8,272
Views
2
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Research Article

Radiosonde comparison of ERA5 and ERA-Interim reanalysis datasets over tropical oceans

ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon, & ORCID Icon
Pages 1-7 | Received 10 Sep 2020, Accepted 06 May 2021, Published online: 26 May 2021
 

Abstract

After the release of the ERA-Interim reanalysis, many changes have been made to the Integrated Forecasting System model and data-assimilation system, resulting in an improved reanalysis, ERA5. One of the changes in the model allows the model version in ERA5 to represent the moisture sensitivity of deep convection more realistically than the model version in ERA-Interim. A previous modeling study showed that this change alone improved the representation of the tropical atmosphere, e.g. tropical variability and precipitation distribution. Here we compare the vertical structures of average temperature and moisture over tropical oceans in ERA5, ERA-Interim and radiosonde observations to see whether ERA5 is also closer to observations for those regions and variables. Our results reveal that at many levels, temperature and relative humidity in ERA5 and ERA-Interim differ from observations, however ERA-Interim is generally closer to observations than ERA5 in the low-to-midtroposphere. Most notably, in many stations, ERA5 is on average colder than observations at ∼550-800 hPa. Large vertical gradients occur in the profile of the mean temperature difference between ERA5 and observations at ∼700-900 hPa, but are absent in ERA-Interim. Relative humidity differences are not as robust as temperature differences, however in many stations ERA5 is on average moister than observations at ∼650-800 hPa while ERA-Interim is closer to observations there. Below the ∼950 hPa-level ERA5 and ERA-Interim are generally colder and moister than observations.

Our results indicate that ERA5 deviates more than ERA-Interim from tropical radiosonde observations in the low-to-midtroposphere. It seems plausible that this deviation is, at least partly, due to the newer formulation of organised deep entrainment in ERA5 and the associated mechanism for the moisture sensitivity. However, more extensive model evaluation is needed to understand the reasons for the differences between the reanalyses and radiosonde observations.

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the anonymous reviewer, whose comments significantly improved the manuscript.

Disclosure statement

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Data availability statement

ERA5 is available in the Climate Data Store at https://cds.climate.copernicus.eu. ERA-Interim can be downloaded from the ECMWF web pages at https://apps.ecmwf.int/datasets. IGRA version 2 dataset is available at https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/data-access/weather-balloon/integrated-global-radiosonde-archive and the TRMM 3B42 satellite precipitation data used in at https://gpm.nasa.gov/trmm.

Additional information

Funding

We gratefully acknowledge the funding received for this research by the Academy of Finland (grant numbers 1333034, 307331, and 316704), the Doctoral Programme in Atmospheric Sciences in the University of Helsinki, and the Vilho, Yrjö and Kalle Väisälä Foundation.