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:

High-resolution modelling identifies the Bering Strait’s role in amplified Arctic warming

Nature Climate Change (2024)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

The Arctic region has warmed nearly four times faster than the global average since 1979, with far-reaching global implications. However, model projections of Arctic warming rates are uncertain and one key component is the ocean heat transport (OHT) into the Arctic Ocean. Here we use high-resolution historical and future climate simulations to show that the OHT through the Bering Strait exerts a more substantial influence on Arctic warming than previously recognized. The high-resolution ensemble exhibits a 20% larger warming rate for 2006–2100 compared with standard low-resolution model simulations. The enhanced Arctic warming in the high-resolution simulations is primarily attributable to an increased OHT through the narrow and shallow Bering Strait that is nearly four times larger than in the low-resolution simulations. Consequently, the projected rate of Arctic warming by low-resolution climate simulations is likely to be underestimated due to the model resolution being insufficient to capture future changes in Bering Strait OHT.

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: Model–observation comparison near the Bering Strait.
Fig. 2: Projected Arctic warming.
Fig. 3: Relationship between projected changes in Bering Strait OHT and Arctic warming.
Fig. 4: Future changes in sea-ice concentration and surface heat fluxes.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The CMIP5 data used in this study can be downloaded from https://esgf-node.llnl.gov/search/cmip5/. The CESM data used in this work are available from https://ihesp.github.io/archive/products/ihesp-products/data-release/DataRelease_Phase2.html. The MODIS data can be download from http://apdrc.soest.hawaii.edu/data/data.php. The mooring data can be downloaded from https://psc.apl.washington.edu/HLD/Bstrait/Data/BeringStraitMooringDataArchive.html.

Code availability

The CESM codes are available via GitHub at https://github.com/ihesp/CESM_SW (ref. 67).

References

  1. Rantanen, M. et al. The Arctic has warmed nearly four times faster than the globe since 1979. Commun. Earth Environ. 3, 168 (2022); https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-022-00498-3

  2. Walter Anthony, K. M., Anthony, P., Grosse, G. & Chanton, J. Geologic methane seeps along boundaries of Arctic permafrost thaw and melting glaciers. Nat. Geosci. 5, 419–426 (2012).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Grémillet, D. et al. Arctic warming: nonlinear impacts of sea‐ice and glacier melt on seabird foraging. Glob. Change Biol. 21, 1116–1123 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Hjort, J. et al. Degrading permafrost puts Arctic infrastructure at risk by mid-century. Nat. Commun. 9, 5147 (2018); https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-07557-4

  5. Miner, K. R. et al. Emergent biogeochemical risks from Arctic permafrost degradation. Nat. Clim. Change 11, 809–819 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Fox-Kemper, B. et al. in Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis (eds Masson-Delmotte, V. et al.) 1211–1361 (IPCC, Cambridge Univ. Press, 2021).

  7. Wallace, J. M., Held, I. M., Thompson, D. W., Trenberth, K. E. & Walsh, J. E. Global warming and winter weather. Science 343, 729–730 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Cohen, J. et al. Recent Arctic amplification and extreme mid-latitude weather. Nat. Geosci. 7, 627–637 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Francis, J. A. & Vavrus, S. J. Evidence for a wavier jet stream in response to rapid Arctic warming. Environ. Res. Lett. 10, 014005 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Kug, J.-S. et al. Two distinct influences of Arctic warming on cold winters over North America and East Asia. Nat. Geosci. 8, 759–762 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Overland, J. E. et al. Nonlinear response of mid-latitude weather to the changing Arctic. Nat. Clim. Change 6, 992–999 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Zhang, R., Sun, C., Zhu, J., Zhang, R. & Li, W. Increased European heat waves in recent decades in response to shrinking Arctic sea ice and Eurasian snow cover. npj Clim. Atmos. Sci. 3, 7 (2020); https://doi.org/10.1038/s41612-020-0110-8

  13. Tang, Q., Zhang, X. & Francis, J. A. Extreme summer weather in northern mid-latitudes linked to a vanishing cryosphere. Nat. Clim. Change 4, 45–50 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Cohen, J. et al. Divergent consensuses on Arctic amplification influence on midlatitude severe winter weather. Nat. Clim. Change 10, 20–29 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Pithan, F. & Mauritsen, T. Arctic amplification dominated by temperature feedbacks in contemporary climate models. Nat. Geosci. 7, 181–184 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Goosse, H. et al. Quantifying climate feedbacks in polar regions. Nat. Commun. 9, 1919 (2018); https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-04173-0

  17. Johannessen, O. M. et al. Arctic climate change: observed and modelled temperature and sea-ice variability. Tellus A 56, 328–341 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Serreze, M., Barrett, A., Stroeve, J., Kindig, D. & Holland, M. The emergence of surface-based Arctic amplification. Cryosphere 3, 11–19 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Comiso, J. C., Parkinson, C. L., Gersten, R. & Stock, L. Accelerated decline in the Arctic sea ice cover. Geophys. Res. Lett. 35, L01703 (2008); https://doi.org/10.1029/2007GL031972

  20. Screen, J. A. & Simmonds, I. The central role of diminishing sea ice in recent Arctic temperature amplification. Nature 464, 1334–1337 (2010).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Polyak, L. et al. History of sea ice in the Arctic. Quat. Sci. Rev. 29, 1757–1778 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Lind, S., Ingvaldsen, R. B. & Furevik, T. Arctic warming hotspot in the northern Barents Sea linked to declining sea-ice import. Nat. Clim. Change 8, 634–639 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Dai, A., Luo, D., Song, M. & Liu, J. Arctic amplification is caused by sea-ice loss under increasing CO2. Nat. Commun. 10, 121 (2019); https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-07954-9

  24. Smedsrud, L. H., Ingvaldsen, R., Nilsen, J. & Skagseth, Ø. Heat in the Barents Sea: transport, storage, and surface fluxes. Ocean Sci. 6, 219–234 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Årthun, M., Eldevik, T., Smedsrud, L., Skagseth, Ø. & Ingvaldsen, R. Quantifying the influence of Atlantic heat on Barents Sea ice variability and retreat. J. Clim. 25, 4736–4743 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. van der Linden, E. C., Le Bars, D., Bintanja, R. & Hazeleger, W. Oceanic heat transport into the Arctic under high and low CO2 forcing. Clim. Dynam. 53, 4763–4780 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Li, D., Zhang, R. & Knutson, T. R. On the discrepancy between observed and CMIP5 multi-model simulated Barents Sea winter sea ice decline. Nat. Commun. 8, 14991 (2017); https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms14991

  28. Årthun, M., Eldevik, T. & Smedsrud, L. H. The role of Atlantic heat transport in future Arctic winter sea ice loss. J. Clim. 32, 3327–3341 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Dörr, J., Årthun, M., Eldevik, T. & Madonna, E. Mechanisms of regional winter sea-ice variability in a warming Arctic. J. Clim. 34, 8635–8653 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Beszczynska-Möller, A., Woodgate, R. A., Lee, C., Melling, H. & Karcher, M. A synthesis of exchanges through the main oceanic gateways to the Arctic Ocean. Oceanography 24, 82–99 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Woodgate, R. A., Weingartner, T. & Lindsay, R. The 2007 Bering Strait oceanic heat flux and anomalous Arctic sea‐ice retreat. Geophys. Res. Lett. 37, L01602 (2010); https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GL041621

  32. Woodgate, R. A. Increases in the Pacific inflow to the Arctic from 1990 to 2015, and insights into seasonal trends and driving mechanisms from year-round Bering Strait mooring data. Prog. Oceanogr. 160, 124–154 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Serreze, M. C., Barrett, A. P., Crawford, A. D. & Woodgate, R. A. Monthly variability in Bering Strait oceanic volume and heat transports, links to atmospheric circulation and ocean temperature, and implications for sea ice conditions. J. Geophys. Res. Oceans 124, 9317–9337 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Stroeve, J. & Notz, D. Changing state of Arctic sea ice across all seasons. Environ. Res. Lett. 13, 103001 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Docquier, D., Koenigk, T., Fuentes-Franco, R., Karami, M. P. & Ruprich-Robert, Y. Impact of ocean heat transport on the Arctic sea-ice decline: a model study with EC-Earth3. Clim. Dynam. 56, 1407–1432 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Mahlstein, I. & Knutti, R. Ocean heat transport as a cause for model uncertainty in projected Arctic warming. J. Clim. 24, 1451–1460 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Carmack, E. et al. Toward quantifying the increasing role of oceanic heat in sea ice loss in the new Arctic. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 96, 2079–2105 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Auclair, G. & Tremblay, L. B. The role of ocean heat transport in rapid sea ice declines in the Community Earth System Model Large Ensemble. J. Geophys. Res. Oceans 123, 8941–8957 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Docquier, D., Fuentes-Franco, R., Koenigk, T. & Fichefet, T. Sea ice–ocean interactions in the Barents Sea modeled at different resolutions. Front. Earth Sci. 8, 172 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Roberts, C. D. et al. Climate model configurations of the ECMWF Integrated Forecasting System (ECMWF-IFS cycle 43r1) for HighResMIP. Geosci. Model Dev. 11, 3681–3712 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Clement Kinney, J. et al. On the flow through the Bering Strait: A synthesis of model results with observations, in The Pacific Arctic Region. Ecosystem Status and Trends in a Rapidly Changing Environment (eds Grebmeier J. M. & Maslowski W.) 167–198 (Springer, 2014).

  42. Roberts, M. J. et al. Description of the resolution hierarchy of the global coupled HadGEM3-GC3.1 model as used in CMIP6 HighResMIP experiments. Geosci. Model Dev. 12, 4999–5028 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Griffies, S. M. et al. Impacts on ocean heat from transient mesoscale eddies in a hierarchy of climate models. J. Clim. 28, 952–977 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Decuypère, M., Tremblay, L. B. & Dufour, C. O. Impact of ocean heat transport on Arctic sea ice variability in the GFDL CM2‐O model suite. J. Geophys. Res. Oceans 127, e2021JC017762 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Madonna, E. & Sandø, A. B. Understanding differences in North Atlantic poleward ocean heat transport and its variability in global climate models. Geophys. Res. Lett. 49, e2021GL096683 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Chang, P. et al. An unprecedented set of high‐resolution earth system simulations for understanding multiscale interactions in climate variability and change. J. Adv. Model. Earth Syst. 12, e2020MS002298 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Chang, P. et al. Uncertain future of sustainable fisheries environment in eastern boundary upwelling zones under climate change. Commun. Earth Environ. 4, 19 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Small, R. J. et al. A new synoptic scale resolving global climate simulation using the Community Earth System Model. J. Adv. Model. Earth Syst. 6, 1065–1094 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Meehl, G. A. et al. Effects of model resolution, physics, and coupling on Southern Hemisphere storm tracks in CESM1.3. Geophys. Res. Lett. 46, 12408–12416 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Walton, C., Pichel, W., Sapper, J. & May, D. The development and operational application of nonlinear algorithms for the measurement of sea surface temperatures with the NOAA polar‐orbiting environmental satellites. J. Geophys. Res. Oceans 103, 27999–28012 (1998).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Brown, O. B. et al. MODIS infrared sea surface temperature algorithm algorithm theoretical basis document version 2.0. (Univ. of Miami, 1999); https://oceancolor.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/technical/atbd_mod25.pdf

  52. England, M., Jahn, A. & Polvani, L. Nonuniform contribution of internal variability to recent Arctic sea ice loss. J. Clim. 32, 4039–4053 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Dörr, J. S., Bonan, D. B., Årthun, M., Svendsen, L. & Wills, R. C. Forced and internal components of observed Arctic sea-ice changes. Cryosphere, 17, 4133–4153 (2023); https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-17-4133-2023

  54. Koenigk, T. & Brodeau, L. Ocean heat transport into the Arctic in the twentieth and twenty-first century in EC-Earth. Clim. Dynam. 42, 3101–3120 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Serreze, M. C., Crawford, A. D., Stroeve, J. C., Barrett, A. P. & Woodgate, R. A. Variability, trends, and predictability of seasonal sea ice retreat and advance in the Chukchi Sea. J. Geophys. Res. Oceans 121, 7308–7325 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Kodaira, T., Waseda, T., Nose, T. & Inoue, J. Record high Pacific Arctic seawater temperatures and delayed sea ice advance in response to episodic atmospheric blocking. Sci. Rep. 10, 20830 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Steele, M., Zhang, J. & Ermold, W. Mechanisms of summertime upper Arctic Ocean warming and the effect on sea ice melt. J. Geophys. Res. Oceans 115, C11004 (2010); https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JC005849

  58. Maslanik, J. et al. A younger, thinner Arctic ice cover: increased potential for rapid, extensive sea‐ice loss. Geophys. Res. Lett. 34, L24501 (2007); https://doi.org/10.1029/2007GL032043

  59. Ricker, R. et al. Satellite‐observed drop of Arctic sea ice growth in winter 2015–2016. Geophys. Res. Lett. 44, 3236–3245 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Polyakov, I. V. et al. Borealization of the Arctic Ocean in response to anomalous advection from sub-Arctic seas. Front. Mar. Sci. 7, 491 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Shu, Q. et al. Arctic Ocean amplification in a warming climate in CMIP6 models. Sci. Adv. 8, eabn9755 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Dörr, J., Årthun, M., Eldevik, T. & Sandø, A. B. Expanding influence of Atlantic and Pacific Ocean heat transport on winter sea‐ice variability in a warming Arctic. J. Geophys. Res. Oceans 129, e2023JC019900 (2024).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Meier, W. N., Fetterer, F., Windnagel, A. K. and Stewart, J. S. NOAA/NSIDC Climate Data Record of Passive Microwave Sea Ice Concentration, Version 4 (NOAA, 2021); https://doi.org/10.7265/efmz-2t65

  64. Woodgate, R. A., Aagaard, K. & Weingartner, T. J. Interannual changes in the Bering Strait fluxes of volume, heat and freshwater between 1991 and 2004. Geophys. Res. Lett. 33, L15609 (2006); https://doi.org/10.1029/2006GL026931

  65. Woodgate, R. A., Weingartner, T. J. & Lindsay, R. Observed increases in Bering Strait oceanic fluxes from the Pacific to the Arctic from 2001 to 2011 and their impacts on the Arctic Ocean water column. Geophys. Res. Lett. 39, L24603 (2012); https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL054092

  66. Woodgate, R. A., Stafford, K. M. & Prahl, F. G. A synthesis of year-round interdisciplinary mooring measurements in the Bering Strait (1990–2014) and the RUSALCA years (2004–2011). Oceanography 28, 46–67 (2015).

  67. ihesp/CESM_SW: Community Earth System Model (CESM1.3.1) on the Sunway TaihuLight supercomputer. Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10888306 (2024).

Download references

Acknowledgements

The high-resolution CESM simulations were initiated by the International Laboratory for High-Resolution Earth System Prediction—a collaboration between the Qingdao Pilot National Laboratory for Marine Science and Technology, Texas A&M University and the US National Science Foundation (NSF) National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR). A major portion of the high-resolution CESM simulations were completed on Frontera at the Texas Advanced Computing Center (TACC) of the University of Texas at Austin, TX, United States, under project number ATM20005. We thank J. Edwards for his assistance in porting and optimizing the CESM code on Frontera at TACC. P.C., G.D., S.G.Y., F.C., G.X. and Q.Z. are supported by the National Academies of Science and Engineering Gulf Research Program grant number 2000013283 and the US NSF grant number AGS-2231237. S.G.Y., P.C. and Q.Z. are supported by the Department of Commerce grant number NA20OAR4310408. M.S. is supported by NASA grant number 80NSSC20K0768, NSF grant number OPP-1751363 and ONR grant number N00014-21-1-2868. W.W. and Y.L. were supported by the Regional and Global Model Analysis (RGMA) component of the Earth and Environmental System Modeling programme of the US Department of Energy’s Office of Science, as a contribution to the HiLAT-RASM project. Y.L. was also supported by the Center for Nonlinear Studies at Los Alamos National Laboratory. N.R. is supported by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Office of Biological & Environmental Research RGMA component of the Earth and Environmental System Modeling Program under award number DE-SC0022070. NSF NCAR is a major facility sponsored by the US NSF under cooperative agreement number 1852977.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Oceanography, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA

    Gaopeng Xu, M. Cameron Rencurrel, Ping Chang, Xiaoqing Liu & Qiuying Zhang

  2. Department of Atmospheric Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA

    Ping Chang

  3. Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA

    Xiaoqing Liu

  4. National Science Foundation National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO, USA

    Gokhan Danabasoglu, Stephen G. Yeager, Nan Rosenbloom & Frederic Castruccio

  5. Polar Science Center/Applied Physics Laboratory, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA

    Michael Steele

  6. Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM, USA

    Wilbert Weijer

  7. International Arctic Research Center, University of Alaska Fairbanks, Fairbanks, AK, USA

    Wilbert Weijer

  8. Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA

    Yuchen Li

Authors
  1. Gaopeng Xu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. Cameron Rencurrel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ping Chang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Xiaoqing Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Gokhan Danabasoglu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Stephen G. Yeager
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Michael Steele
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Wilbert Weijer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Yuchen Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Nan Rosenbloom
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Frederic Castruccio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Qiuying Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

P.C. conceptualized the study. P.C., G.X., M.C.R. and X.L. conducted the investigation. Q.Z., N.R., F.C. and S.G.Y. ran the simulations. G.X., M.C.R. and X.L. performed the analysis. G.X. visualized the data. P.C. and G.D. acquired funding. G.X. and M.C.R. wrote the original draft, P.C., G.D., M.S., W.W., S.G.Y., Y.L. and G.X. reviewed and edited the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ping Chang.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature Climate Change thanks David Docquier and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Additional information

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

Extended data

Extended Data Fig. 1 Inferred calculation method computed OHT.

(a-b) Similar to Fig. 1e & g, respectively, but includes both inferred calculation method-computed (dashed) and model-derived (solid) OHT in HR (red) and LR (blue). Error bars in (a) are the 95% limit of a 1-side Student’s t-test with the degree of freedom as 13.

Extended Data Fig. 2 Standard deviation of OHT and correlation coefficient between detrended sea ice area and OHT.

(a) The standard deviation of OHT from 2000 to 2021 in observations, HR, and LR. (b) The correlation coefficient between detrended sea ice area and OHT anomaly from 2000 to 2021 in observations, HR, and LR. Different colors in each group represent different ensemble members. The correlation coefficients are significant at 95% confidence level but not from LR ensemble #3 (−0.22). Different colors in each group represent different ensemble members.

Extended Data Fig. 3 Definition of the region near the Bering Strait.

Area with green shading is used to construct sea ice timeseries near the Bering Strait in Fig. 1h.

Extended Data Fig. 4 Projected Arctic warming.

The rate of surface air temperature changes in LR over the period 2006–2100.

Extended Data Fig. 5 Decomposition of changes in the Bering Strait OHT in HR.

The change is defined as the difference between the mean over 2081–2100 and that over 2006–2025. MOHT: monthly-mean OHT changes computed using monthly-mean temperature and velocity output; MOHT∆T: change in MOHT due to temperature change ∆T; MOHT∆v: change in MOHT due to velocity change ∆v; MOHT∆T∆v: change in MOHT due to the nonlinear product of temperature and velocity change ∆T∆v.

Extended Data Fig. 6 Scatterplot of changes in annual-mean Bering Strait OHT and Arctic surface air temperature over the Pacific and Atlantic sectors.

(a) Arctic surface air temperature over the Pacific sector and (b) the Atlantic sector of the Arctic from HR (triangle), LR (circle), and CMIP5 models (stars). Changes are defined as the difference between the mean over 2081–2100 and that over 2006–2015. The linear regression in (a) has a slope of 0.22 °C TW-1 and is significant at a 95% confidence level, while the linear regression in (b) has a slope of 0.06 °C TW-1 and is not statistically significant at a 95% confidence level.

Extended Data Fig. 7 Monthly Bering Strait OHT anomaly relative to the mean over 2006–2015.

Results are from HR (red), LR (blue), and CMIP5 models with RCP8.5 forcing (gray) as a function of CO2 concentration increase (bottom x-axis) and time (top x-axis). Black for the CMIP5 multi-model ensemble mean.

Extended Data Fig. 8 Sea ice concentration during different periods.

(a-d) Sea ice concentration in MAM in HR. (e-h) Similar to a-d, but in LR. (i-l) Sea ice concentration in DJF in HR. (m-p) Similar to i-l, but in LR. Orange contour is sea ice edge defined as 15% sea ice concentration.

Extended Data Fig. 9 Future changes in basal sea ice growth, upper-50-m-ocean temperature, sea ice concentration, and surface heat fluxes.

(a-d) Changes in basal growth of sea ice (ocean temperature in the upper 50 m) during boreal winter (DJF) in HR depicted by color shades (contours). (e-h) Same as a-d but for LR. (i-l) Changes in sea ice concentration (turbulent heat flux) during boreal winter (DJF) in HR depicted by color shades (contours). (m-p) Same as i-l but for LR. The first to fourth column represents changes averaged over 2030–2039, 2050–2059, 2070–2079, and 2090–2099 relative to the mean over 2006–2015, respectively. Contour interval in a-h is 0.5 oC and in i-p is 10 Wm−2.

Extended Data Fig. 10 Observed surface air temperature anomalies relative to the 1950–1980 mean.

GISTEMPv4 annual-mean surface air temperature anomalies from 1950 to 2020, relative to the 1950–1980 mean, averaged over the Arctic region (blue), Pacific sector of the Arctic (red), and Atlantic sector of the Arctic (orange). The Pacific sector covers the area from 66°N to 90°N and from 120°E to 240°E. The Atlantic sector covers the area from 66°N to 90°N and from 60°W to 60°E.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Table 1.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Xu, G., Rencurrel, M.C., Chang, P. et al. High-resolution modelling identifies the Bering Strait’s role in amplified Arctic warming. Nat. Clim. Chang. (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-024-02008-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-024-02008-z

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

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