Articles | Volume 22, issue 16
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-10635-2022
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-10635-2022
Research article
 | 
23 Aug 2022
Research article |  | 23 Aug 2022

Effects of reanalysis forcing fields on ozone trends and age of air from a chemical transport model

Yajuan Li, Sandip S. Dhomse, Martyn P. Chipperfield, Wuhu Feng, Andreas Chrysanthou, Yuan Xia, and Dong Guo

Related authors

The impact of El Niño–Southern Oscillation on the total column ozone over the Tibetan Plateau
Yang Li, Wuhu Feng, Xin Zhou, Yajuan Li, and Martyn P. Chipperfield
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 8277–8293, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-8277-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-8277-2024, 2024
Short summary
Quantifying stratospheric ozone trends over 1984–2020: a comparison of ordinary and regularized multivariate regression models
Yajuan Li, Sandip S. Dhomse, Martyn P. Chipperfield, Wuhu Feng, Jianchun Bian, Yuan Xia, and Dong Guo
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 13029–13047, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-13029-2023,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-13029-2023, 2023
Short summary
Significant enhancements of the mesospheric Na layer bottom below 75 km observed by a full-diurnal-cycle lidar at Beijing (40.41° N, 116.01° E), China
Yuan Xia, Jing Jiao, Satonori Nozawa, Xuewu Cheng, Jihong Wang, Chunhua Shi, Lifang Du, Yajuan Li, Haoran Zheng, Faquan Li, and Guotao Yang
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 13817–13831, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-13817-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-13817-2022, 2022
Short summary

Cited articles

Albergel, C., Dutra, E., Munier, S., Calvet, J.-C., Munoz-Sabater, J., de Rosnay, P., and Balsamo, G.: ERA-5 and ERA-Interim driven ISBA land surface model simulations: which one performs better?, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 3515–3532, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-3515-2018, 2018. 
Ball, W. T., Alsing, J., Staehelin, J., Davis, S. M., Froidevaux, L., and Peter, T.: Stratospheric ozone trends for 1985–2018: sensitivity to recent large variability, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 12731–12748, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-12731-2019, 2019. 
Ball, W. T., Chiodo, G., Abalos, M., Alsing, J., and Stenke, A.: Inconsistencies between chemistry–climate models and observed lower stratospheric ozone trends since 1998, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 9737–9752, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-9737-2020, 2020. 
Bekki, S., Rap, A., Poulain, V., Dhomse, S., Marchand, M., Lefevre, F., Forster, P. M., Szopa, S., and Chipperfield, M. P.: Climate impact of stratospheric ozone recovery, Geophys. Res. Lett., 40, 2796–2800, https://doi.org/10.1002/grl.50358, 2013. 
Download
Short summary
Chemical transport models forced with (re)analysis meteorological fields are ideally suited for interpreting the influence of important physical processes on the ozone variability. We use TOMCAT forced by ECMWF ERA-Interim and ERA5 reanalysis data sets to investigate the effects of reanalysis forcing fields on ozone changes. Our results show that models forced by ERA5 reanalyses may not yet be capable of reproducing observed changes in stratospheric ozone, particularly in the lower stratosphere.
Share
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint