Abstract
To extend the linear stochastically forced paradigm of tropical sea surface temperature (SST) variability to the subsurface ocean, a linear inverse model (LIM) is constructed from the simultaneous and 3-month lag covariances of observed 3-month running mean anomalies of SST, thermocline depth, and zonal wind stress. This LIM is then used to identify the empirically-determined linear dynamics with physical processes to gauge their relative importance to ENSO evolution. Optimal growth of SST anomalies over several months is triggered by both an initial SST anomaly and a central equatorial Pacific thermocline anomaly that propagates slowly eastward while leading the amplifying SST anomaly. The initial SST and thermocline anomalies each produce roughly half the SST amplification. If interactions between the sea surface and the thermocline are removed in the linear dynamical operator, the SST anomaly undergoes less optimal growth but is also more persistent, and its location shifts from the eastern to central Pacific. Optimal growth is also found to be essentially the result of two stable eigenmodes with similar structure but differing 2- and 4-year periods evolving from initial destructive to constructive interference. Variations among ENSO events could then be a consequence not of changing stability characteristics but of random excitation of these two eigenmodes, which represent different balances between surface and subsurface coupled dynamics. As found in previous studies, the impact of the additional variables on LIM SST forecasts is relatively small for short time scales. Over time intervals greater than about 9 months, however, the additional variables both significantly enhance forecast skill and predict lag covariances and associated power spectra whose closer agreement with observations enhances the validation of the linear model. Moreover, a secondary type of optimal growth exists that is not present in a LIM constructed from SST alone, in which initial SST anomalies in the southwest tropical Pacific and Indian ocean play a larger role than on shorter time scales, apparently driving sustained off-equatorial wind stress anomalies in the eastern Pacific that result in a more persistent equatorial thermocline anomaly and a more protracted (and predictable) ENSO event.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alexander MA, Matrosova L, Penland C, Scott JD, Chang P (2008) Forecasting Pacific SSTs: linear inverse model predictions of the PDO. J Clim 21:385–402
An SI, Jin FF (2001) Collective role of thermocline and zonal advective feedbacks in the ENSO mode. J Clim 14:3421–3432
Anderson BT (2007) Intraseasonal atmospheric variability in the extratropics and its relation to the onset of tropical Pacific sea surface temperature anomalies. J Clim 20:926–936
Ashok K, Behere SK, Rao SA, Weng H, Yamagata T (2007) El Nino Modoki and its possible teleconnection. J Geophys Res 112. doi:10.1029/2006JC003798
Battisti DS, Hirst AC (1989) Interannual variability in a tropical atmosphere-ocean model: influence of the basic state, ocean geometry, and nonlinearity. J Atmos Sci 46:1687–1712
Bejarano L, Jin FF (2008) Coexistence of equatorial coupled modes of ENSO. J Clim 21:3051–3067
Bjerknes J (1969) Atmospheric teleconnections from the equatorial Pacific. Mon Weather Rev 97:163–172
Boulanger JP, Menkes C (2001) The Trident Pacific model. Part 2: role of long equatorial wave reflection on sea surface temperature anomalies during the 1993–1998 TOPEX/POSEIFON period. Clim Dyn 17:175–186
Burgers G, van Oldenborgh GJ (2003) On the impact of local feedbacks in the central Pacific on the ENSO cycle. J Clim 16:2396–2407
Burgers G, Jin FF, van Oldenborgh GJ (2005) The simplest ENSO recharge oscillator. Geophys Res Lett 32:L13706. doi:10.1029/2005GL022951
