CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,098Climate variability and modelsMeteorological Phenomena and SimulationsAtmospheric aerosols and clouds

Precipitation Characteristics in Eighteen Coupled Climate Models

Dai, Aiguo·2006·Journal of Climate
DOI 10.1175/jcli3884.1
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Monthly and 3-hourly precipitation data from twentieth-century climate simulations by the newest generation of 18 coupled climate system models are analyzed and compared with available observations. The characteristics examined include the mean spatial patterns, intraseasonal-to-interannual and ENSO-related variability, convective versus stratiform precipitation ratio, precipitation frequency and intensity for different precipitation categories, and diurnal cycle. Although most models reproduce the observed broad patterns of precipitation amount and year-to-year variability, models without flux corrections still show an unrealistic double-ITCZ pattern over the tropical Pacific, whereas the flux-corrected models, especially the Meteorological Research Institute (MRI) Coupled Global Climate Model (CGCM; version 2.3.2a), produce realistic rainfall patterns at low latitudes. As in previous generations of coupled models, the rainfall double ITCZs are related to westward expansion of the cold tongue of sea surface temperature (SST) that is observed only over the equatorial eastern Pacific but extends to the central Pacific in the models. The partitioning of the total variance of precipitation among intraseasonal, seasonal, and longer time scales is generally reproduced by the models, except over the western Pacific where the models fail to capture the large intraseasonal variations. Most models produce too much convective (over 95% of total precipitation) and too little stratiform precipitation over most of the low latitudes, in contrast to 45%–65% in convective form in the Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission (TRMM) satellite observations. The biases in the convective versus stratiform precipitation ratio are linked to the unrealistically strong coupling of tropical convection to local SST, which results in a positive correlation between the standard deviation of Niño-3.4 SST and the local convective-to-total precipitation ratio among the models. The models reproduce the percentage of the contribution (to total precipitation) and frequency for moderate precipitation (10–20 mm day−1), but underestimate the contribution and frequency for heavy (>20 mm day−1) and overestimate them for light (<10 mm day−1) precipitation. The newest generation of coupled models still rains too frequently, mostly within the 1–10 mm day−1 category. Precipitation intensity over the storm tracks around the eastern coasts of Asia and North America is comparable to that in the ITCZ (10–12 mm day−1) in the TRMM data, but it is much weaker in the models. The diurnal analysis suggests that warm-season convection still starts too early in these new models and occurs too frequently at reduced intensity in some of the models. The results show that considerable improvements in precipitation simulations are still desirable for the latest generation of the world’s coupled climate models.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1175/jcli3884.1

Cites

74 of 74 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

  • Global models precipitate too frequently with too low a mean precipitation intensity.

    “Global models precipitate too frequently with too low a mean precipitation intensity [20, 82]”

    From Precipitation Extremes Under Climate Change (2015) · cites this paper as [20]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

8 of the 82 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Dai, A.
Affiliations
NSF National Center for Atmospheric Research (US)
Corresponding author
Dai, Aiguo
ORCID
Dai, Aiguo
Venue
Journal of Climate
Publisher
American Meteorological Society
Published
2006-09-15
Volume
19
Issue
18
Pages
4605-4630
ISSN
  • 0894-8755 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-0442
DOI
10.1175/jcli3884.1
OpenAlex
W1980121541
Cited by
1,098
References
82
Citations by year
2026: 28 · 2025: 37 · 2024: 48 · 2023: 70 · 2022: 81 · 2021: 73 · 2020: 71 · 2019: 53 · 2018: 66 · 2017: 67 · 2016: 70 · 2015: 71 · 2014: 70 · 2013: 76 · 2012: 50
FWCI
24.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Climate (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Climate variability and models
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Meteorological Phenomena and Simulations
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Atmospheric aerosols and clouds
Keywords
precipitation characteristics, coupled climate model, precipitation bias, double ITCZ, flux correction, precipitation frequency and intensity, ENSO variability, intraseasonal variability, tropical convection, sea surface temperature, diurnal cycle, heavy rainfall, tropical Pacific, storm tracks, 20th century climate

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