1. Introduction
In recent decades, the temperature of the Southern Hemisphere polar stratosphere has undergone pronounced changes, as observed in radiosonde records over Antarctica for levels up to ~30 hPa. The data show substantial cooling in the spring stratosphere above 300 hPa since about 1985 with maximum cooling of ~10 K in the lower stratosphere (~100 hPa) in November (Randel and Wu 1999). Smaller magnitude cooling extends throughout summer. The cooling increases the latitudinal temperature gradient, resulting in a strengthening of the stratospheric vortex (Thompson and Solomon 2002), as well as a subsequent delay in its springtime breakup (Haigh and Roscoe 2009).
The dominant cause for these temperature trends is the springtime Antarctic ozone hole (Gillett and Thompson 2003), which extends from around 150 to 30 hPa, with maximum ozone losses exceeding 90% at 70 hPa around the late 1990s (Solomon et al. 2005). Although it is clear that ozone loss has a direct impact on the stratosphere by means of radiative cooling, a number of modeling studies (e.g., Christiansen et al. 1997; Manzini et al. 2003; Li et al. 2010; McLandress et al. 2010; Orr et al. 2012) suggest that it can also lead to changes to dynamical heating of the polar stratosphere, which occurs when air associated with the downwelling part of the wave-driven Brewer–Dobson circulation is compressed and adiabatically heated. In a previous study (Orr et al. 2012), the authors used momentum budget analysis within the transformed Eulerian mean (TEM) framework (e.g., Dunkerton et al. 1981) to show that the changes in the zonally averaged circulation associated with the ozone hole were consistent with dynamical forcing changes. In this paper, we determine the contributions of radiative and dynamical processes to the associated temperature changes. Our results are important to explain the timing and evolution of the Southern Hemisphere stratospheric vortex in recent decades and to help understand why most current climate models exhibit a later than observed breakup of the vortex (e.g., Gillett and Thompson 2003; Eyring et al. 2006).
2. Method of analysis, model, and reanalysis dataset
a. Method of analysis
























b. Model
The model simulations are those of Orr et al. (2012). The runs are described in detail in this work. The model is the atmosphere-only component of the Hadley Centre Global Environmental Model, version 3 (HadGEM3-A) (Martin et al. 2006). The horizontal resolution is 1.25° × 1.875° with 85 vertical levels extending from the surface to ~85 km. Following 6 yr of spinup, a control (perturbed) simulation was run for 24 yr forced with a seasonally varying ozone distribution representative of the pre-ozone-hole (ozone hole) period. Both simulations were run with the same climatological sea surface temperatures. The temperature response is evaluated by examining mean differences between the two simulations. Significance is tested using a one-sided Student’s t test (assuming 24 degrees of freedom).
c. Reanalysis dataset
The reanalysis dataset is the 40-yr European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts Re-Analysis (ERA-40) (Uppala et al. 2005) and the impact of ozone depletion on temperature change is evaluated by examining 23-yr linear trends (1979–2001) as it has been demonstrated that most of the increase in ozone loss occurred within this period (Huck et al. 2007). Reanalysis trends were computed because the 23-yr sample size enabled statistically significant changes to be determined. Six-hourly fields of temperature were retrieved at a resolution of 2° × 2° at 17 vertical pressure levels from 1000 to 10 hPa. The 




3. Results
a. Model differences
Figure 1 compares the daily evolution for austral late springtime/early summertime (i.e., November–December) between the model difference and reanalysis trend of zonally averaged temperature 






Simulated (thick lines) and reanalysis (thin lines) daily changes of zonally averaged temperature 



Citation: Journal of Climate 26, 2; 10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00480.1



Latitude–height cross sections of the simulated changes of the zonally averaged terms in Eq. (2) for (top) to (bottom) the onset (2–16 Nov), growth (17 Nov–1 Dec), decline (2–16 Dec) and decay (17 Dec–1 Jan) stages: from (left) to (right) temperature tendency 



