Comparative analysis of the ability of a set of CMIP3 and CMIP5 global climate models to represent precipitation in South America

被引:108
|
作者
Gulizia, Carla [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Camilloni, Ines [1 ,2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Buenos Aires, Fac Ciencias Exactas & Nat, Dept Ciencias Atmosfera & Oceanos, Buenos Aires, DF, Argentina
[2] Univ Buenos Aires, CONICET, CIMA, Buenos Aires, DF, Argentina
[3] UMI IFAECI CNRS, Buenos Aires, DF, Argentina
关键词
global climate models; evaluation; precipitation; South America; CMIP3; CMIP5; PART; 2; SYSTEM; TRENDS; 20TH-CENTURY; SIMULATIONS; RAINFALL;
D O I
10.1002/joc.4005
中图分类号
P4 [大气科学(气象学)];
学科分类号
0706 ; 070601 ;
摘要
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the ability of two sets of global climate models (GCMs) derived from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Projects Phase 3 (CMIP3) and Phase 5 (CMIP5) to represent the summer, winter, and annual precipitation mean patterns in South America south of the equator and in three particular sub-regions, between years 1960 and 1999. Different metrics (relative bias, spatial correlation, RMSE, and relative errors) were calculated and compared between both projects to determine if there has been improvement from CMIP3 to CMIP5 models in the representation of regional rainfall. Results from this analysis indicate that for the analysed seasons, precipitation simulated by both CMIP3 and CMIP5 models' ensembles exhibited some differences. In DJF, the relative bias over Amazonia, central South America, eastern Argentina, and Uruguay is reduced in CMIP5 compared with CMIP3. In JJA, the same occurs in some areas of Amazonia. Annual precipitation is also better represented by the CMIP5 than CMIP3 GCMs as they underestimate precipitation to a lesser extent, although in NE Brazil the overestimation values are much larger in CMIP5 than in CMIP3 analysis. In line with previous studies, the multi-model ensembles show the best representation of the observed patterns in most seasons and regions. Only in some cases, single GCMs [MIROC3.2(hires)-CMIP3- and MIROC4h-CMIP5] presented better results than the ensemble. The high horizontal resolution of these models suggests that this could be a relevant issue for a more adequate estimation of rainfall at least in the analysed regions.
引用
收藏
页码:583 / 595
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Understanding the sources of Caribbean precipitation biases in CMIP3 and CMIP5 simulations
    Jung-Hee Ryu
    Katharine Hayhoe
    Climate Dynamics, 2014, 42 : 3233 - 3252
  • [22] Evaluating the performance of CMIP3 and CMIP5 global climate models over the north-east Atlantic region
    Perez, Jorge
    Menendez, Melisa
    Mendez, Fernando J.
    Losada, Inigo J.
    CLIMATE DYNAMICS, 2014, 43 (9-10) : 2663 - 2680
  • [23] Natural climate variability and teleconnections to precipitation over the Pacific-North American region in CMIP3 and CMIP5 models
    Polade, Suraj D.
    Gershunov, Alexander
    Cayan, Daniel R.
    Dettinger, Michael D.
    Pierce, David W.
    GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, 2013, 40 (10) : 2296 - 2301
  • [24] The Double-ITCZ Bias in CMIP3, CMIP5, and CMIP6 Models Based on Annual Mean Precipitation
    Tian, Baijun
    Dong, Xinyu
    GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, 2020, 47 (08)
  • [25] Why is the amplitude of the Indian Ocean Dipole overly large in CMIP3 and CMIP5 climate models?
    Cai, Wenju
    Cowan, Tim
    GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, 2013, 40 (06) : 1200 - 1205
  • [26] Comparison of Monthly Temperature Extremes Simulated by CMIP3 and CMIP5 Models
    Yao, Yao
    Luo, Yong
    Huang, Jianbin
    Zhao, Zongci
    JOURNAL OF CLIMATE, 2013, 26 (19) : 7692 - 7707
  • [27] CMIP5 update of 'Inter-model variability and biases of the global water cycle in CMIP3 coupled climate models'
    Liepert, Beate G.
    Lo, Fiona
    ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LETTERS, 2013, 8 (02):
  • [28] Evaluation of precipitation and temperature simulation performance of the CMIP3 and CMIP5 historical experiments
    Koutroulis, A. G.
    Grillakis, M. G.
    Tsanis, I. K.
    Papadimitriou, L.
    CLIMATE DYNAMICS, 2016, 47 (5-6) : 1881 - 1898
  • [29] Can the CMIP5 models represent winter frontal precipitation?
    Catto, J. L.
    Jakob, C.
    Nicholls, N.
    GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, 2015, 42 (20) : 8596 - 8604
  • [30] Evaluation of precipitation and temperature simulation performance of the CMIP3 and CMIP5 historical experiments
    A. G. Koutroulis
    M. G. Grillakis
    I. K. Tsanis
    L. Papadimitriou
    Climate Dynamics, 2016, 47 : 1881 - 1898