Cited by 258Climate variability and modelsGeology and Paleoclimatology ResearchMeteorological Phenomena and Simulations

The cause of the fragile relationship between the Pacific El Nino and the Atlantic Nino.

Chang, Ping, Fang, Yue, Saravanan, R., Ji, Link, Seidel, Howard·2006·Nature

Abstract

El Niño, the most prominent climate fluctuation at seasonal-to-interannual timescales, has long been known to have a remote impact on climate variability in the tropical Atlantic Ocean, but a robust influence is found only in the northern tropical Atlantic region. Fluctuations in the equatorial Atlantic are dominated by the Atlantic Niño, a phenomenon analogous to El Niño, characterized by irregular episodes of anomalous warming during the boreal summer. The Atlantic Niño strongly affects seasonal climate prediction in African countries bordering the Gulf of Guinea. The relationship between El Niño and the Atlantic Niño is ambiguous and inconsistent. Here we combine observational and modelling analysis to show that the fragile relationship is a result of destructive interference between atmospheric and oceanic processes in response to El Niño. The net effect of El Niño on the Atlantic Niño depends not only on the atmospheric response that propagates the El Niño signal to the tropical Atlantic, but also on a dynamic ocean-atmosphere interaction in the equatorial Atlantic that works against the atmospheric response. These results emphasize the importance of having an improved ocean-observing system in the tropical Atlantic, because our ability to predict the Atlantic Niño will depend not only on our knowledge of conditions in the tropical Pacific, but also on an accurate estimate of the state of the upper ocean in the equatorial Atlantic.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nature05053

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • There is significant external forcing of TAV from ENSO, the North Atlantic Oscillation, and the South Atlantic Anticyclone.

    “There is also significant external forcing of TAV from ENSO, the North Atlantic Oscillation, and the South Atlantic Anticyclone (Enfield and Mayer, 1997;Czaja et al., 2002;Chang et al., 2006;Illig and Dewitte, 2006;Lübbecke et al., 2010;Lübbecke and McPhaden, 2012).”

    From The tropical atlantic observing system (2019) · cites this paper as Chang et al., 2006

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 22 · Cited by 258

Authors
Chang, P., Fang, Y., Saravanan, R., Ji, L., & Seidel, H.
Affiliations
Texas A&M University (US)
Corresponding author
Chang, Ping
Venue
Nature
Published
2006-09
Volume
443
Issue
7109
Pages
324-328
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
OpenAlex
W2080553664
Cited by
258
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 27 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 9
FWCI
5.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nature (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Climate variability and models
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Geology and Paleoclimatology Research
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Meteorological Phenomena and Simulations
Keywords
Atlantic Niño, equatorial Atlantic, ocean-atmosphere interaction, seasonal climate prediction, coupled climate model, destructive interference

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