• <tr id="yyy80"></tr>
  • <sup id="yyy80"></sup>
  • <tfoot id="yyy80"><noscript id="yyy80"></noscript></tfoot>
  • 99热精品在线国产_美女午夜性视频免费_国产精品国产高清国产av_av欧美777_自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇_亚洲熟女精品中文字幕_www日本黄色视频网_国产精品野战在线观看 ?

    Evaluation of Arctic Sea Ice Drift and its Relationship with Near-surface Wind and Ocean Current in Nine CMIP6 Models from China

    2022-04-02 05:29:02XiaoyongYUChengyanLIUXiaocunWANGJianCAOJihaiDONGandYuLIU
    Advances in Atmospheric Sciences 2022年6期
    關(guān)鍵詞:冷啟動(dòng)陰極燃料電池

    Xiaoyong YU, Chengyan LIU, Xiaocun WANG, Jian CAO, Jihai DONG, and Yu LIU

    1Binjiang College, Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology, Wuxi 214105, China

    2Southern Marine Science and Engineering Guangdong Laboratory (Zhuhai), Zhuhai 519082, China

    3School of Marine Sciences, Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology, Nanjing 210044, China

    4School of Atmospheric Sciences, Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology, Nanjing 210044, China

    5Marine Science and Technology College, Zhejiang Ocean University, Zhoushan 316022, China

    ABSTRACT The simulated Arctic sea ice drift and its relationship with the near-surface wind and surface ocean current during 1979-2014 in nine models from China that participated in the sixth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project(CMIP6) are examined by comparison with observational and reanalysis datasets. Most of the models reasonably represent the Beaufort Gyre (BG) and Transpolar Drift Stream (TDS) in the spatial patterns of their long-term mean sea ice drift,while the detailed location, extent, and strength of the BG and TDS vary among the models. About two-thirds of the models agree with the observation/reanalysis in the sense that the sea ice drift pattern is consistent with the near-surface wind pattern. About the same proportion of models shows that the sea ice drift pattern is consistent with the surface ocean current pattern. In the observation/reanalysis, however, the sea ice drift pattern does not match well with the surface ocean current pattern. All nine models missed the observational widespread sea ice drift speed acceleration across the Arctic. For the Arctic basin-wide spatial average, five of the nine models overestimate the Arctic long-term (1979-2014) mean sea ice drift speed in all months. Only FGOALS-g3 captures a significant sea ice drift speed increase from 1979 to 2014 both in spring and autumn. The increases are weaker than those in the observation. This evaluation helps assess the performance of the Arctic sea ice drift simulations in these CMIP6 models from China.Key words: Arctic sea ice, sea ice drift, CMIP6, model evaluation

    1. Introduction

    Arctic sea ice is a vital component of the Earth’s climate system (de Vernal et al., 2020). In addition to the coverage and thickness, the drift of Arctic sea ice is also of substantial research interest because of its important roles in Arctic climate, such as regulating ice mass distribution and atmosphere-ocean energy exchange (Kwok et al., 2013). The drift of Arctic sea ice has two large-scale patterns: the Beaufort Gyre (BG) and the Transpolar Drift Stream (TDS)(e.g., Colony and Thorndike, 1984). Arctic sea ice drift also exhibits significant seasonality, with maximum speed in September/October and minimum speed in March/April(Rampal et al., 2009; Olason and Notz, 2014). As Arctic sea ice extent has decreased rapidly in recent decades (e.g., Stroeve et al., 2012; Serreze and Stroeve, 2015), the sea ice tends to move faster (Rampal et al., 2009; Spreen et al.,2011; Kwok et al., 2013; Zhang et al., 2021). Although it is clear that Arctic sea ice moves in response to atmospheric forcing (e.g., Vihma et al., 2012; Lei et al., 2019; Zhang et al.,2021), Rampal et al. (2009) found that the substantial increase in the Arctic spatially averaged sea ice drift speed(+17% per decade for winter and +8.5% for summer, based on buoy observation) from 1979 to 2007 is more likely caused by decreased sea ice mechanical strength instead of increased atmospheric forcing. Vihma et al. (2012) confirmed the finding in Rampal et al. (2009) that atmospheric forcing cannot explain the increasing trend of Arctic spatially averaged sea ice drift speed during a similar time(1989-2009). The changes in Arctic sea ice drift and its driver are not regionally uniform. Based on satellite data,Spreen et al. (2011) showed that the winter Arctic sea ice drift speed trend for the period 1992-2009 varies between-4% and 16% per decade depending on the location. Increasing wind speed may explain part of the observed increase in drift speeds in the Central Arctic, but thinning of the sea ice is a more likely cause of sea ice drift acceleration in other regions (Spreen et al., 2011). Kwok et al. (2013) showed the BG and the TDS were enhanced during 1982-2009, especially during the last decade. Based on a longer period(1980-2013) and focused over the Canadian Basin, Petty et al. (2016) also showed the strengthening of the BG and proposed several mechanisms to explain the change, such as ice strength reduction (which is caused by declines in ice thickness and concentration), changes to the ice morphology, the atmospheric boundary layer stability, and/or geostrophic currents.

    For information on how Arctic sea ice will change in the future, we rely on predictions and projections from climate models. Therefore, it is vital to know whether climate models can properly capture observed historical sea ice drift and its dependency on atmospheric and oceanic forcing and sea ice conditions. Rampal et al. (2011) examined Arctic sea ice simulation in the models that participated in the third phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project(CMIP3) and showed that these models failed to capture the observed seasonal cycle and the acceleration of Arctic sea ice drift in recent decades. Based on the fifth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5) models,Tandon et al. (2018) found that only a few models captured the observed seasonal cycle of sea ice drift speed. Among the state-of-art global climate models that participated in the sixth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project(CMIP6), 13 are from China (Zhou et al., 2019). Their performance on simulating Arctic sea ice concentration, area,extent, thickness, volume, and mass budget and snow depth on the ice under modern climate conditions is examined in recent multi-model (Davy and Outten, 2020; Notz et al.,2020; Shu et al., 2020; Smith et al., 2020; ?rthun et al.,2021; Chen et al., 2021; Keen et al., 2021; Long et al.,2021; Shen et al., 2021) and single model (Guo et al.,2020a; Wang et al., 2020; Ren et al., 2021; Rong et al.,2021) evaluation studies. Notz et al. (2020) and Long et al.(2021) showed that BCC-CSM2-MR, FGOALS-f3-L, and FIO-ESM-2-0 are able to simultaneously simulate a plausible amount of Arctic sea-ice loss and a plausible change in global mean temperature over time. In addition, Long et al.(2021) found that CAMS-CSM1-0 largely underestimates the Arctic sea ice extent decline, and BCC-CSM2-MR,CASM-CSM1-0, and FGOALS-f3-L obviously overestimate the climatological sea ice concentration over the Barents Sea and East Greenland Sea. Shen et al. (2021) and Rong et al. (2021) confirmed the underestimation of the Arctic sea ice extent decline in CAMS-CSM1-0. Guo et al.(2020a) confirmed the overestimated climatological sea ice concentration over the Barents Sea and East Greenland Sea in FGOALS-f3-L. Ren et al. (2021) and Wang et al. (2020)pointed out that the underestimation of climatological sea ice concentration over the Barents Sea and East Greenland Sea in BCC-CSM2-MR may be caused by the underestimated surface net radiation and heat transport from the Atlantic Ocean. Smith et al. (2020) reported that BCCCSM2-MR and BCC-ESM1 overestimated the Arctic sea ice melt-period and underestimated the freeze-up and closing period. Cao et al. (2018) demonstrated that NESM3 can represent the modern Arctic climate well, while a cold bias exists over the Barents Sea. However, the performance of these models in simulating the Arctic sea ice drift is unknown so far. Therefore, this study aims to extend the current evaluation studies by providing evaluation of Arctic sea ice drift and its relationship with near-surface wind and surface ocean current in the historical runs of the CMIP6 models from China. This paper is organized in the following way: section 2 describes the model characteristics and the observational data as well as the analysis methods used; section 3 presents the evaluation of spatial patterns in simulated Arctic sea ice drift climatology and trends and the relationship of these patterns with those in Arctic near-surface wind and surface ocean current; evaluation of the seasonal evolution and trend in the simulated Arctic basin-wide mean sea ice drift speed, near-surface wind speed, and surface ocean current is given in section 4; section 5 presents the summary and conclusions.

    2. Data and method

    2.1. Model data

    We evaluate nine coupled models (BCC-CSM2-MR,BCC-ESM1, CAMS-CSM1-0, CAS-ESM2-0, CIESM,FGOALS-f3-L, FGOALS-g3, FIO-ESM-2-0, and NESM3)from China that participated in the CMIP6. We only investigate 9 of 13 models from China because the other 4 models(BCC-CSM2-HR, BNU-ESM-1-1, FGOALS-f3-H, and TaiESM1) have not provided the sea ice drift vector in their CMIP6 historical experiments on the ESGF CMIP6 data distribution website yet. Table 1 shows that only two different sea ice models are used in these coupled models: Sea Ice Simulator (SIS) and Los Alamos sea ice model (CICE). BCCCSM2-MR and BCC-ESM1 use the SIS, and the other seven coupled models use the CICE. More detailed information about these coupled models can be found in Table 1.The monthly sea ice drift, near-surface wind, and surface ocean current vectors from the CMIP6 historical experiments of these nine models are selected for evaluation in this study. As the near-surface wind vector (CMIP6 standard name uas, vas) in CIESM, FGOALS-g3, and FIO-ESM-2-0 are not provided, the wind vector at 1000 hPa is used instead in these three models. The data from the first ensemble member of each model and for the period of 1979-2014 (36 years) is used. We focus the evaluation on spring and autumn when sea ice usually reaches the maximum and minimum extent, respectively.

    Table 1. Characteristics of the nine CMIP6 models from China.

    2.2. Datasets for evaluation

    For the evaluation of the simulated Arctic sea ice drift,the NSIDC-0116 Polar Pathfinder (referred to as NSIDC Pathfinder hereafter) daily sea ice motion vectors(https://nsidc.org/data/NSIDC-0116/versions/3) are used.This dataset provides daily sea ice motion vectors derived from a wide variety of sensors in both gridded and non-gridded (raw) files. We selected the daily sea ice motion vector that was projected on the 25 km EASE-grid and merged observations from a variety of sensors over the Northern Hemisphere. As we use the monthly sea ice drift vectors to obtain the sea ice drift magnitude and direction in the nine CMIP6 models, the monthly sea ice drift vector components in NSIDC Pathfinder are calculated accordingly to assess the observational sea ice drift magnitude and direction. Previous evaluation studies (Sumata et al., 2014, 2015; Gui et al.,2020) show that the bias of NSIDC Pathfinder sea ice drift speed in summer is larger than that in winter, and the summer Arctic average sea ice drift speed is obviously underestimated. These studies also show that the larger the sea ice drift speed or lower the sea ice concentration, the larger the absolute error in sea ice drift. More detail about this dataset can be found in Tschudi et al. (2016). The NSIDC Pathfinder is used in this study because only this product provides the full-season, long-term (1979-2014) sea icedrift data over the whole Arctic so far. This advantage enables us to evaluate the climatology and trend of Arctic sea ice drift in the models during different seasons.

    For the near-surface wind, the monthly 10-m wind from ERA-Interim (referred to as ERA-I hereafter) with 1° × 1° horizontal resolution is used. Compared with the daily average 10-m wind speed from the North Pole drifting ice stations of the former Soviet Union, Lindsay et al.(2014) found that the monthly mean bias of daily averaged 10-m wind speed in ERA-Interim is mostly less than 0.5 m s-1.Besides, the ERA-Interim wind speed has the best correlation (higher than 0.85) with the observation among six atmospheric reanalysis products (Lindsay et al., 2014). More information about this dataset is given by Berrisford et al.(2011). For the surface ocean current, we use the monthly surface ocean current from Ocean Reanalysis System 4(ORAS4) with 1° × 1° horizontal resolution. Detailed information about ORSA4 is given by Balmaseda et al. (2013). Caution is necessary when using these two reanalysis products because of the sparse observation over the Arctic Ocean.

    2.3. Method

    2.3.1. Spatial average

    For the calculations of Arctic basin-wide mean sea ice drift, near-surface wind, and surface ocean current, we follow the method of Olason and Notz (2014) and Docquier et al. (2017) by using the Scientific Ice Expeditions (SCICEX)box (Rothrock et al., 2008) as the domain for the spatial average. The domain of the SCICEX box is shown in Fig. 1a.

    2.3.2. Trends

    Since sea ice drift, near-surface wind, and surface ocean current are vectors, the changes of sea ice drift, nearsurface wind, and surface ocean current could happen in their magnitude or direction, or both. Therefore, we calculate not only the trends of the sea ice drift, near-surface wind, and surface ocean current magnitude, but also the trends of their vector components when we evaluate the spatial patterns of the sea ice drift, near-surface wind, and surface ocean current changes over the Arctic. The trends of their vector components are then used to compose a trend vector that shows the direction of their change. For the evaluation of the Arctic basin-wide mean sea ice drift change, we only calculate the trend of the sea ice drift magnitude. The two-tailed Student’s t-test is used to perform the significance test for the trend. A trend with a confidence level equal to or higher than 95% is considered significant.

    3. Spatial patterns of Arctic sea-ice drift,near-surface wind, and ocean current

    3.1. Spatial patterns of Arctic sea ice drift

    The spatial patterns of spring (March-April-May;MAM) long-term (1979-2014) mean sea ice drift direction(vector) and speed (shading) in the observation and models are shown in Fig. 1. In the NSIDC Pathfinder, the spring sea ice drift pattern is characterized by a typical BG, in which sea ice moves anticyclonically over the Amerasian basin,and a typical TDS, in which there is sea ice drift from the Siberian coast all the way to the Fram Strait (Fig. 1a). All nine models capture the BG and TDS in the spring sea ice drift pattern except for NESM3, in which there are three small anticyclonic vortices aligned together instead of a BG in the sea ice drift field over the Amerasian basin. This distinct sea ice drift pattern in NESM3 (Fig. 1j) is linked to the ocean current beneath the sea ice (see section 3.2). The exact extent, location, and strength of BG and TDS vary among the models. The BG and TDS in CAMS-CSM1-0,CIESM, FGOALS-f3-L, and FIO-ESM-2-0 are close to those in the observation. In BCC-CSM2-MR and FGOALSg3, however, the simulated BG and TDS are different from those in the observation. The BG extent in BCC-CSM2-MR is smaller than that in the observation. The TDS is curved instead of straight, as in the observation. Consequently, in BCC-CSM2-MR, the sea ice over the Siberian coast first drifts toward the Canadian Archipelago and north of Greenland and then turns to drift toward the Fram Strait and the water between Svalbard and the Franz Josef Land (Fig. 1b).The cyclonic near-surface wind centered near the Barents/Kara Sea may be the driver of the curved sea ice drift (see section 3.2 for detail). The BG in FGOALS-g3 is much smaller and weaker than that in the observation. The simulated TDS starts not just from the Siberian coast, but also from the Beaufort Sea. This makes the TDS in FGOALS-g3 much wider than that in the observation. Also,the simulated TDS is weaker and its axis is tilted more eastward compared to that in the observation. In BCC-ESM1,the bias of the simulated TDS is very close to that in BCCCSM2-MR. This could be because both BCC-ESM1 and BCC-CSM2-MR used the same sea ice model. In CASESM2-0, the BG and TDS are both interrupted by the data void at the North Pole (Fig. 1e). Near there, the sea ice drifts around the data void. This is because the sea ice grid in CAS-ESM2-0 filtered the data near the North Pole, so the North Pole acts as an artificial island for the sea ice (Sun and Zhou, 2010; Xu et al., 2013). The simulated TDS in NESM3 is narrower than that in the observation.

    In autumn, the observational extent of the BG is smaller and its shape is more asymmetrical compared to that in spring (Fig. 2a). Meanwhile, the TDS is curved instead of straight. Of the nine models, two of them (CAS-ESM2-0 and FGOALS-g3) show BG extents similar to the BG extent in the observation; five of them (BCC-CSM2-MR, BCCESM1, CAMS-CSM1-0, FGOALS-f3-L, and FIO-ESM-2-0) simulate a larger and stronger BG than that in the observation; two of them (NESM3 and CIESM) do not capture the BG. For TDS simulation, four of the nine models (BCCCSM2-MR, BCC-ESM1, CAS-ESM2-0, and FGOALS-g3)simulate a curved TDS. However, the curved TDS in CASESM2-0 is caused by the “artificial island” near the North Pole, and the direction of the curve is different from that in the observation. Another four models (CAMS-CSM1-0,FGOALS-f3-L, FIO-ESM-2-0, and NESM3) simulate a straight TDS. In CIESM, a reversed TDS is found. For the Arctic sea ice drift pattern shift from spring to autumn, none of the models capture the shrinking of the BG, and only FGOALS-g3 captures the shift of straight a TDS to a curved TDS. Caution is needed when interpreting the NSIDC Pathfinder sea ice drift speed in autumn because large areas of marginal ice zone exist in autumn and the sea ice drift speed uncertainty over the marginal ice zone is large. Previous studies (e.g., Stroeve et al., 2011; Zhang et al., 2021)have shown that the negative phase of Arctic Oscillation(AO) in winter is associated with a stronger BG. Therefore,the BG strength and range differences among the models may be linked to their differences in AO strength and range.

    Fig. 1. Spatial pattern of the spring (MAM) long-term (1979-2014) mean sea ice drift direction (vector) and speed (shading)in NSIDC Polar Pathfinder and nine CMIP6 models (BCC-CSM2-MR, BCC-ESM1, CAMS-CSM1-0, CAS-ESM2-0,CIESM, FGOALS-f3-L, FGOALS-g3, FIO-ESM-2-0, and NESM3) from China. The SCICEX domain is marked as the red box.

    Fig. 2. Same as that in Fig.1, but for autumn (SON).

    3.2. Relationship among the spatial patterns of Arctic sea ice drift, near-surface wind, and surface ocean current

    Figures 3a0, b0, and c0 show that the large-scale pattern of the spring sea ice drift over the Arctic in NSIDC Pathfinder is in good agreement with the near-surface wind pattern in ERA-I. Both in the NSIDC Pathfinder sea ice drift and ERA-I near-surface wind, there is an anticyclonic circulation over the Amerasian basin and straight flow from the Siberian coast to the Fram Strait and north of Greenland.In the ORAS4 surface ocean current, however, the extent of the anticyclonic circulation is obviously smaller than that in the sea ice drift field.

    Of the nine models, four of them (CAMS-CSM1-0,CIESM, FGOALS-f3-L, and FIO-ESM-2-0) show that the spatial patterns of long-term mean sea ice drift, near-surface wind, and surface ocean current vectors in spring are very similar with each other despite there being some displacements in their anticyclonic centers over the Canadian Basin (Fig. 3). Three of the nine models (BCC-ESM1,BCC-CSM2-MR, and CAS-ESM2-0) also show good agreement between the sea ice drift and near-surface wind patterns, but the agreement between their sea ice drift and surface ocean current patterns is poor. In these two models, the large-scale anticyclonic circulation in sea ice drift is mainly confined in the Amerasian Basin. In contrast, the anticyclonic circulation in surface ocean current almost encloses the whole Arctic Ocean. Two of the nine models(FGOALS-g3 and NESM3) show that the sea ice drift pattern does not match well with the near-surface wind pattern.In FGOALS-g3, a BG appears over the Canadian Basin in the sea ice drift. However, no similar circulation is found over the same area in near-surface wind. Additionally, a cyclonic circulation over the central Arctic appears in near-surface wind while no similar pattern is found in sea ice drift accordingly. In NESM3, the single anticyclonic circulation over the Amerasian Basin in near-surface wind is clearly different from the three small anticyclonic vortices aligned together in the same area in sea ice drift. In contrast, the above sea ice drift pattern in NESM3 matches well with the surface ocean current pattern. Since the corresponding surface ocean current magnitude is much larger than the sea ice drift magnitude, the distinct sea ice drift pattern over the Amerasian Basin in NESM3 is likely driven by the surface ocean current.

    Figure 4 shows that although the sea ice drift, near-surface wind, and surface ocean current patterns in autumn(September-October-November; SON) are different from those in spring in the observation/reanalysis, the spatial pattern among these three variables is very similar. The pattern agreement among the sea ice drift, near-surface wind,and surface ocean current in autumn is also very similar to that in spring in each model except for CIESM. In CIESM,the sea ice drift pattern in autumn is no longer in good agreement with the near-surface wind and surface ocean current patterns.

    3.3. Relationship among the trend patterns of Arctic sea ice drift, surface ocean current, near-surface wind

    The trends in spring sea ice drift, near-surface wind,and surface ocean current magnitude (indicated by the color shadings) and their vector components (indicated by the arrows) are shown in Fig. 5. The latter shows the direction of the change in sea ice drift, near-surface wind, and surface ocean current. The areas that the confidence level of the magnitude trend is less than 95% are masked out. The spring sea ice drift speed significantly increased over most of the Arctic during 1979-2014 in the NSIDC Pathfinder(Fig. 5a0). This is consistent with the trend found in Zhang et al. (2021), which also calculated based on NSIDC Pathfinder. The trend vector (indicated by the arrows) also shows that both the BG and TDS are enhanced in the NSIDC Pathfinder (For BG, the trend is about 0.8-1.2 cm s-1(10 yr)-1near Alaska/Canada coast; for TDS, the trend is about 1.6-2.0 cm s-1(10 yr)-1near the Fram Strait). These observational sea ice drift speed increases seem not to be wind-driven because no significant near-surface wind speed changes are found over the corresponding areas in ERA-I.Only a small area of sea ice drift speed decrease over the Siberian coast is matched with the decrease of near-surface wind speed (Fig. 5b0). The observed sea ice drift speed increases are, at most, weakly link to surface ocean current speed changes because the surface ocean current speed in ORSA4 only changes significantly over some narrow, bandshaped areas over the Arctic (Fig. 5c0). Therefore, the observed Arctic sea ice drift acceleration during 1979-2014 is more likely caused by the increased response of the sea ice drift to the wind. This is supported by the fact that the wind factor (the sea ice drift speed from NSIDC Pathfinder divided by the near-surface wind speed from ERA-I) in the observation/reanalysis increases significantly over the sea ice drift speed acceleration areas (Fig. S1 in the electronic supplementary material).

    第一階段:在燃料電池冷啟動(dòng)開(kāi)始階段沒(méi)有冰形成,首先在電池陰極產(chǎn)生水,隨著反應(yīng)的進(jìn)行,陰極側(cè)含水量逐漸升至飽和狀態(tài)。

    Fig. 3. (Continued).

    Fig. 3. Spatial pattern of the spring (MAM) long-term (1979-2014) mean direction (vector) and speed (shading) of sea ice drift (left), near-surface wind (middle), and surface ocean current (right) in the observation/reanalysis (NSIDC Polar Pathfinder for sea ice drift, ERA-Interim for near-surface wind, and ORAS4 for upper layer ocean current) and nine CMIP6 models (BCC-CSM2-MR, BCCESM1, CAMS-CSM1-0, CAS-ESM2-0, CIESM, FGOALS-f3-L, FGOALS-g3, FIO-ESM-2-0, and NESM3) from China.

    Fig. 4. (Continued).

    Fig. 4. Same as that in Fig. 3, but for autumn (SON).

    Fig. 5. (Continued).

    Fig. 5. The trend of spring (MAM) sea ice drift (left), near-surface wind (middle), and surface ocean current (right) in the observation/reanalysis (NSIDC Polar Pathfinder for sea ice drift speed, ERA-Interim for near-surface wind speed, and ORAS4 for upper layer ocean current) and nine CMIP6 models (BCC-CSM2-MR, BCC-ESM1, CAMS-CSM1-0, CAS-ESM2-0, CIESM,FGOALS-f3-L, FGOALS-g3, FIO-ESM-2-0, and NESM3) from China for the period of 1979-2014. Colors and arrows represent the trend in the magnitude and vector components of sea ice drift, near-surface wind, and surface ocean current, respectively. Areas where the confidence level of the magnitude trend is less than 95% are masked out.

    There are three models (FGOALS-f3-L, FGOALS-g3,and NESM3) that partly capture the spring sea ice drift speed acceleration over the Arctic (Fig. 5). In FGOALS-f3-L, the significant sea ice drift speed increase only appears over the north of the Beaufort Sea, part of the central Arctic,the Baffin Bay, and the Davis Strait (Fig. 5a6). These changes may be driven by the wind speed acceleration because significant near-surface wind speed increases are associated with them. The sea ice drift speed increases over the central Arctic are also associated with the surface ocean current speed increases. In FGOALS-g3, the significant sea ice drift speed increase appears approximately over the area between 120°W and 110°E (Fig. 5a7). These increases are unlikely to be wind-driven because no significant near-surface wind speed changes are associated with them. Over the north of the Beaufort Sea, however, there are significant surface ocean current speed increases associated with the sea ice drift speed increases. In NESM3, the significant sea ice drift speed increases appear mainly over the Laptev Sea,Kara Sea, Barents Sea, Fram Strait, and part of the central Arctic (Fig. 5a9). These changes are not wind-driven except over the north and south of the Fram Strait and the west of the Barents Sea, where significant near-surface wind speed increases appear. Additionally, there are some areas of significant sea ice drift speed decreases over the Canadian Basin in NESM3, and they are associated with the strong significant surface ocean current speed decreases over the same area. In the other six models (BCC-CSM2-MR, BCCESM1, CAMS-CSM1-0, CAS-ESM2-0, CIESM, and FIOESM-2-0), there are only a few scattered areas of significant sea ice drift speed, near-surface wind speed, and surface ocean current speed changes, and their locations are not matched well (Fig. 5).

    In autumn, the sea ice drift trends and their relationship with the near-surface wind speed and surface ocean current speed trends in the observation/reanalysis data (Figs. 6a0,b0, and c0) are similar to those in spring in the following way: the autumn sea ice drift speed also increases significantly over most of the Arctic, and the BG and TDS are also strengthened during 1979-2014 in the NSIDC Pathfinder.The sea ice drift speed trends in autumn are also not winddriven because no significant near-surface wind speed trends in ERA-I are associated with them. They are only weakly linked with the surface ocean current speed trends.The differences between the autumn and spring sea ice drift trends are in their magnitudes and patterns. The autumn sea ice drift speed trends over the southern Canadian Basin and the Chukchi Sea are much larger than those in spring. The autumn sea ice drift trend vectors over the north of the Laptev Sea are more curved than those in spring.

    Compared to the observation/reanalysis, the autumn sea ice drift speed trends in the nine models are only significant over a small part of the Arctic (Fig. 6). These areas are almost only located outside the central Arctic except in NESM3, in which significant sea ice drift speed trends appear over a few narrow band-shaped areas in the central Arctic. Areas with significant near-surface wind speed and surface ocean current speed trends are also small, and they are rarely co-located with the significant sea ice drift speed trends in the nine models.

    4. Arctic basin-wide mean sea ice drift speed,near-surface wind speed, and surface ocean current speed

    4.1. Climatology of Arctic basin-wide mean sea ice drift speed

    Figure 7 shows that both the simulated magnitude and seasonal evolution of the Arctic basin-wide (the domain is defined by the SCICEX box, which is shown as the red box in Fig. 1a) mean sea ice drift speed vary among the nine models and are different from those in the observation. In NSIDC Pathfinder, the monthly Arctic sea ice drift speed climatology (1979-2014) varies from 2.36 cm s-1(in July) to 4.14 cm s-1(in October) across different months. The ensemble means of the sea ice drift speed from the nine models are overestimated in all the months. Individually, five of the nine models (BCC-CSM2-MR, BCC-ESM1, CAMSCSM1-0, FGOALS-f3-L, and FIO-ESM-2-0) overestimate the climatological sea ice drift speed for all the months. One model (FGOALS-g3) underestimates the sea ice drift speed for all the months. CAS-ESM2-0 overestimates the sea ice drift speed from July to September and underestimates the sea ice drift speed in the other months. NESM3 overestimates the sea ice drift speed from March to October, especially in July (overestimated by 3.38 cm s-1), and underestimates the sea ice drift speed in the other months. CIESM overestimates the sea ice drift speed from December to July and underestimates the sea ice drift speed in the other months.The climatological sea ice drift speed in CIESM is very low from August to October. The September sea ice drift speed is near zero.

    Fig. 6. (Continued).

    Fig. 6. Same as that in Fig. 5, but for autumn (SON).

    Fig. 7. Arctic basin-wide mean sea ice drift speed (cm s-1) in NSIDC Polar Pathfinder (black line) and nine CMIP6 models (BCC-CSM2-MR, BCC-ESM1, CAMS-CSM1-0, CAS-ESM2-0, CIESM, FGOALS-f3-L,FGOALS-g3, FIO-ESM-2-0, and NESM3) from China for the period of 1979-2014. The domain of the spatial mean is the same as the SCICEX domain, which is marked as the red box in Fig. 1a.

    The seasonality of the sea ice drift speed in the model ensemble mean is similar to that in the NSIDC Pathfinder.Individually, however, none of the models reach a minimum in July like the observation does: four reach a minimum in May, two in September, one in January, one in February, and one in August. The simulated sea ice drift speed from three of the models even peaks in July. Another three models peak in October (same with the observation), one in November, one in December, and one in January. The seasonal variability among the 12 months (defined as the standard deviation of the climatological sea ice drift speed in 12 months) is 0.53 cm s-1in the NSIDC Pathfinder. In the nine models, the sea ice drift speed seasonal variabilities in BCC-CSM2-MR (0.54 cm s-1), CAMS-CSM1-0(0.57 cm s-1), and FGOALS-g3 (0.50 cm s-1) are close to that in the NSIDC Pathfinder. The variabilities in BCC-ESM1(0.84 cm s-1), CAS-ESM2-0 (0.71 cm s-1), CIESM(2.21 cm s-1), FIO-ESM-2-0 (0.81 cm s-1), and NESM3(1.29 cm s-1) are obviously larger than that in the NSIDC Pathfinder. In particular, the sea ice drift speed seasonal variabilities in CIESM and NESM3 are about 2.4 and 4.2 times that in the NSIDC Pathfinder, respectively. The variability in FGOAL-f3-L (0.34 cm s-1) is smaller than that in the NSIDC Pathfinder.

    In order to understand which range of sea ice drift speed was the main cause of the bias in the Arctic mean sea ice drift speed in these nine models, we present the probability distribution of the Arctic sea ice drift in the models against that in the NSIDC Pathfinder (Figs. 8 and 9). Figure 8 shows that six models (BCC-CSM2-MR, BCC-ESM1,CAMS-CSM1-0, CIESM, FGOALS-f3-L, and FIO-ESM-2-0) overestimate the mean sea ice drift speed in MAM because they overestimate the frequency of the high-speed component and underestimate the frequency of the lowspeed component. The threshold between the overestimation and underestimation for these models ranges from 3.2 cm s-1(BCC-CSM2-MR) to 4.0 cm s-1(BCC-ESM1). The MAM sea ice drift speed distribution in NESM3 is close to the observation, with a slight overestimation of sea ice drift speed between 2.0 cm s-1and 4.9 cm s-1. Two models(CAS-ESM2-0 and FGOALS-g3) underestimate the mean sea ice drift speed because they overestimate the frequency of the low-speed component and underestimate the frequency of the high-speed component. The threshold between the overestimation and underestimation for CASESM2-0 and FGOALS-g3 is 2.6 cm s-1and 1.7 cm s-1,respectively.

    In SON, seven models (BCC-CSM2-MR, BCC-ESM1,CAMS-CSM1-0, CAS-ESM2-0, FGOALS-f3-L, FIO-ESM-2-0, and NESM3) overestimate the mean sea ice drift speed because they overestimate the frequency of the high-speed component and underestimate the frequency of the lowspeed component (Fig. 9). The threshold between the overestimation and underestimation for these models ranges from 3.0 cm s-1(CAS-ESM2-0) to 4.4 cm s-1(CAMS-CSM1-0).Two models (CIESM and FGOALS-g3) underestimate the mean sea ice drift speed because they overestimate the frequency of the low-speed component and underestimate the frequency of the high-speed component. The threshold between the overestimation and underestimation for CIESM and FGOALS-g3 is 2.4 cm s-1and 2.3 cm s-1, respectively.

    4.2. Relationship among the climatology of Arctic basinwide mean sea ice drift speed, surface ocean current speed, and near-surface wind speed

    The seasonal evolution of the Arctic basin-wide mean sea ice drift speed, surface ocean current speed, and near-surface wind speed are shown in Fig. 10. There is no clear relation between the seasonal variations of the sea ice drift speed and near-surface wind speed in the observation/reanalysis data. In contrast, the seasonal variation of the sea ice drift speed agrees with that of the surface ocean current speed. Also, the seasonal variation of the near-surface wind speed agrees with that of the surface ocean current speed.

    Fig. 8. The frequency distribution of the spring (MAM) Arctic sea ice drift speed in nine CMIP6 models (BCCCSM2-MR, BCC-ESM1, CAMS-CSM1-0, CAS-ESM2-0, CIESM, FGOALS-f3-L, FGOALS-g3, FIO-ESM-2-0,and NESM3) for the period of 1979-2014 against that in the NSIDC Polar Pathfinder (blue line). The domain of probability distribution calculation is the same as the SCICEX domain, which is marked as the red box in Fig. 1a.

    Fig. 9. Same as that in Fig. 8, but for autumn (SON).

    4.3. Trend of Arctic basin-wide mean sea ice drift speed

    Figures 11 and 12 show the time series and linear trends of the Artic basin-wide mean sea ice drift speed in spring and autumn, respectively, during 1979-2014. In the observation, the spring Arctic sea ice drift speed increases significantly with a rate of 0.64 cm s-1(10 yr)-1from 1979 to 2014 (Fig. 11). In the models, however, only FGOALS-g3 shows a significant increase in spring Arctic sea ice drift speed, and the trend is much weaker [0.18 cm s-1(10 yr)-1].NESM3 shows a weak and significant decrease [-0.15 cm s-1(10 yr)-1] in the Arctic sea ice drift speed. For the other seven models, no significant trend in the Arctic sea ice drift speed is detected. In autumn, the observational Arctic sea ice drift speed shows a significant increase with a rate of 0.89 cm s-1(10 yr)-1from 1979 to 2014 (Fig. 12), which is larger than that in spring. Of the models, also only FGOALS-g3 shows a significant Arctic sea ice drift speed increase, with a rate of 0.12 cm s-1(10 yr)-1. No significant Arctic sea ice drift speed trend is found for the other eight models. Zhang et al. (2021) also investigated the linear trends of the Arctic basin-wide mean sea ice drift speed based on the NSIDC Pathfinder product and shows larger trends in spring and autumn than those found in this study.This may be linked to the differences in spatial average domain and time period between our study and Zhang et al.(2021).

    Fig. 10. The seasonal cycle of Arctic basin-wide mean sea ice drift speed (cm s-1, red line), near-surface wind speed(m s-1, green line), and surface ocean current (cm s-1, blue line) in the observation/reanalysis (NSIDC Polar Pathfinder for sea ice drift speed, ERA-Interim for near-surface wind speed, and ORAS4 for upper layer ocean current) and in nine CMIP6 models from China for the period of 1979-2014. The domain of the spatial mean is the same as the SCICEX domain, which is marked as the red box in Fig. 1a.

    Fig. 11. Arctic mean spring (MAM) sea ice drift speed in NSIDC Polar Pathfinder and nine CMIP6 models (BCCCSM2-MR, BCC-ESM1, CAMS-CSM1-0, CAS-ESM2-0, CIESM, FGOALS-f3-L, FGOALS-g3, FIO-ESM-2-0,and NESM3) from China for the period of 1979-2014. The table in the upper left shows the corresponding linear trend of the sea ice drift speed [cm s-1 (10 yr)-1]. Asterisk indicates the confidence level of the trend reaches 95%.The domain of the spatial mean is the same as the SCICEX domain, which is marked as the red box in Fig. 1a.

    Fig. 12. Same as that in Fig. 11, but for autumn (SON).

    5. Summary and conclusions

    We have evaluated the Arctic sea ice drift and its relationship with the near-surface wind and surface ocean current in the historical runs of nine CMIP6 models from China.These models are BCC-CSM2-MR, BCC-ESM1, CAMSCSM1-0, CAS-ESM2-0, CIESM, FGOALS-f3-L,FGOALS-g3, FIO-ESM-2-0, and NESM3. Sea ice drift from the NSIDC Pathfinder product, near-surface wind from ERA-I, and surface ocean current from ORAS4 are used to evaluate the model results for the period of 1979-2014. Both the spatial patterns and the Arctic basinwide mean (averaged over the SCICEX domain) of the sea ice drift, near-surface wind, and surface ocean current are compared. The main conclusions are listed below:

    (1) All nine models capture the Beaufort Gyre (BG)and the Transpolar Drift Stream (TDS) in spring except for NESM3, in which there are three small anticyclonic vortices aligned together instead of a BG over the Amerasian basin. These anticyclonic vortices are likely current-driven.Four of the nine models show similar extent, location, and strength of BG and TDS as that in the observation in spring.In autumn, two of the nine models show a similar BG extent as that in the observation while five of the nine models show a larger BG extent and stronger BG magnitude than that in the observation.

    (2) For the relationship among the spatial patterns of sea ice drift, near-surface wind, and surface ocean current,seven of the nine models agree with the observation/reanalysis in the sense that the spring (MAM) sea ice drift pattern is in good agreement with the near-surface wind pattern. Six of the nine models also show that the sea ice drift pattern is in good agreement with the surface ocean current pattern. However, they are not in good agreement in the observation/reanalysis. In autumn (SON), the relationship among the spatial patterns of sea ice drift, near-surface wind, and surface ocean current is similar to that in spring for all nine models except CIESM, in which the sea ice drift pattern does not match well with near-surface wind in autumn.

    (3) The observation/reanalysis shows that the sea ice drift speed significantly increased over most of the Arctic in spring and autumn from 1979 to 2014. These sea ice drift speed changes are not wind-driven because no significant near-surface wind speed changes are associated with them.Besides, the observational sea ice drift speed changes are only weakly linked with the surface ocean current speed changes. Of the nine models, only FGOALS-f3-L,FGOALS-g3, and NESM3 partly capture the significant spring sea ice drift acceleration over the Arctic. Areas with the significant near-surface wind speed and surface ocean current speed changes are also small and rarely co-located with the sea ice drift speed changes in all nine models except for NESM3.

    (4) Compared with the observation, more than half of the models (five out of nine) overestimate the Arctic basinwide climatological sea ice drift speed in all 12 months during 1979-2014. One model (FGOALS-g3), in contrast, underestimates the sea ice drift speed in all 12 months. The simulated peaks and troughs of the sea ice drift speed seasonal cycle in most of the models do not agree with the observation.

    (5) For the trend of the Arctic basin-wide mean sea ice drift speed from 1979 to 2014, eight of the nine models do not capture the observational significant sea ice drift speed increase in both spring and autumn. Only FGOALS-g3 captures a weak, but significant sea ice drift speed increase in both spring and autumn.

    Since both the BG and TSD patterns of the nine models in the normal mean sea ice drift field (averaged over all the years from 1979-2014) are close to these patterns in the sea ice field averaged over the years with the AO index being less than -1.0 (Figs. S2 and S3 in the electronic supplementary material), the differences in BG and TSD depiction ability of the nine models are associated with their BG and TSD depiction ability in the negative phase of the AO.The missing widespread sea ice drift speed acceleration across the Arctic in the nine models indicates that improvements in the formulation and parameterization of sea ice dynamics are needed in these models, such as the sea ice rheology.

    The uncertainty in NSIDC Pathfinder sea ice drift speed is noteworthy. Based on daily sea ice drift speed, Docquier et al. (2017) showed that the Arctic basin-wide sea ice drift speed seasonal evolution in NSDIC Pathfinder is different from that in the Arctic buoy observation. According to the daily or 12-hourly Arctic buoy observations, sea ice drift speed peaks in September and troughs in March(Olason and Notz, 2014; Docquier et al., 2017; Tandon et al., 2018).

    The source of Arctic sea ice drift is different from the sources of near-surface wind and surface ocean current in our study. These differences may introduce uncertainty in the obtained relationship between the sea ice drift, near-surface wind, and surface ocean current. In order to investigate this uncertainty, we changed the near-surface wind data source from ERA-Interim to NCEP/NCAR Reanalysis(NCEP-R1) because it is one of the sources to calculate the NSIDC Pathfinder sea ice motion. We also changed the surface ocean current source from ORAS4 to Pan-Arctic Ice Ocean Modeling and Assimilation System (PIOMAS)because PIOMAS uses the NCEP-R1 as the atmospheric forcing, including the near-surface wind. After the near-surface and surface ocean current data sources were changed,the relationship between the Arctic sea ice drift and the near-surface wind remained the same (Figs. S4-S8 in the electronic supplementary material). The relationship between the Arctic sea ice drift speed and surface ocean current speed trend is much better after the sources of near-surface wind and surface ocean current were changed (Figs. S7 and S8 in the electronic supplementary material). Therefore, the uncertainty in the relationship between the Arctic sea ice drift and the surface ocean current is large.

    In the future, investigation of the air-ice and ice-ocean drag coefficient differences among the models could be helpful to explain the differences in sea ice drift-wind and sea ice drift-ocean current relationships among the models (Tandon et al., 2018). In addition, the temporal variations of the relationship between sea ice drift speed, near-surface wind,and surface ocean current in the models also need to be investigated in the future as the influence of wind and ocean current on the Arctic sea ice drift change has decadal variability (Spreen et al., 2011; Kwok et al., 2013).

    Acknowledgements.This research is supported by the National Key R&D Program of China (Grant No.2018YFA0605904) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 41701411).

    Electronic supplementary material:Supplementary material is available in the online version of this article at https://doi.org/10.1007/s00376-021-1153-4.

    猜你喜歡
    冷啟動(dòng)陰極燃料電池
    輕型汽油車(chē)實(shí)際行駛排放試驗(yàn)中冷啟動(dòng)排放的評(píng)估
    基于學(xué)習(xí)興趣的冷啟動(dòng)推薦模型
    客聯(lián)(2021年2期)2021-09-10 07:22:44
    燃料電池題解法分析
    場(chǎng)發(fā)射ZrO/W肖特基式場(chǎng)發(fā)射陰極研究進(jìn)展
    電子制作(2018年12期)2018-08-01 00:47:46
    試駕豐田氫燃料電池車(chē)“MIRAI未來(lái)”后的六個(gè)疑問(wèn)?
    車(chē)迷(2017年12期)2018-01-18 02:16:11
    燃料電池的維護(hù)與保養(yǎng)
    電子制作(2017年10期)2017-04-18 07:23:13
    IT-SOFCs陰極材料Sm0.8La0.2Ba1-xSrxFe2O5+δ的制備與表征
    微生物燃料電池空氣陰極的研究進(jìn)展
    軍事技能“冷啟動(dòng)”式訓(xùn)練理念初探
    非固體電解質(zhì)鉭電容器陰極表面的處理方法
    河南科技(2014年8期)2014-02-27 14:07:47
    日韩,欧美,国产一区二区三区| 九色成人免费人妻av| 国产精品女同一区二区软件| 三级国产精品片| 成年女人在线观看亚洲视频| 99视频精品全部免费 在线| 久久精品国产自在天天线| 国产精品爽爽va在线观看网站| 美女cb高潮喷水在线观看| 亚洲成人一二三区av| 久久婷婷青草| 欧美精品人与动牲交sv欧美| 最近最新中文字幕免费大全7| 久久精品久久精品一区二区三区| 国产精品蜜桃在线观看| 成人高潮视频无遮挡免费网站| 久久99精品国语久久久| 免费大片18禁| 一级av片app| 欧美老熟妇乱子伦牲交| 男女边摸边吃奶| xxx大片免费视频| av国产久精品久网站免费入址| 国产精品久久久久久久久免| 国产精品不卡视频一区二区| av在线观看视频网站免费| 亚洲国产欧美人成| 男人爽女人下面视频在线观看| 在线观看人妻少妇| 欧美日韩一区二区视频在线观看视频在线| 亚洲一级一片aⅴ在线观看| 六月丁香七月| 精品人妻一区二区三区麻豆| 日本黄大片高清| 我的女老师完整版在线观看| 2021少妇久久久久久久久久久| 高清在线视频一区二区三区| 亚洲色图av天堂| 日本午夜av视频| 日韩成人av中文字幕在线观看| 少妇熟女欧美另类| 亚洲性久久影院| 一区二区三区精品91| 欧美另类一区| 99热这里只有是精品在线观看| 人妻 亚洲 视频| 久久久久久九九精品二区国产| 国产成人精品婷婷| 国产中年淑女户外野战色| 人妻 亚洲 视频| 22中文网久久字幕| 噜噜噜噜噜久久久久久91| 国产精品99久久99久久久不卡 | 水蜜桃什么品种好| 大又大粗又爽又黄少妇毛片口| av.在线天堂| 日韩大片免费观看网站| 一级毛片我不卡| 亚洲精品一区蜜桃| 老司机影院毛片| 搡女人真爽免费视频火全软件| 高清不卡的av网站| 高清毛片免费看| 少妇高潮的动态图| av免费在线看不卡| 五月天丁香电影| 成人美女网站在线观看视频| 久久久久久九九精品二区国产| 丰满乱子伦码专区| 韩国高清视频一区二区三区| 大香蕉久久网| 日韩三级伦理在线观看| 亚洲国产色片| 97超碰精品成人国产| 日产精品乱码卡一卡2卡三| 精品一区在线观看国产| 建设人人有责人人尽责人人享有的 | 一级毛片aaaaaa免费看小| 你懂的网址亚洲精品在线观看| 国产成人91sexporn| 大片免费播放器 马上看| 欧美高清性xxxxhd video| 国产黄片美女视频| 在线观看三级黄色| av女优亚洲男人天堂| 男人添女人高潮全过程视频| 久久精品人妻少妇| 噜噜噜噜噜久久久久久91| 天堂俺去俺来也www色官网| 国产伦在线观看视频一区| 亚洲欧美精品专区久久| 精品少妇久久久久久888优播| 嘟嘟电影网在线观看| 亚洲欧美日韩东京热| 日韩伦理黄色片| 少妇猛男粗大的猛烈进出视频| 亚洲人成网站在线播| 久久久久久久久久久免费av| 自拍欧美九色日韩亚洲蝌蚪91 | 中文字幕久久专区| 久久国产乱子免费精品| 97热精品久久久久久| 精品亚洲成国产av| 天天躁夜夜躁狠狠久久av| 97在线视频观看| 狂野欧美白嫩少妇大欣赏| 蜜桃在线观看..| 91aial.com中文字幕在线观看| 日韩成人av中文字幕在线观看| 在线亚洲精品国产二区图片欧美 | 91精品一卡2卡3卡4卡| 只有这里有精品99| videossex国产| 老女人水多毛片| av在线蜜桃| 男女边吃奶边做爰视频| 特大巨黑吊av在线直播| 我的老师免费观看完整版| 免费久久久久久久精品成人欧美视频 | 97在线人人人人妻| 两个人的视频大全免费| 天美传媒精品一区二区| 精品亚洲成国产av| 久久99精品国语久久久| 最后的刺客免费高清国语| av在线老鸭窝| 国产免费一级a男人的天堂| 国国产精品蜜臀av免费| 欧美 日韩 精品 国产| 国产精品.久久久| 中国三级夫妇交换| 久久久久性生活片| 亚洲经典国产精华液单| 色哟哟·www| 三级国产精品片| 国产精品一区二区三区四区免费观看| 我的女老师完整版在线观看| 青春草国产在线视频| 亚洲在久久综合| 亚洲美女视频黄频| 婷婷色综合www| 美女中出高潮动态图| 男人舔奶头视频| 一级毛片久久久久久久久女| 涩涩av久久男人的天堂| 中文天堂在线官网| 日本爱情动作片www.在线观看| 国产爽快片一区二区三区| 最近中文字幕2019免费版| 午夜激情久久久久久久| 欧美日韩亚洲高清精品| 国产女主播在线喷水免费视频网站| 多毛熟女@视频| 国产亚洲一区二区精品| 成年美女黄网站色视频大全免费 | 99热网站在线观看| 99热6这里只有精品| 十八禁网站网址无遮挡 | 一区二区三区免费毛片| 国产色婷婷99| 精华霜和精华液先用哪个| 最后的刺客免费高清国语| 成人一区二区视频在线观看| 日韩伦理黄色片| av不卡在线播放| 18+在线观看网站| 观看av在线不卡| 18禁裸乳无遮挡免费网站照片| 国产淫语在线视频| 亚洲美女黄色视频免费看| 美女福利国产在线 | 日韩不卡一区二区三区视频在线| 人妻少妇偷人精品九色| 久久亚洲国产成人精品v| 免费播放大片免费观看视频在线观看| 水蜜桃什么品种好| 国产在线视频一区二区| 七月丁香在线播放| 91精品国产九色| 日本免费在线观看一区| 91在线精品国自产拍蜜月| 精品人妻一区二区三区麻豆| 国产一区二区三区av在线| 欧美xxxx黑人xx丫x性爽| 精品视频人人做人人爽| 在线观看一区二区三区| 99热全是精品| 免费观看av网站的网址| 最近中文字幕高清免费大全6| 极品少妇高潮喷水抽搐| 中文欧美无线码| 亚洲综合精品二区| 一个人看视频在线观看www免费| 高清日韩中文字幕在线| 性色av一级| 国产高清不卡午夜福利| 国产亚洲午夜精品一区二区久久| 欧美成人午夜免费资源| 一区二区三区精品91| 欧美日韩国产mv在线观看视频 | 久久99热这里只频精品6学生| 中文字幕人妻熟人妻熟丝袜美| 久久热精品热| 能在线免费看毛片的网站| 久热这里只有精品99| 久久女婷五月综合色啪小说| 舔av片在线| 乱码一卡2卡4卡精品| 久久精品人妻少妇| 2021少妇久久久久久久久久久| 久久av网站| 美女国产视频在线观看| 99热这里只有是精品在线观看| 美女脱内裤让男人舔精品视频| 国产一区亚洲一区在线观看| 国产91av在线免费观看| 亚洲精品,欧美精品| 欧美日韩国产mv在线观看视频 | 亚洲成人手机| 欧美人与善性xxx| 最近最新中文字幕免费大全7| 青春草国产在线视频| 国产有黄有色有爽视频| 嫩草影院新地址| 日韩电影二区| 久久久久久伊人网av| 国产精品99久久99久久久不卡 | 日日摸夜夜添夜夜添av毛片| 日本vs欧美在线观看视频 | 精品一品国产午夜福利视频| 久久久成人免费电影| 麻豆乱淫一区二区| 纵有疾风起免费观看全集完整版| 亚洲婷婷狠狠爱综合网| 国产成人freesex在线| 亚洲国产欧美在线一区| 丝瓜视频免费看黄片| 久久热精品热| 在现免费观看毛片| 人体艺术视频欧美日本| 国产av国产精品国产| 日韩欧美一区视频在线观看 | av卡一久久| 人人妻人人看人人澡| 高清日韩中文字幕在线| 蜜桃亚洲精品一区二区三区| 国产免费一级a男人的天堂| 久久国产亚洲av麻豆专区| 少妇的逼水好多| 亚洲国产精品专区欧美| 18禁动态无遮挡网站| 国内少妇人妻偷人精品xxx网站| 天天躁日日操中文字幕| 免费看光身美女| 高清av免费在线| 久久久久久人妻| 国产免费一级a男人的天堂| 美女福利国产在线 | 久久久国产一区二区| 纯流量卡能插随身wifi吗| 在线观看av片永久免费下载| 国产精品嫩草影院av在线观看| 国产欧美亚洲国产| 观看美女的网站| 大又大粗又爽又黄少妇毛片口| 亚洲欧洲国产日韩| 亚洲精品456在线播放app| 两个人的视频大全免费| 国产亚洲精品久久久com| 国产在线免费精品| 日韩成人av中文字幕在线观看| 精品一品国产午夜福利视频| 国产男人的电影天堂91| 国产一区有黄有色的免费视频| 观看av在线不卡| 51国产日韩欧美| 夜夜看夜夜爽夜夜摸| 亚洲,一卡二卡三卡| 80岁老熟妇乱子伦牲交| 国产亚洲91精品色在线| tube8黄色片| 少妇丰满av| 国产亚洲一区二区精品| 免费高清在线观看视频在线观看| 久久精品夜色国产| 国产成人精品久久久久久| 亚洲aⅴ乱码一区二区在线播放| 亚洲精品一二三| 午夜激情久久久久久久| 亚洲第一av免费看| 18禁裸乳无遮挡动漫免费视频| 欧美成人精品欧美一级黄| 亚洲精品久久久久久婷婷小说| 大香蕉97超碰在线| 国产熟女欧美一区二区| 欧美日韩国产mv在线观看视频 | 亚洲四区av| 国产精品.久久久| 国产综合精华液| 丝瓜视频免费看黄片| 精品人妻视频免费看| 日韩 亚洲 欧美在线| 日本免费在线观看一区| 夜夜骑夜夜射夜夜干| 一个人看的www免费观看视频| 午夜免费鲁丝| 久久久欧美国产精品| 国产成人91sexporn| 午夜精品国产一区二区电影| 美女主播在线视频| 国产69精品久久久久777片| 亚洲色图av天堂| 天美传媒精品一区二区| 99re6热这里在线精品视频| 日韩强制内射视频| 赤兔流量卡办理| 大码成人一级视频| 免费黄频网站在线观看国产| 亚洲av男天堂| 老师上课跳d突然被开到最大视频| 五月伊人婷婷丁香| 在线亚洲精品国产二区图片欧美 | 国产永久视频网站| 国产黄色视频一区二区在线观看| 交换朋友夫妻互换小说| 熟女人妻精品中文字幕| 亚洲av欧美aⅴ国产| 最近手机中文字幕大全| 免费观看在线日韩| 热99国产精品久久久久久7| 免费av不卡在线播放| 一区二区三区四区激情视频| 国产在线视频一区二区| 亚洲欧美日韩卡通动漫| 久久鲁丝午夜福利片| 偷拍熟女少妇极品色| 国产精品国产av在线观看| 麻豆国产97在线/欧美| 国产成人a区在线观看| 七月丁香在线播放| 国产高清三级在线| 亚洲精品色激情综合| 成年av动漫网址| 欧美日韩在线观看h| 久久精品国产亚洲网站| 亚洲真实伦在线观看| 国产成人aa在线观看| 国产免费福利视频在线观看| 一本一本综合久久| 1000部很黄的大片| 美女cb高潮喷水在线观看| 精品国产露脸久久av麻豆| 一区二区三区免费毛片| 一级毛片黄色毛片免费观看视频| 2021少妇久久久久久久久久久| 肉色欧美久久久久久久蜜桃| 国产精品熟女久久久久浪| 免费观看在线日韩| 国产淫片久久久久久久久| 高清黄色对白视频在线免费看 | 国产成人a区在线观看| 我的女老师完整版在线观看| 一级爰片在线观看| 精品午夜福利在线看| 九九爱精品视频在线观看| 日韩伦理黄色片| 午夜精品国产一区二区电影| 久久99热这里只有精品18| 国产在线一区二区三区精| 久久久久精品久久久久真实原创| 久久精品国产a三级三级三级| 少妇人妻 视频| 女的被弄到高潮叫床怎么办| 日韩不卡一区二区三区视频在线| 极品少妇高潮喷水抽搐| 亚洲精品色激情综合| 国产69精品久久久久777片| av.在线天堂| 国产精品人妻久久久影院| 777米奇影视久久| 国产精品国产三级国产av玫瑰| 日韩免费高清中文字幕av| 欧美激情极品国产一区二区三区 | 搡老乐熟女国产| 狠狠精品人妻久久久久久综合| 成人毛片a级毛片在线播放| 免费观看无遮挡的男女| 午夜视频国产福利| 欧美zozozo另类| 亚洲国产成人一精品久久久| 欧美三级亚洲精品| 美女xxoo啪啪120秒动态图| 观看免费一级毛片| 亚洲精品自拍成人| 国产精品久久久久久av不卡| 日韩电影二区| 亚洲美女视频黄频| 国产亚洲一区二区精品| 我的老师免费观看完整版| 国产成人a∨麻豆精品| 中国美白少妇内射xxxbb| 激情五月婷婷亚洲| av在线老鸭窝| 3wmmmm亚洲av在线观看| 亚洲欧美中文字幕日韩二区| 国产白丝娇喘喷水9色精品| 亚洲精品国产成人久久av| av在线老鸭窝| 又大又黄又爽视频免费| 亚洲精品成人av观看孕妇| 亚洲国产高清在线一区二区三| 国产高清有码在线观看视频| 精品一品国产午夜福利视频| 菩萨蛮人人尽说江南好唐韦庄| 欧美xxxx性猛交bbbb| 高清午夜精品一区二区三区| 国产精品熟女久久久久浪| av网站免费在线观看视频| 欧美精品亚洲一区二区| 国产午夜精品久久久久久一区二区三区| 嘟嘟电影网在线观看| 视频区图区小说| 久久精品国产a三级三级三级| av免费在线看不卡| 国产伦精品一区二区三区四那| 国产精品一区二区在线不卡| 亚洲久久久国产精品| 少妇裸体淫交视频免费看高清| 国产成人精品福利久久| 高清欧美精品videossex| 制服丝袜香蕉在线| 亚洲人与动物交配视频| 街头女战士在线观看网站| 晚上一个人看的免费电影| 少妇人妻一区二区三区视频| 久久精品国产亚洲av天美| 久久久久久伊人网av| 国产免费又黄又爽又色| 久久久精品94久久精品| 亚洲欧美日韩东京热| 精品久久久久久久末码| 身体一侧抽搐| 亚洲精品成人av观看孕妇| 国产 一区精品| 亚洲美女搞黄在线观看| 国产亚洲91精品色在线| 久久av网站| 在线观看免费高清a一片| 欧美区成人在线视频| 男人爽女人下面视频在线观看| 午夜福利在线在线| 女的被弄到高潮叫床怎么办| 老女人水多毛片| 一本色道久久久久久精品综合| 亚洲av成人精品一区久久| 国产男女内射视频| 国产伦理片在线播放av一区| 日日摸夜夜添夜夜爱| av福利片在线观看| 国产人妻一区二区三区在| 国产精品偷伦视频观看了| 麻豆精品久久久久久蜜桃| 少妇丰满av| 少妇精品久久久久久久| a级毛片免费高清观看在线播放| 国产毛片在线视频| 欧美成人a在线观看| 午夜福利在线观看免费完整高清在| a 毛片基地| 只有这里有精品99| 亚洲国产精品国产精品| 亚洲国产欧美人成| 免费大片黄手机在线观看| 97热精品久久久久久| 交换朋友夫妻互换小说| 美女视频免费永久观看网站| 丰满人妻一区二区三区视频av| 久久精品熟女亚洲av麻豆精品| 久久久久人妻精品一区果冻| 久久久久国产网址| 老司机影院成人| 婷婷色麻豆天堂久久| 蜜桃亚洲精品一区二区三区| 亚洲精品乱久久久久久| 久久亚洲国产成人精品v| 国产精品久久久久久av不卡| 日韩欧美 国产精品| 啦啦啦啦在线视频资源| 精品一区二区免费观看| av视频免费观看在线观看| 一区二区三区四区激情视频| 制服丝袜香蕉在线| 妹子高潮喷水视频| 日韩大片免费观看网站| 欧美老熟妇乱子伦牲交| 成人无遮挡网站| 日韩欧美 国产精品| 男人狂女人下面高潮的视频| 爱豆传媒免费全集在线观看| 亚洲性久久影院| 欧美日韩国产mv在线观看视频 | 建设人人有责人人尽责人人享有的 | 综合色丁香网| 肉色欧美久久久久久久蜜桃| 韩国高清视频一区二区三区| 一级毛片 在线播放| 午夜免费男女啪啪视频观看| 18禁在线无遮挡免费观看视频| 边亲边吃奶的免费视频| 中文字幕亚洲精品专区| 美女国产视频在线观看| 在线播放无遮挡| 久久午夜福利片| 日韩一本色道免费dvd| 午夜精品国产一区二区电影| 2018国产大陆天天弄谢| 黄色配什么色好看| 亚洲国产精品成人久久小说| 成人黄色视频免费在线看| 亚洲国产毛片av蜜桃av| 观看美女的网站| 免费观看av网站的网址| 亚洲精品中文字幕在线视频 | 成人特级av手机在线观看| 女性生殖器流出的白浆| 春色校园在线视频观看| av在线观看视频网站免费| 97在线人人人人妻| 国产高清国产精品国产三级 | 日韩 亚洲 欧美在线| 久久精品久久久久久噜噜老黄| 国产淫语在线视频| 久久国产亚洲av麻豆专区| 成人毛片a级毛片在线播放| 亚洲av不卡在线观看| 一边亲一边摸免费视频| 欧美激情极品国产一区二区三区 | 日本色播在线视频| 亚洲人成网站高清观看| 天堂8中文在线网| 精品国产露脸久久av麻豆| 99热这里只有是精品在线观看| av免费在线看不卡| 欧美人与善性xxx| 国内精品宾馆在线| 五月伊人婷婷丁香| 秋霞伦理黄片| 好男人视频免费观看在线| 午夜福利在线在线| 最近最新中文字幕大全电影3| 久久综合国产亚洲精品| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区黑人 | 亚洲最大成人中文| 国产精品久久久久久精品电影小说 | 下体分泌物呈黄色| 亚洲欧美成人综合另类久久久| 国产av一区二区精品久久 | 人人妻人人爽人人添夜夜欢视频 | 欧美精品一区二区大全| 久久久久久久国产电影| 黑人猛操日本美女一级片| 夫妻性生交免费视频一级片| 三级国产精品片| 免费不卡的大黄色大毛片视频在线观看| 伦精品一区二区三区| 日本欧美国产在线视频| 免费观看a级毛片全部| 国产淫语在线视频| 天天躁日日操中文字幕| 国产极品天堂在线| videos熟女内射| 亚洲国产精品一区三区| 寂寞人妻少妇视频99o| 国产精品久久久久久久久免| 精品久久国产蜜桃| 国产高清不卡午夜福利| 热re99久久精品国产66热6| 中文精品一卡2卡3卡4更新| 国产在线免费精品| 97精品久久久久久久久久精品| 九九久久精品国产亚洲av麻豆| 久久亚洲国产成人精品v| av不卡在线播放| 最黄视频免费看| 国产欧美日韩精品一区二区| 91精品伊人久久大香线蕉| 亚洲精品视频女| 久久久a久久爽久久v久久| 久久青草综合色| 日韩av不卡免费在线播放| 乱码一卡2卡4卡精品| 免费观看性生交大片5| 午夜福利网站1000一区二区三区| 高清毛片免费看| 欧美性感艳星| 边亲边吃奶的免费视频| 久久精品国产鲁丝片午夜精品| 一级毛片久久久久久久久女| 国产高潮美女av| 精品亚洲成a人片在线观看 | 九草在线视频观看| 丝袜脚勾引网站| 美女国产视频在线观看| 一个人看视频在线观看www免费| 熟女人妻精品中文字幕| 高清日韩中文字幕在线| 日韩,欧美,国产一区二区三区| 狂野欧美白嫩少妇大欣赏| 18禁裸乳无遮挡动漫免费视频| 免费大片黄手机在线观看| 一级黄片播放器| 777米奇影视久久| 人人妻人人澡人人爽人人夜夜| 欧美丝袜亚洲另类| 久久久久视频综合|