Representation of Arctic Winter Atmospheric Boundary Layer Stability Over Sea Ice in CMIP6 Models

Abstract The Arctic winter atmospheric boundary layer often features strong and persistent low‐level stability (LLS), which arises from longwave radiative cooling of the surface during the polar night. This stable stratification results in a positive lapse rate feedback, which is a major contributor to Arctic amplification. A second state, with cloudy conditions, weaker stability, and near‐zero net surface longwave flux is also observed. Previous work has shown that many CMIP5 models fail to appropriately partition water between liquid and ice phases in mixed‐phase clouds, leading to a lack of this cloudy state. In this study, we assess the representation of the Arctic winter atmospheric boundary layer over sea ice in global climate models contributing to the latest phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6). We compare boundary layer process relationships in these models to those in surface‐based and radiosonde observations collected during the MOSAiC (2019–2020) and SHEBA (1997–1998) expeditions, and by North Pole drifting stations (1955–1991). The majority of CMIP6 models fail to realistically represent the cloudy state over winter Arctic sea ice. Despite this, CMIP6 multimodel mean LLS falls within the observational range, and models mostly capture the observed dependence of LLS on near‐surface air temperature and wind speed. CMIP6 models predict a decline in winter LLS with Arctic warming, with mean stability falling below zero by 2100 under the SSP2‐4.5 scenario. Our results highlight the failure to accurately simulate mixed‐phase clouds as an important limitation on representing a realistic Arctic winter boundary layer in many CMIP6 models.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres
Published
2025-06-07
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1029/2024jd041412
Primary Topic
Arctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Representation of Arctic Winter Atmospheric Boundary Layer Stability Over Sea Ice in CMIP6 Models

Felix Pithan, Alistair Duffey, Antoine Hermant, Victoria Dutch et al.
Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres
Arctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
article

Representation of Arctic Winter Atmospheric Boundary Layer Stability Over Sea Ice in CMIP6 Models

Felix Pithan, Alistair Duffey, Antoine Hermant, Victoria Dutch, Robbie Mallett, Jonathan J. Day, Julia Steckling
article en

Abstract

Abstract The Arctic winter atmospheric boundary layer often features strong and persistent low‐level stability (LLS), which arises from longwave radiative cooling of the surface during the polar night. This stable stratification results in a positive lapse rate feedback, which is a major contributor to Arctic amplification. A second state, with cloudy conditions, weaker stability, and near‐zero net surface longwave flux is also observed. Previous work has shown that many CMIP5 models fail to appropriately partition water between liquid and ice phases in mixed‐phase clouds, leading to a lack of this cloudy state. In this study, we assess the representation of the Arctic winter atmospheric boundary layer over sea ice in global climate models contributing to the latest phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6). We compare boundary layer process relationships in these models to those in surface‐based and radiosonde observations collected during the MOSAiC (2019–2020) and SHEBA (1997–1998) expeditions, and by North Pole drifting stations (1955–1991). The majority of CMIP6 models fail to realistically represent the cloudy state over winter Arctic sea ice. Despite this, CMIP6 multimodel mean LLS falls within the observational range, and models mostly capture the observed dependence of LLS on near‐surface air temperature and wind speed. CMIP6 models predict a decline in winter LLS with Arctic warming, with mean stability falling below zero by 2100 under the SSP2‐4.5 scenario. Our results highlight the failure to accurately simulate mixed‐phase clouds as an important limitation on representing a realistic Arctic winter boundary layer in many CMIP6 models.

Journal of Geophysical Research AtmospheresVol. 130(11)
University of East Anglia (GB), University of Bern (CH), Alfred-Wegener-Institut Helmholtz-Zentrum für Polar- und Meeresforschung (DE), Oeschger Centre for Climate Change Research (CH), European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (GB), Universität Hamburg (DE), Bjerknes Centre for Climate Research (NO), Northumbria University (GB), Centre for Polar Observation and Modelling (GB), University of Bergen (NO), University College London (GB), UiT The Arctic University of Norway (NO)
Horizon 2020 Framework Programme
Openalex Percentile: Top 83%
Arctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.