How well do state-of-the-art Atmosphere-Ocean general circulation models reproduce atmospheric teleconnection patterns?

Tellus000, 000–000 (0000) Printed 20 September 2012 (Tellus LATEX style file v2.2)

How well do state-of-the-art Atmosphere-Ocean general circulation models reproduce atmospheric teleconnection patterns?

Supplementary Material

By D¨orthe Handorf

, Klaus Dethloff

,

1Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research, Research Department Potsdam, Telegrafenberg A43, D-14471 Potsdam, German

20 September 2012

c 0000 Tellus

0.5 0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

0.95

0.99

1 0

5 10 15

Standard deviation

l at i o n Coe

ff i ci e

nt

CNRM GFDL1 GISSer IAP INMCM3 IPSL CCCT63 CCCT47 UKMOcm BCCR CSIRO0 CSIRO5 GFDL0 GISSaom GISSeh INGV

0.5 0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

0.95

0.99

1 0

5 10 15

Standard Deviation

l at i o n Coe

ff i ci e

nt

MIROm MIROh MRI CNRM GFDL1 GISSer IAP INMCM3 IPSL

REANA AMIP CMIP

Figure 1.Taylor plots for EA/WR of fields ofZ500 CMIP3/AMIP3 model runs and NCEP/NCAR and ERA40 reanalysis, DJF. (a) CMIP from 1958-1999, (b) CMIP/AMIP from 1979-1999.

c 0000 Tellus,000, 000–000

ATMOSPHERIC TELECONNECTION PATTERNS

3

(a) (b)

0 0.1 0.2 0.3

0.4 0.5

0.6 0.7

0.8

0.9

0.95

0.99

1 0

5 10 15 20 25

Standard deviation

Co rr e l at i o

n Coe ff

i ci e nt

ERA40 NCEP MPI NCARcc NCARpcm UKMOgem MIROm MIROh MRI CNRM GFDL1 GISSer IAP INMCM3 IPSL CCCT63 CCCT47 UKMOcm BCCR CSIRO0 CSIRO5 GFDL0 GISSaom GISSeh INGV

0 0.1 0.2 0.3

0.4 0.5

0.6 0.7

0.8

0.9

0.95

0.99

1 0

5 10 15 20 25

Standard Deviation

Co rr e l at i o

n Coe ff

i ci e nt

ERA40 NCEP MPI NCARcc NCARpcm UKMOgem MIROm MIROh MRI CNRM GFDL1 GISSer IAP INMCM3 IPSL

REANA AMIP CMIP

Figure 2.Taylor plots for SCAN of fields ofZ500CMIP3/AMIP3 model runs and NCEP/NCAR and ERA40 reanalysis, DJF. (a) CMIP from 1958-1999, (b) CMIP/AMIP from 1979-1999.

c 0000 Tellus,000, 000–000

0.5 0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

0.95

0.99

1 0

5 10 15 20

Standard deviation

l at i o n Coe

ff i ci e

nt

CNRM GFDL1 GISSer IAP INMCM3 IPSL CCCT63 CCCT47 UKMOcm BCCR CSIRO0 CSIRO5 GFDL0 GISSaom GISSeh INGV

0.5 0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

0.95

0.99

1 0

5 10 15 20

Standard Deviation

l at i o n Coe

ff i ci e

nt

MIROm MIROh MRI CNRM GFDL1 GISSer IAP INMCM3 IPSL

REANA AMIP CMIP

Figure 3.Taylor plots for EP/NP of fields ofZ500 CMIP3/AMIP3 model runs and NCEP/NCAR and ERA40 reanalysis, DJF. (a) CMIP from 1958-1999, (b) CMIP/AMIP from 1979-1999.

c 0000 Tellus,000, 000–000

ATMOSPHERIC TELECONNECTION PATTERNS

5

(a) (b)

0 0.1 0.2 0.3

0.4 0.5

0.6 0.7

0.8

0.9

0.95

0.99

1 0

5 10 15 20 25

Standard deviation

Co rr e l at i o

n Coe ff

i ci e nt

ERA40 NCEP MPI NCARcc NCARpcm UKMOgem MIROm MIROh MRI CNRM GFDL1 GISSer IAP INMCM3 IPSL CCCT63 CCCT47 UKMOcm BCCR CSIRO0 CSIRO5 GFDL0 GISSaom GISSeh INGV

0 0.1 0.2 0.3

0.4 0.5

0.6 0.7

0.8

0.9

0.95

0.99

1 0

5 10 15 20 25

Standard Deviation

Co rr e l at i o

n Coe ff

i ci e nt

ERA40 NCEP MPI NCARcc NCARpcm UKMOgem MIROm MIROh MRI CNRM GFDL1 GISSer IAP INMCM3 IPSL

REANA AMIP CMIP

Figure 4.Taylor plots for POL of fields ofZ500CMIP3/AMIP3 model runs and NCEP/NCAR and ERA40 reanalysis, DJF. (a) CMIP from 1958-1999, (b) CMIP/AMIP from 1979-1999.

c 0000 Tellus,000, 000–000

0.5 0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

0.95

0.99

1 0

5 10 15

Standard deviation

l at i o n Coe

ff i ci e

nt

CNRM GFDL1 GISSer IAP INMCM3 IPSL CCCT63 CCCT47 UKMOcm BCCR CSIRO0 CSIRO5 GFDL0 GISSaom GISSeh INGV

0.5 0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

0.95

0.99

1 0

5 10 15

Standard Deviation

l at i o n Coe

ff i ci e

nt

MIROm MIROh MRI CNRM GFDL1 GISSer IAP INMCM3 IPSL

REANA AMIP CMIP

Figure 5.Taylor plots for TNH of fields ofZ500CMIP3/AMIP3 model runs and NCEP/NCAR and ERA40 reanalysis, DJF. (a) CMIP from 1958-1999, (b) CMIP/AMIP from 1979-1999.

c 0000 Tellus,000, 000–000

ATMOSPHERIC TELECONNECTION PATTERNS

7

(a) (b)

0 0.1 0.2 0.3

0.4 0.5

0.6 0.7

0.8

0.9

0.95

0.99

1

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9

0 5 10 15 20 25

Standard deviation

Co rr e l at i o

n Coe ff

i ci e nt

ERA40 NCEP MPI NCARcc NCARpcm UKMOgem MIROm MIROh MRI CNRM GFDL1 GISSer IAP INMCM3 IPSL CCCT63 CCCT47 UKMOcm BCCR CSIRO0 CSIRO5 GFDL0 GISSaom GISSeh INGV

0 0.1 0.2 0.3

0.4 0.5

0.6 0.7

0.8

0.9

0.95

0.99

1

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9

0 5 10 15 20 25

Standard Deviation

Co rr e l at i o

n Coe ff

i ci e nt

ERA40 NCEP MPI NCARcc NCARpcm UKMOgem MIROm MIROh MRI CNRM GFDL1 GISSer IAP INMCM3 IPSL

REANA AMIP CMIP

Figure 6.Taylor plots for NAO of fields ofZ500CMIP3/AMIP3 model runs and NCEP/NCAR and ERA40 reanalysis, DJF. (a) CMIP3 from 1958-1999, (b) CMIP3/AMIP3 from 1979-1999. The red lines are the skill score isolines defined by Eq. 2 withR0 = 0.96 (see Table 3.

c 0000 Tellus,000, 000–000

0.5 0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

0.95

0.99

1 0

0.25 0.5 0.75

1 1.2

Standard deviation

l at i o n Coe

ff i ci e

nt

CNRM GFDL1 GISSer IAP INMCM3 IPSL CCCT63 CCCT47 UKMOcm BCCR CSIRO0 CSIRO5 GFDL0 GISSaom GISSeh INGV

0.5 0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

0.95

0.99

1 0

0.25 0.5 0.75

1 1.2

Standard Deviation

l at i o n Coe

ff i ci e

nt

MIROm MIROh MRI CNRM GFDL1 GISSer IAP INMCM3 IPSL

Daten AMIP CMIP

Figure 7.Taylor plots for unfiltered time-series of NAO of fields ofZ500, CMIP3 model runs and NCEP/NCAR and ERA40 reanalysis, DJF. (a) CMIP from 1958-1999, (b) CMIP from 1979-1999, AMIP from 1979-1999.

c 0000 Tellus,000, 000–000

ATMOSPHERIC TELECONNECTION PATTERNS

9

(a) (b)

0 0.1 0.2 0.3

0.4 0.5

0.6 0.7

0.8

0.9

0.95

0.99

1 0

0.25 0.5 0.75

1 1.2 1.5

Standard deviation

Co rr e l at i o

n Coe ff

i ci e nt

ERA40 NCEP MPI NCARcc NCARpcm UKMOgem MIROm MIROh MRI CNRM GFDL1 GISSer IAP INMCM3 IPSL CCCT63 CCCT47 UKMOcm BCCR CSIRO0 CSIRO5 GFDL0 GISSaom GISSeh INGV

0 0.1 0.2 0.3

0.4 0.5

0.6 0.7

0.8

0.9

0.95

0.99

1 0

0.25 0.5 0.75

1 1.2 1.5

Standard Deviation

Co rr e l at i o

n Coe ff

i ci e nt

ERA40 NCEP MPI NCARcc NCARpcm UKMOgem MIROm MIROh MRI CNRM GFDL1 GISSer IAP INMCM3 IPSL

Daten AMIP CMIP

Figure 8.Taylor plots for unfiltered time-series of PNA of fields ofZ500, CMIP3 model runs and NCEP/NCAR and ERA40 reanalysis, DJF. (a) CMIP from 1958-1999, (b) CMIP from 1979-1999, AMIP from 1979-1999.

c 0000 Tellus,000, 000–000

0˚ 30˚

60˚

90˚270˚

300˚

330˚

-100 -60 -45 -30 -15 15 30 45 60 100 [gpm]

0˚ 30˚

60˚

90˚270˚

300˚

330˚

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8

1000 500 200 100

Expl. Var.

p [hPa]

(e) (f) (g) (h)

30˚

60˚

90˚

120˚

180˚ 150˚

210˚

240˚

270˚

300˚

330˚

0˚

-100 -60 -45 -30 -15 15 30 45 60 100 [gpm]

30˚

60˚

90˚

120˚

180˚ 150˚

210˚

240˚

270˚

300˚

330˚

0˚

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8

1000 500 200 100 50

Expl. Var.

p [hPa]

UKMO_HADGEM1/, explained variance with NAO

u−PC1 u−PC2

(i) (j) (k) (l)

0˚ 30˚

60˚

90˚

120˚

180˚ 150˚

210˚

240˚

270˚

300˚

330˚

-100 -60 -45 -30 -15 15 30 45 60 100 [gpm]

0˚ 30˚

60˚

90˚

120˚

180˚ 150˚

210˚

240˚

270˚

300˚

330˚

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8

1000 500 200 100 50

Expl. Var.

p [hPa]

CCCMA_CGCM3_1/, explained variance with NAO

u−PC1 u−PC2

Figure 9. Summary of the NAO patterns and their relation to ATL-u-EOF1 for ERA40 reanalysis (a-d), UKMO HadGEM1 (e-h), CCCma CGCM3.1 (T47) (i-l). DJF-data from 1958-1999. From left to right: the NAO pattern (a,e,i); the regression pattern of the global geopotential height field at 500hPa onto ATL-u-PC1 at 250hPa (b,f,j); the regression pattern of the global zonal wind field at 250hPa onto ATL-u-PC1 at 250hPa (colours with overlaid Atlantic mean jet) (c,g,k); the vertical profile of explained variance between the NAO-index and the sectoral ATL-u-PC1 at each height (d,h,l).

c 0000 Tellus,000, 000–000

ATMOSPHERIC TELECONNECTION PATTERNS

11

(a) (b) (c) (d)

0˚ 30˚

60˚

90˚

120˚

180˚ 150˚

210˚

240˚

270˚

300˚

330˚

-100 -60 -45 -30 -15 15 30 45 60 100 [gpm]

0˚ 30˚

60˚

90˚

120˚

180˚ 150˚

210˚

240˚

270˚

300˚

330˚

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8

1000 500 200 100 50

Expl. Var.

p [hPa]

ERA40/, explained variance with EA

u−PC1 u−PC2

(e) (f) (g) (h)

30˚

60˚

90˚

120˚

180˚ 150˚

210˚

240˚

270˚

300˚

330˚

0˚

-100 -60 -45 -30 -15 15 30 45 60 100 [gpm]

30˚

60˚

90˚

120˚

180˚ 150˚

210˚

240˚

270˚

300˚

330˚

0˚

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8

1000 500 200 100 50

Expl. Var.

p [hPa]

UKMO_HADGEM1/, explained variance with EA

u−PC1 u−PC2

(i) (j) (k) (l)

0˚ 30˚

60˚

90˚

120˚

180˚ 150˚

210˚

240˚

270˚

300˚

330˚

-100 -60 -45 -30 -15 15 30 45 60 100 [gpm]

0˚ 30˚

60˚

90˚

120˚

180˚ 150˚

210˚

240˚

270˚

300˚

330˚

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8

1000 500 200 100 50

Expl. Var.

p [hPa]

CCCMA_CGCM3_1/, explained variance with EA

u−PC1 u−PC2

Figure 10.Summary of the EA patterns and their relation to ATL-u-EOF2 for ERA40 reanalysis (a-d), UKMO HadGEM1 (e-h), CCCma CGCM3.1 (T47) (i-l). DJF-data from 1958-1999. From left to right: the EA pattern (a,e,i); the regression pattern of the global geopotential height field at 500hPa onto ATL-u-PC2 at 250hPa (b,f,j); the regression pattern of the global zonal wind field at 250hPa onto ATL-u-PC2 at 250hPa (colours with overlaid Atlantic mean jet) (c,g,k); the vertical profile of explained variance between the EA-index and the sectoral ATL-u-PC2 at each height (d,h,l).

c 0000 Tellus,000, 000–000

0˚ 30˚

60˚

90˚270˚

300˚

330˚

-100 -60 -45 -30 -15 15 30 45 60 100 [gpm]

0˚ 30˚

60˚

90˚270˚

300˚

330˚

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8

1000 500 200 100

Expl. Var.

p [hPa]

(e) (f) (g) (h)

0˚ 30˚

60˚

90˚

120˚

180˚ 150˚

210˚

240˚

270˚

300˚

330˚

-100 -60 -45 -30 -15 15 30 45 60 100 [gpm]

0˚ 30˚

60˚

90˚

120˚

180˚ 150˚

210˚

240˚

270˚

300˚

330˚

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8

1000 500 200 100 50

Expl. Var.

p [hPa]

MIROC3_2_hires/, explained variance with PNA

u−PC1 u−PC2

(i) (j) (k) (l)

0˚ 30˚

60˚

90˚

120˚

180˚ 150˚

210˚

240˚

270˚

300˚

330˚

-100 -60 -45 -30 -15 15 30 45 60 100 [gpm]

0˚ 30˚

60˚

90˚

120˚

180˚ 150˚

210˚

240˚

270˚

300˚

330˚

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8

1000 500 200 100 50

Expl. Var.

p [hPa]

CNRM_CM3/, explained variance with PNA

u−PC1 u−PC2

Figure 11.Summary of the PNA patterns and their relation to PAC-u-EOF1 for ERA40 reanalysis (a-d), MIROC3.2(hires) (e-h), CNRM-CM3 (i-l). DJF-data from 1958-1999. From left to right: the PNA pattern (a,e,i); the regression pattern of the global geopotential height field at 500hPa onto PAC-u-PC1 at 250hPa (b,f,j); the regression pattern of the global zonal wind field at 250hPa onto PAC-u-PC1 at 250hPa (colours with overlaid Pacific mean jet) (c,g,k); the vertical profile of explained variance between the PNA-index and the sectoral PAC-u-PC1 at each height (d,h,l).

c 0000 Tellus,000, 000–000

ATMOSPHERIC TELECONNECTION PATTERNS

13

(a) (b) (c) (d)

0˚ 30˚

60˚

90˚

120˚

180˚ 150˚

210˚

240˚

270˚

300˚

330˚

-100 -60 -45 -30 -15 15 30 45 60 100 [gpm]

0˚ 30˚

60˚

90˚

120˚

180˚ 150˚

210˚

240˚

270˚

300˚

330˚

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8

1000 500 200 100 50

Expl. Var.

p [hPa]

ERA40/, explained variance with WP

u−PC1 u−PC2

(e) (f) (g) (h)

0˚ 30˚

60˚

90˚

120˚

180˚ 150˚

210˚

240˚

270˚

300˚

330˚

-100 -60 -45 -30 -15 15 30 45 60 100 [gpm]

0˚ 30˚

60˚

90˚

120˚

180˚ 150˚

210˚

240˚

270˚

300˚

330˚

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8

1000 500 200 100 50

Expl. Var.

p [hPa]

MIROC3_2_hires/, explained variance with WP

u−PC1 u−PC2

(i) (j) (k) (l)

0˚ 30˚

60˚

90˚

120˚

180˚ 150˚

210˚

240˚

270˚

300˚

330˚

-100 -60 -45 -30 -15 15 30 45 60 100 [gpm]

0˚ 30˚

60˚

90˚

120˚

180˚ 150˚

210˚

240˚

270˚

300˚

330˚

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8

1000 500 200 100 50

Expl. Var.

p [hPa]

CNRM_CM3/, explained variance with WP

u−PC1 u−PC2

Figure 12.Summary of the WP patterns and their relation to PAC-u-EOF2 for ERA40 reanalysis (a-d), MIROC3.2(hires) (e-h), CNRM- CM3 (i-l). DJF-data from 1958-1999. From left to right: the WP pattern (a,e,i); the regression pattern of the global geopotential height field at 500hPa onto PAC-u-PC2 at 250hPa (b,f,j); the regression pattern of the global zonal wind field at 250hPa onto PAC-u-PC2 at 250hPa (colours with overlaid Pacific mean jet) (c,g,k); the vertical profile of explained variance between the WP-index and the sectoral PAC-u-PC2 at each height (d,h,l).

c 0000 Tellus,000, 000–000