Advanced Search
Article Contents

Opposing Trends of Winter Cold Extremes over Eastern Eurasia and North America under Recent Arctic Warming

Fund Project:

This study was jointly supported by the National Key R&D Program (Grant No. 2018YFC1505904), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 41830969 and 41705052), and the Basic Scientific Research and Operation Foundation of CAMS (Grant No. 2018Z006)


doi: 10.1007/s00376-020-0070-2

  • Under recent Arctic warming, boreal winters have witnessed severe cold surges over both Eurasia and North America, bringing about serious social and economic impacts. Here, we investigated the changes in daily surface air temperature (SAT) variability during the rapid Arctic warming period of 1988/89–2015/16, and found the daily SAT variance, mainly contributed by the sub-seasonal component, shows an increasing and decreasing trend over eastern Eurasia and North America, respectively. Increasing cold extremes (defined as days with daily SAT anomalies below 1.5 standard deviations) dominated the increase of the daily SAT variability over eastern Eurasia, while decreasing cold extremes dominated the decrease of the daily SAT variability over North America. The circulation regime of cold extremes over eastern Eurasia (North America) is characterized by an enhanced high-pressure ridge over the Urals (Alaska) and surface Siberian (Canadian) high. The data analyses and model simulations show the recent strengthening of the high-pressure ridge over the Urals was associated with warming of the Barents–Kara seas in the Arctic region, while the high-pressure ridge over Alaska was influenced by the offset effect of Arctic warming over the East Siberian–Chukchi seas and the Pacific decadal oscillation (PDO)–like sea surface temperature (SST) anomalies over the North Pacific. The transition of the PDO-like SST anomalies from a positive to negative phase cancelled the impact of Arctic warming, reduced the occurrence of extreme cold days, and possibly resulted in the decreasing trend of daily SAT variability in North America. The multi-ensemble simulations of climate models confirmed the regional Arctic warming as the driver of the increasing SAT variance over eastern Eurasia and North America and the overwhelming effect of SST forcing on the decreasing SAT variance over North America. Therefore, the regional response of winter cold extremes at midlatitudes to the Arctic warming could be different due to the distinct impact of decadal SST anomalies.
    摘要: 在近三十年北极快速增温的影响下,频繁的寒潮侵袭欧亚和北美,造成严重的社会、经济影响。本文分析了逐日气温变率在北极快速增暖时期1988/89-2015/16的变化,我们发现次季节尺度分量贡献的逐日气温方差,在欧亚东部呈现为显著的增加趋势,而在北美呈现出显著的减小趋势。冷极值(定义为逐日气温偏冷1.5个标准差以上的天数)的增多主导了东亚逐日气温变率的增加,而冷极值的减少主导了北美逐日气温变率的减小。欧亚东部冷极值对应的大气环流主要表现为乌拉尔高压脊增强和西伯利亚高压增强,北美冷极值的大气环流主要表现为阿拉斯加高压脊增强和加拿大高压增强。资料分析和模式模拟结果表明,乌拉尔高压脊的增强主要与巴伦支海和喀拉海地区的增暖相关,而与海温异常的相关很弱。阿拉斯加高压脊的增强既受东西伯利亚和楚科奇地区的增暖的影响,也受北太平洋类太平洋年代际振荡(PDO)型海温的作用。类似PDO型海温异常由正位相向负位相的转换抵消了北极增暖使阿拉斯加高压脊增强的影响,减少了北美冷极值的发生频率,由此导致北美逐日温度变率呈现出减小趋势。气候模式多集合模拟结果证实了北极增暖对欧亚东部和北美逐日气温方差增加的驱动作用,以及海温异常强迫对北美气温方差减少的主导作用。因此,我们认为,由于北太平洋海温年代际异常的显著影响,欧亚东部和北美地区冬季温度冷极值对北极增暖的区域响应表现出反向的变化特征。
  • 加载中
  • Figure 1.  Observed changes in winter SATs from 1988/89 to 2015/16: (a) linear trend of DJF-mean SAT [units: ℃ (10 yr)−1]; (b–d) linear trends of DJF SAT variance [units: ℃2 (10 yr)−1] derived from the (b) total (original field), (c) high-frequency (≤ 10 days) and (d) low-frequency (> 10 days) components; (e, f) time series of DJF SAT variance anomalies averaged over (e) eastern Eurasia (40°–60°N, 50°–120°E) and (f) North America (40°–60°N, 70°–120°W), marked by the green boxes in (b). Stippling indicates significance at the 95% confidence level. Data are taken from ERA-Interim.

    Figure 2.  (a) Histogram distribution of the standardized daily SAT anomalies over eastern Eurasia (left-hand green box in Fig. 1b) during the warmer Arctic epoch of 2000/01–2015/16 (red curve) and colder Arctic epoch of 1988/89–1999/2000 (blue curve). (c, e) Quantile–quantile plot for (c) cold-spell durations and (e) cold-spell minimum SATs during the warmer Arctic epoch of 2000/01–2015/16 and colder Arctic epoch of 1988/89–1999/2000. The horizontal (vertical) dashed lines indicate the P10, P25, P75 and P90 quantiles of 1988/89–1999/2000 (2000/01–2015/16), and the solid lines indicate P50. (b, d, f) As in (a, c, e), respectively, but over North America (right-hand green box in Fig. 1b). The inset plots in (c, d) are for the mean cold-spell SAT as a function of duration. Data are taken from ERA-Interim.

    Figure 3.  Time series of extreme cold day anomalies averaged over eastern Eurasia (solid line with open circles) and North America (dashed line with filled circles) and their linear trend during 1988/89–2015/16. Data are taken from ERA-Interim.

    Figure 4.  Composite anomalies of (a) geopotential height at 500 hPa (Z500; shading; units: 10 gpm) and attendant wave activity flux (arrows), (c) SLP (units: hPa), and (e) SATs (units: ℃) during extreme cold days in eastern Eurasia (total of 283 days). (b, d, f) As in (a, c, e), respectively, but for extreme cold days in North America (total of 262 days). Significant values at the 95% confidence level are represented by white dots. The green boxes in (a, b) mark the Urals blocking region (55°–85°N, 20°–80°E) and the Alaska blocking region (50°–80°N, 160°E–140°W), respectively. Data are taken from ERA-Interim.

    Figure 5.  Regression coefficients of DJF-mean anomalies of (a) SAT (units: ℃), (c) Z500 (units: gpm) and (e) SLP (units: hPa) with respect to the detrended standardized area-weighted average of the frequency of extreme cold days over eastern Eurasia (left-hand green box in Fig. 1b). (b, d, f) As in (a, c, e), respectively, but with respect to the detrended standardized area-weighted average of the frequency of extreme cold days over North America (right-hand green box in Fig. 1b). Dots represent significance at the 95% level. Data are taken from ERA-Interim.

    Figure 6.  Correlation coefficients of DJF-mean surface temperature (SATs over land and ice, SSTs over the oceans) with detrended DJF-mean Z500 anomalies averaged over the (a) Urals blocking region (55°–85°N, 20°–80°E; green box in Fig. 4a) and (b) Alaska blocking region (50°–80°N, 160°E–140°W; green box in Fig. 4b). Dots represent significance at the 95% level. The yellow box in (a) marks the Barents–Kara seas region (70°–90°N, 0°–105°E), and in (b) it marks the East Siberian–Chukchi seas region (65°–85°N, 155°E–130°W). The green boxes in (b) mark the western subtropical North Pacific (WSubNP; 20°–40°N, 120°E–160°W), the extratropical North Pacific (ExtraNP; 40°–60°N, 140°E–135°W), and the eastern tropical North Pacific (ETNP; 10°–25°N, 160°–110°W); the PDO-like SST index is defined as ExtraNP + ETNP − WSubNP. The SST data are taken from the monthly HadISST dataset, and other variables are from ERA-Interim.

    Figure 7.  Linear regression of DJF-mean Z500 (units: 10 gpm) with respect to the standardized detrended DJF-mean SATs averaged over the (a) Barents–Kara seas (yellow box in Fig. 5a), (b) East Siberian–Chukchi seas (yellow box in Fig. 5b), and (c) the PDO-like SST index (averaged over the green boxes in Fig. 5b). (d–f) As in (a–c), respectively, but for SLP (units: hPa). (g–i) As in (a–c), respectively, but for the frequency of DJF extreme cold days (units: days). Stippling indicates significance at the 95% level. Arrows in (a–c) denote the horizontal wave activity flux associated with the Z500 anomalies. The SST data are taken from the monthly HadISST dataset, and other variables are from ERA-Interim.

