Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 73 references

Lab experiments of rotating turbulence with zonal jets show a Richardson-to-diffusive transition at the transitional scale L_β, with eddy diffusivity scaling more weakly on energy dissipation than theory predicts.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

T0 review · grok-4.5

2026-07-14 13:22 UTC pith:AEA6IJVI

load-bearing objection First lab pair-dispersion data in true zonostrophic turbulence; the Richardson-to-diffusion transition at L_eta is solid, the shallower κ–ε exponent is only suggestive. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2607.10225 v1 pith:AEA6IJVI submitted 2026-07-11 physics.flu-dyn physics.ao-phphysics.geo-phphysics.plasm-ph

Relative dispersion and eddy diffusivity in laboratory experiments of β-plane turbulence

Daphn\'e Lemasquerier , Matthew Burke , Benjamin Favier , Joe H. LaCasce , Michael Le Bars This is my paper
classification physics.flu-dyn physics.ao-phphysics.geo-phphysics.plasm-ph
keywords geostrophic turbulencezonostrophic turbulencerelative dispersionturbulent mixingzonal jetsRichardson regimediffusive regimeCIST
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This paper reports the first laboratory measurements of how pairs of fluid particles separate in rapidly rotating turbulence that spontaneously forms strong east-west jets (the zonostrophic regime). From particle-image velocity fields the authors integrate synthetic particle trajectories and compute both time-based statistics (mean-square separation, kurtosis, relative diffusivity) and scale-based statistics (finite-amplitude growth rate and the cumulative inverse separation time, CIST). The data show a clear transition: at scales between the energy-injection scale and the transitional scale L_β the pairs obey Richardson’s 4/3-law; beyond L_β the motion becomes uncorrelated and the relative diffusivity saturates at a constant value. The CIST, which has closed-form predictions in each regime, supplies independent estimates of the energy dissipation rate ε and of the large-scale eddy diffusivity κ. The measured κ scales roughly as ε^0.45, shallower than the mixing-length / zonostrophic prediction κ ∼ ε^{3/5} β^{-4/5}. The result matters because zonal jets dominate transport in oceans, atmospheres and planetary cores, and because the same statistics can now be compared directly with ocean-drifter data and with numerical closures used in climate models.

Core claim

In laboratory zonostrophic turbulence, relative pair dispersion exhibits a Richardson regime (κ ∝ r^{4/3}) between the forcing scale and the transitional scale L_β, followed by a classical diffusive regime (κ constant) at larger scales; the large-scale diffusivity extracted from both relative diffusivity and CIST scales as κ ∝ ε^{0.45±0.12}, weaker than the theoretically expected 3/5 power.

What carries the argument

The cumulative inverse separation time (CIST), defined from the half-crossing times of the cumulative distribution of pair separations; analytical solutions of the Fokker–Planck equation give CIST ∼ r^{-2/3} in the Richardson range and CIST ∼ r^{-2} in the diffusive range, allowing direct extraction of ε and κ.

Load-bearing premise

The analytical formulae used to read ε and κ from the data assume the turbulence is homogeneous and isotropic, yet the measured flow is strongly anisotropic and inhomogeneous because of the zonal jets.

What would settle it

A controlled set of experiments or simulations in which β is varied at fixed ε (or vice versa) and the measured large-scale diffusivity fails to follow either the observed 0.45 power or the classical 3/5 power would falsify the claimed scaling.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

If this is right

  • Ocean and atmospheric models can adopt a shallower ε-dependence when parameterizing eddy diffusivity across zonal jets.
  • The same CIST diagnostic can be applied to surface-drifter clusters to extract local energy-dissipation rates without needing full velocity fields.
  • Because L_β sets the outer scale of the isotropic cascade, laboratory tanks that contain several jets automatically possess a clearer scale separation between Richardson and diffusive regimes than pure 2-D turbulence experiments.
  • Radial (across-jet) diffusivity profiles can now be measured to test whether prograde jets act as true transport barriers.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The residual anisotropy that survives after subtracting the mean flow suggests that eddy anisotropy itself, not merely the mean shear, contributes to the shallower diffusivity scaling.
  • If the CIST continues to outperform FSLE/FAGR for detecting diffusion in other anisotropic flows (stratified, magnetized), it may become the default diagnostic for large-scale mixing in geophysical and fusion plasmas.
  • A follow-up campaign that systematically varies both ε and β would cleanly separate the two exponents and decide whether the classical zonostrophic formula needs a new prefactor or a new functional form.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper reports the first laboratory measurements of two-particle relative dispersion and eddy diffusivity in the zonostrophic regime of rapidly rotating β-plane turbulence, using synthetic Lagrangian trajectories advected by time-resolved PIV velocity fields from four experiments. Time-based statistics (relative dispersion, relative diffusivity K(t), kurtosis) and separation-based statistics (FAGR, CIST, pFSLE) are compared against analytical solutions of the Fokker–Planck equation for the pair-separation PDF. The diagnostics indicate a Richardson regime (κ ∝ r^{4/3}) between the energy-injection scale and a correlation scale that coincides with the transitional scale L_β, followed by a diffusive regime at larger scales. Energy dissipation rate ε and large-scale diffusivity κ are extracted from the amplitudes of these scalings; the measured κ scales as ε^{0.45±0.12}, shallower than the zonostrophic mixing-length prediction κ ∼ ε^{3/5} β^{-4/5}.

