MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3184958363 · doi:10.5194/wcd-2021-43

Twenty-first century Southern Hemisphere impacts of ozone recovery and climate change from the stratosphere to the ocean

2021· preprint· en· W3184958363 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ioana Ivanciu, Katja Matthes, Arne Biastoch, Sebastian Wahl, Jan Harlaß

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric Ozone and Climate
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung
KeywordsStratosphereClimatologyOzone depletionGreenhouse gasWesterliesEnvironmental scienceAtmospheric sciencesOzone layerSouthern HemisphereNorthern HemisphereOzoneClimate changeAtmospheric circulationAtmosphere (unit)GeologyOceanographyMeteorologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Changes in stratospheric ozone concentrations and increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases (GHGs) alter the temperature structure of the atmosphere and drive changes in the atmospheric and oceanic circulation. We systematically investigate the impacts of ozone recovery and increasing GHGs on the atmospheric and oceanic circulation in the Southern Hemisphere during the twenty-first century using a unique coupled ocean-atmosphere climate model with interactive ozone chemistry and enhanced oceanic resolution. We use the high emission scenario SSP5-8.5 for GHGs under which the springtime Antarctic total column ozone returns to 1980s levels by 2048 in our model, warming the lower stratosphere and strengthening the stratospheric westerly winds. Novel results of this study include the springtime stratospheric circulation response to GHGs, which is characterized by changes of opposing sign over the Eastern and Western Hemispheres, the opposing responses of the Agulhas leakage to ozone recovery and increasing GHGs, and large uncertainties in the prediction of atmospheric and oceanic circulation changes related to whether the ozone field is prescribed or calculated interactively. By performing a thorough spatial analysis of the predicted changes in the stratospheric dynamics, we find that the GHG effect during spring exhibits a strong dipole pattern, which contrasts the GHG effect during the rest of the year and which was previously not reported, as it cannot be detected when zonal means are considered. Over the Western Hemisphere, GHGs drive a warming of the lower stratosphere and a weakening of the westerlies, while over the Eastern Hemisphere they drive a cooling and a strengthening of the westerlies. Associated with these changes, planetary waves break higher up in the stratosphere over the Eastern Hemisphere, strengthening the polar downwelling and inducing dynamical warming in the upper stratosphere, while weakening the downwelling and inducing dynamical cooling in the lower stratosphere. The opposite occurs over the Western Hemisphere. Because the changes in the Western Hemisphere dominate during November in our model, we find that during this month GHGs lead to a weakening of the lower branch of the Brewer-Dobson Circulation, reinforcing the weakening caused by ozone recovery. At the surface, the westerly winds weaken and shift equatorward due to ozone recovery, driving a weak decrease in the transport of the Antarctic Circumpolar Current and in the Agulhas leakage, which transports warm and saline waters from the Indian into the Atlantic Ocean. The increasing GHGs drive changes in the opposite direction that overwhelm the ozone effect. The total changes at the surface and in the oceanic circulation are nevertheless weaker in the presence of ozone recovery than those induced by GHGs alone, highlighting the importance of the Montreal Protocol in mitigating some of the impacts of climate change. We additionally compare the combined effect of interactively calculated ozone recovery and increasing GHGs with their combined effect in an ensemble in which we prescribe the CMIP6 ozone field. This second ensemble simulates a weaker ozone effect in all the examined fields. The magnitude of the difference between the simulated changes at the surface and in the oceanic circulation in the two ensembles is as large as the ozone effect itself. This shows that the choice between prescribing or calculating the ozone field interactively can affect the prediction of changes not only in the atmospheric, but also in the oceanic circulation.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.194 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAtmospheric Ozone and Climate→French-language works237,207→