• <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
    免费搜索国产男女视频| 精品欧美一区二区三区在线| 成人国语在线视频| 高清在线国产一区| 9色porny在线观看| 麻豆一二三区av精品| 两个人看的免费小视频| 热re99久久国产66热| 色婷婷久久久亚洲欧美| 黄色 视频免费看| 亚洲五月色婷婷综合| 97人妻天天添夜夜摸| 波多野结衣av一区二区av| 国产黄a三级三级三级人| 亚洲精华国产精华精| 亚洲第一欧美日韩一区二区三区| www日本在线高清视频| av中文乱码字幕在线| 岛国视频午夜一区免费看| 麻豆av在线久日| 女人被狂操c到高潮| 国产亚洲精品av在线| 老司机靠b影院| 99精品欧美一区二区三区四区| 一边摸一边抽搐一进一小说| 日本在线视频免费播放| 国产精品99久久99久久久不卡| 中文字幕人成人乱码亚洲影| av网站免费在线观看视频| 欧美中文日本在线观看视频| 日韩精品中文字幕看吧| 日韩欧美一区二区三区在线观看| 久久久久九九精品影院| 亚洲情色 制服丝袜| 少妇 在线观看| 精品人妻在线不人妻| 搡老妇女老女人老熟妇| 免费久久久久久久精品成人欧美视频| 国产精品亚洲一级av第二区| 99热只有精品国产| 成年人黄色毛片网站| 久久午夜综合久久蜜桃| 亚洲国产欧美日韩在线播放| 国产欧美日韩精品亚洲av| 青草久久国产| 丁香六月欧美| 精品电影一区二区在线| 极品教师在线免费播放| 老司机午夜十八禁免费视频| 国产高清有码在线观看视频 | 久久久久国产精品人妻aⅴ院| 欧美日本亚洲视频在线播放| 黑丝袜美女国产一区| 在线观看日韩欧美| netflix在线观看网站| 日韩精品青青久久久久久| 国产午夜精品久久久久久| 69精品国产乱码久久久| 国产亚洲精品av在线| 涩涩av久久男人的天堂| 啪啪无遮挡十八禁网站| 最近最新中文字幕大全电影3 | 精品电影一区二区在线| 亚洲狠狠婷婷综合久久图片| 久久草成人影院| 欧美 亚洲 国产 日韩一| 色在线成人网| 久久久久久久久久久久大奶| 国产精品一区二区免费欧美| 18禁观看日本| 日本免费a在线| 可以免费在线观看a视频的电影网站| 午夜福利影视在线免费观看| 国产xxxxx性猛交| 女警被强在线播放| 国产亚洲欧美精品永久| 亚洲情色 制服丝袜| 国产成+人综合+亚洲专区| ponron亚洲| 午夜免费观看网址| 精品久久久久久久毛片微露脸| 久9热在线精品视频| 精品第一国产精品| 欧美不卡视频在线免费观看 | 亚洲国产欧美网| 亚洲精品国产区一区二| 久久精品国产清高在天天线| 叶爱在线成人免费视频播放| 69精品国产乱码久久久| 国产精品 欧美亚洲| 亚洲中文日韩欧美视频| 欧美日韩精品网址| 亚洲专区中文字幕在线| av天堂在线播放| 91麻豆精品激情在线观看国产| 久久中文字幕一级| 好男人在线观看高清免费视频 | 中文字幕最新亚洲高清| 香蕉久久夜色| 999精品在线视频| 黄色女人牲交| 亚洲九九香蕉| 日本一区二区免费在线视频| 国产精品永久免费网站| 欧美乱色亚洲激情| 天天躁夜夜躁狠狠躁躁| 精品久久久久久久毛片微露脸| 欧美色欧美亚洲另类二区 | 免费看十八禁软件| 国产精品一区二区免费欧美| 亚洲精品在线观看二区| 亚洲黑人精品在线| 九色国产91popny在线| 亚洲精品中文字幕在线视频| 久久中文字幕人妻熟女| 中文字幕最新亚洲高清| 午夜精品国产一区二区电影| 精品免费久久久久久久清纯| 久久影院123| 一区二区三区高清视频在线| 91av网站免费观看| 欧美中文综合在线视频| 日韩中文字幕欧美一区二区| 99在线人妻在线中文字幕| 三级毛片av免费| 久久精品国产综合久久久| 国产在线观看jvid| 亚洲五月婷婷丁香| 女人爽到高潮嗷嗷叫在线视频| 亚洲第一av免费看| 国产色视频综合| 一级毛片高清免费大全| 一区二区日韩欧美中文字幕| 可以在线观看的亚洲视频| 精品久久久精品久久久| 国产私拍福利视频在线观看| 三级毛片av免费| 不卡av一区二区三区| 一区二区日韩欧美中文字幕| 一进一出抽搐动态| 老司机在亚洲福利影院| 美女高潮到喷水免费观看| 桃色一区二区三区在线观看| 夜夜看夜夜爽夜夜摸| 亚洲精品粉嫩美女一区| www国产在线视频色| 久热爱精品视频在线9| 亚洲精品美女久久久久99蜜臀| bbb黄色大片| 中文字幕精品免费在线观看视频| 黄片小视频在线播放| 欧美日韩福利视频一区二区| 亚洲av五月六月丁香网| 国产精品九九99| 国产精品亚洲av一区麻豆| 97人妻天天添夜夜摸| 亚洲熟妇中文字幕五十中出| 中文字幕色久视频| 亚洲成人久久性| 久久中文字幕一级| 久久久久精品国产欧美久久久| 身体一侧抽搐| 亚洲一码二码三码区别大吗| 高潮久久久久久久久久久不卡| 国产av在哪里看| 夜夜爽天天搞| 夜夜躁狠狠躁天天躁| 国产男靠女视频免费网站| a级毛片在线看网站| 一级毛片女人18水好多| 国产不卡一卡二| 亚洲成av人片免费观看| 久久久久国产精品人妻aⅴ院| 亚洲,欧美精品.| 很黄的视频免费| 老熟妇乱子伦视频在线观看| 岛国视频午夜一区免费看| 极品人妻少妇av视频| 九色亚洲精品在线播放| 亚洲性夜色夜夜综合| 日韩高清综合在线| 一级毛片精品| 精品人妻在线不人妻| 在线观看免费午夜福利视频| 黄色成人免费大全| 久久人妻福利社区极品人妻图片| 淫妇啪啪啪对白视频| 涩涩av久久男人的天堂| 欧美人与性动交α欧美精品济南到| 午夜福利影视在线免费观看| 久久精品影院6| 国产单亲对白刺激| 精品国产超薄肉色丝袜足j| 亚洲av日韩精品久久久久久密| 校园春色视频在线观看| 天天躁夜夜躁狠狠躁躁| 男人的好看免费观看在线视频 | 亚洲天堂国产精品一区在线| 亚洲国产精品999在线| 日韩大码丰满熟妇| 日韩精品中文字幕看吧| 亚洲狠狠婷婷综合久久图片| 黄色a级毛片大全视频| 91成人精品电影| 一边摸一边抽搐一进一小说| 又黄又粗又硬又大视频| 亚洲中文av在线| 熟女少妇亚洲综合色aaa.| 欧美亚洲日本最大视频资源| 中亚洲国语对白在线视频| 一级毛片高清免费大全| 婷婷六月久久综合丁香| 操美女的视频在线观看| 欧美亚洲日本最大视频资源| 1024视频免费在线观看| 超碰成人久久| 欧美日韩中文字幕国产精品一区二区三区 | 亚洲成国产人片在线观看| 精品不卡国产一区二区三区| 午夜亚洲福利在线播放| 久久 成人 亚洲| 两个人免费观看高清视频| 国产国语露脸激情在线看| 国产精品99久久99久久久不卡| 欧美日韩中文字幕国产精品一区二区三区 | 久久久久国产精品人妻aⅴ院| АⅤ资源中文在线天堂| 黄色丝袜av网址大全| 神马国产精品三级电影在线观看 | 少妇裸体淫交视频免费看高清 | 久久久国产成人免费| 一边摸一边抽搐一进一出视频| 国产黄a三级三级三级人| 国产精品久久电影中文字幕| 亚洲成人精品中文字幕电影| 一级作爱视频免费观看| 少妇 在线观看| 叶爱在线成人免费视频播放| 久久 成人 亚洲| 少妇被粗大的猛进出69影院| 久久久久久亚洲精品国产蜜桃av| 黄色 视频免费看| 一个人观看的视频www高清免费观看 | 久久人人97超碰香蕉20202| 亚洲国产欧美一区二区综合| 一本大道久久a久久精品| 国产精品一区二区三区四区久久 | 亚洲欧美日韩高清在线视频| 在线永久观看黄色视频| 亚洲成国产人片在线观看| 免费在线观看影片大全网站| 十八禁人妻一区二区| 又黄又粗又硬又大视频| 国产精品精品国产色婷婷| 精品久久久久久久久久免费视频| 一区二区日韩欧美中文字幕| 精品日产1卡2卡| 精品电影一区二区在线| 真人一进一出gif抽搐免费| 欧美日韩瑟瑟在线播放| 久久中文字幕人妻熟女| 国产成人精品久久二区二区免费| 91精品三级在线观看| 国产激情久久老熟女| 99久久久亚洲精品蜜臀av| videosex国产| 国产97色在线日韩免费| 亚洲av日韩精品久久久久久密| 麻豆av在线久日| 久99久视频精品免费| www日本在线高清视频| 欧美黄色片欧美黄色片| 亚洲一区高清亚洲精品| 精品不卡国产一区二区三区| 亚洲熟妇中文字幕五十中出| 女人精品久久久久毛片| 午夜激情av网站| 亚洲,欧美精品.| 久久这里只有精品19| 亚洲欧美精品综合一区二区三区| 99热只有精品国产| av超薄肉色丝袜交足视频| 亚洲欧洲精品一区二区精品久久久| 国产高清视频在线播放一区| 90打野战视频偷拍视频| 成年女人毛片免费观看观看9| 老司机在亚洲福利影院| 天堂动漫精品| 久久久精品国产亚洲av高清涩受| 搞女人的毛片| 国产91精品成人一区二区三区| 在线观看日韩欧美| 午夜福利影视在线免费观看| 久热这里只有精品99| 久久九九热精品免费| 真人做人爱边吃奶动态| 亚洲第一av免费看| 日韩高清综合在线| 一级毛片高清免费大全| 国产xxxxx性猛交| 久久九九热精品免费| 亚洲国产日韩欧美精品在线观看 | 在线观看66精品国产| а√天堂www在线а√下载| 一区二区三区国产精品乱码| 国产黄a三级三级三级人| 成人18禁高潮啪啪吃奶动态图| 男女下面进入的视频免费午夜 | 国产人伦9x9x在线观看| 国产免费av片在线观看野外av| 国产精品亚洲av一区麻豆| 日韩精品青青久久久久久| 久久久国产成人免费| 成人特级黄色片久久久久久久| 免费人成视频x8x8入口观看| 岛国在线观看网站| 日本a在线网址| 黑人操中国人逼视频| 国产亚洲欧美在线一区二区| 一级毛片高清免费大全| videosex国产| 精品国产国语对白av| 国产亚洲欧美在线一区二区| 免费在线观看日本一区| 天堂√8在线中文| 级片在线观看| 国产人伦9x9x在线观看| 国产亚洲av高清不卡| 天天添夜夜摸| 一级作爱视频免费观看| 丁香六月欧美| 午夜影院日韩av| 一级,二级,三级黄色视频| 国产99久久九九免费精品| 国产野战对白在线观看| a在线观看视频网站| 男男h啪啪无遮挡| 欧美黑人精品巨大| 操出白浆在线播放| 国产精品国产高清国产av| 长腿黑丝高跟| 可以免费在线观看a视频的电影网站| 国产亚洲精品久久久久久毛片| 精品久久久久久久毛片微露脸| 色尼玛亚洲综合影院| 日韩精品青青久久久久久| 这个男人来自地球电影免费观看| 99久久99久久久精品蜜桃| 亚洲第一青青草原| 国产日韩一区二区三区精品不卡| 人人妻人人爽人人添夜夜欢视频| 淫妇啪啪啪对白视频| 欧美黄色片欧美黄色片| 人妻丰满熟妇av一区二区三区| 久久精品国产清高在天天线| 伦理电影免费视频| 亚洲av美国av| 亚洲 欧美一区二区三区| 久久精品影院6| 夜夜躁狠狠躁天天躁| 日本精品一区二区三区蜜桃| 久久青草综合色| 久久亚洲精品不卡| 免费在线观看亚洲国产| 欧美+亚洲+日韩+国产| 欧美色视频一区免费| 在线十欧美十亚洲十日本专区| 日韩三级视频一区二区三区| 91精品国产国语对白视频| 欧美黄色片欧美黄色片| 精品国产乱子伦一区二区三区| 黄片小视频在线播放| 91大片在线观看| 国产私拍福利视频在线观看| 久久久久久久久免费视频了| 99精品欧美一区二区三区四区| 欧美久久黑人一区二区| 国产成年人精品一区二区| 国产精品一区二区免费欧美| АⅤ资源中文在线天堂| 精品久久久久久久人妻蜜臀av | 国产麻豆成人av免费视频| ponron亚洲| 亚洲人成电影免费在线| 此物有八面人人有两片| e午夜精品久久久久久久| 午夜免费成人在线视频| 国产单亲对白刺激| 久久狼人影院| 欧美大码av| 深夜精品福利| 真人做人爱边吃奶动态| 久久中文字幕人妻熟女| 亚洲一区中文字幕在线| 麻豆av在线久日| 亚洲成人免费电影在线观看| 精品欧美国产一区二区三| 999久久久精品免费观看国产| 成年人黄色毛片网站| 99久久久亚洲精品蜜臀av| 可以在线观看的亚洲视频| 嫩草影视91久久| 欧美色欧美亚洲另类二区 | svipshipincom国产片| 国产欧美日韩一区二区三| 欧美大码av| 日本精品一区二区三区蜜桃| 一区二区三区国产精品乱码| 午夜亚洲福利在线播放| 国产精品1区2区在线观看.| 这个男人来自地球电影免费观看| 999精品在线视频| 国产欧美日韩综合在线一区二区| 免费看a级黄色片| 老司机午夜福利在线观看视频| 欧美在线黄色| 级片在线观看| 变态另类丝袜制服| 精品卡一卡二卡四卡免费| 中文字幕另类日韩欧美亚洲嫩草| 老熟妇乱子伦视频在线观看| 国产精华一区二区三区| 黄色 视频免费看| 午夜老司机福利片| 美女免费视频网站| 高清在线国产一区| 天堂√8在线中文| 亚洲中文日韩欧美视频| 亚洲七黄色美女视频| 国产精品98久久久久久宅男小说| 亚洲成av人片免费观看| 好男人电影高清在线观看| 夜夜夜夜夜久久久久| 日本欧美视频一区| 欧美大码av| 变态另类丝袜制服| 国产成+人综合+亚洲专区| 99国产精品一区二区蜜桃av| 亚洲成人免费电影在线观看| 国产麻豆成人av免费视频| 无遮挡黄片免费观看| 免费久久久久久久精品成人欧美视频| 国产又爽黄色视频| 欧美黑人欧美精品刺激| 一级毛片精品| 18禁美女被吸乳视频| 亚洲av五月六月丁香网| 亚洲五月婷婷丁香| 一区二区三区高清视频在线| 首页视频小说图片口味搜索| 日韩欧美一区视频在线观看| 欧美一级a爱片免费观看看 | 国产一区二区三区综合在线观看| 91九色精品人成在线观看| 99国产精品一区二区蜜桃av| 动漫黄色视频在线观看| 18禁黄网站禁片午夜丰满| 天天躁狠狠躁夜夜躁狠狠躁| 日本在线视频免费播放| 免费高清视频大片| 热re99久久国产66热| а√天堂www在线а√下载| 精品少妇一区二区三区视频日本电影| 一区在线观看完整版| 久久久久亚洲av毛片大全| 亚洲第一欧美日韩一区二区三区| 久久中文看片网| 国产成人免费无遮挡视频| 丝袜美腿诱惑在线| 激情在线观看视频在线高清| 欧美成狂野欧美在线观看| 伊人久久大香线蕉亚洲五| 久久精品国产99精品国产亚洲性色 | 男女之事视频高清在线观看| 中文亚洲av片在线观看爽| 成年人黄色毛片网站| 亚洲伊人色综图| 精品久久久久久成人av| 亚洲av美国av| 女人爽到高潮嗷嗷叫在线视频| 一级片免费观看大全| 国产成人欧美| 久久久国产成人精品二区| 国产av一区二区精品久久| 国内精品久久久久精免费| 极品教师在线免费播放| 国产精品免费视频内射| 久久久国产成人免费| 久久久国产欧美日韩av| 成人18禁在线播放| 长腿黑丝高跟| 日韩国内少妇激情av| 