Variations in the STMW thickness
Figure 3 shows the time–latitude plot of the STMW thickness anomalies in the summer 137°E section together with the average and standard deviation. The anomaly is the deviation from the average over the whole period from 1972 to 2019. The mean thickness and the standard deviation are large between 26° and 32°N and decrease to the south (Fig. 3b, c). The thickness variations seem to be similar in the region between 20° and 32°N (Fig. 3a). Figure 4a shows the time series of the thickness anomalies averaged between 26° and 29°N, displaying decadal-scale variations. The autocorrelation function was calculated at each latitude between 20° and 32°N, showing a dominant timescale of approximately 9–15 years (not shown). The increases from the early 1990s, early 2000s and early 2010s and their subsequent decreases are in agreement with those identified from the Argo float and other hydrographic observations by Qiu and Chen (2006); Oka (2009); Qiu and Chen (2013); Rainville et al. (2014); Oka et al. (2015) and Cerovečki and Giglio (2016).
The composite PV sections are made with respect to the STMW thickness anomalies averaged in 26°–29°N (Fig. 4a): one is made by averaging the data when the positive thickness anomalies exceed one standard deviation (thick STMW years; 1981–1983, 1995–1997 and 2013–2015), and the other is made by averaging the data when the negative anomalies exceed one standard deviation (thin STMW years; 1977–1978, 2000–2001 and 2008–2010). In the thick STMW years, the low-PV STMW appears with the large area north of 26°N and extends to the south around 22°N (Fig. 5a). In contrast, the STMW is almost absent along the 137°E section in the thin STMW years (Fig. 5b).
The STMW in the 137°E section originates in the winter mixed layer south of the Kuroshio Extension (Suga et al. 1989; Suga and Hanawa 1995). Indeed, the comparison between the STMW thickness at 137°E and the February-to-March mean MLD south of the Kuroshio Extension, which is calculated using the MOAA-GPV data, shows the close relationship on a decadal timescale (Fig. 4b), though the time series is short because of the limitation of the available observations. As demonstrated by Oka et al. (2019), the change in the MLD heads slightly that in the STMW thickness and their low-pass filtered time series are significantly correlated (a coefficient of 0.89), with a lag of 1 year. This suggests that the change in the STMW thickness in the summer 137°E section originates in the wintertime mixed layer south of the Kuroshio Extension in the preceding year.
In the region north of 30°N, the STMW thickness changes in relation to the Kuroshio path. The STMW became thin from 1975 to 1979, from 1981 to 1983 and after 2018 during the Kuroshio large meander periods, as indicated by the horizontal bars in Fig. 3a. During the Kuroshio large meander, the Kuroshio takes an offshore detouring path between 135° and 139°E (Kawabe 1995) and separates the recirculation gyre south of the Kuroshio, hindering the advection of the STMW from the east north of 30°N (Suga and Hanawa 1995). The reduction in the STMW thickness is not as obvious during the other large meander periods, which are relatively short (less than 1.5 years) compared to the three meanders mentioned above. This is due to the low-pass filter used in Fig. 3a. Without applying the low-pass filter, the short-term Kuroshio meander is accompanied by the reduction in the STMW thickness (figure not shown).
Variations in the pycnocline
In this section, we first describe the variations in the pycnocline depth and then examine their relationships with the STMW thickness and wind-driven baroclinic Rossby waves.
The variations in the pycnocline are investigated by analyzing the isopycnal depths on an isopycnal surface. The depth is linearly interpolated with a density increment of 0.1 \({\sigma }_{\theta }\). Figure 6 shows the mean isopycnal depth and its standard deviation in the summer section. The maximum wintertime outcrop density is obtained from the winter 137°E section data and superimposed in Fig. 6. In the STMW region between 20° and 32°N, the standard deviation is relatively large over almost the entire layer below the wintertime outcrop density, indicating that the pycnocline changes considerably in the STMW region.
The correlation between the STMW thickness and the isopycnal depth is calculated for every isopycnal surface at each latitude grid point in the STMW region between 20° and 32°N (Fig. 7a). In the region between 26° and 32°N where the thick STMW is present in the climatology (Fig. 3b), the correlation is generally negative and positive above and below the STMW layer at approximately \({\sigma }_{\theta }\)= 25.0–25.5 kg m−3, respectively, which signifies that the presence of the thick STMW coincides with the shoaling of the upper pycnocline and the deepening of the lower main pycnocline. The negative correlation in the upper pycnocline is significant at the 95% confidence limit and extends to the south around 20°N over the STMW region, with a slight drop in the correlation in the two STF bands at 21°N and 24°–26°N (Fig. 1b). In contrast, the positive correlation in the main pycnocline is low and confined to the north of 25°N with limited significance, except in the region north of 30°N. The pattern of the negative and positive correlation may be suggestive of the second mode baroclinic adjustment proposed by Xie et al. (2011), though it appears only north of 25°N in the northern part of the STMW region.