    Figure 8.  Linear trends of DJF-mean (a) SST [shading; °C (10 yr)−1], (b) Z500 [gpm (10 yr)−1] and (c) SLP [hPa (10 yr)−1] during the period 1988/89–2015/16. Stippling indicates significance at the 95% confidence level. Arrows in (b) are the horizontal wave activity flux associated with the Z500 trends. (d) Time series of the standardized anomalies of the PDO-like SST index. The SST data are taken from the monthly HadISST dataset, and other variables are from ERA-Interim.

    Figure 9.  Composite anomalies of (a) Z500 (shading; units: 10 gpm; dotted regions exceed the 95% confidence level) and SLP [contours drawn for ±1, ±3, …, ±11 hPa; solid (dashed) contours denote positive (negative) anomalies] and (c) SATs during extreme cold days in eastern Eurasia derived from the 10-member ensemble of MIROC5 simulations. (b, d) As in (a, c), respectively, but for North American extreme cold days. (e) Time series of DJF-mean SAT anomalies averaged over the Barents-Kara seas (BK; yellow box in Fig. 6a) and East Siberian–Chukchi seas (SC; yellow box in Fig. 6b) during 1988/89–2015/16. The sub-plot in (e) is a box-and-whisker plot for the BK and SC SAT trends; the minimum, lower quartile, median, upper quartile, and maximum values of MIROC5-simulated trends are shown; solid circles correspond to the observed trends derived from ERA-Interim.

    Figure 10.  As in Fig. 9 but for CAM5.1 simulations.

    Figure 11.  Linear trends of DJF SAT variance [units: °C2 (10 yr)−1] in the ensemble mean of (a) MIROC5 and (b) CAM5.1 simulations during 1988/89−2015/16. Stippling indicates significance at the 95% confidence level. Green boxes denote the observed increasing trend core regions in eastern Eurasia and the observed decreasing trend core regions in North America. (c) Scatterplot of the DJF-mean SAT trend averaged over the Barents–Kara seas [BK; units °C (10 yr)−1] and SAT variance trend averaged over eastern Eurasia. (d) Scatterplot of the DJF-mean SAT trend averaged over the East Siberian–Chukchi seas [SC; units °C (10 yr)−1] and SAT variance trend averaged over North America. The red, blue and green dots denote the results based on ERA-Interim, the 10-member ensemble mean of MIROC5 simulations, and the 50-member ensemble mean of CAM5.1 simulations, respectively.

  • Cohen, J., 2016: An observational analysis: Tropical relative to Arctic influence on midlatitude weather in the era of Arctic amplification. Geophys. Res. Lett., 43, 5287−5294, https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL069102.
    Cohen, J., and Coauthors, 2014: Recent Arctic amplification and extreme mid-latitude weather. Nature Geoscience, 7, 627−637, https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2234.
    Cohen, J., K. Pfeiffer, and J. A. Francis, 2018: Warm Arctic episodes linked with increased frequency of extreme winter weather in the United States. Nature Communications, 9(1), 869, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-02992-9.
    Cohen, J., and Coauthors, 2020: Divergent consensuses on Arctic amplification influence on midlatitude severe winter weather. Nature Climate Chang, 10, 20−29, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-019-0662-y.
    Dee, D. P., and Coauthors, 2011: The ERA-Interim reanalysis: Configuration and performance of the data assimilation system. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 137, 553−597, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.828.
    Ding, Q. H., J. M. Wallace, D. S. Battisti, E. J. Steig, A. J. E. Gallant, H. J. Kim, and L. Geng, 2014: Tropical forcing of the recent rapid Arctic warming in northeastern Canada and Greenland. Nature, 509(7499), 209−212, https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13260.
    Dobricic, S., E. Vignati, and S. Russo, 2016: Large-scale atmospheric warming in winter and the arctic sea ice retreat. J. Climate, 29, 2869−2888, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-15-0417.1.
    Feng, C., and B. Y. Wu, 2015: Enhancement of winter arctic warming by the siberian high over the past decade. Atmos. Ocean. Sci. Lett., 8(5), 257−263, https://doi.org/10.3878/AOSL20150022.
    Francis, J. A., and S. J. Vavrus, 2012: Evidence linking Arctic amplification to extreme weather in mid-latitudes. Geophys. Res. Lett., 39, L06801, https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL051000.
    Francis, J. A., S. J. Vavrus, and J. Cohen, 2017: Amplified Arctic warming and mid-latitude weather: New perspectives on emerging connections. Wires Climate Change, 8(5), e474, https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.474.
    Gao, Y. Q., and Coauthors, 2015: Arctic sea ice and Eurasian climate: A review. Adv. Atmos. Sci., 32, 92−114, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00376-014-0009-6.
    Hao, M. J., Y. Luo, Y. L. Lin, Z. C. Zhao, L. Wang, and J. B. Huang, 2019: Contribution of atmospheric moisture transport to winter Arctic warming. International Journal of Climatology, 39(5), 2697−2710, https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.5982.
    Honda, M., J. Inoue, and S. Yamane, 2009: Influence of low Arctic sea-ice minima on anomalously cold Eurasian winters. Geophys. Res. Lett., 36, L08707, https://doi.org/10.1029/2008GL037079.
    Horton, D. E., N. C. Johnson, D. Singh, D. L. Swain, B. Rajaratnam, and N. S. Diffenbaugh, 2015: Contribution of changes in atmospheric circulation patterns to extreme temperature trends. Nature, 522(7557), 465−469, https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14550.
    IPCC, 2012: Summary for policymakers. Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation, C. B. Field et al., Eds., Cambridge University Press, 3−21.
    Ito, H., N. C. Johnson, and S. P. Xie, 2013: Subseasonal and interannual temperature variability in relation to extreme temperature occurrence over East Asia. J. Climate, 26(22), 9026−9042, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00676.1.
    Kennedy, D., T. Parker, T. Woollings, B. Harvey, and L. Shaffrey, 2016: The response of high-impact blocking weather systems to climate change. Geophys. Res. Lett., 43, 7250−7258, https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL069725.
    Kim, H. M., and B. M. Kim, 2017: Relative contributions of atmospheric energy transport and sea ice loss to the recent warm arctic winter. J. Climate, 30, 7441−7450, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0157.1.
    Kug, J. S., J. H. Jeong, Y. S. Jang, B. M. Kim, C. K. Folland, S. K. Min, and S. W. Son, 2015: Two distinct influences of Arctic warming on cold winters over North America and East Asia. Nature Geoscience, 8, 759−762, https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2517.
    Lee, M.-Y., C.-C. Hong, and H.-H. Hsu, 2015: 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., 42, 1612−1618, https://doi.org/10.1002/2014GL062956.
    Li, F., H. J. Wang, and Y. Q. Gao, 2015: Extratropical ocean warming and winter arctic sea ice cover since the 1990s. J. Climate, 28, 5510−5522, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-14-00629.1.
    Li, F., Y. J. Orsolini, H. J. Wang, Y. Q. Gao, and S. P. He, 2018: Atlantic multidecadal oscillation modulates the impacts of Arctic sea ice decline. Geophys. Res. Lett., 45, 2497−2506, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL076210.
    Liu, J. P., J. A. Curry, H. J. Wang, M. R. Song, and R. M. Horton, 2012: Impact of declining Arctic sea ice on winter snowfall. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 109, 4074−4079, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1114910109.
    Ma, S. M., and C. W. Zhu, 2019: Extreme cold wave over East Asia in January 2016: A possible response to the larger internal atmospheric variability induced by Arctic warming. J. Climate, 32, 1203−1216, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-18-0234.1.
    Ma, S. M., C. W. Zhu, B. Q. Liu, T. J. Zhou, Y. H. Ding, and Y. J. Orsolini, 2018: Polarized response of east asian winter temperature extremes in the era of arctic warming. J. Climate, 31(14), 5543−5557, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0463.1.
    Mori, M., M. Watanabe, H. Shiogama, J. Inoue, and M. Kimoto, 2014: Robust Arctic sea-ice influence on the frequent Eurasian cold winters in past decades. Nature Geoscience, 7, 869−873, https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2277.
    Mori, M., Y. Kosaka, M. Watanabe, H. Nakamura, and M. Kimoto, 2019: A reconciled estimate of the influence of Arctic sea-ice loss on recent Eurasian cooling. Nature Climate Change, 9(2), 123−129, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0379-3.
    Palmer, T., 2014: Record-breaking winters and global climate change. Science, 344(6186), 803−804, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1255147.
    Palmer, T. N., 2013: Climate extremes and the role of dynamics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 110(14), 5281−5282, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1303295110.
    Park, T.-W., C.-H. Ho, S.-J. Jeong, Y.-S. Choi, S. K. Park, and C.-K. Song, 2011: Different characteristics of cold day and cold surge frequency over East Asia in a global warming situation. J. Geophys. Res., 116, D12118, https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JD015369.
    Rayner, N. A., D. E. Parker, E. B. Horton, C. K. Folland, L. V. Alexander, D. P. Rowell, E. C. Kent, and A. Kaplan, 2003: Global analyses of sea surface temperature, sea ice, and night marine air temperature since the late nineteenth century. J. Geophys. Res., 108, 4407, https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002670.
    Rhines, A., K. A. McKinnon, M. P. Tingley, and P. Huybers, 2017: Seasonally resolved distributional trends of North American temperatures show contraction of winter variability. J. Climate, 30, 1139−1157, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0363.1.
    Screen, J. A., 2014: Arctic amplification decreases temperature variance in northern mid- to high-latitudes. Nature Climate Change, 4, 577−582, https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2268.
    Screen, J. A., and I. Simmonds, 2010: The central role of diminishing sea ice in recent Arctic temperature amplification. Nature, 464, 1334−1337, https://doi.org/10.1038/nature09051.
    Screen, J. A., C. Deser, and L. T. Sun, 2015: Reduced risk of North American cold extremes due to continued Arctic sea ice loss. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 96(9), 1489−1503, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-14-00185.1.
    Screen, J. A., and Coauthors, 2018: Consistency and discrepancy in the atmospheric response to Arctic sea-ice loss across climate models. Nature Geoscience, 11(3), 155−163, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-018-0059-y.
    Shepherd, T. G., 2016: Effects of a warming Arctic. Science, 353(6303), 989−990, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aag2349.
    Shiogama, H., M. Watanabe, Y. Imada, M. Mori, Y. Kamae, M. Ishii, and M. Kimoto, 2014: Attribution of the June-July 2013 heat wave in the southwestern United States. SOLA, 10, 122−126, https://doi.org/10.2151/sola.2014-025.
    Sigmond, M., and J. C. Fyfe, 2016: Tropical Pacific impacts on cooling North American winters. Nature Climate Change, 6(10), 970−974, https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate3069.
    Stone, D. A., and Coauthors, 2018: A basis set for exploration of sensitivity to prescribed ocean conditions for estimating human contributions to extreme weather in CAM5.1-1degree. Weather and Climate Extremes, 19, 10−19, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wace.2017.12.003.
    Sun, L. T., J. Perlwitz, and M. Hoerling, 2016: What caused the recent “Warm Arctic, Cold Continents” trend pattern in winter temperatures? Geophys. Res. Lett., 43, 5345−5352, https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL069024.
    Swain, D. L., B. Langenbrunner, J. D. Neelin, and A. Hall, 2018: Increasing precipitation volatility in twenty-first-century California. Nature Climate Change, 8(5), 427−433, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0140-y.
    Takaya, K., and H. Nakamura, 2001: A formulation of a phase-independent wave-activity flux for stationary and migratory quasigeostrophic eddies on a zonally varying basic flow. J. Atmos. Sci., 58, 608−627, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(2001)058<0608:AFOAPI>2.0.CO;2.
    Tokinaga, H., S. P. Xie, and H. Mukougawa, 2017: Early 20th-century Arctic warming intensified by Pacific and Atlantic multidecadal variability. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 114(24), 6227−6232, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1615880114.
    Trenberth, K. E., J. T. Fasullo, G. Branstator, and A. S. Phillips, 2014: Seasonal aspects of the recent pause in surface warming. Nature Climate Change, 4(10), 911−916, https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2341.
    van Oldenborgh, G. J., R. Haarsma, H. De Vries, and M. R. Allen, 2015: Cold extremes in North America vs. mild weather in Europe: The winter of 2013-14 in the context of a warming world. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 96, 707−714, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-14-00036.1.
    Wallace, J. M., and D. S. Gutzler, 1981: Teleconnections in the geopotential height field during the Northern Hemisphere winter. Mon. Wea. Rev., 109, 784−812, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(1981)109<0784:TITGHF>2.0.CO;2.
    Wallace, J. M., I. M. Held, D. W. J. Thompson, K. E. Trenberth, and J. E. Walsh, 2014: Global warming and winter weather. Science, 343(6172), 729−730, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.343.6172.729.
    Wu, B. Y., 2017: Winter atmospheric circulation anomaly associated with recent arctic winter warm anomalies. J. Climate, 30, 8469−8479, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0175.1.
    Zhang, X. D., C. H. Lu, and Z. Y. Guan, 2012: Weakened cyclones, intensified anticyclones and recent extreme cold winter weather events in Eurasia. Environmental Research Letters, 7(4), 044044, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/7/4/044044.
    Zyulyaeva, Y. A., J. H. P. Studholme, and I. I. Zveryaev, 2019: Long-term changes in wintertime temperature extremes in Moscow and their relation to regional atmospheric dynamics. J. Geophys. Res., 124, 92−109, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018JD028642.
  • [1] Wu Renguang, Chen Lieting, 1995: Interannual Fluctuations of Surface Air Temperature over North America and Its Relationship to the North Pacific SST Anomaly, ADVANCES IN ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES, 12, 20-28.  doi: 10.1007/BF02661284
    [2] HUA Lijuan, MA Zhuguo, ZHONG Linhao, 2011: A Comparative Analysis of Primary and Extreme Characteristics of Dry or Wet Status between Asia and North America, ADVANCES IN ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES, 28, 352-362.  doi: 10.1007/s00376-010-9230-0
    [3] Shangfeng CHEN, Linye SONG, 2018: Impact of the Winter North Pacific Oscillation on the Surface Air Temperature over Eurasia and North America: Sensitivity to the Index Definition, ADVANCES IN ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES, 35, 702-712.  doi: 10.1007/s00376-017-7111-5
    [4] Yao YAO, Wenqin ZHUO, Zhaohui GONG, Binhe LUO, Dehai LUO, Fei ZHENG, Linhao ZHONG, Fei HUANG, Shuangmei MA, Congwen ZHU, Tianjun ZHOU, 2023: Extreme Cold Events in North America and Eurasia in November−December 2022: A Potential Vorticity Gradient Perspective, ADVANCES IN ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES, 40, 953-962.  doi: 10.1007/s00376-023-2384-3
    [5] Tianbao XU, Zhicong YIN, Xiaoqing MA, Yanyan HUANG, Huijun WANG, 2023: Hybrid Seasonal Prediction of Meridional Temperature Gradient Associated with “Warm Arctic–Cold Eurasia”, ADVANCES IN ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES, 40, 1649-1661.  doi: 10.1007/s00376-023-2226-3
    [6] Mu MU, Dehai LUO, Fei ZHENG, 2022: Preface to the Special Issue on Extreme Cold Events from East Asia to North America in Winter 2020/21, ADVANCES IN ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES, 39, 543-545.  doi: 10.1007/s00376-021-1004-3
    [7] Xiangdong ZHANG, Yunfei FU, Zhe HAN, James E. OVERLAND, Annette RINKE, Han TANG, Timo VIHMA, Muyin WANG, 2022: Extreme Cold Events from East Asia to North America in Winter 2020/21: Comparisons, Causes, and Future Implications, ADVANCES IN ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES, 39, 553-565.  doi: 10.1007/s00376-021-1229-1
    [8] Tianjun ZHOU, Wenxia ZHANG, Lixia ZHANG, Robin CLARK, Cheng QIAN, Qinghong ZHANG, Hui QIU, Jie JIANG, Xing ZHANG, 2022: 2021: A Year of Unprecedented Climate Extremes in Eastern Asia, North America, and Europe, ADVANCES IN ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES, 39, 1598-1607.  doi: 10.1007/s00376-022-2063-9
    [9] Yuan WANG, 2015: Air Pollution or Global Warming: Attribution of Extreme Precipitation Changes in Eastern China——Comments on "Trends of Extreme Precipitation in Eastern China and Their Possible Causes", ADVANCES IN ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES, 32, 1444-1446.  doi: 10.1007/s00376-015-5109-4
    [10] Chunzai WANG, Jiayu ZHENG, Wei LIN, Yuqing WANG, 2023: Unprecedented Heatwave in Western North America during Late June of 2021: Roles of Atmospheric Circulation and Global Warming, ADVANCES IN ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES, 40, 14-28.  doi: 10.1007/s00376-022-2078-2
    [11] Liang ZHAO, Yunwen LIU, Yihui DING, Qingquan LI, Wei DONG, Xinyong SHEN, Wei CHENG, Haoxin YAO, Ziniu XIAO, 2023: The Warm Arctic–Cold Eurasia Pattern and Its Key Region in Winter in CMIP6 Model Simulations, ADVANCES IN ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES, 40, 2138-2153.  doi: 10.1007/s00376-022-2201-4
    [12] Huang Jiayou, 1990: Correlations between Sea Surface Temperature in Eastern Equatorial Pacific and Rain Days over China in Summer, ADVANCES IN ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES, 7, 127-136.  doi: 10.1007/BF02919150
    [13] Cen WANG, Baohua REN, Gen LI, Jianqiu ZHENG, Linwei JIANG, Di XU, 2023: An Interdecadal Change in the Influence of the NAO on Atlantic-Induced Arctic Daily Warming around the Mid-1980s, ADVANCES IN ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES, 40, 1285-1297.  doi: 10.1007/s00376-022-2218-8
    [14] HUANG Jiayou, TAN Benkui, SUO Lingling, HU Yongyun, 2007: Monthly Changes in the Influence of the Arctic Oscillation on Surface Air Temperature over China, ADVANCES IN ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES, 24, 799-807.  doi: 10.1007/s00376-007-0799-x
    [15] Shengping HE, Helge DRANGE, Tore FUREVIK, Huijun WANG, Ke FAN, Lise Seland GRAFF, Yvan J. ORSOLINI, 2024: Relative Impacts of Sea Ice Loss and Atmospheric Internal Variability on the Winter Arctic to East Asian Surface Air Temperature Based on Large-Ensemble Simulations with NorESM2, ADVANCES IN ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES.  doi: 10.1007/s00376-023-3006-9
    [16] WEI Ke, CHEN Wen, 2011: An Abrupt Increase in the Summer High Temperature Extreme Days across China in the mid-1990s, ADVANCES IN ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES, 28, 1023-1029.  doi: 10.1007/s00376-010-0080-6
    [17] Zhiyi ZHOU, Juan LI, Haishan CHEN, Zhiwei ZHU, 2023: Seasonal Prediction of Extreme High-Temperature Days in Southwestern China Based on the Physical Precursors, ADVANCES IN ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES, 40, 1212-1224.  doi: 10.1007/s00376-022-2075-5
    [18] Yan XIA, Yongyun HU, Jiankai ZHANG, Fei XIE, Wenshou TIAN, 2021: Record Arctic Ozone Loss in Spring 2020 is Likely Caused by North Pacific Warm Sea Surface Temperature Anomalies, ADVANCES IN ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES, 38, 1723-1736.  doi: 10.1007/s00376-021-0359-9
    [19] Tao WANG, Qiang FU, Wenshou TIAN, Hongwen LIU, Yifeng PENG, Fei XIE, Hongying TIAN, Jiali LUO, 2023: The Influence of Meridional Variation in North Pacific Sea Surface Temperature Anomalies on the Arctic Stratospheric Polar Vortex, ADVANCES IN ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES, 40, 2262-2278.  doi: 10.1007/s00376-022-2033-2
    [20] Mengru FENG, Yujing QIN, Chuhan LU, 2021: An Objective Identification Method for Wintertime Cold Fronts in Eurasia, ADVANCES IN ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES, 38, 1695-1705.  doi: 10.1007/s00376-021-0315-8

Get Citation+

Export:  

Share Article

Manuscript History

Manuscript received: 17 March 2020
Manuscript revised: 15 July 2020
Manuscript accepted: 14 August 2020
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Opposing Trends of Winter Cold Extremes over Eastern Eurasia and North America under Recent Arctic Warming

    Corresponding author: Congwen ZHU, zhucw@cma.gov.cn
  • State Key Laboratory of Severe Weather and Institute of Climate System, Chinese Academy of Meteorological Sciences, Beijing 100081, China

Abstract: Under recent Arctic warming, boreal winters have witnessed severe cold surges over both Eurasia and North America, bringing about serious social and economic impacts. Here, we investigated the changes in daily surface air temperature (SAT) variability during the rapid Arctic warming period of 1988/89–2015/16, and found the daily SAT variance, mainly contributed by the sub-seasonal component, shows an increasing and decreasing trend over eastern Eurasia and North America, respectively. Increasing cold extremes (defined as days with daily SAT anomalies below 1.5 standard deviations) dominated the increase of the daily SAT variability over eastern Eurasia, while decreasing cold extremes dominated the decrease of the daily SAT variability over North America. The circulation regime of cold extremes over eastern Eurasia (North America) is characterized by an enhanced high-pressure ridge over the Urals (Alaska) and surface Siberian (Canadian) high. The data analyses and model simulations show the recent strengthening of the high-pressure ridge over the Urals was associated with warming of the Barents–Kara seas in the Arctic region, while the high-pressure ridge over Alaska was influenced by the offset effect of Arctic warming over the East Siberian–Chukchi seas and the Pacific decadal oscillation (PDO)–like sea surface temperature (SST) anomalies over the North Pacific. The transition of the PDO-like SST anomalies from a positive to negative phase cancelled the impact of Arctic warming, reduced the occurrence of extreme cold days, and possibly resulted in the decreasing trend of daily SAT variability in North America. The multi-ensemble simulations of climate models confirmed the regional Arctic warming as the driver of the increasing SAT variance over eastern Eurasia and North America and the overwhelming effect of SST forcing on the decreasing SAT variance over North America. Therefore, the regional response of winter cold extremes at midlatitudes to the Arctic warming could be different due to the distinct impact of decadal SST anomalies.

摘要: 在近三十年北极快速增温的影响下,频繁的寒潮侵袭欧亚和北美,造成严重的社会、经济影响。本文分析了逐日气温变率在北极快速增暖时期1988/89-2015/16的变化,我们发现次季节尺度分量贡献的逐日气温方差,在欧亚东部呈现为显著的增加趋势,而在北美呈现出显著的减小趋势。冷极值(定义为逐日气温偏冷1.5个标准差以上的天数)的增多主导了东亚逐日气温变率的增加,而冷极值的减少主导了北美逐日气温变率的减小。欧亚东部冷极值对应的大气环流主要表现为乌拉尔高压脊增强和西伯利亚高压增强,北美冷极值的大气环流主要表现为阿拉斯加高压脊增强和加拿大高压增强。资料分析和模式模拟结果表明,乌拉尔高压脊的增强主要与巴伦支海和喀拉海地区的增暖相关,而与海温异常的相关很弱。阿拉斯加高压脊的增强既受东西伯利亚和楚科奇地区的增暖的影响,也受北太平洋类太平洋年代际振荡(PDO)型海温的作用。类似PDO型海温异常由正位相向负位相的转换抵消了北极增暖使阿拉斯加高压脊增强的影响,减少了北美冷极值的发生频率,由此导致北美逐日温度变率呈现出减小趋势。气候模式多集合模拟结果证实了北极增暖对欧亚东部和北美逐日气温方差增加的驱动作用,以及海温异常强迫对北美气温方差减少的主导作用。因此,我们认为,由于北太平洋海温年代际异常的显著影响,欧亚东部和北美地区冬季温度冷极值对北极增暖的区域响应表现出反向的变化特征。

    2.   Data and methods
    • The daily mean of four-times-daily measurements of atmospheric variables during the winters (December–January–February, DJF) of 1979/80–2015/16 were extracted from the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts’ interim reanalysis (ERA-Interim) project (Dee et al., 2011). The variables included SAT, sea level pressure (SLP), and geopotential height at 500 hPa (Z500), as well as horizontal winds at 500 hPa, on standard 1.5° × 1.5° grids. The daily anomaly was defined as its deviation with respect to the climatological mean for each calendar day at each grid point. To smooth out the influence of synoptic activity less than 10 days, the climatological mean on a given calendar day (d) was calculated as the average from d − 10 to d + 10 days during the period 1979–2016. Winter means were computed as the average from 1 December to 28 February. We applied the monthly Hadley Centre Sea Ice and Sea Surface Temperature (HadISST) dataset (Rayner et al., 2003) to examine the impacts of extratropical SST anomalies on the daily SAT variability.

      Following previous studies (Ito et al., 2013; Screen, 2014; Cohen, 2016), the daily SAT variability was defined as the variance of the daily SAT anomalies over 90 days in each winter. A larger (smaller) variance of daily SAT anomalies implies more active (stable) weather, which is referred to as stronger (weaker) “weather whiplash” (Cohen, 2016; Swain et al., 2018). We applied standard least-squares linear regression to examine the trends. The linear trends were calculated based on the winter mean during 1988/89–2015/16, which has been used in previous studies (Ma et al, 2018; Ma and Zhu, 2019), matches the modern period of AA (Cohen et al., 2020), and shares coinciding data with the model simulations we used. The correlation coefficients between variables and regressed circulation anomalies were calculated using detrended data during 1979–2016. The statistical significances for the trends, correlation coefficients and regression coefficients were estimated by a two-tailed Student’s t-test. Following Liu et al. (2012), an extreme cold day was defined as when the daily SAT anomaly was below 1.5 standard deviations (σ), and a cold spell was defined as an uninterrupted sequence of extreme cold days. An extreme cold day over eastern Eurasia and North America was defined as when the regional average SAT anomaly was more than 1.5σ colder than the climatology in the domain (40°–60°N, 50°–120°E) and (40°–60°N, 70°–120°W), respectively. Accordingly, we identified 283 and 262 extreme cold days over eastern Eurasia and North America during the period 1979–2016, accounting for approximately 8.5% and 7.9% of the total days, respectively.

      To confirm the results obtained from ERA-Interim, we employed the daily SAT from the outputs of the atmosphere-only model simulations, which were forced by observed SST, sea-ice concentrations and historical anthropogenic and natural external forcing agents and provided by the International CLIVAR Climate of the 20th Century Plus Detection and Attribution Project. The utilized experiments consisted of a 10-member ensemble simulation conducted using the Model for Interdisciplinary Research on Climate, version 5 (MIROC5), with a horizontal resolution of 1.4° × 1.4° and 40 vertical levels (Shiogama et al., 2014), and a 50-member ensemble simulation carried out with the Community Atmosphere Model, version 5.1 (CAM5.1), with a horizontal resolution of 0.94°(long.) × 1.25°(lat.) and 30 vertical levels (Stone et al., 2018). These experiments are equivalent to the historical Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project. The multi-size of the ensemble helped to distinguish boundary-forced signals of change from internal noise of the atmospheric circulation itself.

    3.   Trends of daily SAT variability and circulation regimes over eastern Eurasia and the North American continent
    • Figure 1a shows the linear trends of winter mean SATs over the extratropical Northern Hemisphere during 1988/89–2015/16. Disproportionate Arctic warming relative to the midlatitudes appears in all seasons, with the strongest warming trend in winter (Cohen et al., 2014). The SAT trend exhibits a warm Arctic and cold continents, and the significant warming is especially strong over the Barents–Kara seas, Hudson Bay, Baffin Bay, as well as the East Siberian–Laptev seas. The rapid Arctic warming with an unprecedented sea-ice decline represents the AA signature of global warming (Liu et al., 2012; Mori et al., 2014; Screen et al., 2015). In contrast, apparent cooling trends are displayed in a large patch over eastern Eurasia, but weakly over North America. The “warm Arctic, cold continents” pattern began in the 1970s and became more prominent around 1990 owing to an acceleration in the rate of Arctic warming (Cohen et al., 2014; Kug et al., 2015; Sun et al., 2016; Mori et al., 2019). The decreasing daily SAT variance encircles the high latitudes (Fig. 1b), consistent with the atmospheric response to the ongoing sea-ice loss under Arctic warming in model simulations (Scree et al., 2015; Sun et al., 2016). Corresponding to the synchronous cooling of winter mean SAT, despite the difference in the cooling rates, the daily SAT variance shows an opposite trend over the midlatitudes of eastern Eurasia and North America (Fig. 1b). Overall, for the trends of the daily SAT variance at midlatitudes, the Eurasian continent is dominated by increasing trends with prominent trends over eastern Eurasia, while North America is dominated by decreasing trends with prominence over southern Canada and the northern United States. Hence, the positive daily SAT variance trends averaged over the core region bounded by 40°–60°N and 50°–120°E were employed to characterize the SAT variability in association with the long-term change over eastern Eurasia, while the negative daily SAT variance trends averaged over the core region bounded by 40°–60°N and 50°–120°E were employed to characterize the SAT variability in association with the long-term change over North America. The area-weighted averaged variance over the eastern Eurasian continent and North American continent shows an increasing and decreasing trend of 4.31°C2 (10 yr)−1 and −4.24°C2 (10 yr)−1, respectively, and both passed the significance test at the 95% confidence level (Figs. 1e and f).

      Figure 1.  Observed changes in winter SATs from 1988/89 to 2015/16: (a) linear trend of DJF-mean SAT [units: ℃ (10 yr)−1]; (b–d) linear trends of DJF SAT variance [units: ℃2 (10 yr)−1] derived from the (b) total (original field), (c) high-frequency (≤ 10 days) and (d) low-frequency (> 10 days) components; (e, f) time series of DJF SAT variance anomalies averaged over (e) eastern Eurasia (40°–60°N, 50°–120°E) and (f) North America (40°–60°N, 70°–120°W), marked by the green boxes in (b). Stippling indicates significance at the 95% confidence level. Data are taken from ERA-Interim.

      The total sub-seasonal SAT variance includes the high-frequency synoptic-scale variation and low-frequency intraseasonal-scale components. To identify the dominant contributor of sub-seasonal variance change, the trends of both high-frequency (≤ 10 days) and low-frequency (> 10 days) variation were examined, where high-frequency and low-frequency variation were extracted by applying a 10-day Lanczos high-pass and low-pass filter to daily data with 41 weights, respectively. The high-frequency variation shows a significant deceasing trend only over western Europe and the high latitudes of North America (Fig. 1c), with little change over lower latitudes. Over eastern Eurasia, however, the increasing counterpart is largely attributable to the low-frequency counterpart. The decreased daily SAT variability is largely contributed by its low-frequency component over North America (Fig. 1d). The trend of low-frequency variance is 4.65°C2 (10 yr)−1 over eastern Eurasia, which is larger than the trend of the total variance. The high-frequency synoptic-scale counterpart, meanwhile, shows a slightly weak and non-significant decreasing rate of −0.32°C2 (10 yr)−1 (Fig. 1e). In contrast, the low-frequency variance over North America displays a significant decreasing trend of −3.39°C2 (10 yr)−1, accounting for approximately 80% of the total trend variance. The high-frequency variance also shows a decreasing trend, of −0.77°C2 (10 yr)−1, but it is not significant at the 95% confidence level (Fig. 1f).

      The total variance of daily SAT reflects the spread of day-to-day SAT fluctuation. A high (small) variance usually indicates that the daily SAT is very distant from (close to) the mean and from each other. It is possibly caused by the shift in the mean, the shape of the distribution, or both (IPCC, 2012; Ito et al., 2013). We calculated the standardized deviation of daily SAT anomalies and compared the frequency distributions before and after 2000/01 corresponding to the colder and warmer Arctic phase, respectively. According to the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test, the distributions of daily SAT anomalies are significantly different (p < 0.001) between the two Arctic phases in eastern Eurasia and North America (Figs. 2a and b). During the warmer Arctic period, the extreme cold days become more frequent over the eastern Eurasian continent, but less frequent over the North American continent. Days within ±1σ of daily SAT anomalies decrease over eastern Eurasia, while days with −1σ < daily SAT anomalies < 0 increase over North America. In contrast, the extreme warm days exhibit almost the same occurrence frequency in both regions during the colder and warmer epochs (Figs. 2a and b). Moreover, in terms of the time series of the frequencies of the extreme cold days (Fig. 3), the 1988/89–2015/16 period saw a steady increase of 2.40 d (10 yr)−1 in extreme cold days over eastern Eurasia. This increase is statistically significant at the 0.05 level. In contrast, the extreme cold days over North America display a decline of −1.56 d (10 yr)−1, which is statistically significant at the 0.1 level. These statistical results imply that the increasing trend of daily SAT variance in eastern Eurasia is mainly contributed by the increase in extreme cold days, while the decreasing trend in North America can be attributed to the decrease in cold extreme days.

      Figure 2.  (a) Histogram distribution of the standardized daily SAT anomalies over eastern Eurasia (left-hand green box in Fig. 1b) during the warmer Arctic epoch of 2000/01–2015/16 (red curve) and colder Arctic epoch of 1988/89–1999/2000 (blue curve). (c, e) Quantile–quantile plot for (c) cold-spell durations and (e) cold-spell minimum SATs during the warmer Arctic epoch of 2000/01–2015/16 and colder Arctic epoch of 1988/89–1999/2000. The horizontal (vertical) dashed lines indicate the P10, P25, P75 and P90 quantiles of 1988/89–1999/2000 (2000/01–2015/16), and the solid lines indicate P50. (b, d, f) As in (a, c, e), respectively, but over North America (right-hand green box in Fig. 1b). The inset plots in (c, d) are for the mean cold-spell SAT as a function of duration. Data are taken from ERA-Interim.

