Advertisement

The Influence of Arctic Amplification on Mid-latitude Weather and Climate

Arctic Climate Change (Mark Serreze, Section Editor)
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Topical Collection on Arctic Climate Change

Abstract

Purpose of Review

The rapidly warming Arctic climate may affect weather in middle latitudes, but controversies remain as to mechanisms and robustness. Here, I synthesize recent advances in this rapidly changing field and summarize recommendations on paths forward.

Recent Findings

Initial “black-and-white” debates about whether Arctic amplification (AA) affects mid-latitude circulation have evolved toward a more nuanced perspective awash in gray. Recent research has demonstrated myriad ways in which AA can influence weather remotely and explored whether any Arctic-based signal is significant against the backdrop of natural variability.

Summary

The popularity of and controversies surrounding this topic have spurred a multitude of approaches and often-conflicting studies that have widened the envelope of our understanding but hindered a scientific consensus. This messy but necessary exploratory phase of independent investigations is benefiting from recent efforts by the research community to self-organize through workshops, working groups, and coordinated experiments.

Keywords

Arctic amplification Extreme weather Teleconnection Middle latitudes Atmospheric circulation Polar vortex 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The author thanks Jennifer Francis for her constructive feedback in informally reviewing this paper.

Funding Information

This work was supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF) grant PLR-1304398 and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) grant NA15OAR4310166.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The author states that there is no conflict of interest.

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major Importance

  1. 1.
    Comiso JC, Hall DK. Climate trends in the Arctic as observed from space: climate trends in the Arctic as observed from space. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Clim Chang. 2014;5:389–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Notz D, Stroeve J. Observed Arctic sea-ice loss directly follows anthropogenic CO2 emission. Science. 2016;354:747–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Shi X, Déry SJ, Groisman PY, Lettenmaier DP. Relationships between recent pan-Arctic snow cover and hydroclimate trends. J Clim. 2013;26:2048–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Min S-K, Zhang X, Zwiers FW, Hegerl GC. Human contribution to more-intense precipitation extremes. Nature. 2011;470:378–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hansen J, Sato M, Ruedy R. Perception of climate change. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2012;109:E2415–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Coumou D, Rahmstorf S. A decade of weather extremes. Nat Clim Chang. 2012;2:491–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Westra S, Alexander LV, Zwiers FW. Global increasing trends in annual maximum daily precipitation. J Clim. 2013;26:3904–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Overland JE, Wang M. Large-scale atmospheric circulation changes are associated with the recent loss of Arctic sea ice. Tellus A: Dyn Meteorol Oceanogr. 2010;62:1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Overland JE, Wood KR, Wang M. Warm Arctic—cold continents: climate impacts of the newly open Arctic Sea. Polar Res. 2011;30:15787.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Francis JA, Vavrus SJ. Evidence linking Arctic amplification to extreme weather in mid-latitudes. Geophys Res Lett. 2012;39:L06801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Liu J, Curry JA, Wang H, Song M, Horton RM. Impact of declining Arctic sea ice on winter snowfall. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2012;109:4074–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hamilton LC, Lemcke-Stampone M. Arctic warming and your weather: public belief in the connection. Int J Climatol. 2014;34:1723–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wallace JM, Held IM, Thompson DW, Trenberth KE, Walsh JE. Global warming and winter weather. Science. 2014;343:729–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kintisch E. Into the maelstrom. Science. 2014;344:250–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Shepherd TG. Effects of a warming Arctic. Science. 2016;353:989–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cohen J, Screen JA, Furtado JC, Barlow M, Whittleston D, Coumou D, et al. Recent Arctic amplification and extreme mid-latitude weather. Nat Geosci. 2014;7:627–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Vihma T. Effects of Arctic sea ice decline on weather and climate: a review. Surv Geophys. 2014;35:1175–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Walsh JE. Intensified warming of the Arctic: causes and impacts on middle latitudes. Glob Planet Change. 2014;117:52–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    • Overland J, Francis JA, Hall R, Hanna E, Kim S-J, Vihma T. The melting Arctic and midlatitude weather patterns: are they connected? J Clim. 2015;28:7917–32. An influential study that describes many of the complicating factors in establishing a robust connection between AA and mid-latitude weather, such as the regional and episodic nature of mechanisms and the confounding effects of internal variability. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Francis JA. Why are Arctic linkages to extreme weather still up in the air? Bull Am Meteorol Soc. 2017;98:2551–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    • Screen JA, Deser C, Smith DM, Zhang X, Blackport R, Kushner PJ, et al. Consistency and discrepancy in the atmospheric response to Arctic sea-ice loss across climate models. Nat Geosci. 2018;11:155–63. A very recent paper emphasizing the importance of fully coupled models for establishing realistic interactions among the atmosphere, ocean, sea ice, and land that lead to more robust relationships between AA and mid-latitude circulation than atmosphere-only GCMs. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Fletcher JO. The heat budget of the Arctic Basin and its relation to climate. Santa Monica, CA: The Rand Corporation; 1965 pp. 179. Report No.: R-444-PR.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Newson RL. Response of a general circulation model of the atmosphere to removal of the Arctic ice cap. Nature. 1973;241:39–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Warshaw M, Rapp RR. An experiment on the sensitivity of a global circulation model. J Appl Meteorol. 3:43–9.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gleason KL, Lawrimore JH, Levinson DH, Karl TR, Karoly DJ. A revised U.S. Climate Extremes Index. J Clim 2008;21:2124–2137.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Heim RR. An overview of weather and climate extremes—products and trends. Weather Clim Extrem. 2015;10:1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Thompson DWJ, Wallace JM. Regional climate impacts of the northern hemisphere annular mode. Science. 2001;293:85–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Schubert S, Wang H, Suarez M. Warm season subseasonal variability and climate extremes in the Northern Hemisphere: the role of stationary Rossby waves. J Clim. 2011;24:4773–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Screen JA, Simmonds I. Exploring links between Arctic amplification and mid-latitude weather. Geophys Res Lett. 2013;40:959–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Screen JA, Simmonds I. Amplified mid-latitude planetary waves favour particular regional weather extremes. Nat Clim Chang. 2014;4:704–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Perlwitz J, Hoerling M, Dole R. Arctic tropospheric warming: causes and linkages to lower latitudes. J Clim. 2015;28:2154–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Meleshko VP, Johannessen OM, Baidin AV, Pavlova TV, Govorkova VA. Arctic amplification: does it impact the polar jet stream? Tellus A: Dyn Meteorol Oceanogr. 2016;68:32330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Barnes EA. Revisiting the evidence linking Arctic amplification to extreme weather in midlatitudes. Geophys Res Lett. 2013;40:4734–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Palmer T. Record-breaking winters and global climate change. Science. 2014;344:803–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    • Barnes EA, Screen JA. The impact of Arctic warming on the midlatitude jet-stream: can it? Has it? Will it?: impact of Arctic warming on the midlatitude jet-stream. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Clim Chang. 2015;6:277–86. A constructive framing of the controversial topic of Arctic mid-latitude linkages, this study helped to make progress by breaking down the debate into theory, observations, and projections. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Cohen JL, Furtado JC, Barlow MA, Alexeev VA, Cherry JE. Arctic warming, increasing snow cover and widespread boreal winter cooling. Environ Res Lett. 2012;7:014007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    • McCusker KE, Fyfe JC, Sigmond M. Twenty-five winters of unexpected Eurasian cooling unlikely due to Arctic sea-ice loss. Nat Geosci. 2016;9:838–42. In combination with the following reference, these studies were important for demonstrating the importance of internal atmospheric variability and its role as a viable explanation for the observed continental winter cooling trend in the Northern Hemisphere. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    • Sun L, Perlwitz J, Hoerling M. What caused the recent “Warm Arctic, Cold Continents” trend pattern in winter temperatures? Geophys Res Lett. 2016;43:5345–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Sun L, Deser C, Tomas RA. Mechanisms of stratospheric and tropospheric circulation response to projected Arctic sea ice loss. J Clim. 2015;28:7824–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Pedersen RA, Cvijanovic I, Langen PL, Vinther BM. The impact of regional Arctic sea ice loss on atmospheric circulation and the NAO. J Clim. 2016;29:889–902.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    • Screen JA. Simulated atmospheric response to regional and pan-Arctic sea ice loss. J Clim. 2017;30:3945–62. Although previous work had suggested that the location of autumn-winter sea-ice loss was an important factor for whether and how the atmosphere responds, this study methodically quantified the distinct regional influences across nine sectors of the Arctic and demonstrated that the largest effects stem from the Barents-Kara Sea and Sea of Okhotsk. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    McKenna CM, Bracegirdle TJ, Shuckburgh EF, Haynes PH, Joshi MM. Arctic sea ice loss in different regions leads to contrasting Northern Hemisphere impacts. Geophys Res Lett. 2018;45:945–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    • Screen JA, Deser C, Sun L. Projected changes in regional climate extremes arising from Arctic Sea ice loss. Environ Res Lett. 2015;10:084006. This analysis indicated that the effect of projected Arctic sea-ice loss on mid-latitude weather extremes is not spatially uniform, but rather it varies significantly by region and season. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Di Capua G, Coumou D. Changes in meandering of the Northern Hemisphere circulation. Environ Res Lett. 2016;11:094028.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Peings Y, Cattiaux J, Vavrus S, Magnusdottir G. Late twenty-first-century changes in the midlatitude atmospheric circulation in the CESM Large Ensemble. J Clim. 2017;30:5943–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Vavrus SJ, Wang F, Martin JE, Francis JA, Peings Y, Cattiaux J. Changes in north American atmospheric circulation and extreme weather: influence of Arctic amplification and Northern Hemisphere snow cover. J Clim. 2017;30:4317–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Dole R, Hoerling M, Perlwitz J, Eischeid J, Pegion P, Zhang T, et al. Was there a basis for anticipating the 2010 Russian heat wave? Geophys Res Lett. 2011;38:L06702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Hartmann DL. Pacific sea surface temperature and the winter of 2014: SST and 2014 winter. Geophys Res Lett. 2015;42:1894–902.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Barnes EA, Simpson IR. Seasonal sensitivity of the Northern Hemisphere jet streams to Arctic temperatures on subseasonal time scales. J Clim. 2017;30:10117–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    • Zappa G, Pithan F, Shepherd TG. Multimodel evidence for an atmospheric circulation response to Arctic sea ice loss in the CMIP5 future projections. Geophys Res Lett. 2018;45:1011–9. A very recent study that utilizes multiple climate models and a novel methodology to investigate the robustness of previously reported results using single models, including the differing circulation responses over the Atlantic vs. Pacific, the relative importance of Arctic vs. lower-latitude warming, and the seasonal time lag in the mid-latitude circulation response to sea-ice loss. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Hoskins B, Woollings T. Persistent extratropical regimes and climate extremes. Curr Clim Change Rep. 2015;1:115–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Drijfhout S, van Oldenborgh GJ, Cimatoribus A. Is a decline of AMOC causing the warming hole above the North Atlantic in observed and modeled warming patterns? J Clim 2012;25:8373–8379.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Woollings T, Gregory JM, Pinto JG, Reyers M, Brayshaw DJ. Response of the North Atlantic storm track to climate change shaped by ocean–atmosphere coupling. Nat Geosci. 2012;5:313–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Li F, Orsolini YJ, Wang H, Gao Y, He S. Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation modulates the impacts of Arctic sea ice decline. Geophys Res Lett. 2018(45):2017GL076210.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Petoukhov V, Semenov VA. A link between reduced Barents-Kara sea ice and cold winter extremes over northern continents. J Geophys Res Atmospheres. 2010;115:D21111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    • Deser C, Tomas RA, Sun L. The role of ocean–atmosphere coupling in the zonal-mean atmospheric response to Arctic sea ice loss. J Clim. 2015;28:2168–86. A very important study for demonstrating the importance of ocean coupling in amplifying the mid-latitude circulation response to Arctic sea-ice loss, including the emergence of a “mini” global warming pattern caused by indirect tropical heating from a warming Arctic. The results underscore the difficulty in cleanly isolating the impact of regional Arctic warming in the tightly coupled global climate system. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Screen JA, Deser C, Simmonds I, Tomas R. Atmospheric impacts of Arctic sea-ice loss, 1979–2009: separating forced change from atmospheric internal variability. Clim Dyn. 2014;43:333–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Petrie RE, Shaffrey LC, Sutton RT. Atmospheric response in summer linked to recent Arctic sea ice loss. Q J R Meteorol Soc. 2015;141:2070–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Chen HW, Zhang F, Alley RB. The robustness of midlatitude weather pattern changes due to Arctic sea ice loss. J Clim. 2016;29:7831–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Cohen JL, Saito K. Eurasian snow cover, more skillful in predicting U.S. winter climate than the NAO/AO? Geophys Res Lett. 2003;30:2190.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Kim B-M, Son S-W, Min S-K, Jeong J-H, Kim S-J, Zhang X, et al. Weakening of the stratospheric polar vortex by Arctic sea-ice loss. Nat Commun. 2014;5:4646.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    • Kretschmer M, Coumou D, Donges JF, Runge J. Using causal effect networks to analyze different Arctic drivers of midlatitude winter circulation. J Clim. 2016;29:4069–81. This paper introduced a novel methodology to improve correlation analyses by better detecting causal relationships and time delays among various processes involved in AA teleconnections. The study concluded that sea-ice loss in the Barents-Kara Seas is an important driver of the mid-latitude circulation through both tropospheric and stratospheric mechanisms. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Wu Y, Smith KL. Response of Northern Hemisphere midlatitude circulation to Arctic amplification in a simple atmospheric general circulation model. J Clim. 2016;29:2041–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Koenigk T, Mikolajewicz U, Jungclaus JH, Kroll A. Sea ice in the Barents Sea: seasonal to interannual variability and climate feedbacks in a global coupled model. Clim Dyn. 2009;32:1119–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Peings Y, Magnusdottir G. Response of the wintertime Northern Hemisphere atmospheric circulation to current and projected Arctic sea ice decline: a numerical study with CAM5. J Clim. 2013;27:244–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Harvey BJ, Shaffrey LC, Woollings TJ. Equator-to-pole temperature differences and the extra-tropical storm track responses of the CMIP5 climate models. Clim Dyn. 2014;43:1171–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    • Blackport R, Kushner PJ. Isolating the atmospheric circulation response to Arctic sea ice loss in the coupled climate system. J Clim. 2017;30:2163–85. This paper introduced a novel “pattern scaling” technique to isolate the separate impact of AA vs. low-mid-latitude warming in affecting the extratropical circulation. Such an approach helps in diagnosing the “tug-of-war” competition between the tropics and polar regions under greenhouse warming. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    • Ayarzagüena B, Screen JA. Future Arctic sea ice loss reduces severity of cold air outbreaks in midlatitudes. Geophys Res Lett. 2016;43:2016GL068092. While many have suggested that the impact on extreme cold of a wavier extratropical circulation pattern would be tempered by upstream warming of Arctic air masses, this study delved into this question and concluded that projected sea-ice loss does not increase the frequency or duration of cold-air outbreaks but does reduce their severity. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Horel JD, Wallace JM. Planetary-scale atmospheric phenomena associated with the Southern Oscillation. Mon Weather Rev. 1981;109:813–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    McCabe GJ, Dettinger MD. Decadal variations in the strength of ENSO teleconnections with precipitation in the western United States. Int J Climatol. 1999;19:1399–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Scaife AA, Copsey D, Gordon C, Harris C, Hinton T, Keeley S, et al. Improved Atlantic winter blocking in a climate model. Geophys Res Lett. 2011;38:L23703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Lee M-Y, Hong C-C, Hsu H-H. Compounding effects of warm sea surface temperature and reduced sea ice on the extreme circulation over the extratropical North Pacific and North America during the 2013–2014 boreal winter. Geophys Res Lett. 2015;42:2014GL062956.Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    • Sung M-K, Kim B-M, Baek E-H, Lim Y-K, Kim S-J. Arctic-North Pacific coupled impacts on the late autumn cold in North America. Environ Res Lett. 2016;11:084016. One of the first papers to document a specific example of the interplay between AA and background state on mid-latitude extreme weather. The simulated impact of Arctic sea-ice loss on downstream atmospheric troughing in North America depends on the phase of the PDO. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Screen JA, Francis JA. Contribution of sea-ice loss to Arctic amplification is regulated by Pacific Ocean decadal variability. Nat Clim Chang. 2016;6:856–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Osborne JM, Screen JA, Collins M. Ocean–atmosphere state dependence of the atmospheric response to Arctic sea ice loss. J Clim. 2017;30:1537–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Overland JE, Dethloff K, Francis JA, Hall RJ, Hanna E, Kim S-J, et al. Nonlinear response of mid-latitude weather to the changing Arctic. Nat Clim Chang. 2016;6:992–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    • Smith DM, Dunstone NJ, Scaife AA, Fiedler EK, Copsey D, Hardiman SC. Atmospheric response to Arctic and Antarctic sea ice: the importance of ocean–atmosphere coupling and the background state. J Clim. 2017;30:4547–65. Combining observational analysis and modeling approaches, this study demonstrated the difficulty in diagnosing the impact of AA on mid-latitude circulation based on observations and also highlighted the dependence of modeling results on ocean-atmosphere coupling and background states. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Mori M, Watanabe M, Shiogama H, Inoue J, Kimoto M. Robust Arctic sea-ice influence on the frequent Eurasian cold winters in past decades. Nat Geosci. 2014;7:869–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    • Kug J-S, Jeong J-H, Jang Y-S, Kim B-M, Folland CK, Min S-K, et al. Two distinct influences of Arctic warming on cold winters over North America and East Asia. Nat Geosci. 2015;8:759–62. This paper identified a similar Arctic mid-latitude wintertime teleconnection involving both East Asia and North America, depending on the location of the Arctic heating anomaly, and described how these regional linkages occur in observations and models. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Zhang P, Wu Y, Smith KL. Prolonged effect of the stratospheric pathway in linking Barents–Kara Sea sea ice variability to the midlatitude circulation in a simplified model. Clim Dyn. 2018;50:527–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Sato K, Inoue J, Watanabe M. Influence of the Gulf Stream on the Barents Sea ice retreat and Eurasian coldness during early winter. Environ Res Lett. 2014;9:084009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Kelleher M, Screen J. Atmospheric precursors of and response to anomalous Arctic sea ice in CMIP5 models. Adv Atmospheric Sci. 2018;35:27–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Peings Y, Magnusdottir G. Wintertime atmospheric response to Atlantic multidecadal variability: effect of stratospheric representation and ocean–atmosphere coupling. Clim Dyn. 2016;47:1029–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Derksen C, Brown R. Spring snow cover extent reductions in the 2008–2012 period exceeding climate model projections. Geophys Res Lett. 2012;39:L19504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Petoukhov V, Rahmstorf S, Petri S, Schellnhuber HJ. Quasiresonant amplification of planetary waves and recent Northern Hemisphere weather extremes. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2013;110:5336–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    • Coumou D, Lehmann J, Beckmann J. The weakening summer circulation in the Northern Hemisphere mid-latitudes. Science. 2015;348:324–7. One of the first studies to focus on the potential influence of AA on summertime extratropical conditions. The findings showed a significant weakening of the circulation in recent decades that may have contributed to the observed rise in extreme heat and that is consistent with projected future circulation changes. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Lehmann J, Coumou D, Frieler K. Increased record-breaking precipitation events under global warming. Clim Chang. 2015;132:501–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Screen JA. Influence of Arctic sea ice on European summer precipitation. Environ Res Lett. 2013;8:044015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Tang Q, Zhang X, Francis JA. Extreme summer weather in northern mid-latitudes linked to a vanishing cryosphere. Nat Clim Chang. 2014;4:45–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Wu B, Zhang R, D’Arrigo R, Su J. On the relationship between winter sea ice and summer atmospheric circulation over Eurasia. J Clim. 2013;26:5523–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Coumou D, Petoukhov V, Rahmstorf S, Petri S, Schellnhuber HJ. Quasi-resonant circulation regimes and hemispheric synchronization of extreme weather in boreal summer. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2014;111:12331–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Stadtherr L, Coumou D, Petoukhov V, Petri S, Rahmstorf S. Record Balkan floods of 2014 linked to planetary wave resonance. Sci Adv. 2016;2:e1501428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Kornhuber K, Petoukhov V, Petri S, Rahmstorf S, Coumou D. Evidence for wave resonance as a key mechanism for generating high-amplitude quasi-stationary waves in boreal summer. Clim Dyn. 2017;49:1961–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    • Mann ME, Rahmstorf S, Kornhuber K, Steinman BA, Miller SK, Coumou D. Influence of anthropogenic climate change on planetary wave resonance and extreme weather events. Sci Rep. 2017;7:45242. Building on previous research documenting the importance of quasi-resonant amplification of Rossby waves for extreme summer weather, this study found an observed and projected increase in such events that is possibly linked to AA. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Hassanzadeh P, Kuang Z, Farrell BF. Responses of midlatitude blocks and wave amplitude to changes in the meridional temperature gradient in an idealized dry GCM. Geophys Res Lett. 2014;41:5223–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Hassanzadeh P, Kuang Z. Blocking variability: Arctic amplification versus Arctic Oscillation. Geophys Res Lett. 2015;42:2015GL065923.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Sellevold R, Sobolowski S, Li C. Investigating possible Arctic–midlatitude teleconnections in a linear framework. J Clim. 2016;29:7329–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    • Deser C, Sun L, Tomas RA, Screen J. Does ocean coupling matter for the northern extratropical response to projected Arctic sea ice loss? Geophys Res Lett. 2016;43:2016GL067792. Primarily of importance for designing and interpreting modeling studies that test the impact of AA, this paper showed how ocean coupling affects the mid-latitude response to Arctic sea-ice loss. Surprisingly, the simulations showed that coupling an atmospheric model to a slab ocean produces a very different mid-latitude circulation response than without any ocean coupling or with dynamical ocean feedbacks. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    • Cvijanovic I, Santer BD, Bonfils C, Lucas DD, Chiang JCH, Zimmerman S. Future loss of Arctic sea-ice cover could drive a substantial decrease in California’s rainfall. Nat Commun. 2017;8:1947. This timely study provided a specific example of how AA could affect mid-latitude extreme weather by identifying a multi-step process by which an Arctic-based heating signal could reach the tropics, where wave energy could propagate to North America to induce drought over California. The results underscore the complex interplay and tight coupling among various regions of the world. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Cassano JJ, Uotila P, Lynch AH, Cassano EN. Predicted changes in synoptic forcing of net precipitation in large Arctic river basins during the 21st century. J Geophys Res Biogeosci. 2007;112:G04S49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Francis J, Skific N. Evidence linking rapid Arctic warming to mid-latitude weather patterns. Phil Trans R Soc A. 2015;373:20140170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Kretschmer M, Coumou D, Agel L, Barlow M, Tziperman E, Cohen J. More-persistent weak stratospheric polar vortex states linked to cold extremes. Bull Am Meteorol Soc. 2017;99:49–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Runge J, Petoukhov V, Kurths J. Quantifying the strength and delay of climatic interactions: the ambiguities of cross correlation and a novel measure based on graphical models. J Clim. 2013;27:720–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Rohli RV, Wrona KM, Mchugh MJ. January Northern Hemisphere circumpolar vortex variability and its relationship with hemispheric temperature and regional teleconnections. Int J Climatol. 2005;25:1421–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Francis JA, Vavrus SJ. Evidence for a wavier jet stream in response to rapid Arctic warming. Environ Res Lett. 2015;10:014005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Cattiaux J, Peings Y, Saint-Martin D, Trou-Kechout N, Vavrus SJ. Sinuosity of midlatitude atmospheric flow in a warming world. Geophys Res Lett. 2016;43:8259–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Nakamura N. Two-dimensional mixing, edge formation, and permeability diagnosed in an area coordinate. J Atmospheric Sci. 1996;53:1524–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Nakamura N, Solomon A. Finite-amplitude wave activity and mean flow adjustments in the atmospheric general circulation. Part I: quasigeostrophic theory and analysis. J Atmospheric Sci. 2010;67:3967–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    • Chen G, Lu J, Burrows DA, Leung LR. Local finite-amplitude wave activity as an objective diagnostic of midlatitude extreme weather. Geophys Res Lett. 2015;42:2015GL066959. Using a complementary blend of theory and reanalysis, this paper describes a useful application of local finite-amplitude wave activity as a diagnostic for quantifying planetary wave heights. The analysis also demonstrates theoretical support for the empirical relationship between weaker zonal flow and amplified Rossby waves. Google Scholar
  110. 110.
    • Barnes EA, Polvani LM. CMIP5 projections of Arctic amplification, of the north American/North Atlantic circulation, and of their relationship. J Clim. 2015;28:5254–71. This was one of the first comprehensive analyses of projected changes in mid-latitude circulation and their possible relationship with AA. The study concluded that the future circulation response is unlikely to be primarily determined by Arctic warming. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. 111.
    Magnusdottir G, Deser C, Saravanan R. The effects of North Atlantic SST and sea ice anomalies on the winter circulation in CCM3. Part I: main features and storm track characteristics of the response. J Clim. 2004;17:857–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. 112.
    Seierstad IA, Bader J. Impact of a projected future Arctic sea ice reduction on extratropical storminess and the NAO. Clim Dyn. 2009;33:937.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. 113.
    Cassano EN, Cassano JJ, Higgins ME, Serreze MC. Atmospheric impacts of an Arctic sea ice minimum as seen in the community atmosphere model. Int J Climatol. 2014;34:766–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. 114.
    Singarayer JS, Bamber JL, Valdes PJ. Twenty-first-century climate impacts from a declining Arctic sea ice cover. J Clim. 2006;19:1109–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. 115.
    Strey ST, Chapman WL, Walsh JE. The 2007 sea ice minimum: impacts on the Northern Hemisphere atmosphere in late autumn and early winter. J Geophys Res Atmospheres. 2010;115:D23103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. 116.
    Zhang J, Tian W, Chipperfield MP, Xie F, Huang J. Persistent shift of the Arctic polar vortex towards the Eurasian continent in recent decades. Nat Clim Chang. 2016;6:1094–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. 117.
    Feldstein SB, Lee S. Intraseasonal and interdecadal jet shifts in the Northern Hemisphere: the role of warm pool tropical convection and sea ice. J Clim. 2014;27:6497–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. 118.
    Ding Q, Wallace JM, Battisti DS, Steig EJ, Gallant AJE, Kim H-J, et al. Tropical forcing of the recent rapid Arctic warming in northeastern Canada and Greenland. Nature. 2014;509:209–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. 119.
    Sorokina SA, Li C, Wettstein JJ, Kvamstø NG. Observed atmospheric coupling between Barents sea ice and the warm-Arctic cold-Siberian anomaly pattern. J Clim. 2015;29:495–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. 120.
    Wernli H, Papritz L. Role of polar anticyclones and mid-latitude cyclones for Arctic summertime sea-ice melting. Nat Geosci. 2018;11:108–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. 121.
    Screen JA. Climate science: far-flung effects of Arctic warming. Nat Geosci. 2017;10:253–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. 122.
    Cohen J, et al. Arctic change and possible influence on mid-latitude climate and weather. U. S. CLIVAR Report; In review.Google Scholar
  123. 123.
    Höhler S. Local disruption or global condition? El Niño as weather and as climate phenomenon. Geo Geogr Environ. 2017;4:e00034.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. 124.
    Dickey JO, Marcus SL, Chin TM. Thermal wind forcing and atmospheric angular momentum: origin of the Earth's delayed response to ENSO. Geophys Res Lett. 2007;34:L17803.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. 125.
    Ashok K, Behera SK, Rao SA, Weng H, Yamagata T. El Niño Modoki and its possible teleconnection. J Geophys Res Oceans. 2007;112:C11007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. 126.
    Cohen J, Pfeiffer K, Francis J. Winter 2015/16: a turning point in ENSO-based seasonal forecasts. Oceanography. 2017;30:82–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. 127.
    Rasmusson EM, Wallace JM. Meteorological aspects of the El Niño/Southern Oscillation. Science. 1983;222:1195–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Nelson Institute Center for Climatic ResearchUniversity of Wisconsin-MadisonMadisonUSA

Personalised recommendations