Professional Documents
Culture Documents
SU ET AL.
4473
TIM LI
International Pacific Research Center, and Department of Meteorology, University of Hawaii at Manoa,
Honolulu, Hawaii
RENHE ZHANG
Chinese Academy of Meteorological Sciences, Beijing, China
(Manuscript received 18 October 2013, in final form 23 February 2014)
ABSTRACT
The initiation and developing mechanisms of four major central Pacific (CP) El Ni~
no events in 1994, 2002,
2004, and 2009 were investigated by analyzing oceanic and atmospheric reanalysis data. A mixed layer heat
budget analysis was conducted and the result shows that the initiation mechanism of the 1994 CP El Ni~
no is
very different from other CP El Ni~
nos in 2000s, while the developing mechanisms are similar among these
events. The initial sea surface temperature (SST) warming of the 1994 El Ni~
no was caused by enhanced solar
radiation, which was related to atmospheric meridional overturning circulation in association with positive
SST anomaly forcing in the subtropical Pacific. The subtropical SST anomalies also induced anticyclonic
surface wind stress curl anomalies, which caused the formation of subsurface warmer waters in the offequatorial regions. The off-equatorial subsurface warmer waters were transported farther equatorward by the
mean subsurface ocean currents, leading to the subsurface warming in the central equatorial Pacific. The
deepened thermocline anomaly at the equator further promoted a positive advective and thermocline
feedback so that the SST anomaly grew. During the initiation phase of the 2000s El Ni~
nos, ocean dynamics
played a dominant role, while the effect of surface heat flux anomalies was minor. Preexisting subsurface
warmer waters appeared in the equatorial region during their initiation phases. Such subsurface anomalies
can cause the SST warming in the central Pacific through induced anomalous eastward zonal currents that
advect high mean SST eastward. This positive zonal advective feedback, along with a positive thermocline
feedback, continued to warm the local SST throughout the developing phase of the 2000s El Ni~
no events.
1. Introduction
The El Ni~
noSouthern Oscillation (ENSO) is the most
pronounced interannual variability in the tropics, and has
far-reaching climatic impacts in many regions over the
world. Based on the spatial pattern of the sea surface
temperature anomalies (SSTAs), the El Ni~
no events are
classified into two types: one is the canonical eastern Pacific (EP) El Ni~
no with maximum SSTA centered in the
eastern equatorial Pacific and another is the central Pacific
(CP) El Ni~
no with maximum SSTA centered in the central
equatorial Pacific (Fu et al. 1986; Trenberth and Stepaniak
2001; Ashok et al. 2007; Kao and Yu 2009; Kug et al. 2009).
The atmospheric responses associated with the two types
of El Ni~
nos exhibit significant differences. For example, the
westerly anomalies during CP El Ni~
no events have a smaller
spatial scale and are located in the western Pacific, farther
westward compared to those in the EP El Ni~
no. Positive
precipitation anomalies appear in the central-eastern
equatorial Pacific during the EP El Ni~
no, but are located
mainly in the western Pacific during the CP El Ni~
no (Kao
and Yu 2009; Kug et al. 2009; Chung and Li 2013).
4474
JOURNAL OF CLIMATE
VOLUME 27
15 JUNE 2014
SU ET AL.
4475
FIG. 1. The evolution of SSTA along the equator (within 58N58S) for four major CP El Ni~
no events. Contour intervals for SSTA are
0.258C. The SST data are from OISST. The initiation phases of the El Ni~
no cases are indicated by gray shading.
4476
JOURNAL OF CLIMATE
VOLUME 27
FIG. 2. Time series of SSTA in the CP region (58N58S, 18081308W). The SST data are from OISST. The temperature anomalies in the mixed layer of GODAS, ORAS4, and SODA 2.1.6 are also shown. The initiation phases for
each of CP El Ni~
no cases are indicated by gray shading.
15 JUNE 2014
SU ET AL.
4477
FIG. 3. Mean temperature anomalies along the equator (within 58N58S) during the initiation phase for each of CP El
Ni~
no events. Contours intervals are 0.58C. The temperature data are from GODAS.
4478
JOURNAL OF CLIMATE
VOLUME 27
the meridional second derivative of Z20 (208C isothermal) anomalies [ug 5 2(g0 /b)(2 h/y2 )]. A local
maximum of positive Z20 anomalies on the equator
results in an anomalous eastward geostrophic current
(u0 . 0).
The positive Z20 anomalies in the central Pacific can
also lead a positive thermocline feedback term. This is
because a positive Z20 anomaly causes a warmer subsurface temperature anomaly, which can further warm
the surface water through anomalous temperature advection by the mean upwelling (w . 0). However, such
a positive thermocline feedback (2wT 0 /z . 0) is
weaker in the central Pacific than in the eastern Pacific.
As the zonal advective feedback is crucial for the
development of the 1994 El Ni~
no, we further examined
the temporal evolution of the anomalous zonal ocean
current in the CP region. The time evolution of the areaaveraged anomalous zonal ocean current obtained from
the aforementioned three ocean assimilation datasets,
an independent ocean current reanalysis dataset of the
Ocean Surface Current Analyses Real-time (OSCAR),
and their ensemble mean were plotted in Fig. 8. The
anomalous zonal current averaged in the CP region is
negative (westward) at the beginning of 1994. After the
initiation phase, the anomalous zonal current changes
to positive (eastward), and reaches its maximum at
the mature phase of the 1994 El Ni~
no. The positive
zonal current anomalies started to develop rapidly in
May 1994, which coincided well with the occurrence of
positive Z20 anomalies at the equator. Thus, a key point
is what caused the development of positive equatorial
FIG. 5. (a) The anomalous velocity potential (contours, with intervals of 0.25 3 1026 m2 s21) and divergent wind
(vectors, in m s21) at 850 hPa and (b) meridional and vertical velocity anomalies along the meridional section averaged over the region of 18081308W during the initiation phase (FebruaryApril) of the 1994 El Ni~
no. The
anomalous SSTA (shading, with intervals of 0.258C) are shown in (a). The contour interval for vertical velocity
anomalies is 0.25 3 1022 Pa s21 in (b).
15 JUNE 2014
4479
SU ET AL.
TABLE 1. The mixed layer temperature tendency terms averaged in the CP region (58N58S, 18081308W) for (a) the initiation phase and
(b) the developing phase of the 1994 El Ni~
no and the 2000s El Ni~
nos. The units are 8C month21. The values are the ensemble mean of
results from three ocean reanalysis datasets (GODAS, ORAS4, and SODA 2.1.6) and three surface heat flux datasets (OAFlux, NCEP2,
and 20CRv2). The terms that have a ratio of mean to standard deviation greater than 1.3 are set bold.
(a)
1994
2000s
DT/dt
Advection
Surface heat
2u0 T/x
2wT0 /z
Solar radiation
0.09
0.17
0.02
0.20
0.10
20.00
20:03 6 0.05
0.13 6 0.10
20:01 6 0.01
0.04 6 0.01
0:11 6 0.02
20.05 6 0.04
(b)
1994
2000s
DT/dt
Advection
Surface heat
2u0 T/x
2wT0 /z
Solar radiation
0.18
0.17
0.35
0.35
20.06
20.23
0.20 6 0.05
0:17 6 0.09
0:03 6 0.00
0:03 6 0.01
0:02 6 0.02
20:01 6 0.04
During the initiation phase, the subsurface temperature anomalies in the western equatorial Pacific were
negative (Figs. 3 and 6a). Hence, the local Z20 deepening
in the central equatorial Pacific was not originated from
the western equatorial Pacific. It is noted that the local
Z20 deepening at the central equatorial Pacific came
from off-equatorial subsurface warming (around 58
108N and 58108S; Fig. 6a). In the meridional-depth
section averaged in the central Pacific (Figs. 9ac),
there is clear evidence that the subsurface temperature
anomalies in the equatorial region changed gradually
FIG. 6. Mean mixed layer (050 m) current anomalies (vectors), temperature anomalies (magenta contour, with
intervals of 18C), and 208C isotherm depth anomalies (shading, with intervals of 2.5 m) during (top) the initiation
phase and (bottom) the developing phase of (left) the 1994 El Ni~
no and (right) the 2000s El Ni~
nos. The climatological
mean temperatures are indicated by gray heavy contours with intervals of 38C. The composite fields are the ensemble
mean of GODAS, ORAS4, and SODA 2.1.6.
4480
JOURNAL OF CLIMATE
VOLUME 27
FIG. 7. Anomalies of zonal currents from the ocean reanalysis data (ensemble mean of GODAS and SODA 2.1.6,
solid line), geostrophic currents (dashed line), and Ekman currents (dotted line) along the equator (averaged within
28N28S) during the developing phase of each El Ni~
no.
equatorward transportation of off-equatorial subsurface warm waters mainly came from the Southern
Hemisphere. The mean equatorward velocity of the
subsurface waters near the central equatorial Pacific
region is about 0.04 m s21, or about 100 km month21.
Hence, it took 35 months for the off-equatorial subsurface waters to be transported to the equatorial region.
The causes of the off-equatorial subsurface warming
were attributed to anomalous surface wind stress forcing. In response to the subtropical warm SSTA in the
North (South) Hemisphere during the initiation phase,
the wind stress anomalies formed an anticyclonic wind
stress curl at both side of the equator (blue shaded areas
in Fig. 10). The anticyclonic wind curl tends to deepen
the local thermocline depth, leading to a positive subsurface warming in the off-equatorial regions.
15 JUNE 2014
SU ET AL.
heat flux anomalies. Table 1 shows that the ocean temperature advection term dominated during the initiation
phase (0.208C month21). Among the advection terms,
major contributions were the zonal advection feedback
term (0.138C month21) and the thermocline feedback
term (0.048C month21) (Table 1). The diagnosis results
from individual CP El Ni~
no events in the 2000s resemble
the composite average shown in Table 1.
During the initiation phase of the 2000s El Ni~
no, there
were preexisting positive subsurface temperature
anomalies in the central equatorial Pacific (Fig. 3), and
the composite Z20 anomaly had a maximum near the
equator (Fig. 6c). The deepened Z20 anomalies at the
equator could cause anomalous eastward geostrophic
currents (figure not shown) and promote a positive zonal
ocean advection feedback. Meanwhile the warmer subsurface waters could be upwelled to the surface to warm
the SST through a positive thermocline feedback.
What induced the initial subsurface warming in the
equatorial Pacific prior to the initiation phase? It is
noted that a few months prior to the initiation phases
of the 2000s El Ni~
nos the ocean thermocline exhibited
a positive anomaly in the western equatorial Pacific.
Associated with the positive thermocline anomaly
were the equatorial easterly anomalies and/or anticyclonic wind stress curl anomalies in the off-equatorial
western Pacific (figure not shown). A further study is
needed to understand the origin of these precursor wind
anomalies.
During the developing phase of the 2000s El Ni~
nos,
the zonal advection feedback and the thermocline
feedback continued to make positive contributions to
4481
the SST warming in the CP region (Table 1). The diagnosis of the zonal current anomaly in an equatorial
b-plane framework shows that the anomalous positive
zonal ocean currents are largely contributed by the
geostrophic current during the developing phase of the
2000s El Ni~
nos (Fig. 7), a similar mechanism operated
during the developing phase of the 1994 El Ni~
no.
After the positive SST anomalies in the central Pacific
were induced, the equatorial subsurface warming was
enhanced through the positive Bjerknes feedback during the developing phase of the 2000s El Ni~
nos. As
a result, the anomalous positive zonal ocean currents
increased gradually from the initiation phase to the developing phase (Figs. 6c,d). Hence, the positive zonal
advective feedback became larger from the initiation
phase to the developing phase. The results obtained
here in general agree with previous studies, such as the
wind-forced thermocline variations (Ashok et al. 2007)
and the zonal advection of the mean SST by anomalous
zonal currents (Kug et al. 2009). In fact, these two
mechanisms operated together during the evolution of
the 2000s CP El Ni~
no events.
Hence, the observational analysis above indicates that
the initiation mechanism of the 1994 El Ni~
no is different
from that of the 2000s El Ni~
nos. The reason for such
a difference lies on the distinctive precursor patterns of
subsurface temperature anomalies in the equatorial region and SSTA patterns in the subtropical regions.
During the initiation phase of the 1994 El Ni~
no, there
were negative subsurface temperature anomalies at the
equator, while there were positive subsurface temperature anomalies during the initiation phase of the 2000s
El Ni~
nos (Figs. 3 and 6a,c). It is the subtropical warm
SSTA that initiated the initial warming in the CP in 1994
through the change of anomalous atmospheric meridional overturning circulation and so-induced shortwave
radiation anomalies and through the generation and
advection of the anomalous subsurface warm waters.
4482
JOURNAL OF CLIMATE
VOLUME 27
FIG. 9. (a)(c) Composite ocean temperature anomalies (contour, with intervals of 0.28C) and climatologic mean meridional ocean
currents (vectors) averaged in the central Pacific (18081308W) during (a) FebruaryApril, (b) MayJuly, and (c) AugustOctober for the
1994 El Ni~
no. (d) The timelatitude section of temperature anomalies along the layers between the base of mixed layer (50 m) and the
s 5 23:1 isopycnal surface averaged over (18081308W). The time is from January 1993 to December 1994. The annual mean depth of
s 5 23:1 isopycnal surface is indicated by magenta lines in (a)(c). The magenta arrows indicate the equatorward movement of the
temperature anomalies. The composite fields are from the ensemble mean of GODAS, ORAS4, and SODA 2.1.6.
15 JUNE 2014
SU ET AL.
4483
anomalies through the westward propagation and reflection of the equatorial Rossby waves (e.g., Suarez and
Schopf 1988) or zonal mean meridional Sverdrup upperocean mass transport (Li 1997; Jin 1997). This study
suggests an alternative way, that is, the off-equatorial
subsurface warm waters can be transported to the equatorial region by climatologic mean subsurface currents.
This subsurface advection mechanism is consistent with
a previous study by Zhang and Rothstein (2000), who
noticed that the off-equatorial subsurface anomalies
could be transported equatorward along isopycnal layers
during the initiation of the 1991/92 El Ni~
no.
One may wonder, given similar precursor thermocline
signals between 2000s CP El Ni~
nos and strong EP El
Ni~
nos such as those in 1982 and 1997, what is the essential cause of distinctive subsequent development
between the two types of El Ni~
nos? We argue that it is
primarily attributed to markedly different anomalous
surface windSST spatial phase relationships between
the two types of El Ni~
nos. For the CP El Ni~
nos, the zonal
wind and precipitation anomalies were located to the
west of a SSTA center, whereas for the 1982 and 1997
EP El Ni~
nos, they were approximately in phase with the
SSTA center (Xiang et al. 2013). As a result, the former
led to local growth of the SSTA in the CP because the
maximum thermocline anomaly is approximately in
phase with the SSTA, and the latter led to the eastward
propagation of the maximum SSTA because a positive
thermocline anomaly appeared to the east of the SSTA
center. The cause of the distinctive zonal windSST
phase relationships is, to a large extent, attributed to the
decadal change of the mean state, in particular, the decadal change of the background zonal SST gradient,
which was demonstrated by Chung and Li (2013) in
idealized atmospheric and oceanic model experiments.
The 1994 CP El Ni~
nos may be regarded as a special case
in which subtropical SSTA forcing had a maximum
vertical motion and shortwave radiation response in the
central equatorial Pacific.
The observational analysis in this study suggests that
there were different evolution features of the recorded El
Ni~
no events and that the initiation mechanisms
for individual El Ni~
nos could be different. For a particular
El Ni~
no type, its formation may be due to a single process
or the combination of several processes. Thus, it is necessary to investigate the initiation/developing mechanisms
for each of the El Ni~
nos. The results derived from the
current analysis have important implication for seasonal
climate prediction. It has been shown by many previous
studies (e.g., Ashok et al. 2007) that seasonal rainfall
anomalies over the Asian monsoon region have distinctive characteristics between the CP and EP El Ni~
nos.
Tropical cyclone activity is also markedly different in the
4484
JOURNAL OF CLIMATE
VOLUME 27
FIG. 11. Schematic for the initiation/developing mechanisms of two central Pacific El Ni~
no
groups.
15 JUNE 2014
SU ET AL.
Balmaseda, M. A., K. Mogensen, and A. T. Weaver, 2013: Evaluation of the ECMWF ocean reanalysis system ORAS4. Quart.
J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 139, 11321161, doi:10.1002/qj.2063.
Capotondi, A., M. A. Alexander, C. Deser, and M. J. McPhaden,
2005: Anatomy and decadal evolution of the Pacific subtropical
tropical cells (STCs). J. Climate, 18, 37393758, doi:10.1175/
JCLI3496.1.
Carton, J. A., and B. S. Giese, 2008: A reanalysis of ocean climate
using Simple Ocean Data Assimilation (SODA). Mon. Wea.
Rev., 136, 29993017, doi:10.1175/2007MWR1978.1.
Chen, G., and C. Y. Tam, 2010: Different impacts of two kinds of
Pacific Ocean warming on tropical cyclone frequency over the
western North Pacific. Geophys. Res. Lett., 37, L01803,
doi:10.1029/2009GL041708.
Chung, P.-H., and T. Li, 2013: Interdecadal relationship between
the mean state and El Ni~
no types. J. Climate, 26, 361379,
doi:10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00106.1.
, and , 2014: Characteristics of tropical cyclone genesis in
the western North Pacific during the developing and decaying
phases of two types of El Ni~
no. J. Trop. Meteor., in press.
Fu, C., H. F. Diaz, and J. O. Fletcher, 1986: Characteristics
of the response of sea surface temperature in the central
Pacific associated with warm episodes of the Southern
Oscillation. Mon. Wea. Rev., 114, 17161739, doi:10.1175/
1520-0493(1986)114,1716:COTROS.2.0.CO;2.
Hong, C.-C., Y.-H. Li, T. Li, and M.-Y. Lee, 2011: Impacts of
central Pacific and eastern Pacific El Ni~
nos on tropical cyclone
tracks over the western North Pacific. Geophys. Res. Lett., 38,
L16712, doi:10.1029/2011GL048821.
Jin, F.-F., 1997: An equatorial ocean recharge paradigm for ENSO.
Part I: Conceptual model. J. Atmos. Sci., 54, 811829,
doi:10.1175/1520-0469(1997)054,0811:AEORPF.2.0.CO;2.
Kanamitsu, M., W. Ebisuzaki, J. Woollen, S.-K. Yang, J. J. Hnilo,
M. Fiorino, and G. L. Potter, 2002: NCEPDOE AMIP-II
Reanalysis (R-2). Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 83, 16311643,
doi:10.1175/BAMS-83-11-1631.
Kao, H.-Y., and J.-Y. Yu, 2009: Contrasting eastern Pacific and
central Pacific types of ENSO. J. Climate, 22, 615632,
doi:10.1175/2008JCLI2309.1.
Kug, J.-S., F.-F. Jin, and S.-I. An, 2009: Two types of El Ni~
no
events: Cold tongue El Ni~
no and warm pool El Ni~
no. J. Climate, 22, 14991515, doi:10.1175/2008JCLI2624.1.
Li, T., 1997: Phase transition of the El Ni~
noSouthern Oscillation:
A stationary SST mode. J. Atmos. Sci., 54, 28722887,
doi:10.1175/1520-0469(1997)054,2872:PTOTEN.2.0.CO;2.
Liebmann, B., and C. A. Smith, 1996: Description of a complete
(interpolated) outgoing longwave radiation dataset. Bull.
Amer. Meteor. Soc., 77, 12751277.
4485
Copyright of Journal of Climate is the property of American Meteorological Society and its
content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email
articles for individual use.