Journal cover Journal topic
The Cryosphere An interactive open-access journal of the European Geosciences Union
Journal topic

Journal metrics

Journal metrics

  • IF value: 4.790 IF 4.790
  • IF 5-year value: 5.921 IF 5-year
    5.921
  • CiteScore value: 5.27 CiteScore
    5.27
  • SNIP value: 1.551 SNIP 1.551
  • IPP value: 5.08 IPP 5.08
  • SJR value: 3.016 SJR 3.016
  • Scimago H <br class='hide-on-tablet hide-on-mobile'>index value: 63 Scimago H
    index 63
  • h5-index value: 51 h5-index 51
Discussion papers
https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-2019-327
© Author(s) 2020. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-2019-327
© Author(s) 2020. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Submitted as: brief communication 12 Feb 2020

Submitted as: brief communication | 12 Feb 2020

Review status
This preprint is currently under review for the journal TC.

Brief communication : Evaluating Antarctic precipitation in ERA5and CMIP6 against CloudSat observations

Marie-Laure Roussel1, Florentin Lemonnier1, Christophe Genthon1, and Gerhard Krinner2 Marie-Laure Roussel et al.
  • 1Laboratoire de Météorologie Dynamique, Institut Pierre-Simon Laplace, Sorbonne Université / CNRS / École Normale Supérieure – PSL Research University / École Polytechnique – IPP, Paris, France
  • 2Institut des Géosciences de l’Environnement, CNRS, Univ. Grenoble Alpes, 38000 Grenoble, France

Abstract. CMIP5, CMIP6 and ERA5 antarctic precipitations are evaluated against CloudSat data. At continental and regional scales, ERA5 and CMIP models median are biased high, with insignificant improvement from CMIP5 to CMIP6 despite near-surface temperature improvement. However, less models yield outlying overestimation in CMIP6. AMIP configurations perform better than historical ones and, surprisingly, relative errors in areas of complex topography are higher (up to 50 %) in the 5 higher resolution models. The seasonal cycle is well reproduced by the median of the CMIP models but not by ERA5. There is limited progress from CMIP5 to CMIP6 and still room for improvement.

Marie-Laure Roussel et al.

Interactive discussion

Status: open (until 10 Apr 2020)
Status: open (until 10 Apr 2020)
AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment
[Subscribe to comment alert] Printer-friendly Version - Printer-friendly version Supplement - Supplement

Marie-Laure Roussel et al.

Marie-Laure Roussel et al.

Viewed

Total article views: 215 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total BibTeX EndNote
146 66 3 215 3 3
  • HTML: 146
  • PDF: 66
  • XML: 3
  • Total: 215
  • BibTeX: 3
  • EndNote: 3
Views and downloads (calculated since 12 Feb 2020)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 12 Feb 2020)

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 161 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 161 with geography defined and 0 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 

Cited

Saved

No saved metrics found.

Discussed

No discussed metrics found.
Latest update: 05 Apr 2020
Publications Copernicus
Download
Short summary
The Antarctic precipitation is evaluated against space radar data in the most recent climate model intercomparison CMIP6 and reanalysis ERA5. The seasonal cycle is mostly well reproduced but relative errors are higher in areas of complex topography, particularly in the higher resolution models. At continental and regional scales all results are biased high, with no significant progress in the more recent models. Predicting Antarctic contribution to sea-level still requires model improvements.
The Antarctic precipitation is evaluated against space radar data in the most recent climate...
Citation