DAO Office Note 97-10 Office Note Series on Global Modeling and Data Assimilation

This study assesses the quality of estimates of climate variability in moisture flux and convergence from three assimilated data sets: two are reanalysis products generated at the Goddard Data Assimilation Office (DAO) and the National Centers for Environmental Prediction/National Centers for Atmospheric Research (NCEP/NCAR), and the third consists of the operational analyses generated at the European Center for Medium Range Forecasts (ECMWF). The regions under study (the United States Great Plains, the Indian monsoon region, and Argentina east of the Andes) are characterized by frequent low level jets (LLJs) and other interannual low level wind variations tied to the large-scale flow. While the emphasis is on the reanalysis products, the comparison with the operational product is provided to help assess the improvements gained from a fixed analysis system. All three analyses capture the main moisture flux anomalies associated with selected extreme climate (drought and flood) events during the period 1985-93. The correspondence is strongest over the Great Plains and weakest over the Indian monsoon region reflecting differences in the observational coverage. For the reanalysis products, the uncertainties in the lower tropospheric winds is by far the dominant source of the discrepancies in the moisture flux anomalies in the middle latitude regions. Only in the Indian Monsoon region, where interannual variability in the low level winds is comparatively small, does the moisture bias play a substantial role. In contrast, the comparisons with the operational product show differences in moisture which are comparable to the differences in the wind in all three regions. Compared with the fluxes, the anomalous moisture convergencesshow substantially larger differences among the three products. The best agreement occurs over the Great Plains region where all three products show vertically-integrated moisture convergence during the floods and divergence during the drought with differences in magnitude of about 25%. The reanalysis products, in particular, show good agreement in depicting the different roles of the mean flow and transients during the flood and drought periods. Differences between the three products in the other two regions exceed 100% reflecting differences in the low level jets and the large scale circulation patterns. The operational product tends to have locally larger amplitude convergence fields which average out in area-mean budgets: this appears to be at least in part due to errors in the surface pressure fields and aliasing from the higher resolution of the original ECMWF fields. On average, the reanalysis products show higher coherence with each other than with the operational product in the estimates of interannual variability. This result is less clear in the Indian monsoon region where differences in the input observations appears to be an important factor. The agreement in the anomalous convergence patterns is, however, still rather poor even over relatively data dense regions such as the United States Great Plains. These differences are attributed to deficiencies in the assimilating GCM’s representations of the planetary boundary layer and orography, and a global observing system incapable of resolving the highly confined low level winds associated with the climate anomalies.