Capotondi A, Alexander MA (2001) Rossby waves in the tropical North Pacific and their role in decadal thermocline variability. J Phys Oceanogr 31:3496–3515
Carton JA, Giese BS (2008) A reanalysis of ocean climate using Simple Ocean Data Assimilation (SODA). Mon Weather Rev 136:2999–3017
Chang P, Zhang L, Saravanan R, Vimont DJ, Chiang JCH, Ji L, Seidel H, Tippett MK (2007) Pacific meridional mode and El Niño-Southern Oscillation. Geophys Res Lett 34:L16608. doi:10.1029/2007GL030302
Chelton DB, Schlax MG (1996) Global observations of oceanic Rossby waves. Science 272:234–238
Chelton DB, Wentz FJ, Gentemann CL, de Szoeke RA, Schlax MG (2000) Satellite microwave SST observations of transequatorial tropical instability waves. Geophys Res Lett 27:1239–1242
Chen D, Cane MA, Kaplan A, Zebiak SE, Huang D (2004) Predictability of El Niño over the past 148 years. Nature 428:733–736
Clarke AJ, Van Gorder S (2003) Improving El Niño prediction using a space-time integration of Indo-Pacific winds and equatorial Pacific upper ocean heat content. Geophys Res Lett 30:1399. doi:10.1029/2002GL016673
Dijkstra HA, Neelin JD (1999) Coupled processes and the tropical climatology. Part III: instabilities of the fully coupled climatology. J Clim 12:1630–1643
Farrell B (1988) Optimal excitation of neutral Rossby waves. J Atmos Sci 45:163–172
Fedorov AV, Philander SG (2001) A stability analysis of tropical ocean-atmosphere interactions: Bridging measurements and theory for El Niño. J Clim 14:3086–3101
Flügel M, Chang P (1996) Impact of dynamical and stochastic processes on the predictability of ENSO. Geophys Res Lett 23:2089–2092
Frankignoul C, Hasselman K (1977) Stochastic climate models. Part II: application to sea-surface temperature variability and thermocline variability. Tellus 29:289–305
Guilyardi E, Wittenberg A, Fedorov A, Collins M, Wang C, Capotondi A, van Oldenborgh GJ, Stockdale T (2009) Understanding El Niño in ocean-atmosphere general circulation models: progress and challenges. Bull Am Meteor Soc 90:325–340
Hasselmann K (1976) Stochastic climate models. Part I. Theory. Tellus 28:474–485
Jiang N, Neelin JD, Ghil M (1995) Quasi-quadrennial and quasi-biennial variability in the equatorial Pacific. Clim Dyn 12:101–112
Jin FF (1997) An equatorial ocean recharge paradigm for ENSO. Part I: conceptual model. J Atmos Sci 54:811–829
Jin FF, An SI (1999) Thermocline and zonal advective feedbacks within the equatorial ocean recharge oscillator model for ENSO. Geophys Res Lett 26:2989–2992
Jin FF, Neelin JD (1993) Modes of interannual tropical ocean-atmosphere interaction—a unified view. Part III: analytical results in fully coupled cases. J Atmos Sci 50:3523–3540
Jin FF, Neelin JD, Ghil M (1994) El Nino on the “Devils Staircase”: annual subharmonic steps to chaos. Science 264:710–713
Jin FF, Kim ST, Bejarano L (2006) A coupled-stability index for ENSO. Geophys Res Lett 33:L23708. doi:10.1029/2006GL027221
Jochum M, Cronin MF, Kessler WS, Shea D (2007) Observed horizontal temperature advection by tropical instability waves. Geophys Res Lett 34:L09604. doi:10.1029/2007GL029416
Johnson SD, Battisti DS, Sarachik ES (2000) Empirically derived Markov models and prediction of tropical pacific sea surface temperature anomalies. J Clim 13:3–17
Kallummal R, Kirtman B (2008) Validity of a linear stochastic view of ENSO in an ACGCM. J Atmos Sci 65:3860–3879. doi:10.1175/2008JAS2286.1
Kalnay E et al (1996) The NCEP/NCAR 40-Year reanalysis project. Bull Am Meteor Soc 77:437–471
Kang IS, An SI, Jin FF (2001) A systematic approximation of the SST anomaly equation for ENSO. J Met Soc Jpn 79:1–10
Kao HY, Yu JY (2009) Contrasting Eastern-Pacific and Central-Pacific types of ENSO. J Clim 22:615–632
Kessler WS (2002) Is ENSO a cycle or a series of events? Geophys Res Lett 29:2125. doi:10:1029/2002GL015924
Kessler WS, McPhaden MJ (1995) The 1991–93 El Niño in the central Pacific. Deep-Sea Res II 42:295–334
Latif M, Graham NE (1992) How much predictive skill is contained in the thermal structure of an OGCM? J Phys Oceanogr 22:951–962
MacMynowski DG, Tziperman E (2008) Factors affecting ENSO’s period. J Atmos Sci 65:1570–1586
McPhaden MJ (1999) Genesis and evolution of the 1997–98 El Niño. Science 283:950–954
McPhaden MJ, Zhang X, Hendon HH, Wheeler MC (2006) Large scale dynamics and MJO forcing of ENSO variability. Geophy Res Lett 33:L16702. doi:10.1029/2006GL026786
Meinen CS, McPhaden MJ (2000) Observations of warm water volume changes in the equatorial pacific and their relationship to El Nino and La Nina. J Clim 13:3551–3559
Moore A, Kleeman R (1997) The singular vectors of a coupled-atmosphere model of ENSO. II: sensitivity studies and dynamical interpretation. Quart J R Meteor Soc 123:983–1006
Moore A, Kleeman R (1999) The non-normal nature of El Niño and intraseasonal variability. J Clim 12:2965–2982
Neelin JD (1991) The slow sea surface temperature mode and the fast-wave limit: analytic theory for tropical interannual oscillations and experiments in hybrid coupled models. J Atmos Sci 48:584–606
Neelin JD, Jin FF (1993) Modes of interannual tropical ocean-atmosphere interaction—a unified view. Part II: analytical results in the weak-coupling limit. J Atmos Sci 50:3504–3522
Newman M (2007) Interannual to decadal predictability of tropical and North Pacific sea surface temperatures. J Clim 20:2333–2356
Newman M, Sardeshmukh PD (2008) Tropical and stratospheric influences on extratropical short-term climate variability. J Clim 21:4326–4347
Newman M, Sardeshmukh PD, Winkler CR, Whitaker JS (2003) A study of subseasonal predictability. Mon Weather Rev 131:1715–1732
Newman M, Sardeshmukh PD, Penland C (2009) How important is air-sea coupling in ENSO and MJO evolution? J Clim 22:2958–2977
Ortiz-Bevía MJ (1997) Estimation of the cyclostationary dependence in geophysical data fields. J Geophys Res 102:13473–13486
Papanicolaou G, Kohle W (1974) Asymptotic theory of mixing stochastic ordinary differential equations. Commun Pure Appl Math 27:641–668
Penland C (1989) Random forcing and forecasting using principal oscillation pattern analysis. Mon Weather Rev 117:2165–2185
Penland C (1996) A stochastic model of IndoPacific sea surface temperature anomalies. Phys D 98:534–558
Penland C, Matrosova L (1994) A balance condition for stochastic numerical models with application to the El Niño-Southern Oscillation. J Clim 7:1352–1372
Penland C, Matrosova L (2006) Studies of El Niño and interdecadal variability in Tropical sea surface temperatures using a nonnormal filter. J Clim 19:5796–5815
Penland C, Sardeshmukh PD (1995) The optimal growth of tropical sea surface temperature anomalies. J Clim 8:1999–2024
Penland C, Flügel M, Chang P (2000) Identification of dynamical regimes in an intermediate coupled ocean-atmosphere model. J Clim 13:2105–2115
Picaut J, Ioualalen M, Menkes C, Delcroix T, McPhaden MJ (1996) Mechanism of the zonal displacements of the Pacific Warm Pool: Implications for ENSO. Science 274:1486–1489
Rayner NA, Parker DE, Horton EB, Folland CK, Alexander LV, Rowell DP, Kent EC, Kaplan A (2003) Global analyses of sea surface temperature, sea ice, and night marine air temperature since the late nineteenth century. J Geophys Res 108:4407. doi:10.1029/2002JD002670
Schopf PS, Suarez MJ (1988) Vacillations in a coupled ocean-atmosphere model. J Atmos Sci 45:549–566
Schopf PS, Anderson DLT, Smith R (1981) Beta-dispersion of low frequency Rossby waves. Dyn Atmos Oceans 5:187–214
Thompson CJ, Battisti DS (2001) A linear stochastic dynamical model of ENSO. Part II: analysis. J Clim 14:445–466
