Noteworthy Cool-Season Extreme Weather Events over Central and Eastern North
America Associated with Strong Extratropical Cyclones
Ph.D. Dissertation Prospectus
Alicia M. Bentley
Department of Atmospheric and Environmental Sciences
University at Albany, State University of New York
1. Introduction
a. Motivation and purpose
Extratropical cyclones (ECs), which form in response to a combination of baroclinic,
diabatic, and barotropic processes, play a major role in determining the day-to-day
weather conditions in the midlatitudes during the cool season.
ECs are a central component maintaining the global atmospheric energy, moisture,
and momentum budgets (Neu at al. 2013).
b. Literature review
c. Research questions and hypotheses
2. Data and methodology
a. Datasets
The primary data source used in this Ph.D. dissertation will be the 0.5° National
Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP) Climate Forecast System Reanalysis
(CFSR) global gridded dataset (Saha et al. 2010, 2014), with data available at 64 vertical
levels every 6 h during the period 1979–present. The 0.5° NCEP CFSR dataset is the
first reanalysis dataset to be created using a global coupled atmosphere–ocean–landsurface–sea-ice model and to assimilate satellite radiances over the entire period of its
availability, making it preferable to its predecessors, the 2.5° NCEP–National Center for
Atmospheric Research reanalysis dataset (Kalnay et al. 1996; Kistler et al. 2001) and the
1
1.125° 40-yr European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) ReAnalysis (ERA-40) reanalysis dataset (Uppala et al. 2005).
Daily teleconnection indices, calculated from the 0.5° NCEP CFSR dataset using the
methodology of Archambault et al. (2008), will be used to determine how the
combinations of baroclinic, diabatic, and barotropic processes most likely to yield strong
ECs leading to noteworthy cool-season EWEs over central and eastern North America
may be influenced by teleconnection pattern. Daily teleconnection indices are utilized in
order to capture rapid planetary-scale regime transitions, defined in Archambault et al.
(2010) as an index change from at least a 1 standard deviation anomaly to at least a 1
standard deviation anomaly of opposite sign within 7 days. Archambault et al. (2010)
determined that planetary-scale regime transitions, specifically positive North Atlantic
Oscillation (NAO+) to negative NAO (NAO−) and negative Pacific–North American
pattern (PNA−) to positive PNA (PNA+) transitions, are associated with periods of
enhance cool-season precipitation over the northeast United States. The results of
Archambault et al. (2010) suggest that NAO+ to NAO− and PNA− to PNA+ transitions
may also be associated with the formation of strong ECs leading to noteworthy coolseason EWE over central and eastern North America, motivating the use of daily
teleconnection indices in the present study.
Version 2 of the ESRL/Physical Sciences Division 1° Global Ensemble Forecasting
System (GEFS) Reforecast dataset (Hamill et al. 2013) will be used in order to establish
the relationship between the skill with which strong ECs leading to noteworthy coolseason EWEs over central and eastern North America are forecast and the combinations
of baroclinic, diabatic, and barotropic processes associated with their formation. The 1°
GEFS Reforecast dataset, created using the 2012 version of the NCEP GEFS, includes
forecasts from an 11-member ensemble initiated once daily (0000 UTC) during the
period 1985–present. Strong ECs leading to noteworthy cool-season EWEs over central
and eastern NA associated with particularly low/high forecast skill will be examined in
greater detail using forecasts from the 51-member ECMWF ensemble prediction system
(EPS) (Buizza et al. 2007). ECMWF EPS forecasts are initiated twice daily (0000 UTC
and 1200 UTC) during the period 1 October 2006–present, and may be obtained from
The Observing System Research and Predictability Experiment (THORPEX) Interactive
2
Global Grand Ensemble (TIGGE) archive (Bougeault et al. 2010) (available online at
http://apps.ecmwf.int/datasets/data/tigge/).
b. Selection of strong ECs leading to noteworthy cool-season EWEs over central and
eastern North America
In order to construct the 1979–present climatology of strong ECs leading to
noteworthy cool-season EWEs over central and eastern North America proposed in
section 1c, EC tracks will be obtained from the 0.5° NCEP CFSR dataset using the
automated Hodges (1999) tracking algorithm. The Hodges (1999) tracking algorithm has
been extensively used to identify EC tracks within reanalysis datasets (e.g., Hodges et al.
