the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Climatology, sources, and transport characteristics of observed water vapor extrema in the lower stratosphere
Abstract. Stratospheric water vapor (H2O) is a substantial component of the global radiation budget, and therefore important to variability of the climate system. Efforts to understand the distribution, transport, and sources of stratospheric water vapor have increased in recent years, with many studies utilizing long-term satellite observations. Previous work to examine stratospheric H2O extrema has typically focused on the stratospheric overworld (pressures ≤ 100 hPa) to ensure the observations used are truly stratospheric. However, this leads to the broad exclusion of the lowermost stratosphere, which can extend over depths more than 5 km below the 100 hPa level in the midlatitudes and polar regions and has been shown to be the largest contributing layer to the stratospheric H2O feedback. Moreover, focusing on the overworld only can lead to a large underestimation of stratospheric H2O extrema occurrence. Therefore, we expand on previous work by examining 16 years of Microwave Limb Sounder (MLS) observations of water vapor extrema (≥ 8 ppmv) in both the stratospheric overworld and the lowermost stratosphere to create a new lower stratosphere climatology. The resulting frequency of H2O extrema increases by more than 300 % globally compared to extrema frequencies within stratospheric overworld observations only, though the percentage increase varies substantially by region and season. Additional context is provided to this climatology through a backward isentropic trajectory analysis to identify potential sources of the extrema. We show that, in general, tropopause-overshooting convection presents as a likely source of H2O extrema in much of the world, while meridional isentropic transport of air from the tropical upper troposphere to the extratropical lower stratosphere is also possible.
-
Notice on discussion status
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
-
Preprint
(16738 KB)
-
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
- Preprint
(16738 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
- Final revised paper
Journal article(s) based on this preprint
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-985', Anonymous Referee #1, 19 Jul 2023
This is a nice analysis and a well-written paper, and will be of interest to ACP readers. I have only a few minor comments and suggestions.
Minor comments:
- Choice of 8 ppmv as a threshold for extrema. I know this is similar to what other studies have done (e.g., Schwarz et al) and that the authors results are not sensitive to the exact threshold per their sensitivity analysis, but would there be some value to using a threshold that varies regionally and/or with vertical level (e.g., a threshold of 3 sigma above the mean)? This might lead to better representation of “extreme” values and would also inherently take into account (im)precision of the MLS measurements. Perhaps some additional discussion/motivation or sensitivity analysis on this would be helpful.
- Line 41: “assent” -> “ascent”
- Lines 47-48: Consider moving parenthetical statement to end of clause, i.e. “… relative frequently over land (…), … “
- Line 58: “studying global” -> “studying the global”
- Line 67: I suggest using LMS here instead of LS to emphasize that LMS is the specific sub-region that is underestimated.
- Line 90-91: I think you are referring specifically to the MLS WV measurements here, not just MLS measurements in general, so you should probably mention that.
- Line 92: I recommend to use “less” here rather than “below” because below is often interpreted as a direction and could be cause confusion.
- Regarding the LMS SC extrema in Fig. 1. I was really confused by this when first mentioned on Line 157 because by your definition the LMS shouldn’t exist in the tropics. But you eventually provide an explanation around line 175. Maybe it’d be worth mentioning in section 2.3 that under some rare circumstances the criteria for LMS (340K < theta < 380 K, PV > 6, and 1 km above LRT) can be met in the tropics?
- Figure 4: Could some of these trajectories in the NP have come from NA or GC convection 10+ days earlier? There seems like a hint that the air came from all the way around the world at 10 days but perhaps the trajectories are too untrustworthy over that length of time.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-985-RC1 -
AC1: 'Response to Reviewers for EGUSPHERE-2023-985', Emily Tinney, 14 Sep 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2023/egusphere-2023-985/egusphere-2023-985-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-985', Anonymous Referee #2, 01 Sep 2023
The study presented by Tinney and Homeyer is scientifically interesting and significant to the community. Additional details and discussion regarding the methodology, however, would greatly strengthen the conclusions reached by the authors and improve the presentation. Please refer to the attached document for a detailed commentary.
