Journal of Oceanography, Vol. 64, pp.

847 to 857, 2008

In-situ Diurnal Sea Surface Temperature Variations and

Near-Surface Thermal Structure in the Tropical Hot Event
of the Indo-Pacific Warm Pool
H IROSHI KAWAMURA1*, HUILING QIN1 and K ENTARO A NDO2
1
Center for Atmosphere and Oceanic Studies, Graduate School of Science, Tohoku University,
Sendai 980-8578, Japan
2
Japan Agency of Marine-Earth Science and Technology, Yokosuka 237-0061, Japan

(Received 31 July 2007; in revised form 20 April 2008; accepted 28 April 2008)

Diurnal Sea Surface Temperature (SST) variations and the near-surface thermal struc- Keywords:
ture of the tropical hot event (HE) have been investigated using advanced in-situ equa- In-situ diurnal SST
torial observations with hourly temporal resolution. The information on the HE area variation,
defined by the satellite cloud-free SSTs is used to sample the in-situ observations. The thermal structure,
hot event.
in-situ SSTs sampled for the HE conditions show that a maximum (minimum) SST
has a histogram mode at 30.8 C (29.0C), and frequently appears at 15:00 (07:00)
local time. The amplitude of the diurnal SST variation (DSST) is defined by the dif-
ference between the maximum and minimum SSTs. The mean DSST during HEs is
greater than 0.5 C, and has a maximum of about 0.75C at the HE peak. The time
series of mean DSST gradually increases (rapidly decreases) before (after) the peak.
The satellite SST has a systematic positive bias against the corresponding daytime
SST measured by the Triangle Trans-Ocean buoy Network. This bias is enhanced
under conditions of large in-situ DSST. One-dimensional numerical model simula-
tion suggests that the systematic bias is caused by the sharp vertical temperature
gradient in the surface layer of HE. The near-surface thermal structure is generated
by conditions of high insolation and low wind speed, which is the typical HE condi-
tion.

1. Introduction speed can overcome the increase in specific humidity dif-

The air-sea interaction over an area with high sea
surface temperature (SST) is quite important in the earths
climate system. The high SST increases near-surface air
temperature and makes the atmospheric boundary layer
unstable. Previous investigations have shown that the
seasonal, inter-annual and long-term natural climate fluc-
tuations in the equatorial and mid-latitude regions are
particularly sensitive to the SST distribution in the warm
tropical oceans (e.g., Lau and Nath, 1994; Webster, 1994).
Using in-situ observations in the equatorial Pacific,
Zhang and McPhaden (1995) examined the relationship
between evaporation and very high SST. Their results
show that evaporation tends to decrease with increasing
SST when SST > about 28C because the decrease of wind
* Corresponding author. E-mail: kamu@ocean.caos.tohoku.
ac.jp
CopyrightThe Oceanographic Society of Japan/TERRAPUB/Springer
ference between the sea surface and the near-surface air.
Deep convections decrease over the area where SST is
higher than 29.5~30C (Waliser and Graham, 1993;
Tompkins, 2001). Ward (2006) showed that failure to
specify the correct interfacial SST led to significant bi-
ases in the heat fluxes from the ocean. Although the rela-
tionship between SST and climate systems has been in-
vestigated by many researchers, the effects on the atmos-
phere of wide-ranging areas with very high SST (> about
30C) is still unclear.
Taking advantage of advanced remote sensing tech-
nology (i.e., the new cloud-free, high-resolution SST
product of Kawai et al. (2006a)), Qin et al. (2007) (here-
after, QKK) have detected oceanic hot events (HEs here-
after), which are large-scale phenomena with very high
SSTs. After a comprehensive review of prior literature,
including Waliser (1996), QKK recognized the importance
of areal coverage and the period during which the very
high SST phenomenon persists. The HE is defined by the
following conditions:

847
Table 1. HEs and in-situ/satellite SSTs used in this study. The HEs occurring 19962003 are analyzed because of the availability
of satellite solar radiation products (Subsection 2.2). Drifting buoy data are also collected for this period (Subsection 2.1).
The HEs illustrated in Fig. 2 are shaded, which were detected by the TRITON buoys. IO: Indian Ocean, SCS: South China
Sea, WP: Western Pacific, EP: Equatorial Pacific, NAU: North of Australia, MEP: Mid-Equatorial Pacific. The HE informa-
tion is from Qin et al. (2007).