      Figure 3.  Time series of extreme cold day anomalies averaged over eastern Eurasia (solid line with open circles) and North America (dashed line with filled circles) and their linear trend during 1988/89–2015/16. Data are taken from ERA-Interim.

      Extreme cold days are often associated with strong cold spells, regulated by the sub-seasonal activity of the East Asian winter monsoon (Park et al., 2011; Ito et al., 2013). The significant upward (downward) trend of sub-seasonal SAT variation suggests an opposite change in cold spells over eastern Eurasia (North America) under recent Arctic warming. To verify this assertion, we applied a quantile–quantile plot to compare the duration and intensity distributions of cold spells during the two Arctic epochs. Over eastern Eurasia, the durations of cold spells are basically above the y = x line, suggesting that the cold spell durations during the warmer Arctic epoch are longer than those of the colder Arctic epoch (Fig. 2c). Over North America, cold spells, especially the 10% longest-lasting cold spells, during the warmer Arctic epoch, are shorter-lasting than those of the colder Arctic epoch (Fig. 2d). The mean cold-spell SAT drops with increasing duration (inset plots in Figs. 2c and d). As expected, over eastern Eurasia, the minimum SAT of cold spells during the warmer Arctic epoch become colder than those of the colder Arctic epoch, while the North American cold-spell minimum SAT shows fewer cold anomalies during the warmer Arctic epoch than those of the colder Arctic epoch (Figs. 2e and f).

    • The circulation regime related to extreme cold days is different over eastern Eurasia and North America. Figure 4 shows the composites of Z500, SLP and SAT anomalies corresponding to extreme cold days over eastern Eurasia and North America. In eastern Eurasia, the positive center of Z500 anomalies is situated over the Ural Mountains and extends southeastward and westward to the midlatitude Pacific and North Atlantic, while a negative center exists over the Asian continent and western Europe. At 500 hPa, the circulation exhibits a deepened trough–ridge–trough structure and displays a southeastward propagation of the Rossby wave train over the Eurasian continent according to the wave activity flux, which is independent of wave phase and parallel to the local group velocity on a zonally varying basic flow (Takaya and Nakamura, 2001). The wave train originates from the warmer Barents–Kara seas (Figs. 4a and e). At the surface, the Eurasian continent is covered almost entirely by positive SLP anomalies (Fig. 4c). This suggests that the circulation regime of a strengthened high-pressure ridge over the Urals and surface Siberian high is closely related to extreme cold days over eastern Eurasia.

      Figure 4.  Composite anomalies of (a) geopotential height at 500 hPa (Z500; shading; units: 10 gpm) and attendant wave activity flux (arrows), (c) SLP (units: hPa), and (e) SATs (units: ℃) during extreme cold days in eastern Eurasia (total of 283 days). (b, d, f) As in (a, c, e), respectively, but for extreme cold days in North America (total of 262 days). Significant values at the 95% confidence level are represented by white dots. The green boxes in (a, b) mark the Urals blocking region (55°–85°N, 20°–80°E) and the Alaska blocking region (50°–80°N, 160°E–140°W), respectively. Data are taken from ERA-Interim.

      For extreme cold days in North America, the positive center of Z500 is located over the high-latitude North Pacific, which extends northward into the Arctic and displays a notable ridge anomaly over the mid-latitude North Atlantic. In contrast, significantly negative height anomalies are mainly located over most areas of North America and the high-latitude North Atlantic. The Z500 anomalies over the North Pacific and North America resemble the negative phase of the North Pacific Oscillation (Wallace and Gutzler, 1981), corresponding to an eastward propagation of the Rossby wave train originating from the Bering Sea (Fig. 4b). At the surface, positive SLP anomalies are observed over Northwest America, which develop from the North Pacific to the mid-latitude North Atlantic and extend northward into the Arctic (Fig. 4d). Meanwhile, a strong warm SAT anomaly appears over the East Siberian–Chukchi seas (Fig. 4f). Therefore, the cold extreme–related circulation regime is associated northerly winds and characterized by a strengthened high-pressure ridge at upper levels over Alaska and an amplified Canadian high near the surface. This result is consistent with the previous study of Cohen et al. (2018).

    4.   Impacts of Arctic SAT and Pacific SST anomalies
    • It has been suggested that the cold extreme–related circulation regime resembles the similar long-term changes of its seasonal mean associated with Arctic warming (Mori et al., 2014, 2019; Kug et al., 2015; Sun et al., 2016). After removing the linear trends of the frequency of extreme cold days, we found that extreme cold days over both eastern Eurasia and North America are negatively correlated with their seasonal means, but positively correlated with their counterparts in the upstream regions of the Arctic (Figs. 5a and b). This suggests that the increased frequencies of extreme cold days over eastern Eurasia and North America are closely related to the dipole SAT anomalies, i.e., cold continents and a warm Arctic. The seasonal anomalies of Z500 and SLP (Figs. 5cf), corresponding to winters with a more frequent occurrence of extreme cold days, resemble the similar circulation patterns of cold extremes in both regions (Figs. 4ad). During winters with a more frequent occurrence of extreme cold days over eastern Eurasia, stronger positive and negative anomalies of DJF-mean Z500 prevail over the Urals and East Asia and western Europe, respectively. Near the surface, the northern Eurasian continent is occupied by positive winter-mean SLP anomalies. This circulation regime is synchronously associated with the upper-level enhanced Urals high-pressure ridge and East Asian trough with an amplification of the Siberian high at the surface. Similarly, cold winters over North America are dominated by a stronger North Pacific high-pressure ridge and North American trough with an enhanced Canadian high near the surface.

      Figure 5.  Regression coefficients of DJF-mean anomalies of (a) SAT (units: ℃), (c) Z500 (units: gpm) and (e) SLP (units: hPa) with respect to the detrended standardized area-weighted average of the frequency of extreme cold days over eastern Eurasia (left-hand green box in Fig. 1b). (b, d, f) As in (a, c, e), respectively, but with respect to the detrended standardized area-weighted average of the frequency of extreme cold days over North America (right-hand green box in Fig. 1b). Dots represent significance at the 95% level. Data are taken from ERA-Interim.

      The recently frequent cold winters at midlatitudes in the Northern Hemisphere have been attributed to the impacts of amplified Arctic warming and extratropical SST forcing (e.g., Honda et al., 2009; Francis et al., 2012; Liu et al., 2012; Ding et al., 2014; Mori et al., 2014; Palmer, 2014; Trenberth et al., 2014; Kug et al., 2015; Lee et al., 2015; Cohen, 2016; Sigmond and Fyfe, 2016; Mori et al., 2019). Melting Arctic sea ice contributes and results from AA (Screen and Simmonds, 2010; Cohen et al., 2014; Gao et al., 2015; Francis et al., 2017), and is usually used as one important forced factor of the impacts of AA on midlatitude weather and climate (Honda et al., 2009; Liu et al., 2012; Mori et al., 2014, 2019; Lee et al., 2015; Screen et al., 2018). Here, following Kug et al. (2015) and Tokinaga et al. (2017), to reveal the possible linkage between AA and the atmospheric circulation regime associated with extreme cold days over eastern Eurasian and North America, we examined the linear correlation between the Arctic SAT and the key circulation factors. Figure 6 shows the correlations of DJF-mean SAT anomalies with the Z500 index anomaly averaged over the Urals and Alaska region, respectively (depicted by the green boxes in Figs. 4a and b). The significantly positive correlations of the Urals Z500 anomaly extend from the Greenland Sea eastward to the Laptev Sea, but no significant correlations are found over the tropical and extratropical oceans (Fig. 6a). Therefore, the enhanced Urals high-pressure ridge at Z500 is closely linked to the warmer SAT anomalies over the Barents–Kara seas. In contrast, the Alaskan height anomaly is positively correlated with the warmer SAT centered over the Chukchi Sea. Meanwhile, it is also closely correlated with the Pacific decadal oscillation (PDO)–like SST anomalies, with significant negative correlations over the western subtropical North Pacific and positive correlations over the extratropical North Pacific and eastern tropical North Pacific (Fig. 6b). Therefore, the enhanced Alaskan high-pressure ridge is possibly forced by the warm SAT anomalies over the East Siberian–Chukchi seas and the PDO-like SST anomalies in the North Pacific. The warmer winter SAT anomalies over the Barents–Kara seas is closely associated with the cold extreme–related circulation regime over eastern Eurasia, characterized by the enhanced Urals high-pressure ridge at Z500, the Siberian high near the surface, and the increased frequency of extreme cold days over eastern Eurasia (Figs. 7a, d and g). The warmer SATs over the East Siberian–Chukchi seas, however, are significantly linked to the cold extreme–related circulation regime in North America (Figs. 7b, e and h).

