A Hybrid Atmosphere-Ocean Coupling Approach on the

Simulation of Tropical Asian-Pacific Climate

Xiouhua Fua, Bin Wanga,b, Tim Lia,b, and Fei-fei Jinc

aIPRC, SOEST, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii

bDepartment of Meteorology, SOEST, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii

cDepartment of Meteorology, Florida State University, 404 Love Building, Tallahassee,

Florida

Manuscript

Corresponding author address: Dr. Joshua Xiouhua Fu, International Pacific Research

Center, SOEST, University of Hawaii at Manoa, 1680 East West Road, POST Bldg. 4th

Floor, Honolulu, HI 96822

ABSTRACT

A unique Hybrid coupled General Circulation Model (HcGCM), that first

exercises full coupling, has been developed. This coupled model combines an ECHAM

AGCM and an intermediate tropical ocean model. In this study, the first 40-year (after 5-

year spin-up) model output has been analyzed and validated with available long-term

observations (and analysis products).

Overall, the model simulations of the climatology and variability in the tropical

Asia-Pacific sector (including Indo-Pacific mean SST and its annual cycle, Asian

Summer monsoon, tropical intraseasonal oscillation (TISO) and ENSO) are fairly

realistic and comparable with (some even better than) those state-of-the-art coupled

GCMs. The model bias of mean SST is within 1oC in most of the ocean domain except in

the southeast Pacific, where the model suffers a warm-bias syndrome present in most

coupled GCMs. The simulated TISO exhibits significant seasonality as in the

observations with dominant eastward-propagating MJO in boreal winter and northward-

propagating mode over the Indian and western Pacific regions in boreal summer. The

model ENSO has two spectral peaks with periods about 2 years and 5 years. It also shows

significant annual phase locking with minimum (maximum) variance in boreal spring (in

late fall).

The encouraging results from this hybrid coupled model indicate that in

representing the present-day climatology and its variability (with time scales from

intraseasonal to interannual) over the tropical Asia-Pacific sector, a hybrid coupled model

is as good as fully coupled GCMs. Use of a hybrid coupled model also saves considerable

computational resources compared to a fully coupled GCM.

2

1. Introduction

In the past two decades, under the auspices of the TOGA (Tropical Ocean-Global

Atmosphere) program and the follow-on CLIVAR (Climate Variability and

Predictability) program, many atmosphere-ocean coupled models have been developed to

improve our understanding of the nature and predictability of tropical Pacific and global

climate variability (Meehl et al. 2000; Latif et al. 2001; Davey et al. 2002). In the TOGA

decade (1985-1994), the coupled models are primarily designed to simulate and predict

the El Nino-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) and the associated tropical and extra-tropical

climate variability. Neelin et al. (1992) made the first inter-comparison of tropical Pacific

behaviors of coupled models, including both coupled general circulation models (CGCM)

and intermediate coupled models. Many of the CGCMs had considerable errors in the

annual-mean temperature of the equatorial Pacific and its zonal gradient. Some of them

cannot produce a correct warm-pool/cold tongue configuration in the equatorial Pacific.

Interannual variability ranged from very weak to moderate. Among these models, ENSO

simulated by the Cane-Zebiak anomaly coupled model is most realistic (Zebiak and Cane

1987). Even today, the Cane-Zebiak model is still one of the best coupled models

(including coupled GCMs) in terms of the ENSO simulation and prediction (Latif et al.

2001; Chen 2004). A few years later, Mechoso et al. (1995) conducted another CGCM

inter-comparison focused on the mean state and seasonal cycle in the tropical Pacific.

Their results showed large improvements compared to those models evaluated by Neelin

et al. (1992). At least, all participating models produce realistic warm-pool/cold tongue

configuration and reasonable zonal SST gradient along the equatorial central Pacific.

Nevertheless, the CGCMs still had substantial biases from the observed state. The

3

simulated equatorial cold tongue generally tends to be too strong, too narrow, and

extends too far west. SSTs in the southeast Pacific are generally too warm, which is

accompanied by a fictitious double inter-tropical convergence zone (ITCZ). The CGCMs

also have a variety of problems in simulating the seasonal cycle of the equatorial SST in

the eastern Pacific (e. g., a too-weak annual harmonic but a too-strong semiannual

harmonic). To summarize the development of coupled models during the TOGA decade,

Delecluse et al. (1998) concluded that substantial progress was made in representation of

the tropical mean state and climate variability through the synergic efforts of the

observational, theoretical, and hierarchal modeling studies (McPhaden et al. 1998; Neelin

et al. 1998; Latif et al. 1998). However, several general systematic errors (e.g., in the

mean state and seasonal cycle) have yet to be eliminated, especially in the east Pacific.

Two recent CGCM inter-comparison projects, ENSIP (the El Nino simulation

intercomparison project, Latif et al. 2001) and STOIC (a study of coupled model

climatology and variability in tropical ocean regions, Davey et al. 2002), revealed that

there still is substantial potential for further model improvement. Latif et al. (2001),

through comparing the performance of 24 CGCMs in the tropical Pacific, indicated that

almost all models (even those employing flux correction) still have considerable

problems in simulating the SST climatology (e.g., cold bias in the equatorial Pacific and a

too-weak annual cycle) although some improvements are found relative to earlier inter-

comparison studies. Only a few of the coupled models realistically simulate the ENSO in

terms of gross equatorial SST anomalies (e.g., amplitude and annual phase locking). In

particular, many models overestimate the variability in the western equatorial Pacific and

underestimate the SST variability in the east, which may be associated with the extension

4

of the model cold tongue too far westward. Davey et al. (2002) further found that the

interannual variability (both SST and zonal wind stress) is commonly too weak in the

models. Most models have difficulty in reproducing the observed Pacific ‘horseshoe’

pattern of negative SST correlations with interannual Nino-3 SST anomalies, and the

observed Indo-Pacific lag correlations. Both inter-comparison projects confirm that

improving the simulations of the tropical Pacific climatology and ENSO remains a

continuing challenge for the coupled-model community.

In this paper, we present a hybrid coupled GCM (HcGCM) newly developed at

the International Pacific Research Center (IPRC), University of Hawaii (UH). This model

couples the ECHAM-4 AGCM (Roeckner et al. 1996) with an intermediate ocean model

(Fu and Wang 2001). Active air-sea coupling is in the tropical Indo-Pacific region only1.

In contrast to other anomalous hybrid coupled GCMs (e.g., Alexander 1992; Kirtman and

Zebiak 1997; Yeh et al. 2004), this hybrid coupled model exercises full coupling. The

model was designed to simulate the annual mean, annual cycle, and interannual

variability within one framework. The model simulations of the climate and variability in

the tropical Asia-Pacific sector are very encouraging even compared to those well-

known, state-of-the-art coupled GCMs (e.g., NCAR CCSM, Meehl and Arblaster 1998;

SINTEX CGCM, Gualdi et al. 2003). The main objective of this study is to validate the

model simulations of the climatology and intraseasonal-to-interannual variability in the

tropical Asia-Pacific sector with available observations, thus establishing a baseline for

evaluating future improvements and for comparison with other models.

1 IPRC’s mission is to understand the nature and predictability of climate variability and regional aspects of global environmental change in the Asia-Pacific sector (http://iprc.soest.hawaii.edu).

5

It is worthwhile to mention that there are three other coupled GCMs that also used

ECHAM-4 as their atmospheric component. Two coupled versions were developed at

Max Planck Institute, Germany: 1) ECHO-2, which coupled ECHAM-4 with HOPE

ocean general circulation model (Frey et al. 1997); 2) ECHAM-4 is coupled to OPYC3

general circulation model with annual-mean heat flux correction (Bacher et al. 1998); 3)

SINTEX CGCM (Gualdi et al. 2003) couples the ECHAM-4 with the ORCA ocean

general circulation model. Through comparing the results from different atmospheric

GCMs (or from the same GCM with different resolutions) coupled to one ocean model,

Guilyardi et al. (2004) have suggested the important role of the atmospheric component

in setting up ENSO characteristics. On the other hand, coupling one AGCM to different

ocean models may give us a clue about how the ocean component will affect the

behaviors of coupled systems. In our following analyses, we will compare some of our

results, in which we have used an intermediate ocean model rather than an ocean general

circulation model, with other ECHAM-4 family CGCMs.