1) SST is greater than a time-dependent threshold
value of about 30C,
2) it occurs over an area > 3.0 106 km2, and
3) it persists for more than 10 days.
QKK identified 31 HEs during 19932003 in and around
the equatorial Indo-Pacific warm pool (some of them,
examined in this study, are listed in Table 1). The mean
HE period, the mean areal size, and the HE-areal aver-
aged SST are 24.2 days, 1.57 107 km2 and 0.25C above
the SST threshold, respectively. The HE areas shift with
the seasons.
QKK also found that the HE area has large diurnal
SST amplitudes (DSSTs), which are derived from satel-
lite solar radiation and satellite wind speed through the
parameterization of Kawai and Kawamura (2005). En-
hanced thermal forcing, which results from high solar
radiation and low wind speed, causes the regional SST to
increase with large satellite-derived DSSTs. It also main-
tains the very high SST in the HE areas for periods longer
than 10 days. Although the satellite products are statisti-
cally validated using in-situ ocean measurements, QKK
have not examined their appearances in the in-situ SST
observations. Is there a signal in the in-situ diurnal SST
variations in the HE region? Does the well-accepted, one-
dimensional process at the air-sea interface (e.g., Kondo
et al., 1978; Price et al., 1987; Fairall et al., 1996) ex-
plain the diurnal SST variations and associated HE for-
mation?
One of the purposes of this paper is to examine bulk-
skin SST differences and satellite-bulk SST differences
in the HE condition. The importance of the diurnal SST
variability on air-sea interaction, especially in the equa-

848 H. Kawamura et al.

torial oceans, is now be coming clearly recognized (e.g.,
Ward et al., 2004; Kawai and Wada, 2007). The satellite
remote sensing community generally accepts that the di-
urnal SST variability has to be treated adequately to im-
prove the accuracy of the satellite SST (e.g., Hepplewhite,
1989; Donlon and GHTSST-PP Science Team, 2005;
Notarstefano et al., 2006; Kawai and Wada, 2007). The
diurnal SST variability enhanced by a clear-sky (strong
insolation) and low wind-speed condition is accompanied
by a sharp vertical temperature gradient in the ocean sur-
face layer, which generates a significant temperature dif-
ference between the waters at the seas surface and at a
few meters depth (e.g., Yokoyama et al., 1995; Soloviev
and Lukas, 1997; Ward, 2006). While the major opera-
tional satellite SST products are tuned against the in-situ
SSTs (bulk SSTs) measured by drifting buoys, the remote
sensing principle of SST measurements is to detect ther-
mal emission from the sea surface (skin SST). Tempera-
ture differences between the surface and a few meters
depth might be formed systematically in HEs.
In the present study, using the information on HEs
defined by QKK, we conditionally sampled the in-situ
observations. As mentioned in the previous paragraphs,
our contention is that the HE condition enhances the SST
diurnal variations and bulk-skin temperature difference,
which may be a reason for a systematic bias between the
satellite and bulk SSTs. The in-situ observing system in
the equatorial western Pacific has been considerably im-
proved in recent years, as represented by the Tropical
Atmosphere Ocean (TAO)/Triangle Trans-Ocean buoy
Network (TRITON) surface mooring array. The purpose
of the present study is: 1) to investigate the diurnal SST
variations and the near-surface thermal structure in HE
using the in-situ equatorial observation system; and 2) to
examine their formation mechanism in conjunction with
the satellite and in-situ SST measurements in the HE re-
gion.
The satellite/in-situ datasets are introduced in Sec-
tion 2. In Section 3 we examine the in-situ DSST and the
difference between the satellite and in-situ SSTs in the
HE region from various aspects. In Subsection 3.1, tem-
poral variations of the in-situ DSST are investigated us-
ing the overall HE condition defined by QKK. Subsec-
tion 3.2 shows the results of the satellite SST validation
in the HE regions. In order to study the observational
evidence obtained in the previous subsections, Subsec-
tion 3.3 is devoted to examining of snapshot match-ups
using a high-resolution satellite infrared SST and buoy-
sampled hourly measurements of the air and sea param-
eters in the HE regions. On the basis of results reported
in Section 3, the SST and near-surface thermal structure
are investigated using a numerical model for further dis-
cussion (Section 4). Finally, we give our conclusions/dis-
cussions in Section 5.
2. Data and Methods
2.1 In-situ SST observations and amplitude of diurnal
SST variation
We use SSTs of the global drifting buoy dataset dis-
tributed by the Marine Environmental Data Service
(MEDS) (http://www.meds-sdmm.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/meds/
Home_e.htm). We collected the drifting-buoy SSTs with
depths within 1.5 meter for the period 19962003, for
which the satellite solar radiation (SSR) product is avail-
able (Subsection 2.2). Since the SST sampling rate of each
buoy varies within 1060 minutes, we finally re-sampled
them every hour. We analyzed 25 HEs, listed in Table 1.
The cloud-free daily OI SST data with 0.1 0.1 spatial
resolution (Kawai et al., 2006a) were used for HE detec-
tion. Using information of the HE coverage by QKK, the
drifting buoys in their regions are specified and the SST
measurements are sampled. Figure 1(a) shows the loca-
tions of all the sampled buoy measurements in the HE
regions. Figure 1(b) shows an example of the sampled
drifting-buoy SSTs for No. 20 HE. Numbers of the speci-
fied drifting buoys for each HE are presented in Table 1.
SST observations of the TRITON mooring array
(http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/tao/proj_over/triton.html) are
also used. Ten HEs (shaded gray in Table 1) have been
captured by the TRITON buoys since their deployment.
Their coverage and the locations of TRITON buoys are
shown in Fig. 2.
The amplitude of the in-situ diurnal SST variation
(in-situ DSST hereafter) is calculated by the daily maxi-
mum SST (daytime) minus the minimum SST (nighttime)
using the in-situ SST time series. They are referred to as
SSTmax and SSTmin, and their appearance times Tmax and
Tmin, respectively. For the drifting buoys, in-situ DSSTs
are derived only for cases where the buoy drifts in an
area within 0.25 0.25 in a day. The areal size is equiva-
lent to the satellite DSST spatial resolution.
2.2 Satellite data
The satellite SST and DSST data used in this study
are the same as those used by QKK. The cloud-free daily
OI SST data covers the global oceans within 85N and
85S with 0.1 0.1 spatial resolution from 1993 to 2003
(Kawai et al., 2006a). The OI SST has been produced by
merging four kinds of satellite SST data. Since the ma-
jority of the satellite SSTs are statistically tuned against
the drifting buoy SSTs, the OI SST is a good representa-
tion of the bulk SST (Kawai et al., 2006a). Concerning
its merging principle, the OI SST can be considered as a
daily mean bulk SST at a given grid.
NOAA/NASA AVHRR Pathfinder SST (PFSST
hereafter, http://podaac.jpl.nasa.gov/products/
product102.html) is also used to compare with the in-situ
SST in the HE region. We obtained the Pathfinder Best-
In-situ Diurnal SST in the Tropical Hot Event 849

