Correction to “Rolling <scp>DICE</scp> to advance knowledge of land‐atmosphere interactions”

The Diurnal Land–Atmosphere Coupling Experiment (DICE) aims to explore the complex interactions between the land surface and atmospheric boundary layer, which are generally not well understood and difficult to isolate in models. The project involves over 10 different models, combining expertise from both land-surface and atmospheric boundary-layer modelling groups. A simple three-stage methodology is designed to assess land–atmosphere feedbacks. Stage 1: the individual components are assessed in isolation, driven and evaluated against observational data; stage 2: the impact of coupling is investigated; stage 3: the sensitivity of the stand-alone models to variations in driving data is explored. For this initial study, a 3-day clear-sky period in the mid-west United States over, an assumed simple, predominantly grass surface was simulated using data from the CASES-99 field campaign. Key conclusions from the study include: (1) the memory of vegetation state within land-surface models needs attention; (2) the height of atmospheric forcing for land-surface models is important, particularly for the nocturnal boundary layer, and this has implications for both observations and vertical resolution for atmospheric models; (3) land–atmosphere feedbacks reduce errors in simulated surface fluxes at the expense of the accuracy of the variables that the models are designed to simulate (e.g., temperature, humidity, and wind speed); (4) problems remain in representing the stable boundary layer in atmospheric models; (5) the mixing of temperature and humidity within the boundary layer may need to be represented separately; (6) differences in daytime profiles of heat, moisture, and momentum between models are mainly due to the way the models erode the inversion at the top of the boundary layer, rather than differences in the surface fluxes. Resultant variations in modelled boundary-layer heights have a substantial impact on relative humidity and could partially explain variations in coupling strength between models in the Global Land–Atmosphere Coupling Experiment.