• Bonan, D. B., F. Lehner, and M. M. Holland, 2021: Partitioning uncertainty in projections of Arctic sea ice. Environ. Res. Lett., 16, 044002, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/abe0ec.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Brennan, M. K., and G. J. Hakim, 2022: Reconstructing Arctic sea ice over the common era using data assimilation. J. Climate, 35, 12311247, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-21-0099.1.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Brennan, M. K., G. J. Hakim, and E. Blanchard-Wrigglesworth, 2020: Arctic sea-ice variability during the instrumental era. Geophys. Res. Lett., 47, e2019GL086843, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL086843.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Cavalieri, D. J., P. Gloersen, and W. J. Campbell, 1984: Determination of sea ice parameters with the Nimbus 7 SMMR. J. Geophys. Res., 89, 53555369, https://doi.org/10.1029/JD089iD04p05355.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Chan, D., A. Cobb, L. R. Zeppetello, D. S. Battisti, and P. Huybers, 2020: Summertime temperature variability increases with local warming in midlatitude regions. Geophys. Res. Lett., 47, e2020GL087624, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL087624.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Chemke, R., and L. M. Polvani, 2020: Using multiple large ensembles to elucidate the discrepancy between the 1979–2019 modeled and observed Antarctic sea ice trends. Geophys. Res. Lett., 47, e2020GL088339, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL088339.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Chen, J., and Coauthors, 2020: Changes in sea ice and future accessibility along the Arctic Northeast Passage. Global Planet. Change, 195, 103319, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2020.103319.

    • Crossref
    • Export Citation
  • Christensen, M., and A. E. Nilsson, 2017: Arctic sea ice and the communication of climate change. Pop. Commun., 15, 249268, https://doi.org/10.1080/15405702.2017.1376064.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Comiso, J. C., 1986: Characteristics of Arctic winter sea ice from satellite multispectral microwave observations. J. Geophys. Res., 91, 975994, https://doi.org/10.1029/JC091iC01p00975.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Comiso, J. C., W. N. Meier, and R. Gersten, 2017: Variability and trends in the Arctic Sea ice cover: Results from different techniques. J. Geophys. Res. Oceans, 122, 68836900, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JC012768.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Dai, A., and C. E. Bloecker, 2019: Impacts of internal variability on temperature and precipitation trends in large ensemble simulations by two climate models. Climate Dyn., 52, 289306, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-018-4132-4.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Davy, R., and S. Outten, 2020: The Arctic surface climate in CMIP6: Status and developments since CMIP5. J. Climate, 33, 80478068, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-19-0990.1.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Deser, C., and Coauthors, 2020a: Insights from Earth system model initial-condition large ensembles and future prospects. Nat. Climate Change, 10, 277286, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-020-0731-2.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Deser, C., and Coauthors, 2020b: Insights from Earth system model initial-condition large ensembles and future prospects. Nat. Climate Change, 10, 277286, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-020-0731-2.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Ding, Q., and Coauthors, 2017: Influence of high-latitude atmospheric circulation changes on summertime Arctic sea ice. Nat. Climate Change, 7, 289295, https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate3241.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Ding, Q., and Coauthors, 2019: Fingerprints of internal drivers of Arctic sea ice loss in observations and model simulations. Nat. Geosci., 12, 2833, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-018-0256-8.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Dörr, J., M. Årthun, T. Eldevik, and E. Madonna, 2021: Mechanisms of regional winter sea-ice variability in a warming Arctic. J. Climate, 34, 86358653, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-21-0149.1.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Elsworth, G. W., N. S. Lovenduski, and K. A. McKinnon, 2021: Alternate history: A synthetic ensemble of ocean chlorophyll concentrations. Global Biogeochem. Cycles, 35, e2020GB006924, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GB006924.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • England, M. R., 2021: Are multi-decadal fluctuations in Arctic and Antarctic surface temperatures a forced response to anthropogenic emissions or part of internal climate variability? Geophys. Res. Lett., 48, e2020GL090631, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL090631.

    • Crossref
    • Export Citation
  • England, M. R., A. Jahn, and L. Polvani, 2019: Nonuniform contribution of internal variability to recent Arctic sea ice loss. J. Climate, 32, 40394053, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-18-0864.1.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Frankcombe, L. M., M. H. England, J. B. Kajtar, M. E. Mann, and B. A. Steinman, 2018: On the choice of ensemble mean for estimating the forced signal in the presence of internal variability. J. Climate, 31, 56815693, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0662.1.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Goosse, H., O. Arzel, C. M. Bitz, A. De Montety, and M. Vancoppenolle, 2009: Increased variability of the Arctic summer ice extent in a warmer climate. Geophys. Res. Lett., 36, L23702, https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GL040546.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Hu, K., G. Huang, and S. P. Xie, 2019: Assessing the internal variability in multi-decadal trends of summer surface air temperature over East Asia with a large ensemble of GCM simulations. Climate Dyn., 52, 62296242, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-018-4503-x.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Jahn, A., 2018: Reduced probability of ice-free summers for 1.5°C compared to 2°C warming. Nat. Climate Change, 8, 409413, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0127-8.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Jahn, A., J. E. Kay, M. M. Holland, and D. M. Hall, 2016: How predictable is the timing of a summer ice-free Arctic? Geophys. Res. Lett., 43, 91139120, https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL070067.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Jeffrey, S., L. Rotstayn, M. Collier, S. Dravitzki, C. Hamalainen, C. Moeseneder, K. Wong, and J. Syktus, 2013: Australia’s CMIP5 submission using the CSIRO-Mk3.6 model. Aust. Meteor. Oceanogr. J., 63 (1), 113, https://doi.org/10.22499/2.6301.001.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Kay, J. E., M. M. Holland, and A. Jahn, 2011: Inter-annual to multi-decadal Arctic sea ice extent trends in a warming world. Geophys. Res. Lett., 38, L15708, https://doi.org/10.1029/2011GL048008.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Kay, J. E., and Coauthors, 2015: The Community Earth System Model (CESM) large ensemble project: A community resource for studying climate change in the presence of internal climate variability. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 96, 13331349, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-13-00255.1.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Kern, S., T. Lavergne, D. Notz, L. Toudal Pedersen, R. Tage Tonboe, R. Saldo, and A. MacDonald Sørensen, 2019: Satellite passive microwave sea-ice concentration data set intercomparison: Closed ice and ship-based observations. Cryosphere, 13, 32613307, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-13-3261-2019.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Kirchmeier-Young, M. C., F. W. Zwiers, and N. P. Gillett, 2017: Attribution of extreme events in Arctic sea ice extent. J. Climate, 30, 553571, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0412.1.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Kovacs, K. M., C. Lydersen, J. E. Overland, and S. E. Moore, 2011: Impacts of changing sea-ice conditions on Arctic marine mammals. Mar. Biodivers., 41, 181194, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12526-010-0061-0.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lehner, F., C. Deser, N. Maher, J. Marotzke, E. M. Fischer, L. Brunner, R. Knutti, and E. Hawkins, 2020: Partitioning climate projection uncertainty with multiple large ensembles and CMIP5/6. Earth Syst. Dyn., 11, 491508, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-11-491-2020.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Li, D., R. Zhang, and T. R. Knutson, 2017: On the discrepancy between observed and CMIP5 multi-model simulated Barents Sea winter sea ice decline. Nat. Commun., 8, 14991, https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms14991.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Maher, N., and Coauthors, 2019: The Max Planck Institute Grand Ensemble: Enabling the exploration of climate system variability. J. Adv. Model. Earth Syst., 11, 20502069, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001639.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Maher, N., F. Lehner, and J. Marotzke, 2020: Quantifying the role of internal variability in the temperature we expect to observe in the coming decades. Environ. Res. Lett., 15, 054014, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab7d02.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Massonnet, F., M. Vancoppenolle, H. Goosse, D. Docquier, T. Fichefet, and E. Blanchard-Wrigglesworth, 2018: Arctic sea-ice change tied to its mean state through thermodynamic processes. Nat. Climate Change, 8, 599603, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0204-z.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • McKinnon, K. A., and C. Deser, 2018: Internal variability and regional climate trends in an observational large ensemble. J. Climate, 31, 67836802, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0901.1.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • McKinnon, K. A., and C. Deser, 2021: The inherent uncertainty of precipitation variability, trends, and extremes due to internal variability, with implications for western U.S. water resources. J. Climate, 34, 96059622, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-21-0251.1.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • McKinnon, K. A., A. Poppick, E. Dunn-Sigouin, and C. Deser, 2017: An “observational large ensemble” to compare observed and modeled temperature trend uncertainty due to internal variability. J. Climate, 30, 75857598, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0905.1.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Meier, W. N., F. Fetterer, A. Windnagel, and J. Stewart, 2021: NOAA/NSIDC climate data record of passive microwave sea ice concentration, version 4. Tech. Rep., National Snow and Ice Data Center, 44 pp., https://doi.org/10.7265/efmz-2t65.

