Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 266

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 82 of the 82 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Improved Estimates of Changes in Upper Ocean Salinity and the Hydrological Cycle

Open access
Cheng, Lijing, Trenberth, Kevin E., Gruber, Nicolas, Abraham, John P., Fasullo, John T., Li, Guancheng, Mann, Michael E., Zhao, Xuanming, Zhu, Jiang·2020·Journal of Climate
DOI 10.1175/jcli-d-20-0366.1
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Ocean salinity records the hydrological cycle and its changes, but data scarcity and the large changes in sampling make the reconstructions of long-term salinity changes challenging. Here, we present a new observational estimate of changes in ocean salinity since 1960 from the surface to 2000 m. We overcome some of the inconsistencies present in existing salinity reconstructions by using an interpolation technique that uses information on the spatiotemporal covariability of salinity taken from model simulations. The interpolation technique is comprehensively evaluated using recent Argo-dominated observations through subsample tests. The new product strengthens previous findings that ocean surface and subsurface salinity contrasts have increased (i.e., the existing salinity pattern has amplified). We quantify this contrast by assessing the difference between the salinity in regions of high and low salinity averaged over the top 2000 m, a metric we refer to as SC2000. The increase in SC2000 is highly distinguishable from the sampling error and less affected by interannual variability and sampling error than if this metric was computed just for the surface. SC2000 increased by 1.9% ± 0.6% from 1960 to 1990 and by 3.3% ± 0.4% from 1991 to 2017 (5.2% ± 0.4% for 1960–2017), indicating an acceleration of the pattern amplification in recent decades. Combining this estimate with model simulations, we show that the change in SC2000 since 1960 emerges clearly as an anthropogenic signal from the natural variability. Based on the salinity-contrast metrics and model simulations, we find a water cycle amplification of 2.6% ± 4.4% K −1 since 1960, with the larger error than salinity metric mainly being due to model uncertainty.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1175/jcli-d-20-0366.1

Cites

82 of 82 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cites

Cited by

See all 266

Metadata

Authors
Cheng, L., Trenberth, K. E., Gruber, N., Abraham, J. P., Fasullo, J. T., Li, G., Mann, M. E., Zhao, X., & Zhu, J.
Venue
Journal of Climate
Publisher
American Meteorological Society
Published
2020-12
Volume
33
Issue
23
Pages
10357-10381
ISSN
  • 0894-8755 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-0442
DOI
10.1175/jcli-d-20-0366.1
OpenAlex
W3084051547
Cited by
266
References
82
FWCI
15.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

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.