2011; Dacre et al. 2012; Azad and Sorteberg 2014; Colle at al. 2015), as well as within
global climate model output (e.g., Catto et al. 2010; Zappa et al. 2013; Chang 2013; Colle
at al. 2015). A strong EC is defined in the present study as an EC that attains a minimum
central pressure of <980 hPa and exhibits a deepening rate of ≥1 Bergeron (Sanders and
Gyakum 1980), normalized by latitude, along its track. The 980-hPa MSLP threshold
used to identify strong ECs in the present study is consistent with the recent work of
Colle et al. (2015), who also used a 980-hPa MSLP threshold to identify strong ECs
within the 0.5° NCEP CFSR dataset. Only strong ECs forming during the cool season,
defined as September–April, will be retained in the present study. This cool-season
definition is consistent with the cool-season definition in the climatology of explosive
cyclogenesis constructed by Sanders and Gyakum (1980) (Fig. 2).
Only strong ECs forming over central North America, eastern North America, and the
northwestern North Atlantic during the cool season are of interest in the present study.
The domain within which strong ECs will be identified is outlined using a thick black
line in Fig. 4. This domain was selected based on 1) the location of cool-season
minimum MSLP values that occurred during 1979–2014 (Fig. 4), 2) the location of the
eastern boundary of the Rocky Mountains and the eastern boundary of North America,
and 3) the location of the most frequent occurrence of northwestern North Atlantic
“bombs” identified in Sanders and Gyakum (1980) (their Fig. 3). The domain within
which strong ECs will be identified is extensive, spanning 40° of latitude (65° of
longitude) at its tallest (widest) point (Fig. 4). Figure 5, which depicts cool-season
3
maximum PW values that occurred during 1979–2014, highlights the moisture variations
that exist across the domain of interest. These moisture variations across the domain of
interest suggest that geographical location may influence the combinations of baroclinic,
diabatic, and barotropic processes most likely to yield strong ECs (research question 3),
specifically proximity to a major moisture source (hypothesis 3).
The normalized departure of select lower-tropospheric meteorological fields from a
long-term (1979–2009) climatology derived from the 0.5° NCEP CFSR dataset will be
used to determining whether a strong EC qualifies as an EWE. The normalized departure
of a meteorological field from the long-term climatology (N) can be calculated using the
methodology of Hart and Grumm (2001), who state that
N = (X − μ)/σ,
(1)
where X is a gridpoint value of a meteorological field, μ is the gridpoint 21-day running
mean, and σ is the gridpoint 21-day running standard deviation. In order to qualify as an
EWE, a strong EC must attain MSLP values, averaged within a 15° box centered over the
EC, that is ≥1σ below climatology for ≥24 h. In addition, a strong EC must attain 925hPa zonal winds and 925-hPa meridional winds, averaged within a 15° box centered over
the EC, that are ≥1σ above climatology for ≥24 h. Strong ECs meeting these EWE
criteria are believed to have a sensible impact that is geographically widespread,
exceptionally prolonged, and climatologically infrequent, in keeping with the definition
of an EWE given section 1a. All strong ECs meeting these EWE criteria within the
domain of interest (Figs. 4 and 5) are considered to be societally disruptive due to their
proximity to the densely populated regions of central and eastern North America, as well
as the shipping lanes of the northwestern North Atlantic.
An example of the selection of a strong EC leading to a noteworthy cool-season EWE
over central and eastern North America is shown in Figs. 6–8 for the case of SS93. As
previously stated, an EC is required to attain a minimum central pressure of <980 hPa and
exhibit a deepening rate of ≥1 Bergeron, normalized by latitude, along its track in order
to qualify as a strong EC. A track map indicating the position and minimum central
pressure associated with the center of SS93 every 6 h between 1800 UTC 12 March and
0000 UTC 16 March 1993 is shown in Fig. 6. Figure 6 reveals that SS93 had a minimum
central pressure of <980 hPa for ~60 h during its life cycle. Figure 6 also reveals that
4
SS93 deepened 28 hPa during the 24-h period from 1800 UTC 12 March to 1800 UTC 13
March 1993. This 24-h deepening rate is equal to ~2 Bergeron when normalized by the
latitude over which it occurred, or approximately double the deepening rate required for
an EC to qualify as a strong EC.
As previously stated, a strong EC must attain MSLP values (925-hPa zonal winds and
925-hPa meridional winds), averaged within a 15° box centered over the EC, that is ≥1σ
below (above) climatology for ≥24 h in order to qualify as an EWE. Figure 7 depicts
MSLP values and standardized anomalies associated with SS93 every 6 h between 0600
UTC 13 March and 0600 UTC 14 March 1993. During the 24-h period shown in Fig. 7,
SS93 attained MSLP values, averaged within a 15° box centered over the EC, that were
2.3σ, 2.8σ, 3.2σ, 3.1σ, and 3.1σ below climatology. Figure 8 depicts 925-hPa wind, as
well as standardized 925-hPa zonal and meridional wind anomalies, associated with SS93
every 6 h between 0600 UTC 13 March and 0600 UTC 14 March 1993. During the 24-h
period shown in Fig. 8, SS93 attained 925-hPa zonal winds (925-meridional winds),
averaged within a 15° box centered over the EC, that were 1.9σ, 2.1σ, 2.1σ, 1.9σ, and
1.7σ (2.5σ, 2.5σ, 2.3σ, 2.4σ, and 1.9σ) above climatology. Figures 6–8 reveal that SS93
would easily be selected as a strong EC that led to a noteworthy cool-season EWE over
central and eastern North America and included in the proposed 1979–present
climatology.
c. Candidate metrics for evaluating baroclinic, diabatic, and barotropic processes
during the evolution of strong ECs
3. Dissertation plan
a. Climatology of strong ECs leading to noteworthy cool-season EWEs over central and
eastern North America (1979–present)
Using the datasets and methodology outlined in sections 2a–b, a 1979–present
climatology of strong ECs leading to noteworthy cool-season EWEs over central and
eastern North America will be constructed. The 1979–present climatology will be used
to determine when strong ECs leading to noteworthy cool-season EWEs over central and
eastern North America most frequently occur (hypothesis 1). In addition, the interannual
5
and intraseasonal variability associated with the location and frequency of strong ECs
included in the 1979–present climatology will be examined and compared to that of
strong ECs included in previous EC climatologies (e.g., Eichler and Higgins 2006; Wang
et al. 2006) in order to put the results of the present climatology in greater context.
The relative contributions of baroclinic, diabatic, and barotropic processes will be
quantified during the evolution of strong ECs included in the 1979–present climatology
using the candidate metrics discussed in section 2c. Quantification of the relative
contributions of baroclinic, diabatic, and barotropic processes during the evolution of
strong ECs included in the 1979–present climatology will be used to 1) identify the
combinations of these processes most likely to yield strong ECs leading to noteworthy
cool-season EWEs over central and eastern North America (hypothesis 2), as well as 2)
establish the importance of geographical location, season, and teleconnection pattern in
determining the combinations of these processes most likely to yield strong ECs leading
to noteworthy cool-season EWEs over central and eastern North America (hypothesis 3).
Interannual and intraseasonal variability associated with the location and frequency of
strong ECs included in the 1979–present climatology that are governed by similar
combinations of baroclinic, diabatic, and barotropic processes will also be examined.
b. Cyclone-relative composite analysis
A cyclone-relative composite analysis will be performed on clusters of strong ECs
identified in the 1979–present climatology that are governed by similar combinations of
baroclinic, diabatic, and barotropic processes. This cyclone-relative composite analysis
will be used to document the structure, motion, and evolution of the most prominent
upper- and lower-tropospheric features associated with the formation and motion of
strong ECs included in each cluster (hypothesis 4).
As stated in section 1c, the author hypothesizes that the majority of strong ECs
identified in the 1979–present climatology will form downstream of an uppertropospheric disturbance, with strong ECs associated with dominant contributions from
diabatic processes forming upstream of a well-defined lower-tropospheric corridor of
meridional water vapor transport (hypothesis 4). The author also hypothesizes that strong
ECs governed by similar combinations of baroclinic, diabatic, and barotropic processes
6
may be associated with similar upper-tropospheric jet configurations. Anecdotal
evidence suggests that strong ECs associated with dominant contributions from diabatic
processes may typically form in equatorward jet-entrance regions, while strong ECs
associated with dominant contributions from baroclinic (barotropic) processes may
typically form in conjunction with coupled jets (in poleward jet-exit regions). This
additional hypothesis will also be tested using the cyclone-relative composite analysis.
c. Multiscale case studies
Multiscale case studies of individual strong ECs leading to noteworthy cool-season
EWEs that are representative of each cluster of strong ECs will be utilized to illustrate the
structure, motion, and evolution of the upper- and lower-tropospheric features associated
with the formation and motion of each strong EC (hypothesis 4). Figures 9–11 depict the
evolution of three strong ECs leading to noteworthy cool-season EWEs that are currently
considered case-study candidates. These three case-study candidates include 1) the 9–11
November 1998 central U.S. cyclone (Iacopelli and Knox 2001), which rapidly deepened
in an environment characterized by tropospheric-deep baroclinicity (Fig. 9), 2) SS93
(Table 1), which rapidly deepened in the presence of widespread deep convection in an
environment characterized by tropospheric-deep baroclinicity (Fig. 10), and 3) the 26–27
October 2010 central U.S. cyclone, which rapidly deepened in the poleward exit region of
a >80 m s−1 250-hPa jet in an environment where baroclinicity was confined to the uppertroposphere (Fig. 11). These three case-study candidates illustrate variations in the
relative contributions of baroclinic, diabatic, and barotropic processes associated with
rapid deepening ECs. The rapid deepening of the 9–11 November 1998 central U.S.
cyclone (Fig. 9) is likely dominated by baroclinic processes; the rapid deepening of SS93
(Fig. 10) is likely dominated by both baroclinic and diabatic processes; and the rapid
deepening of the 26–27 October 2010 central U.S. cyclone (Fig. 11) is likely dominated
by baroclinic and barotropic processes.
Multiscale case studies may also be utilized to illustrate the structure, motion, and
evolution of the upper- and lower-tropospheric features associated with the formation and
motion of strong ECs that develop in different locations over central and eastern North
America. It is likely that the upper- and lower-tropospheric features associated with the
7
formation and motion of strong ECs lee of the Rockies will be different from those
features associated with the formation and motion of strong ECs over the east coast of
North America. Multiscale case studies could be utilized to elucidate some of these
differences, which would likely be reflected in the relative contribution of baroclinic,
diabatic, and barotropic processes associated with each cyclone during its life cycle.
Additional multiscale case studies of strong ECs leading to particularly historic coolseason EWEs will be considered as appropriate.
d. Assessment of predictability of strong ECs dominated by various combinations of
baroclinic, diabatic, and barotropic processes
8
Dissertation outline
1. Introduction
1.1. Motivation and purpose
1.2. Literature review
1.3. Research questions and hypotheses
2. Data and methodology
2.1. Datasets
2.2. Selection of strong ECs leading to noteworthy cool-season EWEs over central
and eastern North America
2.3. Metrics for evaluating baroclinic, diabatic, and barotropic processes during the
evolution of strong ECs
3. Climatology of strong ECs leading to noteworthy cool-season EWEs over central and
eastern North America (1979–present)
3.1. Interannual and intraseasonal variability
3.2. Baroclinic, diabatic, and barotropic processes
3.2.1. Geographical location
3.2.2. Intraseasonal variability
3.2.3. Teleconnection pattern
4. Cyclone-relative composite analysis
4.1. Cluster selection
4.2. Composite discussion
5. Multiscale case studies
5.1. Case studies representative of cyclone-relative composites
5.2. Case studies representative of strong ECs forming in different locations
6. Assessing the predictability of strong ECs
6.1. Track forecast error
6.2. Intensity forecast error
6.3. Case studies
7. Discussion and future work
8. References
9
References
Anthes, R. A., and D. Keyser, 1979: Tests of a fine-mesh model over Europe and the
United States. Mon. Wea. Rev., 107, 963–984.
Anthes, R. A., Y-H. Kuo, and J. R. Gyakum, 1983: Numerical simulations of a case of
explosive marine cyclogenesis. Mon. Wea. Rev., 111, 527–542.
Archambault, H. M., L. F. Bosart, D. Keyser, and A. R. Aiyyer, 2008: Influence of largescale flow regimes on cool-season precipitation in the northeastern United States.
Mon. Wea. Rev., 136, 2945–2963.
Archambault, H. M., D. Keyser, L. F. Bosart, 2010: Relationships between large-scale
regime transitions and major cool-season precipitation events in the northeast United
States. Mon. Wea. Rev., 138, 3454–3473.
Aubert, E. J., 1957: On the release of latent heat as a factor in large scale atmospheric
motions. J. Meteor., 14, 527–542.
Azad, E., and A. Sorteberg, 2014: The vorticity budgets of North Atlantic winter
extratropical cyclone life cycles in MERRA reanalysis. Part I: Development phase. J.
Atmos. Sci., 71, 3109–3128.
Bjerknes, J., 1919: On the structure of moving cyclones. Mon. Wea. Rev., 47, 95–99.
Bjerknes, J., and H. Solberg, 1922: Life cycle of cyclones and the polar front theory of
atmospheric circulation. Geofys. Publ., 3, 3–18.
Bosart, L. F., 1981: The Presidents’ Day snowstorm of 18–19 February 1979: A
subsynoptic-scale event. Mon. Wea. Rev., 109, 1542–1566.
Bosart, L. F., and S. C. Lin, 1984: A diagnostic analysis of the Presidents’ Day
snowstorm of February 1979. Mon. Wea. Rev., 112, 2148–2177.
Bosart, L. F., G. J. Hakim, K. R. Tyle, M. A. Bedrick, W. E. Bracken, M. J. Dickinson,
and D. M. Schultz, 1996: Large-scale antecedent conditions associated with the 12–
14 March 1993 cyclone (“superstorm ‘93”) over eastern North America. Mon. Wea.
Rev., 124, 1865–1891.
Bougeault, P., and Coauthors, 2010: The THORPEX interactive grand global ensemble.
Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 91, 1059–1072.
Buizza, R., J. R. Bidlot, N. Wedi, M. Fuentes, M. Hamrud, G. Holt, and F. Vitart, 2007:
The new ECMWF VAREPS (Variable Resolution Ensemble Prediction System).
Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 133, 681–695.
10
Burrows, W. R., R. A. Treidl, and R. G. Lawford, 1979: The southern Ontario blizzard of
January 26 and 27, 1978. Atmos.–Ocean, 17, 306–320.
Caplan, P., 1995: The 12–14 March 1993 superstorm: Performance of the global model.
Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 76, 201–212.
Carlson, T. N., 1998: Mid-Latitude Weather Systems. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 507 pp.
Catto, J. L., L. C. Shaffrey, and K. I. Hodges, 2010: Can climate models capture the
structure of extratropical cyclones?. J. Climate, 23, 1621–1645.
Chang, E. K. M., 2013: CMIP5 projection of significant reduction in extratropical
cyclone activity over North America. J. Climate, 26, 9903–9922.
Charney, J. G., 1947: The dynamics of long waves in a baroclinic westerly current. J.
Meteor., 4, 136–162.
Colle, B. A., J. A. Booth, and E. C. M. Chang, 2015: A review of the historical and future
changes of extratropical cyclones and associated impacts along the US East Coast.
Current Climate Change Reports, in press.
Cordeira, J. M., 2011: Tropical–extratropical interactions and arctic–extratropical
interactions conducive to intraseasonal variability of the North Pacific jet stream.
Ph.D. dissertation, University at Albany, State University of New York, 202 pp.
[Available online at http://gradworks.umi.com/34/78/3478727.html.]
Dacre, H. F., M. K. Hawcroft, M. A. Stringer, and K. I. Hodges, 2012: An extratropical
cyclone atlas: A tool for illustrating cyclone structure and evolution characteristics.
Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 93, 1497–1502.
Danard, M. B., 1964: On the influence of latent heat on cyclone development. J. Appl.
Meteor., 3, 27–37.
Danard, M. B., 1966: On the contribution of released latent heat to changes in available
potential energy. J. Appl. Meteor., 5, 81–84.
Dickinson, M. J., L. F. Bosart, W. E. Bracken, G. J. Hakim, D. M. Schultz, M. A.
Bedrick, and K. R. Tyle, 1997: The March 1993 superstorm cyclogenesis: Incipient
phase synoptic- and convective-scale flow interaction and model performance. Mon.
Wea. Rev., 125, 3041–3072.
Eady, E. T., 1949: Long waves and cyclone waves. Tellus, 1, 33–52.
Eichler, T., and W. Higgins, 2006: Climatology and ENSO-related variability of North
American extratropical cyclone activity. J. Climate, 19, 2076–2093.
11
Espy, J. P., 1841: The Philosophy of Storms. Little and Brown. 552 pp.
Ferrel, B. F., 1999: Advances in cyclogenesis theory: Toward a generalized theory of
baroclinic development. The Life Cycles of Extratropical Cyclones, M. Shapiro and S.
Grønås, Eds., Amer. Meteor. Soc., 111–122.
Gaza, R. S., and L. F. Bosart, 1990: Trough-merger characteristics over North America.
Wea. Forecasting, 5, 314–331.
Gyakum, J. R., 1983: On the evolution of the QE II storm. I: Synoptic aspects. Mon. Wea.
Rev., 111, 1156–1173.
Gyakum, J. R., 1983: On the evolution of the QE II storm. II: Dynamic and
thermodynamic structure. Mon. Wea. Rev., 111, 1137–1155.
Gyakum, J. R., 1991: Meteorological precursors to the explosive intensification of the QE
II storm. Mon. Wea. Rev., 119, 1105–1131.
Hakim, G. J., L. F. Bosart, and D. Keyser, 1995: The Ohio Valley wave-merger
cyclogenesis event of 25–26 January 1978. Part I: Multiscale case study. Mon. Wea.
Rev., 123, 2663–2692.
Hakim, G. J., D. Keyser, and L. F. Bosart, 1996: The Ohio Valley wave-merger
cyclogenesis event of 25–26 January 1978. Part II: Diagnosis using quasigeostrophic
potential vorticity inversion. Mon. Wea. Rev., 124, 2176–2205.
Hamill, T. M., G. T. Bates, J. S. Whitaker, D. R. Murray, M. Fiorino, T. J. Galarneau Jr.,
Y. Zhu, and W. Lapenta, 2013: NOAA’s second-generation global medium range
ensemble reforecast dataset. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 94, 1553–1565.
Hart, R. E., and R. H. Grumm, 2001: Using normalized climatological anomalies to rank
synoptic-scale events objectively. Mon. Wea. Rev., 129, 2426–2442.
Hibbard, W., D. Santek, L. Uccellini, and K. Brill, 1989: Application of the 4-D McIDAS
to a model diagnostic study of the Presidents’ Day cyclone. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc.,
70, 1394–1403.
Hodges, K. I., 1999: Adaptive constraints for feature tracking. Mon. Wea. Rev., 127,
1362–1373.
Hodges, K. I., R. W. Lee, and L. Bengtsson, 2011: A comparison of extratropical
cyclones in recent reanalyses ERA-Interim, NASA-MERRA, NCEP CFSR, and JRA25. J. Climate, 24, 4888–4906.
Huo, Z., D.-L. Zhang, J. Gyakum, and A. Staniforth, 1995: A diagnostic analysis of the
superstorm of March 1993. Mon. Wea. Rev., 123, 1740–1761.
12
Huo, A., D.-L. Zhang, and J. Gyakum, 1998: An application of potential vorticity
inversion to improve the numerical prediction of the March 1993 superstorm. Mon.
Wea. Rev., 126, 424–436.
Iacopelli, A. J., and J. A. Knox, 2001: Mesoscale dynamics of the record-breaking 10
November 1998 mid-latitude cyclone: A satellite-based case study. Natl. Wea. Dig.,
25, 33–42.
Johnson, D. R., and W. K. Downey, 1976: The absolute angular momentum budget of an
extratropical cyclone: Quasi-Lagrangian diagnostics 3. Mon. Wea. Rev., 104, 3–14.
Kalnay, E., and Coauthors, 1996: The NCEP/NCAR 40-Year Reanalysis Project. Bull.
Amer. Meteor. Soc., 77, 437–471.
Kistler, R., and Coauthors, 2001: The NCEP–NCAR 50–Year Reanalysis: Monthly
means CD–ROM and documentation. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 82, 247–267.
Kocin, P. J., and L. W. Uccellini, 1990: Snowstorms Along the Northeastern Coast of the
United States: 1955 to 1985. Meteor. Monogr., No. 44, Amer. Meter. Soc., 280 pp.
Kocin, P. J., P. N. Schumacher, R. F. Morales Jr., and L. W. Uccellini, 1995: Overview
of the 12–14 March 1993 superstorm. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 76, 165–182.
Kocin, P. J., and L. W. Uccellini, 2005a: Northeast Snowstorms. Vol. 1: Overview. Amer.
Meteor. Soc., 212 pp.
Kocin, P. J., and L. W. Uccellini, 2005a: Northeast Snowstorms. Vol. 2: The Cases.
Amer. Meteor. Soc., 606 pp.
Krishnamurti, T. N., 1968: A study of a developing wave cyclone. Mon. Wea. Rev., 69,
208–217.
Kutzbach, G., 1979: The Thermal Theory of Cyclones: A History of Meteorological
Thought in the Nineteenth Century. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 254 pp.
Lenzen, A. J., D. R. Johnson, and R. Atlas, 1993: Analysis of the impact of Seasat
scatterometer data and horizontal resolution on GLA model simulations of the QE II
storm. Mon. Wea. Rev., 121, 499–521.
Loomis, E., 1841: On the storm which was experienced throughout the United States
about the 20th of December, 1836. Trans. Amer. Philos. Soc., 7, 163 pp.
Lorenz, E. N., 1955: Available potential energy and the maintenance of the general
circulation. Tellus, 7, 157–167.
13
Lorenz, E. N., 1960: Generation of available potential energy and the intensity of the
general circulation. Dynamics of Climate. R. L. Pfeffer, Ed., Oxford: Pergamon Press,
86–92.
Lorenz, E. N., 1965: Energetics of the atmospheric circulation. International Dictionary
of Geophysics. Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1–9.
Mailier, P. J., D. B. Stephenson, C. A. T. Ferro, and K. I. Hodges, 2006: Serial clustering
of extratropical cyclones. Mon. Wea. Rev., 134, 2224–2240.
Manobianco, J., L. W. Uccellini, K. F. Brill, and Y.-H. Kuo, 1992: The impact of
dynamic data assimilation on the numerical simulations of the QE II cyclone and a
analysis of the jet streak influencing the precyclogenetic environment. Mon. Wea.
Rev., 120, 1973–1996.
Margules, M., 1903: Über die Energie der Stürme. Jahrb. Zentralanst. Meteorol. Wien.,
26 pp.
Margules, M., 1906: Über Temperaturschichtung in stationär bewegter und ruhender
Luft. Meteor. Z., 23, 243–254.
Martínez-Alvarado, O., and R. S. Plant, 2014: Parameterized diabatic processes in
numerical simulations of an extratropical cyclone. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 140,
1742–1755.
Neu, U., and Coauthors, 2013: IMILAST: A community effort to intercompare
extratropical cyclone detection and tracking algorithms. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 94,
529–547.
Norquist, D. C., E. E. Recker, and R. J. Reed, 1977: The energetics of African wave
disturbances as observed during Phase III of GATE. Mon. Wea. Rev., 105, 334–342.
NWS, 1994: Superstorm of March 1993: March 12–14 1993. Natural disasters survey
report, NWS, U.S. Dept. of Commerce, 152 pp.
Petterssen, S., 1956: Weather Analysis and Forecasting, McGraw-Hill, 428 pp.
Saha, S., and Coauthors, 2010: The NCEP climate forecast system reanalysis. Bull. Amer.
Meteor. Soc., 91, 1015–1057.
Saha, S., and Coauthors, 2014: The NCEP climate forecast system version 2. J. Climate,
27, 2185–2208.
Salmon, E. M., and P. J. Smith, 1980: A synoptic analysis of the 25–26 January 1978
blizzard cyclone in the central United States. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 61, 435–460.
14
Sanders, F., and J. R. Gyakum, 1980: Synoptic-dynamic climatology of the “bomb.”
Mon. Wea. Rev., 108, 1589–1606.
Schultz, D. M., W. E. Bracken, L. F. Bosart, G. J. Hakim, Mary A. Bedrick, M. J.
Dickinson, and K. R. Tyle, 1997: The 1993 Superstorm cold surge: Frontal structure,
gap flow, and tropical impact. Mon. Wea. Rev., 125, 5–39.
Schultz, D. M., and W. J. Steenburgh, 1999: The formation of a forward-tilting cold front
with multiple cloud bands during Superstorm 1993. Mon. Wea. Rev., 127, 1108–1124.
Spaete, P., D. R. Johnson, and T. K. Schaack, 1994: Stratospheric-Tropospheric mass
exchange during the Presidents’ Day storm. Mon. Wea. Rev., 122, 424–439.
Stoffelen, A. C. M., and G. J. Cats, 1991: The impact of Seasat-A scatterometer data on
high-resolution analyses and forecasts: The development of the QE II storm. Mon.
Wea. Rev., 119, 2794–2802.
Sutcliffe, R. C., 1947: A contribution to the problem of development. Quart. J. Roy.
Meteor. Soc., 73, 370–383.
Tracton, M. S., 1973: The role of cumulus convection in the development of extratropical
cyclones. Mon. Wea. Rev., 101, 573–593.
Uccellini, L. W., 1986: The possible influence of upstream upper-level baroclinic
processes on the development of the QE II storm. Mon. Wea. Rev., 114, 1019–1027.
Uccellini, L. W., 1990: Processes contributing to the rapid development of extratropical
cyclones. Extratropical cyclones: The Erik Palmén Memorial Volume, C. W. Newton
and E. O. Holopainen, Eds., Amer. Meteor. Soc., 81–105.
Uccellini, L. W., P. J. Kocin, R. A. Petersen, C. H. Walsh, and K. F. Brill, 1984: The
Presidents’ Day cyclone of 18–19 February 1979: Synoptic overview and analysis of
the subtropical jet streak influencing the pre-cyclogenetic period. Mon. Wea. Rev.,
112, 31–55.
Uccellini, L. W., D. Keyser, K. F. Brill, and C. H. Walsh, 1985: The Presidents’ Day
cyclone of 18–19 February 1979: Influence of upstream trough amplification and
associated tropopause folding on rapid cyclogenesis. Mon. Wea. Rev., 113, 962–988.
Uccellini, L. W., P. J. Kocin, R. S. Schneider, P. M. Stokols, and R. A. Dorr, 1995:
Forecasting the 12–14 March 1993 superstorm. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 76, 183–
199.
Uppala, S. M., and Coauthors, 2005: The ERA-40 Re-Analysis. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor.
Soc., 131, 2961–3012.
15
Volkert, H., 1999: Components of the Norwegian cyclone model: Observations and
theoretical ideas in Europe prior to 1920. The Life Cycles of Extratropical Cyclones,
M. Shapiro and S. Grønås, Eds., Amer. Meteor. Soc., 15–28.
Wagner, A. J., 1978: Weather and circulation of January 1978: Cold with record snowfall
in the Midwest and Northeast, mild and wet in the West. Mon. Wea. Rev., 106, 579–
585.
Wang, X. L., V. R. Swail, and F. W. Zwiers, 2006: Climatology and changes of
extratropical cyclone activity: Comparison of ERA-40 and NCEP–NCAR reanalysis
for 1958–2001. J. Climate, 19, 3145–3166.
Whitaker, J. S., L. W. Uccellini, and K. F. Brill, 1988: A model-based diagnostic study of
the rapid development phase of the Presidents’ Day cyclone. Mon. Wea. Rev., 116,
2337–2365.
Zappa, G., L. C. Shaffrey, K. I. Hodges, 2013: The ability of the CMIP5 models to
simulate North Atlantic extratropical cyclones. J. Climate, 26, 5379–5396.
16