Articles | Volume 7, issue 4
https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-7-1951-2026
© Author(s) 2026. 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-7-1951-2026
© Author(s) 2026. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Research article
| 
06 Oct 2026
Research article |
| 06 Oct 2026
| 06 Oct 2026
Building blocks of localized storm tracks: revisiting asymmetries between the NH and SH in storm track strength
Chaim I. Garfinkel
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Fredy & Nadine Herrmann Institute of Earth Sciences, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel
Tiffany Shaw
Department of the Geophysical Sciences, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
Benny Keller
Fredy & Nadine Herrmann Institute of Earth Sciences, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel
Edwin P. Gerber
Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences, New York University, New York, NY, USA
Ian P. White
Bureau of Meteorology, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Martin Jucker
Climate Change Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
ARC Centre of Excellence for 21st Century Weather, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia
Wuhan Ning
Fredy & Nadine Herrmann Institute of Earth Sciences, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel
Fredy & Nadine Herrmann Institute of Earth Sciences, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel
Siming Liu
Department of the Geophysical Sciences, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
Related authors
Kexiang Feng, Jian Rao, Chaim I. Garfinkel, Amy H. Butler, Blanca Ayarzagüena, and Xiaoqi Zhang
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-4971, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-4971, 2026
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Weather and Climate Dynamics (WCD).
Short summary
Short summary
Sudden stratospheric warmings can influence weather at the Earth's surface, but the role of the upper atmosphere remains unclear. Using forecast models with different upper-atmosphere conditions, we find that the upper atmosphere actively affects the evolution of these events and their surface impacts. This highlights the importance of better representing the upper atmosphere to improve forecasts of sudden stratospheric warmings and their impacts.
William J. M. Seviour, Justin Finkel, Philip Rupp, Regan Mudhar, Amy H. Butler, Chaim I. Garfinkel, Peter Hitchcock, Blanca Ayarzagüena, Dong-Chan Hong, Yu-Kyung Hyun, Hera Kim, Eun-Pa Lim, Daniel De Maeseneire, Gabriele Messori, Gerbrand Koren, Michael Sigmond, Isla R. Simpson, and Seok-Woo Son
Weather Clim. Dynam., 7, 1405–1423, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-7-1405-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-7-1405-2026, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
Variability of the stratospheric polar vortex is thought to play a role in driving weather extremes, but quantifying this role for a given event has proved challenging. Using a new set of perturbed subseasonal forecast experiments from 7 modelling centres, we determine the stratospheric contribution to the risk and severity of three recent extreme weather events. The forecast-based methodology that we develop is applicable to understanding a range of other drivers of weather extremes.
David Avisar and Chaim I. Garfinkel
Weather Clim. Dynam., 7, 1331–1348, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-7-1331-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-7-1331-2026, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
We use the Large Ensemble Single Forcing simulations to assess the role of individual forcings to the Mediterranean drying and to clarify the dynamical origin of the model’s prediction variability. A more pronounced North Atlantic warming hole, a stronger stratospheric polar vortex, and a larger poleward shift of the subtropical jet correlate with a stronger drying trend. Aerosols had a detectable influence on Mediterranean climate. Hence, their removal may have an impact in future decades.
Chaim I. Garfinkel, David Avisar, Wenjuan Huo, Ales Kuchar, Shoshiro Minobe, Scott Osprey, Katharina Perny, and Jonathon S. Wright
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-3738, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-3738, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
Whether tropical volcanic eruptions lead to a circulation response in winter is still unclear. We re-evaluate this effect using large ensembles from eight separate models with only one time-varying external forcing: volcanic aerosols. We find that 75 % of models simulate the previously proposed effect, but that the signal requires at least 30 eruptions before it emerges robustly from the noise. Furthermore, we demonstrate that the El Niño signal differs from natural El Niño events.
Chaim I. Garfinkel, David Avisar, Scott M. Osprey, Doug Smith, Jian Rao, and Jonathon S. Wright
Weather Clim. Dynam., 7, 1133–1152, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-7-1133-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-7-1133-2026, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
The Quasi-biennial Oscillation (QBO) dominates variability in the tropical stratosphere, & it impacts surface climate in several parts of the world. However, climate models have been shown to systematically under-estimate the influence of the QBO. Here, we re-evaluate this finding using much larger ensemble sizes than have been previously available based on four separate models. We find that the models are comparatively more successful in capturing QBO influences than reported by previous work.
Dong-Chan Hong, Seok-Woo Son, Blanca Ayarzagüena, Amy H. Butler, Chaim I. Garfinkel, Peter Hitchcock, Yu-Kyung Hyun, and Jiankai Zhang
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-2798, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-2798, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
This study investigates how Sudden Stratospheric Warming (SSW) influences surface climate. By comparing multi-model simulations, we isolated and quantified the role of SSWs. Results reveal that poleward mass transport during SSWs induces high pressure over the Arctic, driving changes in extratropical circulations. While SSWs alter the troposphere, chaotic internal weather variability can amplify or suppress their influence, explaining the differing surface impacts following SSWs.
