the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Sensitivity of the Summertime Diurnal Precipitation Cycle over China to Convective Trigger and Closure Treatments in a Single-Column Model
Abstract. Using a single‑column model, we investigate how trigger and closure treatments in ZM, TDK, and UNICON convection schemes affect DCP over China. For late-afternoon rainfall, TDK and ZM schemes with standard CAPE closure simulate precipitation peaks around noon, substantially earlier than observed. The UNICON scheme, with cold‑pool feedback deactivated, also produces a noontime peak. For nocturnal rainfall, all schemes spuriously produce a noontime peak, in stark contrast to the observed nocturnal maximum. These behaviors are closely related to closure assumptions , which is primarily governed by CAPE in ZM and TDK, and responds more directly to surface fluxes in UNICON. By accounting for the imbalance between deep convection and boundary‑layer production through specific modifications: adopting the dCAPE trigger in ZM, activating cold‑pool feedback in UNICON, and applying the non‑equilibrium closure in TDK, the simulated afternoon precipitation is delayed and in better agreement with observations. In addition, allowing elevated convection in ZM and UNICON improves nocturnal rainfall. The improved diurnal cycle is also evident in the diabatic heating fields. All modifications lead to a delayed and more pronounced upward‑tilting heating structure as a result of the suppression of early-afternoon convection, with ZM and TDK extending to higher altitudes, while both intensified and extended in UNICON. These changes alleviate the upper‑level cold bias in TDK and ZM. In UNICON, however, the overly strong convection reverses the upper‑tropospheric bias from cold to warm with stronger magnitude, thereby worsening the bias.
- Preprint
(6130 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(684 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-4008', Anonymous Referee #1, 24 Aug 2026
-
AC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-4008', Xiaocong Wang, 18 Sep 2026
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2026/egusphere-2026-4008/egusphere-2026-4008-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
AC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-4008', Xiaocong Wang, 18 Sep 2026
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-4008', Anonymous Referee #2, 25 Aug 2026
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2026/egusphere-2026-4008/egusphere-2026-4008-RC2-supplement.pdf
-
AC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-4008', Xiaocong Wang, 18 Sep 2026
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2026/egusphere-2026-4008/egusphere-2026-4008-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
AC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-4008', Xiaocong Wang, 18 Sep 2026
-
AC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-4008', Xiaocong Wang, 18 Sep 2026
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2026/egusphere-2026-4008/egusphere-2026-4008-AC1-supplement.pdf
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-4008', Anonymous Referee #1, 24 Aug 2026
This study evaluates the performance of a single‑column model using three different convection schemes (ZM, TDK, UNICON) and their modified versions in representing the diurnal cycles of precipitation (DCP) at three typical locations in China. The manuscript is well motivated, as clarifying the roles of trigger and closure treatments can help deepen our understanding of the physical mechanisms underlying the DCP. However, the current version has several issues that prevent it from achieving its full potential, as detailed below. I therefore recommend a major revision.
Major comments
- My primary concern relates to the experimental design: each sensitivity experiment changes two factors simultaneously. For example, the CAM_ZM sensitivity experiments include dCAPE + elevated convection, and the CAM_UNICON sensitivity experiment includes cold‑pool feedback + elevated convection (Table 1). The authors attribute the improvement in CAM_ZM_SENS to the dCAPE trigger (lines 490–491) and that in CAM_UNICON_SENS to cold‑pool‑driven mesoscale flow, but this attribution is not supported by separate experiments. Similarly, the warm bias seen in CAM_UNICON_SENS cannot currently be ascribed unambiguously to the cold‑pool feedback, to elevated convection, or to their combination. I suggest that the authors perform isolated experiments (e.g., dCAPE‑only and elevated‑convection‑only tests). If additional runs are not feasible, the confounding issue must be explicitly discussed and the corresponding claims appropriately softened.
- In Section 3.2, the modification to CAM_ZM is described as follows (lines 239–240): “Xie and Zhang (2000) addressed this by reducing Mb when dCAPE is below a threshold value of 100 J kg⁻¹ hr⁻¹, with the reduction factor linearly related to dCAPE.” However, this appears inconsistent with the statement in Section 2.2, which says that the CAM_ZM sensitivity experiment “adopts the dCAPE trigger and permits elevated convection, following Xie et al. (2019).” These are not the same implementation. The authors must clearly state which version was actually used in CAM_ZM_SENS and, preferably, provide the governing equations.
- Section 5 and Fig. 9 compare simulated Q1/Q2 against “observations derived from ERA5 reanalysis as residuals … following Yanai et al. (1973),” and the figure caption labels these as “observations.” However, ERA5 is a model product, and its Q1/Q2 inherently carry uncertainties associated with the IFS convection scheme. The authors themselves note that ERA5 exhibits an early phase bias in precipitation over the TP and SECN (line 185). I suggest relabeling these as “ERA5‑derived Q1/Q2” and discussing how ERA5’s convection may contaminate the comparison. Alternatively, the authors could consider an independent constraint, such as TRMM/GPM latent‑heating products.
- The manuscript tests only three subregions of China, without covering eastern or northern China. I therefore suggest moderating the title to reflect a more limited regional scope.
Minor comments
- Line 132: “planet boundary layer” should be “planetary boundary layer”.
- Line 147: Please justify the use of a 3‑hour momentum relaxation toward ERA5.
- The investigation uses only one summer (2021), which was characterized by notable circulation anomalies, and composites are based only on precipitation days exceeding 5 mm d⁻¹ over the TP and 10 mm d⁻¹ over the SECN and SCB. The rationale for and limitations of these choices should be discussed.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-4008-RC1 -
AC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-4008', Xiaocong Wang, 18 Sep 2026
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2026/egusphere-2026-4008/egusphere-2026-4008-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-4008', Anonymous Referee #2, 25 Aug 2026
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2026/egusphere-2026-4008/egusphere-2026-4008-RC2-supplement.pdf
-
AC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-4008', Xiaocong Wang, 18 Sep 2026
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2026/egusphere-2026-4008/egusphere-2026-4008-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
AC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-4008', Xiaocong Wang, 18 Sep 2026
-
AC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-4008', Xiaocong Wang, 18 Sep 2026
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2026/egusphere-2026-4008/egusphere-2026-4008-AC1-supplement.pdf
Data sets
Simulation Data for the Sensitivity of Summertime Diurnal Precipitation Cycle over China to Convective Trigger and Closure Treatments in a Single-Column Model Xiaocong Wang and Yanjie Liu https://zenodo.org/records/21207758
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 197 | 85 | 30 | 312 | 37 | 28 | 34 |
- HTML: 197
- PDF: 85
- XML: 30
- Total: 312
- Supplement: 37
- BibTeX: 28
- EndNote: 34
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
This study evaluates the performance of a single‑column model using three different convection schemes (ZM, TDK, UNICON) and their modified versions in representing the diurnal cycles of precipitation (DCP) at three typical locations in China. The manuscript is well motivated, as clarifying the roles of trigger and closure treatments can help deepen our understanding of the physical mechanisms underlying the DCP. However, the current version has several issues that prevent it from achieving its full potential, as detailed below. I therefore recommend a major revision.
Major comments
Minor comments