Advertisement

Climate Dynamics

, Volume 53, Issue 3–4, pp 2133–2146 | Cite as

A synoptic assessment of the summer extreme rainfall over the middle reaches of Yangtze River in CMIP5 models

  • Yang HuEmail author
  • Yi DengEmail author
  • Zhimin Zhou
  • Hongli Li
  • Chunguang Cui
  • Xiquan Dong
Article

Abstract

The summer mean and extreme rainfall over the middle reaches of Yangtze River (MRYR) are underestimated in many models from phase 5 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5). Our earlier work has identified three synoptic-scale circulation patterns associated with extreme rainfall events over the MRYR during early summer. It is verified here that the presence of these patterns indeed increases the likelihood of the occurrence of extreme rainfall over the MRYR. This relationship between the synoptic-scale circulation pattern and extreme rainfall is reproduced by only a subset of CMIP5 models, where the underestimated frequency of the corresponding synoptic-scale circulation patterns partly explains the underestimated frequency of extreme rainfall thus the summer total over the MRYR. Our analysis also reveals that a few models could “accidentally” simulate a realistic rainfall total and probability distribution of daily rain rate over the MRYR region during summer by generating their own model-dependent synoptic-scale circulation patterns that are not typically seen in observations. These findings suggest that a projection of future changes in extreme rainfall over the MRYR will be better constrained dynamically if we use a subset of models that can reproduce the “rainfall-circulation” relationship, given the diverse response of different circulation patterns to radiative forcing changes in the atmosphere. The results presented here also demonstrate the importance of tracking biases of synoptic-scale circulations in understanding model deficiencies in precipitation simulation, in addition to investigating problems in model physics such as cumulus schemes and microphysics parameterization. Nevertheless, these results are based on the analyses of extreme rainfall in one region and one season, further research covering other regions/seasons is needed.

Keywords

Extreme precipitation Yangtze River basin CMIP5 Synoptic-scale circulation 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to the anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments and suggestions. This study was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 41620104009, 91637211 and 41775071), the Key Program for International S&T Cooperation Projects of China (Grant No. 2016YFE0109400) and the National Key R&D Program of China (2018YFC1507200). Yi Deng is in part supported by the U.S. National Science Foundation through Grants AGS-1354402 and AGS-1445956.