The linear regression of the isopycnal depth is calculated using the STMW thickness as an explanatory variable (see contours in Fig. 7a). The regression coefficient is approximately 0.1–0.2 in the upper pycnocline above the STMW layer, indicating that the upper pycnocline changes in depth by approximately 10–20% of the change in the STMW thickness.
The relationship between the pycnocline and the STMW is recognizable in the time-vertical density section shown in Fig. 8. When the thick, low-PV STMW appears at depths of 200–350 m, the isopycnal surfaces move upward above the STMW with positive density anomalies near the surface. On the other hand, the deepening of the main pycnocline is not so obvious, but it may be identifiable below the low-PV STMW in the periods from 1980 to 1982 and from 1990 to 1997. In 1975 and from 2010 to 2015, the main pycnocline rises despite the presence of the low-PV STMW. The rise occurs over the entire depth above 600 m.
The heaving of isopycnal surfaces is noticeable even at the depth where the mixed layer forms in the preceding winter as shown in Fig. 8. This feature is also confirmed by the negative correlation above the maximum winter outcrop density shown in Fig. 7a. In spring, the sea surface heat flux changes from cooling to heating, and the seasonal pycnocline, which consists of the upper pycnocline, forms, resulting in a rapid shoaling of the mixed layer (Qiu and Kelly 1993). The seasonal pycnocline grows and extends downward from spring to summer, steadily eroding the upper boundary of the STMW mainly through eddy-related processes such as diapycnal eddy diffusion (Qiu et al. 2006; Sukigara et al. 2011) . Because a thick STMW is transported continuously from the formation region on decadal timescales, the seasonal pycnocline could be prevented from developing more deeply during the thick STMW period.
The strong positive correlation below the STMW layer between 30° and 32°N might represent not only the adjustment to the STMW but also the influence of the Kuroshio on the STMW. As mentioned in Sect. 3.1, during the periods of the Kuroshio large meander, the Kuroshio shifts to the south around 30°N at 137°E, which shoals the main pycnocline and reduces the STMW thickness there.
Figure 7b shows the correlation between the observed change in the isopycnal depth and the pycnocline depth anomalies at 137°E computed from the wind-driven Rossby wave model (Sect. 2.2). The correlation is significantly positive over the entire pycnocline in the North Equatorial Current region south of 15°N, where wind forcing plays a key role in interannual-to-decadal changes in the upper ocean through Rossby wave dynamics (Qiu and Chen 2010b). In contrast, in the STMW region, the correlation is overall positive over the entire pycnocline but is not significant between 20° and 29°N. The depth variations of the upper pycnocline are related more to the STMW thickness (Fig. 7a) than to the main pycnocline depth predicted by the Rossby wave model. As for the main pycnocline layer, the correlation is overall not significant with either the STMW thickness (Fig. 7a) or the Rossby waves (Fig. 7b). The mechanisms of the variations in the main pycnocline need further investigation.
Variations in the STF and their cause
In this section, we investigate the relationship between variations in the STF and the STMW on isopycnal surfaces. Figure 9 shows the mean and standard deviation of the meridional density gradient, F on an isopycnal surface in the summer section. F is linearly interpolated with a density increment of 0.1 \({\sigma }_{\theta }\) for each year and is then averaged for the entire analysis period. As can be seen in Fig. 1b, the STF appears with the two bands of the positive \(F\) at 19°N and 25°N above the STMW layer around \({\sigma }_{\theta }\)= 25.0–25.5 kg m−3 (Fig. 9a). The standard deviation is large in the regions north of each STF band (Fig. 9b). We focus on these two large-variability regions and estimate the changes in the STF strength by averaging \(F\) vertically between the isopycnals at the bottom of the mixed layer and the top of the STMW (\({\sigma }_{\theta }\)= 24.8 kg m−3) and then by averaging it between 20° and 22°N and between 26° and 28°N (Fig. 10). The STF shows decadal-scale variability in the two regions. The autocorrelation function estimates a dominant period of approximately 8–15 years, which agrees well with that of the STMW thickness (Sect. 3.1).