(a)
(b)
Fig. 1. a) Locations of the sampled drafting buoys in HEs dur-
ing 19962003. b) Example of the collected in-situ SST
locations for No. 20 HE (Table 1). Circle color indicates
SST values. HE coverage is illustrated by the contour of
HE intensity defined by QKK.
SST with quality flag 7, which is the highest quality. The
local time of AVHRR observation recorded in the PFSST
data file enables us to examine the difference between
the AVHRR and the in-situ SSTs obtained at closer times.
The reported Root Mean Square (RMS) error of PFSST
is 0.53C against the drifting buoy SST (Kilpatrik et al.,
2001).
Using satellite solar radiation (SSR), satellite wind
speed products, and satellite-based latent heat flux (Kawai
and Kawamura, 2003), daily satellite DSST data at 1-m
depth are produced by a parametric model (Kawai and
Kawamura, 2005). The long-term SSR products were pro-
duced from Geostationary Meteorological Satellite
(GMS)/Visible and Infrared Spin Scan Radiometer
850 H. Kawamura et al.
Fig. 2. TRITON buoy locations (dots) and coverage of the ten
HEs captured by them. Numbers on the colored coverage
lines corresponds to the HE numbers in Table 1. The HE
coverage is illustrated by the contour of HE intensity de-
fined by QKK. The TRITON buoy at (0N, 147E; marked
by ) and the TRITON buoy at (0N, 156E; marked by *)
measured the SST time series in No. 23 HE (Fig. 4) and
No. 20 HE (Fig. 8), respectively.
(VISSR) for 19962003. Its validation using the in-situ
ocean observations shows that the bias RMS errors of
the daily SSR is 3.5 23.7 W/m2 (Qin et al., 2006). RMS
error of the daily satellite DSST is around 0.20.3C in
the tropical area (Kawai and Kawamura, 2005).
3. Results
3.1 Appearance of in-situ DSST in the HE region
For the 25 HEs in Table 1, 450 drifting-buoy SST
time series and 69 TRITON-buoy SST time series with
55 PFSST match-ups are obtained. These numbers for
each HE are indicated in Table 1. Using the satellite-SST
information of HE location and period (Table 1), the start
and end days of SST sampling are determined.
Histograms of SST max, SST min, Tmax and Tmin are
shown in Fig. 3. SSTmax has a histogram mode at 30.8C,
and SSTmin a histogram mode at 29C. SST max frequently
appears at 15:00 Local Time (LT), and SSTmin at 07:00
LT. These features are quite similar to the results of pre-
vious studies (e.g., Koizumi, 1956; Stommel et al., 1969;
Kawai and Wada, 2007). The large DSST in the HE re-
gion is derived by the daily solar cycle. Since the in-situ
SST observations are sampled for the specific HE condi-
tions, the SSTmax and SST min histograms have significant
peaks at around 30C. This demonstrates that the HE areal
information based on the OI SST (QKK) properly cap-
tures the diurnal SST fluctuation around 30C. This is
the step-by-step approach, indicating/confirming no con-
tradiction among the OI SST-based sampling and the in-
situ SST features. The confirmation of the solar heating
mechanism leads us to the model simulation in Section 4,
 (a) (b)

Fig. 3. Histograms of parameters characterizing the diurnal SST variations derived from the TRITON SST and drifting buoy SST
time series in the HE region. a) Maximum (gray) and minimum SST (black). Superimposed lines are histograms smoothed by
boxcar average. b) Appearance times of the maximum SST (gray) and the minimum SST (black). Superimposed lines are
histograms smoothed by boxcar average.

since the simple physics is well implemented in the model

used.
(a)
An example of the sampled TRITON SST time se-
ries (black dots) at (0N, 147E) for No. 23 HE (Table 1)
is shown in Fig. 4(b). The location of the TRITON buoy
is indicated in Fig. 2 with a triangle symbol (). Follow-
ing the analyses of QKK, we calculated daily averaged
OI SST in the HE region to investigate the HE temporal (b)
evolution, the time series of which is shown in Fig. 4(a).
QKK mentioned that, during the former period of HE,
the average SST increase is accompanied by intense large
solar radiation, low wind speed and resultant large satel-
lite DSST. It decreases with reducing solar radiation, in-
creasing wind speed and small DSST. In order to analyze (c)
the in-situ DSST statistically, we define HE period rela-
tive to the day with the maximum average SST. In Fig.
4(a), Day-0 is the peak day, and days before (after) are
numbered decreasing (increasing) from Day-0. The newly
defined relative days are indicated in the upper horizon-
tal axes in Figs. 4(a), (b) and (c).
As illustrated in Fig. 4(b), the in-situ DSSTs are de- Fig. 4. a) Time series of No. 23 HE intensity (HE areal aver-
rived from the SST time series. The sampled SST values aged SST) for defining relative days. Peak day is specified
of Fig. 4(b) are higher than the HE-area averaged values by . b) Example of the in-situ SST time series (0N, 147E)
of Fig. 4(a). The buoy measuring the SST time series is in No. 23 HE. Daily Tohoku OI SSTs at the buoy location
located in the central part of No. 23 HE (Fig. 2), which are also plotted (*). Time-dependent threshold is 30.12C,
may be the reason why higher SST values are recorded. indicated by a horizontal line. c) In-situ DSST time series
Figure 4(c) shows the derived in-situ DSST time series derived from the in-situ SST time series in b).
as SSTmax SSTmin over 1 day. The in-situ DSST is higher
during the period before Day-0. In contrast, the in-situ
DSST is not so significant during the later period while have been compared with the corresponding satellite
the daily mean SST decreases. The daily OI SSTs in Fig. DSSTs (Kawai and Kawamura, 2005). Kawai and
4(b) have values between SSTmax and SSTmin on most Kawamura (2003) have proposed the parametric model
days, which agrees with the conclusion of Kawai et al. for generating the satellite DSST. Although the model is
(2006a) that the OI SST is equivalent to the daily mean tuned against the buoy-derived DSSTs obtained from the
SST. wide coverage of the Japanese Geostationary satellite, the
The in-situ DSSTs obtained from TRITON buoys present comparison is for an extreme air-sea condition,

In-situ Diurnal SST in the Tropical Hot Event 851

i.e., HE regions. Figure 5 shows the result of the com-
parison and demonstrates good agreement between them.
The bias is 0.05C and the RMS error is 0.28C, which
is equivalent to the RMS error (0.20.3C) of the above
mentioned analysis by Kawai and Kawamura (2003).
Using the relative day, we averaged all the in-situ
DSSTs for each day. The time series of mean in-situ DSST
is shown in Fig. 6. The HE mean period of 24.2 days
(QKK) is presented for Days-10. The mean DSST in HE
is higher than 0.5C for the 20 days displayed, and be-
comes highest, around 0.75C, on Day-0. It gradually in-
creases toward Day-0 with values higher than 0.5C dur-
ing Days -10 to -0, and quickly decreases toward 0.5C
around Day-+5. This is consistent with the result of QKK
(their figure 5) and the appearance of in-situ DSST shown
8 4 2 0
Fig. 5. Validation of the satellite DSST using the in-situ DSST
in the HE region. Numbers on contours show number den-
sity of the match-ups in a 0.1C 0.1C boxes of the satel-
lite and in-situ DSSTs.
(a)
Fig. 7. Validation of the daily OI SST using the hourly in-situ SST. Numbers on contours show number density of the match-ups
in a 0.1C 0.1C boxes of the OI and in-situ SSTs. a) Match-up conditions are satellite SST(t) > satellite SST(t-1) and
satellite DSST > 0.4C. b) Match-up conditions are satellite SST(t) < satellite SST(t-1) and satellite DSST < 0.4C.
852 H. Kawamura et al.
in Fig. 4(c). However, as seen in Fig. 6, the standard de-
viations are quite large, which suggests that the in-situ
DSST has large variability. Since the buoys were located
at a single point within the HE region, they are suscepti-
ble to local air-sea exchange influences. For the compos-
ite analyses in Fig. 6 we used Days defined by the overall
HE feature, which sometimes does not represent the lo-
cal conditions at buoy locations. Only the mean DSST
apparently changes according to QKK, but individual
DSST variations do not necessarily change as described
by QKK, which leads us to examine 1-D air-sea interac-
tions using the buoy-sampled air and ocean parameters
with hourly temporal resolution (Subsection 3.3) and a
1-D numerical model (Section 4). In order to examine
the reliability of appearing mean DSSTs further, the tem-
poral and spatial variability of the local heat fluxes should
be examined, paying attention to the observational char-
acteristics of the buoy and satellite SSTs. This, however,
lies beyond the scope of the present study, and is left for
future work.
3.2 Validation of satellite OI SST in the HE region
As mentioned in the introduction, the HE condition
Fig. 6. Composite time series of the in-situ DSST in the HE
region. Standard deviation for each relative day is given by
a vertical bar.
(b)
 (a)

