Spring 2011

No. 24
Contents
El Niño Outlook (April – October 2011)

1

JMA’s Seasonal Numerical Ensemble Prediction for Summer 20112

Warm Season Outlook for Summer 2011 in Japan

4

Summary of Asian Winter Monsoon 2010/2011

5

Stratospheric Circulation in Winter 2010/2011

8

JMA’s New Climatological Normals for 1981 – 201010

El Niño Outlook (April – October 2011)
The La Niña conditions that have persisted since last boreal summer are likely to decay by the end of boreal spring,and subsequent neutral conditions are likely to continue inboreal summer.
Pacific Ocean
In March 2011, the SST deviation from a sliding 30-year
mean SST averaged over the NINO.3 region was -0.7°C.
The five-month running-mean value of NINO.3 SST deviations was -1.2°C for January, and the Southern Oscillation
Index for March was +2.0. In March, SST anomalies wereremarkably negative in the central equatorial Pacific, andwere positive around Indonesia (Figure 1). Subsurface temperature anomalies were positive in the western and central

equatorial Pacific (Figure 2), while negative ocean heat
content (OHC) anomalies in its eastern part decreased
through March. In late March, positive OHC anomalies
prevailed over nearly the whole area of the equatorial Pacific (Figure 3). In the lower troposphere, easterly wind
anomalies were seen over the western and central equatorial
Pacific. These characteristics indicate decaying La Niña
conditions.
Further eastward migration of positive subsurface temperature anomalies in the western and central equatorial
Pacific are expected to cause weakening of negative SST
anomalies in its eastern part.
JMA's El Niño prediction model forecasts that the
NINO.3 SST will be near normal during boreal spring and

(a)

(a)

(b)

(b)

Figure 1 Monthly mean (a) sea surface temperatures (SSTs)and (b) SST anomalies in the Indian and Pacific Ocean areas for March 2011
Contour intervals are 1˚C in (a) and 0.5˚C in (b). The base period for the normal is 1971 – 2000.

Figure 2 Monthly mean depth-longitude cross sections of (a)temperatures and (b) temperature anomalies in the equatorial
Indian and Pacific Ocean areas for March 2011
Contour intervals are 1˚C in (a) and 0.5˚C in (b). The base period
for the normal is 1979 – 2004.

Tokyo Climate Center1

No. 24 | Spring 2011

(a)

(b)

Figure 3 Time-longitude cross sections of (a) SST and (b) ocean heat content (OHC) anomalies along theequator in the Indian and Pacific Ocean areas
OHCs are defined here as vertically averaged temperatures in the top 300 m. The base periods for the normal are
1971 – 2000 for (a) and 1979 – 2004 for (b).

near or above normal during boreal summer, although theuncertainty of the latter half of the prediction period is large(Figure 4).
Considering the above factors, the La Niña conditions
that have persisted since last boreal summer are likely todecay in boreal spring, and subsequent neutral conditions
are likely to continue in boreal summer, though the level of
uncertainty for summer is high.
The SST in the tropical western Pacific (NINO.WEST)
region has been above normal since last boreal summer inassociation with the current La Niña event. It is likely togradually approach normal levels in the months ahead.
Indian Ocean
The SST averaged over the tropical Indian Ocean(IOBW) region has been below normal since December lastyear. It is likely to gradually approach normal levels in themonths ahead.
(Ichiro Ishikawa, Climate Prediction Division)* The SST normals for the NINO.WEST region (Eq. – 15°
N, 130°E – 150°E) and the IOBW region (20°S – 20°N, 40°
E – 100°E) are defined as linear extrapolations with respect
to a sliding 30-year period in order to remove the effects oflong-term trends.

Figure 4 Outlook of the NINO.3 SST deviation produced by
the El Niño prediction modelThis figure shows a time series of the monthly NINO.3 SST
deviations. The thick line with closed circles shows observed SST
deviations, and the boxes show the values produced for the next
six months by the El Niño prediction model. Each box denotes therange into which the SST deviation is expected to fall with aprobability of 70%.

JMA’s Seasonal Numerical Ensemble Prediction for Summer 2011
According to JMA’s seasonal numerical prediction model,
sea surface temperature (SST) anomalies in the eastern equatorial Pacific will be above normal this summer, suggesting atransition from the current La Niña conditions to an El Niño
period. Reflecting the predicted El Niño-like SST anomalies,
active convection in the central equatorial Pacific and asouthward shift of the sub-tropical jet are predicted. However, as prediction skill in relation to El Niño/La Niña conditions from spring through summer is relatively low at the end
stage of La Niña periods, it should be noted that the extent of
the atmospheric influence from the predicted El Niño-like
SST anomalies is uncertain. Conversely, active and inactive
convections are predicted to the east of the Philippines andin the tropical Indian Ocean, respectively, reflecting positive
anomalies of SSTs in the western tropical Pacific.

1. Introduction
This article outlines JMA’s dynamical seasonal ensemble prediction for summer (June – August) 2011, which wasused as a basis for the Agency’s operational warm-season
outlook issued on 25 April 2011. This prediction is basedon the seasonal ensemble prediction system used in conjunction with the Atmosphere-Ocean General Circulation
Model (AOGCM). Please refer to the separate column for
details of the system.
Section 2 outlines the global SST anomaly predictions,and Section 3 describes the circulation fields expected over
the tropics and sub-tropics in association with these anomalies. Finally, the circulation fields predicted for the midand high latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere are explained in Section 4.

Tokyo Climate Center2

No. 24 | Spring 2011

2. SST anomalies (Figure 5)
In March 2011, the NINO.3 region’s El Niño monitoringindex, which shows the deviation from a sliding 30-year
mean SST averaged over this region, was -0.7°C. La Niña
conditions have continued since last summer (see also
JMA’s El Niño Outlook in this issue).
The predicted SST anomalies are shown in Figure 5.
Above-normal SSTs are forecast in the eastern equatorial
Pacific, suggesting a transition from the current La Niña
conditions to an El Niño period. However, hindcast experimentation has indicated that JMA’s model tends to predict aquicker transition from La Niña to El Niño conditions thanobserved values show, and that the prediction skill for El
Niño/La Niña conditions from spring through summer isrelatively low at the end stage of La Niña periods. Forecasters therefore believe that neutral conditions are likely to be
seen this summer. Meanwhile, above-normal SSTs are forecast in the eastern tropical Pacific despite the predicted El

Niño-like SST anomalies, though these anomalies are expected to gradually decrease. In the tropical Indian Ocean,normal or slightly above-normal SSTs are predicted.

3. Prediction for the tropics and sub-tropics (Figure 6)
Above-normal precipitation is predicted from the central
to the eastern equatorial Pacific (a) and to the east of thePhilippines (b). Considering the uncertainty of the prediction for a transition to El Niño conditions, the value of theabove-normal precipitation in (a) should not be viewed ashighly significant. However, the above-normal precipitationin (b) is expected in response to high SSTs over the western
tropical Pacific, and the anomaly can be seen as reasonable.
Below-normal precipitation is predicted over the Maritime
Continent and South Asia.
In the upper troposphere, a negative-velocity potential
anomaly at 200 hPa (i.e., more divergent) is predicted over
the tropical Pacific, while positive (i.e., more convergent)anomalies are predicted over the tropical Indian Ocean,reflecting the precipitation anomaly patterns in the tropics.

The stream function at 200 hPa is generally expected tobe negative in the Northern Hemisphere, reflecting thezonal pattern of precipitation (active near the equator andinactive away from it). This indicates a southward-shifting
tendency of the sub-tropical jet. However, considering thatthese anomalies may reflect predicted El Niño-like SST
anomalies, they should not be viewed as highly significant.
Positive (i.e., anti-cyclonic) anomalies are predicted to theeast of the Philippines, reflecting above-normal precipitation in the region.
Stream function anomalies at 850 hPa are expected to be
negative (i.e., cyclonic) to the east of the Philippines andpositive (i.e., anti-cyclonic) over South Asia. These anomalies indicate an active western North Pacific monsoon andan inactive Indian monsoon.

Figure 5 Predicted SSTs (contours) and SST anomalies(shading) for June – August 2011 (ensemble mean of 51
members)(a) RAIN(c) PSI200(b) CHI200(d) PSI850

Figure 6 Predicted atmospheric fields from 60°N – 60°S for June – August 2011 (ensemble mean of 51 members)(a) Precipitation (contours) and anomaly (shading). The contour interval is 2 mm/day.
(b) Velocity potential at 200 hPa (contours) and anomaly (shading). The contour interval is 2 × 106 m2/s.
(c) Stream function at 200 hPa (contours) and anomaly (shading). The contour interval is 16 × 106 m2/s.
(d) Stream function at 850 hPa (contours) and anomaly (shading). The contour interval is 5 × 106 m2/s.

4. Prediction for the mid- and high latitudes of theNorthern Hemisphere (Figure 7)
Negative anomalies of sea level pressure are predicted
for the western part of the North Pacific High, while positive anomalies are expected in East Asia due to active convection to the east of the Philippines. Geo-potential heightTokyo Climate Center

anomalies at 500 hPa are expected to be positive overalmost the whole of the Northern Hemisphere, implying
the influence of the recent warming trend.
(Masayuki Hirai, Climate Prediction Division)3

No. 24 | Spring 2011

(a) SLP‐ 16 ‐ 12‐8(b) Z500

‐4

0

4

8

12

16

‐ 120 ‐ 90

‐ 60 ‐ 30

0

30

60

90

Figures 7 Predicted atmospheric fields from 20°N –90°N for June – August 2011 (ensemble mean of 51
members)(a) Sea level pressure (contours) and anomaly (shading).
The contour interval is 4 hPa.
(b) 500 hPa height (contours) and anomaly (shading). The
contour interval is 60 m.

120

JMA’s Seasonal Ensemble Prediction System
JMA operates a seasonal Ensemble Prediction System (EPS) using the Atmosphere-Ocean General Circulation
Model (AOGCM) to make seasonal predictions beyond a one-month time range. The EPS produces perturbed initialconditions by means of a combination of the initial perturbation method and the lagged average forecasting (LAF)
method. The prediction is made using 51 members from the latest six initial dates (nine members are run every fivedays). Details of the prediction system and verification maps based on 30-year hindcast experiments (1979 – 2008)
are available at http://ds.data.jma.go.jp/tcc/tcc/products/model/.

Warm Season Outlook for Summer 2011 in JapanFor summer 2011, mean temperatures are likely to be
above or near normal in northern Japan and above normal inother regions. Warm-season precipitation amounts areunlikely to exhibit particular features in any region.
1. Outlook summary
In February, JMA issued its outlook for the coming
summer over Japan and updated it in March and April. For
summer 2011, mean temperatures are likely to be above ornear normal in northern Japan with 40% probability forboth categories, above normal with 50% probability inother regions. Warm season precipitation amounts areunlikely to exhibit particular features for any region(Figures 8 and 9).
2. Outlook background
JMA's numerical model predicts that SST anomalies
averaged over the NINO.3 region will be above normal insummer 2011. However, as the prediction accuracy for
NINO.3 SSTs in summer is relatively low at the end stageof La Niña conditions in spring, it is considered that SST
anomalies in the region will be mostly near normal in summer. SSTs in the tropical Indian Ocean (IOBW) and in thewestern equatorial Pacific are both predicted to be slightly
above normal in summer 2011.
Three-month precipitation amounts are predicted to be
Category－0＋

Northern Japan

30

30

40

Eastern Japan

20

30

50

Western Japan

20

30

50

Okinawa and Amami

20

30

50

above normal over central and eastern parts of the equatorial Pacific, and atmospheric circulation anomaly patterns
over the tropical and sub-tropical Pacific are predicted to be
similar to those seen during El Niño conditions. However,the predicted above-normal precipitation amounts are notviewed as highly significant due to the insufficient prediction skill for NINO.3 SSTs.
Positive anomalies of three-month precipitation aroundand to the east of the Philippines are predicted in association with suppressed convective activity over the tropicalIndian Ocean. As a result, the extension of the North Pacific High is predicted to be almost normal around Japan
during summer despite the predicted El Niño-like SST
anomalies. The Tibetan High is also predicted to be normal.
These results indicate that the circulation pattern around
Japan will be almost normal in summer.
Conversely, 500-hPa geopotential height anomalies are
predicted to be positive over almost the whole of the Northern Hemisphere due to the influence of the recent warming
trend. This suggests that summer-averaged temperatures
will be above normal in Japan.
(Koji Ishihara, Climate Prediction Division)(Category －: below normal, 0 : normal, + : above normal, Unit : %)Figure 8 Outlook for summer 2011 temperature probability in JapanTokyo Climate Center4

No. 24 | Spring 2011

Category
Northern Japan
Eastern Japan
Western Japan

－

0

＋

Sea of Japan side

30

30

40

Pacific side

30

30

40

Sea of Japan side

30

40

30

Pacific side

30

40

30

Sea of Japan side

30

40

30

Pacific side

30

40

30

30

40

30

Okinawa and Amami(Category －: below normal, 0 : normal, + : above normal, Unit : %)Figure 9 Outlook for summer 2011 precipitation probability in Japan

Summary of Asian Winter Monsoon 2010/2011
Surface climate conditions
In winter 2010/2011, intra-seasonal variations of temperature anomalies were clear except in southern Asia
(Figure 10). Lower-than-normal temperatures were observed around central Siberia in December, while higherthan-normal temperatures were seen around its northernand southern parts in January and February, respectively.
Also, lower-than-normal temperatures were observed
around China in January, while this area experienced
higher-than-normal temperatures in February. These temperature differences were affected by pronounced intraseasonal variations of the Siberian High (see Conditions ofatmospheric circulation).
Figure 11 shows extreme climate events that occurredfrom December 2010 to February 2011. In December, extremely low temperatures were observed around central
Siberia, while extremely high temperatures were seenaround the South China Sea. Moreover, extremely heavy
precipitation (snow) was observed from eastern Mongolia
to Japan. In January, extremely low temperatures were observed around China, and extremely light precipitation wasseen from the southern part of western Siberia to the easternpart of central Asia and from the Pacific side of Japan to thesouthern part of the Korean Peninsula. In February, heavy
precipitation (snow) was observed from southern Kazakhstan to Pakistan.
(Takafumi Umeda, Climate Prediction Division)

Figure 10 Monthly temperature anomalies from December 2010 to February 2011
Anomalies are deviations from the normal (i.e., the 1971 – 2000 average). The contour interval is 1°C.

Figure 11 Extreme climate events from December 2010 to February 2011

Tokyo Climate Center5

No. 24 | Spring 2011

Conditions of atmospheric circulation
In the 500-hPa height field for boreal winter 2010/2011(December 2010 – February 2011), positive and negative
height anomalies were generally seen in the high and middle latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere, respectively, indicating a negative Arctic Oscillation (AO) phase (Figure 12).
The AO remained in a significantly negative phase during
the first half of winter 2010/2011, turning positive in thesecond half (Figure 13). The Siberian High was stronger
than normal around its center, and the Aleutian Low was

obscure (Figure 12). The Siberian High was significantly
strengthened in January and March 2011, while it was
weakened in December 2010 and February 2011, showingthat its intra-seasonal variation was pronounced in the winter monsoon season (Figure 14). In the tropics, the La Niña
event that started in summer 2010 continued into the winter. In association with this, convective activity was enhanced from the eastern Indian Ocean to the Maritime Continent, while it was suppressed across the western and central equatorial Pacific (Figure 15).

Figure 12 Three-month averaged 500-hPa height (left), sea level pressure (center) and 850-hPa temperature(right) for December 2010 – February 2011
The shading indicates anomalies, and the wavy hatch patterns indicate areas with altitudes higher than 1,600 m.
The base period for the normal is 1979 – 2004. JRA/JCDAS data were used in the analysis.

Figure 13 First mode of empirical orthogonal function (EOF) analysis for three-month mean 500-hPa height in
the Northern Hemisphere (30˚N – 90˚N) for December – February (left), and time series of EOF scores in boreal winter 2010/2011 (right)
Left: the contours show the distribution of values obtained by multiplying the eigenvector of the first mode by theroot of the corresponding eigenvalue (unit: m). EOF analysis was conducted using a covariance matrix for 47 samples
from between 1958 and 2004. ERA-40 data (1958 – 1978) and JRA/JCDAS data (1979 – 2004) were used in theanalysis; right: the values show the normalized EOF scores obtained by dividing EOF scores (calculated by projecting the five-day mean 500-hPa height anomalies onto the eigenvector) by the root of the corresponding eigenvalue.

Figure 14 Time series of intensity for the SiberianHigh from December 2010 to March 2011
The values indicate five-day running means of areaaveraged sea level pressure anomalies (unit: hPa) to thesouthwest of Lake Baikal (45˚N – 55˚N, 90˚E – 105˚E).
The base period for the normal is 1979 – 2004. JRA/JCDAS data were used in the analysis.

Tokyo Climate Center

6

No. 24 | Spring 2011

Figure 15 Three-month averaged outgoing longwave radiation anomaly for December 2010 – February 2011
The warm/cold-color shading indicates weaker/stronger-than-normal convective activity. The base period for the normal
is 1979 – 2004. Original OLR data were provided by NOAA.

Strong East Asian winter monsoon in January 2011
During late December 2010 and January 2011, the East
Asian winter monsoon was significantly enhanced, leading
to extremely low temperatures over wide areas of East Asia
(Figure 16). Japan experienced below-normal January temperatures nationwide for the first time since 1986, as wellas heavy snowfall on the Sea of Japan side of the country.
In the upper troposphere, ridges were seen over the westernpart of Siberia, and blocking highs developed over the eastern part in January (Figure 16). These conditions were suitable for the enhancement of the Siberian High. The Aleutian Low was enhanced to the east of Japan in January(Figure 16), although it was obscure in December and February. The pronounced Siberian High and Aleutian Low led
to a strong winter monsoon over East Asia in January.

Figure 16 Monthly averaged 500-hPa height (left), sea level pressure (center) and 850-hPa temperature (right) for
January 2011
The shading indicates anomalies, and the wavy hatch patterns indicate areas with altitudes higher than 1,600 m. The baseperiod for the normal is 1979 – 2004. JRA/JCDAS data were used in the analysis.

Significant cold surges around the South China Sea inMarch 2011
The Siberian High was significantly developed in March(Figure 14). Focusing on the details, high surface pressure
to the southwest of Lake Baikal peaked around 20 Marchwith an extremely cold air mass in the lower troposphere(Figure 17). Thereafter, high-pressure anomalies related tothis cold air mass propagated southward along the eastern
periphery of the Tibetan Plateau and reached the South
China Sea and the Indochina Peninsula late in the month,bringing significant cold surges. In conjunction with thesesurges, convective activity was enhanced over the South
China Sea and the Indochina Peninsula as well as over the
Maritime Continent, where it was strengthened due to the
La Niña event. The intensity of northerly surges around theSouth China Sea was the strongest for March since 1979
(Figure 18).

Tokyo Climate Center

7(Shotaro Tanaka, Climate Prediction Division)

No. 24 | Spring 2011

Figure 17 Evolution of cold surges around the South China Sea
The upper panels show anomalies of 10-m wind vectors (unit: m/s), sea level pressure at intervals of 4 hPa(contours) and 850-hPa temperature at intervals of 2˚C (shading); the lower panels indicate 850-hPa wave activity
fluxes (unit: m2/s2), anomalies of 850-hPa stream function at intervals of 2.5 × 106 m2/s and outgoing longwave
radiation (unit: W/m2).

Figure 18 Time series of intensity for cold surges around the South China Sea for March from 1979 to 2011
Left: monthly mean outgoing longwave radiation anomalies at intervals of 8 W/m2 (shading) and 925-hPa windvector anomalies (unit: m/s) for March 2011; right: time series of 925-hPa meridional wind speed anomalies averaged around the South China Sea (10˚N – 20˚N, 100˚E – 130˚E: the area shown by the green rectangle in the panelon the left), and negative (positive) values indicate northerly (southerly) wind anomalies.

Stratospheric Circulation in Winter 2010/2011
In winter 2010/2011, the polar vortex was stronger than normal, and lower-than-normal temperatures were generally seen atthe 30-hPa level over the North Pole. Two minor stratosphericsudden warming (SSW) events occurred, but did not reach thecriteria for categorization as major events. This section reportson the characteristics of stratospheric circulation seen during
this winter.
Characteristics of stratospheric circulation
Temperatures at 30 hPa over the North Pole remained below normal during almost the whole period from midNovember 2010 to March 2011, and were remarkably below
normal from mid-February to mid-March in particular. The
minimum value was observed in mid-February, while in the
climatological normal it is seen in the period from late December to early January (Figure 19). In the three-month mean 30hPa height field from December 2010 to February 2011
(Figure 20 (a)), the polar vortex was stronger than normal withnegative anomalies over the Arctic region, which was the opposite of the patterns seen in winter 2009/2010 (Figure 20 (b))
and 2008/2009 (Figure 20 (c)) when a major SSW event occurred (Harada et al. 2010).

Tokyo Climate Center

8

Figure 19 Time series of temperatures at the 30-hPa
level over the North Pole (September 2010 – April 2011)
The black line shows daily temperatures, and the gray line
indicates the climatological mean.

No. 24 | Spring 2011

In winter 2010/2011, two minor SSW events occurredin the first half of January and in the period from late January to early February. In the first event, an anticyclone developed around Alaska, and the polar vortex shifted moderately toward Europe and the Atlantic, showing a pronounced planetary wave of zonal wavenumber 1 (Figure 21(a)). However, the anticyclone did not extend broadly over
the Arctic region. In the second event, the planetary wave
of zonal wavenumber 2 was pronounced following that ofzonal wavenumber 1 (Figure 21 (b)). The two centers of thepolar vortex were seen over the Atlantic and Russia, but it
did not form two clearly split vortices. The vertical component of the Eliassen-Palm flux (EP flux; after Palmer, 1982)(a)averaged over 30° – 90°N at the 100-hPa level was remarkable in the first half of the last 10-day period of Januarywith planetary waves of zonal wavenumber 1 and in thesecond half of the same period with planetary waves ofzonal wavenumber 2 (Figure 22 (c)). Considering that thevertical component of the EP flux indicates the verticalpropagation of energy by planetary waves, it can be inferred that the planetary wave of zonal wavenumber 2
propagated from the troposphere to the stratosphere following the propagation of the planetary wave of zonal
wavenumber 1. When the two SSW events occurred, zonalmean 30-hPa westerly winds at 60°N weakened, but did notturn easterly (Figure 22 (b)).

(c)

(b)

Figure 20 Three-month mean 30-hPa height and anomaly in the Northern Hemisphere for (a) December 2010 –February 2011, (b) December 2009 – February 2010, and (c) December 2008 – February 2009
The contours show 30-hPa height at intervals of 120 m, and the shading indicates its anomaly.

(a)

(b)

(c)

Figure 21 Five-day mean 30-hPa height and anomaly in the Northern Hemisphere for (a) 11 – 15 January, (b)31 January – 4 February, and (c) 11 – 15 April 2011
The contours show 30-hPa height at intervals of 120 m, and the shading indicates its anomaly.

Final warming
The increase of the 30-hPa temperature over the North
Pole was significant in late March, and the temperature
rapidly rose in early April (Figures 19 and 22 (a)). In thisperiod, an anticyclone formed around Alaska, and graduallydeveloped and extended over the polar region (Figure 21(c)). In mid-April, zonal-mean 30-hPa winds at 60° N
turned from westerlies to easterlies (Figure 22 (b)), and an
anticyclonic circulation (a normal formation in the stratosphere during the summer season) appeared over the polar
region.

Reference
Harada, Y., A. Goto, H. Hasegawa, N. Fujikawa, H. Naoeand T. Hirooka, 2010: A major stratospheric sudden
warming event in January 2009. J. Atmos. Sci., 67,
2052-2069. doi: 10.1175/2009JAS3320.1.
Palmer, T. N., 1982: Properties of the Eliassen-Palm flux
for planetary scale motions. J. Atmos. Sci., 39, 992-997.

(Nobuyuki Kayaba, Climate Prediction Division)

Tokyo Climate Center

9

No. 24 | Spring 2011

(a)

(b)

Figure 22 (a) Time-height cross section for seven-day
variations of zonal mean temperature averaged over
75° – 90°N, (b) time-height cross section of zonal
mean zonal wind at 60°N, and (c) time series of vertical components of EP flux averaged over 30° – 90°Nat the 100-hPa level (October 2010 – April 2011)
The red bars in (c) denote the vertical component of EP
flux for whole zonal wave numbers. The purple, lightblue and light-green lines denote the vertical components of EP flux for zonal wavenumbers 1, 2 and 3, respectively. The broken line in (c) denotes the climatological mean for the vertical component of EP flux forwhole zonal wavenumbers. The unit for the verticalcomponent of EP flux in (c) is m2/s2.

(c)

JMA’s New Climatological Normals for 1981 – 2010
1. Introduction
Climatological normals are used as a base for comparison of current conditions, as well as to describe average
climatic conditions. Under the Technical Regulations of theWorld Meteorological Organization (WMO-No. 49), climatological standard normals are averages of climatological
data computed for the following consecutive 30-year periods: 1 January, 1901, to 31 December, 1930; 1 January,
1931, to 31 December, 1960, etc. Countries should calculate climatological standard normals as soon as possible
after the end of a standard normal period. Although notrequired by WMO, many countries including Japan update
their climatological normals every decade.
JMA has developed new climatological normals using
climatological data for the period from 1981 to 2010, andstarted operationally using them on 18 May, 2011. The climatological normals specified below are used in a numberof products available on the TCC website. Some of theirdetails are summarized in the following sections.
- Monthly climatological normals of surface observation
stations in Japan as used in products available in the Climate in Japan section (Section 2)- Monthly climatological normals of surface observation
stations around the world (temperature and precipitation) as
used in products available in the World Climate section(Section 3)- For global mean surface temperature, anomalies for individual surface observations are calculated in relation to the1971 – 2000 average before being averaged over the globe
and adjusted to the 1981 – 2010 reference period (Section
4).
- Climatological normals of oceanographic data based on
Daily Sea Surface Analysis for Climate Monitoring andPredictions (COBE-SST) and the Ocean Data Assimilation
System (MOVE/MRI.COM-G) as used in products available in the El Niño Monitoring section (Section 5)- Climatological normals of atmospheric circulation fields
calculated using data of the Japanese 25-year Reanalysis(JRA-25) and the JMA Climate Data Assimilation System(JCDAS) as used in products available in the Climate System Monitoring section (Details of this section will begiven in the next issue of TCC News.)(Teruko Manabe and Ryuji Yamada, Tokyo Climate Center)

Tokyo Climate Center10

No. 24 | Spring 2011

2. Climatological normals of surface observation stations in Japan
Table 1 shows the differences between new and old climate normals for seasonal and annual mean temperatures ineach region. It can be seen that the new values tend to be
0.2 − 0.3ºC higher than the old ones for most seasons andregions.
Table 2 shows the ratios of new to old normals for sea-sonal and annual precipitation amounts in each region.
There seems to be no common trend of change for any season or region. However, the increase in winter on the Pacific side of eastern Japan and the decrease in autumn on
the Pacific side of western Japan are especially significant.
(Koji Ishihara, Climate Prediction Division)

Table 1 Differences between new and old climate normals for seasonal and annual mean temperatures (unit: ºC)
Positive values indicate new normals higher than old ones.
Winter
(Dec.− Feb.)

Spring(Mar. − May)

Summer(Jun.− Aug.)

Autumn(Sep. – Nov.)

Annual(Jan. – Dec.)

Northern Japan

+0.2

+0.3

+0.1

+0.3

+0.2

Eastern Japan

+0.3

+0.3

+0.3

+0.3

+0.3

Western Japan

+0.2

+0.3

+0.3

+0.4

+0.3

Okinawa and Amami

+0.3

+0.1

+0.2

+0.3

+0.2

Table 2 Ratios of new to old normals for seasonal and annual precipitation amounts (unit: %)Winter
(Dec.− Feb.)

Spring(Mar. − May)

Summer(Jun.− Aug.)

Autumn(Sep. – Nov.)

Annual(Jan. – Dec.)

Sea of Japan side of northern Japan

101

99

101

99

100

Pacific side of northern Japan

101

98

103

97

100

Sea of Japan side of eastern Japan

100

100

99

98

99

Pacific side of eastern Japan

106

100

100

102

101

Sea of Japan side of western Japan

100

101

98

99

99

Pacific side of western Japan

102

100

98

96

99

Okinawa and Amami

97

96

98

103

99

Figure 23 Regionalization for temperatures (left) and precipitation amounts (right)

Tokyo Climate Center

11

No. 24 | Spring 2011

3. World climatological normals
JMA has started using new climatological normals covering the period from 1981 to 2010 to monitor the world
climate.
As before, both data from CLIMAT bulletins and thosefrom the GHCN-Monthly database produced by NOAA/
NCDC were used to produce the new normals. Now, JMA’s
CLIMAT dataset (covering the period from June 1982 topresent) includes almost the whole statistical period of thenormals (1981 – 2010). Accordingly, if both CLIMAT and
GHCN-Monthly data are available for a station, CLIMAT
data take priority.

precipitation stations (except for Japanese stations) for
which new climatological normals could be calculated(Figure 24). The new number of normal-temperature stations is larger than the old one (2,025), while the new number of normal-precipitation stations is smaller (3,800).
The new normal temperatures are higher than the oldones at most stations for every month. However, no distinctive differences extend over wide areas or for several consecutive months between the new and old normal precipitation amounts. Figure 25 shows the differences between the
new and old normal temperatures and the ratio of new to
old precipitation normals for January and July.

Comparison between the new and old normals
There are 2,549 surface temperature stations and 2,658(Takafumi Umeda, Climate Prediction Division)

(a)

(b)

Figure 24 Distributions of climatological-normal stations for (a) surface temperature and (b) precipitation
Only stations with at least eight observations for every month from 1981 to 2010 are plotted on each map.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

Figure 25 Differences between JMA’s new and old normal temperatures for (a) January and (b) July, and ratiosof new to old precipitation normals for (c) January and (d) July

Tokyo Climate Center

12

No. 24 | Spring 2011

4. Global Mean Surface TemperatureWith a changing climate system in which most of thewarming observed since the mid-20th century is very likely
attributable to increased anthropogenic greenhouse concentration (IPCC, 2007), it is increasingly important for policy
makers and the general public to be kept informed of thestate of the Earth. As one of the world’s leading climate
centers, JMA reports on the global mean surface temperature (i.e., the combined average of near-surface air temperatures over land and sea surface temperatures) on a monthly,
seasonal and annual basis, thereby helping to raise publicawareness of climate change.
For the new decade starting from 2011, JMA has replaced the reference period against which global mean temperature anomalies are operationally calculated. As of May
2011, the global temperature is presented as the departurefrom the 1981 – 2010 average as opposed to the previous
period of 1971 – 2000. Anomalies for individual stations
are still calculated in relation to the 1971 – 2000 average, as
this period has wider coverage for historical observations.
For the global mean temperature, however, the baseline
period has been adjusted to 1981 – 2010, which is expected
to better reflect how the climate is experienced by thoseliving in today’s age of global warming. However, one

point should be noted; the global mean temperature anomaly for the year 2010, for example, was reported to be+0.34°C in relation to the 1971 – 2000 average (see TCC
News No. 23), whereas anomalies for 2011 and several
years thereafter are highly likely to fall within a range significantly below this figure. This is not because the Earthhas mysteriously stopped warming and started cooling; it issimply because temperatures will be shown in relation to
the warmer era of 1981 – 2010.
In addition to the reference period change, time-seriesgraph products from JMA have undergone a number of
appearance improvements. In place of the light-blue andpink candlesticks that previously represented temperature
anomalies for individual years (Figure 26), simple line plots
are adopted in the new design (Figure 27). This revised
form is expected to help highlight trends on a decades-tocentury time scale rather than year-to-year and month-tomonth fluctuations. In the context of monitoring global
climate change, which is gradually developing against a
backdrop of greater variability, the longer-term tendency ismore relevant than the fluctuations inherent in the natural
climate system.
(Yoshinori Oikawa, Climate Prediction Division)

Up to April 2011

Figure 26 Surface temperature anomalies
relative to the 1971 – 2000 average
The light-blue and pink bars indicate anomaliesof surface temperature for individual years. The
blue line indicates the five-year running mean,
and the straight red line shows the long-term
linear trend.

As of May 2011

Figure 27 Surface temperature anomalies
relative to the new baseline period of 1981 –2010
The new form of graph product is expected to
draw more attention to the long-term trend thanto year-on-year variability.

Tokyo Climate Center

13

No. 24 | Spring 2011

5. Climatological normals of oceanographic data
(1) Sea surface temperatures
Climatologies of monthly sea surface temperatures(SSTs) have been updated using the average for the period
from 1981 to 2010 instead of 1971 to 2000. From now on,
SST anomalies will be expressed as departures from thisnew period.

Figure 28 shows differences between the new and oldmonthly SST climatologies for January and July. The newones show higher values in the tropical Indian Ocean, thetropical Pacific and the North Atlantic, and higher values in
the Arctic Ocean in summer.

Figure 28 Differences between new and old monthly SST climatologies for January (left) and July (right)(2) Subsurface water temperatures
JMA operationally analyzes ocean subsurface temperatures based on the ocean data assimilation system (MOVE/
MRI.COM-G) for the purpose of monitoring El Niño
events. The subsurface temperature normal has also been
updated using the data from 1981 to 2010 instead of thosefrom the period 1979 – 2004.
Ocean heat content (OHC) in the new normals is lower
in the eastern tropical Pacific and the west of North andSouth America and higher in other areas (Figure 29 (a)).

The global mean difference in OHC from the old normal isabout 0.03°C. In the equatorial Pacific, subsurface watertemperatures in the new normal are higher in the westernequatorial Pacific and lower in the eastern equatorial Pacific than with the old normal (Figure 29 (b)).

(a)

(b)

(Akio Narui and Hiroyuki Sugimoto,
Climate Prediction Division)

Figure 29 (a) Annual mean ocean heat content and (b) depth-longitude cross sections of temperatures along the equator
The black contours show values for the 1981 – 2010 normal. The grey contours in (b) are for the 1979 – 2004 normal. The contour
interval is 2°C, and shading shows differences between the new and old normals.

Any comments or inquiries on this newsletter and/or the Tokyo Climate Center (TCC), Climate Prediction Division, JMA
TCC website would be much appreciated. Please e-mail Address: 1-3-4 Otemachi, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 100-8122, Japan
to: tcc@met.kishou.go.jp
TCC website: http://ds.data.jma.go.jp/tcc/tcc/index.html(Editors: Teruko Manabe, Ryuji Yamada, Kenji Yoshida)

Tokyo Climate Center

14

No. 24 | Spring 2011