Because the STF is associated with the northward shoaling of the upper pycnocline (e.g., Kobashi and Kubokawa 2012), we rewrite \(F\) in terms of the meridional slope of the isopycnal surfaces. Considering a small change in density \(\delta \rho\) from the reference density \({\rho }_{0}\) in the y, z plane, we transform the meridional density gradient from z to isopycnal coordinates as follows:
$$\left[ {\frac{{\left( {\rho_{0} + \delta \rho } \right) - \rho_{0} }}{\delta y}} \right]_{z} = \left[ {\frac{{\left( {\rho_{0} + \delta \rho } \right) - \rho_{0} }}{\delta z}} \right]_{y} \left( {\frac{\delta z}{{\delta y}}} \right)_{\rho } .$$
(3)
This transformation is described in some textbooks (e.g., Holton 2004). Taking the limits \(\delta y, \delta z\to 0\) yields.
$$\left( {\frac{\partial \rho }{{\partial y}}} \right)_{z} = - \left( {\frac{\partial \rho }{{\partial z}}} \right)_{y} \left( {\frac{\partial z}{{\partial y}}} \right)_{\rho } ,$$
(4)
\({\mathrm{where} \left(\partial z/\partial y\right)}_{\rho }\) on the right-hand side of the equation represents the slope of the isopycnal surfaces. Using \({\sigma }_{\theta }\) for \(\rho\), the depth of the isopycnal surfaces \(Z\left({\sigma }_{\theta }\right)\) and the Brunt–Väisälä frequency \(N={\left\{-\left(g/{\rho }_{0}\right)\left(\partial {\sigma }_{\theta }/\partial z\right)\right\}}^{1/2}\), Eq. (4) can be rewritten as.
$$F = \left( {\frac{{\partial \sigma_{\theta } }}{\partial y}} \right)_{z} = - \frac{{\rho_{0} }}{g}N^{2} \left( {\frac{{\partial Z\left( {\sigma_{\theta } } \right)}}{\partial y}} \right)_{{\sigma_{\theta } }} ,$$
(5)
where \(F\) is proportional to the product of the squared Brunt–Väisälä frequency and the isopycnal slope. We replace \({N}^{2}\) in Eq. (5) with the time mean value,\(\stackrel{-}{{N}^{2}}\), and calculate the STF strength in the same manner (Fig. 10). The time series are almost identical to the original one, which indicates that the change in the STF strength is closely associated with that in the isopycnal slope.
We estimate the change in the STF strength due to the STMW, \({F}_{S}^{^{\prime}}\), by using the \(\stackrel{-}{{N}^{2}}\) and the anomalies of isopycnal depth associated with the STMW thickness,\({Z}_{S}^{^{\prime}}\left({\sigma }_{\theta }\right)\), at each latitude point as follows:
$$F_{s}^{^{\prime}} = - \frac{{\rho_{0} }}{g}\overline{{N^{2} }} \left( {\frac{{\partial Z_{S}^{^{\prime}} \left( {\sigma_{\theta } } \right)}}{\partial y}} \right)_{{\sigma_{\theta } }} ,$$
(6)
where the prime denotes the anomaly from the mean. \({Z}_{S}^{^{\prime}}\left({\sigma }_{\theta }\right)\) is calculated from the linear regression of the isopycnal depths on the STMW thickness. For comparison, we also estimate the change in the STF strength due to wind-driven Rossby waves, \({F}_{w}^{^{\prime}}\), in the same manner, but by using the isopycnal depth anomalies regressed on the main pycnocline depth calculated from the Rossby wave model,\({Z}_{w}^{^{\prime}}\left({\sigma }_{\theta }\right)\) as follows:
$$F_{w}^{^{\prime}} = - \frac{{\rho_{0} }}{g}\overline{{N^{2} }} \left( {\frac{{\partial Z_{w}^{^{\prime}} \left( {\sigma_{\theta } } \right)}}{\partial y}} \right)_{{\sigma_{\theta } }} .$$
(7)
Figure 11 shows the correlation coefficients between \({F}^{^{\prime}}\) and \({F}_{S}^{^{\prime}}\) and between \({F}^{^{\prime}}\) and \({F}_{w}^{^{\prime}}\) on an isopycnal surface. The correlation between \({F}^{^{\prime}}\) and \({F}_{S}^{^{\prime}}\) is generally positive and significant in the upper pycnocline above the STMW layer around \({\sigma }_{\theta }\)= 25.0–25.5 kg m−3 north of 20°N, with the two high-correlation bands around 21°N and 28°N. These bands correspond roughly to those of the large STF variability shown in Fig. 9b. In contrast, the correlation between \({F}^{^{\prime}}\) and \({F}_{w}^{^{\prime}}\) is weak and not significant in the STF region. These results indicate the importance of the STMW in the STF variations.