    • Crossref
    • Export Citation
  • Milinski, S., N. Maher, and D. Olonscheck, 2020: How large does a large ensemble need to be? Earth Syst. Dyn., 11, 885901, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-11-885-2020.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Mioduszewski, J. R., S. Vavrus, M. Wang, M. Holland, and L. Landrum, 2019: Past and future interannual variability in Arctic sea ice in coupled climate models. Cryosphere, 13, 113124, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-13-113-2019.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Niederdrenk, A. L., and D. Notz, 2018: Arctic sea ice in a 1.5°C warmer world. Geophys. Res. Lett., 45, 19631971, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL076159.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Notz, D., 2014: Sea-ice extent and its trend provide limited metrics of model performance. Cryosphere, 8, 229243, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-8-229-2014.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Notz, D., 2015: How well must climate models agree with observations? Philos. Trans. Roy. Soc., 373A, 20140164, https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2014.0164.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Notz, D., and J. Marotzke, 2012: Observations reveal external driver for Arctic sea-ice retreat. Geophys. Res. Lett., 39, L08502, https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL051094.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Notz, D., and J. Stroeve, 2018: The trajectory towards a seasonally ice-free Arctic ocean. Curr. Climate Change Rep., 4, 407416, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40641-018-0113-2.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Notz, D., and SIMIP Community, 2020: Arctic sea ice in CMIP6. Geophys. Res. Lett., 47, e2019GL086749, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL086749.

  • Olonscheck, D., and D. Notz, 2017: Consistently estimating internal climate variability from climate model simulations. J. Climate, 30, 95559573, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0428.1.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Olonscheck, D., T. Mauritsen, and D. Notz, 2019: Arctic sea-ice variability is primarily driven by atmospheric temperature fluctuations. Nat. Geosci., 12, 430434, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-019-0363-1.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Onarheim, I. H., T. Eldevik, L. H. Smedsrud, and J. C. Stroeve, 2018: Seasonal and regional manifestation of Arctic sea ice loss. J. Climate, 31, 49174932, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0427.1.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Petrick, S., K. Riemann-Campe, S. Hoog, C. Growitsch, H. Schwind, R. Gerdes, and K. Rehdanz, 2017: Climate change, future Arctic sea ice, and the competitiveness of European Arctic offshore oil and gas production on world markets. Ambio, 46, 410422, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-017-0957-z.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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. Atmos., 108, 4407, https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002670.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Roberts, J., and T. D. Roberts, 1978: Use of the Butterworth low-pass filter for oceanographic data. J. Geophys. Res. Oceans, 83, 55105514, https://doi.org/10.1029/JC083iC11p05510.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Rodgers, K. B., J. Lin, and T. L. Frölicher, 2015: Emergence of multiple ocean ecosystem drivers in a large ensemble suite with an Earth system model. Biogeosciences, 12, 33013320, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-12-3301-2015.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Rosenblum, E., and I. Eisenman, 2017: Sea ice trends in climate models only accurate in runs with biased global warming. J. Climate, 30, 62656278, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0455.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Santer, B. D., and Coauthors, 2008: Consistency of modelled and observed temperature trends in the tropical troposphere. Int. J. Climatol., 28, 17031722, https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.1756.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Schweiger, A., R. Lindsay, J. Zhang, M. Steele, H. Stern, and R. Kwok, 2011: Uncertainty in modeled Arctic sea ice volume. J. Geophys. Res. Oceans, 116, C00D06, https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JC007084.

  • Stroeve, J. C., M. M. Holland, W. Meier, T. Scambos, and M. Serreze, 2007: Arctic sea ice decline: Faster than forecast. Geophys. Res. Lett., 34, 9501, https://doi.org/10.1029/2007GL029703.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Stroeve, J. C., V. Kattsov, A. Barrett, M. Serreze, T. Pavlova, M. Holland, and W. N. Meier, 2012: Trends in Arctic sea ice extent from CMIP5, CMIP3 and observations. Geophys. Res. Lett., 39, L16502, https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL052676.

  • Sun, L., M. Alexander, and C. Deser, 2018: Evolution of the global coupled climate response to Arctic sea ice loss during 1990–2090 and its contribution to climate change. J. Climate, 31, 78237843, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-18-0134.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Swart, N. C., J. C. Fyfe, E. Hawkins, J. E. Kay, and A. Jahn, 2015: Influence of internal variability on Arctic sea-ice trends. Nat. Climate Change, 5, 8689, https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2483.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Uotila, P., S. O’Farrell, S. J. Marsland, and D. Bi, 2013: The sea-ice performance of the Australian climate models participating in the CMIP5. Aust. Meteor. Oceanogr. J., 63, 121143, https://doi.org/10.22499/2.6301.008.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Winton, M., 2011: Do climate models underestimate the sensitivity of Northern Hemisphere sea ice cover? J. Climate, 24, 39243934, https://doi.org/10.1175/2011JCLI4146.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Zhang, R., and J. M. Wallace, 2015: Mechanisms for low-frequency variability of summer Arctic sea ice extent. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 112, 45704575, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1422296112.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 533 533 82
Full Text Views 249 249 5
PDF Downloads 280 280 8

