<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="no"?>
<!DOCTYPE article SYSTEM "http://www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net/inc/acpd/copernicus.dtd">
<article language="en">
	<journal>
		<journal_title>Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics Discussions</journal_title>
		<journal_url>www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net</journal_url>
		<issn>1680-7367</issn>
		<eissn>1680-7375</eissn>
		<volume_number>4</volume_number>
		<issue_number>6</issue_number>
		<publication_year>2004</publication_year>
	</journal>
	<doi>10.5194/acpd-4-7917-2004</doi>
	<article_url>http://www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net/4/7917/2004/</article_url>
	<abstract_html>http://www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net/4/7917/2004/acpd-4-7917-2004.html</abstract_html>
	<fulltext_pdf>http://www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net/4/7917/2004/acpd-4-7917-2004.pdf</fulltext_pdf>
	<start_page>7917</start_page>
	<end_page>7984</end_page>
	<publication_date>2004-12-06</publication_date>
	<article_title content_type="html">Evaluation of the hydrological cycle of MATCH driven by NCEP reanalysis data: comparison with GOME water vapor field measurements</article_title>
	<authors>
		<author numeration="1" affiliations="1">
			<name>R. Lang</name>
			<email>lang@mpch-mainz.mpg.de</email>
		</author>
		<author numeration="2" affiliations="1">
			<name>M. G. Lawrence</name>
		</author>
	</authors>
	<affiliations>
		<affiliation numeration="1" content_type="html">Max-Planck Institute for Chemistry, Mainz, Germany</affiliation>
	</affiliations>
	<abstract content_type="html">This study examines two key parameters of the hydrological cycle, water vapor
(WV) and precipitation rates (PR), as modelled by the chemistry transport
model MATCH (Model of Atmospheric Transport and Chemistry) driven by National
Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP) reanalysis data (NRA). For model
output evaluation we employ WV total column data from the Global Ozone
Monitoring Experiment (GOME) on ERS-2, which is the only instrument capable
measuring WV on a global scale and over all surface types with a substantial
data record from 1995 to the present. We find that MATCH and NRA WV and PR
distributions are closely related, but that significant regional differences
in both parameters exist in magnitude and distribution patterns when compared
to the observations. We also find that WV residual patterns between model and
observations show remarkable similarities to residuals observed in the PR
when comparing MATCH and NRA output to observations comprised by the Global
Precipitation Climatology Project (GPCP). We conclude that deficiencies in
model parameters shared by MATCH and NRA, like, for example, in the
evapotranspiration rates, are likely to lead to the observed differences.
Regional differences between MATCH modelled WV columns and the observations
can be as large as 2 cm on the basis of a three years monthly average.
Differences in the global mean WV values are, however, below 1 mm. Regional
differences in the PR between MATCH and GPCP can be above 5 mm per day and
MATCH computes on average a higher PR than what has been observed. As a
consequence, this leads to shorter model WV residence times by about 1 day as
compared to NRA data and the observations. We find that MATCH has problems in
modelling the WV content in regions of strong upward convection like, for
example, along the Inter Tropical Convergence Zone, where it appears to be
generally too dry as compared to the observations. The study therefore
suggests that a too rapid conversion of WV to precipitate in MATCH,
especially in instances of strong convection, leads to regionally too dry
model results and in turn to generally too low WV residence times. The study
additionally demonstrates the value of the GOME WV record for model
evaluation.</abstract>
	<references>
	</references>
</article>