Vimont DJ, Wallace JM, Battisti DS (2003) The seasonal footprinting mechanism in the Pacific: implications for ENSO. J Clim 16:2668–2675
Wang W, McPhaden MJ (2000) The surface-layer heat balance in the equatorial Pacific ocean. Part II: interannual variability. J Phys Ocean 30:2989–3008
Wang X, Jin FF, Wang Y (2003) A tropical ocean recharge mechanism for climate variability. Part I: equatorial heat content changes induced by the off-equatorial wind. J Clim 16:3585–3598
White WB, Tourre YM, Barlow M, Dettinger M (2003) A delayed action oscillator shared by biennial, interannual, and decadal signals in the Pacific Basin. Geophys Res 108. doi:10.1029/2002JC001490
Winkler CR, Newman M, Sardeshmukh PD (2001) A linear model of wintertime low-frequency variability. Part I: formulation and forecast skill. J Clim 14:4474–4494
Wyrkti K (1985) Water displacements in the Pacific and the genesis of El Niño cycles. J Geophys Res 90:7129–7132
Xue Y, Leetmaa A, Ji M (2000) ENSO prediction with Markov models: the impact of sea level. J Clim 13:849–871
Zebiak SE, Cane MA (1987) A model El Niño-southern oscillation. Mon Weather Rev 115:2268–2278
Zelle H, Appeldoorn G, Burgers G, van Oldenborgh GJ (2004) The relationship between sea surface temperature and thermocline depth in the eastern equatorial Pacific. J Phys Ocean 34:643–655
Zhang Y, Wallace JM, Battisti DS (1997) ENSO-like interdecadal variability. J Clim 10:1004–1020
Acknowledgments
The authors thank Antonietta Capotondi, Cécile Penland, Amy Solomon, David Battisti and two anonymous reviewers for helpful comments. This work was partially supported by a grant from NOAA CLIVAR-Pacific.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix: Construction and validation of the LIM
Appendix: Construction and validation of the LIM
In any multidimensional statistically stationary system with components x i , one may define a time lag covariance matrix C(τ) with elements \( Cij\left( \tau \right) = \left\langle {x_{i} (t + \tau )x(t)} \right\rangle \), where angle brackets denote a long term average. In linear inverse modeling, one assumes that the system satisfies C(τ) = G(τ)C(0), where importantly G(τ) = exp(Lτ) and L is a constant matrix, which follows from (2). One then uses this relationship to estimate L from observational estimates of C(0) and C(τ 0 ) at some lag τo. For the statistics of this system to be stationary, L must be dissipative, i.e its eigenvalues must have negative real parts. In a forecasting context, G(τ)x(t) represents the “best” forecast (in a least squares sense) of x(t + τ) given x(t). Note that unlike multiple linear regression, determination of G at one lag τo identically gives G at all other lags. Also, statistics of the noise forcing, not just the error covariance, are determined by LIM since the positive-definite noise covariance matrix \( {\mathbf{Q}} = \left\langle {\xi \xi^{T} } \right\rangle dt \) is determined from a Fluctuation-Dissipation relationship (3), given the observed C(0) and L.
A training lag of το = 3 months was used to determine L. The EOF truncations (Sect. 2) and training lag were chosen to maximize the LIM’s cross-validated forecast skill for leads up to 18 months, while avoiding the Nyquist problem for L (PS95) that inhibits analysis of interactions amongst the model variables. In no other respect do these choices qualitatively affect the points made in this paper. Estimates of L and of forecast skill were cross-validated by sub-sampling the data record by sequentially removing one five-year period, computing L for the remaining years, and then generating forecasts for the independent years. This procedure was repeated for the entire period. Forecast skill is then determined by comparing the local anomaly correlation between the cross-validated model predictions and gridded untruncated verifications.
