ANALYSIS OF THE OCEAN-ATMOSPHERE COUPLING AT THE SYNOPTIC SCALE ALONG 33 °S ON 19 AND 20 JUNE 2012
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5902/2179460X16213Keywords:
Marine atmospheric boundary layer. Ocean-atmosphere interaction. Rio Grande do Sul continental shelf. Heat fluxes. Oceanographic fronts.Abstract
http://dx.doi.org/10.5902/2179460X1621The southern coast of Brazil is marked during winter by the presence of an oceanographic front between the Brazil Current (BC) and the Brazilian Coastal Current (BCC). The BC/BCC oceanographic front imprints intense thermal gradients between the cold (BCC) waters of the continental shelf and the warm (BC) waters of the deep ocean. This work analyses, for the first time in the known literature, the ocean-atmosphere coupling using observational data taken by ship during 19-20 June 2012 along a transect off the coast of RS State, Brazil. During the period when the data were collected, a cold (post-frontal) air mass penetrated the study region causing an elevation of the atmospheric pressure and a diminution of the air temperature. Data from radiosondes launched in both sides of the oceanographic front indicate an atmospheric boundary layer thicker and more turbulent above the BC in respect to the BCC. The heat fluxes were positive along the entire transect although presenting a big variation in magnitude. Simultaneos in situ observations of both oceanographic and meteorological parameters are necessary for the understanding of the coupled ocean-atmosphere system, having primal importance for the weather prediction.
Downloads
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
To access the DECLARATION AND TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT AUTHOR’S DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT LICENSE click here.
Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication
The Ciência e Natura journal is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles.
Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
In particular,
Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review Articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The Authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding Author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all Co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An Editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the Author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that Authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected Reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
