The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Soil Moisture Memory in AGCM Simulations: Analysis of Global Land–Atmosphere Coupling Experiment (GLACE) Data
Open accessAbstract
Soil moisture memory is a key aspect of land–atmosphere interaction and has major implications for seasonal forecasting. Because of a severe lack of soil moisture observations on most continents, existing analyses of global-scale soil moisture memory have relied previously on atmospheric general circulation model (AGCM) experiments, with derived conclusions that are probably model dependent. The present study is the first survey examining and contrasting global-scale (near) monthly soil moisture memory characteristics across a broad range of AGCMs. The investigated simulations, performed with eight different AGCMs, were generated as part of the Global Land–Atmosphere Coupling Experiment. Overall, the AGCMs present relatively similar global patterns of soil moisture memory. Outliers are generally characterized by anomalous water-holding capacity or biases in radiation forcing. Water-holding capacity is highly variable among the analyzed AGCMs and is the main factor responsible for intermodel differences in soil moisture memory. Therefore, further studies on this topic should focus on the accurate characterization of this parameter for present AGCMs. Despite the range in the AGCMs’ behavior, the average soil moisture memory characteristics of the models appear realistic when compared to available in situ soil moisture observations. An analysis of the processes controlling soil moisture memory in the AGCMs demonstrates that it is mostly controlled by two effects: evaporation’s sensitivity to soil moisture, which increases with decreasing soil moisture content, and runoff’s sensitivity to soil moisture, which increases with increasing soil moisture content. Soil moisture memory is highest in regions of medium soil moisture content, where both effects are small.
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
Seasonal Drought Prediction: Advances, Challenges, and Future Prospects
Hao, Z., Singh, V. P., & Xia, Y. (2018) · Reviews of Geophysics · doi:10.1002/2016rg000549 · Cited by 607
Persistence of heat waves and its link to soil moisture memory
Lorenz, R., Jaeger, E. B., & Seneviratne, S. I. (2010) · Geophysical Research Letters · doi:10.1029/2010gl042764 · Cited by 277
Self-citationMateria, S., Ardilouze, C., Prodhomme, C., Donat, M. G., Benassi, M., Doblas-Reyes, F. J., Peano, D., Caron, L.-P., Ruggieri, P., & Gualdi, S. (2022) · Climate Dynamics · doi:10.1007/s00382-021-05815-8 · Cited by 48
Dagon, K., & Schrag, D. P. (2016) · Journal of Climate · doi:10.1175/jcli-d-15-0472.1 · Cited by 48
Metadata
- Authors
- Seneviratne, S. I., Koster, R. D., Guo, Z., Dirmeyer, P. A., Kowalczyk, E., Lawrence, D., Liu, P., Mocko, D., Lu, C.-H., Oleson, K. W., & Verseghy, D.
- Venue
- Journal of Hydrometeorology
- Publisher
- American Meteorological Society
- Published
- 2006-10-01
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1090-1112
- ISSN
- 1525-7541 (ISSN-L)
- 1525-755X
- OpenAlex
- W2056791235
- Cited by
- 318
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 8.71
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Soil Moisture Memory in AGCM Simulations: Analysis of Global Land–Atmosphere Coupling Experiment (GLACE) Data. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1175/jhm533.1
- The paper
- Seneviratne, S. I., Koster, R. D., Guo, Z., Dirmeyer, P. A., Kowalczyk, E., Lawrence, D., Liu, P., Mocko, D., Lu, C.-H., Oleson, K. W., & Verseghy, D. (2006). Soil Moisture Memory in AGCM Simulations: Analysis of Global Land–Atmosphere Coupling Experiment (GLACE) Data. Journal of Hydrometeorology. https://doi.org/10.1175/jhm533.1
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.