|国家科技期刊平台
首页|期刊导航|中国海洋大学学报(自然科学版)|不同测高产品对地中海中尺度涡探测的影响

不同测高产品对地中海中尺度涡探测的影响OA北大核心CSTPCD

Influence of Different Altimeter Products on Mesoscale Eddy Detection in the Mediterranean Sea

中文摘要英文摘要

长期以来,人们利用海平面异常(Sea level anomaly,SLA)对中尺度涡旋进行了大量研究.然而,随着新的测高产品绝对动力地形(Absolute dynamic topography,ADT)的提出,SLA产品探测涡旋的准确性值得重新检验.因此,本文以地中海为例,使用26 a(1993-2018年)时间序列,提供了 AVISO发布的中尺度涡旋轨迹图集(META数据集)和Tian等发布的海洋涡旋识别与追踪数据集(Tian数据集)这两种由不同测高产品衍生的涡旋数据集之间的比较分析.结果表明,在涡旋识别方面,META比Tian数据集捕获的涡旋数量更多,具有更大的振幅和更小的半径;在空间域上,META数据集更容易检测到永久、准永久性气旋涡.值得注意的是,由于SLA是平均海平面(Mean sea surface,MSS)的异常,而MSS的分辨率在高纬地区以及沿海区域并不高,造成了沿轨SLA不可避免地存在误差.因此,在时域上,SLA捕获的涡旋数量波动不断趋向ADT,使得META相较于Tian数据集质量更稳定.在涡旋追踪方面,Tian比META数据集追踪到的长寿涡(>6个月)普遍具有更长的寿命和更连续的轨迹,从而使涡旋显示出更强的鲁棒性.因此,本文建议,当关注的目标是单体涡旋时,应使用META数据集;当重点关注涡旋轨迹时,应采用Tian数据集.

Eddies play an important role in the transport of oceanic material,energy and momentum,as well as in ocean-air coupling systems and biochemical processes.Although a variety of ocean me-soscale eddy datasets can be used by researchers to study eddy properties of the global ocean,subtle differences in the way these datasets are generated often lead to large differences from one another.In order to better understand the difference of eddy detection capabilities between SLA and ADT data,it is necessary to compare the differences of eddy identification and eddy tracking parameters between the two altimeter data.In this paper,two widely accepted datasets,the Mesoscale Eddy Trajectory Atlas Product Version3.2 DT(META dataset)and the satellite altimeter-based ocean eddy identification and tracking dataset(Tian dataset),with daily temporal resolution and 1/4(°)×1/4(°)spatial resolution,are used as typical representatives of ADT and SLA,respectively.By identifying and tracking eddies in the Mediterranean Sea from 1993 to 2018,we systematically and quantitatively explored the influence of two kinds of altimeter data on the detection of eddies,which provides a reference for the development and progress of the marine mesoscale eddy dataset.The results show that the META captures more ed-dies with larger amplitude and smaller radius than the Tian dataset in terms of eddy identification.In the spatial domain,the META dataset is more likely to detect eddies in geographically active areas.In-terestingly,in the time domain,the number of eddies in the Tian dataset fluctuates and converges to-wards the META dataset,which may,to some extent,indicate that the META dataset is of more con-sistent quality.In terms of eddy tracking,compared with the META datasets,the Tian dataset is able to track longer-lived eddies without large jumps,thus allowing the eddies to show stronger robustness.Therefore,although both datasets are excellent at detecting and describing eddies,users should use the Tian datasets when the focus is on the eddy tracks,and META datasets when the target of interest is the individual eddies.

贺晓辉;王祎诺;王璇;陈笑炎;陈戈

中国海洋大学信息科学与工程学部,山东青岛 266100中国海洋大学信息科学与工程学部,山东青岛 266100||潍坊学院物理与光电工程学院,山东潍坊 261061中国海洋大学信息科学与工程学部,山东青岛 266100||崂山实验室区域海洋动力学与数值模拟功能实验室,山东青岛 266237

测绘与仪器

卫星测高地中海中尺度涡旋涡旋识别与追踪参数统计

satellite altimeterMediterranean Seamesoscale eddyeddy identification and trackingparameter statistics

《中国海洋大学学报(自然科学版)》 2024 (009)

30-39 / 10

崂山实验室科技创新项目(LSKJ202201302);国家自然科学青年基金项目(42106192);中国博士后基金项目(2021M693018)资助 Supported by the Laoshan Laboratory Science and Technology Innovation Project(LSKJ202201302);the National Natural Science Youth Foundation of China(42106192);the China Postdoctoral Science Foundation Project(2021M693018)

10.16441/j.cnki.hdxb.20230159

评论