Qian Lu, Jian Rao, Chunhua Shi, and Chaim I. Garfinkel
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 26, 5763–5780, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-26-5763-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-26-5763-2026, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
Stratospheric water vapor has an impact on global temperature changes. Tropical stratospheric water vapor exhibits a clear imprint of the Quasi-Biennial Oscillation (QBO). This study compares the water vapor variations associated with the QBO between boreal winter and summer, and the seasonal difference in the stratospheric water vapor distribution under different QBO phases is revealed.
Blanca Ayarzagüena, Amy H. Butler, Peter Hitchcock, Chaim I. Garfinkel, Zac D. Lawrence, Wuhan Ning, Philip Rupp, Zheng Wu, Hilla Afargan-Gerstman, Natalia Calvo, Alvaro de la Cámara, Martin Jucker, Gerbrand Koren, Daniel De Maeseneire, Gloria L. Manney, Marisol Osman, Masakazu Taguchi, Cory Barton, Dong-Chan Hong, Yu-Kyung Hyun, Hera Kim, Jeff Knight, Piero Malguzzi, Daniele Mastrangelo, Jiyoung Oh, Inna Polichtchouk, Jadwiga H. Richter, Isla R. Simpson, Seok-Woo Son, Damien Specq, and Tim Stockdale
Weather Clim. Dynam., 7, 411–437, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-7-411-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-7-411-2026, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
Sudden Stratospheric Warmings (SSWs) are known to follow a sustained wave dissipation in the stratosphere, which depends on both the tropospheric and stratospheric states. However, the relative role of each state is still unclear. Using a new set of subseasonal to seasonal forecasts, we show that the stratospheric state does not drastically affect the precursors of three recent SSWs, but modulates the stratospheric wave activity, with impacts depending on SSW features.
Wuhan Ning, Chaim I. Garfinkel, Judah Cohen, Ian P. White, and Jian Rao
Weather Clim. Dynam., 7, 277–295, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-7-277-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-7-277-2026, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
Whether the zonal structure of a polar vortex matters for surface climate is an open question, with much observational work showing a role but with limited modeling work and demonstration of a causal influence. Here, we isolate this influence using a moist general circulation model. We find that the surface responses differ qualitatively depending on the zonal asymmetries of the shifted polar vortex and concurrently occurring wave reflection events, and provide a mechanistic explanation for why.
Cristiana Stan, Saisri Kollapaneni, Andrea M. Jenney, Jiabao Wang, Zheng Wu, Cheng Zheng, Hyemi Kim, Chaim I. Garfinkel, and Ayush Singh
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 7969–7985, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-7969-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-7969-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The diagnostics package is an open-source Python software package used for evaluating the Madden–Julian Oscillation teleconnections to the extratropics, as predicted by subseasonal-to-seasonal (S2S) forecast systems.
Ying Dai, Peter Hitchcock, Amy H. Butler, Chaim I. Garfinkel, and William J. M. Seviour
Weather Clim. Dynam., 6, 841–862, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-6-841-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-6-841-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Using a new database of subseasonal to seasonal (S2S) forecasts, we find that with a successful forecast of the sudden stratospheric warming (SSW), S2S models can capture the European precipitation signals after the 2018 SSW several weeks in advance. The findings indicate that the stratosphere represents an important source of S2S predictability for precipitation over Europe and call for consideration of stratospheric variability in hydrological prediction at S2S timescales.
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.
Peter Hitchcock, Amy Butler, Andrew Charlton-Perez, Chaim I. Garfinkel, Tim Stockdale, James Anstey, Dann Mitchell, Daniela I. V. Domeisen, Tongwen Wu, Yixiong Lu, Daniele Mastrangelo, Piero Malguzzi, Hai Lin, Ryan Muncaster, Bill Merryfield, Michael Sigmond, Baoqiang Xiang, Liwei Jia, Yu-Kyung Hyun, Jiyoung Oh, Damien Specq, Isla R. Simpson, Jadwiga H. Richter, Cory Barton, Jeff Knight, Eun-Pa Lim, and Harry Hendon
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 5073–5092, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-5073-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-5073-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
This paper describes an experimental protocol focused on sudden stratospheric warmings to be carried out by subseasonal forecast modeling centers. These will allow for inter-model comparisons of these major disruptions to the stratospheric polar vortex and their impacts on the near-surface flow. The protocol will lead to new insights into the contribution of the stratosphere to subseasonal forecast skill and new approaches to the dynamical attribution of extreme events.
Chen Schwartz, Chaim I. Garfinkel, Priyanka Yadav, Wen Chen, and Daniela I. V. Domeisen
Weather Clim. Dynam., 3, 679–692, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-3-679-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-3-679-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Eleven operational forecast models that run on subseasonal timescales (up to 2 months) are examined to assess errors in their simulated large-scale stationary waves in the Northern Hemisphere winter. We found that models with a more finely resolved stratosphere generally do better in simulating the waves in both the stratosphere (10–50 km) and troposphere below. Moreover, a connection exists between errors in simulated time-mean convection in tropical regions and errors in the simulated waves.
Shlomi Ziskin Ziv, Chaim I. Garfinkel, Sean Davis, and Antara Banerjee
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 7523–7538, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-7523-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-7523-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Stratospheric water vapor is important for Earth's overall greenhouse effect and for ozone chemistry; however the factors governing its variability on interannual timescales are not fully known, and previous modeling studies have indicated that models struggle to capture this interannual variability. We demonstrate that nonlinear interactions are important for determining overall water vapor concentrations and also that models have improved in their ability to capture these connections.
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.
Kexiang Feng, Jian Rao, Chaim I. Garfinkel, Amy H. Butler, Blanca Ayarzagüena, and Xiaoqi Zhang
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-4971, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-4971, 2026
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Weather and Climate Dynamics (WCD).
Short summary
Short summary
Sudden stratospheric warmings can influence weather at the Earth's surface, but the role of the upper atmosphere remains unclear. Using forecast models with different upper-atmosphere conditions, we find that the upper atmosphere actively affects the evolution of these events and their surface impacts. This highlights the importance of better representing the upper atmosphere to improve forecasts of sudden stratospheric warmings and their impacts.
William J. M. Seviour, Justin Finkel, Philip Rupp, Regan Mudhar, Amy H. Butler, Chaim I. Garfinkel, Peter Hitchcock, Blanca Ayarzagüena, Dong-Chan Hong, Yu-Kyung Hyun, Hera Kim, Eun-Pa Lim, Daniel De Maeseneire, Gabriele Messori, Gerbrand Koren, Michael Sigmond, Isla R. Simpson, and Seok-Woo Son
Weather Clim. Dynam., 7, 1405–1423, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-7-1405-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-7-1405-2026, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
Variability of the stratospheric polar vortex is thought to play a role in driving weather extremes, but quantifying this role for a given event has proved challenging. Using a new set of perturbed subseasonal forecast experiments from 7 modelling centres, we determine the stratospheric contribution to the risk and severity of three recent extreme weather events. The forecast-based methodology that we develop is applicable to understanding a range of other drivers of weather extremes.
David Avisar and Chaim I. Garfinkel
Weather Clim. Dynam., 7, 1331–1348, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-7-1331-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-7-1331-2026, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
We use the Large Ensemble Single Forcing simulations to assess the role of individual forcings to the Mediterranean drying and to clarify the dynamical origin of the model’s prediction variability. A more pronounced North Atlantic warming hole, a stronger stratospheric polar vortex, and a larger poleward shift of the subtropical jet correlate with a stronger drying trend. Aerosols had a detectable influence on Mediterranean climate. Hence, their removal may have an impact in future decades.
Chaim I. Garfinkel, David Avisar, Wenjuan Huo, Ales Kuchar, Shoshiro Minobe, Scott Osprey, Katharina Perny, and Jonathon S. Wright
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-3738, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-3738, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
Whether tropical volcanic eruptions lead to a circulation response in winter is still unclear. We re-evaluate this effect using large ensembles from eight separate models with only one time-varying external forcing: volcanic aerosols. We find that 75 % of models simulate the previously proposed effect, but that the signal requires at least 30 eruptions before it emerges robustly from the noise. Furthermore, we demonstrate that the El Niño signal differs from natural El Niño events.
Chaim I. Garfinkel, David Avisar, Scott M. Osprey, Doug Smith, Jian Rao, and Jonathon S. Wright
Weather Clim. Dynam., 7, 1133–1152, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-7-1133-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-7-1133-2026, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
The Quasi-biennial Oscillation (QBO) dominates variability in the tropical stratosphere, & it impacts surface climate in several parts of the world. However, climate models have been shown to systematically under-estimate the influence of the QBO. Here, we re-evaluate this finding using much larger ensemble sizes than have been previously available based on four separate models. We find that the models are comparatively more successful in capturing QBO influences than reported by previous work.
Dong-Chan Hong, Seok-Woo Son, Blanca Ayarzagüena, Amy H. Butler, Chaim I. Garfinkel, Peter Hitchcock, Yu-Kyung Hyun, and Jiankai Zhang
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-2798, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-2798, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
This study investigates how Sudden Stratospheric Warming (SSW) influences surface climate. By comparing multi-model simulations, we isolated and quantified the role of SSWs. Results reveal that poleward mass transport during SSWs induces high pressure over the Arctic, driving changes in extratropical circulations. While SSWs alter the troposphere, chaotic internal weather variability can amplify or suppress their influence, explaining the differing surface impacts following SSWs.
Qian Lu, Jian Rao, Chunhua Shi, and Chaim I. Garfinkel
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 26, 5763–5780, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-26-5763-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-26-5763-2026, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
Stratospheric water vapor has an impact on global temperature changes. Tropical stratospheric water vapor exhibits a clear imprint of the Quasi-Biennial Oscillation (QBO). This study compares the water vapor variations associated with the QBO between boreal winter and summer, and the seasonal difference in the stratospheric water vapor distribution under different QBO phases is revealed.
Blanca Ayarzagüena, Amy H. Butler, Peter Hitchcock, Chaim I. Garfinkel, Zac D. Lawrence, Wuhan Ning, Philip Rupp, Zheng Wu, Hilla Afargan-Gerstman, Natalia Calvo, Alvaro de la Cámara, Martin Jucker, Gerbrand Koren, Daniel De Maeseneire, Gloria L. Manney, Marisol Osman, Masakazu Taguchi, Cory Barton, Dong-Chan Hong, Yu-Kyung Hyun, Hera Kim, Jeff Knight, Piero Malguzzi, Daniele Mastrangelo, Jiyoung Oh, Inna Polichtchouk, Jadwiga H. Richter, Isla R. Simpson, Seok-Woo Son, Damien Specq, and Tim Stockdale
Weather Clim. Dynam., 7, 411–437, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-7-411-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-7-411-2026, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
Sudden Stratospheric Warmings (SSWs) are known to follow a sustained wave dissipation in the stratosphere, which depends on both the tropospheric and stratospheric states. However, the relative role of each state is still unclear. Using a new set of subseasonal to seasonal forecasts, we show that the stratospheric state does not drastically affect the precursors of three recent SSWs, but modulates the stratospheric wave activity, with impacts depending on SSW features.
Ofer Cohen, Assaf Hochman, Ehud Strobach, Dorita Rostkier-Edelstein, Hezi Gildor, and Ori Adam
Weather Clim. Dynam., 7, 263–275, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-7-263-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-7-263-2026, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
Severe warming and drying in the Eastern Mediterranean makes seasonal prediction of regional rain imperative. The study explores the observed relation of Mediterranean Sea variability to Levant winter precipitation. Ocean heat uptake in the Aegean Sea during summer is found to be a strong predictor of winter Levant precipitation. This connection is mediated by changes in the subtropical jet, which create more favorable conditions for precipitating storms in the Levant during winter.
Wuhan Ning, Chaim I. Garfinkel, Judah Cohen, Ian P. White, and Jian Rao
Weather Clim. Dynam., 7, 277–295, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-7-277-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-7-277-2026, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
Whether the zonal structure of a polar vortex matters for surface climate is an open question, with much observational work showing a role but with limited modeling work and demonstration of a causal influence. Here, we isolate this influence using a moist general circulation model. We find that the surface responses differ qualitatively depending on the zonal asymmetries of the shifted polar vortex and concurrently occurring wave reflection events, and provide a mechanistic explanation for why.
Cristiana Stan, Saisri Kollapaneni, Andrea M. Jenney, Jiabao Wang, Zheng Wu, Cheng Zheng, Hyemi Kim, Chaim I. Garfinkel, and Ayush Singh
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 7969–7985, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-7969-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-7969-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The diagnostics package is an open-source Python software package used for evaluating the Madden–Julian Oscillation teleconnections to the extratropics, as predicted by subseasonal-to-seasonal (S2S) forecast systems.
Ying Dai, Peter Hitchcock, Amy H. Butler, Chaim I. Garfinkel, and William J. M. Seviour
Weather Clim. Dynam., 6, 841–862, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-6-841-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-6-841-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Using a new database of subseasonal to seasonal (S2S) forecasts, we find that with a successful forecast of the sudden stratospheric warming (SSW), S2S models can capture the European precipitation signals after the 2018 SSW several weeks in advance. The findings indicate that the stratosphere represents an important source of S2S predictability for precipitation over Europe and call for consideration of stratospheric variability in hydrological prediction at S2S timescales.
Aaron Match, Edwin P. Gerber, and Stephan Fueglistaler
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 4349–4366, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-4349-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-4349-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The ozone concentration in the tropical stratosphere peaks at 26 km, protecting life from harmful ultraviolet light without poisoning it. Climate models reproduce this peak, but textbook explanations yield errors of 10 km. Simplifying the well-understood sources and sinks of ozone, we develop a theory explaining that tropical ozone peaks where its dominant sink transitions from damping of atomic oxygen aloft (mainly via catalytic chemistry) to damping of ozone below (mainly via transport).
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.
Aaron Match, Edwin P. Gerber, and Stephan Fueglistaler
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 10305–10322, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-10305-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-10305-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Earth's ozone layer absorbs incoming UV light, protecting life. Removing ozone aloft allows UV light to penetrate deeper, where it is known to produce new ozone, leading to "self-healing" that partially stabilizes total ozone. However, a photochemistry model shows that, above 40 km in the tropics, deeper-penetrating UV destroys ozone, destabilizing the total ozone. Photochemical theory reveals that this destabilizing regime occurs where overhead ozone is below a key threshold.
Bjorn Stevens, Stefan Adami, Tariq Ali, Hartwig Anzt, Zafer Aslan, Sabine Attinger, Jaana Bäck, Johanna Baehr, Peter Bauer, Natacha Bernier, Bob Bishop, Hendryk Bockelmann, Sandrine Bony, Guy Brasseur, David N. Bresch, Sean Breyer, Gilbert Brunet, Pier Luigi Buttigieg, Junji Cao, Christelle Castet, Yafang Cheng, Ayantika Dey Choudhury, Deborah Coen, Susanne Crewell, Atish Dabholkar, Qing Dai, Francisco Doblas-Reyes, Dale Durran, Ayoub El Gaidi, Charlie Ewen, Eleftheria Exarchou, Veronika Eyring, Florencia Falkinhoff, David Farrell, Piers M. Forster, Ariane Frassoni, Claudia Frauen, Oliver Fuhrer, Shahzad Gani, Edwin Gerber, Debra Goldfarb, Jens Grieger, Nicolas Gruber, Wilco Hazeleger, Rolf Herken, Chris Hewitt, Torsten Hoefler, Huang-Hsiung Hsu, Daniela Jacob, Alexandra Jahn, Christian Jakob, Thomas Jung, Christopher Kadow, In-Sik Kang, Sarah Kang, Karthik Kashinath, Katharina Kleinen-von Königslöw, Daniel Klocke, Uta Kloenne, Milan Klöwer, Chihiro Kodama, Stefan Kollet, Tobias Kölling, Jenni Kontkanen, Steve Kopp, Michal Koran, Markku Kulmala, Hanna Lappalainen, Fakhria Latifi, Bryan Lawrence, June Yi Lee, Quentin Lejeun, Christian Lessig, Chao Li, Thomas Lippert, Jürg Luterbacher, Pekka Manninen, Jochem Marotzke, Satoshi Matsouoka, Charlotte Merchant, Peter Messmer, Gero Michel, Kristel Michielsen, Tomoki Miyakawa, Jens Müller, Ramsha Munir, Sandeep Narayanasetti, Ousmane Ndiaye, Carlos Nobre, Achim Oberg, Riko Oki, Tuba Özkan-Haller, Tim Palmer, Stan Posey, Andreas Prein, Odessa Primus, Mike Pritchard, Julie Pullen, Dian Putrasahan, Johannes Quaas, Krishnan Raghavan, Venkatachalam Ramaswamy, Markus Rapp, Florian Rauser, Markus Reichstein, Aromar Revi, Sonakshi Saluja, Masaki Satoh, Vera Schemann, Sebastian Schemm, Christina Schnadt Poberaj, Thomas Schulthess, Cath Senior, Jagadish Shukla, Manmeet Singh, Julia Slingo, Adam Sobel, Silvina Solman, Jenna Spitzer, Philip Stier, Thomas Stocker, Sarah Strock, Hang Su, Petteri Taalas, John Taylor, Susann Tegtmeier, Georg Teutsch, Adrian Tompkins, Uwe Ulbrich, Pier-Luigi Vidale, Chien-Ming Wu, Hao Xu, Najibullah Zaki, Laure Zanna, Tianjun Zhou, and Florian Ziemen
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 16, 2113–2122, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-2113-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-2113-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
To manage Earth in the Anthropocene, new tools, new institutions, and new forms of international cooperation will be required. Earth Virtualization Engines is proposed as an international federation of centers of excellence to empower all people to respond to the immense and urgent challenges posed by climate change.
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.
Peter Hitchcock, Amy Butler, Andrew Charlton-Perez, Chaim I. Garfinkel, Tim Stockdale, James Anstey, Dann Mitchell, Daniela I. V. Domeisen, Tongwen Wu, Yixiong Lu, Daniele Mastrangelo, Piero Malguzzi, Hai Lin, Ryan Muncaster, Bill Merryfield, Michael Sigmond, Baoqiang Xiang, Liwei Jia, Yu-Kyung Hyun, Jiyoung Oh, Damien Specq, Isla R. Simpson, Jadwiga H. Richter, Cory Barton, Jeff Knight, Eun-Pa Lim, and Harry Hendon
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 5073–5092, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-5073-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-5073-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
This paper describes an experimental protocol focused on sudden stratospheric warmings to be carried out by subseasonal forecast modeling centers. These will allow for inter-model comparisons of these major disruptions to the stratospheric polar vortex and their impacts on the near-surface flow. The protocol will lead to new insights into the contribution of the stratosphere to subseasonal forecast skill and new approaches to the dynamical attribution of extreme events.
Chen Schwartz, Chaim I. Garfinkel, Priyanka Yadav, Wen Chen, and Daniela I. V. Domeisen
Weather Clim. Dynam., 3, 679–692, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-3-679-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-3-679-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Eleven operational forecast models that run on subseasonal timescales (up to 2 months) are examined to assess errors in their simulated large-scale stationary waves in the Northern Hemisphere winter. We found that models with a more finely resolved stratosphere generally do better in simulating the waves in both the stratosphere (10–50 km) and troposphere below. Moreover, a connection exists between errors in simulated time-mean convection in tropical regions and errors in the simulated waves.
Thomas Reichler and Martin Jucker
Weather Clim. Dynam., 3, 659–677, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-3-659-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-3-659-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Variations in the stratospheric polar vortex, so-called vortex events, can improve predictions of surface weather and climate. There are various ways to detect such events, and here we use the amount of wave energy that propagates into the stratosphere. The new definition is tested against so-called stratospheric sudden warmings (SSWs). We find that the wave definition has advantages over SSWs, for example in terms of a stronger surface response that follows the events.
Shlomi Ziskin Ziv, Chaim I. Garfinkel, Sean Davis, and Antara Banerjee
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 7523–7538, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-7523-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-7523-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Stratospheric water vapor is important for Earth's overall greenhouse effect and for ozone chemistry; however the factors governing its variability on interannual timescales are not fully known, and previous modeling studies have indicated that models struggle to capture this interannual variability. We demonstrate that nonlinear interactions are important for determining overall water vapor concentrations and also that models have improved in their ability to capture these connections.
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.
Cited articles
Andernach, M., Kapsch, M.-L., and Mikolajewicz, U.: Impact of Greenland Ice Sheet disintegration on atmosphere and ocean disentangled, Earth Syst. Dynam., 16, 451–474, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-16-451-2025, 2025. a
Auestad, H., Shibu, A., Ceppi, P., and Woollings, T.: The Latent Heating Feedback on the Mid-Latitude Circulation, Geophys. Res. Lett., 52, e2025GL116437, https://doi.org/10.1029/2025GL116437, 2025. a
Barpanda, P. and Shaw, T.: Using the moist static energy budget to understand storm-track shifts across a range of time scales, J. Atmos. Sci., 74, 2427–2446, https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS-D-17-0022.1, 2017. a
Barpanda, P. and Shaw, T. A.: Surface Fluxes Modulate the Seasonality of Zonal-Mean Storm Tracks, J. Atmos. Sci., 77, 753–779, https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS-D-19-0139.1, 2020. a, b, c
Betts, A. K.: A new convective adjustment scheme. Part I: Observational and theoretical basis, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 112, 677–691, 1986. a
Chemke, R. and Coumou, D.: Human influence on the recent weakening of storm tracks in boreal summer, npj Climate and Atmospheric Science, 7, 86, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41612-024-00640-2, 2024. a
Cox, T., Donohoe, A., Armour, K. C., Roe, G. H., and Frierson, D. M. W.: A New Method for Calculating Instantaneous Atmospheric Heat Transport, J. Climate, 37, 4337–4346, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-23-0521.1, 2024. a
Duffy, M. L., Simpson, I. R., Medeiros, B., Zhu, J., McCluskey, C. S., Herrington, A. R., Gettelman, A., Otto-Bliesner, B. L., Fasullo, J. T., Lauritzen, P. H., Neale, R. B., and Lawrence, D. M.: Is the High ECS in CESM2 Degrading Transient Climate Change Projections Over the 21st Century?, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 18, e2025MS004967, https://doi.org/10.1029/2025MS004967, 2026. a
Frierson, D. M., Held, I. M., and Zurita-Gotor, P.: A gray-radiation aquaplanet moist GCM. Part I: Static stability and eddy scale, J. Atmos. Sci., 63, 2548–2566, 2006. a
Garfinkel, C. I., White, I., Gerber, E. P., Jucker, M., and Erez, M.: The Building Blocks of Northern Hemisphere Wintertime Stationary Waves, J. Climate, 33, 5611–5633, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-19-0181.1, 2020b. a, b
Gerber, E. P. and Vallis, G. K.: On the zonal structure of the North Atlantic Oscillation and annular modes, J. Atmos. Sci., 66, 332–352, 2009. a
Haar, T. V. and Oort, A.: New estimate of annual poleward energy transport by Northern Hemisphere oceans, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 3, 169–172, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0485(1973)003<0169:NEOAPE>2.0.CO;2, 1973. 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, 2020. a
Hoskins, B.: Dynamical processes in the atmosphere and the use of models, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc, 109, 1–21, 1983. a
Jackson, L. C., Hewitt, H. T., Bruciaferri, D., Calvert, D., Graham, T., Guiavarc'h, C., Menary, M. B., New, A. L., Roberts, M., and Storkey, D.: Challenges simulating the AMOC in climate models, Philos. T. Roy. Soc. A, 381, 20220187, https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2022.0187, 2023. a
Jian, B., Li, J., Zhao, Y., He, Y., Wang, J., and Huang, J.: Evaluation of the CMIP6 planetary albedo climatology using satellite observations, Clim. Dynam., 54, 5145–5161, 2020. a
Jucker, M., White, I., and Gerber, E. P.: mjucker/MiMA: MiMA v2.0, Version v2.0, Zenodo [code], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3984605, 2020. a
Jung, T. and Rhines, P. B.: Greenland's pressure drag and the Atlantic storm track, J. Atmos. Sci., 64, 4004–4030, 2007. a
Junge, M., Blender, R., Fraedrich, K., Gayler, V., Luksch, U., and Lunkeit, F.: A world without Greenland: impacts on the Northern Hemisphere winter circulation in low-and high-resolution models, Clim. Dynam., 24, 297–307, 2005. a
Justino, F., Marengo, J., Kucharski, F., Stordal, F., Machado, J., and Rodrigues, M.: Influence of Antarctic ice sheet lowering on the Southern Hemisphere climate: modeling experiments mimicking the mid-Miocene, Clim. Dynam., 42, 843–858, 2014. a
Kang, J. M., Shaw, T. A., Kang, S. M., Simpson, I. R., and Yu, Y.: Revisiting the reanalysis-model discrepancy in Southern Hemisphere winter storm track trends, npj Climate and Atmospheric Science, 7, 252, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41612-024-00801-3, 2024a. a, b
Kang, J. M., Shaw, T. A., and Sun, L.: Anthropogenic aerosols have significantly weakened the regional summertime circulation in the Northern Hemisphere during the satellite era, Agu Advances, 5, e2024AV001318, https://doi.org/10.1029/2024AV001318, 2024b. a
Lee, S.-S., Lee, J.-Y., Ha, K.-J., Wang, B., Kitoh, A., Kajikawa, Y., and Abe, M.: Role of the Tibetan Plateau on the annual variation of mean atmospheric circulation and storm-track activity, J. Climate, 26, 5270–5286, 2013. a
Loeb, N. G., Mayer, M., Kato, S., Fasullo, J. T., Zuo, H., Senan, R., Lyman, J. M., Johnson, G. C., and Balmaseda, M.: Evaluating Twenty-Year Trends in Earth's Energy Flows From Observations and Reanalyses, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 127, e2022JD036686, https://doi.org/10.1029/2022JD036686, 2022. a
Mauritsen, T., Bader, J., Becker, T., Behrens, J., Bittner, M., Brokopf, R., Brovkin, V., Claussen, M., Crueger, T., Esch, M., Fast, I., Fiedler, S., Fläschner, D., Gayler, V., Giorgetta, M., Goll, D. S., Haak, H., Hagemann, S., Hedemann, C., Hohenegger, C., Ilyina, T., Jahns, T., Jimenéz-de-la Cuesta, D., Jungclaus, J., Kleinen, T., Kloster, S., Kracher, D., Kinne, S., Kleberg, D., Lasslop, G., Kornblueh, L., Marotzke, J., Matei, D., Meraner, K., Mikolajewicz, U., Modali, K., Möbis, B., Müller, W. A., Nabel, J. E. M. S., Nam, C. C. W., Notz, D., Nyawira, S.-S., Paulsen, H., Peters, K., Pincus, R., Pohlmann, H., Pongratz, J. R., Popp, M., Raddatz, T. J., Rast, S., Redler, R., Reick, C. H., Rohrschneider, T., Schemann, V., Schmidt, H., Schnur, R., Schulzweida, U., Six, K. D., Stein, L., Stemmler, I., Stevens, B., von Storch, J.-S., Tian, F., Voigt, A., Vrese, P., Wieners, K.-H., Wilkenskjeld, S., Winkler, A., and Roeckner, E.: Developments in the MPI-M Earth System Model version 1.2 (MPI-ESM1.2) and Its Response to Increasing CO2, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 11, 998–1038, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018MS001400, 2019. a
Mayer, M., Kato, S., Bosilovich, M., Bechtold, P., Mayer, J., Schröder, M., Behrangi, A., Wild, M., Kobayashi, S., Li, Z., and L'Ecuyer, T.: Assessment of Atmospheric and Surface Energy Budgets Using Observation-Based Data Products, Surv. Geophys., 45, 1827–1854, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10712-024-09827-x, 2024. a, b, c
Medeiros, B., Shaw, J., Kay, J. E., and Davis, I.: Assessing clouds using satellite observations through three generations of global atmosphere models, Earth and Space Science, 10, e2023EA002918, https://doi.org/10.1029/2023EA002918, 2023. a
Mlawer, E. J., Taubman, S. J., Brown, P. D., Iacono, M. J., and Clough, S. A.: Radiative transfer for inhomogeneous atmospheres: RRTM, a validated correlated-k model for the longwave, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 102, 16663–16682, 1997. a
Moreno-Chamarro, E., Caron, L.-P., Loosveldt Tomas, S., Vegas-Regidor, J., Gutjahr, O., Moine, M.-P., Putrasahan, D., Roberts, C. D., Roberts, M. J., Senan, R., Terray, L., Tourigny, E., and Vidale, P. L.: Impact of increased resolution on long-standing biases in HighResMIP-PRIMAVERA climate models, Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 269–289, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-269-2022, 2022. a
Moreno-Chamarro, E., Arsouze, T., Acosta, M., Bretonnière, P.-A., Castrillo, M., Ferrer, E., Frigola, A., Kuznetsova, D., Martin-Martinez, E., Ortega, P., and Palomas, S.: The very-high-resolution configuration of the EC-Earth global model for HighResMIP, Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 461–482, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-461-2025, 2025. a, b
Oort, A. H. and Haar, T. H. V.: On the Observed Annual Cycle in the Ocean-Atmosphere Heat Balance Over the Northern Hemisphere, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 6, 781–800, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0485(1976)006<0781:OTOACI>2.0.CO;2, 1976. 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, 2016. a
Priestley, C.: Heat transport and zonal stress between latitudes, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 75, 28–40, 1949. a
Priestley, M. D., Ackerley, D., Catto, J. L., Hodges, K. I., McDonald, R. E., and Lee, R. W.: An overview of the extratropical storm tracks in CMIP6 historical simulations, J. Climate, 33, 6315–6343, 2020. a
Priestley, M. D., Ackerley, D., Catto, J. L., and Hodges, K. I.: Drivers of biases in the CMIP6 extratropical storm tracks. Part I: Northern Hemisphere, J. Climate, 36, 1451–1467, 2023a. a
Priestley, M. D., Ackerley, D., Catto, J. L., and Hodges, K. I.: Drivers of biases in the CMIP6 extratropical storm tracks. Part II: Southern Hemisphere, J. Climate, 36, 1469–1486, 2023b. a
