Articles | Volume 22, issue 3
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-2095-2022
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-2095-2022
Research article
 | 
15 Feb 2022
Research article |  | 15 Feb 2022

How well do the CMIP6 models simulate dust aerosols?

Alcide Zhao, Claire L. Ryder, and Laura J. Wilcox

Download

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
  • RC1: 'Comment on acp-2021-578', Anonymous Referee #1, 04 Oct 2021
  • RC2: 'Comment on acp-2021-578', Anonymous Referee #2, 09 Oct 2021
  • AC1: 'Replies to reviewers', Alcide Zhao, 15 Dec 2021
  • AC2: 'Manuscript with tracked changes', Alcide Zhao, 15 Dec 2021

Peer review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision
AR by Alcide Zhao on behalf of the Authors (15 Dec 2021)  Author's response    Author's tracked changes    Manuscript
ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (19 Dec 2021) by Ashu Dastoor
RR by Anonymous Referee #1 (27 Dec 2021)
RR by Anonymous Referee #2 (06 Jan 2022)
ED: Publish as is (18 Jan 2022) by Ashu Dastoor

Post-review adjustments

AA: Author's adjustment | EA: Editor approval
AA by Alcide Zhao on behalf of the Authors (11 Feb 2022)   Author's adjustment   Manuscript
EA: Adjustments approved (14 Feb 2022) by Ashu Dastoor
Download
Short summary
The CMIP6 models' simulated dust processes are getting more uncertain as models become more sophisticated. Of particular challenge are the links between dust cycles and optical properties, and we recommend more detailed output relating to dust cycles in future intercomparison projects to constrain such links. Also, models struggle to capture certain key regional dust processes such as dust accumulation along the slope of the Himalayas and dust seasonal cycles in North China and North America.
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint