Articles | Volume 17, issue 6
https://doi.org/10.5194/os-17-1527-2021
© Author(s) 2021. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/os-17-1527-2021
© Author(s) 2021. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Research article
| 
01 Nov 2021
Research article |
| 01 Nov 2021
| 01 Nov 2021
Using feature-based verification methods to explore the spatial and temporal characteristics of the 2019 chlorophyll-a bloom season in a model of the European Northwest Shelf
Marion Mittermaier
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Verification, Impacts and Post-Processing, Weather Science, Met
Office, Exeter, EX1 3PB, UK
Rachel North
Verification, Impacts and Post-Processing, Weather Science, Met
Office, Exeter, EX1 3PB, UK
Jan Maksymczuk
Ocean Forecasting Research & Development, Weather Science, Met
Office, Exeter, EX1 3PB, UK
Christine Pequignet
Ocean Forecasting Research & Development, Weather Science, Met
Office, Exeter, EX1 3PB, UK
David Ford
Ocean Forecasting Research & Development, Weather Science, Met
Office, Exeter, EX1 3PB, UK
Related authors
Mike Bush, Ian Boutle, John Edwards, Anke Finnenkoetter, Charmaine Franklin, Kirsty Hanley, Aravindakshan Jayakumar, Huw Lewis, Adrian Lock, Marion Mittermaier, Saji Mohandas, Rachel North, Aurore Porson, Belinda Roux, Stuart Webster, and Mark Weeks
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 1713–1734, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-1713-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-1713-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Building on the baseline of RAL1, the RAL2 science configuration is used for regional modelling around the UM partnership and in operations at the Met Office. RAL2 has been tested in different parts of the world including Australia, India and the UK. RAL2 increases medium and low cloud amounts in the mid-latitudes compared to RAL1, leading to improved cloud forecasts and a reduced diurnal cycle of screen temperature. There is also a reduction in the frequency of heavier precipitation rates.
Chiara Marsigli, Elizabeth Ebert, Raghavendra Ashrit, Barbara Casati, Jing Chen, Caio A. S. Coelho, Manfred Dorninger, Eric Gilleland, Thomas Haiden, Stephanie Landman, and Marion Mittermaier
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 1297–1312, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-1297-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-1297-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This paper reviews new observations for the verification of high-impact weather and provides advice for their usage in objective verification. New observations include remote sensing datasets, products developed for nowcasting, datasets derived from telecommunication systems, data collected from citizens, reports of impacts and reports from insurance companies. This work has been performed in the framework of the Joint Working Group on Forecast Verification Research (JWGFVR) of the WMO.
Ric Crocker, Jan Maksymczuk, Marion Mittermaier, Marina Tonani, and Christine Pequignet
Ocean Sci., 16, 831–845, https://doi.org/10.5194/os-16-831-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/os-16-831-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
We assessed the potential benefit of a new verification metric, developed by the atmospheric community, to assess high-resolution ocean models against coarser-resolution configurations. Typical verification metrics often do not show any benefit when high-resolution models are compared to lower-resolution configurations. The new metric showed improvements in higher-resolution models away from the grid scale. The technique can be applied to both deterministic and ensemble forecasts.
Mike Bush, Tom Allen, Caroline Bain, Ian Boutle, John Edwards, Anke Finnenkoetter, Charmaine Franklin, Kirsty Hanley, Humphrey Lean, Adrian Lock, James Manners, Marion Mittermaier, Cyril Morcrette, Rachel North, Jon Petch, Chris Short, Simon Vosper, David Walters, Stuart Webster, Mark Weeks, Jonathan Wilkinson, Nigel Wood, and Mohamed Zerroukat
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 1999–2029, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-1999-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-1999-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
In this paper we define the first Regional Atmosphere and Land (RAL) science configuration for kilometre-scale modelling using the Unified Model (UM) as the basis for the atmosphere and the Joint UK Land Environment Simulator (JULES) for the land. RAL1 defines the science configuration of the dynamics and physics schemes of the atmosphere and land. This configuration will provide a model baseline for any future weather or climate model developments to be described against.
David Walters, Ian Boutle, Malcolm Brooks, Thomas Melvin, Rachel Stratton, Simon Vosper, Helen Wells, Keith Williams, Nigel Wood, Thomas Allen, Andrew Bushell, Dan Copsey, Paul Earnshaw, John Edwards, Markus Gross, Steven Hardiman, Chris Harris, Julian Heming, Nicholas Klingaman, Richard Levine, James Manners, Gill Martin, Sean Milton, Marion Mittermaier, Cyril Morcrette, Thomas Riddick, Malcolm Roberts, Claudio Sanchez, Paul Selwood, Alison Stirling, Chris Smith, Dan Suri, Warren Tennant, Pier Luigi Vidale, Jonathan Wilkinson, Martin Willett, Steve Woolnough, and Prince Xavier
Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 1487–1520, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-1487-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-1487-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
Global Atmosphere (GA) configurations of the Unified Model (UM) and Global Land (GL) configurations of JULES are developed for use in any global atmospheric modelling application.
We describe a recent iteration of these configurations: GA6/GL6. This includes ENDGame: a new dynamical core designed to improve the model's accuracy, stability and scalability. GA6 is now operational in a variety of Met Office and UM collaborators applications and hence its documentation is important.
We describe a recent iteration of these configurations: GA6/GL6. This includes ENDGame: a new dynamical core designed to improve the model's accuracy, stability and scalability. GA6 is now operational in a variety of Met Office and UM collaborators applications and hence its documentation is important.
Nieves G. Valiente, Andrew Saulter, Breogan Gomez, Christopher Bunney, Jian-Guo Li, Tamzin Palmer, and Christine Pequignet
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 2515–2538, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-2515-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-2515-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We document the Met Office operational global and regional wave models which provide wave forecasts up to 7 d ahead. Our models present coarser resolution offshore to higher resolution near the coastline. The increased resolution led to replication of the extremes but to some overestimation during modal conditions. If currents are included, wave directions and long period swells near the coast are significantly improved. New developments focus on the optimisation of the models with resolution.
Mike Bush, Ian Boutle, John Edwards, Anke Finnenkoetter, Charmaine Franklin, Kirsty Hanley, Aravindakshan Jayakumar, Huw Lewis, Adrian Lock, Marion Mittermaier, Saji Mohandas, Rachel North, Aurore Porson, Belinda Roux, Stuart Webster, and Mark Weeks
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 1713–1734, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-1713-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-1713-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Building on the baseline of RAL1, the RAL2 science configuration is used for regional modelling around the UM partnership and in operations at the Met Office. RAL2 has been tested in different parts of the world including Australia, India and the UK. RAL2 increases medium and low cloud amounts in the mid-latitudes compared to RAL1, leading to improved cloud forecasts and a reduced diurnal cycle of screen temperature. There is also a reduction in the frequency of heavier precipitation rates.
Juan Manuel Castillo, Huw W. Lewis, Akhilesh Mishra, Ashis Mitra, Jeff Polton, Ashley Brereton, Andrew Saulter, Alex Arnold, Segolene Berthou, Douglas Clark, Julia Crook, Ananda Das, John Edwards, Xiangbo Feng, Ankur Gupta, Sudheer Joseph, Nicholas Klingaman, Imranali Momin, Christine Pequignet, Claudio Sanchez, Jennifer Saxby, and Maria Valdivieso da Costa
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 4193–4223, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-4193-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-4193-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
A new environmental modelling system has been developed to represent the effect of feedbacks between atmosphere, land, and ocean in the Indian region. Different approaches to simulating tropical cyclones Titli and Fani are demonstrated. It is shown that results are sensitive to the way in which the ocean response to cyclone evolution is captured in the system. Notably, we show how a more rigorous formulation for the near-surface energy budget can be included when air–sea coupling is included.
Chiara Marsigli, Elizabeth Ebert, Raghavendra Ashrit, Barbara Casati, Jing Chen, Caio A. S. Coelho, Manfred Dorninger, Eric Gilleland, Thomas Haiden, Stephanie Landman, and Marion Mittermaier
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 1297–1312, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-1297-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-1297-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This paper reviews new observations for the verification of high-impact weather and provides advice for their usage in objective verification. New observations include remote sensing datasets, products developed for nowcasting, datasets derived from telecommunication systems, data collected from citizens, reports of impacts and reports from insurance companies. This work has been performed in the framework of the Joint Working Group on Forecast Verification Research (JWGFVR) of the WMO.
David Ford
Biogeosciences, 18, 509–534, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-509-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-509-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Biogeochemical-Argo floats are starting to routinely measure ocean chlorophyll, nutrients, oxygen, and pH. This study generated synthetic observations representing two potential Biogeochemical-Argo observing system designs and created a data assimilation scheme to combine them with an ocean model. The proposed system of 1000 floats brought clear benefits to model results, with additional floats giving further benefit. Existing satellite ocean colour observations gave complementary information.
David Andrew Ford
Ocean Sci., 16, 875–893, https://doi.org/10.5194/os-16-875-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/os-16-875-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Satellite observations of the ocean were combined with a numerical model to create simulations of the ocean state between 1998 and 2010. Relationships between physical and biogeochemical quantities were assessed to investigate whether observations of different variables are consistent in their representation of the Earth system. Good consistency was found. The results also highlighted ways in which the model could be improved and the respective impacts of using different observations.
Ric Crocker, Jan Maksymczuk, Marion Mittermaier, Marina Tonani, and Christine Pequignet
Ocean Sci., 16, 831–845, https://doi.org/10.5194/os-16-831-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/os-16-831-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
We assessed the potential benefit of a new verification metric, developed by the atmospheric community, to assess high-resolution ocean models against coarser-resolution configurations. Typical verification metrics often do not show any benefit when high-resolution models are compared to lower-resolution configurations. The new metric showed improvements in higher-resolution models away from the grid scale. The technique can be applied to both deterministic and ensemble forecasts.
Mike Bush, Tom Allen, Caroline Bain, Ian Boutle, John Edwards, Anke Finnenkoetter, Charmaine Franklin, Kirsty Hanley, Humphrey Lean, Adrian Lock, James Manners, Marion Mittermaier, Cyril Morcrette, Rachel North, Jon Petch, Chris Short, Simon Vosper, David Walters, Stuart Webster, Mark Weeks, Jonathan Wilkinson, Nigel Wood, and Mohamed Zerroukat
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 1999–2029, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-1999-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-1999-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
In this paper we define the first Regional Atmosphere and Land (RAL) science configuration for kilometre-scale modelling using the Unified Model (UM) as the basis for the atmosphere and the Joint UK Land Environment Simulator (JULES) for the land. RAL1 defines the science configuration of the dynamics and physics schemes of the atmosphere and land. This configuration will provide a model baseline for any future weather or climate model developments to be described against.
Marina Tonani, Peter Sykes, Robert R. King, Niall McConnell, Anne-Christine Péquignet, Enda O'Dea, Jennifer A. Graham, Jeff Polton, and John Siddorn
Ocean Sci., 15, 1133–1158, https://doi.org/10.5194/os-15-1133-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/os-15-1133-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
A new high-resolution ocean model at 1.5 km has replaced the 7 km system for delivering short-term forecasts of the North-West European Shelf seas. The products (temperature, salinity, currents, and sea surface height) are available on the Copernicus Marine Service catalogue. This study focuses on the high-resolution impact on the quality of the products delivered to the users. Results show that the high-resolution model is better at resolving the variability of the physical variables.
Huw W. Lewis, Juan Manuel Castillo Sanchez, John Siddorn, Robert R. King, Marina Tonani, Andrew Saulter, Peter Sykes, Anne-Christine Pequignet, Graham P. Weedon, Tamzin Palmer, Joanna Staneva, and Lucy Bricheno
Ocean Sci., 15, 669–690, https://doi.org/10.5194/os-15-669-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/os-15-669-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
Forecasts of ocean temperature, salinity, currents, and sea height can be improved by linking state-of-the-art ocean and wave models, so that they can interact to better represent the real world. We test this approach in an ocean model of north-west Europe which can simulate small-scale details of the ocean state. The intention is to implement the system described in this study for operational use so that improved information can be provided to users of ocean forecast data.
David Walters, Ian Boutle, Malcolm Brooks, Thomas Melvin, Rachel Stratton, Simon Vosper, Helen Wells, Keith Williams, Nigel Wood, Thomas Allen, Andrew Bushell, Dan Copsey, Paul Earnshaw, John Edwards, Markus Gross, Steven Hardiman, Chris Harris, Julian Heming, Nicholas Klingaman, Richard Levine, James Manners, Gill Martin, Sean Milton, Marion Mittermaier, Cyril Morcrette, Thomas Riddick, Malcolm Roberts, Claudio Sanchez, Paul Selwood, Alison Stirling, Chris Smith, Dan Suri, Warren Tennant, Pier Luigi Vidale, Jonathan Wilkinson, Martin Willett, Steve Woolnough, and Prince Xavier
Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 1487–1520, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-1487-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-1487-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
Global Atmosphere (GA) configurations of the Unified Model (UM) and Global Land (GL) configurations of JULES are developed for use in any global atmospheric modelling application.
We describe a recent iteration of these configurations: GA6/GL6. This includes ENDGame: a new dynamical core designed to improve the model's accuracy, stability and scalability. GA6 is now operational in a variety of Met Office and UM collaborators applications and hence its documentation is important.
We describe a recent iteration of these configurations: GA6/GL6. This includes ENDGame: a new dynamical core designed to improve the model's accuracy, stability and scalability. GA6 is now operational in a variety of Met Office and UM collaborators applications and hence its documentation is important.
David A. Ford, Johan van der Molen, Kieran Hyder, John Bacon, Rosa Barciela, Veronique Creach, Robert McEwan, Piet Ruardij, and Rodney Forster
Biogeosciences, 14, 1419–1444, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-14-1419-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-14-1419-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
This study presents a novel set of in situ observations of phytoplankton community structure for the North Sea. These observations were used to validate two physical–biogeochemical ocean model simulations, each of which used different variants of the widely used European Regional Seas Ecosystem Model (ERSEM). The results suggest the ability of the models to reproduce the observed phytoplankton community structure was dependent on the details of the biogeochemical model parameterizations used.
J. R. Siddorn, S. A. Good, C. M. Harris, H. W. Lewis, J. Maksymczuk, M. J. Martin, and A. Saulter
Ocean Sci., 12, 217–231, https://doi.org/10.5194/os-12-217-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/os-12-217-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
The Met Office provides a range of services in the marine environment. To support these services, and to ensure they evolve to meet the demands of users and are based on the best available science, a number of scientific challenges need to be addressed. The paper summarises the key challenges, and highlights some priorities for the ocean monitoring and forecasting research group at the Met Office.
Cited articles
Allen, J. I. and Somerfield, P. J.: A multivariate approach to model skill
assessment, J. Mar. Syst., 76, 83-94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmarsys.2008.05.009,
2009.
Allen, J. I., Holt, J. T., Blackford, J., and Proctor, R.: Error
quantification of a high-resolution coupled hydrodynamic-ecosystem
coastal-ocean model: Part 2. Chlorophyll-a, nutrients and SPM, J. Mar.
Syst., 68, 381-404, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmarsys.2007.01.005, 2007a.
Allen, J. I., Somerfield, P. J., and Gilbert, F. J.: Quantifying uncertainty
in high-resolution coupled hydrodynamic-ecosystem models, J. Mar. Syst.,
64, 3-14, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmarsys.2006.02.010, 2007b.
Antoine, D., André, J. M., and Morel, A.: Oceanic primary production: 2.
Estimation at global scale from satellite (Coastal Zone Color Scanner)
chlorophyll, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 10, 57-69, https://doi.org/10.1029/95GB02832, 1996.
Anugerahanti, P., Roy, S., and Haines, K.: A perturbed biogeochemistry model ensemble evaluated against in situ and satellite observations, Biogeosciences, 15, 6685–6711, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-15-6685-2018, 2018.
Behrenfeld, M. J., Boss, E., Siegel, D. A., and Shea, D. M.: Carbon-based
ocean productivity and phytoplankton physiology from space, Global
Biogeochem. Cy., 19, GB1006, https://doi.org/10.1029/2004GB002299, 2005.
Bruggeman, J. and Bolding, K.: A general framework for aquatic
biogeochemical models, Environ. Model. Softw., 61, 249–265,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2014.04.002, 2014.
Butenschön, M., Clark, J., Aldridge, J. N., Allen, J. I., Artioli, Y., Blackford, J., Bruggeman, J., Cazenave, P., Ciavatta, S., Kay, S., Lessin, G., van Leeuwen, S., van der Molen, J., de Mora, L., Polimene, L., Sailley, S., Stephens, N., and Torres, R.: ERSEM 15.06: a generic model for marine biogeochemistry and the ecosystem dynamics of the lower trophic levels, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 1293–1339, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-1293-2016, 2016.
Campbell, J. W.: The lognormal distribution as a model for bio‐optical variability in the sea, J. Geophys. Res.- Ocean., 100, 13237-13254, 1995.
Chelton, D. B., Schlax, M. G., and Samelson, R. M.: Global observations of
nonlinear mesoscale eddies, Prog. Oceanogr., 91, 167–216,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pocean.2011.01.002, 2011.
Chiswell, S. M.: Annual cycles and spring blooms in phytoplankton: Don't
abandon Sverdrup completely, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser., 443, 39–50,
https://doi.org/10.3354/meps09453, 2011.
Clark, A. J., Bullock, R. G., Jensen, T. L., Xue, M., and Kong, F.:
Application of object-based time-domain diagnostics for tracking
precipitation systems in convection-allowing models, Weather Forecast., 29, 517–542, https://doi.org/10.1175/WAF-D-13-00098.1, 2014.
CMEMS: North Atlantic Chlorophyll (Copernicus-GlobColour) from Satellite Observations: Daily Interpolated (Reprocessed from 1997), available at: https://resources.marine.copernicus.eu/product-detail/OCEANCOLOUR_ATL_CHL_L4_REP_OBSERVATIONS_009_098/INFORMATION, CMEMS [data set], last access: 15 October 2021a.
CMEMS: Atlantic – European North West Shelf – Ocean Biogeochemistry Analysis and Forecast, available at: https://resources.marine.copernicus.eu/product-detail/NWSHELF_ANALYSISFORECAST_BGC_004_002/INFORMATION, CMEMS [data set], last access: 15 October 2021b.
Cole, H., Henson, S., Martin, A., and Yool, A.: Mind the gap: The impact of
missing data on the calculation of phytoplankton phenology metrics, J.
Geophys. Res., 117, C08030, https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JC008249, 2012.
Crocker, R. L. and Mittermaier, M. P.: Exploratory use of a satellite cloud
mask to verify NWP models, Meteorol. Appl.,
20, 197–205, 2013.
Crocker, R., Maksymczuk, J., Mittermaier, M., Tonani, M., and Pequignet, C.: An approach to the verification of high-resolution ocean models using spatial methods, Ocean Sci., 16, 831–845, https://doi.org/10.5194/os-16-831-2020, 2020.
Davis, C., Brown, B., and Bullock, R.: Object-based verification of
precipitation forecasts, Part I: Methods and
application to mesoscale rain areas, Mon. Weather Rev., 134, 1772–1784, 2006.
de Mora, L., Butenschön, M., and Allen, J. I.: The assessment of a global marine ecosystem model on the basis of emergent properties and ecosystem function: a case study with ERSEM, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 59–76, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-59-2016, 2016.
Dorninger, M., Gilleland, E., Casati, B., Mittermaier, M. P., Ebert, E. E., Brown, B. G., and Wilson, L. J.: The setup of the MesoVICT project, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 99, 1887-1906. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-17-0164.1, 2018.
Dutkiewicz, S., Hickman, A. E., and Jahn, O.: Modelling ocean-colour-derived chlorophyll a, Biogeosciences, 15, 613–630, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-15-613-2018, 2018.
Edwards, K. P., Barciela, R., and Butenschön, M.: Validation of the NEMO-ERSEM operational ecosystem model for the North West European Continental Shelf, Ocean Sci., 8, 983–1000, https://doi.org/10.5194/os-8-983-2012, 2012.
Falkowski, P. G., Barber, R. T., and Smetacek, V.: Biogeochemical controls
and feedbacks on ocean primary production, Science, 281, 200–206,
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.281.5374.200, 1998.
Ford, D. A., van der Molen, J., Hyder, K., Bacon, J., Barciela, R., Creach, V., McEwan, R., Ruardij, P., and Forster, R.: Observing and modelling phytoplankton community structure in the North Sea, Biogeosciences, 14, 1419–1444, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-14-1419-2017, 2017.
Gilleland, E., Ahijevych, D., Brown, B., and Ebert, E.: Intercomparison of
Spatial Forecast Verification Methods, Weather Forecast., 24, 1416–1430. https://doi.org/10.1175/2009WAF2222269.1, 2009.
Gilleland, E., Lindström, J., and Lindgren, F.: Analyzing the image warp
forecast verification method on precipitation fields from the
ICP, Weather Forecast., 25, 1249–1262, 2010.
Gordon, H. R., Clark, D. K., Brown, J. W., Brown, O. B., Evans, R. H., and
Broenkow, W. W.: Phytoplankton pigment concentrations in the Middle Atlantic
Bight: comparison of ship determinations and CZCS estimates, Appl. Opt.,
22 20–36, https://doi.org/10.1364/ao.22.000020, 1983.
Hague, M. and Vichi, M.: A Link Between CMIP5 Phytoplankton Phenology and
Sea Ice in the Atlantic Southern Ocean, Geophys. Res. Lett., 45, 6566–6575,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2018GL078061, 2018.
Hausmann, U. and Czaja, A.: The observed signature of mesoscale eddies in
sea surface temperature and the associated heat transport, Deep. Res. Part I
Oceanogr. Res. Pap., 70, 60–72, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dsr.2012.08.005, 2012.
Hipsey, M. R., Gal, G., Arhonditsis, G. B., Carey, C. C., Elliott, J. A.,
Frassl, M. A., Janse, J. H., de Mora, L., and Robson, B. J.: A system of
metrics for the assessment and improvement of aquatic ecosystem models,
Environ. Model. Softw., 128, 104697, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2020.104697, 2020.
Jolliff, J. K., Kindle, J. C., Shulman, I., Penta, B., Friedrichs, M. A. M.,
Helber, R., and Arnone, R. A.: Summary diagrams for coupled
hydrodynamic-ecosystem model skill assessment, J. Mar. Sys., 76, 64–82,
2009.
King, R. R., While, J., Martin, M. J., Lea, D. J., Lemieux-Dudon, B.,
Waters, J., and O'Dea, E.: Improving the initialisation of the Met Office
operational shelf-seas model, Ocean Model., 130, 1–14,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocemod.2018.07.004, 2018.
Le Traon, P. Y., Reppucci, A., Fanjul, E. A., Aouf, L., Behrens, A.,
Belmonte, M., Bentamy, A., Bertino, L., Brando, V. E., Kreiner, M. B.,
Benkiran, M., Carval, T., Ciliberti, S. A., Claustre, H., Clementi, E.,
Coppini, G., Cossarini, G., De Alfonso Alonso-Muñoyerro, M., Delamarche,
A., Dibarboure, G., Dinessen, F., Drevillon, M., Drillet, Y., Faugere, Y.,
Fernández, V., Fleming, A., Garcia-Hermosa, M. I., Sotillo, M. G.,
Garric, G., Gasparin, F., Giordan, C., Gehlen, M., Gregoire, M. L.,
Guinehut, S., Hamon, M., Harris, C., Hernandez, F., Hinkler, J. B., Hoyer,
J., Karvonen, J., Kay, S., King, R., Lavergne, T., Lemieux-Dudon, B., Lima,
L., Mao, C., Martin, M. J., Masina, S., Melet, A., Nardelli, B. B., Nolan,
G., Pascual, A., Pistoia, J., Palazov, A., Piolle, J. F., Pujol, M. I.,
Pequignet, A. C., Peneva, E., Gómez, B. P., de la Villeon, L. P.,
Pinardi, N., Pisano, A., Pouliquen, S., Reid, R., Remy, E., Santoleri, R.,
Siddorn, J., She, J., Staneva, J., Stoffelen, A., Tonani, M., Vandenbulcke,
L., von Schuckmann, K., Volpe, G., Wettre, C., and Zacharioudaki, A.: From
observation to information and users: The Copernicus Marine Service
Perspective, Front. Mar. Sci., 6, 234, https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2019.00234, 2019.
Lorenzen, C. J.: Surface Chlorophyll As An Index Of The Depth, Chlorophyll Content, And Primary Productivity Of The Euphotic Layer, Limnol. Oceanogr., 15, 479–480, https://doi.org/10.4319/lo.1970.15.3.0479, 1970.
Madec, G. and the NEMO team: “NEMO ocean engin”, NEMO reference manual 3_6_STABLE, Note du Pôle de modélisation, Institut Pierre-Simon Laplace (IPSL), France, No 27 ISSN No 1288–1619, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3248739, 2016.
Mass, C. F., Ovens, D., Westrick, K., and Colle, B. A.: Does increasing
horizontal resolution produce more skillful forecasts? The results of two
years of real-time numerical weather prediction over the Pacific northwest,
B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 83, 407–430, 2002.
Mattern, J. P., Fennel, K., and Dowd, M.: Introduction and Assessment of Measures
for Quantitative Model-Data Comparison Using Satellite Images, Remote Sensing, 2, 794–818, https://doi.org/10.3390/rs2030794, 2010.
McEwan, Robert, Kay, S., and Ford, D.: Quality Information Document for CMEMS-NWS-QUID-004-002 (4.2), Zenodo [data], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4746438, 2021.
Mittermaier, M. and Bullock, R.: Using MODE to
explore the spatial and temporal characteristics of cloud cover forecasts
from high-resolution NWP models, Meteorol.
Appl., 20, 187–196, 2013.
Mittermaier, M., North, R., Semple, A., and Bullock, R.: Feature-based
diagnostic evaluation of global NWP forecasts, Mon. Weather Rev., 144, 3871–3893, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-15-0167.1, 2016.
Moore, T. S., Campbell, J. W., and Dowell, M. D.: A class-based approach to
characterizing and mapping the uncertainty of the MODIS ocean chlorophyll
product, Remote Sens. Environ., 113, 2424–2430,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2009.07.016, 2009.
Morrow, R. and Le Traon, P. Y.: Recent advances in observing mesoscale ocean
dynamics with satellite altimetry, Adv. Space Res., 50, 1062–1076,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2011.09.033, 2012.
O'Dea, E. J., Arnold, A. K., Edwards, K. P., Furner, R., Hyder, P., Martin,
M. J., Siddorn, J. R., Storkey, D., While, J., Holt, J. T., and Liu, H.: An
operational ocean forecast system incorporating NEMO and SST data
assimilation for the tidally driven European North-West shelf, J. Oper.
Oceanogr., 5, 3–17, https://doi.org/10.1080/1755876X.2012.11020128, 2012.
O'Dea, E., Furner, R., Wakelin, S., Siddorn, J., While, J., Sykes, P., King, R., Holt, J., and Hewitt, H.: The CO5 configuration of the 7 km Atlantic Margin Model: large-scale biases and sensitivity to forcing, physics options and vertical resolution, Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 2947–2969, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-2947-2017, 2017.
Pefanis, V.: Loading of coloured dissolved organic matter in the Arctic Mediterranean Sea and its effects on the ocean heat budget (Doctoral dissertation), Universität Bremen, https://doi.org/10.26092/elib/646, 2021.
Racault, M. F., Le Quéré, C., Buitenhuis, E., Sathyendranath, S.,
and Platt, T.: Phytoplankton phenology in the global ocean, Ecol. Indic.,
14, 152–163, 2012.
Rossa, A. M., Nurmi, P., and Ebert, E. E.: Overview of methods for the verification of quantitative precipitation forecasts, Precipitation: Advances in
Measurement, Estimation and Prediction, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-77655-0_16, pp. 419–452, 2008.
Saux Picart, S., Butenschön, M., and Shutler, J. D.: Wavelet-based spatial comparison technique for analysing and evaluating two-dimensional geophysical model fields, Geosci. Model Dev., 5, 223–230, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-5-223-2012, 2012.
Schalles, J. F.: Optical remote sensing techniques to estimate phytoplankton
chlorophyll a concentrations in coastal waters with varying suspended matter
and cdom concentrations, in: Remote Sensing and Digital Image Processing, Springer, Dordrecht 9, 27–79, 2006, https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-3968-9_3
Shutler, J. D., Smyth, T. J., Saux-Picart, S., Wakelin, S. L., Hyder, P.,
Orekhov, P., Grant, M. G., Tilstone, G. H., and Allen, J. I.: Evaluating the
ability of a hydrodynamic ecosystem model to capture inter- and intra-annual
spatial characteristics of chlorophyll-a in the north east Atlantic, J. Mar.
Syst., 88, 169–182, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmarsys.2011.03.013, 2011.
Siegel, D. A., Doney, S. C., and Yoder, J. A.: The North Atlantic Spring
Phytoplankton Bloom and Sverdrup's Critical Depth Hypothesis, Science, 296, 730–733, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1069174, 2002.
Skákala, J., Ford, D., Brewin, R. J. W., McEwan, R., Kay, S., Taylor,
B., de Mora, L., and Ciavatta, S.: The Assimilation of Phytoplankton
Functional Types for Operational Forecasting in the Northwest European
Shelf, J. Geophys. Res.-Ocean., 123, 5230–5247,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2018JC014153, 2018.
Skákala, J., Bruggeman, J., Brewin, R. J. W., Ford, D. A., and Ciavatta,
S.: Improved Representation of Underwater Light Field and Its Impact on
Ecosystem Dynamics: A Study in the North Sea, J. Geophys. Res.-Ocean.,
125, e2020JC016122, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JC016122, 2020.
Smyth, T. J., Allen, I., Atkinson, A., Bruun, J. T., Harmer, R. A., Pingree,
R. D., Widdicombe, C. E., and Somerfield, P. J.: Ocean net heat flux
influences seasonal to interannual patterns of plankton abundance, Plos One,
9, e98709, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0098709, 2014.
Soppa, M. A., Völker, C., and Bracher, A.: Diatom Phenology in the Southern
Ocean: Mean Patterns, Trends and the Role of Climate Oscillations, Remote
Sens., 8, 420, https://doi.org/10.3390/rs8050420, 2016.
Stow, C. A., Jolliff, J., McGillicuddy, D. J., Doney, S. C., Allen, J. I.,
Friedrichs, M. A. M., Rose, K. A., and Wallhead, P.: Skill assessment for
coupled biological/physical models of marine systems, J. Mar. Syst.,
76, 4–15, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmarsys.2008.03.011, 2009.
Sverdrup, H. U.: On conditions for the vernal blooming of phytoplankton,
ICES J. Mar. Sci., 18, 287–295, https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/18.3.287, 1953.
Taylor, K. E.: Summarizing multiple aspects of model performance in a single
diagram, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 106, 7183–7192, https://doi.org/10.1029/2000JD900719, 2001.
Vichi, M., Allen, J. I., Masina, S., and Hardman-Mountford, N. J.: The
emergence of ocean biogeochemical provinces: A quantitative assessment and a
diagnostic for model evaluation, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 25, GB2005,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GB003867, 2011.
Waters, J., Lea, D. J., Martin, M. J., Mirouze, I., Weaver, A., and While,
J.: Implementing a variational data assimilation system in an operational
1/4 degree global ocean model, Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc., 141, 333–349,
https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.2388, 2015.
Win-Gildenmeister, M., McCabe, G., Prestopnik, J., Opatz, J., Halley Gotway, J., Jensen, T., Vigh, J., Row, M., Kalb, C., Fisher, H., Goodrich, L., Adriaansen, D., Frimel, J., Blank, L., and Arbetter, T.: METplus Verification System Coordinated Release (v4.0.0), Zenodo [code], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5567805, 2021.
Winder, M. and Cloern, J. E.: The annual cycles of phytoplankton biomass,
Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci., 365, 3215–3226, https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2010.0125, 2010.
Short summary
Regions of enhanced chlorophyll-a concentrations can be identified by applying a threshold to the concentration value to a forecast and observed field (or analysis). These regions can then be treated and analysed as features using diagnostic techniques to consider of the evolution of the chlorophyll-a blooms in space and time. This allows us to understand whether the biogeochemistry in the model has any skill in predicting these blooms, their location, intensity, onset, duration and demise.
Regions of enhanced chlorophyll-a concentrations can be identified by applying a threshold to...