Significance. If the reported Richardson-to-diffusive transition at L_β and the shallower κ–ε scaling hold, the work supplies the first controlled experimental benchmark for transport parameterizations in zonostrophic turbulence, with direct relevance to ocean jets, planetary atmospheres, liquid cores and magnetically confined plasmas. Strengths include the public release of processing scripts and data, the first experimental application of the CIST diagnostic, and the convergence of multiple independent diagnostics (relative-diffusivity plateau, kurtosis o 2, CIST/pFSLE ∝ r^{-2}, d_c ≈ L_β from spectra). These features make the regime-transition claim robust and useful even if the precise exponent remains provisional.

major comments (2)
  1. §4d, Fig. 8 and Table 3: the fitted exponent κ ∝ ε^{0.45±0.12} is obtained by extracting both κ and ε from the amplitudes of isotropic analytical solutions (Table 1) that assume homogeneity, isotropy and unit prefactors (κ = ε^{1/3} r^{4/3}). The measured flow violates these assumptions (zonal-to-radial rms-separation ratio already ∼3 at t_c for the full field and ∼1.5 for fluctuations; Fig. 4). Removing the mean flow halves both ε and κ while leaving the exponent almost unchanged, showing that residual anisotropy systematically affects the isotropic amplitudes. With only four experiments at fixed β, any such bias can tilt the reported exponent. The regime-transition claim itself does not require absolute prefactors and is robust; the quantitative shallower-scaling claim does. A clearer statement of this limitation, or a sensitivity test that varies the prefactors within plausible bounds
  2. §4c and Fig. 6: the short non-local (constant) plateau on the CIST/FAGR at scales ≲ l_f is interpreted as the enstrophy-cascade range because T = η^{-1/3} matches the independent Ekman estimate. However, the same plateau disappears when the mean flow is subtracted, and a simple shear-time estimate (T_s = L/U) yields a comparable scale L_s ∼ 1.5 cm. The manuscript notes this possibility but still uses the enstrophy-cascade formula to report η. Clarifying whether the early exponential growth is cascade- or shear-dominated is load-bearing for the claim that the non-local regime is resolved by the PIV.
minor comments (4)
  1. Table 2 vs Table 3: ε^{1/3} extracted from relative diffusivity is systematically a factor of ∼2 smaller than the spectral estimate ε_s. The text attributes this to prefactors, but a short quantitative discussion of which prefactor (Kolmogorov–Kraichnan constant versus the unit coefficient assumed in Table 1) is preferred would help readers.
  2. Fig. 2 caption and §3: the CDF half-time is obtained by fitting an exponential plus offset. The functional form is not justified; a brief note on why this form is preferred over a direct interpolation of the CDF would improve reproducibility.
  3. §3: the domain-selection bias introduced by the two shadow regions (and the subsequent restriction to r < 37 cm) is acknowledged but not quantified. A short appendix panel comparing statistics with and without the outer annulus would strengthen confidence that the reported ε and κ are not systematically high.
  4. Throughout: the geometric factor α = 1.2 is fixed without a sensitivity check. A one-sentence statement that results are unchanged for α ∈ [1.1, 1.3] would be useful.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: ε and κ are extracted by fitting measured statistics to external isotropic theory; the shallower κ–ε exponent is an empirical fit to those values, not a result forced by construction.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is ordinary experimental measurement plus comparison to prior theory. Analytical CIST/PDF solutions (Table 1) are taken from LM22 and classical Richardson/Taylor theory; they are not derived from the present data. ε and κ are obtained by fitting the amplitude of measured relative diffusivity (and CIST) to those external power laws (Fig. 5b,e; Table 3). The central regime-transition claim (Richardson → diffusion near L_β) is diagnosed by multiple independent diagnostics (velocity correlation, kurtosis, FAGR, CIST, relative diffusivity) and does not require the absolute prefactors. The secondary claim of a shallower exponent (κ ∝ ε^{0.45±0.12} vs. Sukoriansky et al.'s 3/5) is simply a power-law fit to the four extracted (ε, κ) pairs (Fig. 8). Self-citations to the authors' prior experimental papers [55,56] supply the velocity fields and spectral L_β/ε_s values; they do not close a logical loop that forces the dispersion results. The acknowledged mismatch between isotropic theory and anisotropic data is a correctness/assumption issue, not circularity. Score 1 for minor self-citation of experimental setup only.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

6 free parameters · 6 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on (1) the Fokker–Planck description of pair separation under isotropic, homogeneous, delta-correlated assumptions, (2) unit-prefactor closures κ=ε^{1/3}r^{4/3} and κ=η^{1/3}r^2 that convert measured amplitudes into ε, η, κ, (3) the experimental identification of L_β and correlation scales, and (4) a handful of analysis choices (α, CDF threshold, correlation threshold). No new physical entities are postulated; CIST is taken from LM22.

free parameters (6)
  • geometric bin factor α = 1.2
    Separation bins defined with α=1.2; enters analytical CIST expressions (Table 1) and all scale-based statistics.
  • unit prefactor in Richardson diffusivity κ=ε^{1/3}r^{4/3} = 1 (assumed)
    Authors set the multiplicative constant to 1 to extract ε from relative diffusivity and CIST amplitudes; absolute ε differs by ~2× from spectral estimates.
  • unit prefactor in non-local diffusivity κ=η^{1/3}r^2 = 1 (assumed)
    Same assumption used to convert early-time kurtosis growth into η^{-1/3}.
  • velocity-correlation threshold for t_c, d_c = 0.5
    Correlation time/scale defined where C_v drops below 0.5; used to mark the Richardson–diffusive transition.
  • CDF half-time threshold for CIST = 0.5
    t_{1/2} taken at CDF=0.5 after exponential-plus-offset fit; defines CIST values.
  • fitted κ–ε exponent = 0.45 ± 0.12
    Best-fit power on four experiments: κ∝ε^{0.45±0.12} (full field) and 0.47±0.10 (fluctuations); central quantitative claim about shallower dependence.
axioms (6)
  • domain assumption Pair-separation PDF obeys the isotropic Fokker–Planck equation ∂p/∂t = (1/r)∂/∂r(κ r ∂p/∂r) under delta-correlated Eulerian flow or Kraichnan DIA.
    Section 2; basis for all analytical CIST, kurtosis, and relative-dispersion predictions in Table 1.
  • domain assumption In the inverse-cascade range the scale-dependent diffusivity is κ∝ε^{1/3}r^{4/3} (Richardson); in the enstrophy range κ=η^{1/3}r^2; in the diffusive range κ is constant.
    Table 1 and §2(c); used both to identify regimes and to invert for ε, η, κ.
  • domain assumption Low Rossby number (Ro≤7×10^{-3}) justifies treating the measured horizontal PIV field as quasi-two-dimensional for Lagrangian advection.
    Methods §3; three-dimensional biases are acknowledged but not quantified.
  • domain assumption Zonostrophic mixing-length theory predicts κ∼ε^{3/5}β^{-4/5} for r>L_β (Sukoriansky et al. 2009).
    Introduction and §4(d); the benchmark against which the shallower experimental exponent is claimed.
  • domain assumption Dissipation is dominated by linear Ekman friction, allowing ε_E≈u_rms^2/(2τ_E) and η_E≈ζ_rms^2/(2τ_E).
    Table 2 and Methods; used for independent estimates compared to Lagrangian measures.
  • standard math Standard calculus and geometric binning of pair separations; no novel mathematical axioms.
    Throughout §2–3.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-grok45 · 28335 in / 4061 out tokens · 36722 ms · 2026-07-14T13:22:46.799073+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Relative dispersion and eddy diffusivity in laboratory experiments of $\beta$-plane turbulence." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/AEA6IJVI

@misc{pith2026260710225,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Relative dispersion and eddy diffusivity in laboratory experiments of $\beta$-plane turbulence},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/AEA6IJVI}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.10225}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

We present the first experimental measures of relative dispersion and turbulent diffusion in rapidly-rotating turbulence in the zonostrophic regime, i.e., in the presence of instantaneous and dominant zonal jets. Synthetic Lagrangian trajectories are computed from time-resolved experimental velocity fields, from which we measure relative (two-particle) dispersion. Time-based and separation-based statistics are calculated, including the cumulative inverse separation time (CIST), for which analytical predictions exist in the inertial ranges (direct enstrophy cascade and inverse energy cascade) and in the diffusive regime. These statistics show evidence of a transition from a Richardson regime at scales larger than the energy-injection scale, to a diffusive regime, at scales larger than the transitional scale, the scale at which turbulence becomes anisotropic due to the interaction between turbulent eddies and Rossby waves. The analytical predictions for the CIST allow us to measure the turbulent energy dissipation rate in the Richardson regime, and the turbulent diffusivity in the diffusive regime. Our measurements of diffusivity are broadly consistent with predictions from mixing-length and zonostrophic theories but suggest a shallower dependence on the energy dissipation rate.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.10225 by Benjamin Favier, Daphn\'e Lemasquerier, Joe H. LaCasce, Matthew Burke, Michael Le Bars.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: (a) Velocity field (arrows) and vertical component of the vorticity (color scale) measured from particle image velocimetry in two experiments; Exp. N (left) and Exp. A (right). (b,c) Typical Lagrangian trajectories computed by numerically integrating equation (3.1) using the measured Eulerian velocity fields from PIV. (b) Experiment N. 310 trajectories are represented for a duration of 50s. (c) Experiment … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Cumulative density function (CDF) as a function of time for given separations, ri, for Experiment A. The dashed lines represent best fits by an exponentially decaying function plus an offset. The horizontal dotted line represent the threshold CDF=0.5 used to calculate the CIST. For the separation bin of 22cm, the CDF is 0.6 at time t=50s, meaning that 60% of the pairs of particles have not yet reached a se… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Kinetic energy spectra for Experiment B [56]. We use a Fourier-Bessel decomposition to separate the zonal (Ez) and residual (Er) contributions. k is hence a radial wavenumber for the zonal spectrum and a combination of radial and azimuthal wavenumbers for the residual (see [56] for more details). The dash-dotted lines correspond to the theoretical predictions Etheo z = CZ β 2k−5 and Etheo r = CKϵ 2/3k−5/3 … view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (a) Lagrangian velocity correlation Cv (equation 4.1) versus time for the four experiments. (d) Lagrangian velocity correlation against rms separation. (b,c) Ratio of zonal to radial rms separation (anisotropy) against time and (e,f) against rms separation. (c,f) Show the same as (b,e) with a log scale on the horizontal axis. Dashed curves correspond to fluctuations (mean flow subtracted). Dash-dotted vert… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Statistics of pair separations when using the full velocity field (top row) and the velocity field where the mean flow has been subtracted (bottom row). The theoretical predictions on panels (a,b,d,e) are for Experiment A only. (a,d) Relative dispersion ⟨r 2 ⟩ plotted against time. The orange dash-dotted line is the theoretical prediction in the asymptotic Richardson regime, where the value of ϵ was measur… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Cumulative inverse separation time (CIST) for Experiment A (top row) and B (bottom row). The shaded region represent separations where the CDF has not decreased to 0.5 by the end of the measurements (hence, no CIST estimates are available). In (a,c) the analysis was performed using the full velocity field. In (b,d) the mean flow was subtracted from the Eulerian velocity fields before calculating the Lagran… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Diffusivity κ measured from the CIST and relative diffusivity plots, as a function of the energy dissipation rate ϵ. The dashed line corresponds to the prediction κ ∝ ϵ 3/5β−4/5 . The full lines are best fits. Orange markers/line show results using the full velocity field, whereas blue markers/line are obtained with the fluctuating velocity field. energy cascade ceases and the flow becomes more zonal. This… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Velocity field (arrows) and axial vorticity (colors) for a snapshot in Experiment B. Left: full velocity field. Right: fluctuations (mean flow subtracted) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_9.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

