Simulation of the Madden–Julian Oscillation in a Coupled General Circulation Model. Part II: The Role of the Basic State

Open Access
Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
In Part I of this study it was shown that air–sea coupling had a positive impact on some aspects of the simulation of the Madden–Julian oscillation (MJO) by a GCM. However, errors in the basic-state climate of that GCM appeared to be preventing the MJO-related convection from propagating into the west Pacific. In this paper, the actual impact of these errors will be addressed. An integration of a flux-adjusted version of the coupled model has been performed, which has reduced basic-state errors in the west Pacific. In this version of the coupled GCM the MJO does propagate into the west Pacific. The simulation of the MJO by a coupled model with the same atmospheric component but a different ocean GCM is also analyzed. This coupled GCM has similar systematic errors in low-level zonal wind and precipitation to the model studied in Part I, but with warmer SSTs. Results from this experiment, together with the other available evidence, suggest that it is the errors in the low-level zonal wind component... Abstract In Part I of this study it was shown that air–sea coupling had a positive impact on some aspects of the simulation of the Madden–Julian oscillation (MJO) by a GCM. However, errors in the basic-state climate of that GCM appeared to be preventing the MJO-related convection from propagating into the west Pacific. In this paper, the actual impact of these errors will be addressed. An integration of a flux-adjusted version of the coupled model has been performed, which has reduced basic-state errors in the west Pacific. In this version of the coupled GCM the MJO does propagate into the west Pacific. The simulation of the MJO by a coupled model with the same atmospheric component but a different ocean GCM is also analyzed. This coupled GCM has similar systematic errors in low-level zonal wind and precipitation to the model studied in Part I, but with warmer SSTs. Results from this experiment, together with the other available evidence, suggest that it is the errors in the low-level zonal wind component...