Tropical Cyclone Frequency: Review Article

REVIEW ARTICLE Tropical Cyclone Frequency
10.1029/2021EF002275
Adam H. Sobel1,2 , Allison A. Wing3 , Suzana J. Camargo2 ,
Key Points: Christina M. Patricola4 , Gabriel A. Vecchi5 , Chia-Ying Lee2, and Michael K. Tippett1
• W e do not understand why the 1
Department of Applied Physics and Applied Mathematics, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA, 2Lamont-
number of tropical cyclones per
year is what it is, nor how it may be Doherty Earth Observatory, Columbia University, Palisades, NY, USA, 3Department of Earth, Ocean and Atmospheric
changing Science, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL, USA, 4Department of Geological and Atmospheric Sciences, Iowa
• In the absence of theory, our main State University, Ames, IA, USA, 5Department of Geosciences, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, USA
tools are numerical models
• Promising research directions
include idealized simulations at high
resolution and study of precursor
Abstract The frequency with which tropical cyclones (TCs) occur controls all other aspects of tropical
disturbances, or "seeds" cyclone risk since a storm that does not occur can do no harm. Yet this frequency is poorly understood.
There is no accepted theory that explains the average number of TCs that occur each year on the Earth,
Correspondence to:
nor how that number will change with global warming. Arguments based on global budgets of heat or
A. H. Sobel, moisture do not yet appear helpful, nor does a detailed understanding of the physical processes of TC
ahs129@columbia.edu genesis. Empirical indices that predict TC frequency as a function of large-scale environmental variables
can explain some of its relative variations in space and time, but not its absolute value. Global numerical
Citation: models with horizontal grid spacings on the order of 25–50 km have allowed much improved simulations
Sobel, A. H., Wing, A. A., Camargo, of TC activity, however. Many such models project a decrease in frequency with warming, but some
S. J., Patricola, C. M., Vecchi, G. A., project an increase. Idealized simulations, including those at higher resolutions, offer promise by allowing
Lee, C.-Y., & Tippett, M. K. (2021).
Tropical cyclone frequency. Earth's a systematic, deductive investigation of the roles of individual environmental factors. In addition to the
Future, 9, e2021EF002275. https://doi. larger-scale environmental modulation of genesis likelihood, precursor disturbances, or “seeds”, may exert
org/10.1029/2021EF002275 an independent influence on TC frequency.
Received 1 JUL 2021
Accepted 8 NOV 2021
Plain Language Summary The term tropical cyclone frequency refers to the average number
of tropical cyclones (also known as hurricanes, typhoons, etc.) which occur each year, either over the
earth as a whole or in smaller regions. In this paper, the authors review the state of the science regarding
Author Contributions:
what is known about tropical cyclone frequency. The state of the science is not great. There are around
Conceptualization: Adam H. Sobel,
Allison A. Wing, Suzana J. Camargo, 80 tropical cyclones in a typical year, and we do not know why it is this number and not a much larger
Christina M. Patricola, Gabriel A. or smaller one. We also do not know much about whether this number should increase or decrease as
Vecchi
the planet warms---thus far, it has not done much of either on the global scale, though there are larger
Funding acquisition: Adam H. Sobel,
Suzana J. Camargo, Chia-Ying Lee, changes in some particular regions. No existing theory predicts tropical cyclone frequency. In this
Michael K. Tippett situation, we are left with numerical models as our primary tool, and the authors discuss the strengths,
Methodology: Allison A. Wing, Suzana
weaknesses, and different ways of using such models to investigate tropical cyclone frequency. Idealized
J. Camargo, Gabriel A. Vecchi
Visualization: Allison A. Wing, simulations, in which the planet is made simpler than it really is, are allowing some new insights. Another
Suzana J. Camargo, Gabriel A. Vecchi promising avenue of investigation involves studying the weaker disturbances that sometimes strengthen
Writing – original draft: Adam
into tropical cyclones.
H. Sobel, Allison A. Wing, Suzana
J. Camargo, Christina M. Patricola,
Gabriel A. Vecchi
Writing – review & editing: Adam 1. Introduction
H. Sobel, Allison A. Wing, Suzana
J. Camargo, Christina M. Patricola, Tropical cyclone frequency is the number of tropical cyclones occurring over a given time period and spatial
Gabriel A. Vecchi, Chia-Ying Lee, domain. Here, we are most interested in the annual frequency over either the entire globe or individual
Michael K. Tippett
basins, that is, particular distinct portions of the tropical oceans over which tropical cyclones occur (such
as the North Atlantic, South Indian, etc.). Tropical cyclone frequency strongly controls the total hazard and
risk from tropical cyclones, because no other aspect of a tropical cyclone matters if it does not occur. We are
particularly interested in how tropical cyclone frequency is related to climate: what factors in the climate
© 2021 The Authors. Earth's Future
published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on system determine the climatological frequency in the present and recent past, its natural variability, and its
behalf of American Geophysical Union. possible changes as a consequence of anthropogenic global warming.
This is an open access article under
the terms of the Creative Commons Other dimensions of the relationship between tropical cyclones and climate are understood with some
Attribution License, which permits use, confidence. Recent reviews indicate relatively high confidence that, on average, global warming in-
distribution and reproduction in any
medium, provided the original work is creases the precipitation produced by tropical cyclones, and also intensifies their winds (e.g., Knutson
properly cited. et al., 2010, 2019, 2020; Walsh et al., 2016). There is high confidence that storm-surge-driven flood risk is
SOBEL ET AL. 1 of 24
23284277, 2021, 12, Downloaded from https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2021EF002275 by Bangladesh Hinari NPL, Wiley Online Library on [23/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Earth’s Future 10.1029/2021EF002275
increasing due to sea level rise (a change which occurs even in the absence of any changes in storms, [e.g.,
Woodruff et al., 2013]). These conclusions are supported by models, theory, and observations to varying
degrees. Some other changes, such as the increase in the latitude at which maximum intensity occurs (Ko-
ssin et al., 2014), have been found in observations but are not fully understood theoretically (Sharmila &
Walsh, 2018) nor found consistently in models.
Despite its importance, tropical cyclone frequency is perhaps the most poorly understood aspect of the rela-
tionship between tropical cyclones and climate. Neither modern instrumental observations nor paleo-proxy
archives show clear indications of century-scale trends in global tropical cyclone frequency yet, and theory
on the subject is almost entirely lacking. Numerical models show inconsistency in their simulated tropical
cyclone frequencies, both in their historical climatologies and their projections in response to radiative forc-
ing scenarios. This weakens our confidence in the models, particularly (but not only) given that their ability
to resolve tropical cyclones adequately for this purpose remains debatable.
In this paper, we review the state of the science on tropical cyclone frequency and suggest research di-
rections for the future. We begin in Section 2 with a survey of observations, describing the mean tropical
cyclone frequencies observed historically, in each basin where the storms occur, and briefly characterizing
their seasonal cycles and some aspects of their variability. In Section 3 we summarize some of the ideas and
tools that have been used, or might conceivably be used, to address tropical cyclone frequency from a the-
oretical perspective. To the extent that we are interested in understanding what controls global frequency,
these sections are thinner than we might like. Observations of global frequency show neither clear trends
nor easily interpretable variability, and our theoretical understanding is weak. Numerical models have con-
sequently become central to research on this problem, both because of the large gap left by observations and
theory and because global models' ability to simulate tropical cyclones has improved dramatically over the
last couple of decades. In Section 4, we describe the state of the art in “high-resolution” (meaning, typically,
25–50 km horizontal grid spacing in this context) global modeling of tropical cyclones. We also summarize
a range of idealized modeling studies, sometimes at higher resolutions, in which domain geometry, bound-
ary conditions, or forcings are simplified in order to derive clearer causal insights. In Section 5 we discuss
“seeding”, or the dependence of frequency on the production of weaker precursor disturbances. Much work
historically assumes, explicitly or implicitly, that the large-scale environment controls frequency in a way
broadly consistent with a Poisson process, that is, that sufficient seeds are always present, or that the fre-
quency of the seeds themselves is not substantially modulated by climate. Whether this is in fact true, and
what the implications might be if seeding allows the system true additional degrees of freedom beyond
those embodied by the large-scale environment, have emerged from recent work as potentially important
questions. Section 6 briefly summarizes and spells out questions for future research.
2. Observations
There are approximately 79 tropical cyclones per year on the Earth, plus or minus about 10 (Schreck
et al., 2014). There is no accepted explanation for this number (e.g., Walsh et al., 2015). Yet, remarkably,
unlike other important and incompletely understood phenomena, there is no controversy about it either.
We have little idea why the total number could not be even an order of magnitude greater or smaller.
While a better understanding of global tropical cyclone frequency would be of great value, the tropical
cyclone frequency in an individual basin is more directly relevant to tropical cyclone risk in any given
particular place. We consider here seven basins into which the Earth's surface is divided for purposes of
tropical cyclone monitoring and prediction: the North Atlantic, Eastern (including Central) and Western
North Pacific, South and North Indian, South Pacific, and Australian regions. Figure 1 shows the time series
of tropical cyclone counts from these basins since 1980 (the period of satellite observations, when global
data are of the highest quality). The figure shows counts for broad intensity categories on the Saffir-Simpson
scale (Tropical Storm; Categories 1–2; Categories 3–5) denoted by colors, with each storm categorized by its
peak value of maximum sustained surface wind speed, per convention. By eye, one sees an upward trend
in total frequency in the North Atlantic basin since the start of the satellite era, a downward trend in the
Australian region (Chand et al., 2019), and an increase in the number of intense storms in the North Indian
Ocean (Balaji et al., 2018). Trends in other basins are either subtle or clearly absent, and the satellite era
(a) North Indian (b) Western North Pacific TS

10 40 Cat 1-2
2 2 Cat 3-5
8
30
Nino3.4 SON
Nino3.4 ASO
1 1
6
NTC
NTC
0 20 0
4
-1 -1
10
2
-2 -2
0 0
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Year Year
(c) Central & Eastern North Pacific (d) North Atlantic
40 30
2 2
Nino3.4 ASO, AMO

30
1 1
Nino3.4 JAS
20
NTC
NTC
20 0 0
-1 10 -1
10
-2 -2
0 0
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Year Year
(e) South Indian (f) Australia
15 20
2 2
15
1 1
Nino3.4 JFM
Nino3.4 JFM
10
NTC
0 NTC 10 0
5 -1 -1
5
-2 -2
0 0
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Season Season
(g) South Pacific (h) Globe
20
100
2 2
15 80
1 1
Nino3.4 JFM
Nino3.4 JFM
60
NTC
NTC
10 0 0
40
-1 -1
5
20
-2 -2
0 0
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Season Year
Figure 1. Time series of the number of tropical cyclones in individual basins, and the globe (lower right). Normalized time series of Niño3.4 are superimposed
(scale on right y-axis label, zero indicated by pink dashed line; different 3-month periods chosen for each basin, indicated in right y-axis label), and on the
Atlantic figure, AMO time series are also superimposed (thin and thick black lines, unsmoothed and smoothed respectively). Tropical cyclone data are from
IBTrACS (Knapp et al., 2010); AMO time series from NOAA, using the Kaplan SST data set (Kaplan et al., 1998); Niño3.4 also from NOAA, using the Reynolds
SST v5 data set (Huang et al., 2017).
trend in the North Atlantic is not evident in century-scale homogenized data (Landsea et al., 2010; Vecchi
et al., 2021), or in century-scale global simulations with historical SST (Chan et al., 2021).
Tropical cyclone activity exhibits a pronounced seasonal cycle in all basins, as shown by the red curves in
Figure 2. The frequency generally peaks in the late summer and early autumn of each hemisphere, when
the off-equatorial sea surface temperatures are greatest and tropical rain belts—intertropical convergence
zones (ITCZs) or monsoons—reach their largest excursions from the equator (e.g., Biasutti et al., 2018, see
Figure 3a). The exception is the North Indian basin, where strong vertical wind shear suppresses tropical
cyclone formation during the June–September monsoon season, leading to an annual cycle with two peaks,
before and after the monsoon. Global tropical cyclone frequency has an annual cycle that is dominated by
the northern hemisphere. This may be a consequence, at least in part, of the absence of tropical cyclones
in the south Atlantic and southeast Pacific. The latter absence, in turn, is a consequence of low sea surface
temperatures and high vertical wind shears in those basins, even in the southern hemisphere summer and
fall, and the associated tendency of the ITCZ to remain north of the equator year round over these oceans.
All basins exhibit variability in tropical cyclone frequency on interannual and decadal time scales (Figure 1).
Some of this is explainable in terms of known large-scale modes of climate variability, the most prominent
of which is the El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) phenomenon. The standardized time series of an
ENSO index, the Niño3.4 sea surface temperature (SST) index (Barnston et al., 1997), is superimposed on
&)65
D 1RUWK,QGLDQ (5$,QW E :HVWHUQ1RUWK3DFLILF

(5$
-5$

0(55$
2EV
17&
17&

- ) 0 $ 0 - - $ 6 2 1 ' - ) 0 $ 0 - - $ 6 2 1 '
F &HQWUDO (DVWHUQ1RUWK3DFLILF G 1RUWK$WODQWLF

17&
17&

- ) 0 $ 0 - - $ 6 2 1 ' - ) 0 $ 0 - - $ 6 2 1 '
H 6RXWK,QGLDQ I $XVWUDOLD

17&
17&

- ) 0 $ 0 - - $ 6 2 1 ' - ) 0 $ 0 - - $ 6 2 1 '
J 6RXWK3DFLILF K *OREH

17&
17&

- ) 0 $ 0 - - $ 6 2 1 ' - ) 0 $ 0 - - $ 6 2 1 '
0RQWK 0RQWK
Figure 2. Seasonal cycles of the number of tropical cyclones in individual basins, and the globe (lower right). Observations are indicated by the red lines,
while the bars show values predicted by an environmental tropical cyclone genesis index (Camargo et al., 2014; Tippett et al., 2011), as computed from different
observation-based reanalyses: Climate Forecast System Reanalysis (Saha et al., 2010, 2014), European Center for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF)
Interim Reanalysis (Dee et al., 2011), ECMWF Reanalysis Version 5 (Hersbach et al., 2020), Japanese 55-year Reanalysis (JRA-55; Kobayashi et al., 2015),
Modern-Era Retrospective analysis for Research and Applications, Version 2 (Gelaro et al., 2017).
D *HQHVLV'HQVLW\
R 1
:HVWHUQ1RUWK3DFLILF 1RUWK$WODQWLF
1RUWK,QGLDQ (DVWHUQ1RUWK3DFLILF
R
1
R
R 6
6RXWK,QGLDQ 6RXWK3DFLILF
$XVWUDOLD
R 6 R
R ( R ( R ( R ( R : R : R : R : R
E 7&*,(5$
R 1
R
1
R