73 extracted references · 19 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Zonal Jets : Phenomenology , Genesis , and Physics

    Galperin B, Read PL. Zonal Jets : Phenomenology , Genesis , and Physics . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2019. Available from: https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/zonal-jets/82763ED4E81E4906C95CC6B248A42F02

    2019

  2. [2]

    Lagrangian ocean analysis: Fundamentals and practices

    van Sebille E, Griffies SM, Abernathey R, Adams TP, Berloff P, Biastoch A, et al. Lagrangian ocean analysis: Fundamentals and practices. Ocean Modelling. 2018 Jan;121:49-75. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1463500317301853

    2018

  3. [3]

    Ocean mixing: drivers, mechanisms and impacts

    Meredith M, Naveira Garabato A. Ocean mixing: drivers, mechanisms and impacts. Amsterdam [etc.]: Elsevier; 2022

    2022

  4. [4]

    Chapter 12 - Mixing in the Southern Ocean

    Gille ST, Sheen KL, Swart S, Thompson AF. Chapter 12 - Mixing in the Southern Ocean . In: Meredith M, Naveira Garabato A, editors. Ocean Mixing . Elsevier; 2022. p. 301-27. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780128215128000190

    2022

  5. [5]

    Challenges and Prospects in Ocean Circulation Models

    Fox-Kemper B, Adcroft A, Böning CW, Chassignet EP, Curchitser E, Danabasoglu G, et al. Challenges and Prospects in Ocean Circulation Models . Frontiers in Marine Science. 2019;6. Available from: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmars.2019.00065/full

    doi:10.3389/fmars.2019.00065/full 2019

  6. [6]

    Convective heat transfer and the pattern of thermal emission on the gas giants

    Aurnou J, Heimpel M, Allen L, King E, Wicht J. Convective heat transfer and the pattern of thermal emission on the gas giants. Geophysical Journal International. 2008 Jun;173(3):793-801. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2008.03764.x

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1111/j.1365-246x.2008.03764.x 2008

  7. [7]

    Effect of shear and magnetic field on the heat-transfer efficiency of convection in rotating spherical shells

    Yadav RK, Gastine T, Christensen UR, Duarte LDV, Reiners A. Effect of shear and magnetic field on the heat-transfer efficiency of convection in rotating spherical shells. Geophysical Journal International. 2016 Feb;204(2):1120-33. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggv506

    work page doi:10.1093/gji/ggv506 2016

  8. [8]

    Jets and large-scale vortices in rotating Rayleigh - B 'enard convection

    Guervilly C, Hughes DW. Jets and large-scale vortices in rotating Rayleigh - B 'enard convection. Physical Review Fluids. 2017 Nov;2(11):113503. Available from: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevFluids.2.113503

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevfluids.2.113503 2017

  9. [9]

    Multiple zonal jets and convective heat transport barriers in a quasi-geostrophic model of planetary cores

    Guervilly C, Cardin P. Multiple zonal jets and convective heat transport barriers in a quasi-geostrophic model of planetary cores. Geophysical Journal International. 2017;211(1):455-71. Tex.publisher= Oxford University Press. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggx315

    work page doi:10.1093/gji/ggx315 2017

  10. [10]

    Gravity darkening in late-type stars - I

    Raynaud R, Rieutord M, Petitdemange L, Gastine T, Putigny B. Gravity darkening in late-type stars - I . The Coriolis effect. Astronomy & Astrophysics. 2018 Jan;609:A124. Available from: https://www.aanda.org/articles/aa/abs/2018/01/aa31729-17/aa31729-17.html

    2018

  11. [11]

    Convection with misaligned gravity and rotation: simulations and rotating mixing length theory

    Currie LK, Barker AJ, Lithwick Y, Browning MK. Convection with misaligned gravity and rotation: simulations and rotating mixing length theory. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. 2020 Apr;493(4):5233-56. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/staa372

    doi:10.1093/mnras/staa372 2020

  12. [12]

    Suppression of turbulence and transport by sheared flow

    Terry PW. Suppression of turbulence and transport by sheared flow. Reviews of Modern Physics. 2000 Jan;72(1):109-65. Available from: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/RevModPhys.72.109

    doi:10.1103/revmodphys.72.109 2000

  13. [13]

    Zonal flows in plasma—a review

    Diamond PH, Itoh SI, Itoh K, Hahm TS. Zonal flows in plasma—a review. Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion. 2005 May;47(5):R35-R161. Available from: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0741-3335/47/5/R01

    doi:10.1088/0741-3335/47/5/r01 2005

  14. [14]

    A review of zonal flow experiments

    Fujisawa A. A review of zonal flow experiments. Nuclear Fusion. 2009 Jan;49(1):013001. Available from: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0029-5515/49/1/013001

    work page doi:10.1088/0029-5515/49/1/013001 2009

  15. [15]

    Zonal flows and pattern formation

    Gürcan OD, Diamond PH. Zonal flows and pattern formation. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical. 2015 Jul;48(29):293001. Available from: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1751-8113/48/29/293001

    doi:10.1088/1751-8113/48/29/293001 2015

  16. [16]

    Rossby and drift wave turbulence and zonal flows: The Charney – Hasegawa – Mima model and its extensions

    Connaughton C, Nazarenko S, Quinn B. Rossby and drift wave turbulence and zonal flows: The Charney – Hasegawa – Mima model and its extensions. Physics Reports. 2015 Dec;604:1-71. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0370157315004421

    2015

  17. [17]

    Atmospheric and Oceanic Fluid Dynamics : Fundamentals and Large - Scale Circulation

    Vallis GK. Atmospheric and Oceanic Fluid Dynamics : Fundamentals and Large - Scale Circulation . 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2017. Available from: https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/atmospheric-and-oceanic-fluid-dynamics/41379BDDC4257CBE11143C466F6428A4

    2017

  18. [18]

    Interaction between eddies and mean flow in Jupiter 's atmosphere: Analysis of Cassini imaging data

    Salyk C, Ingersoll AP, Lorre J, Vasavada A, Del Genio AD. Interaction between eddies and mean flow in Jupiter 's atmosphere: Analysis of Cassini imaging data. Icarus. 2006 Dec;185(2):430-42. Tex.ids= salyk\_interaction\_2006-1. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0019103506002727

    2006

  19. [19]

    Physics of negative viscosity phenomena

    Starr V. Physics of negative viscosity phenomena. Earth and Planetary Science Series. 1966;256. Available from: https://cir.nii.ac.jp/crid/1573387448912410880

    arXiv 1966

  20. [20]

    Potential-vorticity inversion and the wave-turbulence jigsaw: some recent clarifications

    McIntyre M. Potential-vorticity inversion and the wave-turbulence jigsaw: some recent clarifications. Advances in Geosciences. 2008;15:47-56. Tex.publisher= Copernicus GmbH. Available from: https://adgeo.copernicus.org/articles/15/47/2008/

    2008

  21. [21]

    Multiple jets as PV staircases: the Phillips effect and the resilience of eddy-transport barriers

    Dritschel D, McIntyre M. Multiple jets as PV staircases: the Phillips effect and the resilience of eddy-transport barriers. Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences. 2008;65(3):855-74. Tex.ids= dritschel\_multiple\_2008-1. Available from: https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/atsc/65/3/2007jas2227.1.xml

    2008

  22. [22]

    Zonal Jets as Transport Barriers in Planetary Atmospheres

    Beron-Vera FJ, Brown MG, Olascoaga MJ, Rypina II, Koçak H, Udovydchenkov IA. Zonal Jets as Transport Barriers in Planetary Atmospheres . Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences. 2008 Oct;65(10):3316-26. Available from: https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/atsc/65/10/2008jas2579.1.xml

    2008

  23. [23]

    On the Lagrangian Dynamics of Atmospheric Zonal Jets and the Permeability of the Stratospheric Polar Vortex

    Rypina II, Brown MG, Beron-Vera FJ, Koçak H, Olascoaga MJ, Udovydchenkov IA. On the Lagrangian Dynamics of Atmospheric Zonal Jets and the Permeability of the Stratospheric Polar Vortex . Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences. 2007 Oct;64(10):3595-610. Available from: https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/atsc/64/10/jas4036.1.xml

    2007

  24. [24]

    Statistics from Lagrangian observations

    LaCasce JH. Statistics from Lagrangian observations. Progress in Oceanography. 2008 Apr;77(1):1-29. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0079661108000232

    2008

  25. [25]

    Advances in the Application of Surface Drifters

    Lumpkin R, Özgökmen T, Centurioni L. Advances in the Application of Surface Drifters . Annual Review of Marine Science. 2017 Jan;9(Volume 9, 2017):59-81. Available from: https://www.annualreviews.org/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-marine-010816-060641

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-marine-010816-060641 2017

  26. [26]

    Turbulence in rotating, stratified and electrically conducting fluids

    Davidson PA. Turbulence in rotating, stratified and electrically conducting fluids. Cambridge University Press; 2013. Available from: https://books.google.fr/books?hl=en&lr=&id=-QpCAQAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PR15&dq=Davidson,+P.+A.+(2013).+Turbulence+in+rotating,+stratified+and+electrically+conducting+fluids.+Cam-+bridge:+Cambridge+University+Press.&ots=lmBYYEpjv...

    2013

  27. [27]

    Two- Dimensional Turbulence

    Boffetta G, Ecke RE. Two- Dimensional Turbulence . Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics. 2012;44(1):427-51. \_eprint: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-fluid-120710-101240. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-fluid-120710-101240

    doi:10.1146/annurev-fluid-120710-101240 2012

  28. [28]

    Two- Particle Dispersion in Isotropic Turbulent Flows

    Salazar JPLC, Collins LR. Two- Particle Dispersion in Isotropic Turbulent Flows . Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics. 2009 Jan;41(Volume 41, 2009):405-32. Available from: https://www.annualreviews.org/content/journals/10.1146/annurev.fluid.40.111406.102224

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev.fluid.40.111406.102224 2009

  29. [29]

    Atmospheric diffusion shown on a distance-neighbour graph

    Richardson LF. Atmospheric diffusion shown on a distance-neighbour graph. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series A, Containing Papers of a Mathematical and Physical Character. 1926 Apr;110(756):709-37. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1926.0043

    doi:10.1098/rspa.1926.0043 1926

  30. [30]

    Diffusion by Continuous Movements

    Taylor GI. Diffusion by Continuous Movements . Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society. 1922;s2-20(1):196-212. \_eprint: https://londmathsoc.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1112/plms/s2-20.1.196. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1112/plms/s2-20.1.196

    doi:10.1112/plms/s2-20.1.196 1922

  31. [31]

    Finite size Lyapunov exponent: review on applications

    Cencini M, Vulpiani A. Finite size Lyapunov exponent: review on applications. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical. 2013 Jun;46(25):254019. Available from: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1751-8113/46/25/254019

    doi:10.1088/1751-8113/46/25/254019 2013

  32. [32]

    Oceanic diffusion diagrams

    Okubo A. Oceanic diffusion diagrams. In: Deep sea research and oceanographic abstracts. vol. 18. Elsevier; 1971. p. 789-802. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0011747171900465

    arXiv 1971

  33. [33]

    Relative dispersion in the subsurface North Atlantic

    LaCasce J, Bower A. Relative dispersion in the subsurface North Atlantic . Journal of Marine Research. 2000 Jan;58(6). Available from: https://elischolar.library.yale.edu/journal_of_marine_research/2375

    2000

  34. [34]

    Open ocean regimes of relative dispersion

    Ollitrault M, Gabillet C, Verdière ACD. Open ocean regimes of relative dispersion. Journal of Fluid Mechanics. 2005 Jun;533:381-407. Available from: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-fluid-mechanics/article/abs/open-ocean-regimes-of-relative-dispersion/0ECE50797C2F376485CB60FA7B05FCFF

    2005

  35. [35]

    Relative dispersion in the Nordic Seas

    Koszalka I, LaCasce J, Orvik K. Relative dispersion in the Nordic Seas . Journal of Marine Research. 2009 Jan;67(4). Available from: https://elischolar.library.yale.edu/journal_of_marine_research/238

    2009

  36. [36]

    Relative dispersion at the surface of the Gulf of Mexico

    LaCasce J, Ohlmann C. Relative dispersion at the surface of the Gulf of Mexico . Journal of Marine Research. 2003 Jan;61(3). Available from: https://elischolar.library.yale.edu/journal_of_marine_research/11

    2003

  37. [37]

    Submesoscale dispersion in the vicinity of the Deepwater Horizon spill

    Poje AC, Özgökmen TM, Lipphardt BL, Haus BK, Ryan EH, Haza AC, et al. Submesoscale dispersion in the vicinity of the Deepwater Horizon spill. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2014 Sep;111(35):12693-8. Available from: https://www.pnas.org/doi/abs/10.1073/pnas.1402452111

    work page doi:10.1073/pnas.1402452111 2014

  38. [38]

    General characteristics of relative dispersion in the ocean

    Corrado R, Lacorata G, Palatella L, Santoleri R, Zambianchi E. General characteristics of relative dispersion in the ocean. Scientific Reports. 2017 May;7(1):46291. Available from: http://www.nature.com/articles/srep46291

    2017

  39. [39]

    Evidence for a k--5/3 Spectrum from the EOLE Lagrangian Balloons in the Low Stratosphere

    Lacorata G, Aurell E, Legras B, Vulpiani A. Evidence for a k--5/3 Spectrum from the EOLE Lagrangian Balloons in the Low Stratosphere . Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences. 2004 Dec;61(23):2936-42. Available from: https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/atsc/61/23/jas-3292.1.xml

    2004

  40. [40]

    Statistics of Simulated and Observed Pair Separations in the Gulf of Mexico

    Beron-Vera FJ, LaCasce JH. Statistics of Simulated and Observed Pair Separations in the Gulf of Mexico . Journal of Physical Oceanography. 2016 Jul;46(7):2183-99. Available from: https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/phoc/46/7/jpo-d-15-0127.1.xml

    2016

  41. [41]

    Inferring Submesoscale Energy Spectra in the Gulf of Mexico from Surface Drifters

    Qian YK, LaCasce JH, Peng S. Inferring Submesoscale Energy Spectra in the Gulf of Mexico from Surface Drifters . Journal of Physical Oceanography. 2025 Aug;55(9):1475-91. Available from: https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/phoc/55/9/JPO-D-24-0258.1.xml

    2025

  42. [42]

    Richardson Pair Dispersion in Two - Dimensional Turbulence

    Jullien MC, Paret J, Tabeling P. Richardson Pair Dispersion in Two - Dimensional Turbulence . Physical Review Letters. 1999 Apr;82(14):2872-5. Available from: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.82.2872

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.82.2872 1999

  43. [43]

    Pair Dispersion and Doubling Time Statistics in Two - Dimensional Turbulence

    Rivera MK, Ecke RE. Pair Dispersion and Doubling Time Statistics in Two - Dimensional Turbulence . Physical Review Letters. 2005 Nov;95(19):194503. Available from: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.95.194503

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.95.194503 2005

  44. [44]

