%\documentclass[portrait,a0]{a0poster} \documentclass[landscape,a0]{a0poster} %%\documentclass[portrait,a0,draft]{a0poster} \usepackage{amsmath, amssymb} \usepackage{multicol} \usepackage[dvips]{graphicx} \usepackage[dvips]{epsfig} \usepackage[dvips,usenames]{color} \pagecolor[rgb]{0.85,0.85,1.0} \setlength{\columnsep}{64pt} \setlength{\columnseprule}{5pt} \usepackage{apalike} \begin{document} \begin{tabular}{ccc} \begin{minipage}{0.05\hsize} \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=5cm]{../../LOGO/fr2.eps} %% \includegraphics[width=5cm]{../../LOGO/jam0.eps} \end{center} \end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}{0.85\hsize} \begin{center} %{\LARGE {\Huge {\bf Global Scale Energy and Freshwater Balance in Glacial Climate: %% Global Scale Energy and Freshwater Balance in Glacial Climate:\\ %% A Comparison of three PMIP2 LGM simulations\\ %%in Climate Changes (OS41A-0592)\\ %%(OS41A-0592) } } \end{center} \end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}{0.05\hsize} \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=7cm]{../../LOGO/jam_logo.eps} %% \includegraphics[width=5cm]{../../LOGO/jamstec_logo72.eps} %% \includegraphics[width=5cm]{../../LOGO/fr.eps} \end{center} \end{minipage} \end{tabular} \begin{center} {\Huge {\bf A Comparison of three PMIP2 LGM simulations } } \end{center} \vspace{30pt} \begin{center} %{\Large {\LARGE {\bf Shigenori Murakami$^1$, Rumi Ohgaito$^1$, Ayako Abe-Ouchi$^{1,2}$, Michel Crucifix$^3$ and Bette Otto-Bliesner$^4$\\ } } {\large{\bf 1: Frontier Research Center for Global Change, Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology (FRCGC, JAMSTEC) (smurakam@jamstec.go.jp)\\ %% 2: Center for Climate System Research, University of Tokyo\\ 2: CCSR, University of Tokyo, \quad 3: Hadley Centre, Met Office, \quad 4: National Center for Atmospheric Research }} \end{center} \vspace{30pt} %\begin{multicols}{3} \begin{multicols}{5} \large %%\Large \section{Introduction and Summary} %% \section{Summary} %%\vspace{-35pt} Three Atmosphere-Ocean coupled General Circulation Model (AOGCM) simulations of the Last Glacial Maximum [LGM, about 21,000 years before present (21 kyrBP)] conducted under the protocol of the Paleoclimate Modeling Intercomparison Project Phase II (PMIP2) were analyzed from a viewpoint of large scale energy and freshwater balance. Atmospheric latent heat transport decreases in most latitudes due to reduced water vapor in cooled lower troposphere. Dry static energy (DSE) transport greatly increases in NH mid-latitudes mainly due to enhanced stationary waves over the Laurentide Ice Sheet. %% %% Transient waves are enhanced over the Atlantic %% %% and weakened over the Pacific. In low latitudes, DSE transport does not increase although all the three models produce enhanced Hadley circulation in NH. %% Reduced equatorward transport of latent heat mainly %% contributes the enhancement of poleward energy transport at NH low-latitudes. Atlantic heat transport increases at low latitudes whether the meridional overturning circulation (MOC) intensifies or not. Oceanic freshwater transport decreases in each ocean basin %% with all the models reflecting the response of atmospheric water-vapor transport. %% Atmosphere-ocean transport