1. Introduction
Buoyancy reversal at the top of a stratocumulus layer has often been suggested as a major stratocumulus cloud–dissolving mechanism. Lilly (1968) hypothesized that under certain inversion conditions, parcels that are entrained from above the inversion can become negatively buoyant by mixing with saturated air inside the cloud layer. As these parcels sink, turbulence kinetic energy is generated such that additional entrainment is promoted. Such runaway entrainment would rapidly warm and dry the cloud layer, leading to its breakup.
However, Kuo and Schubert (1988) found that most of the available stratocumulus observations lie within the buoyancy reversal regime. Siems et al. (1990) furthermore performed laboratory experiments from which they concluded that a positive entrainment feedback due to buoyancy reversal does not occur under realistic stratocumulus conditions. Similar conclusions are drawn from recent high-resolution large-eddy simulation (LES) results by Yamaguchi and Randall (2008), who find that spontaneous entrainment as a result of evaporative cooling indeed exists, but the effect is weak and does not lead to runaway entrainment. Mellado et al. (2009) furthermore conclude from linear stability and numerical analyses that evaporative cooling of entrained parcels does enhance the turbulence generation slightly below the inversion, but the entrainment velocity is not affected.
Nevertheless, the LES results of Moeng (2000) and more recently of Lock (2009) strongly suggest that cloud cover in stably stratified boundary layers tends to decrease rapidly beyond a certain critical value for κ. Similarly, Noda et al. (2013) show from LESs of transient stratocumulus-topped boundary layers that for larger values of κ, the LWP tendency is more negative and the cloud layer tends to break up earlier.
The κ dependency of cloud cover is particularly interesting in connection with climate perturbation studies. The value of κ will typically increase in climate-warming scenarios, as Δθl remains approximately constant, while the humidity jump increases as a result of Clausius–Clapeyron scaling (Bretherton et al. 2013; Bretherton and Blossey 2013, manuscript submitted to J. Adv. Model. Earth Syst.). A thorough understanding of how this will affect the low cloud cover is important for determining the magnitude of the cloud–climate feedback (Stephens 2005).
Stratocumulus-to-cumulus transitions that are often observed over subtropical oceans provide further motivation for the research presented in this article. As stratocumulus cloud fields are advected toward the equator, Δqt typically increases due to the deepening of the boundary layer in combination with the negative humidity gradient in the free atmosphere, and the increase of the surface saturation specific humidity as the sea surface temperature increases. The temperature jump typically changes less rapidly, as the sea surface temperature increase counteracts the stabilizing effect of boundary layer deepening. The increase of Δqt therefore dominates the change in κ, causing it to increase. Eventually the stratocumulus cloud breaks up and a transition to cumulus clouds is observed.
Four stratocumulus transitions have been simulated as a model intercomparison of the combined Global Atmospheric System Studies (GASS) and European Union Cloud Intercomparison, Process Study and Evaluation (EUCLIPSE) projects. These cases mainly differ in the magnitude of the initial temperature and humidity jumps. For a detailed description of the three composite cases, see Sandu and Stevens (2011). The setup of the transition based on the Atlantic Stratocumulus Transition Experiment (ASTEX; Albrecht et al. 1995) is described by Van der Dussen et al. (2013). The 2-hourly averaged values of the cloud fraction as a function of κ for these four cases, obtained using the Dutch Atmospheric LES (DALES) model, are shown in Fig. 1. Sandu and Stevens (2011) presented in a similar figure the results of the composite transition cases obtained using the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) LES model. These results also indicate that the cloud fraction σ decreases rapidly beyond some critical κ.
The 2-hourly averaged cloud cover as a function of κ for the four GASS–EUCLIPSE model intercomparison cases, as indicated by the legend. Simulations where performed using the DALES model (Heus et al. 2010).
Citation: Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences 71, 2; 10.1175/JAS-D-13-0114.1
For the ASTEX transition, this critical κ value is clearly lower than for the composite transition cases. This apparent lack of a universal critical value for κ has also been found by Xiao et al. (2011), who concluded that decoupling of the boundary layer causes stratocumulus breakup to occur at lower κ values. The study thus shows that the critical value for κ depends on the moisture supply at the stratocumulus cloud base. These examples cannot be sufficiently explained by the existing κ criteria that are based on buoyancy reversal argumentation.
In the following section, we will derive an equation for the tendency of the liquid water path (LWP) of adiabatic stratocumulus cloud layers. This equation is then rewritten in terms of κ, which shows that for sufficiently large values of κ the cloud-thinning tendency due to entrainment drying and warming becomes so large that it cannot be compensated anymore by cloud-building processes. In section 3, a simple entrainment relation is assumed that allows for the derivation of an equilibrium value of κ for which the LWP is constant in time. The results are furthermore linked to the Klein and Hartmann (1993) relation, which describes the cloud cover as a function of the bulk stability of the boundary layer. The final section contains a short summary of the conclusions.
2. Theory









Equations (12a)–(12e) allow for the evaluation of the relative contribution of each of the processes to the LWP tendency. Inserting typical values indicates, for instance, that the magnitude of the LWP tendency due to subsidence (about 5 g m−2 h−1) is about 9 times as small as that due to radiation. Table 1 gives an overview of the LWP tendencies induced by an increase of 1 W m−2 in the cloud-base turbulent and entrainment fluxes, as well as in the precipitation and radiation fluxes.
Overview of the LWP tendency induced by a 1 W m−2 increase in the denoted variables.
The entrainment term in Eq. (12a) is typically of similar magnitude as the radiative cooling term. The first two terms between the parentheses in Eq. (12a) represent cloud-thinning tendencies due to entrainment drying and warming. The third term describes cloud thickening due to entrainment. Randall (1984) found that entrainment can result in net cloud thickening despite its cloud-drying and -warming effect. This “cloud deepening through entrainment” occurs only for deep cloud layers (large h) and/or small inversion jumps Δθl and Δqt. He introduced a variable X, which is similar to the term between parentheses in Eq. (12a), but only valid for a well-mixed boundary layer, as it assumes that the entrainment drying and warming are spread over the entire depth of the boundary layer.
3. Discussion
a. LWP tendency due to entrainment
Figure 2 shows the LWP tendency due to entrainment described by Eq. (15) as a function of κ for several values of Δθl. Table 2 shows the parameters that were used for this plot. These parameters were chosen to match as closely as possible the setup of the Second Dynamics and Chemistry of Marine Stratocumulus field study (DYCOMS-II; Stevens et al. 2003a, 2005). This case is particularly interesting, as it lies well within the original buoyancy reversal regime, yet the stratocumulus cloud layer is persistent in the observations (Stevens et al. 2003b). From the figure, it is clear that the cloud-thinning tendency due to entrainment increases rapidly with κ. For DYCOMS-II, κ ≈ 0.55, such that this thinning tendency exceeds −120 g m−2 h−1. This indicates that entrainment alone can dissolve the stratocumulus cloud in a matter of hours.
Contribution of entrainment to the LWP tendency as a function of κ, as given by Eq. (15) for a set of parameters chosen on the basis of the DYCOMS-II case (Stevens et al. 2005).
Citation: Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences 71, 2; 10.1175/JAS-D-13-0114.1
Overview of the parameters and variables described in the text with the values used. These values are based on the DYCOMS-II case setup (Stevens et al. 2005). Variables η and
Note that the plot indeed shows that there is hardly any explicit dependence of the cloud thinning tendency on Δθl. Furthermore, the entrainment efficiency and the radiative divergence over the cloud layer are simply coefficients of the tendency in Eq. (12a). Larger values will result in a stronger cloud thinning tendency and will shift the lines in Fig. 2 downward.
So far, only entrainment has been considered. In the next section, source terms for the LWP will also be considered in order to find the conditions for which a stratocumulus cloud layer will thin.
b. LWP source terms

Plots of the equilibrium lines defined by Eq. (18), for three values of the surface latent heat fluxes: 75, 100, and 125 W m−2. The blue line indicates the buoyancy reversal criterion formulated by Randall (1980) and Deardorff (1980), κBR = 0.23. The triangle marks the location in phase space of the DYCOMS-II case for which the surface latent heat flux is about 115 W m−2.
Citation: Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences 71, 2; 10.1175/JAS-D-13-0114.1
Figure 3 shows that, for a cloud-base latent heat flux of 100 W m−2, the equilibrium condition given by Eq. (18) is similar to the buoyancy reversal criterion of Randall (1980) and Deardorff (1980), which is shown in blue. However, Eq. (18) allows for the persistence of stratocumulus clouds beyond the original buoyancy reversal criterion line, depending on the magnitude of the source terms and is therefore in accord with the observations summarized by Kuo and Schubert (1988).
The black triangle marks the location of the DYCOMS-II case in the phase space. The latent heat flux for this case is almost constant with height at about 115 W m−2. According to this analysis, the cloud layer is thinning slowly. The rate at which it thins can be calculated using Eqs. (12) and is about −19 g m−2 h−1. The results shown in Fig. 3, however, are significantly influenced by A. For a slightly lower value, A ≈ 1.1 (corresponding to a reduction of the entrainment velocity of only 1 mm s−1), the cloud layer would even be thickening. Similarly, a higher cloud-base latent heat flux of about 150 W m−2 would provide enough moisture to the cloud layer to keep it from thinning.
In that respect, it is important to note that the analysis presented here is based on the instantaneous state of the cloud layer, which means that interactions among processes are not accounted for. As the LWP of the cloud layer changes as a result of a net tendency, radiative fluxes, precipitation, and entrainment will change accordingly on a relatively short time scale. On a longer time scale, the humidity flux at cloud base and Δqt and Δθl will be affected. The goal of this discussion is therefore not to describe the temporal evolution of a stratocumulus cloud layer, but rather to show how the stratocumulus cloud thinning for sufficiently high values of κ can be reasonably expected from mere budget arguments.
The equilibrium inversion stability parameter, given by Eq. (19), for three values of the latent heat flux at cloud base: 75, 100, and 125 W m−2.
Citation: Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences 71, 2; 10.1175/JAS-D-13-0114.1
c. The Klein and Hartmann line
Seasonal cloud cover as a function of κ based on the Klein and Hartmann line as described by Eq. (22), using zi = 800 m and Γθ = −6 K km−1. Function is capped at σ = 100%.
Citation: Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences 71, 2; 10.1175/JAS-D-13-0114.1
4. Conclusions
In this article it is argued that the breakup of the subtropical marine stratocumulus clouds for high values of the inversion stability parameter κ can be satisfactorily explained using simple cloud-layer budget arguments.
A budget equation was derived for the LWP of an adiabatic stratocumulus cloud layer, such that the contributions of the different physical mechanisms could be separately analyzed. Using a phenomenological entrainment relation, it is shown that the cloud-thinning tendency due to entrainment increases rapidly with κ, making cloud breakup inevitable for sufficiently large values of κ.
The conditions for which the cloud layer is neither thickening nor thinning could be found using the LWP tendency equation. This allowed us to define an equilibrium value of κ beyond which the cloud layer will thin. The value of κeq is mainly determined by the turbulence humidity flux at cloud base and the entrainment efficiency parameter A. The results are in qualitative agreement with the findings of Xiao et al. (2011), who show that the κ value for which clouds start to break up are lower for decoupled than for well-mixed boundary layers.
Finally, it was shown that the linear relationship between the LTS and the cloud cover, found from observations by Klein and Hartmann (1993), also describes a cloud cover that decreases with κ.
Acknowledgments
The investigations were done as part of the European Union Cloud Intercomparison, Process Study and Evaluation (EUCLIPSE) project, funded under the Seventh Framework Programme of the European Union. The work was sponsored by the National Computing Facilities Foundation (NCF) for the use of supercomputer facilities. We kindly thank Roel Neggers for the stimulating discussions, as well as Steef Böing and three anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on the manuscript.
APPENDIX
Partial Derivatives of the Liquid Water Specific Humidity
Equation (2) contains partial derivatives of ql with respect to qt, θl, and zi. Below, expressions for each of these derivatives are derived.
a. Total humidity
(a) Clausius–Clapeyron relation γ, (b) η, and (c)
Citation: Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences 71, 2; 10.1175/JAS-D-13-0114.1
b. Liquid water potential temperature
c. Inversion height

REFERENCES
Albrecht, B. A., C. S. Bretherton, D. Johnson, W. H. Scubert, and A. S. Frisch, 1995: The Atlantic Stratocumulus Transition Experiment—ASTEX. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 76, 889–904.
Bretherton, C. S., P. N. Blossey, and C. R. Jones, 2013: Mechanisms of marine low cloud sensitivity to idealized climate perturbations: A single-LES exploration extending the CGILS cases. J. Adv. Model. Earth Syst.,5, 316–337, doi:10.1002/jame.20019.
Chung, D., G. Matheou, and J. Teixeira, 2012: Steady-state large-eddy simulations to study the stratocumulus to shallow cumulus cloud transition. J. Atmos. Sci., 69, 3264–3276.
Deardorff, J. W., 1980: Cloud top entrainment instability. J. Atmos. Sci., 37, 131–147.
Duynkerke, P. G., 1993: The stability of cloud top with regard to entrainment: Amendment of the theory of cloud-top entrainment instability. J. Atmos. Sci., 50, 495–502.
Heus, T., and Coauthors, 2010: Formulation of the Dutch Atmospheric Large-Eddy Simulation (DALES) and overview of its applications. Geosci. Model Dev., 3, 415–444, doi:10.5194/gmd-3-415-2010.
Klein, S. A., and D. L. Hartmann, 1993: The seasonal cycle of low stratiform clouds. J. Climate, 6, 1587–1606.
Kuo, H.-C., and W. H. Schubert, 1988: Stability of cloud-topped boundary layers. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 114, 887–916, doi:10.1002/qj.49711448204.
Lilly, D. K., 1968: Models of cloud-topped mixed layers under a strong inversion. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 94, 292–309, doi:10.1002/qj.49709440106.
Lock, A. P., 2009: Factors influencing cloud area at the capping inversion for shallow cumulus clouds. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 135, 941–952, doi:10.1002/qj.424.
MacVean, M. K., and P. J. Mason, 1990: Cloud-top entrainment instability through small-scale mixing and its parameterization in numerical models. J. Atmos. Sci., 47, 1012–1030.
Mellado, J. P., B. Stevens, H. Schmidt, and N. Peters, 2009: Buoyancy reversal in cloud-top mixing layers. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 135, 963–978, doi:10.1002/qj.417.
Moeng, C.-H., 2000: Entrainment rate, cloud fraction, and liquid water path of PBL stratocumulus clouds. J. Atmos. Sci., 57, 3627–3643.
Noda, A. T., K. Nakamura, T. Iwasaki, and M. Satoh, 2013: A numerical study of a stratocumulus-topped boundary-layer: Relations of decaying clouds with a stability parameter across inversion. J. Meteor. Soc. Japan,in press.
Park, S., C. B. Leovy, and M. A. Rozendaal, 2004: A new heuristic Lagrangian marine boundary layer cloud model. J. Atmos. Sci., 61, 3002–3024.
Randall, D. A., 1980: Conditional instability of the first kind upside-down. J. Atmos. Sci., 37, 125–130.
Randall, D. A., 1984: Stratocumulus cloud deepening through entrainment. Tellus, 36A, 446–457, doi:10.1111/j.1600-0870.1984.tb00261.x.
Sandu, I., and B. Stevens, 2011: On the factors modulating the stratocumulus to cumulus transitions. J. Atmos. Sci., 68, 1865–1881.
Siems, S. T., C. S. Bretherton, M. B. Baker, S. Shy, and R. E. Breidenthal, 1990: Buoyancy reversal and cloud-top entrainment instability. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 116, 705–739, doi:10.1002/qj.49711649309.
Stephens, G. L., 2005: Cloud feedbacks in the climate system: A critical review. J. Climate, 18, 237–273.
Stevens, B., 2002: Entrainment in stratocumulus-topped mixed layers. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 128, 2663–2690, doi:10.1256/qj.01.202.
Stevens, B., and Coauthors, 2003a: Dynamics and Chemistry of Marine Stratocumulus—DYCOMS-II. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 84, 579–593.
Stevens, B., and Coauthors, 2003b: On entrainment rates in nocturnal marine stratocumulus. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 129, 3469–3493, doi:10.1256/qj.02.202.
Stevens, B., and Coauthors, 2005: Evaluation of large-eddy simulations via observations of nocturnal marine stratocumulus. Mon. Wea. Rev., 133, 1443–1462.
Stull, R., 1988: An Introduction to Boundary Layer Meteorology. Kluwer Academic, 666 pp.
Van der Dussen, J. J., and Coauthors, 2013: The GASS/EUCLIPSE model intercomparison of the stratocumulus transition as observed during ASTEX: LES results. J. Adv. Model. Earth Syst.,5, 483–499, doi:10.1002/jame.20033.
Wang, Q., and D. H. Lenschow, 1995: An observational study of the role of penetrating cumulus in a marine stratocumulus-topped boundary layer. J. Atmos. Sci., 52, 2778–2787.
Wood, R., 2005: Drizzle in stratiform boundary layer clouds. Part I: Vertical and horizontal structure. J. Atmos. Sci., 62, 3011–3033.
Wood, R., and C. S. Bretherton, 2004: Boundary layer depth, entrainment, and decoupling in the cloud-capped subtropical and tropical marine boundary layer. J. Climate, 17, 3576–3588.
Xiao, H., C.-M. Wu, and C. R. Mechoso, 2011: Buoyancy reversal, decoupling and the transition from stratocumulus to shallow cumulus topped marine boundary layers. Climate Dyn., 37, 971–984, doi:10.1007/s00382-010-0882-3.
Yamaguchi, T., and D. A. Randall, 2008: Large-eddy simulation of evaporatively driven entrainment in cloud-topped mixed layers. J. Atmos. Sci., 65, 1481–1504.