• Anan’ev, I. P., 1986: Remote sensing estimates of evaporation from forest and swamp landscapes of western Siberia (in Russian). Mater. Meteor. Nablyudenii,10, 109–115.

  • Anderson, E. A., 1973: National Weather Service river forecast system—Snow accumulation and ablation model. NOAA Tech. Memo. NWS HYDRO-17, U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Silver Spring, MD. [Available from National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Rd., Springfield, VA 22161.].

  • Budyko, M. I., 1948: Evaporation under Natural Conditions (in Russian). Gidrometeoizdat, 136 pp.

  • Cess, R. D., and Coauthors, 1991: Interpretation of snow–climate feedback as produced by 17 general circulation models. Science,253, 888–892.

  • Chanine, M. T., 1995: Observation of local cloud and moisture feedbacks over high ocean and desert surface temperatures. J. Geophys. Res.,100 (D5), 8919–8927.

  • Cohen, J., and D. Rind, 1991: The effect of snow cover on the climate. J. Climate,4, 689–706.

  • Dekic, L. J., D. T. Mihailovic, and B. Rajkovic, 1995: A study of the sensitivity of bare soil evaporation schemes to soil surface wetness, using the coupled soil moisture and surface temperature prediction model, BARESOIL. Meteor. Atmos. Phys.,55, 101–112.

  • Del Genio, A. D., M.-S. Yao, W. Kovari, and K. K.-W. Lo, 1996: A prognostic cloud water parameterization for global climate models. J. Climate,9, 270–304.

  • Famiglietti, J. S., and E. F. Wood, 1991: Evapotranspiration and runoff from large land areas: Land surface hydrology for atmospheric general circulation models. Surv. Geophys.,12, 179–204.

  • ——, ——, M. Sivapalan, and D. J. Thongs, 1992: A catchment scale water balance model for FIFE. J. Geophys. Res.,97 (D17), 18997–19007.

  • Gaffen, D. J., and W. P. Elliott, 1993: Column water vapor content in clear and cloudy skies. J. Climate,6, 2278–2287.

  • Gates, W. L., 1992: AMIP: The Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc.,73, 1962–1970.

  • Genikhovich, E. L., and G. I. Osipova, 1984: Determination of the exchange coefficient using data of routine meteorological observations (in Russian). Trans. Main Geophys. Observatory,479, 62–69.

  • Gol’tzberg, I. A., 1969: Microclimate of the USSR. Israel Program for Scientific Translations, 236 pp.

  • Gorodetsky, O. A., Ed., 1970: Observations at the USSR Meteorological Network. Definitions of Meteorological Elements and Estimates of the Accuracy of their Observations (in Russian). Gidrometeoizdat, 89 pp.

  • Groisman, P. Ya., and P. M. Zhai, 1994: Climate under clear skies: An empirical benchmark for the cloud feedback problem. AGU 1994 Fall Meeting. Eos,Trans. Amer. Geophys. Union, (Suppl.),74, 219.

  • ——, and ——, 1995: Climate variability under clear skies: Applications for the cloud and snow cover feedback problems. Proc. Sixth Int. Meeting on Statistical Climatology, Galway, Ireland, All Ireland Committee on Statistics and Amer. Meteor. Soc., 605–608.

  • —— and E. L. Genikhovich, 1997: Assessing surface–atmosphere interactions using former Soviet Union standard meteorological network data. Part I: Method. J. Climate,10, 2154–2183.

  • ——, T. R. Karl, and R. W. Knight, 1994a: Observed impact of snow cover on the heat balance and the rise of continental spring temperatures. Science,263, 198–200.

  • ——, ——, ——, and G. L. Stenchikov, 1994b: Changes of snow cover, temperature, and the radiative heat balance over the Northern Hemisphere. J. Climate,7, 1633–1656.

  • ——, P.-M. Zhai, and E. L. Genikhovich, 1995: Cloud and snow cover effects on the surface–atmosphere interactions. Extended Abstracts, Joint Meeting of the Canadian Geophysical Union-Hydrology Section (CGU-HS) and International GEWEX Workshop on Cold-Season/Region Hydrometeorology, Banff, AB, Canada, Canadian Geophysical Union, 209–212.

  • ——, E. L. Genikhovich, and P.-M. Zhai, 1996a: “Overall” cloud and snow cover effects on internal climate variables: The use of clear sky climatology. Bull Amer. Meteor. Soc.,77, 2055–2065.

