January 2004
An Element of the World Climate Research Programme (WCRP),
initiated by the Global Energy and Water Cycle Experiment (GEWEX)

5Contributions of Satellite Data Are Fundamental to Success of the Coordinated Enhanced
Observing Period (CEOP)
Gregory W. Withee, NOAA Assistant Administrator for Satellite and Information Services, Washington D.C.
I am pleased to have an opportunity tocomment on the CEOP program and its relation to the Committee on Earth Observation
Satellites (CEOS) and the Integrated Global
Observing Strategy Partnership (IGOS-P).
Over the past year I have had the privilege ofchairing CEOS. Created in 1984 under theaegis of the G7, CEOS is tasked with ensuring
cooperation in mission planning as well as
acting as the focal point for international coDr. Gregory W. Withee
ordination in remote sensing activities. CEOS
unities all space agencies with civilian Earth observation satellite programs and major user entities; its programs rely on the “best efforts” of
its member organizations. A primary focus of CEOS has been Satellite
Data Utilization and the integration of these data with other types ofdata as part of IGOS while remaining a strong promoter of Sustainable
Development.
During my tenure as the Chair of CEOS I was able to witness firsthand the level of support for the coordination of observing networks by
the international community. During the last meeting of the IGOS
Partners in Colorado Springs in November 2003, three themes, including the water cycle theme, that had been developed over the past yearwith considerable guidance from CEOS were approved. An importantcomponent of the Integrated Global Water Cycle Observations (IGWCO)
Theme has been the Coordinated Enhanced Observing Period (CEOP). It
is critically important to measure, understand and model the water andenergy cycles within the climate system, but to do this takes broadinternational initiatives that encourage multi-disciplinary involvement by
the scientific community at large. In my view CEOS has been fortunate
in having a close association with the World Climate Research
Programme (WCRP) which has asked national agencies to support suchwork through the CEOP. CEOP, which is an element of WCRP that was
initiated by the Global Energy and Water Cycle Experiment (GEWEX), hasmany common goals with CEOS members in terms of the developmentof observing systems and integrated products. Given these connections
it is very understandable that CEOP was selected as ‘the first element of
IGWCO within the framework of IGOS-P’. CEOS recognizes the need for
an integrated approach to understanding the water cycle and is undertaking the development of methodologies that seek to promote the integration, not only of the science but of the observations, observational
systems and models that support that science. The initial success CEOP
has had in assembling data sets from different sources on different
continents and its continuing work and plans represents an innovative
effort to acquire global data and use data assimilation to integrate insitu and remote sensing data with model output to develop a global
understanding of the water cycle. This approach is directly synergisticwith the IGOS-P Global Water Cycle theme’s integration goals.
Professor Toshio Koike, the scientific leader for CEOP, has made anumber of visits to agencies, including NOAA, to seek support in termsof data services. It is clear that CEOP is evolving as a unifying and inte-

grating framework supported by the scientific community, space agencies and modeling centers that is designed to benefit from and build on
existing and future activities within the climate research community. As
part of WCRP’s efforts to meet its global research objectives, CEOP has
been timed to take advantage of the fact that data, which are fundamental to water and energy budget studies, are available from the existing suite of operational satellites. Because of their consistency andmaturity, these data are of critical importance to on-going and plannedwater cycle research initiatives that are developing within a number ofnational and international projects. CEOP is also hoping to exploit datathat have begun to arrive from the new series of Earth system satellites.
This group of satellites includes several that have already been successfully launched, such as TERRA, TRMM, AQUA, and ENVISAT.
During CEOS deliberations we have exercised some ownership of
CEOP by putting steps in place to ensure that CEOP takes into accountthe requirements of the climate research community at large in planning the assembly of coordinated data sets that will serve numerical
weather prediction and climate research and analyses needs. This work
has proven its value as successful comprehensive CEOP intercomparisons of in situ data, satellite products and model outputs are alreadyunderway. I wish, therefore, to appeal to heads of all relevant Agencies
and Organizations receiving requests to assist CEOP by contributing to
its basic need for satellite data to consider their decision seriously as
we are doing at NOAA and as has been undertaken through discussionsat CEOS, and to ultimately commit the necessary intellectual and fiscal
resources to help establish and exploit this important coordinated database. I firmly believe that the exploitation of satellite data in this way
will lead to improved models and better predictions of key climate
processes at all scales.
As noted earlier CEOS has a strong interest in the use of satellites topromote Sustainable Development. CEOS was heavily involved in theWorld Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) and has developed
an active follow-up program. In return for our data support, I expect
CEOP to actively contribute to the water and climate modules within our
CEOS/ WSSD program. Furthermore, the close partnership between
research and operations that is evident in CEOP may be a model forother CEOS activities. In order to strengthen the ties between CEOS
and CEOP, I would encourage more activities such as the CEOP testbed
facility that is being developed as part of the CEOS Working Group on
Information Systems and Services (WGISS) activities.
Contents:• Contributions of Satellite Data Fundmental to Success of the CoordinatedEnhanced Observing Period (CEOP) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1• Diurnal variability in the monsoon region: Preliminary results from the CEOP
Inter-Monsoon Studies (CIMS) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 2,3,4• Land Surface Processes Simulated from the Noah LSM in the NCEP Global
Model: A Comparative Study using the CEOP EOP-1 Reference Site
Observations • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 5,6• Notes from the CEOP Session at the 9th Meeting of the Gewex
Hydrometeorology Panel (GHP-9; Luneburg, Germany, September 2003) • • • • • • • • • • 7• Summary of the CEOP Session at AGU 2003 Meeting • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 7• Water and Carbon Exchange at the Mt. Bigelow Semi-Arid Sky Island CEOP
Reference Site • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 8

2

CEOP Newsletter No.5

Diurnal variability in the monsoon region: Preliminary results from the CEOP Inter-Monsoon
Studies (CIMS)
William K. M. Lau, Laboratory for Atmospheres, NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA
J. Matsumoto, Dept. of Earth & Planetary Science, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
Massimo Bollasina, Epson Meteo Centre, Milan, Italy
H. Berbery, Department of Meteorology, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, USA
1. Introduction
CIMS is a CEOP scientific initiative to assess, validate and improvethe capabilities of climate models in simulating physical processes inmonsoon regions around the world. CIMS will be conducted in conjunction with the two other CEOP initiatives; the Water and Energy BalanceStudies and the Watershed Hydrology to demonstrate the utility of CEOP
data for better understanding of the regional and global water cycle andfor model physics improvement. Model validation data will be derived
from CEOP global data sets, model location time series (MOLTS), as wellas in-situ observations from reference sites, which include GEWEX continental scale experiments (CSE). In CIMS, numerical experiments will be
designed and targeted towards simulation of fundamental physicalprocesses that will likely lead to identification of basic errors and biases
in model physics. For this purpose, a hierarchy of models including
general circulation models (GCM), regional climate models (RCM) andcloud resolving models (CRM) will be used. Monsoon processes aretargeted in CIMS because of their scientific values and their importancein improving weather and climate predictions in the global tropics andextratropics. Moreover, monsoon processes involve strong interactionsof atmosphere, the land, the biosphere and the oceans, and constitutethe basic building blocks of climate models.
CIMS should be considered not only as a research project for CEOP
but also a pilot research effort, towards the broader goal of improving
model physics parameterization for climate predictions and globalchange projections. As such, the coordination with on-going modelinter-comparison projects and GEWEX and CLIVAR modeling initiatives
are critically important for CIMS. For more details of CEOP and CIMS,
the readers are referred to the CIMS report on http://www.ceop.net.
2. Objectives of CIMS
There are myriad physical processes governing the variability of
monsoon regions ranging from supercloud cluster organization, cumulus, stratocumulus cloud formation, boundary layer processes, surface
radiative and hydrologic forcings, air-sea, and air-land interactions tobiosphere feedbacks, and anthropogenic impacts. From a modelingviewpoint, the most fundamental processes are those associated withthe diurnal cycles, the annual cycles and monsoon intraseasonal oscillations. Identifying model errors and biases in the these fundamental
processes will provide important clues for improving model physics particularly with respect to the better understanding of the water and energy cycles, and interactions of the atmosphere with land and oceanic
surface processes. Realistic simulation of these processes is a pre-requisite for better climate predictions on seasonal, interannual and longer
time scales. Specific objectives of CIMS are:i) To provide better understanding of fundamental physical processes
underpinning the diurnal and annual cycles, and intraseasonal oscillations in monsoon land and adjacent oceanic regions of Asia, Australia,
North America, South America and Africa.
ii) To demonstrate the synergy and utility of CEOP integrated satellitedata, in situ observations and assimilated data in providing a pathway
for model physics evaluation and improvement
3. Preliminary results
All monsoon regions of the world are known to have pronounced
diurnal cycle variability. According to previous studies, deep convection
and associated precipitation tend to peak in the late afternoon orevening over land areas, and in mid-night to early morning over adjacent oceanic regions. However, there are large variations to this basic

theme in different monsoon regions. In addition, the amplitudes of thediurnal cycle are often strongly modulated by daily and synoptic scale
forcings. In the following, we provide some highlights of CIMS-related
ongoing research focusing on the daily and diurnal variability over different monsoon regions.
a. Himalayas regions
The Himalayas region provides strong orographic and thermal forcings on the Asian monsoon. The daily and diurnal rainfall in this region
is very complex. A preliminary analysis of precipitation variability during
the EOP-1 was conducted at the CEOP Himalayas Reference Site (HRS).
Surface data were collected at the Pyramid AWS (5035 m above sea
level), established by a collaboration effort among Ev-K2-CNR, theEpson Meteo Centre and the Water Research Institute/CNR, and at
Syangboche AWS (3833 m above sea level), established by the
Glaciological Expedition of Nepal and maintained by GAME-AAN project.
The two AWSs are located about 20 km apart along the Khumbu Valley,that runs from southwest to northeast reaching Mt. Everest. AWSs data
were compared to TRMM 2A25 PR instantaneous observations and
3B42 daily rainfall rate gridded at 1°x1° resolution, and with NASA's
Global Modeling and Assimilation Office (GMAO, formerly the Data
Assimilation Office) GEOS-3 3-hr accumulated precipitation data at the
HRS (27.96°N, 86.81°E, which is Pyramid AWS' location). The current
analysis was limited to July 2001, when air temperature was constantly
above 0°C, to avoid errors related to solid precipitation measurement.
Daily total precipitation is represented in Fig.1a, together with estimated values from NASA's GMAO MOLTS and TRMM (average over themesh 27°-28°N; 86°-87°E, which encloses the two AWSs). Both measured precipitation series exhibit a strong and similar intra-seasonal
cycle. The only discrepancy around 10-11 July was checked by thesnapshot of TRMM/PR at 1230 UTC, when the satellite passed just over
the Khumbu Valley showing isolated meso-scale convection prevailingonly over Syangboche AWS. Such convective cells with sub-regional finestructure may cause large discrepancy even at points only 20 km apart.
A large precipitation event on 19-20 July is evident in all of theseries. The agreement of GMAO with observations is good; however,
GMAO tends to underestimate precipitation during the most intense
events, even if the monthly total is close to observations (about 91% ofwhat is observed at the Pyramid). TRMM estimates reproduce observations very well. Daily variations of precipitation are strongly correlatedwith synoptic scale forcings associated with the fluctuations of the
Tibetan High. The synoptic scale forcings strongly modify the amplitude,
and possibly the phases of the diurnal cycle (e.g., Ueno et al., 2001a;
Bollasina et al., 2002).
Figure 1b shows the diurnal variation of 3-hourly precipitation at the
two AWSs, in comparison with NASA's GMAO MOLTS. At higher altitude(Pyramid), precipitation has two distinct peaks, one in the (local) early
afternoon, and the other at midnight. At lower altitude (Syangboche),precipitation is more concentrated from the evening to the early morning. Differences in precipitation as a function of elevation is very important for surface hydrology, and its mechanisms have been discussed
based on thermally induced local circulation under the condition of constant large scale monsoon upslope flow (e.g., Ueno et al., 2001b;
Barros and Lang, 2003). For instance, strong daytime precipitation may
be caused around the ridges, and local scale convergence or radiative
cooling may cause night time precipitation at lower elevation. The
MOLTS data show comparable magnitude, with a single peak about 3
hours (6 hours) advance of Pyramid (Syangboche).

CEOP Newsletter No.5

Figure 1a Time series of daily total precipitation (mm) observed at Pyramid(dark blue line) and at Syangboche (red line), estimated by GMAO MOLTS (light
blue rectangles) and TRMM data (green rectangles) during July 2001.

Figure 1b Diurnal cycle of average 3-hourly total precipitation (mm) at Pyramid(dark blue) , Syangboche (red) and estimated by GMAO MOLTS (light blue) during July 2001. Time is in UTC (Nepal LT – 6-hr).

b. Other monsoon regions
Diurnal convection generated locally in monsoon regions may propagate systematically away from its source. Satomura (2000) simulated
the diurnal variation of convective activity along east-west cross-sections of Indochina using 2-dimensional cloud resolving model (RAMS).
Diurnal convection excited by topography in the afternoon propagateseastward during the nighttime, with an estimated speed of 7 ms-1.
These results were consistent with radar observations from the GAMEtropics project. However, other more complex features such as earlymorning peak of convection in northeastern Thailand have not been
simulated realistically. Thee-dimensional cloud resolving models isstrongly recommended in CIMS.
In the equatorial region over the Sumatera Island, with the mountain
range above 3000m, interesting diurnal movement of convective activity
has been noted, based on analysis of GMS IR1 data by Sakurai et al.
(2003). They found a diurnal cycle of convective activities whichbecame active in mountainous region in the afternoon and migrated
westward and/or eastward at a distance of several hundreds kilometersfrom midnight to morning (Fig. 2). The westward migration of cloud systems occurred in all areas almost throughout a year except in August.
An area of eastward migration was observed in/near the ITCZ around
100oE. The area appeared to shift northward and southward with annual cycle. The reasons for the preferred eastward or westward propagations of diurnal oscillations are unknown, and should be clarified infuture. Interaction between the diurnal cycle and seasonally varying

monsoonal circulation will be a focus for CIMS.
In the American monsoon region, diurnal variability manifests
itself not only in convection but also in low-level jet (LLJ). The
LLJ’s are generally found flowing parallel to north-south oriented mountain ranges such as the Andes for the South American
monsoon (SAM), and the Sierra Madre for the North American
monsoon (NAM) (e.g., Douglas 1995; Berbery 2001; Berbery
and Fox-Rabinovitz 2003). The SAM LLJ is important in transporting moisture from tropical South America towards the subtropical monsoon region of southern Brazil and the La Plata
Basin. Its diurnal cycle is not well known, with modeling studies
suggesting a nighttime maximum that is consistent with thepredominantly nighttime precipitation over La Plata basin(Berbery and Collini 2000), while other studies suggest that thestrongest wind in the afternoon and its core maximum wind islocated between 1600-2000 m (Marengo et al. 2002).
For the NAM, the Gulf of California (GC) LLJ is most pronounced in the early morning, along the coast of Mexico reaching the southwestern Arizona. This can be seen in Fig.3, whichshows the 3-hourly moisture flux at 925 hPa, simulated by the
ETA model and satellite estimated precipitation that includes
TRMM. As the inland heats up during the afternoon, the LLJ
gives way to a predominantly eastward flow, transporting moisture from the GC, which in terms leads to strong moisture convergence and peak diurnal precipitation along the coastal regionof Mexico. Synoptic scale fluctuations of the LLJ of the GC are
responsible for moisture surges, which may lead to the onset
the monsoon rain in southwestern United States.
As shown in the aforementioned examples, diurnal variability
in the monsoon regions represent a complex interplay of
responses of convection, moisture and circulation to solar heating, thermal and mechanical effects from topography, latentheating from precipitation, and surface heating. As the first stepfor model physics improvement, climate models should be validated against their ability to reproduce the diurnal cycle.
Acknowledgement
The authors would like to express thanks to participants of CIMS who
have provided background material for this newsletter articles. Dr. M.
Bosilovich provided the GMAO MOLTS for the comparison analysis.
Reference
Barros, A.P., and T.J. Lang, 2003: Monitoring the Monsoon in the Himalayas:
Observations in Central Nepal, June 2001. Mon. Wea. Rev., in press.
Berbery, E. H., and M. S. Fox-Rabinovitz, 2002: Multiscale diagnosis of theNorth American monsoon system using a variable resolution GCM. J.
Climate, 16, 1929-1947.
Berbery, E. H., and E. A. Collini, 2000: Springtime precipitation and water vapor
flux over subtropical South America. Mon. Wea. Rev.,128, 1328-1346.
Berbery, E. H., 2001: Mesoscale moisture analysis of the North American monsoon. J. Climate, 14, 121-137.
Bollasina, M., et al., 2002: Meteorological observations at high altitude in the
Khumbu Valley, Nepal Himalayas, 1994-1999. Bull. Glaciol. Res., 19, 1-11.
Douglas, M. W., 1995: The summertime low-level jet over the Gulf of California.
Mon. Wea. Rev.,123, 2334-2347.
Marengo J. A., et al., 2002: The South American low-level jet east of the Andes
during the 1999 LBA-TRMM and LBA-WET AMC Campaigns. J. Geophys.
Res., 107 (D20): Art. No. 8079.
Sakurai et al., 2003: Diurnal cycle of migration of cloud systems over Sumatera
Island. (To be submitted to JMSJ)
Satomura, T., 2000: Diurnal variation of precipitation over the Indo-China
Peninsula: Two dimensional numerical simulation. J. Met. Soc. Japan, 78,
461-475.
Ueno, K., et al., 2001a: Weak and frequent monsoon precipitation over the
Tibetan Plateau. J. Met. Soc. Japan, 79, 419-434.
Ueno, K., et al., 2001b: Meteorological observations during 1994-2000 at the
Automatic Weather Station (GEN-AWS) in Khumbu region, Nepal Himalayas.
Bull. Glaciol. Res., 18, 23-30.

34

CEOP Newsletter No.5

Figure 2 Upper panels: Monthly
mean diurnal cycles of cloud
movement over Sumatra Island,
indicated by frequency of occurrence of cloud top temperaturecooller tan 230K. Lower panels:
Schematic showing structures ofcirculation around convective
clouds based on rawinsonde
observations indicated by yellow
arrows (Sakurai et al., 2003).

EDAS Moisture flux at 925 hPa JAS 1998-2001
1200 UTC (early morning)

1500 UTC

andNASA 1deg 3-h precip JAS 1998-2001

1800 UTC (late morning)

2100 UTC

35N

30N

25N

115W

110W

105W

115W

110W

105W

115W

110W

50

50

0000 UTC (late afternoon)

105W

115W

110W

50

0300 UTC

105W
50

0600 UTC (late evening)

0900 UTC

35N

30N

25N

115W

110W

105W
50

115W

110W

105W
50

115W

110W

105W
50

115W

110W

105W
50

Figure 3 Diurnal
cycle of vertically integrated moisture flux
(gm Kg-1ms-1), andprecipitation (mm/day)for the North American
monsoon.

