Sources of multi-decadal variability in Arctic sea ice extent

The observed dramatic decrease in September sea ice extent (SIE) has been widely discussed in the scientific literature. Though there is qualitative agreement between observations and ensemble members of the Third Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP3), it is concerning that the observed trend (1979–2010) is not captured by any ensemble member. The potential sources of this discrepancy include: observational uncertainty, physical model limitations and vigorous natural climate variability. The latter has received less attention and is difficult to assess using the relatively short observational sea ice records. In this study multi-centennial pre-industrial control simulations with five CMIP3 climate models are used to investigate the role that the Arctic oscillation (AO), the Atlantic multi-decadal oscillation (AMO) and the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation (AMOC) play in decadal sea ice variability. Further, we use the models to determine the impact that these sources of variability have had on SIE over both the era of satellite observation (1979–2010) and an extended observational record (1953–2010). There is little evidence of a relationship between the AO and SIE in the models. However, we find that both the AMO and AMOC indices are significantly correlated with SIE in all the models considered. Using sensitivity statistics derived from the models, assuming a linear relationship, we attribute 0.5–3.1%/decade of the 10.1%/decade decline in September SIE (1979–2010) to AMO driven variability.

Photosynthetic activity and early growth of four Cacao genotypes as influenced by different shade regimes under West African dry and wet season conditions

The physiological performance of four cacao clones was examined under three artificial shade regimes over the course of a year in Ghana. Plants under light shade had significantly higher photosynthetic rates in the rainy seasons whereas in the dry season there was a trend of higher photosynthetic rates under heavy shade. The results imply that during the wet seasons light was the main limiting factor to photosynthesis whereas in the dry season vapour pressure deficit was the major factor limiting photosynthesis through stomatal regulation. Leaf area was generally lower under heavier shade but the difference between shade treatments varied between clones. Such differences in leaf area allocation appeared to underlie genotypic differences in final biomass production in response to shade. The results suggest that shade for young cacao should be provided based on the current ambient environment and genotype.

Using paleo-climate comparisons to constrain future projections in CMIP5

We present a description of the theoretical framework and "best practice" for using the paleo-climate model component of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (Phase 5) (CMIP5) to constrain future projections of climate using the same models. The constraints arise from measures of skill in hindcasting paleo-climate changes from the present over 3 periods: the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) (21 thousand years before present, ka), the mid-Holocene (MH) (6 ka) and the Last Millennium (LM) (850–1850 CE). The skill measures may be used to validate robust patterns of climate change across scenarios or to distinguish between models that have differing outcomes in future scenarios. We find that the multi-model ensemble of paleo-simulations is adequate for addressing at least some of these issues. For example, selected benchmarks for the LGM and MH are correlated to the rank of future projections of precipitation/temperature or sea ice extent to indicate that models that produce the best agreement with paleoclimate information give demonstrably different future results than the rest of the models. We also find that some comparisons, for instance associated with model variability, are strongly dependent on uncertain forcing timeseries, or show time dependent behaviour, making direct inferences for the future problematic. Overall, we demonstrate that there is a strong potential for the paleo-climate simulations to help inform the future projections and urge all the modeling groups to complete this subset of the CMIP5 runs.

Evaluation of CMIP5 palaeo-simulations to improve climate projections

Structural differences among models account for much of the uncertainty in projected climate changes, at least until the mid-twenty-first century. Recent observations encompass too limited a range of climate variability to provide a robust test of the ability to simulate climate changes. Past climate changes provide a unique opportunity for out-of-sample evaluation of model performance. Palaeo-evaluation has shown that the large-scale changes seen in twenty-first-century projections, including enhanced land–sea temperature contrast, latitudinal amplification, changes in temperature seasonality and scaling of precipitation with temperature, are likely to be realistic. Although models generally simulate changes in large-scale circulation sufficiently well to shift regional climates in the right direction, they often do not predict the correct magnitude of these changes. Differences in performance are only weakly related to modern-day biases or climate sensitivity, and more sophisticated models are not better at simulating climate changes. Although models correctly capture the broad patterns of climate change, improvements are required to produce reliable regional projections.

Using palaeo-climate comparisons to constrain future projections in CMIP5

We present a selection of methodologies for using the palaeo-climate model component of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (Phase 5) (CMIP5) to attempt to constrain future climate projections using the same models. The constraints arise from measures of skill in hindcasting palaeo-climate changes from the present over three periods: the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) (21 000 yr before present, ka), the mid-Holocene (MH) (6 ka) and the Last Millennium (LM) (850–1850 CE). The skill measures may be used to validate robust patterns of climate change across scenarios or to distinguish between models that have differing outcomes in future scenarios. We find that the multi-model ensemble of palaeo-simulations is adequate for addressing at least some of these issues. For example, selected benchmarks for the LGM and MH are correlated to the rank of future projections of precipitation/temperature or sea ice extent to indicate that models that produce the best agreement with palaeo-climate information give demonstrably different future results than the rest of the models. We also explore cases where comparisons are strongly dependent on uncertain forcing time series or show important non-stationarity, making direct inferences for the future problematic. Overall, we demonstrate that there is a strong potential for the palaeo-climate simulations to help inform the future projections and urge all the modelling groups to complete this subset of the CMIP5 runs.