Because our focus is the tropical Asia-Pacific climate, we will validate the model

simulations of tropical Pacific climate along with the Asian-Australian monsoon and

tropical intraseasonal oscillations (TISO). In literature, a few AGCM inter-comparison

projects have been conducted to focus on the Asian summer monsoon (Gadgil and Sajani

1998; Kang et al. 2002) and the TISO (Slingo et al. 1996; Waliser et al. 2003). We will

also refer to some results from these inter-comparison projects when we validate those

relevant simulations in this hybrid-coupled model.

The remaining parts of the paper are organized as follows. The model and the data

used to validate the model are given in section 2. In section 3, we validate the model

6

climatology (both annual-mean and annual cycle) in the tropical Asia-Pacific sector. In

section 4, the seasonality of the simulated TISO, both the northward-propagating ISO in

boreal summer and eastward-propagating MJO in boreal winter, is compared to the

available observations. The interannual variability of the tropical Pacific is evaluated in

section 5. Finally, we summarize our main results and discuss the pathways to further

improve the model in section 6.

2. The Hybrid Coupled GCM (HcGCM)

a. The atmospheric component ECHAM-4

The atmospheric model used in this study is the ECHAM-4 general circulation

model, which has been documented in detail by Roeckner et al. (1996). A brief

description is given here for the convenience of readers. We used the T30 version (the

corresponding horizontal resolution is about 3.75o) in this study instead of the standard

ECHAM-4 T42 version, because it produces similar results as the higher-resolution

versions but requires fewer computational resources (Stendel and Roeckner 1998). The

model has 19 layers extending from the surface to 10 hPa. Its land surface scheme is a

modified bucket model with improved parameterization of rainfall-runoff (Dumenil and

Todini 1992). The surface fluxes of momentum, heat, water vapor, and cloud water are

based on the Monin-Obukhov similarity theory. The vertical diffusion in the model is

computed with a high-order closure scheme depending on the turbulent kinetic energy.

Gravity wave drag associated with orographic gravity waves is simulated after Miller et

al. (1989). The mass flux scheme of Tiedtke (1989) for deep, shallow, and mid-level

convection has been used with the modified closure schemes for penetrative convection

7

and the formation of organized entrainment and detrainment (Nordeng 1994). The

radiation scheme is a modified version of the European Center for Medium-Range

Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) scheme. Two- and six-band intervals are used in the solar

and terrestrial part of the spectrum, respectively.

b. The updated intermediate ocean model

The ocean component of this hybrid coupled model is a tropical upper ocean

model with intermediate complexity. It was originally developed by Wang et al. (1995)

for the tropical Pacific and improved by Fu and Wang (2001). The ocean model

comprises a mixed layer, in which the temperature and velocity are vertically uniform,

and a thermocline layer in which temperature decreases linearly from the mixed layer

base to the thermocline base. Both layers have variable depths. The deep ocean beneath

the thermocline base is motionless with a constant reference temperature. This ocean

model combines the mixed-layer thermodynamics of Gaspar (1988) and the upper ocean

dynamics of McCreary and Yu (1992). It well reproduces the annual cycles of sea surface

temperature, upper ocean currents, and mixed layer depth in the tropical Pacific (Fu and

Wang 2001; Wang and Fu 2001).

In this study, the parameterization of the entrained water temperature has been

updated. In our previous studies, the entrained water temperature is parameterized in

terms of the vertical temperature gradient between the mixed layer and the deep inert

layer (Wang et al. 1995). The weakness of this parameterization is that the mixed-layer

temperature is not sensitive to the changes of thermocline depth. Therefore, the SST

interannual variability that is strongly associated with thermocline feedback (Zebiak and

Cane 1987) is very weak in our early versions of coupled models (e.g., Fu and Wang

8

2001; Fu et al. 2002). Following the footprints of other intermediate ocean models

(Zebiak and Cane 1987; Seager et al. 1988; McCreary et al. 1993; Jin 1996, 1998), we

have parameterized the entrained water temperature as an explicit function of thermocline

depth, very similar to the one used in Jin (1998). In this study, the ocean model is active

in both the tropical Indian and Pacific Oceans (from 30oS to 30oN) with realistic but

simplified coastal boundaries of the oceans. It is feasible to further extend the ocean

domain to the tropical Atlantic Ocean and mid-latitude region (Lu et al. 1998). The

horizontal resolution of the model is 0.5o longitude by 0.5o latitude, which requires an

approximate time interval of 3 h. No-flux conditions for temperature and free-slip

conditions for velocities are applied at the coastal boundaries.

c. The coupling procedure

The ECHAM-4 was coupled with the intermediate ocean model in the tropical

Indian and Pacific Oceans without heat flux correction (except that the SSTs in the north-

south open boundaries have been relaxed to the observations, Fu and Wang 2001).

Beyond the coupling regions, the underlying sea surface temperature is specified as the

climatological monthly mean of the 16-year (1979-1994) SST dataset used as the

boundary conditions in the AMIP II experiments (Taylor et al. 2000). In the active air-sea

coupling domain, atmospheric component exchanges information with ocean component

once per day. The atmosphere provides daily mean surface winds and heat fluxes to the

ocean model. The latter send daily mean SST back to the former. The coupled model is

integrated with seasonally varying solar radiation forcing. The initial atmospheric field is

a restart file from previous long-term integration on January 1. The initial ocean field is

the steady state in January after a ten-year integration of the ocean model forced with

9

observed climatological surface winds and heat fluxes. The spin-up period for the

coupled model is 5 years. The output from the next 40 years’ integration was used in the

following analyses.

d. The data used to validate the model

Several long-term datasets either from the observations or from the analysis and

reanalysis have been used in this study to validate the model simulations. The datasets

include the Hadley Center monthly-mean SST from 1901 to 2000 (GISST, Rayner et al.

1998), Climate Prediction Center (CPC) Merged Analysis of Precipitation (CMAP)

pentad-mean rainfall from 1979 to 2000 (Xie and Arkin 1997), daily–mean winds of

ECMWF analysis from 1991 to 2000, and monthly-mean sea level pressure from NCEP

reanalysis from 1961 to 2000 (Kalnay et al. 1996).

3. The Model Climatology

a. In the tropical Asia-Pacific sector

During the 40-year integration, the coupled model exhibits no apparent climate

drift though no heat flux correction is applied. The simulated annual-mean SST (averaged

in 40-years) agrees with the observations (averaged in 100-years) quite well (Fig. 1). The

model bias is within 1oC in most tropical Indo-Pacific regions except in the southeast

Pacific, particularly close to the Peruvian coast, where the model SST is too high (Fig.

1c). This warm bias is associated with the fictitious eastward extension of the south

Pacific convergence zone (SPCZ) warm water. In fact, this problem is a common

syndrome for almost all state-of-the-art CGCMs (Davey et al. 2002; Frey et al. 1997;

Gordon et al. 2000; Meehl et al. 2001; Guilyardi et al. 2003; Wang et al. 2004, among

10

others). It is believed that this problem originates primarily from deficiencies in

atmospheric models caused by the lack of stratocumulus or too-weak along-shore winds

(Philander et al. 1996; Schneider et al. 1997; Mechoso et al. 2000), and probably

amplified by local air-sea coupling (Li and Philander 1996).

Figure 2a-d shows the climatological zonal wind shear (200 hPa-850 hPa) and

precipitation from the observations and the coupled model. We assessed the simulated

wind shear here, because it is suggested to be an important factor to initiate and steer the

intraseasonal variability in the Indo-western Pacific region (Wang and Xie 1996; Jiang et

al. 2004). In boreal summer, the major observed rainfall systems (Fig. 2a) are associated

with the Asian summer monsoon, ITCZ and eastern North Pacific summer monsoon

(ENPSM, Murakami et al. 1992). Strong easterly shear is observed in the northern Indian

Ocean and the western North Pacific (WNP) associated with the monsoon rainbelt around

15oN (Fig. 2a). The coupled model well captures this easterly shear (Fig. 2b) with a

maximum of about 30 m s-1 located in the northwest Indian Ocean. In the eastern Pacific,

the model tends to overestimate the easterly shear associated with the ENPSM even

though the rainfall is a little underestimated. The ITCZ rainfall in the central Pacific

(between 160oW and 120oW) is weaker than the observed. This bias also exists in the

stand-alone ECHAM-4 GCM (Roeckner et al. 1996). This rainfall bias may be associated

with the westerly bias in the upper troposphere (Fig. 4b). The erroneous westerly duct in

the model favors the intrusion of the subtropical dry (and cold) air into the equatorial

region and tends to suppress the model ITCZ convection in the central Pacific (Mapes

and Zuidema 1996; Yoneyama and Parsons, 1999; Tompkins 2001). Increasing the model

horizontal resolution mitigates this bias (Gualdi et al. 2003).

11

In the Asia-western Pacific region, the model captures the major rainfall systems,

for example, strong rainfall at the eastern Arabian Sea and the Bay of Bengal (Figs. 2a-b).

The simulated maximum rainfall in the Arabian Sea shifts too far away from the Indian

western coast probably owing to the coarse resolution (see also Gualdi et al. 2003 and

Rajendran et al. 2004). The observed rainbelt just south of the equatorial Indian Ocean is

reproduced but with a weaker intensity. This rainbelt may play an essential role in

initiating the dominant northward propagating ISO in the Indian Ocean (Waliser et al.

2003; Fu and Wang 2004b), but was missed by many AGCMs (Kang et al. 2002). The

observed rainbelt in the South China Sea and the WNP is captured but with a quite

different orientation compared to the observations (Figs. 2a-b). A rainy center is observed

in the SPCZ but the model only shows a hint there. Overall, the simulated rainfall pattern

associated with Asian summer monsoon is very similar with that in the SINTEX CGCM

(Gualdi et al. 2003) and is much better than the simulations with stand-alone ECHAM-4

AGCM (Roeckner et al. 1996) and many other AGCMs (Kang et al. 2002). This result

supports our previous finding that warm-pool air-sea coupling significantly improves the

simulation of mean Asian summer monsoon (Fu et al. 2002).

In boreal winter, major convective zones move to the Southern Hemisphere (Figs.

2c-d) following the seasonal migration of solar radiation. The major rainbelt extends

from the southern Indian Ocean to the SPCZ, with a tail (the Pacific ITCZ) remaining in

the Northern Hemisphere. The observed easterly shear centers over the maritime

continent. The overall rainfall and wind shear patterns are well simulated by the model

(Fig. 2d). However, there are two systematic errors in the simulation, the northern ITCZ

12

is too weak and the SPCZ extends too far eastward. Most likely, both errors are

associated with the warm bias in the southeast Pacific (Fig. 1c).

Figures 3a-d compare the climatology of 1000-hPa winds from the ECMWF

analysis and the model. In boreal summer (Figs. 3a-b), the monsoonal flows associated

with the Asian summer monsoon in the Indian Ocean are reasonably captured. In the

tropical Pacific, the simulated northeast trades are more realistic than the southeast trades.

The latter are too strong in the western South Pacific (between 150oE and 150oW), which

may be the cause of weaker SPCZ rainfall in the model (Fig. 2a). In boreal winter (Figs.

3c-d), the overall flow patterns are similar between the model and the observations except

that the strong northeast trades in the model penetrate too far equatorward and the south

Pacific convergence zone extends too far eastward (Fig. 3d).

The upper troposphere (200-hPa) zonal winds from the ECMWF analysis and

coupled model are compared in Figs. 4a-d. In boreal summer, the easterlies associated

with the Asia-western Pacific summer monsoon are reproduced but with a smaller

amplitude, particularly in the northern Indian Ocean (Fig. 4b). On the other hand, the

easterlies in the eastern equatorial Pacific are slightly too strong. As mentioned before, an

erroneous westerly duct is produced in the equatorial central Pacific. In boreal winter, the

observed easterlies associated with the Australian monsoon (Fig. 4c) are much weaker

than their summer counterparts (Fig. 4a). The simulated easterly center locates over the

maritime continent as in the observations but with slightly smaller amplitude (Fig. 4d).

b. In the equatorial Indo-Pacific region

Davey et al. (2002) evaluated the global equatorial SSTs and zonal wind stresses

13

simulated in 15 CGCMs (without heat flux correction). They found that most CGCMs

(11 of 15) have significant cold bias in the western-central equatorial Pacific. At the same

time, easterly winds are considerably overestimated in the western Pacific, but

underestimated in the central Pacific (figures 1-2 in Davey et al. 2002). The causes of

these systematic errors are probably associated with the misrepresentations of oceanic

mixing (Li et al. 2001), adjacent monsoon systems (Fu et al. 2004), and local atmosphere-

ocean feedback (Jin 1998).

We have compared the mean SSTs and zonal winds in the equatorial Indo-Pacific

Oceans from this hybrid coupled model with the observations (Figs. 5a-b). The model

SST bias (Fig. 5a) is very small in most equatorial regions except in the eastern end of the

Pacific (east of 120oW), where simulated SST is too warm with a bias about 2oC as in

most coupled GCMs (figure 1 in Davey et al. 2002). For this hybrid coupled model, the

warm bias primarily originates from the underestimated stratocumulus in the atmospheric

component (figure not shown), which is one of our targets for further model

improvement. The simulated zonal winds (Fig. 5b) also show a reasonable agreement

with the observations except in the western Pacific, where the model easterlies are

slightly too strong.

In the deep tropics, the downward solar radiation at the top of atmosphere has a

dominant semiannual cycle. However, the observed SST in the equatorial eastern-central

Pacific shows a peculiar annual cycle (Fig. 6a) with highest and lowest SST, respectively,

in spring and fall. Many state-of-the-art CGCMs have various problems in reasonably

simulating this feature (Mechoso et al. 1995; Latif et al. 2001). Some models (e.g.,

NCAR CCSM and SINTEX CGCM) tend to produce a dominant semiannual cycle in the

14

equatorial eastern Pacific (Meehl and Arblaster 1998; Guilyardi et al. 2004). The failure

to simulate a reasonable annual cycle may result in an unrealistic annual phase locking of

the model El Nino (e.g., Guilyardi et al. 2004). This hybrid coupled model produces a

significant SST annual cycle in the eastern Pacific (Fig. 6b) even though the simulated

phase lagged the observations by about 1 month and the amplitude is somewhat reduced.

Compared to other ECHAM-4 family CGCMs (e.g., Frey et al. 1997; Gualdi et al. 2003),

the annual cycle seems better represented in this hybrid coupled model. The reason is

likely related to the introduction of an explicit mixed-layer in our intermediate ocean

model (Fu and Wang 2001). In the western Pacific, the observed semiannual cycle is also

well reproduced by the model. In the Indian Ocean, the model captures the annual cycle

in the eastern basin and the semiannual cycle in the western basin. However, the observed

strong summer cooling near the Somali coast is underestimated, suggesting the coastal

upwelling is not well represented. Higher horizontal resolutions in both the atmosphere

and ocean models are probably needed to mitigate this bias.

Figures 7a-b compare the annual cycles of the equatorial zonal winds with the

observations and the model. The major observed features are captured in the model: the

annual cycle in the eastern Pacific, the winter (and spring) westerly and summer

easterlies in the western Pacific, and semiannual cycle in the Indian Ocean. The

simulation, however, shows a few obvious biases, particularly in the western Pacific,

such as a stronger westerly in boreal spring and a weaker westerly in boreal winter.

4. The Tropical Intraseasonal Oscillation (TISO)

The atmosphere-ocean variability (e.g., precipitation, low-level winds, surface

15

heat fluxes and SST) associated with the TISO has its strongest signal in the tropical

Indo-Pacific sector even though its impacts could spread around the world. The TISO

significantly regulates the onset and retreat of Asian-Australian monsoons (Yasunari

1980), tropical storm activity (Maloney and Hartmann 2000), and ENSO evolution

(McPhaden and Yu 1999), even the subseasonal rainfall variability over Americas (Mo

2000; Jones 2000). This intraseasonal mode is first revealed by Madden and Julian (1971)

as an eastward propagating planetary-scale zonal wind oscillation with a period of about

40-50 days (popularly termed as Madden-Julian Oscillation or MJO). Many follow-up

studies have found that the eastward propagating MJO prevails primarily in boreal

winter. In boreal summer, the dominant intraseasonal mode propagates northeastward

from the equatorial Indian Ocean to East Asia (Yasunari 1979; Lau and Chan 1986;

Wang and Rui 1990).

As revealed by several model inter-comparison projects (Slingo et al. 1996;

Sperber et al. 1997; Waliser et al. 2003), most current GCMs have considerable problems

in realistically representing the TISO. Many recent studies have suggested that air-sea

coupling significantly improves the simulations of the TISO in terms of its intensity,

convection-SST phase relationship, propagation and seasonality (Flatau et al. 1997;

Waliser et al. 1999; Inness and Slingo 2003; Fu et al. 2003). Fu and Wang (2004a, b)

further demonstrated that two different TISO solutions, respectively, exist in an air-sea

coupled system and a forced atmosphere-only system. The solution from the coupled

system resembles the observations more than that from the atmosphere-only system. In

this section, the TISO simulated in this hybrid coupled GCM is assessed briefly. We

focus on the seasonal variations of the TISO, such as the changes of spatial pattern of

16

rainfall variability, eastward-propagating MJO in boreal winter and northward-

propagating ISO in boreal summer.

Figures 8a-d show the standard deviations of filtered rainfall (with period of 20-

90 days retained), which are used to represent the intensity of the TISO, from the CMAP

observations and the coupled model. In boreal winter (Fig. 8a), major rainfall variances

associated with TISO activities locate in the southern Indian Ocean, SPCZ, ITCZs and

South America. The model captures almost all these activities with the intensity slightly

overestimated in the maritime continent, southern Indian Ocean and SPCZ (Fig. 8b). The

simulation in the ITCZ is slightly weaker than the observations, probably a consequence

of the underestimated mean rainfall in this area (Figs. 2c-d). During boreal summer (Fig.

8c), major rainfall variability shifts to the Northern Hemisphere following the seasonal

march of mean rainfall. The action centers appear in the equatorial and northern Indian

Ocean, South China Sea, the WNP and ITCZs. They are well collocated with the pattern

of mean summer rainfall (Fig. 2a). As in the model mean (Fig. 2b), the orientation of

maximum TISO intensity in the western North Pacific is not in line with the observations

(Figs. 8c-d). In the eastern Pacific ITCZ, a relatively isolated TISO center occurs in

association with the ENPSM (Maloney and Esbensen 2003). In general, the coupled

model captures all the action centers that appeared in the observations but with slightly

larger amplitude (Fig. 8d). Compared to the simulations of all 10 AGCMs that

participated in the CLIVAR/Asian-Australian monsoon inter-comparison project

(Waliser et al. 2003), the simulation of this hybrid coupled model is much better in terms

of both the spatial pattern and amplitude of the TISO rainfall variability.

17

A limited-domain wavenumber-frequency spectral analysis is used to summarize

the spatio-temporal characteristics of the TISO in the Asia-Pacific region. The advantages

and usefulness of this method have been substantiated by several previous studies (Teng

and Wang 2003; Fu et al. 2003; Fu and Wang 2004a, b). In boreal winter (NDJFMA),

this wavenumber-frequency analysis is applied between 40oE and 140oW to extract the

eastward-westward propagating modes. In boreal summer (MJJASO), the analysis is

limited between 10oS and 30oN, focusing on the northward-southward propagating

modes.

Figures 9a-b compare the wavenumber-frequency spectra of rainfall (averaged

between 10oS and 5oN) associated with the eastward-westward propagating intraseasonal

modes in boreal winter from the CMAP observations and the coupled model. The results

from the observations and the model are, respectively, 22-year (1979-2000) mean and 39-

year mean. In the observations (Fig. 9a), eastward propagating disturbances

overwhelmingly dominate their westward counterparts. The maximum spectrum

corresponds to the MJO mode discovered by Madden and Julian (1971) with a period of

50 days and a wavelength of 200 degrees in longitude. The associated eastward

propagating speed is about 5 m s-1. The major characteristics of the observed MJO (e.g.,

period, wavelength (or speed), and intensity) seem well simulated by this model (Fig.

9b). On the other hand, there are also several biases in the simulation, for example, too

strong westward propagating disturbances and too much variance with shorter periods

and smaller spatial scales.

During boreal summer, northward propagating TISO dominates in the Indian

and western Pacific Oceans (Lau and Chan 1986; Wang and Rui 1990; Fu and Wang

18

2004b). Our previous studies have focused over the Indian Ocean (Fu et al. 2003; Fu and

Wang 2004a). Here, we shift our attention to the western Pacific. Figures 10a, b compare

the wavenumber-frequency spectra of rainfall variability averaged between 120oE and

150oE from the CMAP observations and the coupled model. The TISO characteristics in

the simulation resemble those in the observations. The observed maximum spectrum

corresponds to an oscillation of a period about 40-50 days and a wavelength of 40

degrees in latitude. The corresponding northward propagating speed is about 1 m s-1. In

the simulation (Fig. 10b), the dominant period is about 30-50 days with both northward

and southward variances slightly larger than the observations. The model also tends to

produce too much variability in shorter time scales and smaller spatial scales.

The above analyses indicate that the observed seasonal variations of the TISO

have been largely captured by this hybrid coupled model. The spatial patterns of the

TISO intensity (Fig. 8) and mean rainfall (Fig. 2) are highly correlated with each other in

both the observations and the simulation. This coincidence probably suggests that the

better simulation of mean rainfall is the pre-requirement for the better simulation of

TISO. Additional analyses of 10 AGCMs’ outputs from the CLIVAR/monsoon inter-

comparison project (Kang et al. 2002) showed that none of them are able to reasonably

capture both the dominant northward propagation in summer and eastward propagation in

winter (figure not shown). It is very encouraging to see that this hybrid coupled model is

capable of representing this significant seasonality of TISO with some realism.

5. The ENSO Variability

The most significant interannual variability in the tropical Asia-Pacific region is

19

the variability associated with ENSO. Though considerable improvements of the

simulation and prediction of ENSO have been made during the past twenty years (Latif et

al. 1998; Chen et al. 2004), current coupled models still need to be improved with regard

to realistically representing ENSO (Latif et al. 2001; Davey et al. 2002; Wang et al.

2004). In this section, the ENSO variability simulated by this hybrid coupled GCM will

be evaluated.

First, we compare the spatial patterns of SST standard deviation in the tropical

Asia-Pacific sector between the observations and the model (Figs. 11a-b). The coupled

model produces significant SST variations in the central-eastern equatorial Pacific as in

the observations. The observations have two maximum variance centers: one near the

Peruvian coast and the other in the eastern equatorial Pacific (~110oW). The model well

locates the first maximum center, but the second center is shifted 40 degrees west of the

observed one. This is a common error presented in many other coupled GCMs (e.g., Frey

et al. 1997; Knutson and Manabe 1998; Meehl et al. 2001), probably associated with too

much westward extension of the cold tongue in mean state.

The simulated time series of SST anomaly in the Nino-3.4 region (Fig. 12b) has a

somewhat similar evolution as in the observations during the period of 1912-1951 (Fig.

12a). As in the observations, the simulated SST time series indicates considerable

irregularity. For example, before the warm event that peaks in 1930 in the observations

(Fig. 12a), there is no significant cold event preceding it. Similar warm events (years 34

and 37) appear in the simulation. The model also produces significant biennial variations

during years 16-20 as in the observations during the period of 1922-1926. The elongated

warm event (years 27-30) with embedded annual variability in the simulation also finds a

20

resemblance in the observations from 1939 to 1941. With a longer simulation (~ 85

years), a power spectrum analysis indicates that the time series of SST anomaly in the

Nino-3.4 region has two peaks with periods of about 2 years and 5 years, respectively

(figure not shown).