CEOP Newsletter No.5

Land Surface Processes Simulated from the Noah LSM in the NCEP Global Model:
A Comparative Study using the CEOP EOP-1 Reference Site Observations
Cheng-Hsuan Lu 1,2 and Kenneth Mitchell 2

1
2

RS Information Systems Inc, McLean, VA
Environmental Modeling Center, NCEP, NOAA/NWS, Camp Springs, MD

1. Introduction
The Coordinated Enhanced Observing Period (CEOP) is an element of
the World Climate Research Program (WCRP) initiated by the Global
Energy and Water Cycle Experiment (GEWEX). Observations at CEOP
reference sites are used in this study to evaluate land surface processes in the NCEP Global Forecast System (GFS), and for comparison, in
NCEP's North American Land Data Assimilation System (NLDAS).
2. CEOP Reference Sites
We highly commend the representatives and operating agencies andinstitutions that sponsor and operate the CEOP reference sites for providing their observations for broad use by the scientific community.
Under WCRP coordination, the site managers and CEOP have striven
diligently with the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) to
establish a centralized database for reference-site data in a common
format. This greatly facilitates use of the CEOP data for model assessment.
Here the GFS is assessed at three CEOP reference sites during EOP1 (1 July-30 September 2001), including the Pantanal site in Brazil(19.56S, 57.01W) from LBA (The Large Scale Biosphere Atmosphere
Experiment) (This data was provided by Dr. A. Manzi, leader of theInterdisciplinary Pantanal Experiment, which is a partnership from National
Institute for Space Research and the Federal University of Mato Grosso do Sul,in Brazil. This project was funded by FAPESP under Grant Number 98/001055.), the Lindenberg site in Germany (52.17N, 14.12E) from BALTEX (The

Baltic Sea Experiment), and a Southern Great Plains (SGP) site (48.31N,
105.1W) from GAPP (GEWEX America Prediction Project). The reported
dominant vegetation is forest at the Lindenberg site, wetland at thePantanal site and short grass at the SGP site. The default vegetation
type in the GFS at Lindenberg, Pantanal and SGP, respectively, is mixed
forest, savanna, and grass/crop.
3. Global Model and Experiment Setup
This study uses the global spectral model of the NCEP GFS, configured with T62 spatial resolution (~ 200km) and 28 vertical levels,
matching that of NCEP's current seasonal forecast system. Aside fromresolution, the model is only slightly modified from the operational
medium-range weather forecasting model and is targeted for a future
upgrade of NCEP's seasonal forecast system. Parameterizations
include simplified Arakawa Schubert convection, longwave and shortwave radiation, explicit cloud microphysics, non-local vertical diffusionand gravity wave drag.
The operational version of GFS utilizes the Oregon State University(OSU) Land Surface Model (LSM) of Pan and Mahrt (1987). As part ofNCEP efforts with GAPP to upgrade the land component in all NCEP
global and regional models and data assimilation systems, the newer
NCEP Noah LSM (Ek et al., 2003) has been implemented in the test bedof the NCEP GFS. The Noah LSM, an advanced descendant of the OSU
LSM, was developed at NCEP and executed in NCEP's recently completed 25-year Regional Reanalysis (Mesinger et al., 2004). Key advancesin the Noah vs. OSU LSM include soil layers changed from 2 (10 and 90
cm thick) to 4 (10, 30, 60, 100 cm thick), addition of frozen soil physics
and patchy snowpack treatments, and improvements in bare soil evaporation, snow albedo and ground heat flux under snowpack and nonsparse vegetation.
Thus we compare two versions of the GFS model: control(CNTRL/OSU) using the OSU LSM and experimental (TEST/Noah) using
the Noah LSM.
For both, daily 5-day forecasts with hourly output are executed during EOP-1. Day-1 forecast results are presented here. Initial conditions

are taken from the 00Z analysis of the NCEP Global Data Assimilation
System (GDAS). To date, the GDAS has been executed using only the
OSU LSM, which yields non-optimal initial land states for the Noah LSM
in the TEST runs (implications discussed more below).
4. Results
Figure 1 shows the monthly mean diurnal cycle of near-surface airtemperature, surface solar insolation, sensible heat flux and latent heat
flux at the Lindenberg site during 1-31 July 2001 from observations,
CNTRL/OSU runs and TEST/Noah runs. The corresponding mean diurnal cycle at the Pantanal and SGP sites are shown in Figures 2 and 3,
respectively. The shorter period (July 7-12) depicted at the Pantanalsite reflects the available observations during EOP-1, e.g., latent heat
flux was reported only during this 6-day window.
At the three sites, the TEST/Noah runs yield notably higher daytime
latent heat flux (and cooler 2-m air temperature) than the CONTRL/OSU
runs, with both having higher latent heat flux than the observations. Yet
the daytime sensible heat flux of both GFS runs are closer to each otherand to the observations. Thus net radiation and ground heat flux differences must contribute notably to the latent heat flux differences.
Assessment of LSM physics in the global model is hindered by surface forcing errors in the parent atmospheric model. For example, at the
Lindenberg and SGP sites, a high bias in the GFS surface solar insolation compared to the in situ observations is evident (top-right in Figures
1 and 3). The precipitation forcing errors (not shown) of the parent
model will be quantified in near-future follow-on study. Additionally, theNoah LSM assessment to date is hindered by the aforementioned lackof Noah-based, continuously-cycled land states in the GDAS.
Parent model surface-forcing biases and lack of Noah-cycled initialland states spur us to consider the uncoupled results of the Noah LSM
in the North American Land Data Assimilation System (NLDAS). The
NLDAS is fully described in Mitchell et al. (2003). It is a land-only(uncoupled) system that integrates forward in time the land states offour land models in parallel (including the Noah LSM) in a continuously
cycled fashion over the continental U.S. from common initial land stateson 01 October 1996 to present realtime (for the Noah LSM) using
shared, externally specified, atmospheric surface forcing. The seven
NLDAS surface forcing fields include observation-based precipitation(from gauges and radar) and satellite-based surface solar insolation(Pinker et al., 2003), both of which manifest substantially less bias in
NLDAS than in the GFS, as illustrated for solar insolation in Figure 3(top-right). Using the same Noah LSM as in the coupled GFS
TEST/Noah runs, the NLDAS at the SGP site yields simulations of bothlatent heat flux and sensible heat flux (lower panels in Figure 3) thatagree well with the CEOP in situ observations during July of EOP-1. The
improvement in the latent heat flux of the Noah LSM in the NLDAS vs.
the GFS TEST/Noah runs is especially dramatic. Hence the NLDAS
offers an appealing and complementary uncoupled assessment of the
Noah LSM via improved surface forcing and properly spun-up landstates.
5. Conclusions
This preliminary pilot study, illustrates the utility of the CEOP reference site observations for assessing land-surface processing.
Caveats in this study to the LSM assessment in the coupled model werehighlighted: (a) surface forcing biases in the parent atmospheric modeland (b) lack of Noah-LSM compatible initial land states. The simultaneous assessment of the Noah LSM in the uncoupled NLDAS is a usefulcompanion analysis that largely avoids caveats (a) and (b) above.
Conclusive LSM assessment for the coupled model awaits follow-on

56

CEOP Newsletter No.5

study including the following:• Cycle the coupled GDAS using the Noah LSM for at least one
year to provide initial land states compatible with the Noah
LSM,
• Include other surface and sub-surface fields in the comparison(soil moisture and temperature, all radiation components,
ground heat flux),• Extend the number of reference sites examined and add theperiods of EOP-2 through EOP-4.
• Quantify other surface forcing errors in the parent model (e.g.,precipitation).
References
Ek, M. B., et al., 2003: Implementation of Noah land-surface model
advances in the NCEP operational mesoscale Eta model, J. of
Geophys. Res., in press.
Mesinger, F., et al., 2004: North American Regional Reanalysis. 15th
Symp. on Global Change and Climate Variations, P1.1, Combined
Preprints CD-ROM, 84th AMS Annual Meeting, Seattle, WA.
Mitchell, K., et al., 2003: The Multi-institution North American land data
assimilation system (NLDAS) project: Utilizing multiple GCIP products
and partners in a continental distributed hydrological modeling system, J. Geophys. Res., in press.
Pan and Mahrt, 1987: Interaction between soil hydrology and boundary
layer developments, Boundary Layer Meteorol., 38, 185-202.
Pinker, R. T., et al., 2003: Surface radiation budgets in support of the
GEWEX Continental Scale International Project (GCIP) and the GEWEX
Americas Prediction Project (GAPP), including the North American
Land Data Assimilation System (NLDAS) Project, J. of Geophys. Res.,in press.

Mourning Dr. Hajime Nakamura's
passing
Toshio Koike, CEOP Lead Scientist andProfessor, the University of Tokyo

Dr. Hajime Nakamura, Director of the
Numerical Prediction Division at the Japan
Meteorological Agency, passed away suddenly
on October 18, 2003. Dr Nakamura had led the
CEOP Model Output Integration effort andenthusiastically supported other CEOP activities. I am certain that not only CEOP but theworld wide numerical prediction and meteorological communities will feel the loss of thisimportant and respected colleague. As the
CEOP Lead Scientist and as a personal friend of
Dr Hajime Nakamura I wish to express my sincere sorrow at his passing.

Figure 1. For in situ observations (red with circles) and GFS runs of CNTRL/OSU (blue line)
and TEST/Noah (green with crosses), the mean diurnal cycle for 1-31 July 2001 at the
BALTEX Lindenberg reference site for 2-m air temperature (K) (top-left), surface solar insolation (W/m2) (top-right), sensible heat flux (W/m2) (bottom-left), latent heat flux (W/m2) (bottom-right). Y-axis range for latent and sensible heat flux differs from that of solar insolation.

Figure 2. Same as Figure 1, except for 7-12 July 2001 at the LBA Pantanal site.

Figure 3. Same as Figure 1, except for the GAPP SGP site and addition of NLDAS timeseries (purple with triangles).

CEOP Newsletter No.5

Notes from the CEOP Session at the 9th Meeting of the Gewex Hydrometeorology Panel(GHP-9; Luneburg, Germany, September 2003)
Sam Benedict, CEOP International Coordination Function, CA, USA
The CEOP Science Strategy and Direction Overview was provided atby several model evaluations based on this data that were presented at
the meeting by Drs H. Grassl, CEOP Science Steering Committee
the meeting. The initial results are available at: http://monsoon.t.uChairman and J.Matsumoto, who was acting on behalf of Dr T. Koike,
tokyo.ac.jp/ceop/model/telecon/ (See also the article in this Newsletter
CEOP Lead Scientist. Dr Matsumoto’s presentation included a report on
by Drs Mitchell and Lu).
the initial Earth Observation Summit (Washington DC, USA, July 2003)
and provided information on the development of the Group on EarthA request for Reference Site Data collected during the CEOP third
Observations (GEO). The group was informed that Dr T. Koike, was a
Enhanced Observing Period (EOP-3) from October 2002 throughmember of two of the GEO sub-working panels that would assist with
September 2003 was submitted to the GEWEX Continental Scale
the Japanese and overall international contribution to the implementaExperiments (CSEs) in August 2003. Data began arriving at the CEOP
tion of the GEO initiative and especially to the planning of the EarthCentral Data Archive immediately. An initial “composite” data set (first
Observation Summit-2 to be held in Japan in May 2004. The particihalf of EOP-3) is planned for release in early 2004.
pants agreed that the implementation of CEOP and GEWEX/GHP needed
to remain complementary to the plans and evolution of these extensive
The CEOP Inter-monsoon Model Study (CIMS) concept was endorsed
international initiativies.
at the meeting. The group welcomed the provisional plans presented by
Drs Marengo and Mechoso to hold a targeted CEOP Monsoon Workshop
Dr R. Lawford, reported that CEOP had gained broad recognition as
in South America that would be a joint CEOP-CIMS/VAMOS meeting for
an initial element of the Integrated Global Water Cycle Observations
the North and South American monsoon to be held in September 2004,(IGWCO)’ theme within the framework of the Integrated Global
after the GHP-10 meeting in Montevideo, Uruguay.
Observing Strategy Partnership (IGOS-P). See more on this edorsementof CEOP in the Commentary by Dr Gregg Withee in this Newsletter.
Dr J. Roads reaffirmed that progress has been made on CEOP’s
Water and Energy Simulation and Prediction (WESP) sub-projects relatDr S. Williams reported that CEOP Reference Site data/metadata is
ed to water and energy budget analyses, transferability studies, andcontinuing to be maintained on the Internet at:land data assimilation.
http://www.joss.ucar.edu/ghp/ceopdm/rsite.html. The success of theinitial (EOP-1) CEOP dataset (July to September 2001) was evidenced

Summary of the CEOP Session at AGU 2003 Meeting
J. Roads, CEOP/WESP co-chair, R. Lawford, GEWEX Program Manager, S. Benedict, CEOP international coordinatorand the time period for the data request. Of special interest was the isoA CEOP session was recently convened at the 2003 fall AGU meeting
tope data being collected over Australia, as described by K. McGuffie. R.
by J. Roads and R. Lawford. The talks and posters provided an overview
Lawford described the many opportunities for creative use of all of theof the data and scientific aspects of the CEOP initiative as well as
data sets.
CEOP’s links with climate programs. Even while CEOP continues its
observational phase, these papers provide early scientific results, using
J. Roads et al. described the model output being provided by the
CEOP’s initial dataset (EOP1), that show the direction the CEOP
Scripps Experimental Climate Prediction Center and the National
Research phase will take.
Centers for Environmental Prediction. The model output is being used todiagnose model problems as well as provide beginning descriptions ofT. Koike provided an overview of some of the first in-situ data sets
the processes governing the diurnal cycle of atmospheric and surface
and model output being developed for CEOP. The CEOP data will bewater and energy cycles. W. Lau and J. Matsumoto described beginning
used to address studies on the inter-comparison and inter-connectivity
studies associated with the CEOP Inter-Monsoon Study (CIMS) which isof the monsoon systems and regional water and energy budgets, anda major initiative under CEOP to engage the modeling and the observawill provide a means for downscaling from the global climate to local
tional communities to join in a coordinated effort to use CEOP data towater resources. Recent results on the downscaling and the mountainbetter understand the monsoons in various regions of the world.
valley circulation were discussed by Koike’s research group.
S. Loehrer described the 36 reference site in-situ data sets beingarchived and quality controlled for CEOP at UCAR’s Joint Office for
Science Support. These reference sites provide observations of surface
meteorology, radiation, fluxes, soils, and atmospheric profiles in a uniform format. B. Burford described the developing integrated dataarchive being developed at University of Tokyo. There will be a userinterface, which will allow users to select the type of data, the location

