Open AccessSensitivity of the MM5 mesoscale model to physical parameterizations for regional climate studies: Annual cycle
Author(s) -
Fernández J.,
Montávez J. P.,
Sáenz J.,
GonzálezRouco J. F.,
Zorita E.
Publication year - 2007
Publication title -
journal of geophysical research: atmospheres
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.67
H-Index - 298
eISSN - 2156-2202
pISSN - 0148-0227
DOI - 10.1029/2005jd006649
Subject(s) - mm5 , mesoscale meteorology , precipitation , climatology , environmental science , outgoing longwave radiation , longwave , atmospheric sciences , climate model , boundary layer , planetary boundary layer , meteorology , climate change , geology , radiation , geography , physics , oceanography , convection , quantum mechanics , thermodynamics
We present an analysis of the sensitivity to different physical parameterizations of a high‐resolution simulation of the MM5 mesoscale model over the Iberian Peninsula. Several (16) 5‐year runs of the MM5 model with varying parameterizations of microphysics, cumulus, planetary boundary layer and longwave radiation have been carried out. The results have been extensively compared with observational precipitation and surface temperature data. The parameterization uncertainty has also been compared with that related to the boundary conditions and the varying observational data sets. The annual cycles of precipitation and surface temperature are well reproduced. The summer season presents the largest deviations, with a 5 K cold bias in the southeast and noticeable precipitation errors over mountain areas. The cold bias seems to be related to the surface, probably because of the excessive moisture availability of the five‐layer soil scheme used. No parameterization combination was found to perform best in simulating both precipitation and surface temperature in every season and subregion. The Kain‐Fritsch cumulus scheme was found to produce unrealistically high summer precipitation. The longwave radiation parameterizations tested were found to have little impact on our target variables. Other factors, such as the choice of boundary conditions, have an impact on the results as large as the selection of parameterizations. The range of variability in the MM5 physics ensemble is of the same order of magnitude as the observational uncertainty, except in summer, when it is larger and probably related to the inaccuracy of the model to reproduce the summer precipitation over the area.