The time series of \({F}^{^{\prime}}\) in the two high-correlation bands are plotted in Fig. 12, together with the contributions of the STMW thickness \({F}_{S}^{^{\prime}}\) and the Rossby wave \({F}_{w}^{^{\prime}}\). The contributions of \({F}_{S}^{^{\prime}}\) and \({F}_{w}^{^{\prime}}\) are calculated by linearly regressing \({F}^{^{\prime}}\) on \({F}_{S}^{^{\prime}}\) and \({F}^{^{\prime}}\) on \({F}_{w}^{^{\prime}}\), respectively. The variations in \({F}^{^{\prime}}\) agree well with those in \({F}_{S}^{^{\prime}}\) in each region, with significant positive correlation coefficients of 0.73 and 0.69 for the northern and southern regions, respectively, while the contribution of \({F}_{w}^{^{\prime}}\) to \({F}^{^{\prime}}\) is small, with a small amplitude in both regions.
How does the STMW change the STF? The isopycnal depth of the STF,\({Z\left(\rho \right)}_{STF}\), is expressed as.
$$Z\left( \rho \right)_{STF} = Z\left( {\rho_{b} } \right) - Q,$$
(8)
where Z \(\left({\rho }_{b}\right)\) is the main pycnocline depth of the isopycnal surface \({\rho }_{b}\), and \(Q\) is the thickness of the layer between \({Z\left(\rho \right)}_{STF}\) and Z \(\left({\rho }_{b}\right)\). Subtracting the time mean and taking the meridional derivative yields.
$$\frac{{\partial Z^{\prime}\left( \rho \right)_{STF} }}{\partial y} = \frac{{\partial Z^{\prime}\left( {\rho_{b} } \right)}}{\partial y} - \frac{{\partial Q^{\prime}}}{\partial y}.$$
(9)
The left-hand term is the slope of the isopycnal surfaces of the STF. The first term on the right-hand side is the slope of the main pycnocline, and the second term is the meridional gradient of the thickness of the layer. The right-hand terms can be decomposed into the components associated with the STMW thickness and the others as follows:
$$\frac{{\partial Z^{\prime}\left( \rho \right)_{STF} }}{\partial y} = \frac{{\partial Z_{s}^{^{\prime}} \left( {\rho_{b} } \right)}}{\partial y} - \frac{{\partial Q_{s}^{^{\prime}} }}{\partial y} + R,$$
(10)
where \({Q}_{s}^{^{\prime}}\) is the STMW thickness anomaly,\({Z}_{s}^{^{\prime}}\left({\rho }_{b}\right)\) is the change in the main pycnocline depth associated with the STMW thickness and \(R\) is the other factors that include wind-driven Rossby waves. The first two terms on the right-hand side are associated with the STMW. The equation states that a thicker STMW can increase the meridional gradient of the STMW layer and intensify the slope of the STF to the south. A similar diagnostic equation was derived in terms of PV by Kobashi et al. (2006). We calculate the first two terms on the right-hand side of the equation at each latitude using \({\sigma }_{\theta }\)= 26.0 kg m−3 for \({\rho }_{b}\) and the STMW thickness. Figure 13 shows the correlation and regression between the left-hand term and the sum of the first two right-hand terms for every isopycnal surface above the top of the STMW (\({\sigma }_{\theta }\)= 24.8 kg m−3). The correlation is significantly positive, with the maxima around 20°–22°N and 27°–28°N, consistent with the results in Fig. 11a. This demonstrates that the STMW changes the STF strength.
The regression coefficients are smaller than unity in Fig. 13, which means that the change in the isopycnal slope of the STF is smaller than the expectation from that in the STMW thickness. In addition, because the correlation coefficients are approximately 0.6–0.7 in the STF region in Fig. 13, they are equivalent to the explained variance of approximately 40–50%. More than half of the variance remains to be understood. The correlation and regression coefficients decrease to the surface above the wintertime maximum outcrop density (Fig. 13). The seasonal upper pycnocline is affected by various processes such as heat and freshwater fluxes at the sea surface and horizontal advection of heat and freshwater by the mean circulation. These processes could alter the STMW-induced slope of the upper pycnocline and thus the STF.