PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 5, 2026Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres3 citationsOpen Access

Response of the Migrating Solar Semidiurnal Tide to Arctic and Antarctic Stratospheric Polar Vortices: A Comprehensive Study

View Full Paper
SKSunil KumarJOJens OberheideLXLu Xian

Key Points

  • This research aims to explore how migrating solar semidiurnal tide variability relates to the strength of Arctic and Antarctic polar vortices.
  • Utilized the Specified Dynamics Whole Atmosphere Community Climate Model (SD-WACCM-X) for analysis.
  • Examined the influence of Arctic and Antarctic stratospheric polar vortices on the migrating solar semidiurnal tide (SW2).
  • Analyzed Hough modes of SW2 in relation to the polar vortex strength during different seasons.
  • 50% of SW2 variability during boreal winter is linked to Arctic polar vortex strength.
  • 34% of variability during austral spring is associated with Antarctic polar vortex strength.
  • The first antisymmetric Hough mode (2,3) shows a significant response to Arctic SPV, while the second symmetric mode (2,4) responds to Antarctic SPV.
  • Stratospheric ozone contributes minimally to Hough mode variability, with primary influences from background neutral winds.

Abstract

Abstract In this study, we use the Specified Dynamics Whole Atmosphere Community Climate Model with thermosphere‐ionosphere eXtension (SD‐WACCM‐X) to investigate how the migrating solar semidiurnal tide (SW2) in the mesosphere and lower thermosphere (MLT) responds to the strength of Arctic and Antarctic Stratospheric Polar Vortices (SPVs). SW2 shows a substantial response to both SPVs, though the Antarctic influence is weaker. During boreal winter, 50% of SW2 variability is linked to Arctic SPV strength, while 34% during austral spring is associated with Antarctic SPV. Classical tidal theory Hough modes (HMs) of SW2 point to a clear relationship between the HMs and Arctic SPV with the most significant change occurring in the first antisymmetric (2,3) HM. However, only the second symmetric (2,4) HM responds significantly to the Antarctic SPV. These distinctive differences in HMs arise from dynamic changes in the stratosphere and MLT. Stratospheric ozone contributes only 6%–10% to the (2,2) HM during weak state of Arctic SPV and shows no significant influence under Antarctic SPV variability. As such, HM variabilities are primarily caused by changes in background neutral winds during weak and strong Arctic and Antarctic SPVs rather than changes in stratospheric ozone heating. In addition, the zonal momentum budget of each HM of SW2 is analyzed. The classical term (Coriolis + pressure gradient forcing) exhibits the largest variations with the strength of the Arctic and Antarctic SPVs, followed by the advection term.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Kumar et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69843451f1d9ada3c1fb2568https://doi.org/10.1029/2025jd045307
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper