Fig. 2: Intercomparison of liquid cloud properties response to aerosol perturbations (i.e., cloud susceptibilities) from Holuhraun-2014 eruption in ECHAM6.3-HAM2.3 with different cloud schemes and sensitivities (each experiment with ten ensemble runs, ensemble mean values and one standard deviation are shown) and two models from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (MPI-ESM-1-2-HAM and UKESM1-0-LL, each with three ensemble runs). | Nature Communications

Fig. 2: Intercomparison of liquid cloud properties response to aerosol perturbations (i.e., cloud susceptibilities) from Holuhraun-2014 eruption in ECHAM6.3-HAM2.3 with different cloud schemes and sensitivities (each experiment with ten ensemble runs, ensemble mean values and one standard deviation are shown) and two models from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (MPI-ESM-1-2-HAM and UKESM1-0-LL, each with three ensemble runs).

From: Challenges in global climate models to represent cloud response to aerosols: insights from volcanic eruptions

Fig. 2

Cloud susceptibilities (-dlnRe/dlnNd, dlnLWP/dlnNd, dlnCOD/dlnNd, and dlnLCC/dlnNd) are changes in cloud properties (Re cloud droplet effective radius, LWP liquid water path, COD cloud optical depth, LCC liquid cloud cover) in response to changes in droplet number concentration, Nd. The violin plots represent 90% confidence intervals of machine-learning-based observational constraints6, with the inner box showing the 25th, 50th, and 75th percentiles. Note: the three ensemble runs for each CMIP6 model are all plotted, but they overlap with each other due to negligible differences.

Back to article page