(b)

(d)

Fig. 8. a) SST time series (gray) of the TRITON buoy at (0N, 156E; marked by * in Fig. 2) in No. 20 HE. Corresponding OI
SST (*) and PFSST () are superimposed. b) Results of numerical simulation (black) at 1-m depth and the TRITON SST
(gray) shown in a). c) Scatter plots of the simulated and in-situ DSSTs for 1233 days in the HE condition. Bias and standard
deviation are 0.036C and 0.24C, respectively. d) Closer views of time series of TRITON SSTs (gray) and simulated SSTs
(black) at 1-m depth, and corresponding OISST (*) and PFSST () on 28 December 1999.

enhances the bulk-skin temperature difference, which may
cause a systematic bias between the satellite and in-situ
SSTs. Figure 7 shows the validation of the OI SST in the
HE regions (Table 1). The daily OI SST is compared with
the hourly in-situ SST obtained during the same day in
coordinated universal time (UTC). The merging process
for the OI SST generation is based on UTC. In Fig. 7(a)
(7(b)), the match-up condition is that the OI SST increases
(decreases) from the value of the previous day and the
satellite DSST is higher than or equal to (smaller than)
0.4C. The attached color bar shows the appearance rate
of match ups within a 0.15C grid since the OI SST nu-
merical resolution is 0.15C.
The characteristics of OI SST in the global oceans
were examined by Kawai et al. (2006a), who showed that
the OI SST does not have a significant bias against the
drifting-buoy SST. How large is the bias in the HE con-
dition? The satellite SST tends to be higher than the in-
situ SST when the SST increases under the HE condition
of high-insolation/low wind-speed (Fig. 7(a)). The satel-
lite SST agrees well with or tends to be slightly lower
than the in-situ SST under the opposite condition (Fig.
7(b)). Almost all of the satellite SSTs merged for the OI
SST are tuned statistically against the bulk SST of drift-
ing buoys (Kawai et al., 2006a). However, Fig. 7 indi-
cates that, under the special conditions of the HE region,
the OI SST has systematic biases against the in-situ SST
observed by the drifting and TRITON buoys.

In-situ Diurnal SST in the Tropical Hot Event 853

Table 2. Comparison between the observed difference between PFSST and the TRITON SST and model-simulated differences
between SST and temperatures at 1-m and 1.5-m depths.

Match-up number Mean in-situ DSST Mean difference obs. Mean difference model Mean difference model
with PFSST (C) (C) SST-T(1m) (C) SST-T(1.5m) (C)
DSST > 0.4 30 0.76 0.26 0.19 0.31
DSST > 0.8 11 1.08 0.50 0.35 0.6

Table 3. Characteristics of the one-dimensional ocean mixed layer model (Noh and Kim, 1999) used in the present study.

Computational parameters Present study

Vertical resolution 50 cm
Output interval 3600 s
Atmospheric forcing Wind stress, solar radiation, net longwave radiative,
sensible and evaporative heat fluxes
Model domain 0150 m

3.3 Diurnal SST variation and difference between satel-
lite and in-situ SSTs in the HE region
In order to examine the DSST characteristics shown
in Subsection 3.1 and the difference between the satellite
OI SST and the in-situ SST in Subsection 3.3, we use
PFSST derived from NOAA/AVHRRs and the hourly
TRITON buoy SST. Since NOAA 13 and 14 pass the equa-
torial area at around 14:00 LT, we compare PFSST with
the TRITON in-situ SST at 14:00 LT. The number of
match-ups for each HE is presented in Table 1. An exam-
ple of the TRITON SST time series (gray dots) at (0N,
156E) and PFSST (black dots), OISST (black stars) in
No. 20 HE is shown in Fig. 8(a). The location of this sam-
ple is marked by a star symbol (*) in Fig. 2(b). While the
cloud-free OI SST appears at the buoy location every day,
PFSST does not due to cloud disturbance of the AVHRR
IR measurement. Figure 8(c) is a closer view for one day
(29 December 1999, marked in the time series) depicted
in Fig. 8(a). Figures 8(b) and (c) include the numerical
simulation results, which are discussed in the next sec-
tion.
We obtained 55 match-ups of the PFSST and
TRITON SST (Table 1). The mean difference between
the PFSST and the in-situ SST is 0.21C. As in Fig. 7, we
use the in-situ DSST for the sampling condition (Table
2). When DSST > 0.4C, the reduced match-up number
is 30; the mean DSST is 0.76C and the mean difference
is 0.26C. When DSST > 0.8C, the further reduced
match-up number is 11; the mean DSST is 1.08C and
the mean difference is 0.5C. The PFSST is higher than
the TRITON in-situ SST at around 14:00 LT, and the tem-
perature difference depends on the in-situ DSST. The sys-
tematic bias between the satellite and in-situ SSTs in the
HE region is again confirmed by the temporally precise
analyses using the PFSST.
4. Discussion
We use a numerical model to discuss the DSST ap-
pearance features, including the systematic bias. A vari-
ety of numerical models have been developed for simu-
lating the diurnal SST and upper ocean variations. Ac-
cording to Soloviev and Lukas (2006), however, no model
can simulate the diurnal variations perfectly. We selected
a one-dimensional ocean mixed layer model developed
by Noh and Kim (1999) for a simple examination of the
surface layer in the HE condition. The model is a second-
order turbulence closure model. A set of equations gov-
erning the horizontal velocity, temperature and salinity
fields is driven by fluxes of heat and wind stress. The
turbulent kinetic energy flux and the roughness length
scale were modified and the parameterization of stratifi-
cation effects is improved for better simulation of tem-
perature and turbulence structure of the oceanic bound-
ary layer. The characteristics of the model used are sum-
marized in Table 3.
The SST time series in Fig. 8(a) is simulated using
the numerical model (Fig. 8(b)). All the boundary condi-
tions governing the model simulation are calculated from
measurements of the TRITON buoy. The TRITON verti-
cal temperature/salinity profiles for 0 to 150 m depths
are also used for the models initial condition. The output
interval of the model simulation is one hour. As seen in
Fig. 8(b), the diurnal SST variations are simulated well,
although a low-frequency bias, which might be caused
by horizontal water advection, sometimes appears. Since
our interest is in the high-frequency components of diur-

854 H. Kawamura et al.


Fig. 9. Mean vertical temperature profile derived from the nu-
merical simulation for conditions DSST > 0.8C (Table 2).
Standard deviation is illustrated by the horizontal bar.
nal SST variations, we ignore the low-frequency compo-
nents. Scatter plots of all the simulated DSST and the
corresponding in-situ DSST are shown in Fig. 4(c). The
number of simulated days is 1233, and the bias and the
standard deviation are 0.036C and 0.24C, respectively.
The simulation result for one day is illustrated in the day
with the matched PFSST in Fig. 8(d).
Twenty-one time series with the 55 PFSST match-
ups are simulated, as shown in Figs. 8(b) and (d). The
mean difference between PFSST and the corresponding
TRITON SST is 0.21C, as mentioned in the last para-
graph of Section 3. The simulated mean temperature dif-
ference between the surface and 1-m depth is 0.15C. The
days of 55 match-ups include a variety of surface flux
conditions, though they were in the HE region. Their
DSSTs also range widely. Using the in-situ DSST condi-
tions in Table 2, the simulated temperature differences
between the surface and 1m/1.5m depths are calculated,
and added in Table 2. The observed mean difference of
0.26C for DSST > 0.4C lies between the simulated mean
differences for 1-m (0.19C) and 1.5-m (0.31C) depths.
That (0.5C) for DSST > 0.8C is between those for 1-m
(0.35C) and 1.5-m (0.6C) depths. The systematic bi-
ases between PFSST and the in-situ SST are well simu-
lated by the one-dimensional numerical model with the
TRITON initial/boundary conditions.
The simulated vertical temperature profiles for
DSST > 0.8C are averaged, and are shown in Fig. 9 with
the standard deviation. A sharp temperature gradient is
formed in the surface layer, which is the reason for the
difference between the temperatures at 1-m and 1.5-m
depths. The observed mean difference between the PFSST
and the in-situ SST may be attributed to the sharp tem-
perature gradient. Ward (2006) also reported large tem-
perature gradients from in-situ high resolution profiles.
Kawai et al. (2006b) have investigated the validity
of TRITON buoy-observed SST using special instruments
to measure near-surface temperatures. Through careful
examination of the high-resolution observations and nu-
merical simulations, they considered that the TRITON
SST measured at 1.5 m depth of the sensor installation
(SST 1.5m) is affected by platform effects (Kawai and
Kawamura, 2000) in calm and clear-sky conditions, and
SST1.5m may be slightly higher than the true value at 1.5m
depth (Kawai et al., 2006b) in the condition DSST >
0.5C. SST1.5m may be the value intermediate between
the water temperature at the surface and 1.5-m depth (Y.
Kawai, 2007, personal communication), which is consist-
ent with our analyses of the difference between PFSST
and the TRITON SST in the HE region.
Summarizing the above discussions, the following
may be inferred. 1) The satellite SST is tuned against the
global buoy SSTs in a variety of air-sea conditions, which
statistically equalizes the skin SST and the bulk SST.
2) The satellite global SST retrieval algorithm treats the
skin-SST and the bulk SST similarly. 3) The mean DSST
during HEs is more than 0.5C, and has a maximum of
~0.75C at the peak of the HE. The mean DSST shows an
asymmetry around the peak HE, gradually increasing from
0.5C before the peak and rapidly decreasing after the
peak. 4) The special condition of HE regularly generates
the sharp gradient of daytime vertical temperature pro-
file in the near-surface layer (i.e., the warm layer). The
gradient magnitude increases with increasing DSST.
5) The systematic bias between the satellite- and buoy-
measured SSTs in the HE region may be caused by the
difference of temperatures between the surface and the
buoy sensor depth.
5. Conclusions and Remarks
The features governing the appearance of in-situ di-
urnal SST variations in the HE region have been investi-
gated using the drifting buoy and TRITON buoy SSTs
and the satellite-based HE information of QKK. The fea-
tures and associated near-surface thermal structure are
simulated by a one-dimensional ocean mixed layer model.
The followings conclusions may be drawn.
1) The in-situ SST observations specifically sam-
pled for the HE conditions defined by the satellite cloud-