Calendar of CEOP Meetings:• The 3rd CEOP Implementation Planning Meeting:
Irvine, California, USA 10-12 March 2004
• CEOP and Asian Monsoon Systems Session,
Joint AOGS 1st Annual Meeting & APHW 2nd Conference:
Singapore, Singapore, 5-9 July 2004

Accident on Earth Observation Operationof Midori-II
From Press Release by Japan Aerospace Exploration
Agency (JAXA) on October 31, 2003
The Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) has been investigating the possibility of recovering the observations of Midori-II (alsocalled ADEOS-II) after an anomaly was detected in the satellite on
October 25th, 2003. JAXA has been continually trying to send thesatellite commands to restore its functions, and analyze its current
status. However, as a result of investigation, analysis, and inability tore-establish any communications with the satellite, JAXA foundtoday that the possibility of restoring the operations of Midori-II isextremely remote.

7

8

CEOP Newsletter No.5

Water and CO2 Exchange at the Mt. Bigelow Reference Site
Constance Brown-Mitic, W. James Shuttleworth, Eleanor Burke, Jonathan Petti, and Soroosh Sorooshian. SAHRA,
Dept. of Hydrology and Water Resources, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, U.S.A.
The Mt Bigelow reference site is located at 2583 m a.s.l. in the
Santa Catalina Mountains NE of Tucson, Arizona, U.S.A., Latitude 32º
25' 00" N and Longitude 110º 43' 31" W in a Douglas fir/Pine mixed
forest. The fetch for the tower includes the mature forest cover as well
as some areas that were recently burnt. There was minimal effect fromthe 2002 Bullock forest fire but the 2003 Aspen fire resulted in sometree removal within a 1km radius. The tower site and its footprint area
are in the only unburned pine/fir forest along the Catalina ridge line.
Air temperature rarely exceeds 32º and the soil moisture clearly indicates the ecosystem’s pronounced annual wet-dry cycle (Figure 1).
Energy closure for this complex ecosystem is very good with daytime
recovery, approaching 100%. The energy and CO2 fluxes illustrate thepre/post monsoon and winter characteristics (Figure 2). During the premonsoon season when essentially all the winter precipitation had been
evaporated and the soil was extremely dry, the trees essentially closed
down. Daytime CO2 uptake was very low, latent heat flux remained close
to zero all day with daytime vpd greater than 2 kPa. Soon after the monsoon, the daytime Bowen ratio fell to about 0.3, while the net CO2
uptake remained significant, as it did throughout the winter months.
These are some of the unique eco-hydro-micrometeorological behaviorof semi arid ecosystem (Brown-Mitic et al 2004), which have the potential to significantly impact the dynamics of the annual carbon and water
cycles. Figure 3 shows the 32-day running mean for the fraction ofphotosynthetically active radiation (FPAR) obtained from TERRA-MODISfor 2002. It detects the pronounced response of the vegetation to water
availability and is expected to prove useful not only in diagnosing
drought stress but also for improving estimates of ET and net ecosystem exchange.

Acknowledgement
Primary funding: NSF STC SAHRA under Agreement EAR-9876800.
Additional funding: NOAA project NA16GP2002.

References
Brown-Mitic C, Shuttleworth W.J., Harlow C., Petti J., Burke E., Bales R. (2004):
Water, Heat, and CO2 Exchange for a Sky Island, Subalpine Forest In
Southwestern U.S., J. Agri. and Forest Meteorol. (Submitted).

Figure 2. Pre-monsoon, post-monsoon & winter fluxes.
Figure 3.
FPAR from
MODIS onTERRA for the
tower site

Figure 1. Air Temp. and soil moisture in the vicinity of the tower

Newsletter Editorial Board: Robert SCHIFFER, Carlos R. MECHOSO, Paul D. TRY
Contact Address of International Coordination Body:
Sam BENEDICT (International Coordinator)
742 “H” Avenue
Coronado, CA, 92118, USA
Phone: +1-619-437-7904 Fax: +1-619-437-6814
E-mail: seb@www.wmo.ch

Dawen YANG (Secretary General), Akiko GODA, Katsunori TAMAGAWA
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Tokyo
7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8656, Japan
Phone: +81-3-5841-6132 Fax: +81-3-5841-6130
E-mail: ceop@monsoon.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp

Supported by: Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA), Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST)