Comparisons of the tropospheric specific humidity from GPS radio occultations with ERA-Interim, NASA MERRA, and AIRS data
-
Published:2018-03-02
Issue:2
Volume:11
Page:1193-1206
-
ISSN:1867-8548
-
Container-title:Atmospheric Measurement Techniques
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Atmos. Meas. Tech.
Author:
Vergados Panagiotis, Mannucci Anthony J.ORCID, Ao Chi O., Verkhoglyadova Olga, Iijima Byron
Abstract
Abstract. We construct a 9-year data record (2007–2015) of the tropospheric
specific humidity using Global Positioning System radio occultation (GPS RO)
observations from the Constellation Observing System for Meteorology,
Ionosphere, and Climate (COSMIC) mission. This record covers the ±40∘ latitude belt and includes estimates of the zonally averaged monthly
mean specific humidity from 700 up to 400 hPa. It includes three major
climate zones: (a) the deep tropics (±15∘), (b) the trade winds
belts (±15–30∘), and (c) the subtropics (±30–40∘).
We find that the RO observations agree very well with the European Centre for
Medium-Range Weather Forecasts Re-Analysis Interim (ERA-Interim), the
Modern-Era Retrospective Analysis for Research and Applications (MERRA), and
the Atmospheric Infrared Sounder (AIRS) by capturing similar magnitudes and
patterns of variability in the monthly zonal mean specific humidity and
interannual anomaly over annual and interannual timescales. The JPL and UCAR
specific humidity climatologies differ by less than 15 % (depending on
location and pressure level), primarily due to differences in the retrieved
refractivity. In the middle-to-upper troposphere, in all climate zones, JPL
is the wettest of all data sets, AIRS is the driest of all data sets, and
UCAR, ERA-Interim, and MERRA are in very good agreement, lying between the
JPL and AIRS climatologies. In the lower-to-middle troposphere, we present a
complex behavior of discrepancies, and we speculate that this might be due to
convection and entrainment. Conclusively, the RO observations could
potentially be used as a climate variable, but more thorough analysis is
required to assess the structural uncertainty between centers and its origin.
Publisher
Copernicus GmbH
Subject
Atmospheric Science
Reference50 articles.
1. Anthes, R. A., Bernhardt, P. A., Chen, Y., Cucurull, L., Dymond, K. F.,
Ector, D., Healy, S. B., Ho, S.-P., Hunt, D. C., Kuo, Y.-H., Liu, H.,
Manning, K., McCormick, C., Meehan, T. K., Randel, W. J., Rocken, C.,
Schreiner, W. S., Sokolovskiy, S. V., Syndergaard, S., Thompson, D. C.,
Trenberth, K. E., Wee, T.-K., Yen, N. L., and Zeng, Z.: The COSMIC/FORMOSAT-3
mission: Early results, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 89, 313–333,
https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-89-3-313, 2008. 2. Ao, C. O., Meehan, T. K., Hajj, G. A., Mannucci, A. J., and Beyerle, G.:
Lower troposphere refractivity bias in GPS occultation retrievals, J.
Geophys. Res., 108, 4577, https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD003216, 2003. 3. Ao, C. O., Waliser, D. E., Chan, S. K., Li, J.-L., Tian, B., Xie, F., and
Mannucci, A. J.: Planetary boundary layer heights from GPS radio occultation
refractivity and humidity profiles, J. Geophys. Res., 117, D16117,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JD017598, 2012. 4. Blackwell, W. J., Pieper, M., and Jairam, L. G.: Neural network estimation of
atmospheric profiles using AIRS/IASI/AMSU data in the presence of clouds,
Proc. SPIE, 7149, 714905, https://doi.org/10.1117/12.804841, 2008. 5. Bosilovich, M. G., Robertson, F. R., Takacs, L., Molod, A., and Mocko, D.:
Atmospheric Water Balance and Variability in the MERRA-2 Reanalysis, J.
Climate, 30, 1177–1196, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0338.1, 2017.
Cited by
9 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|