Yu, L., & Jin, X. (2014). Insights on the OAFlux ocean surface vector wind analysis merged from scatterometers and passive microwave radiometers (1987 onward). J. Geophys. Res. Oceans , 119 (8), 5244–5269.
Luecke, C. A., Arbic, B. K., Bassette, S. L., Richman, J. G., Shriver, J. F., Alford, M. H., et al. (2017). The Global Mesoscale Eddy Available Potential Energy Field in Models and Observations. J. Geophys. Res. Oceans , 122 (11), 9126–9143.
Luecke, C. A., Arbic, B. K., Bassette, S. L., Richman, J. G., Shriver, J. F., Alford, M. H., et al. (2017). The Global Mesoscale Eddy Available Potential Energy Field in Models and Observations: GLOBAL LOW-FREQUENCY EDDY APE. J. Geophys. Res. Oceans , 122 (11), 9126–9143.
Abstract: Global maps of the mesoscale eddy available potential energy (EAPE) field at a depth of 500 m are created using potential density anomalies in a high‐resolution 1/12.5° global ocean model. Maps made from both a free‐running simulation and a data‐assimilative reanalysis of the HYbrid Coordinate Ocean Model (HYCOM) are compared with maps made by other researchers from density anomalies in Argo profiles. The HYCOM and Argo maps display similar features, especially in the dominance of western boundary currents. The reanalysis maps match the Argo maps more closely, demonstrating the added value of data assimilation. Global averages of the simulation, reanalysis, and Argo EAPE all agree to within about 10%. The model and Argo EAPE fields are compared to EAPE computed from temperature anomalies in a data set of “moored historical observations” (MHO) in conjunction with buoyancy frequencies computed from a global climatology. The MHO data set allows for an estimate of the EAPE in high‐frequency motions that is aliased into the Argo EAPE values. At MHO locations, 15–32% of the EAPE in the Argo estimates is due to aliased motions having periods of 10 days or less. Spatial averages of EAPE in HYCOM, Argo, and MHO data agree to within 50% at MHO locations, with both model estimates lying within error bars observations. Analysis of the EAPE field in an idealized model, in conjunction with published theory, suggests that much of the scatter seen in comparisons of different EAPE estimates is to be expected given the chaotic, unpredictable nature of mesoscale eddies.
Chassignet, E. P., & Xu, X. (2017). Impact of Horizontal Resolution (1/12° to 1/50°) on Gulf Stream Separation, Penetration, and Variability. J. Phys. Oceanogr. , 47 (8), 1999–2021.
Krishnamurti, T. N., Kumar, V., Simon, A., Thomas, A., Bhardwaj, A., Das, S., et al. (2017). March of buoyancy elements during extreme rainfall over India. Clim Dyn , 48 (5-6), 1931–1951.
Smedstad, O. M., Hurlburt, H. E., Metzger, E. J., Rhodes, R. C., Shriver, J. F., Wallcraft, A. J., et al. (2003). An operational Eddy resolving 1/16° global ocean nowcast/forecast system. Journal of Marine Systems , 40-41 , 341–361.
Dukhovskoy, D. S., Leben, R. R., Chassignet, E. P., Hall, C. A., Morey, S. L., & Nedbor-Gross, R. (2015). Characterization of the uncertainty of loop current metrics using a multidecadal numerical simulation and altimeter observations. Deep Sea Research Part I: Oceanographic Research Papers , 100 , 140–158.
Nguyen, T. T. (2014). Variability of Cross-Slope Flow in the Desoto Canyon Region . Master's thesis, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL.
Robinson, W., Speich, S., & Chassignet, E. (2018). Exploring the Interplay Between Ocean Eddies and the Atmosphere. Eos , 99 .
Abstract: Climate models, for the first time, have sufficient resolution to capture mesoscale ocean eddies and their interactions with the atmosphere.New model results suggest that the atmosphere, at weather scales or larger, responds to cumulative effects of the much smaller ocean eddies. Intriguing new model results presented at the workshop suggested that the atmosphere, at weather scales or larger.
Ajayi, A., Le Sommer, J., Chassignet, E., Molines, J. - M., Xu, X., Albert, A., et al. (2020). Spatial and Temporal Variability of the North Atlantic Eddy Field From Two Kilometric-Resolution Ocean Models. J. Geophys. Res. Oceans , 125 (5).
Abstract: Ocean circulation is dominated by turbulent geostrophic eddy fields with typical scales ranging from 10 to 300 km. At mesoscales (>50 km), the size of eddy structures varies regionally following the Rossby radius of deformation. The variability of the scale of smaller eddies is not well known due to the limitations in existing numerical simulations and satellite capability. Nevertheless, it is well established that oceanic flows (<50 km) generally exhibit strong seasonality. In this study, we present a basin‐scale analysis of coherent structures down to 10 km in the North Atlantic Ocean using two submesoscale‐permitting ocean models, a NEMO‐based North Atlantic simulation with a horizontal resolution of 1/60 (NATL60) and an HYCOM‐based Atlantic simulation with a horizontal resolution of 1/50 (HYCOM50). We investigate the spatial and temporal variability of the scale of eddy structures with a particular focus on eddies with scales of 10 to 100 km, and examine the impact of the seasonality of submesoscale energy on the seasonality and distribution of coherent structures in the North Atlantic. Our results show an overall good agreement between the two models in terms of surface wave number spectra and seasonal variability. The key findings of the paper are that (i) the mean size of ocean eddies show strong seasonality; (ii) this seasonality is associated with an increased population of submesoscale eddies (10�50 km) in winter; and (iii) the net release of available potential energy associated with mixed layer instability is responsible for the emergence of the increased population of submesoscale eddies in wintertime.
