The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The land surface‐atmosphere interaction: A review based on observational and global modeling perspectives
Abstract
This review discusses the land‐surface‐atmosphere interaction using observations from two North American field experiments (First International Satellite Land Surface Climatology Project Field Experiment (FIFE) and Boreal Ecosystem Atmosphere Study (BOREAS)) and the application of research data to the improvement of land surface and boundary layer parameterizations in the European Centre for Medium‐Range Weather Forecast (ECMWF) global forecast model. Using field data, we discuss some of the diurnal and seasonal feedback loops controlling the net surface radiation and its partition into the surface sensible and latent heat fluxes and the ground heat flux. We consider the impact on the boundary layer evolution and show the changes in the diurnal cycle with soil moisture in midsummer. We contrast the surface energy budget over the tropical oceans with that over both dry and wet land surfaces in summer. Results from a new ECMWF model with four predicted soil layers illustrate the interaction between the soil moisture reservoir, evaporation and precipitation on different timescales and space scales. An analysis of an ensemble of 30‐day integrations for July 1993 (the month of the Mississippi flood) showed a large sensitivity of the monthly precipitation pattern (and amount) to different initial soil moisture conditions. Short‐range forecasts with old and new land surface and boundary layer schemes showed that the new scheme produced much better precipitation forecasts for the central United States because of a more realistic thermodynamic structure, which in turn resulted from improved evaporation in an area that is about 1‐day upstream. The results suggest that some predictability exists in the extended range as a result of the memory of the soil moisture reservoir. We also discuss briefly the problem of soil moisture initialization in a global forecast model and summarize recent experience with nudging of soil moisture at ECMWF and improvements in the surface energy budget coming from the better prediction of clouds.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Miralles, D. G., Gentine, P., Seneviratne, S. I., & Teuling, A. J. (2019) · Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1111/nyas.13912 · Cited by 1,080
The terrestrial segment of soil moisture-climate coupling
Dirmeyer, P. A. (2011) · Geophysical Research Letters · doi:10.1029/2011gl048268 · Cited by 458
MCALPINE, C. A., SYKTUS, J., RYAN, J. G., DEO, R. C., MCKEON, G. M., MCGOWAN, H. A., & PHINN, S. R. (2009) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2486.2009.01939.x · Cited by 152
Thermodynamic Foundations of the Earth System
Kleidon, A. (2016) · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139342742 · Cited by 133
Continuous Single-Column Model Evaluation at a Permanent Meteorological Supersite
Neggers, R. A. J., Siebesma, A. P., & Heus, T. (2012) · Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society · doi:10.1175/bams-d-11-00162.1 · Cited by 117
Metadata
- Authors
- Betts, A. K., Ball, J. H., Beljaars, A. C. M., Miller, M. J., & Viterbo, P. A.
- Venue
- Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres
- Publisher
- American Geophysical Union (AGU)
- Published
- 1996-03
- Volume
- 101
- Issue
- D3
- Pages
- 7209-7225
- ISSN
- 0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1980210658
- Cited by
- 741
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 9.99
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The land surface‐atmosphere interaction: A review based on observational and global modeling perspectives. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/95jd02135
- The paper
- Betts, A. K., Ball, J. H., Beljaars, A. C. M., Miller, M. J., & Viterbo, P. A. (1996). The land surface‐atmosphere interaction: A review based on observational and global modeling perspectives. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres. https://doi.org/10.1029/95jd02135
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.