If you are using
Navigator 4.x
or
Internet Explorer 4.x
or
Omni Web 4.x
, this site will not render
correctly!
gfdl's home page > gfdl on-line bibliography > 1994: Journal of Geophysical Research, 99(D1), 1187-1210
Evaluation of water vapor distribution in general circulation models using satellite observations
| Soden, B. J., and F. P. Bretherton, 1994: Evaluation of water vapor distribution in general circulation models using satellite observations. Journal of Geophysical Research, 99(D1), 1187-1210. |
| Abstract: This paper presents a comparison of the water vapor distribution obtained from two general circulation models, the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) model and the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) Community Climate Model (CCM), with satellite observations of total precipitable water (TPW) from SSM/I and upper tropospheric relative humidity (UTH) from GOES. Overall, both models are successful in capturing the primary features of the observed water vapor distribution and its seasonal variation. For the ECMWF model, however, a systematic moist bias in TPW is noted over well-known stratocumulus regions in the eastern subtropical oceans. Comparison with radiosonde profiles suggests that this problem is attributable to difficulties in modeling the shallowness of the boundary layer and large vertical water vapor gradients which characterize these regions. In comparison, the CCM is more successful in capturing the low values of TPW in the stratocumulus regions, although it tends to exhibit a dry bias over the eastern half of the subtropical oceans and a corresponding moist bias in the western half. The CCM also significantly overestimates the daily variability of the moisture fields in convective regions, suggesting a problem in simulating the temporal nature of moisture transport by deep convection. Comparison of the monthly mean UTH distribution indicates generally larger discrepancies than were noted for TPW owing to the greater influence of large-scale dynamical processes in determining the distribution of UTH. In particular, the ECMWF model exhibits a distinct dry bias along the ITCZ and a moist bias over the subtropical descending branches of the Hadley cell, suggesting an underprediction in the strength of the Hadley circulation. The CCM, on the other hand, demonstrates greater discrepancies in UTH than are observed for the ECMWF model, but none that are as clearly correlated with well-known features of the large-scale circulation. |