References

  1. Bador M, Donat M, Geoffroy O, Alexander LV (2018) Assessing the robustness of future extreme precipitation intensification in the CMIP5 ensemble. J Clim 31:6505–6525.  https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0683.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bao J, Sherwood SC, Alexander LV, Evans JP (2017a) Future increases in extreme precipitation exceed observed scaling rates. Nat Clim Change 7(2):128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bao J, Sherwood SC, Colin M, Dixit V (2017b) The robust relationship between extreme precipitation and convective organization in idealized numerical in idealized numerical modeling simulations. J Adv Model Earth Syst 9(6):2291–2303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cassano JJ, Uotila P, Lynch A (2006) Changes in synoptic weather patterns in the polar regions in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, part 1: arctic. Int J Climatol 26(8):1027–1049CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. DeAngelis AM, Broccoli AJ, Decker SG (2013) A comparison of CMIP3 simulations of precipitation over North America with observations: daily statistics and circulation features accompanying extreme events. J Clim 26:3209–3230.  https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00374.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Deng Y, Bowman K, Jackson C (2007) Differences in rain rate intensities between TRMM observations and community atmosphere model simulations. Geophys Res Lett 34:L01808.  https://doi.org/10.1029/2006GL027246 Google Scholar
  7. Gao X, Schlosser CA, Xie P, Monier E, Entekhabi D (2014) An analogue approach to identify heavy precipitation events: evaluation and application to CMIP5 climate models in the United States. J Clim 27:5941–5963.  https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-13-00598.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gelaro R, Mccarty W, Suárez MJ et al (2017) The modern-era retrospective analysis for research and applications, version 2 (MERRA-2). J Clim 30(14):5419–5454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gibson PB, Perkins-Kirkpatrick SE, Renwick JA (2016) Projected changes in synoptic weather patterns over New Zealand examined through self-organizing maps. Int J Climatol 36(12):3934–3948CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gibson PB, Perkins-Kirkpatrick SE, Uotila P, Pepler AS, Alexander LV (2017) On the use of self-organizing maps for studying climate extremes. J Geophys Res Atmos 122(7):3891–3903CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. He C, Zhou T (2015) Responses of the western North Pacific subtropical high to global warming under RCP4.5 and RCP8.5 scenarios projected by 33 CMIP5 models: the dominance of tropical Indian Ocean–tropical western Pacific SST gradient. J. Clim 28:365–380.  https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-13-00494.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. He S, Yang J, Bao Q, Wang L, Wang B (2019) Fidelity of the observational/reanalysis datasets and global climate models in representation of extreme precipitation in East China. J Clim 32(1):195–212.  https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-18-0104.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hu Y, Deng Y, Zhou Z, Cui C, Dong X (2019) A Statistical and dynamical characterization of large-scale circulation patterns associated with summer extreme precipitation over the middle reaches of Yangtze River. Clim Dyn 52(9):6213–6228.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-018-4501-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kawazoe S, Gutowski WJ Jr (2013) Regional, very heavy daily precipitation in CMIP5 simulations. J Hydrometeor 14:1228–1242.  https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-12-0112.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Li W, Jiang Z, Xu J, Li L (2016) Extreme precipitation Indices over China in CMIP5 models. Part 2 probabilistic projection. J Clim 29(24):8989–9004.  https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0377.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Li D, Zou L, Zhou T (2018) Extreme climate event changes in China in the 1.5 and 2 C warmer climates: results from statistical and dynamical downscaling. J Geophys Res Atmos 128(18):10215–10230.  https://doi.org/10.1029/2018JD028835 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Min S, Zhang X, Zwiers F, Hegerl G (2011) Human contribution to more-intense precipitation extremes. Nature 470:378–381.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nature09763 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Nishiyama K, Endo S, Jinno K, Uvo CB, Olsson J, Berndtsson R (2007) Identification of typical synoptic patterns causing heavy rainfall in the rainy season in Japan by a self-organizing map. Atmos Res 83(2):185–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. O’Gorman PA (2015) Precipitation extremes under climate change. Curr Clim Change Rep 1:49–59.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s40641-015-0009-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ohba M, Kadokura S, Yoshida Y, Nohara D, Toyoda Y (2015) Anomalous weather patterns in relation to heavy precipitation events in Japan during the Baiu season. J Hydrometeorol 16(2):688–701CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Pfahl S, O’Gorman PA, Fischer EM (2017) Understanding the regional pattern of projected future changes in extreme precipitation. Nat Clim Change 7:423–427.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate3287 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Tandon N, Nie J, Zhang X (2018) Strong influence of eddy length on boreal summertime extreme precipitation projections. Geophys Res Lett 45(19):10665–10672.  https://doi.org/10.1029/2018GL079327 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Trenberth KE, Dai A, Rasmussen RM et al (2003) The changing character of precipitation. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 84(9):1205–1217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Uotila P, Lynch A, Cassano J and Cullather R (2007). Changes in Antarctic net precipitation in the 21st century based on Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) model scenarios. J Geophys Res Atmos 112(D10)Google Scholar
  25. Wang X, Luo S, Liu X, Ren Z, Sun H (2006) Quality control and software development about A-format data of National Basic Automatic Weather Station. Meteorol Mon 32(3):107–112 (in Chinese) Google Scholar
  26. Wilks DS (2016) “The stippling shows statistically significant grid points”: how research results are routinely overstated and overinterpreted, and what to do about it. Bull Am Meteor Soc 97(12):2263–2273.  https://doi.org/10.1175/bams-d-15-00267.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Zhao S, Deng Y, Black R (2016) Warm season dry spells in the central and eastern United States: diverging skill in climate model representation. J Clim.  https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0321.1 Google Scholar
  28. Zhao S, Deng Y, Black R (2017a) A dynamical and statistical characterization of U.S. extreme precipitation events and their associated large-scale meteorological patterns. J Clim 30(4):1307–1326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Zhao S, Deng Y, Black R (2017b) Observed and simulated spring and summer dryness in the United States: the impact of the Pacific Sea surface temperature and beyond. J Geophys Res Atmos 122(23):12713–12731.  https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JD027279 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Zhou B, Wen Q, Xu Y, Song L, Zhang X (2014) Projected changes in temperature and precipitation extremes in China by the CMIP5 multimodel ensembles. J Clim 27(17):6591–6611CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Hubei Key Laboratory for Heavy Rain Monitoring and Warning Research, Institute of Heavy RainChina Meteorological AdministrationWuhanChina
  2. 2.School of Earth and Atmospheric SciencesGeorgia Institute of TechnologyAtlantaUSA
  3. 3.Department of Hydrology and Atmospheric SciencesUniversity of ArizonaTucsonUSA

Personalised recommendations