Articles | Volume 6, issue 4
https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-6-1283-2025
© Author(s) 2025. 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-6-1283-2025
© Author(s) 2025. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Research article
| 
04 Nov 2025
Research article |
| 04 Nov 2025
| 04 Nov 2025
Mean state and day-to-day variability of tropospheric circulation in planetary-scale barotropic Rossby waves during Eurasian heat extremes in CMIP5 models
Iana Strigunova
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Meteorological Institute, Center for Earth System Research and Sustainability (CEN), Universität of Hamburg, Grindelberg 5, 20144 Hamburg, Germany
now at: Department of Earth Sciences, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden
Frank Lunkeit
Meteorological Institute, Center for Earth System Research and Sustainability (CEN), Universität of Hamburg, Grindelberg 5, 20144 Hamburg, Germany
Nedjeljka Žagar
Meteorological Institute, Center for Earth System Research and Sustainability (CEN), Universität of Hamburg, Grindelberg 5, 20144 Hamburg, Germany
Damjan Jelić
Department of Physics, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
now at: Department of Geophysics, Faculty of Science, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia
Related authors
Iana Strigunova, Richard Blender, Frank Lunkeit, and Nedjeljka Žagar
Weather Clim. Dynam., 3, 1399–1414, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-3-1399-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-3-1399-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We show that the Eurasian heat waves (HWs) have signatures in the global circulation. We present changes in the probability density functions (PDFs) of energy anomalies in the zonal-mean state and in the Rossby waves at different zonal scales in relation to the changes in intramonthly variability. The skewness of the PDF of planetary-scale Rossby waves is shown to increase during HWs, while their intramonthly variability is reduced, a process referred to as blocking.
Danilo Custódio, Katrine Aspmo Pfaffhuber, T. Gerard Spain, Fidel F. Pankratov, Iana Strigunova, Koketso Molepo, Henrik Skov, Johannes Bieser, and Ralf Ebinghaus
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 3827–3840, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-3827-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-3827-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
As a poison in the air that we breathe and the food that we eat, mercury is a human health concern for society as a whole. In that regard, this work deals with monitoring and modelling mercury in the environment, improving wherewithal, identifying the strength of the different components at play, and interpreting information to support the efforts that seek to safeguard public health.
Peishan Chen, Katharina M. Holube, Frank Lunkeit, Nedjeljka Žagar, Yuan-Bing Zhao, and Riyu Lu
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2485, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2485, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We analyze the equatorial wave circulation associated with the subtropical western North Pacific (SWNP) convection. Results show that Rossby and Kelvin waves–the Gill solution–enhance the equatorward side of the SWNP anticyclone/cyclone together, while mixed Rossby-gravity and inertia-gravity waves dominate the cross-equatorial flow, suggesting caution in applying the Gill solution. Following peak convection, IG waves complements Rossby waves to shape the anticyclone in the Southern Hemisphere.
Rémy Asselot, Philip B. Holden, Frank Lunkeit, and Inga Hense
Earth Syst. Dynam., 15, 875–891, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-875-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-875-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Phytoplankton are tiny oceanic algae able to absorb the light penetrating the ocean. The light absorbed by these organisms is re-emitted as heat in the surrounding environment, a process commonly called phytoplankton light absorption (PLA). As a consequence, PLA increases the oceanic temperature. We studied this mechanism with a climate model under different climate scenarios. We show that phytoplankton light absorption is reduced under strong warming scenarios, limiting oceanic warming.
Yuan-Bing Zhao, Nedjeljka Žagar, Frank Lunkeit, and Richard Blender
Weather Clim. Dynam., 4, 833–852, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-4-833-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-4-833-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Coupled climate models have significant biases in the tropical Indian Ocean (TIO) sea surface temperature (SST). Our study shows that the TIO SST biases can affect the simulated global atmospheric circulation and its spatio-temporal variability on large scales. The response of the spatial variability is related to the amplitude or phase of the circulation bias, depending on the flow regime and spatial scale, while the response of the interannual variability depends on the sign of the SST bias.
Iana Strigunova, Richard Blender, Frank Lunkeit, and Nedjeljka Žagar
Weather Clim. Dynam., 3, 1399–1414, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-3-1399-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-3-1399-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We show that the Eurasian heat waves (HWs) have signatures in the global circulation. We present changes in the probability density functions (PDFs) of energy anomalies in the zonal-mean state and in the Rossby waves at different zonal scales in relation to the changes in intramonthly variability. The skewness of the PDF of planetary-scale Rossby waves is shown to increase during HWs, while their intramonthly variability is reduced, a process referred to as blocking.
Matic Pikovnik, Žiga Zaplotnik, Lina Boljka, and Nedjeljka Žagar
Weather Clim. Dynam., 3, 625–644, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-3-625-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-3-625-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Potential future changes in the Hadley cells (HCs), either to their strength or their meridional extent, will profoundly impact the global distribution of precipitation. Therefore, to objectively evaluate and inter-compare past and future changes in the overall HC strength between different studies, a unified metric is required. The study proposes two new metrics, which alleviate the spatial inhomogeneities of the HC strength trend.
Miriam D'Errico, Flavio Pons, Pascal Yiou, Soulivanh Tao, Cesare Nardini, Frank Lunkeit, and Davide Faranda
Earth Syst. Dynam., 13, 961–992, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-961-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-961-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Climate change is already affecting weather extremes. In a warming climate, we will expect the cold spells to decrease in frequency and intensity. Our analysis shows that the frequency of circulation patterns leading to snowy cold-spell events over Italy will not decrease under business-as-usual emission scenarios, although the associated events may not lead to cold conditions in the warmer scenarios.
Danilo Custódio, Katrine Aspmo Pfaffhuber, T. Gerard Spain, Fidel F. Pankratov, Iana Strigunova, Koketso Molepo, Henrik Skov, Johannes Bieser, and Ralf Ebinghaus
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 3827–3840, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-3827-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-3827-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
As a poison in the air that we breathe and the food that we eat, mercury is a human health concern for society as a whole. In that regard, this work deals with monitoring and modelling mercury in the environment, improving wherewithal, identifying the strength of the different components at play, and interpreting information to support the efforts that seek to safeguard public health.
Rémy Asselot, Frank Lunkeit, Philip B. Holden, and Inga Hense
Biogeosciences, 19, 223–239, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-19-223-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-19-223-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Previous studies show that phytoplankton light absorption can warm the atmosphere, but how this warming occurs is still unknown. We compare the importance of air–sea heat versus CO2 flux in the phytoplankton-induced atmospheric warming and determine the main driver. To shed light on this research question, we conduct simulations with a climate model of intermediate complexity. We show that phytoplankton mainly warms the atmosphere by increasing the air–sea CO2 flux.
Rémy Asselot, Frank Lunkeit, Philip Holden, and Inga Hense
Earth Syst. Dynam. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-2021-91, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-2021-91, 2021
Revised manuscript not accepted
Short summary
Short summary
Phytoplankton absorbing light can influence the climate system but its future effect on the climate is still unclear. We use a climate model to investigate the role of phytoplankton light absorption under global warming. We find out that the effect of phytoplankton light absorption is smaller under a high greenhouse gas emissions compared to reduced and intermediate greenhouse gas emissions. Additionally, we show that phytoplankton light absorption is an important mechanism for the carbon cycle.
Cited articles
Barriopedro, D., García-Herrera, R., Ordóñez, C., Miralles, D., and Salcedo-Sanz, S.: Heat waves: Physical understanding and scientific challenges, Rev. Geophys., 61, e2022RG000780, https://doi.org/10.1029/2022RG000780, 2023. a, b, c
Basharin, D., Polonsky, A., and Stankunavicius, G.: Projected precipitation and air temperature over Europe using a performance-based selection method of CMIP5 GCMs, J. Water Clim. Chang., 7, 103–113, https://doi.org/10.2166/wcc.2015.081, 2016. a, b
Brunner, L., Schaller, N., Anstey, J., Sillmann, J., and Steiner, A. K.: Dependence of present and future European temperature extremes on the location of atmospheric blocking, Geophys. Res. Lett., 45, 6311–6320, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018GL077837, 2018. a, b
Buzan, J. R., Oleson, K., and Huber, M.: Implementation and comparison of a suite of heat stress metrics within the Community Land Model version 4.5, Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 151–170, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-151-2015, 2015. a
Davini, P. and D’Andrea, F.: Northern Hemisphere atmospheric blocking representation in global climate models: twenty years of improvements?, J. Climate, 29, 8823–8840, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0242.1, 2016. a, b, c
Davini, P. and d’Andrea, F.: From CMIP3 to CMIP6: Northern Hemisphere atmospheric blocking simulation in present and future climate, J. Climate, 33, 10021–10038, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-19-0862.1, 2020. a
De Luca, P. and Donat, M. G.: Projected changes in hot, dry, and compound hot-dry extremes over global land regions, Geophys. Res. Lett., 50, e2022GL102493, https://doi.org/10.1029/2022GL102493, 2023. a, b
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. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 137, 553–597, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.828, 2011. a
Doblas-Reyes, F., Sörensson, A., Almazroui, M., Dosio, A., Gutowski, W., Haarsma, R., Hamdi, R., Hewitson, B., Kwon, W.-T., Lamptey, B., Maraun, D., Stephenson, T., Takayabu, I., Terray, L., Turner, A., and Zuo, Z.: Linking Global to Regional Climate Change, p. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 1363–1512, https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896.012, 2021. a
Domeisen, D. I. V., Eltahir, E. A. B., Fischer, E. M., Knutti, R., Perkins-Kirkpatrick, S. E., Schär, C., Seneviratne, S. I., Weisheimer, A., and Wernli, H.: Prediction and projection of heatwaves, Nat. Rev. Earth Environ., 4, 36–50, https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-022-00371-z, 2023. a, b
Donner, L. J., Wyman, B. L., Hemler, R. S., Horowitz, L. W., Ming, Y., Zhao, M., Golaz, J.-C., Ginoux, P., Lin, S.-J., Schwarzkopf, M. D., Austin, J., Alaka, G., Cooke, W. F., Delworth, T. L., Freidenreich, S. M., Gordon, C. T., Griffies, S. M., Held, I. M., Hurlin, W. J., Klein, S. A., Knutson, T. R., Langenhorst, A. R., Lee, H.-C., Lin, Y., Magi, B. I., Malyshev, S. L., Milly, P. C. D., Naik, V., Nath, M. J., Pincus, R., Ploshay, J. J., Ramaswamy, V., Seman, C. J., Shevliakova, E., Sirutis, J. J., Stern, W. F., Stouffer, R. J., Wilson, R. J., Winton, M., Wittenberg, A. T., and Zeng, F.: The Dynamical Core, Physical Parameterizations, and Basic Simulation Characteristics of the Atmospheric Component AM3 of the GFDL Global Coupled Model CM3, J. Climate, 24, 3484–3519, https://doi.org/10.1175/2011JCLI3955.1, 2011. a
Dunn-Sigouin, E. and Son, S.-W.: Northern Hemisphere blocking frequency and duration in the CMIP5 models, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 118, 1179–1188, https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50143, 2013. a
Fan, X., Miao, C., Duan, Q., Shen, C., and Wu, Y.: The performance of CMIP6 versus CMIP5 in simulating temperature extremes over the global land surface, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 125, e2020JD033031, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JD033031, 2020. a
Fischer, E. M., Seneviratne, S. I., Vidale, P. L., Lüthi, D., and Schär, C.: Soil Moisture–Atmosphere Interactions during the 2003 European Summer Heat Wave, J. Climate, 20, 5081–5099, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI4288.1, 2007. a
Flato, G., Marotzke, J., Abiodun, B., Braconnot, P., Chou, S., Collins, W., Cox, P., Driouech, F., Emori, S., Eyring, V., Forest, C., Gleckler, P., Guilyardi, E., Jakob, C., Kattsov, V., Reason, C., and Rummukainen, M.: Evaluation of Climate Models, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 741–866, https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.020, 2013. a
Giorgetta, M. A., Jungclaus, J., Reick, C. H., Legutke, S., Bader, J., Böttinger, M., Brovkin, V., Crueger, T., Esch, M., Fieg, K., Glushak, K., Gayler, V., Haak, H., Hollweg, H.-D., Ilyina, T., Kinne, S., Kornblueh, L., Matei, D., Mauritsen, T., Mikolajewicz, U., Mueller, W., Notz, D., Pithan, F., Raddatz, T., Rast, S., Redler, R., Roeckner, E., Schmidt, H., Schnur, R., Segschneider, J., Six, K. D., Stockhause, M., Timmreck, C., Wegner, J., Widmann, H., Wieners, K.-H., Claussen, M., Marotzke, J., and Stevens, B.: Climate and carbon cycle changes from 1850 to 2100 in MPI-ESM simulations for the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 5, J. Adv. Model., 5, 572–597, https://doi.org/10.1002/jame.20038, 2013. a
Gulev, S., Thorne, P., Ahn, J., Dentener, F., Domingues, C., Gerland, S., Gong, D., Kaufman, D., Nnamchi, H., Quaas, J., Rivera, J., Sathyendranath, S., Smith, S., Trewin, B., von Schuckmann, K., and Vose, R.: Changing State of the Climate System, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 287–422, https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896.004, 2021. a
Hersbach, H., Bell, B., Berrisford, P., Hirahara, S., 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., De Chiara, G., Dahlgren, P., Dee, D., Diamantakis, M., Dragani, R., Flemming, J., Forbes, R., Fuentes, M., Geer, A., Haimberger, L., Healy, S., Hogan, R. J., Hólm, E., 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. a
Hirsch, A. L., Ridder, N. N., Perkins-Kirkpatrick, S. E., and Ukkola, A.: CMIP6 MultiModel Evaluation of Present-Day Heatwave Attributes, Geophys. Res. Lett., 48, e2021GL095161, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021GL095161, 2021. a, b, c
Horton, R. M., Mankin, J. S., Lesk, C., Coffel, E., and Raymond, C.: A review of recent advances in research on extreme heat events, Curr. Clim. Change Rep., 2, 242–259, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40641-016-0042-x, 2016. a
Hunt, E., Femia, F., Werrell, C., Christian, J. I., Otkin, J. A., Basara, J., Anderson, M., White, T., Hain, C., Randall, R., and McGaughey, K.: Agricultural and food security impacts from the 2010 Russia flash drought, Weather Clim. Extrem., 34, 100383, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wace.2021.100383, 2021. a
IPCC: Climate Change 2021 – The Physical Science Basis: Working Group I Contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, 1055–1210, https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896.010, 2023. a, b
Jeong, D. I., Cannon, A. J., and Yu, B.: Influences of atmospheric blocking on North American summer heatwaves in a changing climate: a comparison of two Canadian Earth system model large ensembles, Clim. Change, 172, 1–21, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-022-03358-3, 2022. a, b
Jeong, J.-H., Kim, M.-S., Yoon, J.-H., Kim, H., Wang, S.-Y. S., Woo, S.-H., and Linderholm, H. W.: Emerging trans-Eurasian heatwave-drought train in a warming climate, Sci. Adv., 11, eadr7320, https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.adr7320, 2025. a
Kim, Y.-H., Min, S.-K., Zhang, X., Sillmann, J., and Sandstad, M.: Evaluation of the CMIP6 multi-model ensemble for climate extreme indices, Weather Clim. Extrem., 29, 100269, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wace.2020.100269, 2020. a
Kobayashi, S., Ota, Y., Harada, Y., Ebita, A., Moriya, M., Onoda, H., Onogi, K., Kamahori, H., Kobayashi, C., Endo, H., Miyaoka, K., and Takahashi, K.: The JRA-55 reanalysis: General specifications and basic characteristics, J. Meteorol. Soc. Jpn. Ser. II, 93, 5–48, https://doi.org/10.2151/jmsj.2015-001, 2015. a
Lee, J.-Y., Marotzke, J., Bala, G., Cao, L., Corti, S., Dunne, J., Engelbrecht, F., Fischer, E., Fyfe, J., Jones, C., Maycock, A., Mutemi, J., Ndiaye, O., Panickal, S., and Zhou, T.: Future Global Climate: Scenario-Based Projections and Near-Term Information, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 553–672, https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896.006, 2021. a
Lembo, V., Bordoni, S., Bevacqua, E., Domeisen, D., Franzke, C., Galfi, V., Garfinkel, C., Grams, C., Hochman, A., Jha, R., Kornhuber, K., Kwasniok, F., Lucarini, V., Messori, G., Pappert, D., Perez-Fernandez, I., Riboldi, J., Russo, E., Shaw, T., Strigunova, I., Strnad, F., P., Y., and Ẑagar, N.: Dynamics, Statistics, and Predictability of Rossby Waves, Heat Waves, and Spatially Compounding Extreme Events, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 105, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-24-0145.1, 2024. a
Li, M., Yao, Y., Simmonds, I., Luo, D., Zhong, L., and Chen, X.: Collaborative impact of the NAO and atmospheric blocking on European heatwaves, with a focus on the hot summer of 2018, Environ. Res. Lett., 15, 114003, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aba6ad, 2020. a
Luo, F., Selten, F., Wehrli, K., Kornhuber, K., Le Sager, P., May, W., Reerink, T., Seneviratne, S. I., Shiogama, H., Tokuda, D., Kim, H., and Coumou, D.: Summertime Rossby waves in climate models: substantial biases in surface imprint associated with small biases in upper-level circulation, Weather Clim. Dynam., 3, 905–935, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-3-905-2022, 2022. a
Ma, Q. and Franzke, C. L. E.: The role of transient eddies and diabatic heating in the maintenance of European heat waves: a nonlinear quasi-stationary wave perspective, Clim. Dynam., 56, 2983–3002, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-021-05628-9, 2021. a
Martius, O., Wehrli, K., and Rohrer, M.: Local and Remote Atmospheric Responses to Soil Moisture Anomalies in Australia, J. Climate, 34, 9115–9131, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-21-0130.1, 2021. a, b
Mazdiyasni, O., Sadegh, M., Chiang, F., and AghaKouchak, A.: Heat wave intensity duration frequency curve: A multivariate approach for hazard and attribution analysis, Sci. Rep., 9, 14117, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-50643-w, 2019. a
Michel, S., von der Heydt, A. S., van Westen, R. M., Baatsen, M. L. J., and Dijkstra, H. A.: Increased wintertime European atmospheric blocking frequencies in General Circulation Models with an eddy-permitting ocean, npj Clim. Atmos. Sci., 6, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41612-023-00372-9, 2023. a
Moss, R., Edmonds, J. A., Hibbard, K. A., Manning, M. R., Rose, S. K., van Vuuren, D. P., Carter, T. R., Emori, S., Kainuma, M., Kram, T., Meehl, G. A., Mitchell, J. F. B., Nakicenovic, N., Riahi, K., Smith, S. J., Stouffer, R. J., Thomson, A. M., Weyant, J. P., and Wilbanks, T. J.: The next generation of scenarios for climate change research and assessment, Nature, 463, 747–756, https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08823, 2010. a, b
Naomi, R., Adriana, K., Karen, M., and Rachel, N.: Measuring community heatwave resilience: A comprehensive framework and tool, Clim. Risk Manag., 46, 100662, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crm.2024.100662, 2024. a
Perkins, S.: A review on the scientific understanding of heatwaves – Their measurement, driving mechanisms, and changes at the global scale, Atmos. Res., 164-165, 242–267, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2015.05.014, 2015. a
Perkins-Kirkpatrick, S. E. and Gibson, P. B.: Changes in regional heatwave characteristics as a function of increasing global temperature, Sci. Rep., 7, 1–12, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-12520-2, 2017. a, b
Perkins-Kirkpatrick, S. E. and Lewis, S. C.: Increasing trends in regional heatwaves, Nat. Commun., 11, 3357, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-16970-7, 2020. a
Pithan, F., Shepherd, T. G., Zappa, G., and Sandu, I.: Climate model biases in jet streams, blocking and storm tracks resulting from missing orographic drag, Geophys. Res. Lett., 43, 7231–7240, https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL069551, 2016. a, b
Rienecker, M. M., Suarez, M. J., Gelaro, R., Todling, R., Bacmeister, J., Liu, E., Bosilovich, M. G., Schubert, S. D., Takacs, L., Kim, G.-K., Bloom, S., Chen, J., Collins, D., Conaty, A., da Silva, A., Gu, W., Joiner, J., Koster, R. D., Lucchesi, R., Molod, A., Owens, T., Pawson, S., Pegion, P., Redder, C. R., Reichle, R., Robertson, F. R., Ruddick, A. G., Sienkiewicz, M., and Woollen, J.: MERRA: NASA’s Modern-Era Retrospective Analysis for Research and Applications, J. Climate, 24, 3624–3648, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-11-00015.1, 2011. a
Russo, S., Dosio, A., Graversen, R. G., Sillmann, J., Carrao, H., Dunbar, M. B., Singleton, A., Montagna, P., Barbola, P., and Vogt, J. V.: Magnitude of extreme heat waves in present climate and their projection in a warming world, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 119, 12500–12512, https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JD022098, 2014. a
Scaife, A. A., Copsey, D., Gordon, C., Harris, C., Hinton, T., Keeley, S., O'Neill, A., Roberts, M., and Williams, K.: Improved Atlantic winter blocking in a climate model, Geophys. Res. Lett., 38, https://doi.org/10.1029/2011GL049573, 2011. a
Schaller, N., Sillmann, J., Anstey, J., Fischer, E. M., Grams, C. M., and Russo, S.: Influence of blocking on Northern European and Western Russian heatwaves in large climate model ensembles, Environ. Res. Lett., 13, 054015, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aaba55, 2018. a, b
Schiemann, R., Athanasiadis, P., Barriopedro, D., Doblas-Reyes, F., Lohmann, K., Roberts, M. J., Sein, D. V., Roberts, C. D., Terray, L., and Vidale, P. L.: Northern Hemisphere blocking simulation in current climate models: evaluating progress from the Climate Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 to 6 and sensitivity to resolution, Weather Clim. Dynam., 1, 277–292, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-1-277-2020, 2020. a, b
Screen, J. A. and Simmonds, I.: Amplified mid-latitude planetary waves favour particular regional weather extremes, Nat. Clim. Change, 4, 704–709, https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2271, 2014. a
Seneviratne, S., Zhang, X., Adnan, M., Badi, W., Dereczynski, C., Di Luca, A., Ghosh, S., Iskandar, I., Kossin, J., Lewis, S., Otto, F., Pinto, I., Satoh, M., Vicente-Serrano, S., Wehner, M., and Zhou, B.: Weather and Climate Extreme Events in a Changing Climate, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 1513–1766, https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896.013, 2021. a
Shepherd, T. G.: Atmospheric circulation as a source of uncertainty in climate change projections, Nat. Geosci., 7, 703–708, https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2253, 2014. a
Sillmann, J., Kharin, V. V., Zhang, X., Zwiers, F. W., and Bronaugh, D.: Climate extremes indices in the CMIP5 multimodel ensemble: Part 1. Model evaluation in the present climate, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 118, 1716–1733, https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50203, 2013a. a, b
Sillmann, J., Kharin, V. V., Zwiers, F. W., Zhang, X., and Bronaugh, D.: Climate extremes indices in the CMIP5 multimodel ensemble: Part 2. Future climate projections, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 118, 2473–2493, https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50188, 2013b. a
Sippel, S., Zscheischler, J., and Reichstein, M.: Ecosystem impacts of climate extremes crucially depend on the timing, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 113, 5768–5770, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1605667113, 2016. a
Strigunova, I.: IanaStrigunova/python-pdf-skewness-energy-anom: v1 (mean-state-variability), Zenodo [code, data set], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17449724, 2025. a, b
Strigunova, I., Blender, R., Lunkeit, F., and Žagar, N.: Signatures of Eurasian heat waves in global Rossby wave spectra, Weather Clim. Dynam., 3, 1399–1414, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-3-1399-2022, 2022. a, b
Strigunova, I., Lunkeit, F., Žagar, N., and Jelić, D.: Data and scripts for ”Mean state and day-to-day variability of tropospheric circulation in planetary-scale barotropic Rossby waves during Eurasian heat extremes in CMIP5 models”, Zenodo [data set], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17482898, 2025. a, b
Taylor, K. E.and Ronald J. Stouffer, R. J. and Meehl, G. A.: An Overview of CMIP5 and the Experiment Design, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 93, 485–498, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-11-00094.1, 2012. a
Thomson, A. M., Calvin, K. V., Smith, S. J., Kyle, G. P., Volke, A., Patel, P., Delgado-Arias, S., Bond-Lamberty, B., Wise, M. A., Clarke, L. E., and Edmonds, J. A.: The summer northern annular mode and abnormal summer weather in 2003, Clim. Change, 109, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0151-4, 2011. a, b
Thorarinsdottir, T. L., Sillmann, J., Haugen, M., Gissibl, N., and Sandstad, M.: Evaluation of CMIP5 and CMIP6 simulations of historical surface air temperature extremes using proper evaluation methods, Environ. Res. Lett., 15, 124041, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/abc778, 2020. a
Van Loon, S. and Thompson, D. W. J.: Comparing local versus hemispheric perspectives of extreme heat events, Geophys. Res. Lett., 50, e2023GL105246, https://doi.org/10.1029/2023GL105246, 2023. a
van Vuuren, D. P., Edmonds, J., Kainuma, M., Riahi, K., Thomson, A., Hibbard, K., Hurtt, G. C., Kram, T., Krey, V., Lamarque, J.-F., Masui, T., Meinshausen, M., Nakicenovic, N., Smith, S. J., and Rose, S. K.: The representative concentration pathways: an overview, Clim. Change, 109, 5–31, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0148-z, 2011. a, b
Vautard, R., Cattiaux, J., Happé, T., Singh, J., Bonnet, R., Cassou, C., Coumou, D., D’Andrea, F., Faranda, D., Fischer, E., Ribes, A., Sippel, S., and Yiou, P.: Heat extremes in Western Europe increasing faster than simulated due to atmospheric circulation trends, Nat. Commun., 14, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-42143-3, 2023. a
Voldoire, A., Sanchez-Gomez, E., and Salas y Mélia, D., Decharme, B., Cassou, C., Sénési, S., Valcke, S., Beau, I., Alias, A., Chevallier, M., Déqué, M., Deshayes, J., Douville, H., Fernandez, E., Madec, G., Maisonnave, E., Moine, M.-P., Planton, S., Saint-Martin, D., Szopa, S., Tyteca, S., Alkama, R., Belamari, S., Braun, A., Coquart, L., and Chauvin, F.: The CNRM-CM5.1 global climate model: description and basic evaluation, Clim. Dynam., 40, 2091–2121, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-011-1259-y, 2013. a
Wang, C., Zhang, L., Lee, S.-K.and Wu, L., and Mechoso, C. R.: A global perspective on CMIP5 climate model biases, Nat. Clim. Change, 4, 201–205, https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2118, 2014. a
Wang, P., Hui, P., Xue, D., and Tang, J.: Future projection of heat waves over China under global warming within the CORDEX-EA-II project, Clim. Dynam., 53, 957–973, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-019-04621-7, 2019. a
Watanabe, M., Suzuki, T., O’ishi, R., Komuro, Y., Watanabe, S., Emori, S., Takemura, T., Chikira, M., Ogura, T., Sekiguchi, M., Takata, K., Yamazaki, D., Yokohata, T., Nozawa, T., Hasumi, H., Tatebe, H., and Kimoto, M.: Improved Climate Simulation by MIROC5: Mean States, Variability, and Climate Sensitivity, J. Climate, 23, 6312–6335, https://doi.org/10.1175/2010JCLI3679.1, 2010. a
Wehner, M., Gleckler, P., and Lee, J.: Characterization of long period return values of extreme daily temperature and precipitation in the CMIP6 models: Part 1, model evaluation, Weather Clim. Extrem., 30, 100283, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wace.2020.100283, 2020. a
Yuan, Z., Yang, Z., Yan, D., and Yin, J.: Historical changes and future projection of extreme precipitation in China, Theor. Appl. Climatol., 127, 393–407, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-015-1643-3, 2017. a
Žagar, N., Kosovelj, K., Manzini, E., Horvat, M., and Castanheira, J.: An assessment of scale-dependent variability and bias in global prediction models, Clim. Dynam., 54, 287–306, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-019-05001-x, 2020. a
Zhao, Y.-B., Žagar, N., Lunkeit, F., and Blender, R.: Atmospheric bias teleconnections in boreal winter associated with systematic sea surface temperature errors in the tropical Indian Ocean, Weather Clim. Dynam., 4, 833–852, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-4-833-2023, 2023. a, b
Short summary
Our study builds on previous research by examining how climate models simulate the large-scale Rossby wave circulation during present-day Eurasian heat waves (EHWs) and how it alters in the future. We find no increase in future frequency for EHWs defined with respect to the simulated mean climate. The models capture the averaged atmospheric circulation during EHWs but struggle with daily variability. Our results highlight the need for improvements to enhance predictions of extreme weather.
Our study builds on previous research by examining how climate models simulate the large-scale...
