2020•Geophysical Research LettersOpen access

Assessment of Sea Ice Extent in CMIP6 With Comparison to Observations and CMIP5

Qi Shu, Qiang Wang, Zhenya Song, Fangli Qiao, Jiechen Zhao, Min Chu, Xinfang Li

Open full text 251 citations

Abstract

Abstract Both the Arctic and Antarctic sea ice extents (SIEs) from 44 coupled models in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) are evaluated by comparing them with observations and CMIP5 results. The CMIP6 multimodel mean can adequately reproduce the seasonal cycles of both the Arctic and Antarctic SIE. The observed Arctic September SIE declining trend (−0.82 ± 0.18 million km 2 per decade) between 1979 and 2014 is slightly underestimated in CMIP6 models (−0.70 ± 0.06 million km 2 per decade). The observed weak but significant upward trend of the Antarctic SIE is not captured, which was an issue already in the CMIP5 phase. Compared with CMIP5 models, CMIP6 models have lower intermodel spreads in SIE mean values and trends, although their SIE biases are relatively larger. The CMIP6 models did not reproduce the new summer tendencies after 2000, including the faster decline of Arctic SIE and the larger interannual variability in Antarctic SIE.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Abstract Both the Arctic and Antarctic sea ice extents (SIEs) from 44 coupled models in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) are evaluated by comparing them with observations and CMIP5 results. The CMIP6 multimodel mean can adequately reproduce the seasonal cycles of both the Arctic and Antarctic SIE. The observed Arctic September SIE declining trend (−0.82 ± 0.18 million km 2 per decade) between 1979 and 2014 is slightly underestimated in CMIP6 models (−0.70 ± 0.06 million km 2 per decade). The observed weak but significant upward trend of the Antarctic SIE is not captured, which was an issue already in the CMIP5 phase. Compared with CMIP5 models, CMIP6 models have lower intermodel spreads in SIE mean values and trends, although their SIE biases are relatively larger. The CMIP6 models did not reproduce the new summer tendencies after 2000, including the faster decline of Arctic SIE and the larger interannual variability in Antarctic SIE.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 251 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Abstract Both the Arctic and Antarctic sea ice extents (SIEs) from 44 coupled models in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) are evaluated by comparing them with observations and CMIP5 results. The CMIP6 multimodel mean can adequately reproduce the seasonal cycles of both the Arctic and Antarctic SIE. The observed Arctic September SIE declining trend (−0.82 ± 0.18 million km 2 per decade) between 1979 and 2014 is slightly underestimated in CMIP6 models (−0.70 ± 0.06 million km 2 per decade). The observed weak but significant upward trend of the Antarctic SIE is not captured, which was an issue already in the CMIP5 phase. Compared with CMIP5 models, CMIP6 models have lower intermodel spreads in SIE mean values and trends, although their SIE biases are relatively larger. The CMIP6 models did not reproduce the new summer tendencies after 2000, including the faster decline of Arctic SIE and the larger interannual variability in Antarctic SIE.

Key concepts: Coupled model intercomparison project, Climatology, Arctic, Sea ice, The arctic, Environmental science, Climate model, Climate change

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Assessment of Sea Ice Extent in CMIP6 With Comparison to Observations and CMIP5 — Research Paper | ScholarLens