Citation: Journal of Climate 26, 2; 10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00480.1
The TEM formulation is strictly regarded as being applicable to disturbances of the zonally averaged circulation that evolve over sufficiently long time scales for the condition of quasi steadiness to be approached (Haynes et al. 1991). Despite this, the methodology has been demonstrated to be suitable for studying relatively transient events in the stratosphere such as sudden stratospheric warmings (e.g., Dunkerton et al. 1981; Palmer 1981). Similarly, we argue that this methodology is suitable here due to the use of 15-day averaging periods and differences. In Fig. 2 this is particularly evident during the onset and growth stages, which show quasi steadiness in that 




During the onset stage, 









During the growth stage, the 






During the decline stage, 





During the decay stage, the 




The 
To investigate this further, Fig. 1 also includes the temporal evolution of the model difference of zonally averaged vertical Eliassen–Palm (EP) flux 







b. Reanalysis trends
Figure 3 is as Fig. 2 but shows trends from reanalysis/SLIMCAT. Note the same notation is used to describe the trends (which are expressed as the change per decade) as was used above to describe the model differences, that is, 
















As in Fig. 2 but showing 23-yr linear trends (1979–2001) of ERA-40 temperature tendency, diagnosed radiative heating rate from SLIMCAT, and dynamical heating rate (computed as the residual). The same notation is used to describe the trends (expressed as the change per decade) as was used to describe the model differences: that is, 





Citation: Journal of Climate 26, 2; 10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00480.1
4. Conclusions
Our analysis clarifies the importance of dynamical heating in modulating recent stratospheric temperature trends within the Antarctic ozone hole. First, in late spring much of the radiative cooling above ~200 hPa is canceled by increased dynamical heating; that is, the actual cooling is due to subtle differences between two large opposing terms. Second, in late spring the radiative cooling is enhanced by a decrease in dynamical heating between ~300 and ~100 hPa; that is, changes to dynamical heating drive the migration of cooling downward to the tropopause. Third, during early summer the radiative cooling is overwhelmed by increased dynamical heating, resulting in the erosion of the anomalously cold temperatures. These results suggest that there will be subtle changes in the temporal evolution of the thermal balance as one or other term undergoes modest changes from year to year as the century progresses.
The lack of balance between the model difference in actual temperature tendency and the net heating rate during the onset and growth stages suggests that some additional dynamical heating is required—that is, additional wave drag. This may be partly due to ignoring the effects of unresolved gravity wave drag in Eq. (2) as the model difference fields showed an increase in parameterized gravity wave drag during November (not shown).
Acknowledgments
The comments of the two anonymous reviewers contributed considerably to the improvement of the original manuscript. Thanks are given to P. Braesicke, M. Chipperfield, P. Haynes, and M. McIntyre for useful discussions and to L. Abraham, S. Hardiman, S. Osprey, and P. Telford for helping create the ozone climatologies.
REFERENCES
Briegleb, B. P., 1992: Delta-Eddington approximation for solar radiation in the NCAR Community Climate Model. J. Geophys. Res., 97, 7603–7612.
Chipperfield, M. P., 2006: New version of the TOMCAT/SLIMCAT off-line chemical transport model: Intercomparison of stratospheric tracer experiments. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 132, 1179–1203.
Christiansen, B., A. Guldberg, A. W. Hansen, and L. P. Rishøjgaard, 1997: On the response of a three-dimensional general circulation model to imposed changes in ozone distribution. J. Geophys. Res., 102, 13 051–13 077.
Dunkerton, T., C.-P. F. Hsu, and M. E. McIntyre, 1981: Some Eulerian and Lagrangian diagnostics for a model stratospheric warming. J. Atmos. Sci., 38, 819–843.
Eyring, V., and Coauthors, 2006: Assessment of temperature, trace species, and ozone in chemistry-climate model simulations of the recent past. J. Geophys. Res., 111, D22308, doi:10.1029/2006JD007327.
Feng, W., and Coauthors, 2005: Three-dimensional model study of the Arctic ozone loss in 2002/03 and comparison with 1999/2000 and 2003/04. Atmos. Chem. Phys., 5, 139–152.
Feng, W., M. P. Chipperfield, M. Dorf, K. Pfeilsticker, and P. Ricaud, 2007: Mid-latitude ozone changes: Studies with a 3-D CTM forced by ERA-40 analyses. Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 2357–2369.
Fusco, A. C., and M. L. Salby, 1999: Interannual variations of total ozone and their relationship to variations of planetary wave activity. J. Climate, 12, 1619–1629.
Gillett, N. P., and D. W. J. Thompson, 2003: Simulation of recent Southern Hemisphere climate change. Science, 302, 273–275.
Haigh, J. D., and H. R. Roscoe, 2009: The final warming date of the Antarctic polar vortex and influences on its interannual variability. J. Climate, 22, 5809–5819.
Haynes, P. H., C. J. Marks, M. E. McIntyre, T. G. Shepherd, and K. P. Shine, 1991: On the “downward control” of extratropical diabatic circulations by eddy-induced mean zonal forces. J. Atmos. Sci., 48, 651–678.
Huck, P. E., S. Tilmes, G. E. Bodeker, W. J. Randel, A. J. McDonald, and H. Nakajima, 2007: An improved measure of ozone depletion in the Antarctic stratosphere. J. Geophys. Res., 112, D11104, doi:10.1029/2006JD007860.
Li, F., P. A. Newman, and R. S. Stolarski, 2010: Relationships between the Brewer-Dobson circulation and the southern annular mode during austral summer in coupled chemistry-climate model simulations. J. Geophys. Res., 115, D15106, doi:10.1029/2009JD012876.
Manzini, E., B. Steil, C. Brühl, M. A. Giorgetta, and K. Kruger, 2003: A new interactive chemistry-climate model: 2. Sensitivity of the middle atmosphere to ozone depletion and increase in greenhouse gases and implications for recent stratospheric cooling. J. Geophys. Res., 108, 4429, doi:10.1029/2002JD002977.
Martin, G. M., M. A. Ringer, V. D. Pope, A. Jones, C. Dearden, and T. J. Hinton, 2006: The physical properties of the atmosphere in the new Hadley Centre Global Environmental Model (HadGEM1). Part I: Model description and global climatology. J. Climate, 19, 1274–1301.
McLandress, C., A. I. Jonsson, D. A. Plummer, M. C. Reader, J. F. Scinocca, and T. G. Shepherd, 2010: Separating the dynamical effects of climate change and ozone depletion. Part I: Southern Hemisphere stratosphere. J. Climate, 23, 5002–5020.
Orr, A., P. Bechtold, J. Scinocca, M. Ern, and M. Janiskova, 2010: Improved middle atmosphere climate and forecasts in the ECMWF model through a nonorographic gravity wave drag parameterization. J. Climate, 23, 5905–5926.
Orr, A., T. J. Bracegirdle, J. Scott Hosking, T. Jung, J. D. Haigh, T. Phillips, and W. Feng, 2012: Possible dynamical mechanisms for Southern Hemisphere climate change due to the ozone hole. J. Atmos. Sci., 69, 2917–2932.
Palmer, T. N., 1981: Diagnostic study of a wavenumber-2 stratospheric sudden warming in a transformed Eulerian-mean formalism. J. Atmos. Sci., 38, 844–855.
Randel, W. J., and F. Wu, 1999: Cooling of the Arctic and Antarctic polar stratospheres in response to ozone depletion. J. Climate, 12, 1467–1479.
Solomon, S., R. W. Portmann, T. Sasaki, D. J. Hofmann, and D. W. J. Thompson, 2005: Four decades of ozonesonde measurements over Antarctica. J. Geophys. Res., 110, D21311, doi:10.1029/2005JD005917.
Thompson, D. W. J., and S. Solomon, 2002: Interpretation of recent Southern Hemisphere climate change. Science, 296, 895–899.
Uppala, S. M., and Coauthors, 2005: The ERA-40 Re-Analysis. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 131, 2961–3012.
Wohltmann, I., and M. Rex, 2008: Improvement of vertical and residual velocities in pressure or hybrid sigma-pressure coordinates in analysis data in the stratosphere. Atmos. Chem. Phys., 8, 265–272.
WMO, 2007: Scientific assessment of ozone depletion: 2006. World Meteorological Organization Global Ozone Research and Monitoring Project Rep. 50, 572 pp.
