1 JUNE 2017 WANG AND CHEN 4103

Quasi-Biweekly Oscillation over the South China Sea in

Late Summer: Propagation Dynamics and Energetics

XU WANG
Center for Monsoon System Research, Institute of Atmospheric Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences,
and Department for Earth System Science, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China

GUANGHUA CHEN
Center for Monsoon System Research, Institute of Atmospheric Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences,
Beijing, China

(Manuscript received 21 July 2016, in final form 31 January 2017)

ABSTRACT

The propagation dynamics and energetics of the quasi-biweekly oscillation (QBWO) over the South China
Sea (SCS) in late summer [August–September (AS)] are investigated in this study. The QBWO originates
from east of the Philippines and has a northwestward propagation. After arriving to the east of the SCS, the
QBWO shifts to a westward migration and dominates over the SCS. The analyses of the vorticity budget
suggest that the meridional wind anomaly could control the spatial migration of the vorticity anomaly through
the b-effect term and further influences the movement of the convection anomaly. It implies that the me-
ridional wind is a crucial factor to drive the propagation of the QBWO. The energetics of the QBWO is
investigated to understand the maintenance of the QBWO, which indicates that the convection anomaly
could affect the circulation anomaly through the energy conversions to maintain the QBWO.

1. Introduction oscillation on the time scale of 15 days is closely connected

with the active/weak cycle of monsoon. During the active
The quasi-biweekly oscillation (QBWO), whose time
(weak) monsoon stage, it shows a distinct cyclonic (anti-
scale falls between the synoptic and the Madden–Julian
cyclonic) circulation over the Bay of Bengal, which is
oscillation (MJO; Madden and Julian 1971, 1972), is one
accompanied by cold (warm) temperature anomalies in
of the most important components of the tropical intra-
the lower troposphere and warm (cold) anomalies at the
seasonal oscillation (ISO). The QBWO signal was first
upper level, and increase (decrease) of the depth of the
found in the Indian summer monsoon (Keshavamurty
moist layer. This also implies that the active (weak)
1971, 1972), which was characterized by the meridional
monsoon circulation over India is intimately associated
wind with a 15–20-day period at the lower-tropospheric
with the enhanced (suppressed) convective activity over
level. From then on, a great deal of research investigated
the Bay of Bengal. As reviewed by Wang et al. (2009), the
the features, mechanisms, and influences of the QBWO
QBWO over the SCS is more active than that in the In-
over the Indian Ocean, East Asia (EA), the South China
dian summer monsoon region. Kikuchi and Wang (2009)
Sea (SCS), Indo-China, and the western North Pacific
also suggested that the QBWO is quite significant in bo-
(WNP) (e.g., Murakami and Frydrych 1974; Krishnamurti
real summer over the SCS. Besides, it was documented
and Bhalme 1976; Krishnamurti and Ardanuy 1980;
that the QBWO can influence the onset/break of the
Yasunari 1981; Chen and Chen 1993; Kiladis and Wheeler
South China Sea summer monsoon (e.g., Chen et al. 2000;
1995; Chen et al. 2000; Chan et al. 2002). The study by
Chan et al. 2002; Mao and Chan 2005). Some studies in-
Murakami (1976) is seminal to the QBWO exploration
dicated that the QBWO is related to the rainfall in the
in the summer monsoon over India. It is found that the
Yangtze and Huai River basin of China in boreal summer
(e.g., Yang et al. 2010; Liu et al. 2014). The QBWO can
Corresponding author e-mail: Dr. Guanghua Chen, cgh@mail. also impact the track of the tropical cyclone (e.g., Wu et al.
iap.ac.cn 2011; Liang et al. 2011).

DOI: 10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0533.1
Ó 2017 American Meteorological Society. For information regarding reuse of this content and general copyright information, consult the AMS Copyright
Policy (www.ametsoc.org/PUBSReuseLicenses).
4104 JOURNAL OF CLIMATE
In addition, the seasonal characteristics of the boreal
summer QBWO, the intraseasonal features were also
documented. Fukutomi and Yasunari (1999) investi-
gated the QBWO (10–25 days) over the EA and the
WNP in early summer (June–July). They found that
the 10–25-day convective oscillation is associated with
the large-scale circulation and the convection in the
Asian–Pacific region. However, they only discussed
qualitatively the interaction of the circulation and con-
vection, but their study lacked quantitative analysis. Chen
and Sui (2010) investigated the QBWO (10–20 days)
over the WNP during July–October in summer. They
found that the QBWO can be traced to westward-
moving equatorial wave disturbances that reach 1508E
and then propagate northwestward toward the south of
Japan. It exhibits an alternating cyclonic and anticy-
clonic wave train with a southeast–northwest orienta-
tion and a wavelength of about 3500 km. According to
the energetic analysis, they suggested that the waves
are maintained through baroclinic conversion north of
258N and diabatic latent heating in the tropics. Based
on the comparison of the zonal wavenumber, westward
phase speed, and group velocity, they implied that the
QBWO origin may be treated as an n 5 1 equatorial
Rossby (ER) wave. Yang et al. (2014) found that the
spatial distributions and propagating tracks of the
QBWO (12–20 days) over the EA are quite different in
early (10 June–20 July) and late (21 July–31 August)
summers, and they discussed the effects of the eastward
extension of the monsoon trough and the northward
movements of the westerly jet and the South Asia high
(SAH) on the behaviors of the QBWO from early to
late summer. Wang et al. (2016) also found different
characteristics of the QBWO over the SCS in early
[May–June (MJ)] and late [August–September (AS)]
summers. According to Wang et al. (2016), the QBWO
over the SCS exhibits a distinct local oscillation in MJ,
but propagates from east of the Philippines in AS. The
northwestward propagation in AS is similar to that in
Chen and Sui (2010). The propagation dynamics and
the maintenance mechanism of the QBWO are not
addressed well yet.
Based on the study of Wang et al. (2016), we further
explore the propagating dynamics and the maintenance
of the QBWO in late summer using the vorticity and
energy budget equations in this study. The paper is or-
ganized as follows. Section 2 introduces the data and
methodology used in this study. In section 3, the prop-
agation characteristics of the QBWO are described in
detail, and the propagation dynamics of the QBWO are
discussed via the vorticity budget. In section 4, ener-
getics of the QBWO is analyzed by the eddy available
potential and kinetic energy budgets to investigate the
VOLUME 30
maintenance of the QBWO. Finally, the conclusions and
discussion are given in section 6.
2. Data and methodology
The daily atmospheric variables are derived from the
reanalysis data from the National Centers for Environ-
mental Prediction–Department of Energy (NCEP–DOE)
Reanalysis 2 (NCEP2) (Kanamitsu et al. 2002). The
dataset spans from August to September (AS) for
1990–2009, and has a horizontal resolution of 2.58 3 2.58 at
12 pressure levels (1000–100 hPa). Daily outgoing long-
wave radiation (OLR) data from the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) satellites
(Liebmann and Smith 1996), with the same period and
grid resolution as the NCEP2 variables, are used as a
proxy of deep tropical convection in this study.
Lanczos filtering (Duchon 1979) is applied to extract
the quasi-biweekly (10–20 day) signals from all variables.
To purify the 10–20-day signals, the 20-yr (1990–2009)
liner trend and annual cycle are removed from the time
series before filtering. The composite technique and di-
agnostic analyses are used to investigate the 20-yr cli-
matology, the propagation dynamics, and the energetics
of the QBWO.
3. Propagation and its dynamics of the QBWO
a. Propagation of the QBWO
The evolution of the QBWO over the SCS in late
summer is described in this section by compositing OLR
and low-level circulation for the QBWO events to ex-
hibit the propagation feature. There are 46 typical
events selected according to the following two criteria:
1) in the region of 12.58–22.58N, 1108–1208E where the
QBWO variance is most significant, the negative
anomaly of standardized OLR (on day 0) in one QBWO
event must be ,21 standard deviation; and similarly,
2) the subsequent positive anomaly of standardized
OLR (on day 6) must be larger than one standard de-
viation. In this study, the criterion in the OLR anomaly
at day 26 was not imposed as in Wang et al. (2016). As a
result, the exclusion of the criterion can increase the
sample number for a significance test, but has little im-
pact on the presentation of major QBWO characteris-
tics. The same method as that in Wang et al. (2016) is
conducted to test the statistical significance for the
composite OLR and circulation fields.
Figure 1 presents successive composite maps of the
10–20-day OLR and 850-hPa circulation anomalies from
day 25 to day 6. On day 25 (Fig. 1a), a distinct anticy-
clonic circulation anomaly (AC) couples with a strong
1 JUNE 2017 WANG AND CHEN 4105

FIG. 1. (a)–(l) Spatial distributions of the composite 10–20-day OLR (colored) and 850-hPa wind (vector) anomalies from day 25 to
day 16 in the late summer. The interval for the OLR anomaly is 4 W m22. Only statistically significant (.99%) OLR and wind anomalies
are shown. The red dashed line [(17.58N, 1008E)–(17.58N, 117.58E)–(12.58N, 1408E)] plotted in (f) represents the migration path of
the QBWO.

positive OLR anomaly over the SCS, exhibiting a sig-
nificant suppression of the convection. Meanwhile, a
weaker cyclonic circulation anomaly (CC) is located
east of the Philippines, and a small negative OLR
anomaly around 1358E appears east of the CC. In the
subsequent days, both the AC and the positive OLR
anomaly over the SCS decay while propagating west-
ward, and finally disappear in the continent of China,
near 1058E on day 23 (Fig. 1c). However, the CC to
the east of the Philippines strengthens and migrates
northwestward, and the weak negative OLR anomaly
extends zonally. On day 23 (Fig. 1c), the enhanced CC
4106 JOURNAL OF CLIMATE
and the expansive negative OLR anomaly are almost
coupled with each other around the south of Taiwan.
Subsequently, the convective anomaly begins to in-
tensify, and matches well the CC to the east of the SCS
(17.58N, 117.58E) on day 22 (Fig. 1d). Later, the CC with
the convection anomaly centered develops and propa-
gates westward. On day 0 (Fig. 1f), the anomalously
strong cyclonic circulation and convection dominate
over the SCS. Moreover, note that following the CC’s
northwestward propagation, a new AC emerges gradu-
ally to its southeast in the equatorial region. The fol-
lowing evolution is quite similar to that from day 25 to
day 0 (Figs. 1a–f), but with an opposite sign (Figs. 1g–l).
To sum up, the low-level circulation anomalies exhibit
a propagation that moves from east of the Philippines
(around 158N, 1308E) to east of the SCS (around 17.58N,
117.58E), and then shifts to a westward propagation to the
SCS. The convection (OLR) embedded in the center of
anomalous circulation also displays a similar propagation
characteristic. Hence, it indicates that the QBWO over
the SCS originates from east of the Philippines, and has
a northwestward–westward propagation in late summer.
The propagation feature of QBWO over the SCS seems
somewhat similar to that in the western portion of the
WNP that has been investigated by Chen and Sui (2010).
However, comparison with the QBWO over the WNP
during July–October [Fig. 5 in Chen and Sui (2010)] in-
dicates that the circulation anomalies in this study do not
exhibit a distinct zonally elongated structural feature like
their counterparts as displayed in Chen and Sui (2010),
and moreover, the migration of the QBWO in the present
study does not have a uniform northwestward direction,
but shifts westward after reaching the south of Taiwan.
b. The vorticity dynamics of the QBWO
It is well known that, since the low-level positive
(negative) vorticity, namely, the cyclonic (anticyclonic)
circulation, can enhance (suppress) the development of
the convection, it is interesting to examine the propa-
gation and its dynamics of the vorticity oscillation.
Figure 2 displays the evolution of the low-level vorticity
anomaly along the cross section in alignment with the
migration direction of the QBWO as shown in Fig. 1f. It
is evident that a positive vorticity anomaly appears east
of the Philippines on day 25 and then propagates
northwestward with the increase in its magnitude. While
reaching to the east of the SCS (17.58N, 117.58E), the
anomaly is shifted westward along 17.58N. On day 0, the
anomaly reaches its peak over the SCS, and then decays
as it moves westward gradually. However, a negative
vorticity anomaly emerges east of the Philippines after
day 0, and has a similar evolution as the positive vorticity
anomaly. The propagation feature for the low-level
VOLUME 30
FIG. 2. The evolution of the composite 1000–850-hPa-averaged
10–20-day vorticity anomaly (shaded) in the cross section with
time. The interval for the vorticity anomaly is 1.0 3 1026 s21. The
statistically significant (.99%) vorticity anomalies are dotted in
the plot.
vorticity anomaly shown in Fig. 2 is almost consistent
with that of the convection (OLR) anomaly shown in
Fig. 1, indicating that the spatial migration of the con-
vection on the quasi-biweekly scale is closely related to
the oscillation for the low-level vorticity.
The propagation dynamics of the vorticity anomaly is
further analyzed by using the perturbation vorticity
budget to investigate what factors are responsible for the
propagation of the low-level eddy vorticity. The per-
turbation vorticity equation may be written as
 0  0
›z0 ›z ›f
5 (2Vh  =h z)0 1 2v 1 2y
›t ›p ›y
1 [2(z 1 f )D]0 1 T 0 1 R0 , (1)
where z 5 (›y/›x) 2 (›u/›y) and D 5 (›u/›x) 1 (›y/›y)
are the relative vorticity and divergence, respectively;
Vh 5 ui 1 yj is the horizontal wind; =h 5 i(›/›x) 1 j(›/›y)
is the horizontal gradient operator; f is the Coriolis
parameter; and other symbols follow conventional
definitions. In addition, the prime denotes the 10–20-day
anomaly. The term ›z0 /›t represents the local tendency of
the vorticity anomaly, (2Vh  =h z)0 denotes the anomaly
of the horizontal advection, [2v(›z/›p)]0 is the anomaly
of vertical advection, and [2y(›f /›y)]0 is the anomaly due
to the b effect. The terms of [2(z 1 f )D]0 and T 0 [i.e.,
expressed as [(›v/›y)(›u/›p) 2 (›v/›x)(›y/›p)]0 ] de-
scribe the anomalies associated with the stretching and
tilting effects, respectively. The last term R0 is the re-
sidual, which includes contributions from all processes
not expressed explicitly in Eq. (1), including boundary
1 JUNE 2017 WANG AND CHEN 4107

FIG. 3. Contours are the evolutions of the composite 1000–850-hPa-averaged (a) (2Vh  =h z)0 , (b) [2(z 1 f )D]0 ,
(c) [2y(›f /›y)]0 , and (d) y0 in the cross section with time. Intervals for (2Vh  =h z)0 , [2(z 1 f )D]0 , [2y(›f /›y)]0 , and
y0 are 2.0 3 10211 s22, 2.0 3 10211 s22, 1.0 3 10211 s22, and 0.3 m s21, respectively. The vorticity anomaly in
(a)–(d) is shaded as in Fig. 2.

friction, cumulus convection, and other subgrid-scale
transports.
The terms [2v(›z/›p)]0 and T 0 are negligible due to an
order of magnitude smaller than other terms at the low
level, and they just have relatively large magnitudes at
the upper level (as shown in Figs. 4d,e). The evolutions
of terms (2Vh  =h z)0 , [2(z 1 f )D]0 , and [2y(›f /›y)]0
along the cross section are shown in Figs. 3a–c. It is
clearly shown that the evolution related to the anomaly
of the horizontal advection (2Vh  =h z)0 is out of phase
with that of the vorticity anomaly (Fig. 3a), while that
related to the anomaly associated with the stretching
effect [2(z 1 f )D]0 is almost in phase with the vorticity
anomaly (Fig. 3b). For a sinusoidal-like disturbance, a
forcing that is in phase or out of phase with the fluctu-
ation contributes to exponential growth or decrease,
whereas a forcing that is in quadrature with them leads
to phase propagation (Lau and Lau 1992). Thus, the
phase relationship of the leading terms and vorticity
anomaly suggests that the anomalies of the vorticity ad-
vection (2Vh  =h z)0 and the stretching [2(z 1 f )D]0 just
contribute to the local suppression and enhancement of
the vorticity anomaly, respectively, instead of affecting the
propagation of vorticity anomaly along the cross section.
To further evaluate the contribution of (2Vh  =h z)0 ,
we separate this term to zonal [2u(›z/›x)]0 and meridi-
onal [2y(›z/›y)]0 components. Comparison between
[2u(›z/›x)]0 and [2y(›z/›y)]0 (Figs. 4a,b) suggests that
the effect of the local suppression on the low-level
vorticity anomaly in (2Vh  =h z)0 is mainly attributed
to the anomaly of the meridional vorticity transport
[2y(›z/›y)]0 , which implies that the meridional compo-
nent in the low-level circulation has a distinct influence on
the vorticity in the quasi-biweekly scale in late summer.
Regarding the contribution from the term [2(z 1 f )D]0 ,
it exhibits a low-level convergence (divergence) anomaly
4108 JOURNAL OF CLIMATE
in conjunction with a positive (negative) vorticity, in-
dicating that the divergence anomaly D0 could affect
the local vorticity anomaly through modulation related
to the term [2(z 1 f )D]0 . Similarly, (2Vh  =h z)0 and
[2(z 1 f )D]0 can hardly act as a contributor to the
spatial propagation of the low-level vorticity anomaly,
but enhance or suppress the local oscillation. In con-
trast, the term related to the b effect [2y(›f /›y)]0
(Fig. 3c) leads the vorticity anomaly by approximately
;3–4 days (about a quarter of a QBWO cycle). Since
VOLUME 30
FIG. 4. (a)–(c) As in Fig. 3, but for (a) [2u(›z/›x)]0 ,
(b) [2y(›f /›y)]0 , and (c) D0 contoured. The vertical
distributions of (d) [2v(›z/›p)]0 and (e) T 0 in the
cross section on day 0. Intervals for [2u(›z/›x)]0 ,
[2y(›z/›y)]0 , and D0 are (a) 2.0 3 10211 s22, (b) 2.0 3
10211 s22, and (c) 0.4 3 1026 s21. Those for [2v(›z/›p)]0
and T 0 in (d) and (e) are 1.0 3 10211 s22.
the subgrid-scale effects associated with the residual
term R0 theoretically influence the local eddy vorticity
as (2Vh  =h z)0 and [2(z 1 f )D]0 , it implies that the
term [2y(›f /›y)]0 is the only decisive forcing in con-
tributing to the westward propagation of vorticity
anomaly along the cross section. Furthermore, the term
[2y(›f /›y)]0 is mainly decided by 2y 0 considering that
the term ›f /›y almost keeps constant. It can be found
that the evolution of the meridional wind anomaly y 0 is
quite similar to that of [2y(›f /›y)]0 (Fig. 3d), but with
1 JUNE 2017 WANG AND CHEN 4109

opposite signs. As a result, the meridional wind

anomaly on the quasi-biweekly scale results into the
spatial oscillation of the b-effect term [2y(›f /›y)]0 , and
further induces the propagation of the vorticity
anomaly in the low level as shown in Fig. 2.
Based on the analysis of the eddy vorticity budget, it
can be found that the spatial migration of the low-level
QBWO vorticity anomaly is hardly contributed to by
the anomalies of the horizontal advection (2Vh  =h z)0
and the stretching [2(z 1 f )D]0 , and instead mainly
depends on the phase of the b-effect term [2y(›f /›y)]0 ,
which is modulated by the oscillation of the meridional
wind. Therefore, the meridional wind anomaly could
be regarded as a crucial dynamic factor in the propa-
gation of the convective anomaly that is closely asso-
ciated with the low-level vorticity oscillation on the
quasi-biweekly scale.

4. Energy budget of the QBWO

In the previous section, we found that the meridional
wind anomaly can affect the convection anomaly
through the low-level vorticity anomaly to drive the
propagation of QBWO. However, the role of the con-
vection anomaly in maintaining the QBWO is not yet
discussed in detail. To understand the maintenance, we
analyzed the energy budget of the QBWO to shed light
on the conversion between the eddy available potential
energy (EAPE) and the eddy kinetic energy (EKE).
Following Chen and Sui (2010), the budget equation of
EAPE (defined by A 5 RT 02 /2Sp P) is written as
›A R 0 0 RT 0 v0 R vection anomaly.
’2 Vh T  =h T 1 1 Q0 T 0 , (2)
›t Sp P P Cp Sp P 1
where Sp 5 (RT/Cp P) 2 (›T/›p) is the static stability, R
is the gas constant, Cp is the specific heat at constant
pressure, Q1 is the apparent heat source, and T and P
are the air temperature and pressure, respectively.
Other symbols are expressed as those in Eq. (1). The
variables in Eq. (2) with the overbar denote those av-
eraged over a QBWO cycle. The rate of EAPE change
over a cycle period has a much smaller magnitude in
contrast to the other terms and can be negligible. This
indicates that the three terms on the right-hand side
in Eq. (2) approximately balance one another. The term
2(R/Sp P)V0h T 0  =h T (PI) represents the rate of the
baroclinic conversion from mean available potential en-
ergy (MAPE) to EAPE. The term RT 0 v0 /P (2KP) is the
rate of the destruction of EAPE through conversion to
EKE. The last term R/(Cp Sp P)Q01 T 0 (PQ) describes the
generation of EAPE by diabatic effects. The PQ term
primarily originates from the release of latent heat due to
FIG. 5. Spatial distributions of the vertically integral (a) PI,
(b) 2KP, and (c) PQ from 1000 to 100 hPa. Intervals for them are
0.001 m2 s23. The domain inside the dashed line box is the SCS
(12.58–22.58N, 1108–1208E).
condensation, which is closely associated with the con-
Vertically integral distributions of the PI, 2KP, and
PQ terms from 1000 to 100 hPa are shown in Fig. 5,
which are expressed as hhPIii, hh2KPii, and hhPQii,
respectively. It can be found that the hhPIii has less
contribution in the SCS (Fig. 5a), indicating less con-
version from MAPE to EAPE in the SCS. However, the
conversion of EAPE to EKE through the rising (sink-
ing) motion of warm (cold) air expressed by the hh2KPii
exhibits a significant negative value in the SCS, ac-
counting for a major loss of EAPE over the SCS
(Fig. 5b). Inversely, the diabatic process hhPQii shows
an obviously positive value in the SCS, playing an im-
portant role in the generation of EAPE to supply the
loss of EAPE owing to the conversion from EAPE to
EKE (Fig. 5c). According to the vertical distributions of
the 2KP and PQ terms in the cross section (Fig. 6), it
suggests that both the generation and conversion of
EAPE are mainly located in the upper level of the SCS.
We further explore the conversion of EKE using the
EKE balance equation, which is written as
4110 JOURNAL OF CLIMATE
FIG. 6. Vertical structures of the (a) 2KP and (b) PQ in the cross
section. Intervals for them are 1.0 3 1023 m2 s23.
›K R converted to EKE through the (R/P)v0 T 0 term at the
5 2V0h (V0  =)Vh 2 v0 T 0 2 =  (V0 F0 )
›t P upper level over the SCS. Subsequently, the 2=  (V0 F0 )
2 V  =K 2 V0  =K 1 KR ,
where K 5 (u02 1 y 02 )/2 is the horizontal EKE, F is the
geopotential, and V 5 ui 1 yj 1 vk and = 5 i(›/›x) 1
j(›/›y) 1 k(›/›p) are the three-dimensional wind and
gradient operator, respectively. Other symbols in Eq. (3)
are identical to those in Eq. (2). The rate of change for
EKE is also nearly zero (›K/›t ’ 0) to the other terms,
and the all terms on the right-hand side in Eq. (3) can be
cancelled out by one another. The term 2V0  =K, which
represents the advection of EKE by the perturbation
flow, is almost negligible compared with the other
terms. The first two terms, 2V0h (V0  =)Vh (KI) and
2(R/P)v0 T 0 (KP), on the right-hand side stand for the
rate of conversions from the time-mean kinetic en-
ergy (MKE) and EAPE to EKE, acting as sources of
EKE. The third and fourth terms, 2=  (V0 F0 ) (KZ) and
2V  =K (KAm), denote the spatial redistribution of EKE
by the local convergence of eddy geopotential flux and the
advection of EKE, respectively. The last term (KR) de-
scribes the net dissipation rate of EKE by frictional and
other subgrid-scale effects.
As shown in Figs. 7a,b, both the hhKIii and hhKPii are
positive in the SCS. It can be seen that the term hhKPii is
the major contributor to the EKE generation, providing
VOLUME 30
more energy conversion than the barotropic conversion
hhKIii. It indicates that the EKE in the QBWO is mainly
supplied by the conversion of EAPE, which is quite similar
to the result in Chen and Sui (2010). As for the hhKZii
term, it displays a distinct destruction of EKE through the
EKE spatial redistribution (Fig. 7c). According to Chen
and Sui (2010), the term 2=  (V0 F0 ) (KZ) can be sepa-
rated into the terms 2V0h  =h F0 and (R/P)v0 T 0 (2KP),
and moreover the term (R/P)v0 T 0 (2KP) is dominant in
2=  (V0 F0 ) (KZ), which suggests that the term KP is al-
most offset by the term KZ over the SCS. In contrast,
the term hhKAmii seems to have no effect over the SCS
(Fig. 7d). It implies that all redistributions are nearly
accomplished by the geopotential flux instead of the
advection of EKE by the mean flow. The last term
hhKRii exhibits a dissipation of the EKE with negative
values in the SCS (Fig. 7e). In vertical, it can be found
that the generation of EKE from the conversion of
EAPE occurs at the upper level of the SCS (Fig. 8a),
and the EKE is redistributed from the upper level to
the low level in the SCS through the effect of KZ
(Fig. 8b). The KR dissipates the redistributed EKE in
the low level of the SCS (Fig. 8c).
In summary, the EAPE is generated from the diabatic
heating anomaly that is attributed to the release of
condensational heating. The generated EAPE is mostly
(3) term redistributes EKE converted from EAPE from the
upper level to the low level over the SCS, and the KR
term finally dissipates the redistributed EKE in the low
level. Because the circulation anomaly is closely related
to the EKE, it implies that the convection anomaly is
responsible for the maintenance of the QBWO circula-
tion through the conversion of the eddy energy.
5. Conclusions and discussion
In this study, the migration feature of the QBWO over
the SCS in late summer is examined, and the propagation
dynamics and energetics of the QBWO are diagnosed.
The QBWO exhibits a distinct spatial propagation in
convection and low-level circulation, which originate from
east of the Philippines, move northwestward to east of the
SCS, and then turn westward. In the QBWO, the low-
level circulation anomaly is dominated by the rotational
component. Through analyses of the individual terms in
the perturbation vorticity budget, it is found that only the
term associated with the b effect [2y(›f /›y)]0 can affect
the propagation of the vorticity anomaly, while other
terms are responsible for the enhancement or suppression
of a preexisting local disturbance. Considering that the
term ›f /›y almost keeps a constant positive value, the
1 JUNE 2017 WANG AND CHEN
FIG. 7. As in Fig. 5, but for (a) KI, (b) KP, (c) KZ, (d) KAm,
and (e) KR.
meridional wind anomaly, which it affects, plays an es-
sential role in controlling the spatial propagation of
QBWO circulation and convection over the SCS in
late summer.
Moreover, it is found that the large fraction of eddy
available potential energy generated by the latent heat
release due to condensation at the upper level over the
SCS can be converted to eddy kinetic energy, and then
be redistributed toward the low level through the local
4111
FIG. 8. As in Fig. 6, but for (a) KP, (b) KZ, and (c) KR.
convergence of eddy geopotential flux 2=  (V0 F0 ).
Since the eddy kinetic energy is a measure of the strength
of the circulation anomaly, the convection anomaly
could affect the low-level circulation anomaly through
the energy conversion in such a way as to maintain
the QBWO.
As reviewed in Wang et al. (2009), the northward
propagation from the equatorial western Pacific to the
SCS is a common and essential feature for the QBWO.
The off-equatorial westward-propagating mode of the
QBWO is perceived as a moist equatorial Rossby wave
modified by the basic state (Wang and Xu 1997; Chatterjee
and Goswami 2004) or a mixed Rossby–gravity wave
(Goswami and Mathew 1994; Mao and Chan 2005). In this
study, it is pointed out that the meridional wind anomaly
is a crucial factor in the propagation of the QBWO over
the SCS in late summer. However, the origin of the
meridional wind anomaly and its possible linkage with
4112 JOURNAL OF CLIMATE
tropical waves is still unclear, and thus needs further
studies for elucidation.
Acknowledgments. This study is supported financially
by the National Basic Research Program of China
(Grant 2014CB953902) and the National Natural Sci-
ence Foundation of China (Grant 41475074).
REFERENCES
Chan, J. C., W. Ai, and J. Xu, 2002: Mechanisms responsible for
the maintenance of the 1998 South China Sea summer
monsoon. J. Meteor. Soc. Japan, 80, 1103–1113, doi:10.2151/
jmsj.80.1103.
Chatterjee, P., and B. N. Goswami, 2004: Structure, genesis and
scale selection of the tropical quasi-biweekly mode. Quart.
J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 130, 1171–1194, doi:10.1256/qj.03.133.
Chen, G., and C.-H. Sui, 2010: Characteristics and origin of quasi-
biweekly oscillation over the western North Pacific during
boreal summer. J. Geophys. Res., 115, D14113, doi:10.1029/
2009JD013389.
Chen, T.-C., and J.-M. Chen, 1993: The 10–20-day mode of the 1979
Indian monsoon: Its relation with the time variation of mon-
soon rainfall. Mon. Wea. Rev., 121, 2465–2482, doi:10.1175/
1520-0493(1993)121,2465:TDMOTI.2.0.CO;2.
——, M.-C. Yen, and S.-P. Weng, 2000: Interaction between the
summer monsoons in East Asia and the South China Sea:
Intraseasonal monsoon modes. J. Atmos. Sci., 57, 1373–1392,
doi:10.1175/1520-0469(2000)057,1373:IBTSMI.2.0.CO;2.
Duchon, C. E., 1979: Lanczos filtering in one and two di-
mensions. J. Appl. Meteor., 18, 1016–1022, doi:10.1175/
1520-0450(1979)018,1016:LFIOAT.2.0.CO;2.
Fukutomi, Y., and T. Yasunari, 1999: 10-25 day intraseasonal
variations of convection and circulation over East Asia and
western North Pacific during early summer. J. Meteor. Soc.
Japan, 77, 753–769.
Goswami, P., and V. Mathew, 1994: A mechanism of scale se-
lection in tropical circulation at observed intraseasonal
frequencies. J. Atmos. Sci., 51, 3155–3166, doi:10.1175/
1520-0469(1994)051,3155:AMOSSI.2.0.CO;2.
Kanamitsu, M., W. Ebisuzaki, J. Woollen, S.-K. Yang, J. J. Hnilo,
M. Fiorino, and G. L. Potter, 2002: NCEP–DOE AMIP-II
Reanalysis (R-2). Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 83, 1631–1643,
doi:10.1175/BAMS-83-11-1631.
Keshavamurty, R. N., 1971: Power spectra of large-scale distur-
bances of Indian summer monsoon. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc.,
52, 796.
——, 1972: On the vertical tilt of monsoon disturbances. J. Atmos.
Sci., 29, 993–995, doi:10.1175/1520-0469(1972)029,0993:
OTVTOM.2.0.CO;2.
Kikuchi, K., and B. Wang, 2009: Global perspective of the quasi-
biweekly oscillation. J. Climate, 22, 1340–1359, doi:10.1175/
2008JCLI2368.1.
Kiladis, G. N., and M. Wheeler, 1995: Horizontal and vertical
structure of observed tropospheric equatorial Rossby waves.
J. Geophys. Res., 100, 22 981–22 997, doi:10.1029/95JD02415.
Krishnamurti, T. N., and H. Bhalme, 1976: Oscillations of a
monsoon system. Part I: Observational aspects. J. Atmos.
VOLUME 30
Sci., 33, 1937–1954, doi:10.1175/1520-0469(1976)033,1937:
OOAMSP.2.0.CO;2.
——, and P. Ardanuy, 1980: The 10 to 20-day westward propa-
gating mode and ‘‘Breaks in the Monsoons.’’ Tellus, 32, 15–26,
doi:10.1111/j.2153-3490.1980.tb01717.x.
Lau, K. H., and N. C. Lau, 1992: The energetics and propagation
dynamics of tropical summertime synoptic-scale distur-
bances. Mon. Wea. Rev., 120, 2523–2539, doi:10.1175/
1520-0493(1992)120,2523:TEAPDO.2.0.CO;2.
Liang, J., L. Wu, X. Ge, and C.-C. Wu, 2011: Monsoonal influence
on Typhoon Morakot (2009). Part II: Numerical study.
J. Atmos. Sci., 68, 2222–2235, doi:10.1175/2011JAS3731.1.
Liebmann, B., and C. A. Smith, 1996: Description of a complete
(interpolated) outgoing longwave radiation dataset. Bull.
Amer. Meteor. Soc., 77, 1275–1277.
Liu, H. B., J. Yang, D.-L. Zhang, and B. Wang, 2014: Roles of
synoptic to quasi-biweekly disturbances in generating the
summer 2003 heavy rainfall in east China. Mon. Wea. Rev.,
142, 886–904, doi:10.1175/MWR-D-13-00055.1.
Madden, R. A., and P. R. Julian, 1971: Detection of a 40–50 day
oscillation in the zonal wind in the tropical Pacific. J. Atmos.
Sci., 28, 702–708, doi:10.1175/1520-0469(1971)028,0702:
DOADOI.2.0.CO;2.
——, and ——, 1972: Description of global-scale circulation cells in
the tropics with a 40–50 day period. J. Atmos. Sci., 29, 1109–1123,
doi:10.1175/1520-0469(1972)029,1109:DOGSCC.2.0.CO;2.
Mao, J., and J. C. L. Chan, 2005: Intraseasonal variability of the
South China Sea summer monsoon. J. Climate, 18, 2388–2402,
doi:10.1175/JCLI3395.1.
Murakami, M., 1976: Analysis of summer monsoon fluctuations
over India. J. Meteor. Soc. Japan, 54, 15–31.
Murakami, T., and M. Frydrych, 1974: On the preferred period of
upper wind fluctuations during the summer monsoon. J. Atmos.
Sci., 31, 1549–1555, doi:10.1175/1520-0469(1974)031,1549:
OTPPOU.2.0.CO;2.
Wang, B., and X. Xu, 1997: Northern Hemisphere summer monsoon
singularities and climatological intraseasonal oscillation. J. Cli-
mate, 10, 1071–1085, doi:10.1175/1520-0442(1997)010,1071:
NHSMSA.2.0.CO;2.
——, F. Huang, Z. Wu, J. Yang, X. Fu, and K. Kikuchi, 2009: Multi-
scale climate variability of the South China Sea monsoon:
A review. Dyn. Atmos. Oceans, 47, 15–37, doi:10.1016/
j.dynatmoce.2008.09.004.
Wang, X., G. Chen, and R. Huang, 2016: Different characteristics
of the quasi-biweekly oscillation over the South China Sea in
two boreal summer stages. Theor. Appl. Climatol., 126, 1–13,
doi:10.1007/s00704-015-1550-7.
Wu, L., J. Liang, and C.-C. Wu, 2011: Monsoonal influence on
Typhoon Morakot (2009). Part I: Observational analysis.
J. Atmos. Sci., 68, 2208–2221, doi:10.1175/2011JAS3730.1.
Yang, J., B. Wang, and Q. Bao, 2010: Biweekly and 21–30-day varia-
tions of the subtropical summer monsoon rainfall over the lower
reach of the Yangtze River Basin. J. Climate, 23, 1146–1159,
doi:10.1175/2009JCLI3005.1.
——, Q. Bao, B. Wang, D.-Y. Gong, H. He, and M.-N. Gao, 2014:
Distinct quasi-biweekly features of the subtropical East Asian
monsoon during early and late summers. Climate Dyn., 42, 1469–
1486, doi:10.1007/s00382-013-1728-6.
Yasunari, T., 1981: Structure of an Indian summer monsoon system
with around 40-day period. J. Meteor. Soc. Japan, 59, 336–354.