一本久久中文字幕| 极品教师在线免费播放| 777久久人妻少妇嫩草av网站| 久久久久国内视频| 午夜精品国产一区二区电影| 亚洲第一欧美日韩一区二区三区| 亚洲男人天堂网一区| 精品卡一卡二卡四卡免费| 啪啪无遮挡十八禁网站| 老汉色∧v一级毛片| 亚洲成a人片在线一区二区| 两个人免费观看高清视频| 日日夜夜操网爽| 久久人妻熟女aⅴ| 国产亚洲精品久久久久久毛片| 热99re8久久精品国产| 国产不卡一卡二| 日韩大尺度精品在线看网址 | 亚洲人成网站在线播放欧美日韩| 女警被强在线播放| av欧美777| 免费在线观看日本一区| 亚洲精品中文字幕一二三四区| 动漫黄色视频在线观看| 十分钟在线观看高清视频www| 国产蜜桃级精品一区二区三区| 啦啦啦韩国在线观看视频| 黄频高清免费视频| 久久香蕉精品热| 精品熟女少妇八av免费久了| 巨乳人妻的诱惑在线观看| 黄色a级毛片大全视频| 少妇裸体淫交视频免费看高清 | 日韩欧美国产在线观看| АⅤ资源中文在线天堂| 亚洲国产精品合色在线| tocl精华| 精品国产一区二区三区四区第35| 黄色a级毛片大全视频| 国产伦人伦偷精品视频| 亚洲精品中文字幕在线视频| 亚洲欧美精品综合久久99| 国产精品一区二区三区四区久久 | 日本黄色视频三级网站网址| 两人在一起打扑克的视频| 亚洲视频免费观看视频| 搡老熟女国产l中国老女人| 又大又爽又粗| 日本五十路高清| 国产人伦9x9x在线观看| 俄罗斯特黄特色一大片| 午夜两性在线视频| aaaaa片日本免费| 久久天堂一区二区三区四区| 咕卡用的链子| 国产亚洲av嫩草精品影院| 日韩成人在线观看一区二区三区| 久久国产精品人妻蜜桃| 性色av乱码一区二区三区2| 色哟哟哟哟哟哟| 精品日产1卡2卡| 欧美激情极品国产一区二区三区| 成年版毛片免费区| 可以在线观看的亚洲视频| 久热这里只有精品99| 在线国产一区二区在线| 18美女黄网站色大片免费观看| 乱人伦中国视频| 最新美女视频免费是黄的| 日韩欧美免费精品| 激情视频va一区二区三区| 亚洲成国产人片在线观看| 免费高清视频大片| 欧美不卡视频在线免费观看 | 精品欧美国产一区二区三| 国产真人三级小视频在线观看| 成人欧美大片| 一级,二级,三级黄色视频| 日本五十路高清| 人人澡人人妻人| 性色av乱码一区二区三区2| 亚洲成人久久性| 国产激情久久老熟女| 亚洲av电影在线进入| 成人特级黄色片久久久久久久| 久久精品国产99精品国产亚洲性色 | 给我免费播放毛片高清在线观看| 美女免费视频网站| 91精品国产国语对白视频| 这个男人来自地球电影免费观看| 精品久久久久久,| 亚洲欧美日韩高清在线视频| 欧美在线一区亚洲| 亚洲伊人色综图| 久久久久久久久免费视频了| 大型av网站在线播放| 久久人人97超碰香蕉20202| 国产精品一区二区在线不卡| 午夜福利免费观看在线| 亚洲午夜精品一区,二区,三区| 禁无遮挡网站| 乱人伦中国视频| 精品日产1卡2卡| 欧美黑人欧美精品刺激| 韩国av一区二区三区四区| 中亚洲国语对白在线视频| 国产野战对白在线观看| 啦啦啦韩国在线观看视频| 久久精品91无色码中文字幕| 久久人人精品亚洲av| 国产精品电影一区二区三区| 在线观看午夜福利视频| 色在线成人网| 亚洲精品av麻豆狂野| 久久精品成人免费网站| 欧美av亚洲av综合av国产av| 精品国内亚洲2022精品成人| 18美女黄网站色大片免费观看| 亚洲国产精品999在线| 亚洲色图综合在线观看| 这个男人来自地球电影免费观看| 国产成人系列免费观看| 精品高清国产在线一区|