The Atmospheric River Tracking Method Intercomparison Project (ARTMIP): Quantifying Uncertainties in Atmospheric River Climatology. Issue 24 (24th December 2019)
- Record Type:
- Journal Article
- Title:
- The Atmospheric River Tracking Method Intercomparison Project (ARTMIP): Quantifying Uncertainties in Atmospheric River Climatology. Issue 24 (24th December 2019)
- Main Title:
- The Atmospheric River Tracking Method Intercomparison Project (ARTMIP): Quantifying Uncertainties in Atmospheric River Climatology
- Authors:
- Rutz, Jonathan J.
Shields, Christine A.
Lora, Juan M.
Payne, Ashley E.
Guan, Bin
Ullrich, Paul
O'Brien, Travis
Leung, L. Ruby
Ralph, F. Martin
Wehner, Michael
Brands, Swen
Collow, Allison
Goldenson, Naomi
Gorodetskaya, Irina
Griffith, Helen
Kashinath, Karthik
Kawzenuk, Brian
Krishnan, Harinarayan
Kurlin, Vitaliy
Lavers, David
Magnusdottir, Gudrun
Mahoney, Kelly
McClenny, Elizabeth
Muszynski, Grzegorz
Nguyen, Phu Dinh
Prabhat, Mr.
Qian, Yun
Ramos, Alexandre M.
Sarangi, Chandan
Sellars, Scott
Shulgina, T.
Tome, Ricardo
Waliser, Duane
Walton, Daniel
Wick, Gary
Wilson, Anna M.
Viale, Maximiliano
… (more) - Abstract:
- Abstract: Atmospheric rivers (ARs) are now widely known for their association with high‐impact weather events and long‐term water supply in many regions. Researchers within the scientific community have developed numerous methods to identify and track of ARs—a necessary step for analyses on gridded data sets, and objective attribution of impacts to ARs. These different methods have been developed to answer specific research questions and hence use different criteria (e.g., geometry, threshold values of key variables, and time dependence). Furthermore, these methods are often employed using different reanalysis data sets, time periods, and regions of interest. The goal of the Atmospheric River Tracking Method Intercomparison Project (ARTMIP) is to understand and quantify uncertainties in AR science that arise due to differences in these methods. This paper presents results for key AR‐related metrics based on 20+ different AR identification and tracking methods applied to Modern‐Era Retrospective Analysis for Research and Applications Version 2 reanalysis data from January 1980 through June 2017. We show that AR frequency, duration, and seasonality exhibit a wide range of results, while the meridional distribution of these metrics along selected coastal (but not interior) transects are quite similar across methods. Furthermore, methods are grouped into criteria‐based clusters, within which the range of results is reduced. AR case studies and an evaluation of individual methodAbstract: Atmospheric rivers (ARs) are now widely known for their association with high‐impact weather events and long‐term water supply in many regions. Researchers within the scientific community have developed numerous methods to identify and track of ARs—a necessary step for analyses on gridded data sets, and objective attribution of impacts to ARs. These different methods have been developed to answer specific research questions and hence use different criteria (e.g., geometry, threshold values of key variables, and time dependence). Furthermore, these methods are often employed using different reanalysis data sets, time periods, and regions of interest. The goal of the Atmospheric River Tracking Method Intercomparison Project (ARTMIP) is to understand and quantify uncertainties in AR science that arise due to differences in these methods. This paper presents results for key AR‐related metrics based on 20+ different AR identification and tracking methods applied to Modern‐Era Retrospective Analysis for Research and Applications Version 2 reanalysis data from January 1980 through June 2017. We show that AR frequency, duration, and seasonality exhibit a wide range of results, while the meridional distribution of these metrics along selected coastal (but not interior) transects are quite similar across methods. Furthermore, methods are grouped into criteria‐based clusters, within which the range of results is reduced. AR case studies and an evaluation of individual method deviation from an all‐method mean highlight advantages/disadvantages of certain approaches. For example, methods with less (more) restrictive criteria identify more (less) ARs and AR‐related impacts. Finally, this paper concludes with a discussion and recommendations for those conducting AR‐related research to consider. Key Points: The large number of atmospheric river identification/tracking methods produces large uncertainty related to AR climatology and impacts Uncertainty is quantified using the same data (MERRA v2), time period (1980–2017), region (global where possible), and common metrics This study presents recommendations regarding the advantages/disadvantages of certain approaches based on science application … (more)
- Is Part Of:
- Journal of geophysical research. Volume 124:Issue 24(2019)
- Journal:
- Journal of geophysical research
- Issue:
- Volume 124:Issue 24(2019)
- Issue Display:
- Volume 124, Issue 24 (2019)
- Year:
- 2019
- Volume:
- 124
- Issue:
- 24
- Issue Sort Value:
- 2019-0124-0024-0000
- Page Start:
- 13777
- Page End:
- 13802
- Publication Date:
- 2019-12-24
- Subjects:
- atmospheric river -- intercomparison -- climate -- weather -- hydroclimate -- impacts
Atmospheric physics -- Periodicals
Geophysics -- Periodicals
551.5 - Journal URLs:
- http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1002/(ISSN)2169-8996 ↗
http://www.agu.org/journals/jd/ ↗
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/ ↗ - DOI:
- 10.1029/2019JD030936 ↗
- Languages:
- English
- ISSNs:
- 2169-897X
- Deposit Type:
- Legaldeposit
- View Content:
- Available online (eLD content is only available in our Reading Rooms) ↗
- Physical Locations:
- British Library DSC - 4995.001000
British Library DSC - BLDSS-3PM
British Library HMNTS - ELD Digital store - Ingest File:
- 20874.xml