free SSTs shows that SSTmax has a histogram mode at
30.8C, and SSTmin is 29.0C. SSTmax frequently appears
at 15:00, and SSTmin at 07:00 LT.
2) The mean in-situ DSST in HE is higher than
0.5C, and assures the highest value of around 0.75C at
the peak of the HE evolution. It gradually increases to-
ward the peak, maintaining values higher than 0.5C, and
rapidly decreases toward 0.5C after the peak. These find-
ings are consistent with the satellite DSST behavior pre-
sented in QKK. The large standard deviation of in-situ
DSST suggests a significant influence of the local air-sea
In-situ Diurnal SST in the Tropical Hot Event 855
condition, which differs from the overall HE condition.
3) The satellite SSTs (the Tohoku OI SST and
PFSST) have a systematic positive bias against the cor-
responding daytime TRITON SSTs in the HE region. The
bias is enhanced in conditions of large in-situ DSST.
4) One-dimensional numerical simulation of the
SST and the near-surface thermal structure suggests that
the systematic bias between the satellite- and buoy-mea-
sured SSTs may be caused by the regularly formed, sharp,
vertical temperature gradient in the surface layer of the
HE region.
Kawai and Wada (2007) have pointed out the impor-
tance of warm-layer observation for a better understand-
ing and modeling of the air-sea interaction in the equato-
rial oceans, although no model can simulate the diurnal
variations perfectly (Soloviev and Lukas, 2006). Kawai
et al. (2006b) have examined the TRITON buoy SST, and
pointed out that the buoy hall itself affects the SST meas-
urements in the extreme condition of warm-layer estab-
lishment (the platform effect, Kawai and Kawamura,
2000). The satellite SST statistically tuned against the
global in-situ SSTs has a systematic bias under the HE
condition. However, as seen in the present study, all these
modes of study (the satellite and in-situ observations and
the numerical model) reveal consistent aspects of the near-
surface phenomenon, when sampled for the same HE con-
dition.
HE is a phenomenon that occurs in wide regions of
the ocean, in quite a thin layer near the surface. Its detec-
tion is difficult due to the large scale and high-frequency
characteristics. Air-sea boundary layer processes are es-
sentially important for its formation, but its impacts on
the large-scale air-sea interaction may be immeasurable
at present. It was just revealed by advanced satellite ob-
servations (QKK) in 2007, and needs further research
combining high-resolution satellite/in-situ observations
and improved numerical ocean/atmosphere models.
Acknowledgements
This study was conducted as part of a cooperative
study between the Tohoku University and JAMSTEC. The
authors appreciate Dr. Yoshimi Kawai of JAMSTEC for
valuable comments and Dr. T. Matsuura of National Re-
search Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Preven-
tion for providing the 1-D numerical model. The second
author acknowledges financial support from the Endo
scholarship and a scholarship from the 21st Century COE
Program, Advanced Science and Technology Center for
the Dynamic Earth, during her Ph.D. course.
References
Donlon, C. J. and the GHRSST-PP Science Team (2005): The
GHRSST-PP Data Processing Specification Version 1.5,
available form the GHRSST-PP International Project Of-
856 H. Kawamura et al.
fice, Met Office, Exeter, U.K., or at http://www.ghrsst-
pp.org, 241 pp.
Fairall, C. W., E. F. Bradley, D. P. Rogers, J. B. Edson and G.
S. Young (1996): Bulk parameterization of air-sea fluxes
for Tropical Ocean-Global Atmosphere Coupled-Ocean At-
mosphere Response Experiment. J. Geophys. Res., 101,
37473764.
Hepplewhite, C. L. (1989): Remote observation of the sea sur-
face and atmosphere. The oceanic skin effect. Int. J. Re-
mote Sensing, 10, 801810.
Kawai, Y. and H. Kawamura (2000): Study on a platform effect
in the in-situ sea surface temperature observations under
weak wind and clear sky conditions using numerical mod-
els. J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol., 17, 185196.
Kawai, Y. and H. Kawamura (2003): Validation of daily ampli-
tude of seasurface temperature evaluated with a parametric
model using satellite data. J. Oceanogr., 59, 637644.
Kawai, Y. and H. Kawamura (2005): Spatial and temporal vari-
ations of model-derived diurnal amplitude of sea surface
temperature in the western Pacific ocean. J. Geophys. Res.,
110, C08012, doi:10.1029/2004JC002652.8, 589605.
Kawai, Y. and A. Wada (2007): Diurnal sea surface tempera-
ture variation and its impact on the atmosphere and ocean:
A review. J. Oceanogr., 63, 721744.
Kawai, Y., H. Kawamura, S. Takahashi, K. Hosoda, H.
Murakami, M. Kachi and L. Guan (2006a): Satellite-based
global daily 0.1-grid optimum interpolation sea surface
temperature data. J. Geophys. Res., 111 , C06016,
doi:10.1029/2005JC003313.
Kawai, Y., H. Kawamura, S. Tanba, K. Ando, K. Yoneyama and
N. Nagahama (2006b): Validity of sea surface temperature
observed with the TRITON buoy under diurnal heating con-
ditions. J. Oceanogr., 62(6), 825838.
Kilpatrick, K. A., G. P. Podesta and R. Evans (2001): Over-
view of the NOAA/NASA advanced very high resolution
radiometer Pathfinder algorithm for sea surface tempera-
ture and associated matchup database. J. Geophys. Res., 106,
91799198.
Koizumi, M. (1956): Researches on variations of oceanographic
conditions in the region of the ocean weather station Ex-
tra in the North Pacific Ocean (IV)On the diurnal varia-
tions in air and sea-surface temperatures. Papers in Me-
teorology and Geophysics, 7, 145157.
Kondo, J., O. Kanechika and N. Yasuda (1978): Heat and mo-
mentum transfer and strong stability in the atmospheric sur-
face layer. J. Atmos. Sci., 35, 10121021.
Lau, N.-C. and M. J. Nath (1994): A modeling study of the rela-
tive roles of tropical and extratropical SST anomalies in
the variability of the global atmosphere-ocean system. J.
Climate, 7, 11841207.
Noh, Y. and H. J. Kim (1999): Simulation of temperature and
turbulence structure of the oceanic boundary layer with the
improved near-surface process. J. Geophys. Res., 104,
1562115634.
Notarstefano, G., E. Mauri and P.-M. Poulain (2006): Near-sur-
face thermal structure and surface diurnal warming in the
Adriatic sea using satellite and drifter data. Remote Sens.
Environ., 101, 194211.
Price, J. F., R. A. Weller, C. M. Bowers and M. G. Briscoe
 (1987): Diurnal response of sea surface temperature ob-
served at the long-term upper ocean study (34N, 70W) in
the Sargasso Sea. J. Geophys. Res., 92, 1448014490.
Qin, H., Y. Kawai and H. Kawamura (2006): Comparison of
downward surface solar radiation derived from GMS5/
VISSR and of reanalysis products. J. Oceanogr., 62, 577
586.
Qin, H., H. Kawamura and Y. Kawai (2007): Detection of hot
event in the equatorial Indo-Pacific warm pool using ad-
vanced satellite sea surface temperature, solar radiation, and
wind speed. J. Geophys. Res., 112, C07015, doi:10.1029/
2006JC003969.
Soloviev, A. V. and R. Lukas (1997): Large diurnal warming
events in the near-surface layer of the western equatorial
Pacific warm pool. Deep-Sea Res., 44, 10551076.
Soloviev, A. V. and R. Lukas (2006): The Near-Surface Layer
of the Ocean: Structure, Dynamics, and Applications.
Springer, Netherlands, 572 pp.
Stommel, H., K. Sanders, W. Simmons and J. Cooper (1969):
Observations of the diurnal thermocline. Deep-Sea Res., 16,
269284.
Tompkins, A. M. (2001): On the relationship between tropical
convection and sea surface temperature. J. Climate, 14, 633
637.
Waliser, D. E. (1996): Formation and limiting mechanisms for
very high sea surface temperature: Linking the dynamics
and the thermodynamics. J. Climate, 9, 161187.
Waliser, D. E. and N. E. Graham (1993): Convective cloud sys-
tems and warm pool sea surface temperatures: Coupled in-
teractions and selfregulation. J. Geophys. Res., 98, 12881
12893.
Ward, B. (2006): Near-surface ocean temperature. J. Geophys.
Res., 111, C02005, doi:10.1029/2004JC002689.
Ward, B., R. Wanninkhof, W. R. McGillis, A. T. Jessup, M. D.
DeGrandpre, J. E. Hare and J. B. Edson (2004): Biases in
the air-sea flux of CO2 resulting from ocean surface tem-
perature gradients. J. Geophys. Res., 109, C08S08,
doi:10.1029/2003JC001800.
Webster, P. J. (1994): The role of hydrological processes in
ocean-atmosphere interactions. Rev. Geophys., 32, 427476.
Yokoyama, R., S. Tanba and T. Souma (1995): Sea surface ef-
fects on the sea surface temperature estimation by remote
sensing. Int. J. Remote Sens., 16, 227238.
Zhang, G. J. and M. McPhaden (1995): The relationship be-
tween sea surface temperature and latent heat flux in the
equatorial Pacific. J. Climate, 8, 589605.
In-situ Diurnal SST in the Tropical Hot Event 857