      Figure 6.  Correlation coefficients of DJF-mean surface temperature (SATs over land and ice, SSTs over the oceans) with detrended DJF-mean Z500 anomalies averaged over the (a) Urals blocking region (55°–85°N, 20°–80°E; green box in Fig. 4a) and (b) Alaska blocking region (50°–80°N, 160°E–140°W; green box in Fig. 4b). Dots represent significance at the 95% level. The yellow box in (a) marks the Barents–Kara seas region (70°–90°N, 0°–105°E), and in (b) it marks the East Siberian–Chukchi seas region (65°–85°N, 155°E–130°W). The green boxes in (b) mark the western subtropical North Pacific (WSubNP; 20°–40°N, 120°E–160°W), the extratropical North Pacific (ExtraNP; 40°–60°N, 140°E–135°W), and the eastern tropical North Pacific (ETNP; 10°–25°N, 160°–110°W); the PDO-like SST index is defined as ExtraNP + ETNP − WSubNP. The SST data are taken from the monthly HadISST dataset, and other variables are from ERA-Interim.

      Figure 7.  Linear regression of DJF-mean Z500 (units: 10 gpm) with respect to the standardized detrended DJF-mean SATs averaged over the (a) Barents–Kara seas (yellow box in Fig. 5a), (b) East Siberian–Chukchi seas (yellow box in Fig. 5b), and (c) the PDO-like SST index (averaged over the green boxes in Fig. 5b). (d–f) As in (a–c), respectively, but for SLP (units: hPa). (g–i) As in (a–c), respectively, but for the frequency of DJF extreme cold days (units: days). Stippling indicates significance at the 95% level. Arrows in (a–c) denote the horizontal wave activity flux associated with the Z500 anomalies. The SST data are taken from the monthly HadISST dataset, and other variables are from ERA-Interim.

      To reveal the impact of the PDO-like SST anomalies, we defined the regional SST difference of the extratropical North Pacific (ExtraNP) and eastern tropical North Pacific (ETNP) from the western subtropical North Pacific (WSubNP), i.e., ExtraNP + ETNP − WSubNP. The central PDO-like SST anomalies shift southward approximately 10° of latitude relative to those SST anomalies for the commonly used PDO. The correlation coefficient (r) between the PDO-like SST index and PDO index is 0.42, which is statistically significant at the 0.05 level. In contrast, the atmospheric circulation anomalies associated with the positive PDO-like SST anomalies are almost the same as those associated with the warm anomalies of the DJF-mean SATs over the East Siberian–Chukchi seas (Figs. 7c, f and i), albeit with a slight southward shifting of the strong center of anomalous circulation.

      Corresponding to the significant warming over the Barents–Kara Sea region (Fig. 1a), the seasonal Z500 anomalies show strong increasing trends over the Urals region and slightly decreasing trends over the west coast of Europe and Lake Baikal (Fig. 8b). It looks like a southeastward-propagating Rossby wave train over the Eurasian continent, originating from the Barents–Kara seas. The SLP anomalies show significant increasing trends across almost the entire northern Eurasian continent (Fig. 8c). The enhanced circulation regime related to cold extremes provides a favorable background and increase in extreme cold days over eastern Eurasia. Consequently, the winter-mean SATs show cooling trends (Fig. 1a), cold extremes occur more frequently (Figs. 2 and 3), and the daily SAT variance increases over eastern Eurasia (Figs. 1b and e).

      Figure 8.  Linear trends of DJF-mean (a) SST [shading; °C (10 yr)−1], (b) Z500 [gpm (10 yr)−1] and (c) SLP [hPa (10 yr)−1] during the period 1988/89–2015/16. Stippling indicates significance at the 95% confidence level. Arrows in (b) are the horizontal wave activity flux associated with the Z500 trends. (d) Time series of the standardized anomalies of the PDO-like SST index. The SST data are taken from the monthly HadISST dataset, and other variables are from ERA-Interim.

      Increasing trends of DJF-mean Z500 anomalies are observed over the north of the Bering Sea (Fig. 8b), associated with prominent warming over the East Siberian–Chukchi seas (Fig. 1a). They exhibit a wave-like distribution with negative–positive–negative values over the Aleutian, northwestern American and eastern American regions, respectively (Fig. 8b). The response of Z500 to the strong warming trend over the western subtropical North Pacific and the weak cooling trend over the extratropical North Pacific and eastern tropical North Pacific, i.e., the negative PDO-like SST change (Fig. 8a), partially cancels out the response to Arctic warming. Consequently, the Z500 trends are not significant from the Aleutian low region to the east coast of North America. The SLP shows an increasing and decreasing trend over western and eastern North America, respectively, but they are weak and not significant (Fig. 8c). The offsetting effects of the Arctic warming and the North Pacific SST suppress the intensity of the Alaskan high-pressure ridge and surface Canadian high region, consequently resulting in weak cooling and even a warming trend over North America (Fig. 1a). It is suspected that the remote response of cold extremes to Arctic warming is overwhelmed by the effect of the North Pacific SST change, which reduces the frequency of extreme cold days in the North American continent (Figs. 2b and 3), and therefore the corresponding daily SAT variance shows a significant decreasing trend (Figs. 1b and f). It is found that the decreasing rate of daily SAT variability in North America has slowed down since the 2010s (Fig. 1f), when the PDO-like SST anomaly changed from a negative to positive phase (Fig. 8d).

    • Numerical model simulations using MIROC5 and CAM5.1 were employed to further test the physical mechanism responsible for the opposite trends of sub-seasonal temperature variability over eastern Eurasia and North America derived from the analysis using ERA-Interim data. MIROC5 can simulate the circulation regime of extreme cold days very well over both eastern Eurasia and North America (Figs. 9ad). The pattern correlations between the model and observation over eastern Eurasia (North America) is 0.90 (0.94) for Z500, 0.94 (0.91) for SLP, and 0.92 (0.95) for SAT. Its historical simulation can reproduce the temporal evolution of winter-mean SAT very well over the Barents–Kara seas and East Siberian–Chukchi seas, as well as the upstream Arctic region of eastern Eurasia and North America (Fig. 9e). Similarly, CAM5.1 simulates a realistic circulation regime of extreme cold days over both eastern Eurasia and North America (Figs. 10ad). The pattern correlations between the model and observation over eastern Eurasia (North America) is 0.92 (0.86) for Z500, 0.96 (0.88) for SLP, and 0.95 (0.95) for SAT. The observed temporal evolution of winter-mean SAT over both the Barents–Kara seas and East Siberian–Chukchi seas are also reasonably captured by CAM5.1 (Fig. 10e).

      Figure 9.  Composite anomalies of (a) Z500 (shading; units: 10 gpm; dotted regions exceed the 95% confidence level) and SLP [contours drawn for ±1, ±3, …, ±11 hPa; solid (dashed) contours denote positive (negative) anomalies] and (c) SATs during extreme cold days in eastern Eurasia derived from the 10-member ensemble of MIROC5 simulations. (b, d) As in (a, c), respectively, but for North American extreme cold days. (e) Time series of DJF-mean SAT anomalies averaged over the Barents-Kara seas (BK; yellow box in Fig. 6a) and East Siberian–Chukchi seas (SC; yellow box in Fig. 6b) during 1988/89–2015/16. The sub-plot in (e) is a box-and-whisker plot for the BK and SC SAT trends; the minimum, lower quartile, median, upper quartile, and maximum values of MIROC5-simulated trends are shown; solid circles correspond to the observed trends derived from ERA-Interim.

      Figure 10.  As in Fig. 9 but for CAM5.1 simulations.

      In addition, the warming trends over both the Barents–Kara seas and East Siberian–Chukchi seas are reproduced in both the MIROC5 and CAM5.1 simulations, albeit the observed warming trends are underestimated in both models (Figs. 9e and 10e). During the winters of 1988/89–2015/16, the area-weighted average SAT over the Barents–Kara seas exhibit a strong warming trend of 2.13°C (10 yr)−1 in the observation, but 1.02° (10 yr)−1 and 1.11°C (10 yr)−1 in the ensemble mean of the MIROC5 and CAM5.1 simulations, respectively, with ranges of 0.58–1.44°C (10 yr)−1 and 0.18–1.87°C (10 yr)−1, respectively. The SAT averaged in the East Siberian–Chukchi seas shows an observed warming trend at a rate of 1.47°C (10 yr)−1, and a rate of 0.89°C (10 yr)−1 and 1.02°C (10 yr)−1 in the ensemble mean of the MIROC5 and CAM5.1 simulations, respectively. Both trends are significant at the 0.01 level. The observed warming trend over the Barents–Kara seas falls outside the ranges of both the MIROC5 and CAM5.1 ensembles, while the observed warming trend over the East Siberian–Chukchi seas lies within the simulated trend ranges of both the MIROC5 and CAM5.1 ensembles.

      Having established that MIROC5 and CAM5.1 can reproduce the observed atmospheric circulation regimes for extreme cold days in both eastern Eurasia and North America, as well as the warming trends over both the Barents–Kara seas and East Siberian–Chukchi seas, we then investigated the simulated trends of wintertime sub-seasonal SAT variance during 1988/89–2015/16. The winter daily SAT variance in the ensemble mean of both the MIROC5 and CAM5.1 simulations display significant increasing trends over large patches of eastern Eurasia and decreasing trends over most of North America (Figs. 11a and b), similar to the observations (Fig. 1b). However, both the increasing trend over eastern Eurasia and the decreasing trend over North America are underestimated. This underestimation may be closely related to the performance of the model itself, as well as the tendency for the current generation of climate models to respond too weakly to sea-ice change (Screen et al., 2018). In addition, the natural atmospheric variability, remote response to climate fluctuations in the tropical SSTs, and the forced response to climate change act together to affect midlatitude weather and climate (Shepherd, 2016; Sigmond and Fyfe, 2016; Ma and Zhu, 2019; Mori et al., 2019). Thus, it is possible that the stronger natural atmospheric circulation leads to the underestimation of the model ensemble mean compared to the observed change of sub-seasonal SAT variance.

      Figure 11.  Linear trends of DJF SAT variance [units: °C2 (10 yr)−1] in the ensemble mean of (a) MIROC5 and (b) CAM5.1 simulations during 1988/89−2015/16. Stippling indicates significance at the 95% confidence level. Green boxes denote the observed increasing trend core regions in eastern Eurasia and the observed decreasing trend core regions in North America. (c) Scatterplot of the DJF-mean SAT trend averaged over the Barents–Kara seas [BK; units °C (10 yr)−1] and SAT variance trend averaged over eastern Eurasia. (d) Scatterplot of the DJF-mean SAT trend averaged over the East Siberian–Chukchi seas [SC; units °C (10 yr)−1] and SAT variance trend averaged over North America. The red, blue and green dots denote the results based on ERA-Interim, the 10-member ensemble mean of MIROC5 simulations, and the 50-member ensemble mean of CAM5.1 simulations, respectively.

      To further explore the realism of the physical linkages between the warming over the Barents–Kara seas and the changes in daily SAT variance over eastern Eurasia, as well as the linkages between the warming over the East Siberian–Chukchi seas and the changes in daily SAT variance over North America, we show the scatter relationship between the warming trends over the Barents–Kara seas (East Siberian–Chukchi seas) and the daily SAT variance trend over eastern Eurasia (North America) in the 60-member ensembles of the MIROC5 and CAM5.1 simulations. An obvious linear relationship exists, with a correlation of 0.60 between the warming trends over the Barents–Kara seas and the daily SAT variance trends over eastern Eurasia, and a correlation of 0.44 between the warming trends over the East Siberian–Chukchi seas and the daily SAT variance trends over North America. Both correlations are significant at the 0.01 level. By comparison with the model ensembles, both the observed warming trend over the Barents–Kara seas and the increasing SAT variance trend over eastern Eurasia stand out as an extreme. However, the linearity between the warming trend over the Barents–Kara seas and the increasing trend over North America describes the observed results well. Similarly, the observed SAT variance trend over North America is also consistent with a simple physical process of East Siberian–Chukchi seas warming driving as indicated by the agreement with the linear relationship among model ensembles. Meanwhile, the preponderance of decreasing trends of daily SAT variance over North America among the model ensembles indicates the overwhelming effect of SST forcing.

      Because the historical simulations of MIROC5 and CAM5.1 are mainly driven by the observed SST and sea ice under global warming, their successful capture of the cold extreme–related circulation regime and opposite trends of daily SAT variance over eastern Eurasia and North America confirms the different impacts of the upstream Arctic warming and PDO-like SST anomalies on the trends of SAT over eastern Eurasia and North America.

    5.   Summary and discussion
    • Frequent cold extremes have occurred recently at the midlatitudes of the Northern Hemisphere, and concurrently with the unprecedented Arctic warming. However, we found the response of cold extreme events are opposite over the eastern Eurasia and North American continents. Accordingly, we analyzed the daily SAT variability over the Northern Hemisphere midlatitudes during the winters of 1988/89–2015/16 and discussed the possible underlying mechanism based on statistical analyses and model simulations. The main findings can be summarized as follows:

      The variations of cold extremes at midlatitudes of the Northern Hemisphere can be represented by the daily SAT variances, which have different regional variation. The trends of daily SAT variance are mainly contributed by their sub-seasonal components, showing an increasing and decreasing trend over eastern Eurasia and North America, respectively. The daily SAT variance shows a significant upward and downward trend of 10.15% (10 yr)−1 and −8.16% (10 yr)−1 over eastern Eurasia and North America, respectively. The trends of daily SAT variability can be attributed to the frequency of extreme cold days, regulated by the sub-seasonal component of SAT variance over eastern Eurasia and North America.

      The cold extreme–related circulation regime is characterized by an enhanced Urals high-pressure ridge at Z500 and Siberian high near the surface over eastern Eurasia. The recent significant warming over the Barents–Kara seas has enhanced the cold extreme circulation regime over eastern Eurasia and led to more extreme cold days, and increased the daily SAT variability of the sub-seasonal component. This is consistent with previous studies (Honda et al., 2009; Liu et al., 2012; Mori et al., 2014, 2019; Ma et al., 2018; Ma and Zhu, 2019). Over the North American region, the circulation regime of extreme cold days is characterized by a strengthened Alaskan high-pressure ridge at Z500 and amplified Canadian high near the surface. The warming over the East Siberian–Chukchi seas in the Arctic region may strengthen the Alaskan high-pressure ridge, but a PDO-like SST anomaly in the North Pacific may weaken the Alaskan high-pressure ridge. When the effect of warming over the upstream Arctic is overwhelmed by the effect of PDO-like SST anomalies, it reduces the sub-seasonal SAT variability and extreme cold days over North America, resulting in the increasing and decreasing trends of daily SAT variability over eastern Eurasia and North America, respectively. The regional Arctic warming driving the changes in SAT variance over both eastern Eurasia and North America, and the overwhelming contribution of SST forcing to the decreasing SAT variance over North America, were confirmed by the multi-ensemble simulations of both MIORC5 and CAM5.1.

    • It is suggested that the increased frequency of extreme cold days over eastern Eurasia, with an enhanced Urals high-pressure ridge and Siberian high, is closely associated with the warming over the Barents–Kara seas in the Arctic region. Besides the impact of Arctic warming, it is also likely that atmospheric circulation anomalies at midlatitudes (Feng and Wu, 2015; Dobricic et al., 2016; Wu, 2017), extratropical ocean warming (Li et al., 2015; Wu, 2017), and atmospheric transport of moisture and energy from lower latitudes (Kim and Kim, 2017; Hao et al., 2019) may also affect the daily SAT variability over eastern Eurasia. However, the increasing trend of cold extremes in this region is mainly attributable to Arctic warming, particularly during the era of AA. The PDO-like SST anomalies show decadal variability, which may enhance the Alaskan high-pressure ridge and the cold extremes over North America when it turns to a positive phase in the future. In the present study, we compared the daily SAT variability between 40° and 60°N with the strong and opposite SAT variance trends over eastern Eurasia (50°–120°E) and the North American continent (70°–120°W). We also compared the trends of extreme cold days derived from the selected core domain to small domains by shrinking the lateral boundaries slightly (within 8°), as well as domains defined by a slight shift northward or southward with respect to the core domain (within 8°). We found that the slightly shrunken domain and slightly northward- or southward-shifted domain exhibit similar trends in extreme cold days as the core domain, albeit the magnitude and significance of the corresponding trends differ. The selected core region in North America corresponds only to the northernmost part, and the SAT trends are weaker than those in the core region selected over Eurasia. The results would be very different if other areas of North America had been selected, such as the southern United States, where the SAT variance trends are positive.

      Acknowledgements. This study was jointly supported by the National Key R&D Program (Grant No. 2018YFC1505904), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 41830969 and 41705052), and the Basic Scientific Research and Operation Foundation of CAMS (Grant No. 2018Z006).

Reference

Catalog

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return