Roberts, M. J., Jackson, L. C., Roberts, C. D., Meccia, V., Docquier, D., Koenigk, T., Ortega, P., Moreno-Chamarro, E., Bellucci, A., Coward, A., Drijfhout, S., Exarchou, E., Gutjahr, O., Hewitt, H., Iovino, D., Lohmann, K., Putrasahan, D., Schiemann, R., Seddon, J., Terray, L., Xu, X., Zhang, Q., Chang, P., Yeager, S. G., Castruccio, F. S., Zhang, S., and Wu, L.: Sensitivity of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation to model resolution in CMIP6 HighResMIP simulations and implications for future changes, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 12, e2019MS002014, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS002014, 2020. a
Schemm, S.: Toward Eliminating the Decades-Old “Too Zonal and Too Equatorward” Storm-Track Bias in Climate Models, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 15, e2022MS003482, https://doi.org/10.1029/2022MS003482, 2023. a
Schuddeboom, A. J. and McDonald, A. J.: The Southern Ocean radiative bias, cloud compensating errors, and equilibrium climate sensitivity in CMIP6 models, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 126, e2021JD035310, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021JD035310, 2021. a
Shaw, T., Baldwin, M., Barnes, E., Caballero, R., Garfinkel, C., Hwang, Y.-T., Li, C., O'Gorman, P., Rivière, G., Simpson, I., and Voigt, A.: Storm track processes and the opposing influences of climate change, Nat. Geosci., 9, 656, https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2783, 2016. a
Shaw, T. A. and Graham, R. J.: Hydrological Cycle Changes Explain Weak Snowball Earth Storm Track Despite Increased Surface Baroclinicity, Geophys. Res. Lett., 47, e2020GL089866, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL089866, 2020. a
Simpson, I. R., Seager, R., Ting, M., and Shaw, T. A.: Causes of change in Northern Hemisphere winter meridional winds and regional hydroclimate, Nat. Clim. Change, 6, 65–70, 2016. a
Simpson, I. R., Shaw, T. A., Ceppi, P., Clement, A. C., Fischer, E., Grise, K. M., Pendergrass, A. G., Screen, J. A., Wills, R. C., Woollings, T., Blackport, R., Kang, J. M., and Po-Chedley, S.: Confronting Earth System Model trends with observations, Sci. Adv., 11, eadt8035, https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.adt8035, 2025. a
Trenberth, K. E. and Fasullo, J. T.: An Observational Estimate of Inferred Ocean Energy Divergence, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 38, 984–999, https://doi.org/10.1175/2007JPO3833.1, 2008. a
Trenberth, K. E. and Fasullo, J. T.: Atlantic meridional heat transports computed from balancing Earth's energy locally, Geophys. Res. Lett., 44, 1919–1927, https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL072475, 2017. a
Trenberth, K. E. and Stepaniak, D. P.: The flow of energy through the Earth's climate system, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 130, 2677–2701, 2004. a
Vignesh, P. P., Jiang, J. H., Kishore, P., Su, H., Smay, T., Brighton, N., and Velicogna, I.: Assessment of CMIP6 Cloud Fraction and Comparison with Satellite Observations, Earth and Space Science, 7, e2019EA000975, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019EA000975, 2020. a
Wenta, M., Grams, C. M., Papritz, L., and Federer, M.: Linking Gulf Stream air–sea interactions to the exceptional blocking episode in February 2019: a Lagrangian perspective, Weather Clim. Dynam., 5, 181–209, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-5-181-2024, 2024. a, b
White, I. P., Garfinkel, C. I., Cohen, J., Jucker, M., and Rao, J.: The Impact of Split and Displacement Sudden Stratospheric Warmings on the Troposphere, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 126, e2020JD033989, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JD033989, 2021a. a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, j, k, l, m, n, o, p, q, r, s, t, u, v, w
White, I. P., Garfinkel, C. I., Jucker, M., and Gerber, E. P.: ianpwhite/MiMA: MiMA: Applying stratospheric heating perturbations, Version MiMA-ThermalForcing-v1.0beta, Zenodo [code], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4523199, 2021b. a
White, R. H., Wallace, J. M., and Battisti, D. S.: Revisiting the Role of Mountains in the Northern Hemisphere Winter Atmospheric Circulation, Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences, 78, 2221–2235, https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS-D-20-0300.1, 2021c. a
Short summary
Midlatitude storm tracks are stronger over ocean basins than continents, and also stronger in the Southern Hemisphere than in the Northern Hemisphere. It is still not clear how Earth's land-ocean distribution, ocean heat transport, and orography, set up this structure. We use an intermediate complexity moist general circulation model to reveal substantial non-additivities in the response to these inhomogeneities, and then diagnose why.
Midlatitude storm tracks are stronger over ocean basins than continents, and also stronger in...