  • ——, R. S. Bradley, and E. L. Genikhovich, 1996b: Climate sensitivity to cloud and snow cover variations: Comparison of global climate models with empirical data. Preprints, Second Int. Scientific Conf. on the Global Energy and Water Cycle, Washington, DC, GEWEX Project of the World Climate Research Programme, 523–524.

  • Hahn, C. J., S. G. Warren, and J. London, 1994: Edited synoptic cloud reports from ship and land stations over the globe, 1982–1991. Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN, 47 pp. and appendixes. [Available from National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Rd., Springfield, VA 22161.].

  • Hall, F. G, K. E. Huemmrich, S. J. Goetz, P. J. Sellers, and J. E. Nickeson, 1992: Satellite remote sensing of surface energy balance: Success, failures, and unresolved issues in FIFE. J. Geophys. Res.,97 (D17), 19061–19089.

  • Harrison, E. F., P. Minnis, B. R. Barkstrom, V. Ramanathan, R. D. Cess, and G. G. Gibson, 1990: Seasonal variation of cloud radiative forcing derived from the Earth Radiation Budget Experiment. J. Geophys. Res.,95, 18687–18703.

  • Henderson-Sellers, A. A., Z.-L. Yang, and R. E. Dickinson, 1993: The Project for Intercomparison of Land-Surface Parameterization Schemes (PILPS). Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc.,74, 1335–1349.

  • IGBP, 1991: The International Geosphere–Biosphere Programme, Plant–water interactions in large-scale hydrological modeling. Report of a Workshop 17, 44 pp.

  • IPCC, 1990: Climate Change. The IPCC Scientific Assessment. Cambridge University Press, 362 pp.

  • ——, 1996: Climate Change 1995: The Science of Climate Change. The Second IPCC Scientific Assessment. Cambridge University Press, 572 pp.

  • Kagan, R. L., 1979: Averaging of Meteorological Fields (in Russian). Gidrometeoizdat, 212 pp.

  • Kuchment, L. S., V. N. Demidov, and Yu. G. Motovilov, 1983: Streamflow Formation (in Russian). Nauka, 216 pp.

  • Lamb, H. H., 1955: Two-way relationship between the snow or ice limit and 1,000–500 mb thickness in the overlying atmosphere. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc.,81, 172–189.

  • Leathers, D. J., A. W. Ellis, and D. A. Robinson, 1995: Characteristics of temperature depressions associated with snow cover across the northeast United States. J. Appl. Meteor.,34, 381–390.

  • Mihailovic, D. T., B. Rajkovic, B. Lalic, and L. Decic, 1995: Schemes for parameterizing evaporation from non-plant-covered surface and their impact on partitioning the surface energy in land-air exchange parameterization. J. Appl. Meteor., 34, 2462–2475.

  • Namias, J., 1985: Some empirical evidence for the influence of snow cover on temperature and precipitation. Mon. Wea. Rev.,113, 1542–1553.

  • Peck, E. L., and J. C. Schaake, 1990: Network design for water supply forecasting in the west. Water Resour. Bull.,26, 87–99.

  • Phillips, T. J. 1994: A summary documentation of the AMIP models. PCMDI Rep. 18, 343 pp. [Available from Program for Climate Model Diagnosis and Intercomparison, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA 94550; and National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Rd., Springfield, VA 22161.].

  • Pokrovskaya, T. V., and L. P. Spirina, 1965: Estimates of the snow cover impact on spring air temperature over the European part of the USSR (in Russian). Trans. Main Geophys. Observatory,181, 110–113.

  • Potter, G. L., J. M. Slingo, J.-J. Morcrette, and L. Corsetti, 1992: Modeling perspective on cloud radiative forcing. J. Geophys. Res.,97 (D18), 20507–20518.

  • Razuvaev, V. N., E. B. Apasova, R. A. Martuganov, D. P. Kaiser, 1995: Six- and three-hourly meteorological observations from 223 USSR stations. ORNL/CDIAC-66, NDP-048, 68 pp. plus appendixes. [Available from Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN 37831-6335.].

  • Robock, A., K. Ya. Vinnikov, C. A. Schlosser, N. A. Speranskaya, and Y. Xue, 1995: Use of midlatitudinal soil moisture and meteorological observations to validate soil moisture simulations with biosphere and bucket models. J. Climate,8, 15–35.

  • Rosenberg, N. J., B. L. Blad, and S. B. Verma, 1983: Microclimate. The Biological Environment. John Wiley & Sons, 495 pp.

  • Sellers, P. J., and F. G. Hall, 1992: FIFE in 1992: Results, scientific gains, and future research directions. J. Geophys. Res.,97 (D17), 19091–19109.