Explicitly including both τx and Z 20 in the LIM state vector increases skill of 9 (Figs. 12a, b) and 18 (Fig. 12c, d) month T o forecasts. Skill improvement is mostly due to the inclusion of Z 20 rather than τx, confirming that the Z 20 data provides useful information. In addition, the LIM makes Z 20 forecasts whose skill is significantly better than persistence (not shown). The difference in SST skill between the ocean and SST-LIMs generally increases with forecast lead because the ocean LIM captures the slower Z 20 evolution. For example, a second set of “fixed-Z 20” ocean LIM forecasts in which the initial Z 20 anomaly is persisted throughout the forecast period (i.e., Z 20(t) = Z 20(0); not shown) has greatly reduced 18-month forecast skill.
We test the validity of the linear approximation with a “tau-test” (PS95). For example, since (2) implies that C(τ) = G(τ) C(0), the LIM should be able to reproduce observed lag-covariance statistics at much longer lags than the 3 month lag on which the LIM was trained (e.g., C(18) = [G(3)]6 C(0)). Figure 13 compares the observed and predicted lag-autocovariances of T O for lags of 9, 18, and 36 months, using both the ocean LIM and the SST13-LIM. The SST13-LIM does a reasonably good job capturing the main aspects of the lag-autocovariance pattern, but for lags less than about a year it tends to overestimate persistence especially along the equator and for longer lags it errs in the amplitude of the negative lag-autocovariance. The ocean LIM improves upon these deficiencies, as well as reproducing observed lag-covariance for Z 20 over the same lags (not shown).
A complementary test of linearity is to compare observed and LIM-predicted power spectra, by integrating (2) for 42,000 years using the method described in Penland and Matrosova (1994) and Newman et al. (2009) and then collecting statistics. The white noise forcing is determined from the noise covariance matrix Q determined as a residual from (3). Q should be positive-definite but determined this way it is only guaranteed to be symmetric. Ensuring positive-definiteness in the manner of Penland and Matrosova (1994), by rescaling the noise due to one small negative eigenvalue of Q that accounted for less than 0.25% of the trace of Q, resulted in an almost negligible impact on C(0). The resulting model “data” is separated into 1,000 42-year time series. The observed spectra and the ensemble mean of the model spectra for the three leading PCs of T O and Z 20 are shown in Figs. 14 and 15, respectively. The corresponding EOF pattern for each spectrum is shown in the inset panels. The gray shading shows the 95% confidence intervals of these spectra, estimated using the 1,000 model realizations.
The LIM reproduces the main features of the observed power spectra for the leading PCs of each variable (including τx, not shown). Obviously, the mean LIM spectra are much smoother than observed, due to the relatively few degrees of freedom in the truncated EOF space. On the other hand, the irregularity of the observed spectra is at least partly due to sampling, as indicated by the confidence intervals, which show how much variation in the spectra could occur simply from different realizations of noise.
Since C(0) and C(τ) have seasonal dependence, both Johnson et al. 2000 and Xue et al. 2000 suggested that L should also be considered to be seasonally-varying. They constructed “Markov models” in which they determined G(το) for each season (but not L) so that forecasts are made by an appropriate product of each G. On the other hand, PS95 and Penland (1996) argued that the observed seasonality of ENSO, including its phase locking, can be captured with a fixed L with seasonally varying Q. Newman et al. (2009) found that a tropical atmosphere-SST LIM constructed using weekly data had a poorer representation of coupled ENSO dynamics when segregated by season, although the internal subseasonal atmospheric dynamics were slightly improved. They also found pronounced seasonality of the noise, as did Penland (1996) and Chang et al. (2007). Similar to Penland, we found that the seasonal dependence of the tests above can be generally captured by assuming fixed L but with seasonally varying Q. As in Newman et al. (2009), we also found that seasonal LIMs did poorer in these tests compared to those using a fixed L.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Newman, M., Alexander, M.A. & Scott, J.D. An empirical model of tropical ocean dynamics. Clim Dyn 37, 1823–1841 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-011-1034-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-011-1034-0