Modeled Interannual Variability of Arctic Sea Ice Cover is within Observational Uncertainty

Christopher Wyburn-PowellaDepartment of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, and Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, Colorado

Search for other papers by Christopher Wyburn-Powell in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8362-9151
,
Alexandra JahnaDepartment of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, and Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, Colorado

Search for other papers by Alexandra Jahn in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
, and
Mark R. EnglandbDepartment of Earth and Planetary Science, University of California, Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, California

Search for other papers by Mark R. England in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
Restricted access

Abstract

Internal variability is the dominant cause of projection uncertainty of Arctic sea ice in the short and medium term. However, it is difficult to determine the realism of simulated internal variability in climate models, as observations only provide one possible realization while climate models can provide numerous different realizations. To enable a robust assessment of simulated internal variability of Arctic sea ice, we use a resampling technique to build synthetic ensembles for both observations and climate models, focusing on interannual variability, which is the dominant time scale of Arctic sea ice internal variability. We assess the realism of the interannual variability of Arctic sea ice cover as simulated by six models from phase 5 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5) that provide large ensembles compared to four observational datasets. We augment the standard definition of model and observational consistency by representing the full distribution of resamplings, analogous to the distribution of variability that could have randomly occurred. We find that modeled interannual variability typically lies within observational uncertainty. The three models with the smallest mean state biases are the only ones consistent in the pan-Arctic for all months, but no model is consistent for all regions and seasons. Hence, choosing the right model for a given task as well as using internal variability as an additional metric to assess sea ice simulations is important. The fact that CMIP5 large ensembles broadly simulate interannual variability consistent within observational uncertainty gives confidence in the internal projection uncertainty for Arctic sea ice based on these models.

Significance Statement

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the historical simulated internal variability of Arctic sea ice in climate models. Determining model realism is important to have confidence in the projected sea ice evolution from these models, but so far only mean state and trends are commonly assessed metrics. Here we assess internal variability with a focus on the interannual variability, which is the dominant time scale for internal variability. We find that, in general, models agree well with observations, but as no model is within observational uncertainty for all months and locations, choosing the right model for a given task is crucial. Further refinement of internal variability realism assessments will require reduced observational uncertainty.

© 2022 American Meteorological Society. For information regarding reuse of this content and general copyright information, consult the AMS Copyright Policy (www.ametsoc.org/PUBSReuseLicenses).

Corresponding author: Christopher Wyburn-Powell, chwy8767@colorado.edu

Abstract

Internal variability is the dominant cause of projection uncertainty of Arctic sea ice in the short and medium term. However, it is difficult to determine the realism of simulated internal variability in climate models, as observations only provide one possible realization while climate models can provide numerous different realizations. To enable a robust assessment of simulated internal variability of Arctic sea ice, we use a resampling technique to build synthetic ensembles for both observations and climate models, focusing on interannual variability, which is the dominant time scale of Arctic sea ice internal variability. We assess the realism of the interannual variability of Arctic sea ice cover as simulated by six models from phase 5 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5) that provide large ensembles compared to four observational datasets. We augment the standard definition of model and observational consistency by representing the full distribution of resamplings, analogous to the distribution of variability that could have randomly occurred. We find that modeled interannual variability typically lies within observational uncertainty. The three models with the smallest mean state biases are the only ones consistent in the pan-Arctic for all months, but no model is consistent for all regions and seasons. Hence, choosing the right model for a given task as well as using internal variability as an additional metric to assess sea ice simulations is important. The fact that CMIP5 large ensembles broadly simulate interannual variability consistent within observational uncertainty gives confidence in the internal projection uncertainty for Arctic sea ice based on these models.

Significance Statement

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the historical simulated internal variability of Arctic sea ice in climate models. Determining model realism is important to have confidence in the projected sea ice evolution from these models, but so far only mean state and trends are commonly assessed metrics. Here we assess internal variability with a focus on the interannual variability, which is the dominant time scale for internal variability. We find that, in general, models agree well with observations, but as no model is within observational uncertainty for all months and locations, choosing the right model for a given task is crucial. Further refinement of internal variability realism assessments will require reduced observational uncertainty.

© 2022 American Meteorological Society. For information regarding reuse of this content and general copyright information, consult the AMS Copyright Policy (www.ametsoc.org/PUBSReuseLicenses).

Corresponding author: Christopher Wyburn-Powell, chwy8767@colorado.edu

Supplementary Materials

    • Supplemental Materials (PDF 44.4 MB)
Save