R
6
R 6 R R R R R R R R R R
( ( ( ( : : : :

Figure 3. Observed annual genesis density (a) and that predicted by the Tippett et al. (2011) genesis index, as modified by (Camargo et al., 2014), with
environmental fields from the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts Reanalysis Version 5 reanalysis (b) (Hersbach et al., 2020). Also shown in
(a) are the basin boundaries used in Figures 1 and 2.
all curves in Figure 1. TC frequency is significantly correlated with ENSO in the Eastern and Central North
Pacific and anticorrelated with it in the North Atlantic (Table 1). In the case of the Atlantic, we also show
in Figure 1d a smoothed version of the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation index—essentially North Atlantic
SST minus South Atlantic SST. Multidecadal variability in this quantity is closely associated with similar
variations in North Atlantic hurricane activity. The multidecadal SST fluctuations have been historically
viewed as consequences of fluctuations in the thermohaline circulation (Goldenberg et al., 2001). More re-
cently, considerable evidence has emerged that particularly at lower latitudes (which matter most for trop-
ical cyclones) these SST fluctuations are to some extent radiatively forced by time-varying anthropogenic
emissions of greenhouse gases and aerosols (Murphy et al., 2017). The extent to which ocean dynamics play
an active role in generating these fluctuations—and associated variations in tropical cyclone activity—is
still the subject of research (Clement et al., 2015; Delworth et al., 2017). It is possible that radiative forcing
changes trigger coupled ocean-atmosphere adjustments on multi-decadal timescales so that both mecha-
nisms are important (Otterå et al., 2010).
The interannual variability in TC frequency is, to some extent, predictable. Observed correlations between
frequency and predictable large-scale modes of climate variability (e.g., ENSO) have been used since the
1980s to make statistical forecasts of frequency months in advance (Nicholls, 1979; Gray, 1984). More re-
cently, dynamical models have also been used to make such forecasts (Camargo & Barnston, 2009; J. Chen &
Lin, 2013; Vecchi et al., 2011, 2014; Vitart et al., 2007). While the skill of these forecasts is modest (Camargo
et al., 2010; Klotzbach et al., 2019), it is enough to make clear that tropical cyclone formation is controlled
Table 1 to a substantial extent by its large-scale environment, since that environ-

Correlations Between ENSO, Represented by the Niño3.4 Index, and TC ment is what is actually predictable on seasonal time scales. We discuss
Frequencies Over the Southern Indian (SI), Australian (AUS), Southern the nature of this control in the next section.
Pacific (SP), Northern Indian (NI), Western North Pacific (WNP), Eastern
North Pacific (EP), and North Atlantic (ATL) Basins
Basin TCs TS + HUR MHUR
3. Theoretical Considerations
SI 0.0323 −0.0269 −0.1528 −0.0096 3.1. The Process of Tropical Cyclogenesis
AUS −0.5752 −0.5328 −0.4891 −0.3059 Since tropical cyclone frequency is equivalent to the number of tropical
SP 0.4631 0.4845 0.5694 0.3871 cyclogenesis events in a given time and area (e.g., a year and the whole
NI 0.1838 0.0369 −0.1387 −0.0293 planet), it is natural to ask how research into the process of tropical cy-
clogenesis informs our understanding of frequency. Tropical cyclogenesis
WNP −0.0654 0.3248 0.5708 0.7065
has been the subject of intense research for decades, using an arsenal
EP 0.4561 0.4755 0.3710 0.4058 of methods including targeted field programs and high-resolution nu-
ATL −0.4121 −0.3710 −0.5136 −0.3982 merical models. The literature on this topic is much too large to review
Note. Data from 1980 to 2019 in the Northern Hemisphere, 1980/81– comprehensively here, but much of it focuses on the specific physical
2018/19 in the Southern Hemisphere, using months JFM in the Southern processes by which weaker disturbances (referred to below as “seeds” or
Hemisphere, ASO in the ATL and WNP, JAS in the EP, and SON in the “precursors”) become tropical cyclones. Quantities of interest include
NI. Statistical significance shown as p < 0.01 boldface, 0.01 < p < 0.05
both those that are external, in the large-scale environment and internal
underlined. Data sources as in Figures 1 and 3.
to the incipient disturbance itself. One example is the debate, reviewed
by Raymond et al. (2014) concerning the importance of “bottom up” ver-
sus “top down” processes, that is, whether genesis occurs fundamentally
through the downward extension of a midlevel vortex (Bister & Emanuel, 1997; Nolan, 2007; Raymond &
Sessions, 2007) or through the merger of “vortical hot towers” which grow from the surface (Hendricks
et al., 2004; Montgomery et al., 2006).
It is of intrinsic scientific importance to understand the processes of tropical cyclogenesis at a detailed,

mechanistic level, and one hopes that such understanding might inform a theory of tropical cyclone fre-
quency. Nonetheless, to our knowledge, the literature on genesis has not produced any concrete ideas on
how to upscale event-scale understanding of the dynamics of genesis to produce such a climatological
theory. In addition, the fact that numerical weather prediction models with a horizontal grid spacing of
tens of kilometers have for some time been able to predict genesis with considerable success (e.g., Halperin
et al., 2013), even in the extended range (e.g., Elsberry et al., 2010; Robertson et al., 2020), suggests that
large-scale environmental control is at least partly independent of these specifics. These models surely do
not adequately resolve the details of either the bottom-up or top-down processes that are documented in the
field or high-resolution modeling studies.
3.2. TC Genesis Indices
It has been known since at least the mid-20th century that tropical cyclones form in regions of high sea
surface temperature and atmospheric conditional instability, while their avoidance of a narrow belt around
the equator indicates the necessity of a finite Coriolis parameter (Palmén, 1948). Through in-depth studies
of growing observational data sets documenting both tropical cyclones and their large-scale environments,
Gray (1968) added low vertical wind shear and high humidity in the lower-to mid-troposphere as additional
important factors for genesis. Gray (1979) built on this understanding to choose predictors for an index of
tropical cyclogenesis: at any given place and time, a single number, constructed as a weighted combination
of the different environmental factors (six, in Gray's original index) that quantifies the probability that a
storm will form. The weighting of the factors is determined by a multivariate statistical analysis of the
empirical associations between frequency and the factors themselves. Most indices are constructed from
monthly or longer-term mean data so that they represent the climate rather than the weather. They can be
computed from shorter-timescale data as well, for example, to study the influence of subseasonal modes of
variability on genesis (e.g., Camargo et al., 2009).
Many genesis indices have been developed since Gray's time (e.g., Bruyère et al., 2012; Emanuel & No-
lan, 2004; Emanuel, 2010; Tippett et al., 2011) and used to interpret the relationships between many kinds
of variations in the large-scale environment and TC frequency, both in observations and numerical models
(Camargo, Emanuel, & Sobel, 2007; Camargo, Sobel, et al., 2007; Camargo et al., 2014, 2016). Figure 3
shows a global map of one such index, along with the observed genesis density. The index shown, a mod-
ified version of that of Tippett et al. (2011), uses four predictors: potential intensity (a thermodynamic
quantity strongly related to sea surface temperature; Emanuel, 1986), vertical wind shear, defined as the
magnitude of the difference between the vector winds at the 200 and 850 hPa pressure levels, absolute
vorticity at 850 hPa (which includes the Coriolis parameter) and column integrated relative humidity. The
index is constructed by a Poisson regression fit to the mean TC genesis density seasonal cycle; the Poisson
regression assumes that tropical cyclone genesis results from a large and climate-independent number of
trials, but that the probability that a given trial will result in genesis depends on the local values of the four
climate predictors. Comparison of the two panels of Figure 3 indicates the goodness of fit achieved by this
procedure. Another metric of this fit is shown by the bars in Figure 2, representing basin area integrals of
the same index computed from different reanalysis products. The index captures the overall seasonal cycles
reasonably well, though with some biases that are consistent across reanalysis products: the peak seasons
over the north Atlantic and eastern North Pacific are underestimated by the index, while those over the
South Pacific and South Indian oceans are underestimated.
A genesis index has the appearance of a predictive theory for frequency, in that it takes aspects of the large-
scale environment as inputs and predicts the probability of TC formation (or expected number of TCs over
a given area and time period) as an output. In that, they are functionally analogous to potential intensity,
which predicts the maximum possible intensity of a TC given environmental conditions (Emanuel, 2000;
Shields et al., 2020; Wing et al., 2007), or to the ventilation index (Tang & Emanuel, 2012), which predicts to
what extent that maximum possible intensity is reduced by combinations of vertical shear and dry or cool
air in the environment.
The potential intensity and ventilation index are derived from an explicit physical theory, however. Specif-
ically, this theory posits the mature tropical cyclone as an axisymmetric, balanced vortex in which the air
is saturated in the absence of vertical shear. In the presence of vertical shear, the limiting effect of subsatu-
ration on intensity is captured by the ventilation index. All genesis indices developed to date, on the other
hand, are inherently empirical. Physical understanding informs the choice of predictors, but there is not
an underlying theory of cyclogenesis analogous to that for the maintenance of the mature tropical cyclone.
This limits the indices' predictive power.
Genesis indices can help us to understand some of the relative frequency differences between one basin
and another, and between different times in the same basin, whether due to the seasonal cycle or internal
variations such as those due to ENSO. But they do not explain the overall global frequency, nor the abso-
lute frequency in any basin. Every index, to our knowledge, requires empirical calibration to observations,
explicitly or implicitly, such that the absolute frequency is not meaningfully predicted. The empirical basis
of existing genesis indices also undercuts their predictions of how global frequency will change with glob-
al warming. Different indices can give opposite answers—either an increase in frequency with warming
or a decrease—even when they behave very similarly in the present climate (Camargo et al., 2014; Lee
et al., 2020).
3.3. The Irrelevance of Global Budgets
An obstacle to a predictive theory for tropical cyclone frequency is the relatively small role that tropical
cyclones appear to play in the climate system as a whole. Simple budget arguments have been very useful
in understanding global precipitation (e.g., Allen & Ingram, 2002); this makes them tempting as a route to
understanding tropical cyclones as well. Precipitation is the only substantial net sink of atmospheric water
vapor, and the latent heating associated with it is the primary heating term in the atmospheric heat budget
(balanced on a global basis mainly by radiative cooling). Not only the climatological value but also the rate
of change of global precipitation with warming can be deduced from an understanding of radiative transfer
and its relationship to thermal structure in the earth's atmosphere (Jeevanjee & Romps, 2018). Analyses of
tropical cyclone precipitation in particular show, however, that, while it may contribute as much as 30%–
50% of the average total precipitation in some localized regions (Khouakhi et al., 2017), it only contributes
a few percent of the global mean precipitation (Skok et al., 2013), and only around 10% or less of the total
precipitation even in oceanic tropical cyclone basins (Jiang & Zipser, 2010). Naive arguments based on the
Table 2
Correlations Between Different Basin TC Frequencies
SI AUS SP NI WNP EP ATL
SI 1.0000 0.0834 −0.0880 0.0929 0.0581 0.0814 0.1207
AUS 0.0834 1.0000 −0.2886 0.0123 0.2383 0.0051 −0.1890
SP −0.0880 −0.2886 1.0000 0.1742 −0.3293 0.2084 −0.1927
NI 0.0929 0.0123 0.1742 1.0000 −0.0981 0.1666 0.0721
WNP 0.0581 0.2383 −0.3293 −0.0981 1.0000 0.2301 −0.1288
EP 0.0814 0.0051 0.2084 0.1666 0.2301 1.0000 −0.4468
ATL 0.1207 −0.1890 −0.1927 0.0721 −0.1288 −0.4468 1.0000
Note. Data, seasons chosen, significance, and sources as in Table 1.
heat or moisture budgets, such as are informative for global precipitation, thus do not seem promising as ex-
planations for TC frequency, since the number of TCs could change by a large percentage without requiring
much adjustment in the rest of the budget of heat or moisture. We are not aware of any other global budget
arguments that provide stronger constraints on tropical cyclone frequency.
3.4. Regional Frequency and the Independence of Basins
The perception that the global number of TCs per year is remarkably stable, with some cancellation between
the interannual fluctuations in different basins, has led to speculation that there might be negative feedback
whereby increases in TC activity in one basin cause suppression in another. If so, this would constitute an
important control on TC frequency. Frank and Young (2007) showed, however, that fluctuations in basins
are indistinguishable from what would be expected if the basins were independent, apart from correlations
induced by the influence of large-scale modes of climate variability on multiple basins simultaneously.
Large-scale modes of climate variability—especially ENSO but also others—do affect TC activity in most
basins, however, introducing some degree of dependence between them. Table 2 shows interannual corre-
lation coefficients between annual TC numbers in different basins using Best Track data from 1980–2019.
There is a significant well known anti-correlation between the North Atlantic and the Eastern Pacific (C.
Wang & Lee, 2009). This is apparently due to the influences of ENSO and the Atlantic Meridional Mode
(Patricola et al., 2017). Other basins show clearer ENSO signals in other metrics of TC activity than fre-
quency. In the western North Pacific, for example, ENSO signals are most apparent in intensity, or integral
measures like accumulated cyclone energy (Camargo & Sobel, 2005). Even a weak ENSO event can some-
times manifest strongly, for example, in metrics such as the numbers of the most intense storms (Sobel
et al., 2016). Recently, other factors have been explored as causes for integrated variability of TC activity in
the northern hemisphere, such as subtropical warming and stationary waves (C. Wang, Wang, & Cao, 2019;
Z. Wang et al., 2020).
3.5. Understanding Projections
Human-induced climate change provides strong motivation to understand tropical cyclone frequency, since
any radiatively forced changes in frequency could have large impacts on human society. In early thinking
on the topic, there was a belief that a warmer climate would produce more tropical cyclones, because the
area over which the SST exceeds the threshold for deep convection and tropical cyclogenesis—historically
somewhere in the 26–27°C range—would increase. That argument has, by now, long been understood to be
wrong (Henderson-Sellers et al., 1998) because the threshold itself rises with warming as the troposphere
warms moist adiabatically (Johnson & Xie, 2010a; Williams et al., 2009). Relative SST, the difference be-
tween SST in a given region and tropical mean SST, is a better predictor of both genesis and intensity than
is absolute SST (Ramsay & Sobel, 2011; Vecchi & Soden, 2007; Zhao et al., 2009). Essentially, TCs form
preferentially over the warmest ocean surfaces in a given climate, however warm those may be, because the
ocean there is warmest compared to the atmosphere, whose temperature is more horizontally uniform than
the ocean's. At the same time, global mean SST is not entirely irrelevant; a hypothetical globally uniform
increase in SST is still expected to influence, for example, its influence on potential intensity (Emanuel &
Sobel, 2013; Ramsay & Sobel, 2011).
Since the early 2000s, when global atmospheric models with resolutions in the 25–50 km range began to be
practical for climate studies, most such models have predicted decreases, or at most no change, in global
TC frequency (Roberts et al., 2020a, 2020b). Assessment reports and review articles have largely based their
statements about future frequency change on these results (Knutson et al., 2010, 2020; Walsh et al., 2016),
though generally with low confidence. Recently, however, a few studies have simulated increases, with
either dynamical models (Bhatia et al., 2018; Vecchi et al., 2019) or statistical-dynamical downscaling (Ema-
nuel, 2013; Lee et al., 2020). These results are discussed in greater detail in the next section.
Numerical model results are most useful when complemented by solid theoretical understanding. In the
case of global TC frequency, there are plausible ideas that have been used to interpret the model results, but
none of them is sufficiently well-developed or established, in our view, to resolve the discrepancy between
the models. One argument, for example, is that the reduction in the TC frequency is due to the reduction of
the mass flux in regions of TC activity (Sugi et al., 2012, 2015).
Another argument focuses on the environmental humidity, and requires understanding multiple measures
of that quantity. The relative humidity is the ratio of the actual specific humidity (roughly, the mass of water
vapor in a given mass of air) to its saturation value. The saturation deficit is the difference, rather than the
ratio, of the same two numbers. The saturation value itself increases with temperature (at a fixed pressure)
according to the Clausius-Clapeyron relation. In a warming climate, as relative humidity in the tropical
lower troposphere remains close to constant (e.g., Held & Soden, 2000), the saturation deficit increases
there, since it is a fixed fraction (1 − R, where R is relative humidity) of an increasing saturation specific
humidity. This inhibits tropical cyclone genesis, because surface fluxes have to do more moistening to bring
the column to saturation. The saturation deficit plays a key role in the axisymmetric theory of tropical cy-
clone intensity that underlies the potential intensity and ventilation index. In the presence of ambient verti-
cal wind shear, a greater saturation deficit allows greater “ventilation” and lowers the maximum achievable
storm intensity (Chavas, 2017; Tang & Emanuel, 2010, 2012). Although strictly applicable only to a mature,
axisymmetric tropical cyclone, it is plausible to expect that saturation deficit also inhibits the initial forma-
tion of such a cyclone from a non-axisymmetric precursor via similar dynamics.
A genesis index which uses saturation deficit as its humidity predictor was able to predict frequency de-
creases with warming simulated by the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL) High Resolution
Atmospheric Model (HiRAM) after being fit to the same model's historical climate (Camargo et al., 2014).
That was just a rationalization, however; a more recent GFDL model simulates an increase in TC frequency
(Bhatia et al., 2018), even as its saturation deficit still increases (Vecchi et al., 2019). If the relative humidity
is used as the predictor in the index in place of saturation deficit, then other predictors control the response
to warming, since relative humidity stays nearly constant. Potential intensity, in particular, increases with
warming and drives global increases in the genesis index of Tippett et al. (2011) (with the warming simu-
lated by several Coupled Model Intercomparison Project, Phase 5 [CMIP5] models) if the relative humidity
is the humidity predictor. On the other hand, the genesis index decreases globally if saturation deficit is the
humidity predictor (Camargo et al., 2014; Lee et al., 2020).
In some cases, our confidence in frequency changes projected or attributed to anthropogenic radiative forc-
ings may be greater for individual basins than globally. This is especially the case where and to the extent
that there is confidence in the spatial pattern of the forced SST response, such that we have some confidence
in projection or attribution of relative SST changes. That is, if the sea surface temperature warms more in
one basin than others, that basin is likely to see increasing tropical cyclone activity. Relative SST is strongly
related to potential intensity, convective available potential energy (a metric of the potential buoyancy of
an air parcel rising from near the surface), and the occurrence of deep convection (e.g., Izumo et al., 2019;
Johnson & Xie, 2010b; Vecchi & Soden, 2007). In some basins (esp. the Atlantic) relative SST is also anti-cor-
related with vertical wind shear (e.g., Kossin & Vimont, 2007; Latif et al., 2007). Changes in relative SST
generally are associated with changes of the same sign in empirical genesis indices, and with TC frequency
itself, to an extent that such TC frequency changes can be predicted (at least in sign) even without explicit
numerical simulation of TCs themselves if the relative SST change can be predicted with confidence. The
North Atlantic, where relative SST and vertical wind shear changes in the late 20th and early 21st century
have been associated with changes in aerosol and greenhouse gas forcing, is one such example (Clement
et al., 2015; Mann & Emanuel, 2006; Murphy et al., 2017; Vecchi & Soden, 2007b). The Arabian Sea, whose
sea surface temperature the models robustly project will increase more than that of either the adjacent
Bay of Bengal or the tropical mean (e.g., Liu et al., 2015; Murakami et al., 2013; Yao et al., 2015; Zheng
et al., 2013), may be another. High activity recently observed in the Arabian Sea's late season has in fact
been attributed to anthropogenic forcing (Murakami et al., 2017). A similar argument holds wherever there
is confidence in a regional climate change that is directly relevant to TC frequency, for example, a robust
change in vertical wind shear, even in the absence of a relative SST signal.
Increased confidence in projections of regional climate change would thus increase confidence in projec-
tions of regional TC frequency, even in the absence of any new insights into TCs per se. Questions about
the response of the upper equatorial Pacific ocean to radiative forcing may be particularly important in this
regard, since we expect the response of TCs in some basins to force changes in the equatorial Pacific SST
to resemble their responses to ENSO (e.g., warming of the equatorial Pacific cold tongue is associated with
increased eastern North Pacific TC frequency but decreased North Atlantic TC frequency). If the equato-
rial Pacific responds differently to radiative forcing than current earth system models predict (e.g., Seager
et al., 2019), any projections of regional tropical cyclone frequency changes based on those models will
likely be wrong, even in the sign of the changes.
4. Modeling
In this section, we summarize the use of numerical models to study tropical cyclone frequency. In Sec-
tion 4.1 we describe the global models used to simulate climate and tropical cyclones simultaneously, at
resolutions high enough to be at least “TC-permitting” (meaning that tropical cyclones with a number of
reasonable features are simulated, though they are still under-resolved). These models form the primary
basis, such as it is, of our current understanding of how tropical cyclone frequency may change with global
warming. In Section 4.2, we discuss more idealized modeling studies, some of them using higher resolu-
tions, that are designed to isolate how specific environmental factors control frequency, and that may offer
the most likely route to increased fundamental understanding.
4.1. High-Resolution Global Models
An ideal model for studying the relationship of tropical cyclones to climate is one that can simulate both
the climate and tropical cyclones, as well as the interactions between them, organically and faithfully. This
implies that the model should be global, and at the same time have sufficient resolution to simulate tropical
cyclones well. There are several factors that influence a climate model's simulated TC climatology, however,
including model resolution, the inclusion of atmosphere-ocean coupling, and representation of unresolved
processes (e.g., Broccoli & Manabe, 1990).
An atmospheric model horizontal grid spacing of ∼1.0° (approximately 110 km) or greater typically pro-
resolution of ∼0.25° (e.g., Balaguru et al., 2020; Camargo et al., 2020; J.-H. Chen & Lin, 2011; Murakami
duces too few TCs globally, whereas simulated TC numbers are substantially improved for an atmospheric
et al., 2015; Reed et al., 2015; Roberts et al., 2015; Shaevitz et al., 2014). This resolution is currently con-
sidered “high-resolution,” or “TC-permitting,” for global climate models. While clearly tropical cyclones
∼0.25° (∼28 km), many aspects of the observed climatology and regional interannual variability of trop-
are not adequately resolved at such grid spacings, since real tropical cyclones can have eyes smaller than
ical cyclones can be remarkably well-represented at these resolutions (Murakami et al., 2015; Roberts
et al., 2015, 2020a, 2020b). Even the highest-intensity storms can be simulated in some models, though it
can be argued that such high intensities cannot be simulated entirely for the right reasons when the storms
are so under-resolved (C. Davis, 2018). The apparent high quality of the simulations with these models,
however, including evidence of seasonal prediction skill, make them attractive nonetheless. This is particu-
larly so given the much greater expense of running global simulations that are truly “TC-resolving” (i.e.,
horizontal grid spacings of order 1 km).
Increases in computational power have allowed for decades-long TC-permitting global climate model simu-
lations to become feasible in recent years. For example, the High Resolution Model Intercomparison Project
(HighResMIP) is a coordinated modeling effort in which simulations have been performed with multiple
climate models at high (and also low) resolution (Haarsma et al., 2016). Despite having the advantage of
high resolution, the simulations from the HighResMIP multi-model ensemble still do not produce consist-
ent future TC projections across Northern Hemisphere ocean basins, though they tend to project a reduc-
tion of TC activity in the Southern Hemisphere (Roberts et al., 2020a, 2020b). Even in the historical era,
uncertainties since the 19th century limit the ability of global models to simulate past multidecadal changes
in TC frequency (Chan et al., 2021).
Atmosphere-ocean coupling can present a challenge for global models in simulating climatological TC fre-
quency. In particular, generations of coupled climate models have suffered from persistent SST biases in the
tropics and subtropics (e.g., Richter, 2015; Zuidema et al., 2016), where TCs form and develop. Such biases
are problematic because they can substantially degrade the representation of simulated TC activity, for
example, erroneously reducing Atlantic TC activity by half, lowering the skill of interannual TC prediction
(Hsu et al., 2019; Vecchi et al., 2014), and impacting the TC response to CO2 doubling in coupled models
(Vecchi et al., 2019). At the same time, the inclusion of atmosphere-ocean coupling is necessary to capture
TC-ocean feedbacks at the local scale, which can influence observed (e.g., Shay et al., 1992) and simulated
(H. Li & Sriver, 2018; Scoccimarro et al., 2017; Zarzycki, 2016) TC intensity and precipitation. In addition,
the coupling is needed to represent the future changes in the ocean mean state and variability that influence
TCs.
Increasing resolution in both atmospheric and ocean models holds promise as a route to alleviating biases
in simulated TC activity, including those associated with atmosphere-ocean coupling as well as those associ-
ated with representing the TCs per se, particularly as the representation of unresolved processes, including
convection, remains uncertain in simulating and projecting TC frequency. Although global cloud resolving
(kilometer-scale) models have been developed (e.g., Judt et al., 2021; Satoh et al., 2019), the duration of
the simulations performed with these models are typically shorter than what is needed for TC projections.
Overcoming this challenge requires advancements in supercomputing that are unlikely to take place within
the next decade. Higher resolutions are possible today, however, in more idealized studies. We discuss these
next.
4.2. Idealized Modeling
In idealized simulations, understanding of the relationships between the simulated TC activity and the
boundary conditions and forcings is prioritized over direct relevance to the real Earth. Under sufficiently
idealized conditions, the domain size and/or simulation time needed to achieve adequate statistics may be
shorter than those for more realistic settings where geographic and temporal variability are complicating
influences. Idealized simulations thus can allow higher resolution, and thus more faithful simulation of
TCs, for a given computing resource. The simplifications can also allow stronger causal inference about how
different environmental factors control TC frequency.
Idealized simulations facilitate exploration of the parameter space far beyond current Earth-like conditions,
where a much larger signal-noise ratio may be valuable for testing general theories of genesis. (The same
is true, in principle, of simulations of TCs in past climates [Dandoy et al., 2021; Korty et al., 2012a, 2012b;
Lawton et al., 2021; Q. Yan et al., 2015], or on other planets [M. Yan & Yang, 2020]. While the latter could
ideally offer the possibility of observational verification, studies to date have not yet done such verification,
presumably because the available observations are not adequate. Simulations of such climates are thus, for
the moment, functionally similar to idealized simulations that are not designed to mimic any real climate).
Particularly in the absence of other sources of theoretical insight, idealized simulations thus offer an ap-
pealing avenue to pursue the understanding of how climate controls TC frequency. Several different types
of idealized model set-ups have been used for this purpose, across a hierarchy of domain configurations,
boundary conditions, and thermal forcings (Merlis & Held, 2019).
The number of TCs in a given domain over a given period of time depends both on the rates of TC genesis
and loss. Loss can occur through dissipation, transition to another storm type, or (if the study design allows
it) migration out of the domain of interest. Numerous studies have considered the sensitivity of the spin-up
of individual TCs to environmental parameters in idealized settings, revealing intertwined dependencies on
the Coriolis parameter (f), the thermodynamic state, and vertical wind shear (e.g., Nolan & Rappin, 2008;
Nolan et al., 2007; Rappin et al., 2010; Zhou, 2015). Other studies have revealed that TCs can form spon-
taneously from random noise in radiative-convective equilibrium (RCE) simulations in the presence of
planetary rotation. In such simulations, boundary conditions are spatially homogenous (e.g., uniform SST)
and the only large-scale forcing is radiative cooling, such that any spatial or temporal variations in the
solution are consequences only of internal dynamics (Bretherton et al., 2005; Nolan et al., 2007). Such
“rotating RCE” simulations allow for an investigation of fundamental controls on TC formation, absent
complications from other disturbances, varying environmental conditions, or surface heterogeneities. The
formation of individual TCs has been investigated in this setting (Boos et al., 2016; Carstens & Wing, 2020;
C. A. Davis, 2015; Muller & Romps, 2018; Ramsay et al., 2020; Yang & Tan, 2020; Wing et al., 2016), as have
the statistics of a population of TCs (“TC world”; Cronin & Chavas, 2019; Held & Zhao, 2008; Khairoutdi-
nov & Emanuel, 2013; Reed & Chavas, 2015; Zhou et al., 2014, 2017).
In rotating RCE simulations of a population of TCs, the number of TCs increases with increasing f (Held
& Zhao, 2008; Merlis et al., 2016; Zhou et al., 2014), for example, as shown in Figure 4, and decreases with
increasing SST (Khairoutdinov & Emanuel, 2013; Merlis et al., 2016; Zhou et al., 2014). As SST is uniform in
these simulations, it should be thought of as analogous to global (or tropical) mean SST on a more realistic
planet, not relative SST. The relevance of these rotating RCE simulations to Earth's climate can only be in-
direct, because the number of TCs in them depends on how many can fit in a tightly-packed configuration,
while the number of TCs that exist in Earth's real climate is far less than the number that could fit within
the global area that has a favorable environment (Hoogewind et al., 2020; Vu et al., 2020; Q. Wang, Kieu, &
Vu, 2019). Nonetheless, these sensitivities are qualitatively consistent with those found as we move up the
hierarchy toward more realistic simulations.
Spherical simulations have been performed in aquaplanet configurations with a constant planetary rotation
rate but varying Coriolis parameter (β ≠ 0, where
𝐴𝐴 𝐴𝐴 = 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
and y is meridional distance) and uniform thermal
forcing (uniform SST and insolation); see Figure 4d. These, as well as large domain β-plane simulations
(Figure 4c), maintain the advantages of rotating RCE in revealing the intrinsic properties of TC formation
in an ideal environment but allow more dynamic TC formation, migration (via “beta drift”, a process by
which cyclones seek higher latitudes where the vertical component of planetary rotation is greater), and
dissipation (Chavas & Reed, 2019; Hsieh et al., 2020; Merlis et al., 2016; Shi & Bretherton, 2014).
On a planet where the environment for TC genesis and intensification is globally uniform in every way
other than the Coriolis parameter, TCs are generated most frequently in the subtropics and propagate to-
ward the poles, such that TC density strongly increases from low to high latitudes (Chavas & Reed, 2019;
Merlis et al., 2016; Shi & Bretherton, 2014). When planetary rotation rate or radius are varied, the genesis
rate in these simulations peaks at a value of f that scales with a theoretical critical f value. This critical
√ value
occurs where two natural length scales relevant to TC dynamics are equal: the Rhines 𝐴𝐴 scale ( 𝑈𝑈 ∕𝛽𝛽 , with
U a velocity scale for the large-scale flow), and a scale defined by the tropical cyclone potential intensity
(PI) divided by the Coriolis parameter (PI/f). This scaling is an important building block toward a theory
for global genesis, but it is still unknown what sets the intrinsic genesis rate or its meridional rate of change
with f. For example, the intrinsic genesis rate in such idealized simulations is strongly dependent on global
mean surface temperature. Merlis et al. (2016) found that the genesis rate of low-latitude TCs decreased
with warming, which, combined with a contraction of the range of latitudes with TC activity toward the
poles, resulted in a decrease in the global number of TCs.
From aquaplanets with uniform SST, aquaplanet simulations with realistic meridional gradients in inso-
lation and SST (but still no zonal asymmetries in the boundary conditions) are the next step toward more
Earth-like conditions (Ballinger et al., 2015; Fedorov et al., 2019; F. Li et al., 2013; Merlis et al., 2013; Reed
& Jablonowski, 2011; Viale & Merlis, 2017; Walsh et al., 2020; Zarzycki et al., 2014; G. Zhang, Silvers,
et al., 2021). As the magnitude and structure of the meridional SST gradient are varied, the ITCZ latitude
does as well. All else equal, TC frequency increases strongly with ITCZ latitude, a relationship qualitatively
consistent with the dependence of genesis rate on f found by Chavas and Reed (2019). This relationship can
explain the response to radiative forcing as well: in simulations of this type with an atmosphere coupled to a
Figure 4. Snapshot of surface wind speed (ms−1) in simulations of radiative-convective equilibrium with uniform sea surface temperature and uniform
insolation. The colorbar saturates at 50 ms−1 and the contour interval is 2 ms−1. Panels (a) and (b) are doubly periodic, f-plane simulations with SAM v6.8.2
(Khairoutdinov & Randall, 2003) as configured in Wing et al. (2016) with 3 km horizontal grid spacing. Two different values of the Coriolis parameter reveal
regimes dominated by a single, spontaneously generated tropical cyclones (TC) (a) or a “TC world” with densely packed TCs (b). Panel (c) is a β-plane centered
at fo corresponding to 15°N with Earth-like β using SAM v6.11.2 (Khairoutdinov & Randall, 2003) with 5 km horizontal grid spacing, and other parameters
following Wing et al. (2018). It is zonally periodic with rigid walls at the north and south boundaries. The white dashed line indicates the location of f = 0.
element dynamical core, ∼25 km grid spacing, and Earth-like values of planetary radius and rotation rate. Note that the domain size in (a) and (b) is an order of
Panel (d) is a spherical aquaplanet simulation from Chavas and Reed (2019) with uniform thermal forcing using CAM5 (Neale et al., 2012) with spectral
magnitude smaller than that of (c).
slab ocean (as necessary to allow the surface temperature to change), radiatively-forced global warming re-
sults in an increase in TC frequency due to a poleward shift in the ITCZ (Merlis et al., 2013). Different ITCZ
shifts due to different patterns of warming associated with different forcing agents also explain the differing
TC response to solar versus CO2 forcing (Viale & Merlis, 2017). If the ITCZ is constrained to stay in the same
location (using imposed ocean heat fluxes) or SST is warmed uniformly, there is instead a decrease in TC
frequency with warming (Ballinger et al., 2015; Merlis et al., 2013; Walsh et al., 2020), consistent with the
response described above for spherical simulations with uniform thermal forcing and f-plane simulations.
The response of TC genesis to changes in the meridional SST gradient varies as a result of competition be-
tween shifts in the ITCZ and changes in environmental parameters like vertical wind shear, and whether or
not there are zonal asymmetries in SST (Ballinger et al., 2015; Hsieh et al., 2020; Fedorov et al., 2019; Walsh
et al., 2020; G. Zhang, Silvers, et al., 2021).
Over the full range of idealized simulations, the response of TC frequency to climate warming appears to
result from changes in circulation associated with the pattern of warming, with the ITCZ latitude of funda-
mental importance (Ballinger et al., 2015; Burnett et al., 2021; Merlis et al., 2013; Viale & Merlis, 2017; G.
Zhang, Silvers, et al., 2021), mediated by an intrinsic dependence on global mean surface temperature. The
essential components of a theory predicting the ITCZ-related control of TC frequency are thus, perhaps,
beginning to emerge. They include a theory to predict the latitude of the ITCZ (e.g., Biasutti et al., 2018;
Byrne et al., 2018; Schneider et al., 2014), as well as the rate at which TC genesis increases with that lat-
itude (e.g., Burnett et al., 2021; Merlis & Held, 2019), which we might expect to be related to the rate
of increase with Coriolis parameter in rotating RCE (e.g., Chavas & Reed, 2019, though we note that the
genesis rate increases with ITCZ latitude in Burnett et al., 2021's results much more rapidly than implied
by Chavas & Reed, 2019). Additional complexities to be reckoned with would then be how ITCZ strength
or structure, vertical shear (e.g., Fedorov et al., 2019; Walsh et al., 2020), zonal variations (e.g., G. Zhang,
Silvers, et al., 2021), or other mitigating factors change TC frequency compared to what a relationship with
ITCZ latitude alone would predict. One important such mitigating factor is the dependence on global mean
surface temperature, generally (but not in all models) a decrease in frequency with warming (Ballinger
et al., 2015; Khairoutdinov & Emanuel, 2013; Merlis et al., 2013, 2016; Walsh et al., 2020; Zhou et al., 2014).
Overall, this complexity—even in idealized settings—helps explain why a robust response of TC frequency
to future warming in comprehensive models has not been achieved, and in turn why a comprehensive the-
ory of TC frequency is still lacking, despite considerable progress in understanding the individual elements.
5. Seeding
One of the necessary conditions for tropical cyclogenesis in real-world situations is a precursor disturbance,
or “seed”. Broadly speaking, such a disturbance will have some of the same properties as a tropical cyclone,
but weaker: cyclonic rotation at low-to mid-levels, surface pressure below the ambient value (if perhaps
only slightly so), and some deep convection. A warm core is not necessary, instead of being a characteristic
of the mature tropical cyclone that develops as a consequence of genesis. Operationally, forecasters identify
disturbances that have the potential to become tropical cyclones as “invests” in real time, using satellite
and other observations as available, and observation-based research studies can define them in historical
data (e.g., McBride & Zehr, 1981). In neither case are the criteria for doing so globally uniform, however. In
numerical modeling studies, the automated tracking routines used to identify simulated tropical cyclones
can trace vorticity maxima or pressure minima back in time from the (somewhat arbitrary) genesis point, to
define precursors in the model output. Here again, the criteria are not consistent from study to study, and
probably should not be, given differences in model resolution.
Genesis is theoretically possible in the absence of a well-defined precursor, as demonstrated by idealized

rotating RCE simulations such as those described in the previous section. Such precursors are absent by
construction in those simulations, but may eventually form spontaneously, from which genesis then occurs.
Precursors associated with larger-scale dynamical phenomena (excluded from RCE), on the other hand,
such as Easterly waves or the monsoon trough, appear to be common enough that genesis rarely occurs in
the absence of one in reality. This is uncontroversial, notwithstanding the imprecision in the definition of a
precursor. The World Meteorological Organization defines tropical cyclogenesis, in fact, as beginning from
a tropical “disturbance,” which in turn is defined simply as “a discrete tropical (or subtropical) weather
system of apparently organized convection” (World Meteorological Organization, 2017).
Given the necessity of precursor disturbances to genesis, it is natural to ask to what extent the frequency, in-
tensity, or other statistical properties of such disturbances might control tropical cyclone frequency. The dis-
cussion above, and most prior research on tropical cyclone frequency as it relates to climate, focuses on how
large-scale environmental conditions determine the probability of tropical cyclogenesis, without consider-
ing the role of seeds. This amounts to an assumption either that adequate seeds are always available, that
their availability (even if to some extent rate-limiting) is independent of climate, or that it is controlled by
the same environmental factors as control their later development into TCs so that seeds do not provide an
independent degree of freedom influencing TC frequency. Some recent work questions these assumptions.
In the North Atlantic, African Easterly waves (AEWs) are the dominant source of TC precursors, with about
85% of Atlantic hurricanes observed to originate from AEWs (Landsea, 1993; Russell et al., 2017). However,
until recently little was known about the role of TC precursors in generating variability and change in TC
activity on interannual to centennial timescales. In particular, are TC precursors an independent control on
TC frequency, or do they simply co-vary with the large-scale controls on TCs? If TC seeds are an independ-
ent controlling factor on TC frequency, climate model simulations must be able to realistically represent
seeds to make reliable projections of frequency. On the other hand, if TC precursors are indeed simply co-
vary with other controls on TC frequency, it may be possible to rely on large-scale environmental conditions
(e.g., those characterized in TC genesis indices) to project future TC frequency. Some studies provide evi-
dence to support the latter. Mechanistic regional climate model experiments that controlled AEWs through
lateral boundary conditions demonstrated that seasonal Atlantic TC activity is unchanged when AEWs are
suppressed (Patricola et al., 2018). This suggests that, given favorable large-scale conditions for TCs, the
climatological TC frequency can be maintained even in the absence of typical TC precursors. This idea is
further supported by results from synthetic TC track models and statistical models, which can reproduce
the interannual variability of Atlantic TC activity without AEW variability as an input to the model (Ema-
nuel, 2010; Emanuel et al., 2008; Saunders et al., 2017). In future climate projections, concurrent changes
in TC seeds and TC frequency, with either an increase or decrease in both, have been simulated in global
models (Lee et al., 2020; Sugi et al., 2020; Vecchi et al., 2019; Yamada et al., 2021).
Recent modeling studies show, however, that in addition to modifying the likelihood of a TC seed to become
a TC, large-scale climate changes can influence TC frequency by altering the number of TC seeds (Hsieh
et al., 2020; Lee et al., 2020; T. Li et al., 2010; Sugi et al., 2020; Vecchi et al., 2019; Yamada et al., 2021). For
example, Vecchi et al. (2019) showed that while two related high-resolution climate models had very simi-
lar changes in large-scale climate factors connected to genesis probability, one showed a global increase in
TC frequency in response to CO2 doubling and warming while the other showed a decrease. These results,
taken together, suggested a more hostile environment for TC genesis in both models. The differences in TC
frequency sensitivity could be connected, instead, to changes in TC seeds with climate: the climate model
showing an increase in TCs had a larger increase in TC seeds with the warming that outweighed the de-
creased TC genesis probability. Sugi et al. (2020) and Yamada et al. (2021) showed that inter-model differ-
ences in TC frequency sensitivity to warming could be understood in large part as a consequence of changes
in the frequency of TC seeds. Hsieh et al. (2020) explored a hierarchy of dynamical model experiments to
show that TC seed changes are a dominant element of understanding the global and regional climate con-
trol of TC frequency.
Figure 5, adapted from Hsieh et al. (2020), illustrates the combined roles of changes in genesis probability
and TC seeds in controlling global TC frequency using a suite of perturbation experiments with 𝐴𝐴 the ∼ 50
km resolution HiRAM model (Zhao et al., 2009). Each symbol shows changes in global TC frequency and
related activity measures for experiments with uniform warming and cooling, CO2 increases and decreases,
and spatially non-uniform SST changes. As can be seen in Figure 5a, an environmental index comparable
to those discussed above—here, one based on the ventilation index of Tang and Emanuel (2012)—is able to
explain some, but not all, aspects of the changes in the model TC frequency, particularly for the experiments
with patterned SST perturbations. The index predicts the probability that a given seed will develop into a
TC. Changes in seed frequency (Figure 5b) are also able to explain some, but not all aspects of the changes
in model TC frequency, particularly in the experiments with uniform SST perturbations and idealized CO2
forcing. However, the sensitivity of TC frequency to a broad range of perturbations in these simulations can
be explained better when genesis probability changes and TC seed changes are brought together, such that
the expected number of TCs is the product of the number of seeds and the genesis probability (Figure 5c),
than when only one of the two factors is considered. That is, the response of TC frequency depends on the
often compensating response of the frequency of TC precursors and of the likelihood that those precursors
will develop into a TC.
What are the climatic controls on TC seeds? A number of studies have described the dependence of TC seeds
on climate drivers (e.g., warming the ocean, doubling CO2), but how do large-scale climate changes impact
TC seed frequency? T. Li et al. (2010) suggested that changes in wind shear could impact the formation of
easterly waves. Some studies (Held & Zhao, 2011; Yoshimura & Sugi, 2005; Yoshimura et al., 2006) point to
reductions in large-scale ascent as a possible driver connecting CO2 increases and warming to reductions
in TC seeds. However, Vecchi et al. (2019) showed that in a pair of high-resolution models a TC seed index
tended to show increases even as large-scale ascent decreased and that the relationship between large-scale
ascent and the seed index was weak. Recently, Hsieh et al. (2020) developed a theoretical scaling argument,
Figure 5. Relationship between the response of TC frequency, seeds, and large-scale environmental conditions in a 50-km atmospheric GCM. (a) Change
in global TC frequency versus change in genesis probability based on Tang and Emanuel (2012) ventilation index, (b) change in global TC frequency versus
change in TC seeds, (c) change in global TC frequency versus change in Binomial model combining seed frequency and genesis probability, and (d) change in
seed frequency versus change in large-scale seed genesis index based on large-scale vorticity and mid-tropospheric pressure velocity. Each symbol represents
the response of the 50-km version of the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory High-Resolution Atmospheric Model (Zhao et al., 2009) to global scale
perturbations. Green symbols show a response to a halving and doubling of atmospheric CO2 without sea surface temperature change, and a CO2 doubling
with uniform 2 °C sea surface warming. Blue symbols show the response to uniform ±2°C and ±4°C sea surface temperature changes. Brown symbols show
the response to spatially structured warming, by adding 1C to regions either warmer than 28°C/26°C (e.g., pluslogistic1K26 C) or cooler than 28°C/26°C (e.g.,
plusinvlogistic1K26 C). Figure adapted from Hsieh et al. (2020).
tested across a hierarchy of high-resolution climate model experiments, that connected the frequency of
seeds to the superposition of large-scale ascent and a parameter that depends on large scale vorticity and its
gradients. Hsieh et al. (2020) demonstrate that regionally and globally, the change in the frequency of seeds
depends on the projection of changes in large-scale atmospheric convection on background absolute vortic-
ity; Figure 5d shows that the Hsieh et al. (2020) scaling successfully captures the global response of TC seeds
in a high-resolution climate model to a broad range of forcings. In the framework of Hsieh et al. (2020), both
TC seeds and the probability of tropical cyclone genesis exhibit sensitivity to large-scale climate drivers, but
each depends on different factors. Seeds depend on the coincidence of large-scale ascent and background
vorticity, while TC genesis probability depends on the ventilation index.
6. Future Directions
What determines the frequency of tropical cyclones is a question of basic scientific interest. It also has
great practical urgency, in that our ability to assess future tropical cyclone risk is currently limited by our
understanding of it. Greater and more focused effort toward answering this question is, in our view, easily
justified. Considering the state of the science as described here, we can see several areas where progress
seems possible.
6.1. Scaling up Genesis Theories
Can an understanding of the genesis process, either as that understanding presently stands or after near-fu-
ture advances, be scaled up to the point that it can more directly inform genesis indices that relate local
climate conditions to the probability of genesis? If so, we can envision that such indices could become
less empirical, more explicitly physics-based, and truly predictive. One specific question along these lines
(though certainly not the only one of interest) is whether it can be more conclusively demonstrated, using
any combination of theoretical argument, high-resolution modeling or observational evidence, how hu-
midity controls genesis. Can we rule out relative humidity as the relevant variable in favor of saturation
deficit? Since these two variables behave very differently in a warming climate—relative humidity staying
near-constant while saturation deficit increases—a clear answer to this question would resolve a substan-
tial uncertainty. Another area that shows a promising connection between genesis theories and global TC
frequency is the growing body of work that shows that TC development is accelerated by cloud-radiative
interactions in cloud-resolving simulations (Muller & Romps, 2018; Ruppert et al., 2020; Smith et al., 2020;
Wing et al., 2016; Yang & Tan, 2020) and observations (Wu et al., 2021). Consistent with this, global TC fre-
quency is reduced in GCM simulations with realistic boundary conditions when these radiative interactions
are suppressed (B. Zhang, Soden, et al., 2021).
6.2. TC Seeds
What are TC seeds and how should they be characterized? A number of metrics have been suggested as
useful and relevant, from the variance of filtered mid-tropospheric horizontal velocity (T. Li et al., 2010) to
tracking vorticity and rainfall clusters (Hsieh et al., 2020; Sugi et al., 2020). It is not yet clear the extent to
which these metrics are equivalent, nor what are their relative advantages and disadvantages. Future work
should focus on comparing and evaluating different TC seed metrics in order to develop generally accepted
methodologies. A theoretically-based scaling has been developed to predict the dependence of seeds on
large-scale climate drivers across a range of experiments, but in one model family (Hsieh et al., 2020). It is
necessary to explore other model systems and observations to understand the robustness of this scaling and
its limitations.
6.3. Faithfulness of Global Models
Are the controls on frequency in models that marginally resolve TCs, for example, 25 km horizontal grid
spacing in the model atmosphere, faithful to those in reality? To what extent or under what conditions?
Are there any discernable commonalities in model construction between models whose frequencies are
similar, either in their historical climatologies or in future projections under some specified set of climate
conditions? Process-oriented diagnostics, which “characterize a specific physical process or emergent be-
havior that is hypothesized to be related to the ability to simulate an observed phenomenon” (e.g., Maloney
et al., 2019) may be helpful in answering this question. Process-oriented diagnostics have been developed
to analyze some aspects of TC behavior in models (Kim et al., 2018; Wing et al., 2019), but new ones could
be targeted specifically at the genesis process and used to interpret both climatologies and forced trends in
simulated TC frequencies across multi-model ensembles.
6.4. Idealized Simulations as a Building Block for Theory
Can idealized simulations—say, at grid spacings sufficiently small to truly resolve TCs, that is, on the order
of 1 km—with simplified boundary conditions form a scaffold on which a theory of TC frequency can be
constructed that is directly relevant to Earth's climate? We might envision, for example, working toward
such a theory by starting from some particular idealized scenario, for example, a rotating RCE world with
uniform SST, using high-resolution simulations to obtain a TC frequency in that scenario, and then consid-
ering the effects of additional complicating factors that drive the actual frequency away from that, such as
vertical wind shear, landfall, advection or beta drift to unfavorable environments. We can imagine accepting
the numerical model as providing some parts of the answer (e.g., the number of TCs in a statistically steady
RCE on an f-plane, or on a zonally symmetric aquaplanet with a well-defined ITCZ at some latitude), while
others, such as the roles of shear, advection, etc., might be captured by simple theoretical arguments. Such
arguments could be evaluated within a perfect-model framework, in which a given numerical model is
taken as truth, and experiments are done with that model to test the theory over a range of parameter space
much wider than that available from observations.
6.5. Regional Climate Change
Tropical cyclone frequency may be an aspect of climate about which understanding is more forthcoming on
the regional scale than on the global. Relative frequency differences between basins are better understood
than absolute frequency is, and frequency trends are significant in some basins while there is no significant
global trend. Impacts and adaptation all occur at local and regional scales. Thus, any research that improves
confidence in projections or attribution of regional climate change in TC basins will also benefit our under-
standing of TC frequency change in the real world. For example, uncertainties in the pattern of the forced
response of relative SST—especially in the equatorial Pacific (Seager et al., 2019), which influences TC fre-
quency in multiple basins on the interannual time scale—impose limits on our confidence in TC frequency
projections. Since these limits are independent of our understanding of TCs themselves, our confidence in
the projections could also be increased, even in the absence of any improvement in our understanding of
TCs, if we could increase our confidence in projections of the spatial structure of radiatively forced climate
change.
Data Availability Statement

Data sets are listed in captions. The IBTrACS data are available at https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ibtracs/in-
dex.php?name=bib; the AMO index data are available at https://psl.noaa.gov/data/timeseries/AMO/; the
Niño3.4 data are available at https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/data/indices/. The CFSR environmental fields
were downloaded from the NCAR Research Data Archive https://rda.ucar.edu and the IRI data library
https://iridl.ldeo.columbia.edu. The ERA-Interim data set is available at https://www.ecmwf.int/en/fore-
casts/dataset/ecmwf-reanalysis-interim and the ERA5 data set at https://www.ecmwf.int/en/forecasts/
datasets/reanalysis-datasets/era5. The JRA-55 data was downloaded from NCAR Research Data Archive
Acknowledgments https://rda.ucar.edu. The MERRA2 data access is described at https://gmao.gsfc.nasa.gov/reanalysis/MER-
AHS, SJC, CL and MKT thank the RA-2/data_access/, some fields were downloaded from the IRI data library https://iridl.ldeo.columbia.edu.
Swiss Re Institute for supporting this The data underlying Figures 4 and 5 will be available at Columbia Academic Commons repository upon
work. AAW acknowledges support
from NOAA's Climate Program Office's acceptance.
Modeling, Analysis, Predictions,
and Projections program (award
NA18OAR4310270). SJC thanks the References
Vetlesen Foundation for their generous
and sustained support of climate Allen, M. R., & Ingram, W. J. (2002). Constraints on future changes in climate and the hydrologic cycle. Nature, 419(6903), 228–232.
science at the Lamont-Doherty Earth https://doi.org/10.1038/nature01092
Observatory of Columbia University. Balaguru, K., Leung, L. R., Van Roekel, L. P., Golaz, J.-C., Ullrich, P. A., Caldwell, P. M., & Mametjanov, A. (2020). Characterizing tropical
CMP acknowledges support from the cyclones in the Energy Exascale Earth System Model Version 1. Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 12(8), e2019MS002024.
U.S. Department of Energy, Office https://doi.org/10.1029/2019ms002024
of Science, Office of Biological and Balaji, M., Chakraborty, A., & Mandal, M. (2018). Changes in tropical cyclone activity in North Indian Ocean during satellite era (1981 -
Environmental Research (BER), Earth 2014). International Journal of Climatology, 38, 2819–2837. https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.5463
and Environmental Systems Modeling Ballinger, A. P., Merlis, T. M., Held, I. M., & Zhao, M. (2015). The sensitivity of tropical cyclone activity to off-equatorial thermal forcing.
(EESM) Program, under Early Career Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences, 72, 2286–2302. https://doi.org/10.1175/jas-d-14-0284.1
Research Program Award Number Barnston, A. G., Chelliah, M., & Goldenberg, S. B. (1997). Documentation of a highly ENSO-related SST region in the equatorial Pacific.
DE-SC0021109. GAV acknowledges Atmosphere-Ocean, 35, 367–383.
support from NOAA/OCO (award Bhatia, K., Vecchi, G., Murakami, H., Underwood, S., & Kossin, J. (2018). Projected response of tropical cyclone intensity and intensifica-
NA18OAR4310418) and the Carbon tion in a global climate model. Journal of Climate, 31(20), 8281–8303. https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli-d-17-0898.1
Mitigation Initiative (CMI) at Princeton Biasutti, M., Voigt, A., Boos, W. R., Braconnot, P., Hargreaves, J. C., Harrison, S. P., et al. (2018). Global energetics and local physics as
University. We thank Chiara Lepore for drivers of past, present and future monsoons. Nature Geosciences 11, 392–400. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-018-0137-1
help obtaining the ERA-5 reanalysis Bister, M., & Emanuel, K. A. (1997). The genesis of hurricane Guillermo: TEXMEX analyses and a modeling study. Monthly Weather Re-
data, Tsung-Lin Hsieh for generating view, 125, 2662–2682. https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(1997)125<2662:tgohgt>2.0.co;2
Figure 5, Jacob Carstens for generating Boos, W., Fedorov, A., & Muir, L. (2016). Convective self-aggregation and tropical cyclogenesis under the hypohydrostatic rescaling. Jour-
Figure 4c, Daniel Chavas and Kevin nal of the Atmospheric Sciences, 73, 525–544. https://doi.org/10.1175/jas-d-15-0049.1
Reed for sharing the model data used to Bretherton, C. S., Blossey, P. N., & Khairoutdinov, M. (2005). An energy-balance analysis of deep convective self-aggregation above uniform
generate Figure 4d, and Marat Khair- SST. Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences, 62, 4237–4292. https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS3614.1
outdinov for providing and maintaining Broccoli, A. J., & Manabe, S. (1990). Can existing climate models be used to study anthropogenic changes in tropical cyclone climate?
the System for Atmospheric Modeling Geophysical Research Letters, 17, 1917–1920. https://doi.org/10.1029/gl017i011p01917
(SAM), which was used to generate Bruyère, C. L., Holland, G. J., & Towler, E. (2012). Investigating the use of a genesis potential index for tropical cyclones in the North At-
Figures 4a–4c. lantic basin. Journal of Climate, 25, 8611–8626. https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli-d-11-00619.1
Burnett, A. C., Sheshadri, A., Silvers, L. G., & Robinson, T. (2021). Tropical cyclone frequency under varying SSTs in aquaplanet simula-
tions. Geophysical Research Letters, 48, e2020GL091980. https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL091980
Byrne, M. P., Pendergrass, A. G., Rapp, A. D., & Wodzicki, K. R. (2018). Response of the intertropical convergence zone to climate change:
Location, width, and strength. Current Climate Change Reports, 4, 355–370. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40641-018-0110-5
Camargo, S. J., & Barnston, A. G. (2009). Experimental seasonal dynamical forecasts of tropical cyclone activity at IRI. Weather Forecasting,
24, 472–491. https://doi.org/10.1175/2008waf2007099.1
Camargo, S. J., Emanuel, K. A., & Sobel, A. H. (2007). Use of a genesis potential index to diagnose ENSO effects on tropical cyclone genesis.
Journal of Climate, 20, 4819–4834. https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli4282.1
Camargo, S. J., Giulivi, C. F., Sobel, A. H., Wing, A. A., Kim, D., Moon, Y., et al. (2020). Characteristics of model tropical cyclone climatol-
ogy and the large-scale environment. Journal of Climate, 33, 4463–4487. https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-19-0500.1
Camargo, S. J., & Sobel, A. H. (2005). Western North Pacific tropical cyclone intensity and ENSO. Journal of Climate, 18, 2996–3006.
https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli3457.1
Camargo, S. J., Sobel, A. H., Barnston, A. G., & Emanuel, K. A. (2007). Tropical cyclone genesis potential index in climate models. Tellus,
59A, 428–443. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0870.2007.00238.x
Camargo, S. J., Sobel, A. H., Barnston, A. G., & Klotzbach, P. J. (2010). The influence of natural climate variability on tropical cyclones and
seasonal forecasts of tropical cyclone activity. In J. C. L. Chan, & J. D. Kepert (Eds.), Global perspectives on tropical cyclones, from science
to mitigation (pp. 325–360). World Scientific. https://doi.org/10.1142/9789814293488_0011
Camargo, S. J., Sobel, A. H., Genio, A. D. D., Jonas, J. A., Kelley, M., Lu, Y., et al. (2016). Tropical cyclones in the GISS ModelE2. Tellus, 68,
31494. https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusa.v68.31494
Camargo, S. J., Tippett, M. K., Sobel, A. H., Vecchi, G. A., & Zhao, M. (2014). Testing the performance of tropical cyclone genesis indices in
future climates using the HIRAM model. Journal of Climate, 27, 9171–9196. https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli-d-13-00505.1
Camargo, S. J., Wheeler, M. C., & Sobel, A. H. (2009). Diagnosis of the mjo modulation of tropical cyclogenesis using an empirical index.
Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences, 66, 3061–3074. https://doi.org/10.1175/2009jas3101.1
Carstens, J. D., & Wing, A. A. (2020). Tropical cyclogenesis from self-aggregated convection in numerical simulations of rotating radia-
tive-convective equilibrium. Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 12. https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS002020
Chan, D., Vecchi, G. A., Yang, W., & Huybers, P. (2021). Improved simulation of 19th and 20th century north Atlantic hurricane frequency
after correcting historical sea surface temperatures. Science Advances, 76, eabg6931. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abg6931
Chand, S. S., Dowdy, A. J., Ramsay, H. A., Walsh, K. J. E., Tory, K. J., Power, S. B., et al. (2019). Review of tropical cyclones in the Australian
region: Climatology, variability, predictability, and trends. WIREs Climate Change, 10(5), e602. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.602
Chavas, D. R. (2017). A simple derivation of tropical cyclone ventilation theory and its application to capped surface entropy fluxes. Journal
of the Atmospheric Sciences, 74, 2989–2996. https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS-D-17-0061.1
Chavas, D. R., & Reed, K. A. (2019). Dynamical aquaplanet experiments with uniform thermal forcing: System dynamics and implications
for tropical cyclone genesis and size. Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences, 76, 2257–2274. https://doi.org/10.1175/jas-d-19-0001.1
Chen, J., & Lin, S. (2013). Seasonal predictions of tropical cyclones using a 25-km general circulation model. Journal of Climate, 26,
380–398. https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli-d-12-00061.1
Chen, J.-H., & Lin, S.-J. (2011). The remarkable predictability of inter-annual variability of Atlantic hurricanes during the past decade.
Geophysical Research Letters, 38, L11804. https://doi.org/10.1029/2011gl047629
Clement, A., Bellomo, K., Murphy, L. N., Cane, M. A., Mauritsen, T., Rädel, G., & Stevens, B. (2015). The Atlantic multidecadal oscillation
without a role for ocean circulation. Science, 350, 320–324. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aab3980
Cronin, T., & Chavas, D. (2019). Dry and semidry tropical cyclones. Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences, 76, 2193–2220. https://doi.
org/10.1175/JAS-D-18-0357.1
Dandoy, S., Pausata, F. S. R., Camargo, S. J., Laprise, R., Winger, K., & Emanuel, K. (2021). Atlantic hurricanes response to Sahara greening
and reduced dust emissions during the mid-Holocene. Climate of the Past, 17, 675–701. https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-17-675-2021
Davis, C. (2018). Resolving tropical cyclone intensity in models. Geophysical Research Letters, 45(4), 2082–2087. https://doi.
org/10.1002/2017gl076966
Davis, C. A. (2015). The formation of moist vortices and tropical cyclones in idealized simulations. Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences, 72,
3499–3516. https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS-D-15-0027.1
Dee, D. P., Uppala, S. M., Simmons, A. J., Berrisford, P., Poli, P., Kobayashi, S., et al. (2011). The ERA-Interim reanalysis: Configura-
tion and performance of the data assimilation system. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, 137, 553–597. https://doi.
org/10.1002/qj.828
Delworth, T., Zeng, F., Zhang, L., Zhang, R., Vecchi, G., & Yang, X. (2017). The central role of ocean dynamics in connecting the north
atlantic oscillation to the extratropical component of the Atlantic multidecadal oscillation. Journal of Climate, 30, 3789–3805. https://
doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0358.1
Elsberry, R. L., Jordan, M. S., & Vitart, F. (2010). Predictability of tropical cyclone events on intraseasonal timescales with the ECMWF
monthly forecast model. Asia-Pacific Journal of Atmospheric Science, 46, 135–153. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13143-010-0013-4
Emanuel, K. A. (1986). An air-sea interaction theory for tropical cyclones. Part I: Steady-state maintenance. Journal of the Atmospheric
Sciences, 43(6), 585–605. https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1986)043<0585:aasitf>2.0.co;2
Emanuel, K. A. (2000). A statistical analysis of tropical cyclone intensity. Monthly Weather Review, 128(4), 1139–1152. https://doi.org/10.1
175/1520-0493(2000)128<1139:asaotc>2.0.co;2
Emanuel, K. A. (2010). Tropical cyclone activity downscaled from NOAA-CIRES reanalysis, 1908-1958. Journal of Advances in Modeling
Earth Systems, 2, 1. https://doi.org/10.3894/JAMES.2010.2.1
Emanuel, K. A. (2013). Downscaling CMIP5 climate models shows increased tropical cyclone activity over the 21st century. Proceedings of
the National Academy of Sciences, 110, 12219–12224. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1301293110
Emanuel, K. A., & Nolan, D. S. (2004). Tropical cyclone activity and global climate. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 85,
666–667.
Emanuel, K. A., & Sobel, A. H. (2013). Response of tropical sea surface temperature, precipitation, and tropical cyclone-related variables
to changes in global and local forcing. Journal of Advances in Modelling Earth Systems, 5, 447–458. https://doi.org/10.1002/jame.20032
Emanuel, K. A., Sundararajan, R., & Williams, J. (2008). Hurricanes and global warming: Results from downscaling IPCC AR4 simula-
tions. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 89, 347–368. https://doi.org/10.1175/bams-89-3-347
Fedorov, A., Muir, L., Boos, W., & Studholme, J. (2019). Tropical cyclogenesis in warm climates simulated by a cloud-system resolving
model. Climate Dynamics, 52, 107–127. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-018-4134-2
Frank, W. M., & Young, G. S. (2007). The interannual variability of tropical cyclones. Monthly Weather Review, 135(10), 3587–3598. https://
doi.org/10.1175/mwr3435.1
Gelaro, R., McCarty, W., Suárez, M. J., Todling, R., Molod, A., Takacs, L., et al. (2017). The modern-era retrospective analysis for research
and applications, Version 2 (MERRA-2). Journal of Climate, 30(14), 5419–5454. https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0758.1
Goldenberg, S. B., Landsea, C. W., Mestas-Nuñez, A. M., & Gray, W. M. (2001). The recent increase in Atlantic hurricane activity: Causes
and implications. Science, 293, 474–479. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1060040
Gray, W. M. (1968). Global view of the origin of tropical disturbances and storms. Monthly Weather Review, 96, 669–700. https://doi.
org/10.1175/1520-0493(1968)096<0669:gvotoo>2.0.co;2
Gray, W. M. (1979). Meteorology over the tropical oceans. Royal Meteorological Society, 155–218.
Gray, W. M. (1984). Atlantic seasonal hurricane frequency. Part I: El-Niño and 30-MB quasi-biennial oscillation influences. Monthly Weath-
er Review, 112, 1649–1668. https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(1984)112<1649:ashfpi>2.0.co;2
Haarsma, R. J., Roberts, M., Vidale, P. L., Senior, C. A., Bellucci, A., Bao, Q., et al. (2016). High resolution model intercomparison project
(HighResMIP). Geoscientific Model Development Discussions. https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2016-66
Halperin, D. J., Fuelberg, H. E., Hart, R. E., Cossuth, J. H., Sura, P., & Pasch, R. J. (2013). An evaluation of tropical cyclone genesis forecasts
from global numerical models. Weather Forecasting, 28, 1423–1445. https://doi.org/10.1175/WAF-D-13-00008.1
Held, I. M., & Soden, B. J. (2000). Water vapor feedback and global warming. Annual Review of Energy and Environment, 25, 441–475.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.energy.25.1.441
Held, I. M., & Zhao, M. (2008). Aquaplanet homogeneouchre rotating radiative-convective equilibrium at GCM resolution. Journal of
Atmospheric Sciences, 65, 2003–2013. https://doi.org/10.1175/2007JAS2604.1
Held, I. M., & Zhao, M. (2011). The response of tropical cyclone statistics to an increase in CO2 with fixed sea surface temperatures. Journal
of Climate, 24(20), 5353–5364. https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli-d-11-00050.1
Henderson-Sellers, A., Zhang, H., Berz, G., Emanuel, K. A., Gray, W., Landsea, C., et al. (1998). Tropical cyclones and glob-
al climate change: A post-IPCC assessment. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 79(1), 19–38. https://doi.
org/10.1175/1520-0477(1998)079<0019:tcagcc>2.0.co;2
Hendricks, E. A., Montgomery, M. T., & Davis, C. A. (2004). The role of vortical hot towers in the formation of tropical cyclone Diana
(1984). Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences, 61, 1209–1232. https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(2004)061<1209:trovht>2.0.co;2
Hersbach, H., Bell, B., Berrisford, P., Hirahara, S., Horányi, A., Muñoz-Sabater, J., et al. (2020). The ERA5 global reanalysis. Quarterly
Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, 146(730), 1999–2049. https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.3803
Hersbach, H., Berrisford, P., Hirahara, S., Horányi, A., Muñoz-Sabater, J., Nicolas, J., et al. (2020). The ERA5 global reanalysis. Quarterly
Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, 146, 1999–2049. https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.3803
Hoogewind, K., Chavas, D. R., Schenkel, B., & O'Neill, M. (2020). Exploring controls on tropical cyclone count through the geography of
environmental favorability. Journal of Climate, 33, 1725–1745. https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-18-0862.1
Hsieh, T.-L., Vecchi, G. A., Yang, W., Held, I. M., & Garner, S. T. (2020). Large-scale control on the frequency of tropical cyclones and
seeds: A consistent relationship across a hierarchy of global atmospheric models. Climate Dynamics, 55(11), 3177–3196. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s00382-020-05446-5
Hsu, W.-C., Patricola, C. M., & Chang, P. (2019). The impact of climate model sea surface temperature biases on tropical cyclone simula-
tions. Climate Dynamics, 53(1–2), 173–192. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-018-4577-5
Huang, B., Thorne, P. W., coauthors, V. F., Boyer, T., Chepurin, G., Lawrimore, J. H., et al. (2017). Extended reconstructed sea surface tem-
perature version 5 (ersstv5), upgrades, validations, and intercomparisons. Journal of Climate, 108, 8179–8205. https://doi.org/10.1175/
JCLI-D-16-0836.1
Izumo, T., Vialard, J., Lengaigne, M., & Suresh, I. (2019). Relevance of relative sea surface temperature for tropical rainfall interannual
variability. Geophysical Research Letters, 47. https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL086182
Jeevanjee, N., & Romps, D. M. (2018). Mean precipitation change from a deepening troposphere. Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences, 115(45), 11465–11470. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1720683115
Jiang, H., & Zipser, E. J. (2010). Contribution of tropical cyclones to the global precipitation from eight seasons of trmm data: Regional,
seasonal, and interannual variations. Journal of Climate, 23(6), 1526–1543. https://doi.org/10.1175/2009jcli3303.1
Johnson, N. C., & Xie, S.-P. (2010a). Changes in the sea surface temperature threshold for tropical convection. Nature Geoscience, 3(12),
842–845. https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo1008
Johnson, N. C., & Xie, S.-P. (2010b). Variability and change of the sea surface temperature threshold for convection over tropical oceans.
Nature Geosciences, 3, 842–845. https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo1008
Judt, F., Klocke, D., Rios-Berrios, R., Vanniere, B., Ziemen, F., Auger, L., et al. (2021). Tropical cyclones in global storm-resolving models.
Journal of the Meteorological Society of Japan., 99, 579–602. https://doi.org/10.2151/jmsj.2021-029
Kaplan, A., Cane, M., Kushnir, Y., Clement, A., Blumenthal, M., & Rajagopalan, B. (1998). Analyses of global sea surface temperature
1856-1991. Journal of Geophysical Research, 108(18), 567589–567618. https://doi.org/10.1029/97jc01736
Khairoutdinov, M. F., & Emanuel, K. A. (2013). Rotating radiative-convective equilibrium simulated by a cloud-resolving model. Journal
of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 5, 816–825. https://doi.org/10.1002/2013MS000253
Khairoutdinov, M. F., & Randall, D. (2003). Cloud resolving modeling of the ARM Summer 1997 IOP: Model formulation, results, un-
certainties, and sensitivities. Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences, 60, 607–625. https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(2003)060<0607
:crmota>2.0.co;2
Khouakhi, A., Villarini, G., & Vecchi, G. A. (2017). Contribution of tropical cyclones to rainfall at the global scale. Journal of Climate, 30(1),
359–372. https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli-d-16-0298.1
Kim, D., Moon, Y., Camargo, S., Wing, A., Sobel, A., Murakami, H., et al. (2018). Process-oriented diagnosis of tropical cyclones in high-res-
olution GCMs. Journal of Climate, 31, 1685–1702. https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0269.1
Klotzbach, P. J., Blake, E. S., Camp, J., Caron, L.-P., Chan, J., Kang, N., et al. (2019). Seasonal tropical cyclone forecasting. Tropical Cyclone
Research and Review, 8, 134–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tcrr.2019.10.003
Knapp, K. R., Kruk, M. C., Levinson, D. H., Diamond, H. J., & Neumann, C. J. (2010). The international best track archive for climate stew-
ardship (ibtracs). Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 91, 363–376. https://doi.org/10.1175/2009BAMS2755.1
Knutson, T., Camargo, S. J., Chan, J. C. L., Emanuel, K., Ho, C.-H., Kossin, J., et al. (2019). Tropical cyclones and climate change assessment: Part
I. Detection and attribution. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 100, 1987–2007. https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-18-0189.1
Knutson, T., Camargo, S. J., Chan, J. C. L., Emanuel, K., Ho, C.-H., Kossin, J., et al. (2020). Tropical cyclones and climate change as-
sessment: Part II. Projected response to anthropogenic warming. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 101, E303–E322.
https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-18-0194.1
Knutson, T., McBride, J., Chan, J., Emanuel, K. A., Holland, G., Landsea, C., et al. (2010). Tropical cyclones and climate change. Nature
Geoscience, 3, 157–163. https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo779
Kobayashi, S., Ota, Y., Harada, Y., Ebita, A., Moriya, M., Onoda, H., et al. (2015). The JRA-55 reanalysis: General specifications and basic
characteristics. Journal of the Meteorological Society of Japan. Ser. II, 93(1), 5–48. https://doi.org/10.2151/jmsj.2015-001
Korty, R., Camargo, S. J., & Galewsky, J. (2012a). Tropical cyclone genesis factors in simulations of the Last Glacial Maximum. Journal of
Climate, 25, 4358–4365. https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-11-00517.1
Korty, R., Camargo, S. J., & Galewsky, J. (2012b). Variations in tropical cyclone genesis factors in simulations of the Holocene Epoch.
Journal of Climate, 25, 8196–8211. https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00033.1
Kossin, J. P., Emanuel, K. A., & Vecchi, G. A. (2014). The poleward migration of the location of tropical cyclone maximum intensity. Na-
ture, 509, 349–352. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13278
Kossin, J. P., & Vimont, D. J. (2007). A more general framework for understanding Atlantic hurricane variability and trends Bulletin of the
American Meteorological Society, 88, 1767–1782. https://doi.org/10.1175/bams-88-11-1767
Landsea, C. W. (1993). A climatology of intense (or major) Atlantic hurricanes. Monthly Weather Review, 121, 1703–1713. https://doi.
org/10.1175/1520-0493(1993)121<1703:acoima>2.0.co;2
Landsea, C. W., Vecchi, G. A., Bengtsson, L., & Knutson, T. R. (2010). Impact of duration thresholds on atlantic tropical cyclone counts.
Journal of Climate, 23, 2508–2519. https://doi.org/10.1175/2009JCLI3034.1
Latif, M., Keenlyside, N., & Bader, J. (2007). Tropical sea surface temperature, vertical wind shear, and hurricane development. Geophysical
Research Letters, 34. https://doi.org/10.1029/2006GL027969
Lawton, Q. A., Korty, R., & Zamora, R. A. (2021). Tropical cyclones downscaled from simulations of the last glacial maximum. Journal of
Climate, 31, 659–674. https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli-d-20-0409.1
Lee, C.-Y., Camargo, S. J., Sobel, A. H., & Tippett, M. K. (2020). Statistical–dynamical downscaling projections of tropical cyclone activity
in a warming climate: Two diverging genesis scenarios. Journal of Climate, 33(11), 4815–4834. https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli-d-19-0452.1
Li, F., Collins, W., Wehner, M., & Leung, L. (2013). Hurricanes in an aquaplanet world: Implications of the impacts of external forcing and
model horizontal resolution. Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 5, 134–145. https://doi.org/10.1002/jame.20020
Li, H., & Sriver, R. L. (2018). Tropical cyclone activity in the high-resolution Community Earth System Model and the impact of ocean
coupling. Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 10, 165–186. https://doi.org/10.1002/2017MS001199
Li, T., Kwon, M., Zhao, M., Kug, J.-S., Luo, J.-J., & Yu, W. (2010). Global warming shifts pacific tropical cyclone location. Geophysical Re-
search Letters, 37(21). https://doi.org/10.1029/2010gl045124
Liu, W., Lu, J., & Xie, S.-P. (2015). Understanding the Indian Ocean response to double CO2 forcing in a coupled model. Ocean Dynamics,
65, 1037–1046. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10236-015-0854-6
Maloney, E. D., Ming, Y., Neelin, J. D., Barrie, D., Mariotti, A., Chen, C.-C., et al. (2019). Process-oriented evaluation of climate and weather
forecasting models. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 100, 1665–1686. https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-18-0042.1
Mann, M. E., & Emanuel, K. A. (2006). Atlantic hurricane trends linked to climate change. EOS, 71, 233. https://doi.
org/10.1029/2006EO240001
McBride, J. L., & Zehr, R. (1981). Observational analysis of tropical cyclone formation. Part II: Comparison of non-developing versus
non-developing Systems. Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences, 38, 1132–1151. https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1981)038<1132:oaot
cf>2.0.co;2
Merlis, T. M., & Held, I. M. (2019). Aquaplanet simulations of tropical cyclones. Current Climate Change Reports, 5, 185–195. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s40641-019-00133-y
Merlis, T. M., Zhao, M., & Held, I. M. (2013). The sensitivity of hurricane frequency to ITCZ changes and radiatively forced warming in
aquaplanet simulations. Geophysical Research Letters, 40, 4109–4114. https://doi.org/10.1002/grl.50680
Merlis, T. M., Zhou, W., Held, I. M., & Zhao, M. (2016). Surface temperature dependence of tropical cyclone-permitting simulations in
a spherical model with uniform thermal forcing. Geophysical Research Letters, 43, 2859–2865. https://doi.org/10.1002/2016gl067730
Montgomery, M. T., Nicholls, M. E., Cram, T. A., & Saunders, A. B. (2006). A vortical hot tower route to tropical cyclogenesis. Journal of
the Atmospheric Sciences, 63, 355–386. https://doi.org/10.1175/jas3604.1
Muller, C. J., & Romps, D. M. (2018). Acceleration of tropical cyclogenesis by self-aggregation feedbacks. Proceedings of the National Acad-
emy of Sciences, 115, 2930–2935. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1719967115
Murakami, H., Sugi, M., & Kitoh, A. (2013). Future changes in tropical cyclone activity in the North Indian Ocean projected by high-reso-
lution MRI-AGCMs. Climate Dynamics, 49, 1949–1968. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-012-1407-z
Murakami, H., Vecchi, G. A., & Underwood, S. (2017). Increasing frequency of extremely severe cyclonic storms over the Arabian Sea.
Nature Climate Change, 7, 885–889. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-017-0008-6
Murakami, H., Vecchi, G. A., Underwood, S., Delworth, T. L., Wittenberg, A. T., Anderson, W. G., et al. (2015). Simulation and prediction
of category 4 and 5 hurricanes in the high-resolution GFDL HiFLOR coupled climate model. Journal of Climate, 28(23), 9058–9079.
https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli-d-15-0216.1
Murphy, L. N., Bellomo, K., Cane, M. A., & Clement, A. (2017). The role of historical forcings in simulating the observed Atlantic multidec-
adal oscillation. Geophysical Research Letters, 44, 2742–2480. https://doi.org/10.1002/2016gl071337
Neale, R. B., Chen, C.-C., Gettelman, A., Lauritzen, P. H., Park, S., Williamson, D. L., & Taylor, M. A. (2012). Description of the NCAR
Community atmosphere model (CAM 5.0) (NCAR Technical note nos. NCAR/TN-486+STR). National Center for Atmospheric Research.
Nicholls, N. (1979). A possible method for predicting seasonal tropical cyclone activity in the Australian region. Monthly Weather Review,
107, 1221–1224. https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(1979)107<1221:apmfps>2.0.co;2
Nolan, D. S. (2007). What is the trigger for tropical cyclogenesis? Australian Meterological Magazine 56, 241–266.
Nolan, D. S., & Rappin, E. D. (2008). Increased sensitivity of tropical cyclogenesis to wind shear in higher sst environments. Geophysical
Research Letters, 35, L14805. https://doi.org/10.1029/2008GL034147
Nolan, D. S., Rappin, E. D., & Emanuel, K. E. (2007). Tropical cyclonegenesis sensitivity to environmental parameters in radiative-convec-
tive equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, 133, 2085–2107. https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.170
Otterå, O. H., Bentsen, M., Drange, H., & Suo, L. (2010). External forcing as a metronome for Atlantic multidecadal variability. Nature
Geoscience, 3(10), 688–694. https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo955
Palmén, E. (1948). On the formation and structure of tropical hurricanes. Geophysica, 3, 26–38.
Patricola, C. M., Saravanan, R., & Chang, P. (2017). A teleconnection between Atlantic sea surface temperature and eastern and central
North Pacific tropical cyclones. Geophysical Research Letters, 44, 1167–1174. https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL071965
Patricola, C. M., Saravanan, R., & Chang, P. (2018). The response of Atlantic tropical cyclones to suppression of African easterly waves.
Geophysical Research Letters, 45(1), 471–479. https://doi.org/10.1002/2017gl076081
Ramsay, H. A., Singh, M. S., & Chavas, D. R. (2020). Response of tropical cyclone formation and intensification rates to climate warming
in idealized simulations. Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 12, e2020MS002086. https://doi.org/10.1029/2020MS002086
Ramsay, H. A., & Sobel, A. H. (2011). Effects of relative and absolute sea surface temperature on tropical cyclone potential intensity using
a single-column model. Journal of Climate, 24(1), 183–193. https://doi.org/10.1175/2010jcli3690.1
Rappin, E. D., Nolan, D. S., & Emanuel, K. A. (2010). Thermodynamic control of tropical cyclogenesis in environments of radiative-convec-
tive equilibrium with shear. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, 136. https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.706
Raymond, D. J., Gjorgjievska, S., Sessions, S., & Fuchs, Z. (2014). Tropical cyclogenesis and mid-level vorticity. Australian Meteorological
and Oceangraphic Journal, 64, 11–25. https://doi.org/10.22499/2.6401.003
Raymond, D. J., & Sessions, S. L. (2007). Evolution of convection during tropical cyclogenesis. Geophysical Research Letters, 34, L06811.
https://doi.org/10.1029/2006GL028607
Reed, K. A., Bacmeister, J., Rosenbloom, N., Wehner, M., Bates, S., Lauritzen, P., et al. (2015). Impact of the dynamical core on the di-
rect simulation of tropical cyclones in a high-resolution global model. Geophysical Research Letters, 42(9), 3603–3608. https://doi.
org/10.1002/2015gl063974
Reed, K. A., & Chavas, D. R. (2015). Uniformly rotating global radiative-convective equilibrium in the Community Atmosphere Model,
version 5. Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 7, 1938–1955. https://doi.org/10.1002/2015MS000519
Reed, K. A., & Jablonowski, C. (2011). An analytic vortex initialization technique for idealized tropical cyclone studies in AGCMs. Monthly
Weather Review, 139, 689–710. https://doi.org/10.1175/2010MWR3488.1
Richter, I. (2015). Climate model biases in the eastern tropical oceans: Causes, impacts and ways forward. Wires Climate Change, 6,
345–358. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.338
Roberts, M. J., Camp, J., Seddon, J., Vidale, P. L., Hodges, K., & Vanniere, B. (2020a). Impact of model resolution on tropical cyclone
simulation using the HighResMIP–PRIMAVERA multimodel ensemble. Journal of Climate, 33, 2557–2583. https://doi.org/10.1175/
JCLI-D-19-0639.1
Roberts, M. J., Camp, J., Seddon, J., Vidale, P. L., Hodges, K., & Vannière, B. (2020b). Projected future changes in tropical cyclones using the
CMIP6 HighResMIP multimodel ensemble. Geophysical Research Letters, 47, e2020GL088662. https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL088662
Roberts, M. J., Vidale, P. L., Mizielinski, M. S., Demory, M.-E., Schiemann, R., & Strachan, J. (2015). Tropical cyclones in the upscale en-
semble of high-resolution global climate models. Journal of Climate, 28(2), 574–596. https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli-d-14-00131.1
Robertson, A. W., Vitart, F., & Camargo, S. J. (2020). Sub-seasonal to seasonal prediction of weather to climate with application to tropical
cyclones. Journal of Geophysical Research, 125, e2018JD029375. https://doi.org/10.1029/2018JD029375
Ruppert, J., Wing, A., Tang, X., & Duran, E. (2020). The critical role of cloud-infrared radiation feedback in tropical cyclone development.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117, 27884–27892. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2013584117
Russell, J. O., Aiyyer, A., White, J. D., & Hannah, W. (2017). Revisiting the connection between African Easterly Waves and Atlantic tropical
cyclogenesis. Geophysical Research Letters, 44, 587–595. https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL071236
Saha, S., Moorthi, S., Pan, H.-L., Wu, X., Wang, J., Nadiga, S., & Goldberg, M. (2010). The NCEP climate forecast system reanalysis. Bulletin
of the American Meteorological Society, 91, 1015–1058. https://doi.org/10.1175/2010BAMS3001.1
Saha, S., Moorthi, S., Wu, X., Wang, J., Nadiga, S., Tripp, P., & Becker, E. (2014). The NCEP climate forecast system version 2. Journal of
Climate, 27, 2185–2208. https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli-d-12-00823.1
Satoh, M., Stevens, B., Judt, F., Khairoutdinov, M., Lin, S.-J., Putman, W. M., & Duben, P. (2019). Global cloud resolving models. Current
Climate Change Reports, 5, 172–184. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40641-019-00131-0
Saunders, M. A., Klotzbach, P. J., & Lea, A. S. R. (2017). Replicating annual north Atlantic hurricane activity 1878-2012 from environmen-
tal variables. Journal of Geophysical Research, 122, 6284–6297. https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JD026492
Schneider, T., Bischoff, T., & Haug, G. H. (2014). Migrations and dynamics of the intertropical convergence zone. Nature, 513, 45–53.
https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13636
Schreck, C. J., III, Knapp, K. K., & Kossin, J. P. (2014). The impact of best track discrepancies on global tropical cyclone climatologies using
IBTrACS. Monthly Weather Review, 142, 3881–3899. https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-14-00021.1
Scoccimarro, E., Fogli, P. G., Reed, K. A., Gualdi, S., Masina, S., & Navarra, A. (2017). Tropical cyclone interaction with the ocean: The role
of high-frequency (subdaily) coupled processes. Journal of Climate, 30, 145–162. https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0292.1
Seager, R., Cane, M., Henderson, N., Lee, D.-E., Abernathey, R., & Zhang, H. (2019). Strengthening tropical pacific zonal sea surface temper-
ature gradient consistent with rising greenhouse gases. Nature Climate Change, 9, 517–522. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-019-0505-x
Shaevitz, D. A., Camargo, S. J., Sobel, A. H., Jonas, J. A., Kim, D., Kumar, A., et al. (2014). Characteristics of tropical cyclones in high-resolution
models in the present climate. Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 6(4), 1154–1172. https://doi.org/10.1002/2014ms000372
Sharmila, S., & Walsh, K. J. E. (2018). Recent poleward shift of tropical cyclone formation linked to Hadley cell expansion. Nature Climate
Change, 8, 730–736. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0227-5
Shay, L. K., Black, P. G., Mariano, A. J., Hawkins, J. D., & Elsberry, R. L. (1992). Upper ocean response to hurricane Gilbert. Journal of
Geophysical Research, 97, 20227–20248. https://doi.org/10.1029/92jc01586
Shi, X., & Bretherton, C. S. (2014). Large-scale character of an atmosphere in rotating radiative-convective equilibrium. Journal of Advanc-
es in Modeling Earth Systems, 6, 616–629. https://doi.org/10.1002/2014MS000342
Shields, S., Wing, A., & Gilford, D. (2020). A global analysis of interannual variability of potential and actual tropical cyclone intensities.
Geophysical Research Letters, 47, e2020GL089512. https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL089512
Skok, G., Bacmeister, J., & Tribbia, J. (2013). Analysis of tropical cyclone precipitation using an object-based algorithm. Journal of Climate,
26(8), 2563–2579. https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli-d-12-00135.1
Smith, W., Nicholls, M. E., & Pielke, R. (2020). The role of radiation in accelerating tropical cyclogenesis in idealized simulations. Journal
of the Atmospheric Sciences, 77, 1261–1277. https://doi.org/10.1175/jas-d-19-0044.1
Sobel, A. H., Camargo, S. J., & Barnston, A. (2016). Northern hemisphere tropical cyclones during the quasi-El Niño of late 2014. Natural
Hazards, 83, 1717–1729. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-016-2389-7
Sugi, M., Murakami, H., & Yushimura, J. (2012). On the mechanism of tropical cyclone frequency changes due to global warming. Journal
of Meteorological Society of Japan, 90A, 397–408. https://doi.org/10.2151/jmsj.2012-A24
Sugi, M., Yamada, Y., Yoshida, K., Mizuta, R., Nakano, M., Kodama, C., & Satoh, M. (2020). Future changes in the global frequency of
tropical cyclone seeds. SOLA, 16, 70–74. https://doi.org/10.2151/sola.2020-012
Sugi, M., Yoshida, K., & Murakami, H. (2015). More tropical cyclones in a cooler climate? Geophysical Research Letters, 42, 6780–6784.
https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GL064929
Tang, B., & Emanuel, K. A. (2010). Midlevel ventilation's constraint on tropical cyclone intensity. Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences, 67,
1817–1830. https://doi.org/10.1175/2010jas3318.1
Tang, B., & Emanuel, K. A. (2012). A ventilation index for tropical cyclones. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 93(12), 1901–
1912. https://doi.org/10.1175/bams-d-11-00165.1
Tippett, M. K., Camargo, S. J., & Sobel, A. H. (2011). A Poisson regression index for tropical cyclone genesis and the role of large-scale
vorticity in genesis. Journal of Climate, 24, 2335–2357. https://doi.org/10.1175/2010JCLI3811.1
Vecchi, G. A., Delworth, T., Gudgel, R., Kapnick, S., Rosati, A., Wittenberg, A. T., et al. (2014). On the seasonal forecasting of regional
tropical cyclone activity. Journal of Climate, 27(21), 7994–8016. https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli-d-14-00158.1
Vecchi, G. A., Delworth, T. L., Murakami, H., Underwood, S. D., Wittenberg, A. T., Zeng, F., et al. (2019). Tropical cyclone sensitivities
to CO2 doubling: Roles of atmospheric resolution, synoptic variability and background climate changes. Climate Dynamics, 53(9–10),
5999–6033. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-019-04913-y
Vecchi, G. A., Landsea, C., Zhang, W., Villarini, G., & Knutson, T. (2021). Changes in Atlantic major hurricane frequency since the late 19th
century. Nature Communications. ”in press”. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-24268-5
Vecchi, G. A., & Soden, B. J. (2007a). Effect of remote sea surface temperature change on tropical cyclone potential intensity. Nature,
450(7172), 1066–1070. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature06423
Vecchi, G. A., & Soden, B. J. (2007b). Increased tropical Atlantic wind shear in model projections of global warming. Geophysical Research
Letters, 34. https://doi.org/10.1029/2006GL028905
Vecchi, G. A., Zhao, M., Wang, H., Villarini, G., Rosati, A., Kumar, A., & Gudgel, R. (2011). Dynamical predictions of seasonal North At-
lantic hurricane activity. Monthly Weather Review, 139, 1070–1082. https://doi.org/10.1175/2010mwr3499.1
Viale, F., & Merlis, T. M. (2017). Variations in tropical cyclone frequency response to solar and CO2 forcing in aquaplanet simulations.
Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 9, 4–18. https://doi.org/10.1002/2016MS000785
Vitart, F., Huddleston, M., D'eque'e, M., Peake, D., Palmer, T., Stockdale, T., & Weisheimer, A. (2007). Dynamically-based season-
al forecasts of Atlantic tropical storm activity issued in June by EUROSIP. Geophysical Research Letters, 34, L16815. https://doi.
org/10.1029/2007gl030740
Vu, T.-A., Kieu, C., Chavas, D., & Wang, Q. (2020). A numerical study of the global formation of tropical cyclones. Journal of Advances in
Modeling Earth Systems. https://doi.org/10.1029/2020MS002207
Walsh, K. J. E., Camargo, S. J., Vecchi, G. A., Daloz, A. S., Elsner, J., Emanuel, K., & Henderson, N. (2015). Hurricanes and climate: The
U.S. CLIVAR Working Group on hurricanes. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 96, 997–1017. https://doi.org/10.1175/
BAMS-D-13-00242.1
Walsh, K. J. E., McBride, J. L., Klotzbach, P. J., Balachandran, S., Camargo, S. J., Holland, G., & Sugi, M. (2016). Tropical cyclones and
climate change. WIREs Climate Change, 7, 65–89. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.371
Walsh, K. J. E., Sharmila, S., Thatcher, M., Wales, S., Utembe, S., & Vaughan, A. (2020). Real world and tropical cyclone world. Part II:
Sensitivity of tropical cyclone formation to uniform and meridionally varying sea surface temperatures under aquaplanet conditions.
Journal of Climate, 33, 1473–1486. https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-19-0079.1
Wang, C., & Lee, S.-K. (2009). Co-variability of tropical cyclones in the North Atlantic and the eastern North Pacific. Geophysical Research
Letters, 36, L24702. https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GL041469
Wang, C., Wang, B., & Cao, J. (2019). Unprecedented northern hemisphere tropical cyclone genesis in 2018 shaped by subtropical warm-
ing in the North Pacific and the North Atlantic. Geophysical Research Letters, 46, 13327–13337. https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL085406
Wang, Q., Kieu, C., & Vu, T.-A. (2019). Large-scale dynamics of tropical cyclone formation associated with ITCZ breakdown. Atmospheric
Chemistry and Physics, 19, 8383–8397. https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-8383-2019
Wang, Z., Zhang, G., Dunkerton, T. J., & Jin, F.-F. (2020). Summertime stationary waves integrate tropical and extratropical impacts on
tropical cyclone activity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117, 22720–22726. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2010547117
Williams, I. N., Pierrehumbert, R. T., & Huber, M. (2009). Global warming, convective threshold and false thermostats. Geophysical Re-
search Letters, 36(21), L21805. https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GL039849
Wing, A. A., Camargo, S., Sobel, A., Kim, D., Moon, Y., Murakami, H., & Zhao, M. (2019). Moist static energy budget analysis of tropical
cyclone intensification in high-resolution climate models. Journal of Climate, 32, 6071–6095. https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-18-0599.1
Wing, A. A., Camargo, S. J., & Sobel, A. H. (2016). Role of radiative-convective feedbacks in spontaneous tropical cyclogenesis in idealized
numerical simulations. Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences, 73, 2633–2642. https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS-D-15-0380.1
Wing, A. A., Reed, K., Satoh, M., Stevens, B., Bony, S., & Ohno, T. (2018). Radiative–convective equilibrium model intercomparison project.
Geoscientific Model Development, 11, 793–813. https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-793-2018
Wing, A. A., Sobel, A. H., & Camargo, S. J. (2007). Relationship between the potential and actual intensities of tropical cyclones on inter-
annual time scales. Geophysical Research Letters, 34, L08810. https://doi.org/10.1029/2006GL028581
Woodruff, J. D., Irish, J. L., & Camargo, S. J. (2013). Coastal flooding by tropical cyclones and sea-level rise. Nature, 504, 44–52. https://doi.
org/10.1038/nature12855
World Meteorological Organization. (2017). Global Guide to tropical cyclone forecasting, WMO-No. 1194. Tech. Rep.). WMO.
Wu, S.-N., Soden, B. J., & Nolan, D. S. (2021). Examining the role of cloud radiative interactions in tropical cyclone development using
satellite measurements and wrf simulations. Geophysical Research Letters, 48, e2021GL093259. https://doi.org/10.1029/2021GL093259
Yamada, Y., Kodama, C., Satoh, M., Sugi, M., Roberts, M. J., Mizuta, R., & Vidale, P. L. (2021). Evaluation of the contribution of tropical
cyclone seeds to changes in tropical cyclone frequency due to global warming in high-resolution multi-model ensemble simulations.
Progress in Earth and Planetary Science, 8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40645-020-00397-1
Yan, M., & Yang, J. (2020). Hurricanes on tidally locked terrestrial planets: Fixed surface temperature experiments. Astronomy & Astro-
physics, 643, A37.
Yan, Q., Korty, R., & Zhang, Z. (2015). Tropical cyclone genesis factors in a simulation of the last two millennia: Results from the Commu-
nity Earth System Model. Journal of Climate, 28, 7182–7202. https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli-d-15-0054.1
Yang, B., & Tan, Z.-M. (2020). Interactive radiation accelerates the intensification of the midlevel vortex for tropical cyclogenesis. Journal
of the Atmospheric Sciences, 77, 4051–4065. https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS-D-20-0094.1
Yao, S.-L., Huang, G., & Wu, R.-G. (2015). Inhomogeneous warming of the tropical Indian Ocean in the CMIP5 model simulations during
1900-2005 and associated mechanisms. Climate Dynamics, 46, 619–636. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-015-2602-5
Yoshimura, J., & Sugi, M. (2005). Tropical cyclone climatology in a high-resolution AGCM - Impacts of SST warming and CO2 increase.
SOLA, 1, 133–136. https://doi.org/10.2151/sola.2005-035
Yoshimura, J., Sugi, M., & Noda, A. (2006). Influence of greenhouse warming on tropical cyclone frequency. Journal of the Meteorological
Society of Japan, 84(2), 405–428. https://doi.org/10.2151/jmsj.84.405
Zarzycki, C. M. (2016). Tropical cyclone intensity errors associated with lack of two-way ocean coupling in high-resolution global simula-
tions. Journal of Climate, 29, 8589–8610. https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0273.1
Zarzycki, C. M., Jablonowski, C., & Taylor, M. A. (2014). Using variable-resolution meshes to model tropical cyclones in the Community
Atmosphere Model. Monthly Weather Review, 142, 1221–1239. https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-13-00179.1
Zhang, B., Soden, B. J., Vecchi, G. A., & Yang, W. (2021). The role of radiative interactions in tropical cyclone development under realistic
boundary conditions. Journal of Climate, 34, 2079–2091. https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-20-0574.1
Zhang, G., Silvers, L. G., Zhao, M., & Knutson, T. R. (2021). Idealized aquaplanet simulations of tropical cyclone activity: Significance
of temperature gradients, Hadley circulation, and zonal asymmetry. Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences, 78, 877–902. https://doi.
org/10.1175/JAS-D-20-0079.1
Zhao, M., Held, I. M., Lin, S.-J., & Vecchi, G. A. (2009). Simulations of global hurricane climatology, interannual variability, and response
to global warming using a 50-km resolution gcm. Journal of Climate, 22(24), 6653–6678. https://doi.org/10.1175/2009jcli3049.1
Zheng, X.-T., Xie, S.-P., Du, Y., Liu, L., Huang, G., & Liu, Q. (2013). Indian Ocean dipole response to global warming in the CMIP5 multi-
model ensemble. Journal of Climate, 26, 6067–6080. https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00638.1
Zhou, W. (2015). The impact of vertical shear on the sensitivity of tropical cyclogenesis to environmental rotation and thermodynamic
state. Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 7, 1872. https://doi.org/10.1002/2015MS000543
Zhou, W., Held, I., & Garner, S. (2017). Tropical cyclones in rotating radiative-convective equilibrium with coupled SST. Journal of the
Atmospheric Sciences, 74, 879–892. https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS-D-16-0195.1
Zhou, W., Held, I. M., & Garner, S. T. (2014). Parameter study of tropical cyclones in rotating radiative-convective equilibrium with column
physics and resolution of a 25 km GCM. Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences, 71, 1058–1068. https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS-D-13-0190.1
Zuidema, P., Chang, P., Medeiros, B., Kirtman, B. P., Mechoso, R., Schneider, E. K., & Xu, Z. (2016). Challenges and prospects for reduc-
ing coupled climate model SST biases in the eastern tropical Atlantic and Pacific oceans: The U.S. CLIVAR Eastern Tropical Oceans
Synthesis Working Group. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 97, 2305–2328. https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-15-00274.1

Tropical Cyclone Frequency: Review Article

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Tropical Cyclone Frequency: Review Article

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Tropical Cyclone Frequency: Review Article

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

REVIEW ARTICLE Tropical Cyclone Frequency

(a) North Indian (b) Western North Pacific TS

Nino3.4 ASO, AMO

D 1RUWK,QGLDQ (5$,QW E :HVWHUQ1RUWK3DFLILF

F &HQWUDO (DVWHUQ1RUWK3DFLILF G 1RUWK$WODQWLF

       

Table 1 to a substantial extent by its large-scale environment, since that environ-

It is of intrinsic scientific importance to understand the processes of tropical cyclogenesis at a detailed,

3.2. TC Genesis Indices

3.3. The Irrelevance of Global Budgets

3.4. Regional Frequency and the Independence of Basins

3.5. Understanding Projections

4.1. High-Resolution Global Models

4.2. Idealized Modeling

magnitude smaller than that of (c).

Genesis is theoretically possible in the absence of a well-defined precursor, as demonstrated by idealized

6.1. Scaling up Genesis Theories

6.3. Faithfulness of Global Models

6.4. Idealized Simulations as a Building Block for Theory

6.5. Regional Climate Change

Data Availability Statement

You might also like

D 1RUWK,QGLDQ (5$,QW E :HVWHUQ1RUWK3DFLILF