    Double Cascade Turbulence and Richardson Dispersion in a Horizontal Fluid Flow Induced by Faraday Waves

    von Kameke A, Huhn F, Fernández-García G, Muñuzuri AP, Pérez-Muñuzuri V. Double Cascade Turbulence and Richardson Dispersion in a Horizontal Fluid Flow Induced by Faraday Waves . Physical Review Letters. 2011 Aug;107(7):074502. Available from: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.107.074502

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.107.074502 2011

  45. [45]

    Lagrangian scale of particle dispersion in turbulence

    Xia H, Francois N, Punzmann H, Shats M. Lagrangian scale of particle dispersion in turbulence. Nature Communications. 2013 Jun;4(1):2013. Available from: https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms3013

    2013

  46. [46]

    Zonostrophic turbulence

    Galperin B, Sukoriansky S, Dikovskaya N. Zonostrophic turbulence. Physica Scripta. 2008 Dec;2008(T132):014034. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-8949/2008/T132/014034

    work page doi:10.1088/0031-8949/2008/t132/014034 2008

  47. [47]

    Energy spectra and coherent structures in forced two-dimensional and beta-plane turbulence

    Maltrud ME, Vallis GK. Energy spectra and coherent structures in forced two-dimensional and beta-plane turbulence. Journal of Fluid Mechanics Digital Archive. 1991 Jul;228:321. Available from: http://www.journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0022112091002720

    1991

  48. [48]

    Turbulent diffusion in the geostrophic inverse cascade

    Smith KS, Boccaletti G, Henning CC, Marinov I, Tam CY, Held IM, et al. Turbulent diffusion in the geostrophic inverse cascade. Journal of Fluid Mechanics. 2002 Oct;469:13-48. Available from: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-fluid-mechanics/article/abs/turbulent-diffusion-in-the-geostrophic-inverse-cascade/4D64DFCB2C30A2C476C0D90798E2C454

    2002

  49. [49]

    Diffusivity, Kinetic Energy Dissipation , and Closure Theories for the Poleward Eddy Heat Flux

    Lapeyre G, Held IM. Diffusivity, Kinetic Energy Dissipation , and Closure Theories for the Poleward Eddy Heat Flux . Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences. 2003 Dec;60(23):2907-16. Available from: https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/atsc/60/23/1520-0469_2003_060_2907_dkedac_2.0.co_2.xml

    2003

  50. [50]

    Tracer transport along and across coherent jets in two-dimensional turbulent flow

    Smith KS. Tracer transport along and across coherent jets in two-dimensional turbulent flow. Journal of Fluid Mechanics. 2005 Dec;544:133-42. Available from: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-fluid-mechanics/article/tracer-transport-along-and-across-coherent-jets-in-twodimensional-turbulent-flow/E96CAEB0039B7389DD4BA68CC0EA8851

    2005

  51. [51]

    Transport of momentum and scalar in turbulent flows with anisotropic dispersive waves

    Sukoriansky S, Dikovskaya N, Galperin B. Transport of momentum and scalar in turbulent flows with anisotropic dispersive waves. Geophysical Research Letters. 2009;36(14). \_eprint: https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1029/2009GL038632. Available from: https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1029/2009GL038632

    work page doi:10.1029/2009gl038632 2009

  52. [52]

    The Eddy Diffusivity in Barotropic β- Plane Turbulence

    Kong H, Jansen M. The Eddy Diffusivity in Barotropic β- Plane Turbulence . Fluids. 2017 Oct;2(4):54. Available from: https://www.mdpi.com/2311-5521/2/4/54

    2017

  53. [53]

    Anisotropic macroturbulence and diffusion associated with a westward zonal jet: From laboratory to planetary atmospheres and oceans

    Galperin B, Hoemann J, Espa S, Di Nitto G, Lacorata G. Anisotropic macroturbulence and diffusion associated with a westward zonal jet: From laboratory to planetary atmospheres and oceans. Physical Review E. 2016 Dec;94(6):063102. Available from: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevE.94.063102

    work page doi:10.1103/physreve.94.063102 2016

  54. [54]

    On the influence of a β-effect on Lagrangian diffusion

    Lacorata G, Espa S. On the influence of a β-effect on Lagrangian diffusion. Geophysical Research Letters. 2012;39(11):L11605. \_eprint: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1029/2012GL051841. Available from: http://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1029/2012GL051841

    work page doi:10.1029/2012gl051841 2012

  55. [55]

    Zonal jets at the laboratory scale: hysteresis and Rossby waves resonance

    Lemasquerier D, Favier B, Le Bars M. Zonal jets at the laboratory scale: hysteresis and Rossby waves resonance. Journal of Fluid Mechanics. 2021 Mar;910:A18. Tex.ids= lemasquerier\_zonal\_2020 arXiv: 2008.10304. Available from: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-fluid-mechanics/article/zonal-jets-at-the-laboratory-scale-hysteresis-and-ross...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  56. [56]

    Zonal jets experiments in the gas giants’ zonostrophic regime

    Lemasquerier D, Favier B, Le Bars M. Zonal jets experiments in the gas giants’ zonostrophic regime. Icarus. 2023 Jan;390:115292. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0019103522003840

    2023

  57. [57]

    The Finite Size Lyapunov Exponent and the Finite Amplitude Growth Rate

    Meunier T, LaCasce JH. The Finite Size Lyapunov Exponent and the Finite Amplitude Growth Rate . Fluids. 2021 Oct;6(10):348. Available from: https://www.mdpi.com/2311-5521/6/10/348

    2021

  58. [58]

    Relative dispersion with finite inertial ranges

    LaCasce JH, Meunier T. Relative dispersion with finite inertial ranges. Journal of Fluid Mechanics. 2022 Feb;932:A39. Available from: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-fluid-mechanics/article/abs/relative-dispersion-with-finite-inertial-ranges/A4810AD4971C9C9FC920CE4BDAF8AE95

    2022

  59. [59]

    Turbulent pair dispersion and scalar diffusion

    Lundgren TS. Turbulent pair dispersion and scalar diffusion. Journal of Fluid Mechanics. 1981 Oct;111:27-57. Available from: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-fluid-mechanics/article/turbulent-pair-dispersion-and-scalar-diffusion/47ED9279A8E4AFE60F349A5C82C830CC

    1981

  60. [60]

    Lagrangian‐ History Closure Approximation for Turbulence

    Kraichnan RH. Lagrangian‐ History Closure Approximation for Turbulence . The Physics of Fluids. 1965 Apr;8(4):575-98. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1761271

    work page doi:10.1063/1.1761271 1965

  61. [61]

    Dispersion of Particle Pairs in Homogeneous Turbulence

    Kraichnan RH. Dispersion of Particle Pairs in Homogeneous Turbulence . The Physics of Fluids. 1966 Oct;9(10):1937-43. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1761547

    work page doi:10.1063/1.1761547 1966

  62. [62]

    Relative displacement probability distribution functions from balloons and drifters

    LaCasce JH. Relative displacement probability distribution functions from balloons and drifters. Journal of Marine Research. 2010 May;68(3):433-57. Available from: http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/10.1357/002224010794657155

    work page doi:10.1357/002224010794657155 2010

  63. [63]

    Relative dispersion in generalized two-dimensional turbulence

    Foussard A, Berti S, Perrot X, Lapeyre G. Relative dispersion in generalized two-dimensional turbulence. Journal of Fluid Mechanics. 2017 Jun;821:358-83. Available from: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-fluid-mechanics/article/relative-dispersion-in-generalized-twodimensional-turbulence/08FB0083BEF447F4E528555341687809

    2017

  64. [64]

    Lagrangian Fluid Dynamics

    Bennett A. Lagrangian Fluid Dynamics . Cambridge Monographs on Mechanics . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2006. Available from: https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/lagrangian-fluid-dynamics/80C52C6CCB59865D99A076E35FEC3546

    2006

  65. [65]

    xdispersion: For calculation of relative dispersion from Lagrangian particle pairs

    Qian YK. xdispersion: For calculation of relative dispersion from Lagrangian particle pairs;. Available from: https://github.com/miniufo/xdispersion

  66. [66]

    Relative Dispersion in the Atmosphere from Reanalysis Winds

    Graff LS, Guttu S, LaCasce JH. Relative Dispersion in the Atmosphere from Reanalysis Winds . Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences. 2015 Jul;72(7):2769-85. Available from: https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/atsc/72/7/jas-d-14-0225.1.xml

    2015

  67. [67]

    Relative Dispersion of Constant – Level Balloons in the 200–mb General Circulation

    Morel P, Larceveque M. Relative Dispersion of Constant – Level Balloons in the 200–mb General Circulation . Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences. 1974 Nov;31(8):2189-96. Available from: https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/atsc/31/8/1520-0469_1974_031_2189_rdocbi_2_0_co_2.xml

    1974

  68. [68]

    Suppression of eddy diffusivity across jets in the Southern Ocean

    Ferrari R, Nikurashin M. Suppression of eddy diffusivity across jets in the Southern Ocean . Journal of Physical Oceanography. 2010;40(7):1501-19. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1175/2010JPO4278.1

    work page doi:10.1175/2010jpo4278.1 2010

  69. [69]

    A laboratory model for deep-seated jets on the gas giants

    Cabanes S, Aurnou J, Favier B, Le Bars M. A laboratory model for deep-seated jets on the gas giants. Nature Physics. 2017 Apr;13(4):387-90. Available from: http://www.nature.com/articles/nphys4001

    2017

  70. [70]

    Jet Formation and Evolution in Baroclinic Turbulence with Simple Topography

    Thompson AF. Jet Formation and Evolution in Baroclinic Turbulence with Simple Topography . Journal of Physical Oceanography. 2010 Feb;40(2):257-78. Available from: https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/phoc/40/2/2009jpo4218.1.xml

    2010

  71. [71]

    Estimating Suppression of Eddy Mixing by Mean Flows

    Klocker A, Ferrari R, LaCasce JH. Estimating Suppression of Eddy Mixing by Mean Flows . Journal of Physical Oceanography. 2012 Sep;42(9):1566-76. Available from: https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/phoc/42/9/jpo-d-11-0205.1.xml

    2012

  72. [72]

    Reynolds Stress and Eddy Diffusivity of β- Plane Shear Flows

    Srinivasan K, Young WR. Reynolds Stress and Eddy Diffusivity of β- Plane Shear Flows . Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences. 2014 Jun;71(6):2169-85. Available from: https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/atsc/71/6/jas-d-13-0246.1.xml

    2014

  73. [73]

    Complexity of Mesoscale Eddy Diffusivity in the Ocean

    Kamenkovich I, Berloff P, Haigh M, Sun L, Lu Y. Complexity of Mesoscale Eddy Diffusivity in the Ocean . Geophysical Research Letters. 2021;48(5):e2020GL091719. \_eprint: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1029/2020GL091719. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1029/2020GL091719

    work page doi:10.1029/2020gl091719 2021