Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40130261›Full record

ArticleDiscover atmosphere2025

Model performance and surface impacts of atmospheric river events in Antarctica.

Marlen Kolbe, Jose Abraham Torres Alavez, Ruth Mottram, Richard Bintanja, Eveline C van der Linden, Martin Stendel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Discover atmosphere, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Marlen KolbeFaculty of Science and Engineering, Energy and Sustainability Research Institute Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.
Jose Abraham Torres AlavezNational Centre for Climate Research, Danish Meteorological Institute, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Ruth MottramNational Centre for Climate Research, Danish Meteorological Institute, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Richard BintanjaFaculty of Science and Engineering, Energy and Sustainability Research Institute Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.
Eveline C van der LindenResearch and Development of Weather and Climate models, Royal Dutch Meteorological Institute, De Bilt, Netherlands.
Martin StendelNational Centre for Climate Research, Danish Meteorological Institute, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is increasing evidence that atmospheric rivers (ARs) drive extreme precipitation and melt events across Antarctica and that these impacts are more accurately captured in high-resolution models. However, a comprehensive evaluation of AR impacts, comparing the performance of models with varying resolutions and physics across multiple AR events, has not yet been conducted. In this study, we simulate four recent AR events using the regional climate model HCLIM43 in its ALADIN (11 km) and AROME (11 km and 2.5 km) configurations, as well as ERA5 (31 km) and MERRA-2 (50 km), to analyze the dominant factors driving melt and precipitation and how spatial resolution and model physics affect surface impacts compared to observations. The events include intense snowfall and longwave radiation (Jun 2019), surface melt from foehn winds (Feb 2020), a large-scale heat anomaly driven by radiative and turbulent processes (Mar 2022), and inland surface warming after moisture is released by sea ice and ice shelves (Dec 2023). While all reanalyses and models underestimate surface warming and melt during these events, the high-resolution 2.5 km AROME configuration tends to simulate the most realistic precipitation and melt extents, largely due to its improved representation of foehn effects and reduced cloud biases. Longwave radiation generally dominates AR-induced warming, particularly over wider inland regions, while sensible heat fluxes are dominant in coastal and foehn-prone regions. Lastly, substantial differences among models/reanalyses in cloud phase and total cloud water paths underscore the need for improved cloud parameterizations and surface energy budget calculations. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s44292-025-00026-w.

Indexed as

Antarctic Atmospheric RiversExtreme PrecipitationSurface Energy BudgetSurface Melt

Identifiers

PMID40130261
PMCPMC11931731

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.