Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Asymmetry in the seasonal cycle of Antarctic sea ice driven by insolation

Nature Geoscience volume 15, pages 277–281 (2022)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

The mean seasonal cycle of Antarctic sea-ice extent is asymmetric, with the period of ice retreat being approximately two months shorter than the period of ice advance. This feature is largely consistent in observations from year to year and across different satellite products. The asymmetry is also broadly reproduced by comprehensive climate models across generations from CMIP3 to CMIP6, with limited impacts from internal variability. Using a range of idealized climate models of varying complexity, we show that the seasonal cycle in top-of-atmosphere incident solar radiation drives the asymmetry. Because insolation in southern high latitudes departs from a sinusoid by having a narrow peak of intense brightness in summer and a long period of low light in winter, there is rapid summer ice retreat and gradual winter ice advance. This simple physical explanation is markedly different from those proposed in previous studies.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Observed mean seasonal cycle in Antarctic sea-ice extent averaged over 1979–1998.
Fig. 2: Antarctic sea-ice seasonal asymmetry (δI) in CMIP6 simulations and observations.
Fig. 3: Antarctic sea-ice extent and temperature seasonal asymmetry in a range of configurations of the idealized climate model.
Fig. 4: Insolation and resulting surface temperature in the simplest model configuration (NoIce_NoDiff).

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Data for the processed observations, comprehensive climate model output and idealized model results is available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5913959.

Code availability

Code for the idealized climate model is available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5913959 and https://eisenman-group.github.io.

References

  1. Pellichero, V., Sallée, J.-B., Chapman, C. C. & Downes, S. M. The Southern Ocean meridional overturning in the sea-ice sector is driven by freshwater fluxes. Nat. Commun. 9, 1789 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Orsi, A. H., Johnson, G. C. & Bullister, J. L. Circulation, mixing, and production of Antarctic Bottom Water. Prog. Oceanogr. 43, 55–109 (1999).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Massom, R. A. et al. Antarctic ice shelf disintegration triggered by sea ice loss and ocean swell. Nature 558, 383–389 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Arrigo, K. R., Worthen, D. L., Lizotte, M. P., Dixon, P. & Dieckmann, G. Primary production in Antarctic sea ice. Science 276, 394–397 (1997).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Eayrs, C. et al. Understanding the seasonal cycle of Antarctic sea ice extent in the context of longer-term variability. Rev. Geophys. 57, 1037–1064 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Gordon, A. L. Seasonality of Southern Ocean sea ice. J. Geophys. Res. 86, 4193–4197 (1981).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Peixoto, J. P. & Oort, A. H. Physics of Climate (American Institute of Physics, 1992).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  8. Enomoto, H. & Ohmura, A. The influences of atmospheric half-yearly cycle on the sea ice extent in the Antarctic. J. Geophys. Res. 95, 9497–9511 (1990).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Stammerjohn, S. E., Drinkwater, M. R., Smith, R. C. & Liu, X. Ice–atmosphere interactions during sea-ice advance and retreat in the western Antarctic Peninsula region. J. Geophys. Res. Oceans 108, 3329 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Cerrone, D., Fusco, G., Simmonds, I., Aulicino, G. & Budillon, G. Dominant covarying climate signals in the Southern Ocean and Antarctic sea ice influence during the last three decades. J. Clim. 30, 3055–3072 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Eayrs, C., Faller, D. & Holland, D. M. Mechanisms driving the asymmetric seasonal cycle of Antarctic sea ice in the CESM Large Ensemble. Ann. Glaciol. 61, 171–180 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Raphael, M. N., Handcock, M. S., Holland, M. M. & Landrum, L. L. An assessment of the temporal variability in the annual cycle of daily Antarctic sea ice in the NCAR Community Earth System Model, Version 2: a comparison of the historical runs with observations. J. Geophys. Res. Oceans 125, e2020JC016459 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Turner, J. et al. An initial assessment of Antarctic sea ice extent in the CMIP5 models. J. Clim. 26, 1473–1484 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Zunz, V., Goosse, H. & Massonnet, F. How does internal variability influence the ability of CMIP5 models to reproduce the recent trend in Southern Ocean sea ice extent? Cryosphere 7, 451–468 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Shu, Q., Song, Z. & Qiao, F. Assessment of sea ice simulations in the CMIP5 models. Cryosphere 9, 399–409 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Roach, L. A., Dean, S. M. & Renwick, J. A. Consistent biases in Antarctic sea ice concentration simulated by climate models. Cryosphere 12, 365–383 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Roach, L. A. et al. Antarctic sea ice area in CMIP6. Geophys. Res. Lett. 47, e2019GL086729 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Shu, Q. et al. Assessment of sea ice extent in CMIP6 with comparison to observations and CMIP5. Geophys. Res. Lett. 47, GL087965 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Wagner, T. J. W. & Eisenman, I. How climate model complexity influences sea ice stability. J. Clim. 28, 3998–4014 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Reynolds, R. W., Rayner, N. A., Smith, T. M., Stokes, D. C. & Wang, W. An improved in situ and satellite SST analysis for climate. J. Clim. 15, 1609–1625 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Meier, W., Fetterer, F., Windnagel, A. & Stewart, J. NOAA/NSIDC Climate Data Record of Passive Microwave Sea Ice Concentration Version 4 (NSIDC, 2021).

  22. Eisenman, I., Schneider, T., Battisti, D. S. & Bitz, C. M. Consistent changes in the sea ice seasonal cycle in response to global warming. J. Clim. 24, 5325–5335 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. North, G. R. & Coakley, J. A. Differences between seasonal and mean annual energy-balance model calculations of climate and climate sensitivity. J. Atmos. Sci. 36, 1189–1204 (1979).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Donohoe, A., Dawson, E., McMurdie, L., Battisti, D. S. & Rhines, A. Seasonal asymmetries in the lag between insolation and surface temperature. J. Clim. 33, 3921–3945 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Blanchard-Wrigglesworth, E., Donohoe, A., Roach, L. A., DuVivier, A. & Bitz, C. M. High-frequency sea ice variability in observations and models. Geophys. Res. Lett. 48, e2020GL092356 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Kay, J. E. et al. The Community Earth System Model (CESM) Large Ensemble project: a community resource for studying climate change in the presence of internal climate variability. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 96, 1333–1349 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. SIMIP Community Arctic sea ice in CMIP6. Geophys. Res. Lett. 47, e2019GL086749 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  28. Notz, D. et al. The CMIP6 Sea-Ice Model Intercomparison Project (SIMIP): understanding sea ice through climate-model simulations. Geosci. Model Dev. 9, 3427–3446 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Huybers, P. & Eisenman, I. Integrated Summer Insolation Calculations IGBP PAGES/WDCA Contribution Series 2006-079 (NOAA/NCDC Paleoclimatology Program, 2006).

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank C. Eayrs for helpful discussions. This work was supported by the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research (SCAR) Fellowship Program; the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Climate and Global Change Postdoctoral Fellowship Program, which is administered by UCAR’s Cooperative Programs for the Advancement of Earth System Science (CPAESS) under award NA18NWS4620043B; US National Science Foundation grants OPP-1643445, OCE-2048590 and OPP-1643431; and NOAA grant NA18OAR4310274.

Author information

Author notes

  1. L. A. Roach

    Present address: NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, New York, NY, USA

  2. L. A. Roach

    Present address: Center for Climate Systems Research, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Atmospheric Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA

    L. A. Roach, E. Blanchard-Wrigglesworth & C. M. Bitz

  2. Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California, San Diego, CA, USA

    I. Eisenman

  3. Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA

    T. J. W. Wagner

  4. Physics and Physical Oceanography, University of North Carolina, Wilmington, NC, USA

    T. J. W. Wagner

Authors
  1. L. A. Roach
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. I. Eisenman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. T. J. W. Wagner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. E. Blanchard-Wrigglesworth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. C. M. Bitz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

T.J.W.W. and L.A.R. conceived the study question. I.E., L.A.R. and T.J.W.W. designed the research, constructed the idealized models, interpreted the results and developed the conclusions. L.A.R. analysed the observations and CMIP output. C.M.B. and E.B.-W. assisted with initial attempts to address the question. L.A.R., I.E. and T.J.W.W. wrote the manuscript with contributions from all co-authors.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to I. Eisenman.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature Geoscience thanks Clare Eayrs, Kenneth Golden and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work. Primary Handling Editor: Tom Richardson, in collaboration with the Nature Geoscience team.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Roach, L.A., Eisenman, I., Wagner, T.J.W. et al. Asymmetry in the seasonal cycle of Antarctic sea ice driven by insolation. Nat. Geosci. 15, 277–281 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-022-00913-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-022-00913-6

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing Anthropocene

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Anthropocene newsletter — what matters in anthropocene research, free to your inbox weekly.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing: Anthropocene