The model ENSO shows reasonable phase locking with annual cycle (Fig. 13). The

observed SST standard deviation in the Nino-3.4 region is minimum (~ 0.45oC) in late

spring and maximum (~ 0.65oC) in winter. The simulated SST standard deviation has

considerable annual variations as in the observations. The minimum (maximum) in the

model occurs one month (two months) earlier than that in the observations, with the

annual range slightly larger. Compared to the results from those coupled GCMs

participating in the ENSIP project (Latif et al. 2001), the simulated ENSO annual phase

locking in this model is better than most of them. The reason is most likely due to the

reasonable simulation of annual cycle in the central-eastern Pacific. For example, the

ENSO simulated in SINTEX CGCM, which also used ECHAM-4 as its atmospheric

component, has no apparent annual phase locking due to inappropriate representation (a

weaker annual harmonics and a stronger semiannual harmonic) of annual cycle

(Guilyardi et al. 2004).

Although the strongest SST signal associated with ENSO is in the equatorial

eastern Pacific, its impacts actually spread around the world. Figures 14a-b compare the

global sea-level-pressure (SLP) teleconnection patterns correlated with the Nino-3.4

indices from the NCEP reanalysis (surrogate of the observations) and the coupled model.

The model captures almost all the large-scale teleconnection features presented in the

observations, particularly the see-saw patterns between the tropical Pacific Ocean and

21

Indian Ocean. Compared to the observations (Fig. 14a), the simulated pattern shifts a bit

westward due to the flaw in SST anomaly pattern (Fig. 11). The teleconnection with

North American continent is also reproduced with the simulated positive SLP center

locating slightly westward compared to the reanalysis. El Nino in the Pacific also acts to

increase the SLP in the equatorial Atlantic (Fig. 14a). The model tends to exaggerate this

connection.

6. Summary and Discussions

a. Summary

We have successfully developed a unique Hybrid coupled GCM (HcGCM) that is

able to reasonably simulate both climatology (annual-mean and annual cycle) and

variability in the tropical Asia-Pacific region. This hybrid coupled GCM combined the

ECHAM-4 AGCM (Roeckner et al. 1996) with an intermediate ocean model developed

at University of Hawaii (McCreary and Yu 1992; Wang et al. 1995; Fu and Wang 2001).

In this study, the first 40-year (after 5-year spin-up) output from this coupled

model has been analyzed and compared to available observations and other state-of-the-

art coupled GCMs. Overall, the model simulations of the climatology and variability in

the tropical Asia-Pacific sector (e.g., Pacific mean SST and its annual cycle, Asian

Summer monsoon, tropical intraseasonal oscillation (TISO) and ENSO) are quite

reasonable and comparable with those sophisticated CGCMs.

The mean SST difference between the model and observations is within 1oC in

most of the tropical Indo-Pacific Oceans (Fig. 1c). The cold bias problem of the

equatorial western-central Pacific troubled most coupled GCMs (Figure 1 in Davey et al.

22

2002) is only minor in this hybrid coupled model. This indicates that the ‘climatological

Bjerknes atmosphere-ocean feedback’ mechanism (Neelin and Dijkstra 1995; Jin 1996),

which is critical to configure the warm-pool/cold tongue along the equatorial Pacific, has

been reasonably represented. However, the model also suffers a warm-bias syndrome in

the southeast Pacific like most other coupled GCMs (Davey et al. 2002). The primary

reason is that the atmospheric model considerably underestimates the stratocumulus in

this region. The simulated seasonal cycle in the eastern Pacific quite resembles the

observations with a dominant annual harmonic (Fig. 6). However, the amplitude is

slightly underestimated with a phase delayed about 1-2 months. Even so, the simulation

is still much better than those of many fully coupled GCMs (e.g., NCAR CCSM, Meehl

and Arblaster 1998; SINTEX CGCM, Guiyardi et al. 2004).

The Asian summer monsoon and tropical intraseasonal variability are also well

simulated in this hybrid coupled model as in most other ECHAM-4 family coupled

models (e.g., Gualdi et al. 2003; Sperber et al. 2003). The spatial patterns of summer-

mean rainfall (Fig. 2) and its intraseasonal standard deviation (Fig. 8) in the model are

much closer to the observations than all 10 AGCMs participating in the CLIVAR/Asian-

Australian monsoon inter-comparison project (Kang et al. 2002; Waliser et al. 2003). The

simulated tropical intraseasonal oscillations (TISO) exhibit significant seasonality as in

the observations. In boreal winter (NDJFMA), the TISO action centers are primarily

located in the southeast Indian Ocean and Pacific SPCZ region (Fig. 8b). The dominant

ISO mode is the eastward-propagating MJO (Fig. 9). In boreal summer (MJJASO), major

TISO activities shift to the Northern Hemisphere (Fig. 8d), with dominant northward-

propagating mode in the Indian and western Pacific regions (Fig. 10).

23

The simulated ENSO is comparable to the observed one in terms of the variance

and frequency. The model ENSO has two spectral peaks with periods about 2 years and 5

years. The ENSO variance shows enough meridional expansion, but the location of the

maximum shifts a bit too westward. The simulated ENSO indicates reasonable annual

phase locking with minimum (maximum) variance in boreal spring (in late fall). This

ENSO characteristic was not captured by the SINTEX CGCM, probably due to the

misrepresentation of annual cycle in that model (Guilyardi et al. 2003). This hybrid

coupled model also reasonably captures the global teleconnection of ENSO, including the

remote impacts to the Indian Ocean sector and North America (Fig. 15).

b. Discussions

The results presented in this paper clearly indicate that with regards to

representing the present-day climatology and its variability (with time scales from

intraseasonal to interannual) in the tropical Asia-Pacific sector, a hybrid coupled model is

as good as fully coupled GCMs. Use of a hybrid coupled model also saves a lot of

computational resources compared to a fully coupled GCM in terms of both running time

(this model is up to 2-3 times faster than a fully coupled model with similar temporal and

spatial resolution) and data storage.

Although very encouraging results have been obtained with this hybrid coupled

model, we believe that there is still plenty of room to improve this model for both the

atmospheric component and oceanic component. Further model improvements will focus

on following two aspects.

24

First, we will try to improve the stratocumulus’ simulation in the atmospheric

model, which probably leads to significant mitigation of the warm bias near the Peruvian

coast in the coupled model (Fig. 1c). Recent numerical studies with regional atmospheric

models (Wang et al. 2004; McCaa and Bretherton 2004) have shown that the

stratocumulus in the southeastern Pacific is very sensitive to the cumulus

parameterization schemes and model resolutions. Because both studies have proven that

the stratocumulus can be reasonably represented with a mass flux scheme, it is optimistic

that ECHAM-4 AGCM (also using a mass flux scheme) can be improved through better

validation of the cumulus parameterization scheme and increase of model resolution.

Second, the parameterization of entrained water temperature can be further

improved. Because of the coarse vertical resolution of intermediate ocean models, they

can’t produce an entrainment temperature the way as in ocean general circulation models

(Gent and Cane 1989). The success of intermediate ocean models largely depends on the

parameterization of entrained water temperature. The usefulness of this approach has

been supported by a lot of previous studies (Zebiak and Cane 1987; Seager et al. 1988;

McCreary et al. 1993; Wang et al. 1995; Jin 1998; Fu and Wang 2001). The results

presented in this study further support that this framework is a pragmatic approach to

represent the thermodynamics and dynamics of upper tropical oceans. As suggested by

previous studies (Perigaud and Dewitte 1996; Zhang and Zebiak 2003), the scheme of

entrained water temperature can be further improved through validating it with available

ocean observational data or reanalysis products. We are also aware that ultimate

improvement of fully coupled GCMs needs to better represent various mixing processes

25

in the ocean GCMs. Our current effort to develop a hybrid coupled GCM is probably a

complementary approach of fully CGCMs.

Acknowledgements. This work was supported by NOAA PACS Program, NSF Climate

Dynamics Program, NASA Earth Science Program and by the Japan Agency for Marine-

Earth Science and Technology (JAMSTEC) through its sponsorship of the IPRC. XF

likes to thank Diane Henderson for editing the manuscript. This paper is SOEST

contribution number xxxx and IPRC contribution number yyyy.

26

References

Alexander, M. A., 1992: Midlatitude atmosphere-ocean interaction during El Nino. Part I:

the North Pacific Ocean. J. Climate, 5, 944-958.

Bacher, A., J. M. Oberhuber and E. Roeckner, 1998: ENSO dynamics and seasonal cycle

in the tropical Pacific as simulated by the ECHAM4/OPYC3 coupled general

circulation model, Clim. Dyn., 14, 431-450.

Chen, D., M. A. Cane, A. Kaplan, S. E. Zebiak, and D. Huang, 2004: Predictability of El

Nino over the past 148 years. Nature, 428, 733-736.

Davey, M., and Coauthors, 2002: STOIC: A study of coupled model climatology and

variability in tropical ocean regions. Clim. Dyn., 18, 403-420.

Delecluse, P., M. K. Davey, Y. Kitamura, S. G. H. Philander, M. Suarez, and L.

Bengstsson, 1998: Coupled general circulation modeling of the tropical Pacific. J.

Geophys. Res., 103, C7, 14357-14374.

Dumenil, L., and E. Todini, 1992: A rainfall-runoff scheme for use in the Hamburg

climate model. Advances in Theoretical Hydrology, A Tribute to James Dooge,

European Geophysical Society Series on Hydrological Sciences, Vol. 1, Elsevier

Press, 129-157.

Flatau, M., P. Flatau, P. Phoebus, and P. Niller, 1997: The feedback between equatorial

convection and local radiative and evaporative processes: The implications for

intraseasonal oscillations. J. Atmos. Sci., 54, 2373-2386.

Frey, H., M. Latif, and T. Stockdale, 1997: The coupled GCM ECHO-2, Part I: the

tropical Pacific. Mon. Wea. Rev., 125, 703-720.

27

Fu, X., and B. Wang, 2001: A coupled modeling study of the seasonal cycle of the

Pacific cold tongue. Part I: Simulation and sensitivity experiments. J. Climate, 14,

765-779.

Fu, X., B. Wang, and T. Li, 2002: Impacts of air-sea coupling on the simulation of mean

Asian summer monsoon in the ECHAM4 model. Mon. Wea. Rev., 130, 2889-

2904.

Fu, X., and B. Wang, T. Li and J. P. McCreary, 2003: Coupling between northward

propagating, intraseasonal oscillations and sea-surface temperature in the Indian

Ocean. J. Atmos. Sci., 60, 1733-1753.

Fu, X., and B. Wang, 2004a: Differences of boreal-summer intraseasonal oscillations

simulated in an atmosphere-ocean coupled model and an atmosphere-only model.

J. Climate, 17, 1263-1271.

Fu, X., and B. Wang, 2004b: The boreal-summer intraseasonal oscillations simulated in a

hybrid coupled atmosphere-ocean model. Mon Wea. Rev., in press.

Fu, X., F. F. Jin, and B. Wang, 2004: Monsoonal impacts on Pacific cold-tongue strength

and its implication for cold bias in coupled GCMs. To be submitted.

Gadgil, S., and S. Sajani, 1998: Monsoon precipitation in the AMIP runs. Clim. Dyn., 14,

659-689.

Gaspar, P., 1988: Modeling the seasonal cycle of the upper ocean. J. Phys. Oceanogr.,

18, 161-180.

Gent, P. R., and M. A. Cane, 1989: A reduced gravity, primitive equation model of the

upper equatorial ocean. J. Comput. Phys., 81, 444-480.

28

Gordon, C. T., A. Rosati, and R. Gudgel, 2000: Tropical sensitivity of a coupled model to

specified ISCCP low clouds. J. Climate, 13, 2239-2260.

Gualdi, S., A. Navarra, E. Guilyardi, and P. Delecluse, 2003: Assessment of the tropical

Indo-Pacific climate in the SINTEX CGCM. Annals of Geophysics, 46, 1-26.

Guilyardi, E., P. Delecluse, S. Gualdi, and A. Navarra, 2003: Mechanisms for ENSO

phase change in a coupled GCM. J. Climate, 16, 1141-1158.

Guilyardi, E., S. Gualdi, J. Slingo, A. Navarra, P. Delecluse, J. Cole, G. Madec, M.

Roberts, M. Latif, and L. Terray, 2004: Representing El Nino in coupled ocean-

atmosphere GCMs: the dominant role of the atmosphere. J. Climate, in press.

Inness, P. M., and J. M. Slingo, 2003: Simulation of the Madden-Julian Oscillation in a

coupled general circulation model I: Comparison with observations and an

atmosphere-only GCM. J. Climate, 16, 345-364.

Jiang, X., T. Li, and B. Wang, 2004: Structures and mechanisms of the northward

propagating boreal summer intraseasonal oscillations. J. Climate, 17, 1022-1039.

Jin, F. F., 1996: Tropical ocean-atmosphere interaction, the Pacific cold tongue, and El

Nino-Southern Oscillation. Science, 274, 76-78.

Jin, F. F., 1998: A simple model for the Pacific cold tongue and ENSO. J. Atmos. Sci.,

55, 2458-2469.

Jones, C., 2000: Occurrence of extreme precipitation events in California and

relationships with the Madden-Julian Oscillation. J. Climate, 13, 3576-3587.

Kalnay, E., and Co-authors, 1996: The NCEP/NCAR 40-year reanalysis project. Bull.

Amer. Meteor. Soc., 77, 437-471.

29

Kang, I.-S., and Co-authors, 2002: Inter-comparison of the climatological variations of

Asian summer monsoon precipitation simulated by 10 GCMs. Clim. Dyn., 19,

383-395.

Kirtman, B. P., and S. E. Zebiak, 1997: ENSO simulation and prediction with a hybrid

coupled model. Mon. Wea. Rev., 125, 2620-2641.

Knutson, T. R., and S. Manabe, 1998: Model assessment of decadal variability and trends

in the tropical Pacific Ocean. J. Climate, 11, 2273-2296.

Latif, M., D. Anderson, T. Barnett, M. Cane, R. Kleeman, A. Leetmaa, J. OBrien, A.

Rosati, and E. Schneider, 1998: A review of the predictability and prediction of

ENSO. J. Geophys. Res., 103, C7, 14375-14394.

Latif, M., and Coauthors, 2001: ENSIP: the El Nino simulation intercomparison project.

Clim. Dyn., 18, 255-276.

Lau, K. M., and P. H. Chan, 1986: Aspects of the 40-50 day oscillation during the

northern summer as inferred from outgoing longwave radiation. Mon. Wea. Rev.,

114, 1354-1367.

Li, T., and S. G. H. Philander, 1996: On the annual cycle of the eastern equatorial Pacific.

J. Climate, 9, 2986-2997.

Li, X., Y. Chao, J. C. McWilliams, and L.-L. Fu, 2001: A comparison of two vertical-

mixing schemes in a Pacific Ocean general circulation model. J. Climate, 14,

1377-1398.

Lu, P., J. P. McCreary, and B. A. Klinger, 1998: Meridional circulation cells and the

source waters of the Pacific equatorial undercurrent. J. Phys. Oceanogr., 28, 62-

84.

30

Madden, R. A., and P. R. Julian, 1971: Detection of a 40-50 oscillation in the zonal wind

in the tropical Pacific. J. Atmos. Sci., 28, 702-708.

Maloney, E. D., and D. L. Hartmann, 2000: Modulation of hurricane activity in Gulf of

Mexico by the Madden-Julian Oscillation. Science, 287, 2002-2004.

Maloney, E. D., and S. K. Esbensen, 2003: The amplification of east Pacific Madden-

Julian Oscillation convection and wind anomalies during June-November. J.

Climate, 16, 3482-3497.

Mapes, B. E., and P. Zuidema, 1996: Radiative-dynamical consequences of dry tongues

in the tropical troposphere. J. Atmos. Sci., 53, 620-638.

McCaa, J. R., and C. S. Bretherton, 2004: A new parameterization for shallow cumulus

convection and its application to marine subtropical cloud-topped boundary

layers. Part II: Regional simulation of marine boundary layer clouds. Mon. Wea.

Rev., 132, 883-896.

McCreary, J. P., and Z. J. Yu, 1992: Equatorial dynamics in a 2.5-layer model. Progress

in Oceanography, Vol. 29, Pergamon, 61-132.

McCreary, J. P., P. K. Kundu, and R. L. Molinari, 1993: A numerical investigation of

dynamics, thermodynamics and mixed-layer processes in the Indian Ocean.

Progress in Oceanography, Vol. 31, Pergamon, 181-244.

McPhaden, M. J., and Co-authors, 1998: The tropical ocean-global atmosphere observing

system: A decade of program. J. Geophys. Res., 103, C7, 14169-14240.

McPhaden, M. J., and X. Yu, 1999: Equatorial waves and the 1997-1998 El Nino.

Geophys. Res. Let., 26, 2961-2964.

31

Mechoso, C., and Co-authors, 1995: The seasonal cycle over the tropical Pacific in

general circulation models. Mon. Wea. Rev., 123, 2825-2838.

Mechoso, C., J. Y. Yu, and A. Arakawa, 2000: A coupled GCM pilgrimage: from climate

catastrophe to ENSO simulations. In General Circulation Model Development:

Past, Present and Future, D. A. Randall, Ed., Academic Press, pp 539-575.

Meehl, G. A., and J. M. Arblaster, 1998: The Asian-Australian monsoon and El Nino-

Southern Oscillation in the NCAR climate system model. J. Climate, 11, 1356-

1385.

Meehl, G. A., G. J. Boer, C. Covey, M. Latif, and R. J. Stouffer, 2000: The Coupled

Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP). Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 81, 313-318.

Meehl, G. A., P. R. Gent, J. M. Arblaster, B. L. Otto-Bliesner, E. C. Brady, and A. Craig,

2001: Factors that affect the amplitude of El Nino in global coupled models. Clim.

Dyn., 17, 515-527.

Miller, M. J., T. N. Palmer, and R. Swinbank, 1989: Parameterization and influence of

sub-grid scale orography in general circulation and numerical weather prediction

models. Meteor. Atmos. Phys., 40, 84-109.

Mo, K. C., 2000: Intraseasonal modulation of summer precipitation over North America.

Mon. Wea. Rev., 128, 1490-1505.

Murakami, T., B. Wang, and S. W. Lyons, 1992: Summer monsoons over the Bay of

Bengal and the eastern North Pacific. J. Meteor. Soc. Japan, 70, 191-210.

Neelin, J. D., and Co-author, 1992: Tropical air-sea interaction in general circulation

models. Clim. Dyn., 7, 73-104.

32

Neelin, J. D., and H. A. Dijkstra, 1995: Ocean-atmosphere interaction and the tropical

climatology. Part I: The dangers of flux correction. J .Climate, 8, 1325-1342.

Neelin, J. D., D. S. Battisti, A. C. Hirst, F.-F. Jin, Y. Wakata, T. Yamagata, and Zebiak,

S. E., 1998: ENSO theory. J. Geophys. Res., 103, C7, 14261-14290.

Nordeng, T. E., 1994: Extended version of the convective parameterization scheme at ECMWF

and their impact on the mean and transient activity of the model in the tropics. ECMWF

Research Dept. Tech. Memo., 206, European Center for Medium-Range Weather

Forecasts, Reading, United Kingdom, 41 pp.

Perigaud, C., and B. Dewitte, 1996: El Nino-La Nina events simulated with Cane and

Zebiak’s model and observed with satellite or in situ data. Part I: Model data

coimparison. J. Climate, 9, 66-84.

Philander, S. G. H., D. Gu, D. Halpern, D. Lambert, N.-C. Lau, T. Li, and R. C.

Pacanowski, 1996: Why the ITCZ is mostly north of the equator. J. Climate, 9,

2958-2972.

Rajendran, K., A. Kotoh, S. Yukimoto, 2004: South and East Asian summer monsoon

climate and variation in the MRI coupled model (MRI_CGCM2). J. Climate, 17,

763-782.

Rayner, M. A., E. B. Horton, D. E. Parker, and C. K. Folland, 1998: Versions 2.3b and

3.0 of the global sea-ice and sea surface temperature data set. Hadley Centre

Internal Note 85.

Roeckner, E., and Co-authors, 1996: The atmospheric general circulation model

ECHAM-4: Model description and simulation of present-day climate. Max-

Planck-Institute for Meteorology Report 218, 90pp.

33

Schneider, E. K., Z. Zhu, B. S. Giese, B. Huang, B. P. Kirtman, J. Shukla, and J. A.

Carton, 1997: Annual cycle and ENSO in a coupled ocean-atmosphere model.

Mon Wea. Rev., 125, 680-706.

Seager, R., S. E. Zebiak, and M. A. Cane, 1988: A model of the tropical Pacific sea

surface temperature climatology. J. Geophys. Res., 93, 1265-1280.

Slingo, J. M., and Co-authors, 1996: Intraseasonal oscillations in 15 atmospheric general

circulation models: Results from am AMIP diagnostic subproject. Clim. Dyn., 12,

325-357.

Sperber, K. R., J. M. Slingo, P. M. Inness, and W.K.-M. Lau, 1997: On the maintenance

and initiation of the intraseasonal oscillation in the NCEP/NCAR reanalysis and

in the GLA and UKMO AMIP simulations. Clim. Dyn., 13, 769-795.

Sperber, K. R., J. M. Slingo, P. M. Inness, S. Gualdi, W. Li, P. J. Gleckler, C. Doutriaux,

and the AMIP and CMIP Modeling Groups, 2003: The Madden-Julian Oscillation

in general circulation models. ECMWF/CLIVAR Workshop on Simulation and

Prediction of Intraseasonal Variability with Emphasis on the MJO (UCRL-PROC-

200601). Reading, United Kingdom.

Stendel, M., and E. Roeckner, 1998: Impacts of horizontal resolution on simulated

climate statistics in ECHAM4. Max-Planck-Institute for Meteorology Rep. 253,

Hamburg, 120 pp.

Taylor, K. E., D. Williamson, and F. Zwiers, 2000: The sea surface temperature and sea-

ice concentration boundary condition for AMIP II simulations, PCMDI Rep. 60,

Program for Climate Model Diagnosis and Intercomparison, Lawrence Livermore

34

National Laboratory, Livermore, CA, 25 pp. [Available online at http://www-

pcmdi.llnl.gov/amip/AMIP2EXPDSN/BCS/amip2bcs.html.]

Teng, H. Y., and B. Wang, 2003: Interannual variations of the boreal summer

intraseasonal oscillation in the Asian-Pacific region. J. Climate, 16, 3572-3584.

Tiedtke, M., 1989: A comprehensive mass flux scheme for cumulus parameterization in

large-scale models. Mon. Wea. Rev., 117, 1779-1800.

Tompkins, A. M., 2001: Organization of tropical convection in low vertical wind shears:

The role of water vapor. J. Atmos. Sci., 58, 529-545.

Waliser, D. E., K. M. Lau, and J. H. Kim, 1999: The influence of coupled sea surface

temperatures on the Madden-Julian oscillation: A model perturbation experiment.

J. Atmos. Sci., 56, 333-358.

Waliser, D. E. and Co-authors, 2003: AGCM simulations of intraseasonal variability

associated with the Asian summer monsoon. Climate Dyn., 21, 423-446.

Wang, B., and H. Rui, 1990: Synoptic climatology of transient tropical intraseasonal

convection anomalies: 1975-1985. Meteor. Atmos. Phys., 44, 43-61.

Wang, B., T. Li, and P. Chang, 1995: An intermediate model of the tropical Pacific

ocean. J. Phys. Oceanogr., 25, 1599-1616.

Wang, B., and X. Xie, 1996: Low-frequency equatorial waves in sheared zonal flow. Part

I: Stable waves. J. Atmos. Sci., 53, 449-467.

Wang, B., and X. Fu, 2001: Physical processes determining the rapid reestablishment of

the equatorial Pacific cold tongue/ITCZ complex from March to May. J. Climate,

14, 2250-2265.

35

Wang, W. Q., S. Saha, H. L. Pan, S. Nadiga, and G. White, 2004: Simulation of ENSO in

the new NCEP coupled forecast system model (CFS03). Submitted to Bull. Amer.

Meteor. Soc.

Wang, Y., H. Xu, and S. P. Xie, 2004: Regional model simulation of marine boundary

layer clouds over the southeast Pacific off South America. Part II: Sensitivity

experiments. Mon. Wea. Rev., In press

Xie, P., and P. A. Arkin, 1997: Global precipitation: A 17-year monthly analysis based on

gauge observations, satellite estimates, and numerical model outputs. Bull. Amer.

Meteor. Soc., 78, 2539-2558.

Yasunari, T., 1979: Cloudiness fluctuations associated with the Northern Hemisphere

summer monsoon. J. Meteor. Soc. Japan, 57, 227-242.

Yasunari, T., 1980: A quasi-stationary appearance of 30 to 40 day period in the

cloudiness fluctuations during the summer monsoon over India. J. Meteor. Soc.

Japan, 58, 225-229.

Yeh, S. W., J. G. Jhun, I.-S. Kang, B. P. Kirtman, 2004: The decadal ENSO variability in

a hybrid coupled model. J. Climate, 17, 1225-1238.

Yoneyama, K., and D. B. Parsons, 1999: A proposed mechanism for the intrusion of dry

air into the tropical western Pacific region. J. Atmos. Sci., 56, 1524-1546.

Zebiak, S. E., and M. A. Cane, 1987: A model El Nino Southern Oscillation. Mon. Wea.

Rev., 115, 2262-2278.

Zhang, R.-H., and S. E. Zebiak, 2003: Embedding a SST anomaly model into a z-

coordinate oceanic GCM for producing El Nino oscillation in the tropical Pacific

climate system. Geo. Res. Let., 30(4), 1176, doi:10.1029/2002GL015428.

36

Figure Captions

Figure1, Annual-mean SST from the observations (100-year mean from GISST) (a), from

the hybrid coupled model (40-year mean) (b), and model bias ((b)-(a)). Contour interval

is 1oC.

Figure 2, Seasonal-mean zonal wind vertical shear (200 hPa-850 hPa) and rainfall in

boreal summer (JJAS) from the observations (a), from the model (b); and in boreal winter

(DJFM) from the observations (c) and the model (d). Shadings are for rainfall (mm day-1)

and contours are for vertical shear (m s-1).

Figure 3, 1000-hPa wind vector and wind speed (contours) in boreal summer (JJAS) from

the observations (a) and the model (b); and in boreal winter (DJFM) from the

observations (c) and the model (d). Contour interval is 2 m s-1 (larger than 6 m s-1 are

shaded).

Figure 4, 200-hPa zonal wind speed in boreal summer (JJAS) from the observations (a)

and the model (b); and in boreal winter (DJFM) from the observations (c) and the model

(d). Contour interval is 5 m s-1 (larger than 40 m s-1 are shaded).

Figure 5, Annual means of (a) SSTs (oC) and (b) surface zonal winds (m s-1) from the

observations and the model along the equatorial Indo-Pacific Oceans.

Figure 6, Annual cycles of SSTs along the equatorial Indo-Pacific Oceans from the

observations (a) and the model (b). Contour interval is 0.5oC (positive values are shaded).

Figure 7, Annual cycles of surface zonal winds along the equatorial Indo-Pacific Oceans

from the observations (a) and the model (b). Contour interval is 0.5 m s-1 (positive values

are shaded).

37

Figure 8, Rainfall standard deviations associated with tropical intraseasonal oscillations

(with periods between 20-90 days) in boreal winter (NDJFMA) from the observations (a)

and the model (b); and in boreal summer (MJJASO) from the observations (c) and the

model (d). Contour interval is 1 mm day-1 (larger than 2 are shaded).

Figure 9, Wavenumber-frequency spectra of rainfall associated with west-eastward

propagating disturbances in boreal winter (NDJFMA) averaged between 10oS and 5oN

from the observations (a) and the model (b). Contour interval is 3 (mm day-1)2.

Figure 10, Wavenumber-frequency spectra of rainfall associated with south-northward

propagating disturbances in boreal summer (MJJASO) averaged between 120oE and

150oE from the observations (a) and the model (b). Contour interval is 3 (mm day-1)2.

Figure 11, Standard deviation of SST anomalies in Indo-Pacific sector from the

observations (a) and the model (b). Contour interval is 0.1oC (larger than 0.2 are shaded).

Figure 12, Time series of Nino-3.4 SST anomalies (oC) from the observations (a) and the

model (b).

Figure 13, Seasonal cycles of SST internannual standard deviations (oC) at Nino-3.4

region from the observations (a) and the model (b).

Figure 14, Maps of correlation of the Nino-3.4 SST anomaly time series with global sea-

level pressure anomaly from the NCEP reanalysis (a) and the model (b). Correlation

coefficients larger than 0.6 or smaller than -0.6 are shaded.

38

Figure1, Annual-mean SST from the observations (100-year mean from GISST) (a), from

the hybrid coupled model (40-year mean) (b), and model bias ((b)-(a)). Contour interval

is 1oC.

39

Figure 2, Seasonal-mean zonal wind vertical shear (200 hPa-850 hPa) and rainfall in

boreal summer (JJAS) from the observations (a), from the model (b); and in boreal winter

(DJFM) from the observations (c) and the model (d). Shadings are for rainfall (mm day-1)

and contours are for vertical shear (m s-1).

40

Figure 3, 1000-hPa wind vector and wind speed (contours) in boreal summer (JJAS) from

the observations (a) and the model (b); and in boreal winter (DJFM) from the

observations (c) and the model (d). Contour interval is 2 m s-1 (larger than 6 m s-1 are

shaded).

41

Figure 4, 200-hPa zonal wind speed in boreal summer (JJAS) from the observations (a)

and the model (b); and in boreal winter (DJFM) from the observations (c) and the model

(d). Contour interval is 5 m s-1 (larger than 40 m s-1 are shaded).

42

Figure 5, Annual means of (a) SSTs (oC) and (b) surface zonal winds (m s-1) from the

observations and the model along the equatorial Indo-Pacific Oceans.

43

Figure 6, Annual cycles of SSTs along the equatorial Indo-Pacific Oceans from the

observations (a) and the model (b). Contour interval is 0.5oC (positive values are shaded).

44

Figure 7, Annual cycles of surface zonal winds along the equatorial Indo-Pacific Oceans

from the observations (a) and the model (b). Contour interval is 0.5 m s-1 (positive values

are shaded).

45

Figure 8, Rainfall standard deviations associated with tropical intraseasonal oscillations

(with periods between 20-90 days) in boreal winter (NDJFMA) from the observations (a)

and the model (b); and in boreal summer (MJJASO) from the observations (c) and the

model (d). Contour interval is 1 mm day-1 (larger than 2 are shaded).

46

Figure 9, Wavenumber-frequency spectra of rainfall associated with west-eastward

propagating disturbances in boreal winter (NDJFMA) averaged between 10oS and 5oN

from the observations (a) and the model (b). Contour interval is 3 (mm day-1)2.

47

Figure 10, Wavenumber-frequency spectra of rainfall associated with south-northward

propagating disturbances in boreal summer (MJJASO) averaged between 120oE and

150oE from the observations (a) and the model (b). Contour interval is 3 (mm day-1)2.

48

Figure 11, Standard deviation of SST anomalies in Indo-Pacific sector from the

observations (a) and the model (b). Contour interval is 0.1oC (larger than 0.2 are shaded).

49

Figure 12, Time series of Nino-3.4 SST anomalies (oC) from the observations (a) and the

model (b).

50

Figure 13, Seasonal cycles of SST internannual standard deviations (oC) at Nino-3.4

region from the observations (a) and the model (b).

51

Figure 14, Maps of correlation of the Nino-3.4 SST anomaly time series with global sea-

level pressure anomaly from the NCEP reanalysis (a) and the model (b). Correlation

coefficients larger than 0.6 or smaller than -0.6 are shaded.

52