  • Sohn, B.-J., and F. R. Robertson, 1993: Intercomparison of observed cloud radiative forcing: A zonal and global perspective. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc.,74, 997–1006.

  • State Committee of the USSR on Hydrometeorology and Environment Control, 1985: Handbook of Hydro-Meteorological Observations at Primary and Secondary Hydro-Meteorological Networks (in Russian). Vol. 3, Part 1, Gidrometeoizdat, 300 pp.

  • Stouffer, R. J., S. Manabe, and K. Ya. Vinnikov, 1994: Model assessment of the role of natural variability in recent global warming. Nature,367, 634–636.

  • Voeikov, A. I., 1889: Snow cover, its effects on soil, climate, and weather and methods of investigation (in Russian). Notes Russian Geograph. Soc. on General Geography, 18 (2).

  • Wagner, A. J., 1973: The influence of average snow depth on monthly mean temperature anomaly. Mon. Wea. Rev.,101, 624–626.

  • Warren, S. G., C. J. Hahn, J. London, R. M. Chervin, and R. L. Jenne, 1986: Global distribution of total cloud cover and cloud type amounts over land. NCAR Tech. Note TN-273+STR, 229 pp. [Available from National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Rd., Springfield, VA 22161.].

  • Weare, B. C., and I. I. Mokhov, 1995: Evaluation of total cloudiness and its variability in the Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project. J. Climate,8, 2224–2238.

  • Zubenok, L. I., 1947: On the question of measuring the soil surface temperature. Trans. Main Geophys. Observatory,6, 71–74.

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 17 17 0
PDF Downloads 7 7 0

Assessing Surface–Atmosphere Interactions Using Former Soviet Union Standard Meteorological Network Data. Part II: Cloud and Snow Cover Effects

View More View Less
  • 1 Department of Geosciences, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Massachusetts
  • | 2 Main Geophysical Observatory, St. Petersburg, Russia
  • | 3 Department of Geosciences, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Massachusetts
  • | 4 Main Geophysical Observatory, St. Petersburg, Russia
© Get Permissions
Restricted access

Abstract

Groisman and Genikhovich developed a method to obtain direct estimates of surface turbulent heat fluxes. The authors now apply it to the territory of the former Soviet Union using the 3-/6-h data of 257 stations for the past several decades to assess the sensitivity of sensible heat flux to cloud and snow cover. This property was quantified for bare soil landscapes over the entire country. During the day, the presence of clouds is associated with low values of sensible heat flux from the surface to the atmosphere. At night (and during the day in winter in high latitudes), the sign of the effect is different, but because the direction of sensible heat flux is also different (from the atmosphere to the surface), the presence of clouds again reduces the turbulent heat exchange between the bare soil and the atmosphere. The estimates of “overall cloud effect” on summer sensible heat flux are compared with similar estimates from five general circulation models to assess the abilities of these GCMs to reproduce the response of this flux to cloud cover change. Snow on the ground is associated with temperature depression. When the effect of this depression is excluded, the presence of snow on the ground is generally associated with less water vapor in the lower troposphere under clear-sky conditions, while the evaporation rate and sensible heat flux are higher than average.

Corresponding author address: Dr. Pavel Ya. Groisman, National Climatic Data Center, 151 Patton Ave., Asheville, NC 28801.

Email: pgroisma@ncdc.noaa.gov

Abstract

Groisman and Genikhovich developed a method to obtain direct estimates of surface turbulent heat fluxes. The authors now apply it to the territory of the former Soviet Union using the 3-/6-h data of 257 stations for the past several decades to assess the sensitivity of sensible heat flux to cloud and snow cover. This property was quantified for bare soil landscapes over the entire country. During the day, the presence of clouds is associated with low values of sensible heat flux from the surface to the atmosphere. At night (and during the day in winter in high latitudes), the sign of the effect is different, but because the direction of sensible heat flux is also different (from the atmosphere to the surface), the presence of clouds again reduces the turbulent heat exchange between the bare soil and the atmosphere. The estimates of “overall cloud effect” on summer sensible heat flux are compared with similar estimates from five general circulation models to assess the abilities of these GCMs to reproduce the response of this flux to cloud cover change. Snow on the ground is associated with temperature depression. When the effect of this depression is excluded, the presence of snow on the ground is generally associated with less water vapor in the lower troposphere under clear-sky conditions, while the evaporation rate and sensible heat flux are higher than average.

Corresponding author address: Dr. Pavel Ya. Groisman, National Climatic Data Center, 151 Patton Ave., Asheville, NC 28801.

Email: pgroisma@ncdc.noaa.gov

Save