JCLI2549.1, 2009.
Chang, Y., Schubert, S. D., Koster, R. D., Molod, A. M., and Wang, H.:
Tendency Bias Correction in Coupled and Uncoupled Global Climate Models with
a Focus on Impacts over North America, J. Climate, 32, 639–661,
https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-18-0598.1, 2019.
Domeisen, D. I., Garfinkel, C. I., and Butler, A. H.: The teleconnection of
El Niño Southern Oscillation to the stratosphere, Rev.
Geophys., 57, 5–47, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018RG000596, 2019.
Dommenget, D., Haase, S., Bayr, T., and Frauen, C.: Analysis of the Slab
Ocean El Niño atmospheric feedbacks in observed and simulated ENSO
dynamics, Clim. Dynam., 42, 3187–3205, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-014-2057-0,
2014.
Frauen, C., Dommenget, D., Tyrrell, N. L., Rezny, M., and Wales, S.: Analysis
of the Nonlinearity of El Niño–Southern Oscillation Teleconnections, J.
Climate, 27, 6225–6244, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-13-00757.1, 2014.
Garfinkel, C. I. and Hartmann, D. L.: Effects of the El Niño–Southern
Oscillation and the quasi–biennial oscillation on polar temperatures in the
stratosphere, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 112, D19112, https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD008481,
2007.
Garfinkel, C. I., Weinberger, I., White, I. P., Oman, L. D., Aquila, V., and
Lim, Y. K.: The salience of nonlinearities in the boreal winter response to
ENSO: North Pacific and North America, Clim. Dynam., 52, 4429–4446,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-018-4386-x, 2019.
Hersbach, H., Bell, B., Berrisford, P., Biavati, G., Horányi, A., Muñoz Sabater, J., Nicolas, J., Peubey, C., Radu, R., Rozum, I., Schepers, D., Simmons, A., Soci, C., Dee, D., and Thépaut, J.-N.: ERA5 hourly data on pressure levels from 1979 to present, Copernicus Climate Change Service (C3S) Climate Data Store (CDS) [data set], https://doi.org/10.24381/cds.bd0915c6, 2018.
Hersbach, H., Bell, B., Berrisford, P., Horányi, A., Muñoz-Sabater, J., Nicolas, J., Peubey, C., Radu, R., Schepers, D., Simmons, A., Soci, C., Abdalla, S., Abellan, X., Balsamo, G., Bechtold, P., Biavati, G., Bidlot, J., Bonavita, M., Dahlgren, P., De Chiara, G., Dee, D. P., Diamantakis, M., Dragani, R., Flemming, J., Forbes, R., Fuentes, M., Geer, A. J., Haimberger, L., Healy, S. B., Hogan, R. J., Hólm, E. V., Janisková, M., Keeley, S., Laloyaux, P., Lopez, P., Lupu, C., Radnoti, G., de Rosnay, P., Rozum, I., Vamborg, F., Villaume, S., and Thépaut, J.-N.: The ERA5 global reanalysis, Q.
J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 146, 1999–2049, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.3803, 2020.
Hoskins, B. J. and Karoly, D. J.: The steady linear response of a spherical
atmosphere to thermal and orographic forcing, J. Atmos. Sci., 38,
1179–1196, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1981)038<1179:TSLROA>2.0.CO;2, 1981.
Jiménez-Esteve, B. and Domeisen, D. I. V.: The tropospheric pathway of
the ENSO–North Atlantic teleconnection, J. Climate, 31, 4563–4584,
https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0716.1, 2018.
Jiménez-Esteve, B. and Domeisen, D. I. V.: Nonlinearity in the North
Pacific atmospheric response to a linear ENSO forcing, Geophys. Res. Lett.,
46, 2271–2281, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018GL081226, 2019.
Karpechko, A. Yu., Tyrrell, N. L., and Rast, S.: Sensitivity of QBO
teleconnection to model circulation biases, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 147, 2147–2159,
https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.4014 2021.
Kharin, V. V. and Scinocca, J. F.: The impact of model fidelity on seasonal
predictive skill, Geophys. Res. Lett., 39, L18803, https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL052815,
2012.
King, M. P., Herceg-Bulić, I., Bladé, I., García-Serrano, J.,
Keenlyside, N., Kucharski, F., Li, C., and Sobolowski, S.: Importance of late
fall ENSO teleconnection in the Euro-Atlantic sector, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc.,
99, 1337–1343, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-17-0020.1, 2018.
Li, R. K., Woollings, T., O'Reilly, C., and Scaife, A. A.: Effect of the
North Pacific tropospheric waveguide on the fidelity of model El Niño
teleconnections, J. Climate, 33, 5223–5237, 2020.
Magnusson, L., Alonso-Balmaseda, M., Corti, S., Molteni, F., and Stockdale,
T.: Evaluation of forecast strategies for seasonal and decadal forecasts in
presence of systematic model errors, Clim. Dynam., 41, 2393–2409,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-012-1599-2, 2013a.
Magnusson, L., Alonso–Balmaseda, M., and Molteni, F.: On the dependence of
ENSO simulation on the coupled model mean state, Clim. Dynam., 41, 1509–1525,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-012-1574-y, 2013b.
Manganello, J. V. and Huang, B.: The influence of systematic errors in the
Southeast Pacific on ENSO variability and prediction in a coupled GCM, Clim.
Dynam., 32, 1015–1034, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-008-0407-5, 2009.
Manzini, E., Giorgetta, M. A., Esch, M., Kornblueh, L., and Roeckner, E.:
The Influence of Sea Surface Temperatures on the Northern Winter
Stratosphere: Ensemble Simulations with the MAECHAM5 Model, J. Climate, 19,
3863–3881, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI3826.1, 2006.
Max-Planck-Institut für Meteorologie: Availability & Licenses, available at:
https://mpimet.mpg.de/en/science/models/availability-licenses, last access: 13 January 2020.
Met Office Hadley Centre: Hadley Centre Sea Ice and Sea Surface Temperature data set (HadISST), available at: https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadisst/, last access: 13 January 2020.
Mezzina, B., García-Serrano, J., Bladé, I., Palmeiro, F.M.,
Batté, L., Ardilouze, C., Benassi, M., and Gualdi, S.: Multi-model
assessment of the late-winter extra-tropical response to El Niño and La
Niña, Clim. Dynam., 1–22, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-020-05415-y, 2020.
Rayner, N. A., Parker, D. E., Horton, E. B., Folland, C. K., Alexander, L. V., Rowell, D. P., Kent, E. C., and Kaplan, A.: Global analyses of sea surface temperature, sea ice, and night marine air temperature since the late nineteenth century, J. Geophys. Res., 108, 4407, https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002670, 2003.
Rodríguez-Fonseca, B., Suárez-Moreno, R., Ayarzagüena, B., López-Parages, J., Gómara, I., Villamayor, J., Mohino, E., Losada, T., and Castaño-Tierno, A.: A Review of ENSO Influence on the North Atlantic. A Non-Stationary Signal, Atmosphere, 7, 87, https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos7070087, 2016.
Simpson, I. R., Hitchcock, P., Shepherd, T. G., and Scinocca, J. F.: Southern
annular mode dynamics in observations and models. Part I: The influence of
climatological zonal wind biases in a comprehensive GCM, J. Climate, 26,
3953–3967, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00348.1, 2013a.
Simpson, I. R., Hitchcock, P., Shepherd, T. G., and Scinocca, J. F.: Southern
annular mode dynamics in observations and models. Part II: Eddy feedbacks,
J. Climate, 26, 5220–5241, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00495.1, 2013b.
Spencer, H., Sutton, R., and Slingo, J. M.: El Niño in a Coupled Climate
Model: Sensitivity to Changes in Mean State Induced by Heat Flux and Wind
Stress Corrections, J. Climate, 20, 2273–2298, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI4111.1, 2007.
Stevens, B., Giorgetta, M., Esch, M., Mauritsen, T., Crueger, T., Rast, S., Salzmann, M., Schmidt, H., Bader, J., Block, K., and Brokopf, R.: Atmospheric component of the MPI‐M Earth system model: ECHAM6, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 5, 146–172, https://doi.org/10.1002/jame.20015, 2013.
Tyrrell, N. and Karpechko, A. Yu.: ECHAM6 Bias Correction ENSO, figshare [data set], https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.13311623.v2, 2020.
Tyrrell, N. L., Karpechko, A. Y., and Rast, S.: Siberian snow forcing in a
dynamically bias–corrected model, J. Climate, 33, 10455–10467,
https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-19-0966.1, 2020.
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.
Tropical Pacific sea surface temperatures (El Niño) affect the global climate. The...