-
AC1: 'Response to Reviewers for EGUSPHERE-2023-985', Emily Tinney, 14 Sep 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2023/egusphere-2023-985/egusphere-2023-985-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
AC1: 'Response to Reviewers for EGUSPHERE-2023-985', Emily Tinney, 14 Sep 2023
-
AC1: 'Response to Reviewers for EGUSPHERE-2023-985', Emily Tinney, 14 Sep 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2023/egusphere-2023-985/egusphere-2023-985-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
AC2: 'Track changed revision for egusphere-2023-985', Emily Tinney, 14 Sep 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2023/egusphere-2023-985/egusphere-2023-985-AC2-supplement.pdf
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-985', Anonymous Referee #1, 19 Jul 2023
This is a nice analysis and a well-written paper, and will be of interest to ACP readers. I have only a few minor comments and suggestions.
Minor comments:
- Choice of 8 ppmv as a threshold for extrema. I know this is similar to what other studies have done (e.g., Schwarz et al) and that the authors results are not sensitive to the exact threshold per their sensitivity analysis, but would there be some value to using a threshold that varies regionally and/or with vertical level (e.g., a threshold of 3 sigma above the mean)? This might lead to better representation of “extreme” values and would also inherently take into account (im)precision of the MLS measurements. Perhaps some additional discussion/motivation or sensitivity analysis on this would be helpful.
- Line 41: “assent” -> “ascent”
- Lines 47-48: Consider moving parenthetical statement to end of clause, i.e. “… relative frequently over land (…), … “
- Line 58: “studying global” -> “studying the global”
- Line 67: I suggest using LMS here instead of LS to emphasize that LMS is the specific sub-region that is underestimated.
- Line 90-91: I think you are referring specifically to the MLS WV measurements here, not just MLS measurements in general, so you should probably mention that.
- Line 92: I recommend to use “less” here rather than “below” because below is often interpreted as a direction and could be cause confusion.
- Regarding the LMS SC extrema in Fig. 1. I was really confused by this when first mentioned on Line 157 because by your definition the LMS shouldn’t exist in the tropics. But you eventually provide an explanation around line 175. Maybe it’d be worth mentioning in section 2.3 that under some rare circumstances the criteria for LMS (340K < theta < 380 K, PV > 6, and 1 km above LRT) can be met in the tropics?
- Figure 4: Could some of these trajectories in the NP have come from NA or GC convection 10+ days earlier? There seems like a hint that the air came from all the way around the world at 10 days but perhaps the trajectories are too untrustworthy over that length of time.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-985-RC1 -
AC1: 'Response to Reviewers for EGUSPHERE-2023-985', Emily Tinney, 14 Sep 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2023/egusphere-2023-985/egusphere-2023-985-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-985', Anonymous Referee #2, 01 Sep 2023
The study presented by Tinney and Homeyer is scientifically interesting and significant to the community. Additional details and discussion regarding the methodology, however, would greatly strengthen the conclusions reached by the authors and improve the presentation. Please refer to the attached document for a detailed commentary.
-
AC1: 'Response to Reviewers for EGUSPHERE-2023-985', Emily Tinney, 14 Sep 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2023/egusphere-2023-985/egusphere-2023-985-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
AC1: 'Response to Reviewers for EGUSPHERE-2023-985', Emily Tinney, 14 Sep 2023
-
AC1: 'Response to Reviewers for EGUSPHERE-2023-985', Emily Tinney, 14 Sep 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2023/egusphere-2023-985/egusphere-2023-985-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
AC2: 'Track changed revision for egusphere-2023-985', Emily Tinney, 14 Sep 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2023/egusphere-2023-985/egusphere-2023-985-AC2-supplement.pdf
Peer review completion
Journal article(s) based on this preprint
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
302 | 101 | 22 | 425 | 9 | 10 |
- HTML: 302
- PDF: 101
- XML: 22
- Total: 425
- BibTeX: 9
- EndNote: 10
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1
Cameron R. Homeyer
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
- Preprint
(16738 KB) - Metadata XML