responses These responses make the northern North Atlantic coled and relatively fresh, and make the Antarctic saline and relatively warm compared with the changes in other ocean regions. This is common and robust feature with all the three models but resulted density fields and MOC responses are different among the models. %% Changes in vertical structure of the atmosphere and ocean at LGM %% seem to play main role in determining the response of circulation and %% its transport at low latitudes. %% \section{Models and basic results} %% \section{Some basic results} %% Among the models joind the porpject PMIP2, %% the Hadley Centre coupled Climate Model (HadCM3M2), %% the National Center for Climate Research (NCAR) Community Climate System Model %% (CCSM3) %% and the CCSR (Center for Climate System Research)/NIES (National Institute for %% Environmental Studies)/FRCGC (Frontier Research Center for Global Change) %% coupled GCM named MIROC3.2.2 are used in this analysis, %% because these models %% %% are also used in IPCC AR4 and %% bprovidenthree dimensional (3-D) ocean and atmosphere variables %% as climatological monthly mean data %% for both LGM and CTL. %% \begin{center} %% %% {\normalsize %% {\small %% %% {\bf Table 1} \; Global mean responses in three AOGCMs simulations. %% \begin{tabular}{|c||c|c|c||c||c|} %% \hline %% LGM - CTL & CCSM & HadCM & MIROC & CTL$^1$ & units \\ \hline %% \hline %% rsdt ($\downarrow$) & -- & -- & -- & 341.5 &[W m$^{-2}$]\\ \hline %% rsut ($\uparrow$) & 5.2 & 6.2 & 5.4 & 103.7 &[W m$^{-2}$]\\ \hline %% rlut ($\uparrow$) & -5.2 & -6.0 & -5.4 & 237.1 &[W m$^{-2}$]\\ \hline %% albedo (TOA) & 1.5 & 1.8 & 1.6 & 30.4 &[\%] \\ \hline %% \hline %% rsds ($\downarrow$) & 5.9 & 6.3 & 6.5 & 185.4 &[W m$^{-2}$]\\ \hline %% rsus ($\uparrow$) & 8.9 & 9.1 & 8.3 & 23.7 &[W m$^{-2}$]\\ \hline %% rlds ($\downarrow$) & -23.2 & -27.6 & -24.5 & 331.3 &[W m$^{-2}$]\\ \hline %% rlus ($\uparrow$) & -20.8 & -23.6 & -21.2 & 392.8 &[W m$^{-2}$]\\ \hline %% hfls ($\uparrow$) & -7.3 & -7.8 & -6.4 & 80.6 &[W m$^{-2}$]\\ \hline %% hfss ($\uparrow$) & 1.6 & 1.1 & 1.1 & 19.0 &[W m$^{-2}$]\\ \hline %% \hline %% tas & -4.5 & -5.1 & -4.5 & 13.5 & [C$^\circ$] \\ \hline %% pr & -9.2 \%& -9.3 \%& -8.2 \%&$3.2\times10^{-5}$ & %% [kg m$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$]\\ \hline %% prw &-18.4 \% &-21.6 \% & -22.2 \% & 23.0 & [g m$^{-2}$] \\ \hline %% hur925 & -2.1 & -1.9 & -2.1$^2$ & 76.1 & [\%] \\ \hline %% RDI & 0.05 & 0.04 & 0.04 & 1.25 & \\ \hline %% \end{tabular} %% } %% \end{center} %% \begin{center} %% %% {\normalsize %% {\small %% {\bf Table 2} \; Ocean mean responses in three AOGCMs simulations. %% \begin{tabular}{|c||c|c|c||c|c|c||c|} %% \hline %% &\multicolumn{3}{c||}{LGM - CTL}&\multicolumn{3}{c||}{CTL}& \\ %% \cline{2-8} %% & CCSM & HadCM & MIROC &CCSM&HadCM&MIROC&units\\ \hline %% \hline %% SST &-1.88$^1$& -1.89 & -1.93 &17.05$^1$& 18.15& 17.24&[C$^\circ$]\\ \hline %% T &-2.06$^1$& -1.88 & -1.96 &2.81$^1$ & 3.08 & 4.27&[C$^\circ$]\\ \hline %% SSS & 1.08$^1$& 0.17 & -0.08 &34.22$^1$& 33.54& 34.45&[psu]\\ \hline %% S & 1.87$^1$& 0.26 & 0.01 &34.72$^1$& 34.74& 34.72&[psu]\\ \hline %% SIA & 18.1 & 11.3 & 11.4 & 29.3 & 20.5 & 19.5 &[10$^{12}$ m$^2$]\\\hline %% SIA (NH)& 1.8 & 3.3 & 3.5 & 13.3 & 10.2 & 11.6 &[10$^{12}$ m$^2$]\\\hline %% SIA (SH)& 16.3 & 7.5 & 7.9 & 16.0 & 10.2 & 7.9 &[10$^{12}$ m$^2$]\\\hline %% \end{tabular} %% } %% \end{center} %% \begin{center} %% \includegraphics[width=600pt,height=320pt]{../eps/zmAlbedoTas-CCSM.eps} %% \includegraphics[width=600pt,height=320pt]{../eps/zmAlbedoTas-HadCM.eps} %% \includegraphics[width=600pt,height=320pt]{../eps/zmAlbedoTas-MIROC2.eps} %% \\ %% {\normalsize %% Fig.~1 \; Latitudinal profiles of zonal-mean planetary-albedo and surface air %% temperature for LGM and CT.} %% \end{center} %% \section{Atmospheric energy transport} \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=600pt,height=600pt]{../eps/HTran21ka0kaATMRADPMIP2.eps} \\ {\normalsize Fig.~1 \; Latitudinal profiles of northward energy transport calculated as area-integrated net energy flux for LGM and CTL, and differences between the two states.} \end{center} \section{Atmospheric energy transport} \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=600pt,height=250pt]{../eps/HTrn21ka0kaRADATM-CCSM-ab.eps} \includegraphics[width=600pt,height=250pt]{../eps/HTrn21ka0kaATM-HadCM2-ab.eps} \includegraphics[width=600pt,height=250pt]{../eps/HTrn21ka0kaATM-MIROC2-ab.eps} \\ {\normalsize Fig.~2 \; Latitudinal profiles of atmospheric dry static energy (DSE) transport (orange line) and latent heat (LH) transport (green line). } \end{center} \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=600pt,height=270pt]{../eps/HTrn21ka0kaRADAZMST-CCSM-ab.eps} \includegraphics[width=600pt,height=270pt]{../eps/HTrn21ka0kaAZMST-HadCM-st.eps} \includegraphics[width=600pt,height=270pt]{../eps/HTrn21ka0kaRADAZMST-MIROC2-ab.eps} \\ {\normalsize Fig.~3 \; Latitudinal profiles of decomposed DSE transport into MMC transport (purple line), stationary eddy transport (light blue line) and transient eddy transport (orange line) } \end{center} %% \section{Mid-latitude waves} \section{Stationary waves and Hadley circulation} %% \begin{center} %% \includegraphics[width=600pt]{../eps/STEtrn21ka0kaATMmapPMIP2.eps} %% \\ %% {\normalsize %% Fig.~3 \; Geographical maps of vertically integrated northward DSE flux %% transported by stationary eddies for LGM (right panels) and CTL (left panels). %% } %% \end{center} \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=600pt]{../eps/stWaveCTLmap-MIROC2.eps} \includegraphics[width=600pt]{../eps/stWaveLGMmap-MIROC2.eps} \\ {\normalsize Fig.~4 \; Geographical maps of annual-mean geopotential height at 500 hPa (contour) and anomaly from zonal mean (shade) with the MIROC model for CTL climate (upper panel) and for LGM climate (lower panel). } \end{center} %% \begin{center} %% \includegraphics[width=600pt]{../eps/TrEddy21ka0kaMIROC2map.eps} %% \\ %% {\normalsize %% Fig.~3 \; Geographical maps of vertically-integrated northward DSE flux %% transported by transient eddies (top), root-mean-square 250 hPa height-anomaly %% from annual-mean climatology (middle) and root-mean-square 250 hPa %% height-anomaly from synoptic-scale climatology (bottom) with MIROC model %% for CTL (left) and LGM (right). %% } %% \end{center} %% \section{Hadley Ciraculation and tropical atmosphere} %% \vspace{-10pt} \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=600pt,height=250pt]{../eps/HadleyCellSE-CCSM.eps} \includegraphics[width=600pt,height=250pt]{../eps/HadleyCellSE-HadCM.eps} \includegraphics[width=600pt,height=250pt]{../eps/HadleyCellSE-MIROC2.eps} \\ {\normalsize Fig.~5 \; Mass stream-function of mean meridional circulation for LGM (contour) and deviations from CTL (shade). Left panels show June-July-August climatology and right panels show December-January-February climatology. } \end{center} %% \begin{center} %% \includegraphics[width=600pt,height=270pt]{../eps/vTZprofDSE-CCSM.eps} %% \includegraphics[width=600pt,height=270pt]{../eps/vTZprofDSE-HadCM.eps} %% \includegraphics[width=600pt,height=270pt]{../eps/vTZprofDSE-MIROC2.eps} %% \\ %% {\normalsize %% Fig.~3 \; Vertical profiles of temperature differences between LGM and CTL %% (left column) and potential temperature (center column) averaged over tropical %% zone (20$^\circ$ S - 20$^\circ$ N), and decomposition of MMC-DSE transport %% differences between LGM and CTL in low latitudes (right column). %% } %% \end{center} \section{Ocean circulations} %% \vspace{-10pt} \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=600pt]{../eps/osfbarotLGM-CTLpacPMIP2.eps} \\ {\normalsize Fig.~6 \; Geographical maps of ocean barotropic streamfunction for LGM (contour) and deviations from CTL (shade). } \end{center} \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=600pt]{../eps/stfmocLGM-CTLgocPMIP2.eps} \\ {\normalsize Fig.~7 \; Streamfunctions of ocean meridional overturning circulation (MOC) for LGM (contour) and deviations from CTL (shade) with global ocean. } \end{center} %% \vspace{60pt} %% \section{Oceanic heat transport} \section{Oceanic transport} \begin{center} %%\includegraphics[width=600pt,height=650pt]{../eps/HTran21ka0kaOCNbsnPMIP2.eps} \includegraphics[width=600pt,height=650pt]{../eps/HTran21ka0kaOCNbsnDifPMIP2.eps} \\ {\normalsize Fig.~8 \; Latitudinal profiles of oceanic (northward) heat transport (right panels) at LGM (solid line) and CTL (doted line) for each basin and those differences (left panels) between LGM and CTL. %% Latitudinal profiles of area-integrated ocean surface heat flux %% (right panels) and oceanic heat transport (left panels) for each ocean basin %% at LGM (solid lines) and CTL (doted lines). } \end{center} %% \begin{center} %% \includegraphics[width=600pt,height=900pt]{../eps/HTran21ka0kaZAOCNbsn.eps} %% \\ %% {\normalsize %% Fig.~6 \; Decomposition of ocean heat transport (see text) for Pacific (left) %% and Atlantic (right) with CCSM (top), HadCM (middle) and MIROC (bottom). %% } %% \end{center} %% \begin{center} %% \includegraphics[width=600pt]{../eps/stfmocTDLGM-CTLatlPMIP2.eps} %% \\ %% {\normalsize %% Fig.~6 \; Streamfunctions of Atlantic MOC at LGM(contour) and temperature %% differences between LGM and CTL excluded entire-ocean volume-mean changes %% (shade). %% } %% \end{center} %% \section{Oceanic freshwater transport} \begin{center} %%\includegraphics[width=600pt,height=650pt]{../eps/WTran21ka0kaOCNbsnPMIP2.eps} \includegraphics[width=600pt,height=650pt]{../eps/WTran21ka0kaOCNbsnDifPMIP2.eps} \\ {\normalsize Fig.~9 \; Latitudinal profiles of oceanic (northward) freshwater transport (right panels) at LGM (solid line) and CTL (doted line) for each basin and those differences (left panels) between LGM and CTL. %% Latitudinal profiles of area-integrated ocean surface freshwater flux %% (right panels) and oceanic heat transport (left panels) for each ocean basin %% at LGM (solid lines) and CTL (doted lines). } \end{center} %% \begin{center} %% \includegraphics[width=600pt,height=900pt]{../eps/WTran21ka0kaZAOCNbsn.eps} %% \\ %% {\normalsize %% Fig.~6 \; Decomposition of ocean freshwater transport (see text) %% for Pacific (left) and Atlantic (right) %% with CCSM (top), HadCM (middle) and MIROC (bottom). %% } %% \end{center} %% \begin{center} %% \includegraphics[width=600pt]{../eps/stfmocSDLGM-CTLatlPMIP2.eps} %% \\ %% {\normalsize %% Fig.~6 \; Streamfunctions of Atlantic MOC at LGM(contour) and salinity %% differences between LGM and CTL excluded entire-ocean volume-mean changes %% (shade). %% } %% \end{center} %% \section{Ocean T, S. R} %% \begin{center} %% \includegraphics[width=600pt]{../eps/dint2kTSR21ka0kaOCNbsnPMIP2.eps} %% \\ %% {\normalsize %% Fig.~6 \; Latitudinal profiles of depth-averaged potential-temperature (left), %% salinity (center) and density (right) as deviations from the entire-ocean %% volume-means for each ocean basin. %% } %% \end{center} %% \section{Conclusions} %% Freshwater forcing under the global warming condition increases salinity %% in the North Atlantic and will enhances the THC as an equilibrium response. %% This response is consistent with the thermohaline %% driven regime of the 4-box model. This issue should be tested by various %% model simulations and observations. %% \vspace{-20pt} \small %\normalsize \begin{thebibliography}{} \vspace{-10pt} %% \bibitem[Murakami et al. 2007]{Murakami2007} %% Murakami, S., R. Ohgaito, A. Abe-Ouchi, %% M. Crucifix and B. Otto-Bliesner\\ %% \newblock Global Scale Energy and Freshwater Balance in Glacial Climate: %% A Comparison of three PMIP2 LGM simulations, %% \newblock Submitted to {\em J. Clim.} \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Murakami \& Kitoh}{Murakami and Kitoh}{2005}]{Murakami2005} Murakami, S., and A.~Kitoh, 2005: \newblock Euler-lagrange equation of the most simple 1d climate model based on the maximum entropy production hypothesis. \newblock {\em Quart. J. Roy. Meteor.}, {\bf 131}, 1529--1538. %% \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Otto-Bliesner, Hewitt, Marchitto, Brady, %% Abe-Ouchi, Crucifix, Murakami \& Weber}{Otto-Bliesner %% et~al.}{2007}]{OttoB2007} %% Otto-Bliesner, B., C.~Hewitt, T.~Marchitto, E.~C. Brady, A.~Abe-Ouchi, %% M.~Crucifix, S.~Murakami, and S.~Weber, 2007: %% \newblock Last glacial maximum ocean thermohaline circulation: Pmip2 model %% intercomparisons and data constraints. %% \newblock {\em Geophys. Res. Lett.}, submitted. %% \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Weber, Drijfhout, Abe-Ouchi, Crucifix, Eby, %% Ganopolski, Murakami, B. \& R.}{Weber et~al.}{2007}]{Weber2007} %% Weber, S.~L., S.~S. Drijfhout, A.~Abe-Ouchi, M.~Crucifix, M.~Eby, %% A.~Ganopolski, S.~Murakami, O.-B. B., and P.~W. R., 2007: %% \newblock The modern and glacial overturning circulation in the atlantic ocean %% in pmip coupled model simulations. %% \newblock {\em Climate of the Past}, {\bf 3}, 51--64. \end{thebibliography} \end{multicols} \end{document}