Revised Text for Xu Et Al

Supplementary Information for Does warmer China land attract more super typhoons? Xiangde Xu, Shiqiu Peng, Xiangjing Yang, Hongxiong Xu, Daniel Q. Tong , Dongxiao Wang , Yudi Guo, Johnny C. L. Chan, Lianshou Chen, Wei Yu, Yineng Li, Zhijuan Lai and Shengjun Zhang Correspondence to : [email protected]

This PDF file includes Materials and Methods Supporting Text Figs. S1-S13 Table S1 References

1. Materials and Methods

1. 1 Data description

The land surface temperature used in this study is obtained from the CMA archive of daily-mean land surface temperature measured at 753 stations over China (which has denser distribution in coastal regions of China) and interpolated to regular grid points with a resolution of 0.5°x 0.5° using the Cressman method (S1). A 9-point smoothing was applied 30 times to get the composite land surface temperature field at the time of 2 days before landfalls of each super typhoon in Figure 1, and three times to get the individual land surface temperature field in Figure 2. The result for each grid point after the 9-point smoothing is a weighted average of the grid point plus the 8 surrounding points with the weights of 1.0 (center point), 0.5 (the points at each side and above and below), and 0.3 (corner points). Any missing data points are not included in the sum; points beyond the grid boundary are considered to be missing. The location of highest

1 land surface temperature 1-4 days before the landfall of a typhoon is identified by a searching algorithm within a coastal area of 30 ° x30 ° centered at typhoon center.

The reanalysis data from the National Centers for Environmental Prediction

(NCEP) of the United States National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (US

NOAA), available 4 times a day at 0000 UTC, 0600 UTC, 1200 UTC, and 1800 UTC with horizontal resolution of 2.5ºx 2.5º (before 2000) or 1ºx 1º (on/after 2000), are used to derive the daily-mean 500-hPa potential height, the vertical velocity, the apparent heat  source (Q1 ), the apparent moisture sink (Q2 ), and the horizontal moisture flux ( F ).

1.2 Calculation of track deviation angle 1 and 2

Let A denote the location of the typhoon center two days before landfall, B the observed landfall location, and C the point of the highest land surface temperature within

° ° an area of 30 x30 centered at the typhoon center A at the time of two days before

landfall. Let1 and 2 represent deviation angles of tracks predicted by the surface land

temperature and the steering flow, respectively. As shown schematically in Fig. S1, 1 is

the angle between line AB and line AC, and 2 is the angle between line AB and the steering flow vector. A computer program is used to search for the point of the highest land surface temperature for each tropical cyclone and to calculate the corresponding

deviation angle 1 . The steering flow is calculated as a height- and area-averaged large- scale flow between 925 hPa and 300 hPa and over a ring-area with 3~8 grids away from the typhoon center.

Fig. S2 displays the land surface temperature of coastal China, the 500-hPa geopotential height, the observed tracks, the predicted tracks by the land surface

2 temperature, and the steering vectors at the time of two days before landfalls for 18 super

typhoons during 1960-2009. The deviation angles 1 and 2 are also shown in the right corner of each panel. Table S1 presents a statistics of the calculated track deviation angle

1 and the corresponding track type for all tropical cyclones making landfalls on the mainland of China during 1960-2009, together with their lowest sea level pressure, maximum wind speed and storm category. In Table S1 we bin all the landfall tracks into

5 groups based on the values of 1 : I (1 ≤15°), II (15°<1 ≤30°), III (30°<1 ≤45°),

IV (45°<1 <90°), and V (1 ≥90º) .

1.3 Calculation of temperature perturbation, apparent heat source ( Q1 ) and apparent moisture

sink (Q2 ), and horizontal water vapor flux

To examine the thermodynamic mechanism of the “warmward landfall” of typhoons, we analyze the spatial distribution and temporal evolution of temperature perturbation,

apparent heat source (Q1 ), apparent moisture sink (Q2 ), and vertical velocity for some typhoon cases. We calculate the temperature perturbation field by the following procedure. First, we apply a 9-point smoothing to the temperature field by 50 times, and

then subtract the smoothed field from the original field. The formulas for calculating Q1

and Q2 follow the scheme (S2):

 R dS抖 T p cp q Q1= = Cp [ + V籽 T + ( ) �w ] + Q 11 + Q 12 Q 13 (1) dt抖 t p0 p

dq抖 q qw Q= - L = - L[ +炎 qV + ] = Q + Q + Q (2) 2dt抖 t t 21 22 23

3 where S is the dry static energy which is the sum of enthalpy and potential energy S =CP

 T+gz, T the temperature, V the horizontal wind vector, p the pressure, p0 the reference pressure (usually set to 1000 hPa),  the vertical velocity,  the potential temperature, q

the specific water vapor, C p the specific heat content at constant pressure, L the latent

heat coefficient, and R the universal gas constant. Q11 and Q21 represent the terms of local change, Q12 and Q22 the terms of horizontal advection, and Q13 and Q23 the terms of vertical transportation.

To investigate the moisture supply for the convection activities over the landfalling typhoons and the warm land surface, the horizontal water vapor flux is calculated using the following formula:

 1  Q  Vq (3) g  Where V is the horizontal wind vector, q the specific water vapor and g the gravitational acceleration.

1.4 Model description and experimental setup

The model employed in this study is the Weather Research & Forecasting (WRF) model Version 3.3 with the Advanced Research (ARW) core (S3). WRF is a next- generation mesoscale numerical weather prediction system developed principally by the

National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) and the National Centers for

Environmental Prediction (NCEP). It was designed to serve both operational forecasting and atmospheric research needs, and is suitable for a broad spectrum of applications across scales ranging from meters to thousands of kilometers (S4). It employs s a fully compressible, Eulerian and nonhydrostatic control equation set, a terrain-following,

4 hydrostatic-pressure vertical coordinate system with the top of the model being a constant pressure surface, a horizontal Arakawa-C grid, and a third-order Runge-Kutta time integration scheme. The physical processes in WRF include microphysics, cumulus parameterization, planetary boundary layer (PBL), surface layer, land-surface, and longwave and shortwave radiations, with optional multi-schemes available for each process.

The super typhoon Longwang (2005), which made landfall on Fujian Province of

China (see Fig. S3), is selected for our numerical experiments. To see the sensitivity of the landfalling track of Longwang (2005) to the land surface temperature, we design a set of experiments by imposing different temperature increment t on the right or left hand side of the observed landing location and by initializing at 0000 30 Sept. 2005 (3 days before landing) and at 0000 UTC 1 Oct. 2005 (2 days before landing), respectively, and compare the predicted tracks with that by a control run without any change of land surface temperature. The following is a list of description for each experiment:

R1: t =5K, on the right;

L1: t =5K, on the left;

CNTR: control run, i.e., no change of land surface temperature.

Fig. S3 displays the distribution of land surface temperature after an increment t

=5K is imposed on the right or left hand side of the observed landfalling location at 0000

30 Sept. 2005 (3 days before landing).

5 Two nested domains with horizontal resolutions of 60 km and 20 km, respectively, are employed in all the experiments, with the central location of (22.2 ° N, 124.0 ° E).

There 36 layers in the vertical with the top at 10 hPa. The initial conditions (IC) and boundary conditions (BC) for the first guess are generated from the NCEP Final Analysis

° ° dataset of the Global Forecast System with 1 x1 horizontal resolution and 6-h interval.

The Thompson microphysics scheme (S5), Kain-Fritsch cumulus scheme (S6,S7,S8),

Goddard short wave (S9) and RRTM long wave (S10) radiation scheme, YSU PBL scheme （S11）, and NOAH land surface model (S12) are chosen in all experiments.

2. Supporting Text

Fig. S3 shows the scatter plot of the highest land surface temperature vs. year for super

typhoons with 1 ≤ 15° (with a total number of 25). It can be seen that there are 19 out of 25 with the LST higher than 31°C (indicated by the dashed line), accounting for 76%

of the total. Fig. S4 shows the scatter plot of the deviation angles 1 of the LST-predicted tracks vs. LST averaged over an area with radius of 600km centered at the landfall locations during 1960-2009 for typhoons, severe typhoons and super typhoons. A good

relationship between 1 and LST is found that 1 reduces with increasing LST, especially for super typhoons (with the highest value of R 2 =0.0839 where R is the

correlation coefficient). The linear fittings between 1 and LST for both typhoons and super typhoons exceed the t-test 90% confidence level.

Figs. S13-S15 display the vertical cross-sections of temperature perturbation and vertical velocity ( , negative value indicates upward motion) along the center of warm land surface and the central positions of typhoons at different time before their landfalls

6 of Jelawat (2000), Talim (2005) and Longwang (2005), respectively. From the vertical distribution of temperature perturbation, we found a warm center in the middle-upper atmosphere over the typhoon centers and another one in the lower atmosphere over the warm land surface. The former moved toward the latter until eventually merged together with it. From the vertical cross section of the vertical velocity, it is found that strong upward motions occurred over the typhoon “walls” and the warm land surface, accompanied by downward motions out of the typhoon “walls” and over the vicinity of warmer land surface. The downward motions out of the typhoon “walls” are important to maintain the upward motions inside the typhoon “wall” and thus the intensity of typhoons in the view of the mass balance. When typhoons moved toward the coastal regions, its downward motions out of the “walls” merged gradually with those at the vicinity of the warmer land surface and thus intensified, facilitating the maintenance or intensification of typhoons. Figs. S16-S18 display the vertical cross sections of the apparent heat source (

Q1 ), moisture sink (Q2 ) along the center of warm land surface and the central positions of typhoons at different time steps before landfalls. Two thermal cores, which extended from the low to the upper levels of the troposphere, can be also seen obviously over the warm land surface and the central positions of the typhoons at different time before landfalls, and the thermal cores of typhoons tended to approach those over the warm land surface and merged together with time. Therefore, from the vertical distribution of

temperature perturbation, vertical velocity, Q1 andQ2 , typhoons tended to move toward the place where they can gain energy and momentum to maintain their thermal structure as well as theirs upward motions.

7 3. Figs. S1-S14

Fig. S1 Schematic diagram for the deviation angles of land-temperature-predicted tracks (

1 ) and steering-flow-predicted tracks ( 2 ), where A, B and C denote the typhoon center, the observed landfall location and the point of highest land surface temperature, respectively, and the red arrow denotes the direction of steering flow. The point of highest land surface temperature is determined by searching within an area 30 ° x30 ° centered at the typhoon center at the time of 1-4 days before landfall.

8 9 10 Fig. S2 The land surface temperature (color shaded, unit: Celsius degree), 500-hPa geopotential height (dashed contour, unit: gpm) at the time of two days before landfall and the observed track of the super typhoon (a) Opal (1962), (b) Amy (1962), (c) Wendy (1967), (d) Emma (1967), (e) Elaine (1968), (f) Nadine (1971), (g) Billie (1976), (h) Kim (1980), (i) Percy (1980), (j) Wayne (1983), (k) Gordon (1989), (l) Amy (1991), (m) Omar (1992), (n) Herb (1996), (o) Winnie (1997), (p) Bilis (2000), (q) Talim (2005), and (r) Longwang (2005). A 9-point smoothing was applied to the land surface temperature for 3 times. The blue solid square denotes the location of highest land surface temperature within an area of 30°x30° surrounding the typhoon center at the time of two days before landfall, and the red empty dot denotes the location of landfall. The red arrow represents the steering flow.1 and 2 are the deviation angles of the predicted tracks by the land surface temperature and the steering flow, respectively (see Fig. S1).

11 40 38 e

r 36 u t 34 a r

e 32 p

m 30 e t

c 26 a f r 24 u s

n 20 a L

Identification number

Fig. S3 Scatter plot of the highest land surface temperature vs. year for super typhoons

with 1 < 15° (with a total number of 25) during 1960-2009. Dashed line indicates the criterion temperature value of 31°C, on and above which there are 19 cases, or 76% of the total.

12 Fig. S4 Scatter plot of the deviation angles of the land-surface-temperature-predicted tracks vs. land surface temperature averaged over an area with a radius of 600km centered at the landfalls of (a) typhoons., (b) severe typhoons, and (c) super typhoons during 1960-2009. Solid line represents the linear fit with the fitting equation, the square of correlation coefficient ( R2 ) and sample number (N) indicated on the upper right corner. The value of R2 corresponding to the t-test 90% significance level for typhoons

(N=74), severe typhoons (N=43), and super typhoons (N=59) is 0.0402, 0.0739, and

0.0514, respectively.

13 3 0 o N 3 0 8 O B S C N T R 2 8 o N 3 0 6

3 0 4 2 6 o N 3 0 2 2 4 o N 3 0 0 2 2 o N 2 9 8 o 2 0 N 1 1 0 o E 1 1 5 o E 1 2 0 o E 1 2 5 o E 1 3 0 o E 1 3 5 o E

3 0 o N 3 0 6 O B S C N T R 3 0 4 2 8 o N

3 0 2 2 6 o N 3 0 0 2 4 o N 2 9 8 2 2 o N 2 9 6 o 2 0 N 1 1 0 o E 1 1 5 o E 1 2 0 o E 1 2 5 o E 1 3 0 o E 1 3 5 o E

Fig. S5 The land surface temperature after an increment t =5K is imposed on the right

(top panel) or left (bottom panel) hand side of the observed landing location at 0000 UTC

30 Sept. 2005 (3 days before landing). The observed track (heavy solid line) and simulated track by the control run (thin solid line) are also shown in the figure.

Fig. S6 The averaged land surface temperature and the standard deviation (gray shaded)

10 days before and after the landfalls of (a) typhoons with 1 <15° and (b) super

typhoons with 1 < 15°.

Fig. S7 The time-height cross section of the mean temperature (shaded, unit: K) and water vapor (contour, unit: g·kg-1) anomalies (averaged over an area of 5º×5º centered at the landfall location) around the landfalls of (a) typhoons, (b)

super typhoons with 1 ＜15º during 2000-2009. The anomalies are calculated upon the mean of averaged from 10 days before landfall to 10 days after landfall, where is the mean of A (here A represents the air temperature or water vapor) on each vertical level and on each day from 10 days before to 10 days after landfall averaged over all typhoons and super typhoons.

16 b a

c 25 b

Fig S8 Surface winds (vector, unit: ms-1), divergence (contour, unit: 10-5 ·s-1) and land surface temperature (color shaded, unit: Celsius degree) of Longwang (2005) from reanalysis data at (a) 1800 UTC 30 SEP 2005, (b) 1800 UTC 01 OCT 2005, (c) 1800 UTC 02 OCT 2005. Black dots indicate the typhoon track with red empty circle denoting the position at the specific time.

17 c 25 a b

Fig S9 Surface winds (vector, unit: ms-1), vorticity (contour, unit: 10-5 ·s-1) and land surface temperature (color shaded, unit: Celsius degree) of Longwang (2005) from reanalysis data at (a) 1800 UTC 30 SEP 2005, (b) 1800 UTC 01 OCT 2005, (c) 1800 UTC 02 OCT 2005. Black dots indicate the typhoon track with red empty circle denoting the position at the specific time.

18 a b c

Fig.S10 Mean moisture flux (vectors, unit: g·kg-1m·s-1) and water vapor (color shaded, unit: g·kg-1) at lower levels (1000-700 hPa) for Longwang (2005) from experimental results of CTRL (left panels), L3 (middle panels) and R3 (right panels) at 1200 UTC 01 OCT 2005 (top panels) and 0600 UTC 02 OCT 2005 (bottom panels). The direction of the long axis of the ellipse represents the moving direction of the typhoon where water vapor is high over the warm land surface.

19 a b c

Fig.S11 Latent heat flux (color shaded, unit: W·m-2) at surface for Longwang (2005) from experimental results of CTRL (left panels), L1 (middle panels) and R1 (right panels) at 0000 UTC 01 OCT 2005 (top panels) and 0000 UTC 02 OCT 2005 (bottom panels).

20 a b c

Fig.S12 Planetary boundary layer height (unit: m) for Longwang (2005) from experimental results of CTRL (left panels), L1 (middle panels) and R1 (right panels) at 0000 UTC 01 OCT 2005 (top panels) and 0000 UTC 02 OCT 2005 (bottom panels).

21 a d

Fig. S13 The vertical cross sections of temperature perturbations (left panels a-c, unit: K) and vertical velocity  (right panels d-f, unit: 10-2Pa·s -1 ) along the center of warm land surface (indicated by the empty triangle) and the typhoon center of Jelawat (2000)

(indicated by the symbol ) at 0600 UTC 8 August (54h before landfall, top panels a and d) , 0600 UTC 9 August (30 h before landfall, middle panels b and e) and 0600 UTC 10

August 2000 (6 h before landfall, bottom panels c and f).

22 a d

Fig. S14 The vertical cross sections of temperature perturbations (left panels a-c, unit: K) and vertical velocity  (right panels d-f, unit: 10-2Pa·s -1 ) along the center of warm land surface (indicated by the empty triangle) and the typhoon center of Talim (2005) (indicated by the symbol ) at 0600 UTC 30 August (48 h before landfall, top panels a and d) , 0600 UTC 31 August (24 h before landfall, middle panels b and e) and 0600 UTC 1 September 2005 (0 h before landfall, bottom panels c and f).

23 a d

Fig. S15 The vertical cross sections of temperature perturbations (left panels a-c, unit: K) and vertical velocity  (right panels d-f, unit: 10-2Pa·s -1 ) along the center of warm land surface (indicated by the empty triangle) and the typhoon center of Longwang

(2005) (indicated by the symbol ) at 0600 UTC 30 September (57 h before landfall, top panels a and d) , 0600 UTC 1 October (33 h before landfall, middle panels b and e) and 0600 UTC 2 October 2005 (9 h before landfall, bottom panels c and f).

24 a c

Fig. S16 The vertical cross sections of apparent heat source Q1 (left panels a-b, unit: 10- 5Ks-1) and apparent moisture sink Q2 (right panels c-d, unit: 10-5Ks-1).along the center of warm land surface (indicated by the empty triangle) and the typhoon center of Jelawat

(2000) (indicated by the symbol ) at 0600 UTC 9 August 2000 (30 h before landfall, top panels a and c) and 0600 UTC 10 August 2000 (6 h before landfall, bottom panels b and d)..

25 a c

Fig. S17 The vertical cross sections of apparent heat source Q1 (left panels a-b, unit: 10-5Ks-1 ) and apparent moisture sink Q2 (right panels c-d, unit: 10-5Ks-1) along the center of warm land surface (indicated by the empty triangle) and the typhoon center of Talim (2005) (indicated by the symbol ) at 0600 UTC 30 August 2005 (48 h before landfall, top panels a and c) and 0600 UTC 1 September 2005 (0 h before landfall, bottom panels b and d).

26 a c

Fig. S18 The vertical cross sections of apparent heat source Q1 (left panels a-b, unit: 10-5Ks-1 ) and apparent moisture sink Q2 (right panels c-d, unit: 10-5Ks-1) along the center of warm land surface (indicated by the empty triangle) and the typhoon center of Longwang (2005) (indicated by the symbol ) at 0600 UTC 1 October 2005 (33 h before landfall, top panels a and c) and 0600 UTC 2 October 2005 (9 h before landfall, bottom panels b and d).

27 Fig. S19 Mean soil-air temperature difference (averaged over an area with radius of 600km centered at the warmest land surface two days before

landfall) 10 days before and after the landfalls of typhoons (black curve) and super

typhoons (red curve) with 1 ＜15ºduring 1960-2009.

Fig. S20 The averaged land surface temperature and the standard deviation (gray shaded)

10 days before and after the landfalls of (a) typhoons with 1 < 15° and (b) super

typhoons with 1 < 15°.

29 Fig. S21 Scatter plot of the deviation angles of the land-surface-temperature-predicted tracks vs. soil-air temperature difference averaged over an area with a radius of 600km centered at the landfalls of (a) typhoons., (b) severe typhoons, and (c) super typhoons during 1960-2009. Solid line represents the linear fit with the fitting equation, the square of correlation coefficient ( R2 ) and sample number (N) indicated on the upper right corner. The value of R2 corresponding to the t-test 90% significance level for typhoons

(N=74), severe typhoons (N=43), and super typhoons (N=59) is 0.0402, 0.0739, and

0.0514, respectively.

30 4. Table Table S1 Statistics of all typhoons, severe typhoons and super typhoons which made landfalls on the mainland of China (those that only made landfalls on the islands of Hainan and Taiwan are excluded here) during 1960-2009*. time LSLP MWS Landfall Storm name/# Storm category (month/year) (hPa) (m/s) 1 2 Group

Mary/6001 6/1960 970 45 severe typhoon 57.7 5.8 IV

Polly/6005 7/1960 947 70 super typhoon 55.3 13.8 IV

Shirley/6007 8/1960 910 70 super typhoon 3.7 15.1 I

Trix/6008 8/1960 928 65 super typhoon 41.0 37.1 IV Elaine/6016 8/1960 975 40 typhoon 41.6 68.5 IV Alice/6103 05/1961 975 40 typhoon 43.5 1.1 III Elsie/6110 07/1961 974 50 severe typhoon 51.2 54.8 IV

June/6115 08/1961 960 50 severe typhoon 46.4 27.8 III

Lorna/6120 08/1961 950 65 super typhoon 37.2 23.8 III Olga/6121 09/1961 980 35 typhoon 24.2 7.5 II Pamela/6122 09/1961 909 85 super typhoon 21.0 14.7 II Sally/6125 09/1961 980 40 typhoon 12.3 13.2 I Kate/6205 07/1962 967 40 typhoon 6.5 23.2 I Patsy/6209 08/1962 975 35 typhoon 50.9 1.4 IV Opal/6208 08/1962 900 75 super typhoon 6.6 13.0 I Wanda/6213 09/1962 949 50 severe typhoon 34.1 15.6 III

Amy/6214 09/1962 935 65 super typhoon 18.2 7.6 II

Dinah/6217 10/1962 953 50 severe typhoon 0.1 27.0 I Trix/6304 06/1963 980 35 typhoon 11.9 5.1 I Wendy/6306 07/1963 922 70 super typhoon 0.6 5.4 I

Lgloria/6312 09/1963 918 70 super typhoon 14.1 22.4 III Viola/6402 05/1964 980 35 typhoon 40.1 16.1 III Helen/6410 08/1964 931 75 super typhoon 89.0 17.1 V

Ida/6411 08/1964 925 85 super typhoon 43.8 41.6 III

Ruby/6415 09/1964 960 45 severe typhoon 36.2 13.6 III

Sally/6416 09/1964 896 100 super typhoon 58.3 22.0 IV

31 Dot/6423 10/1964 975 45 severe typhoon 52.8 16.8 IV

Harriet/6510 07/1965 977 45 severe typhoon 9.9 3.7 II

Mary/6513 08/1965 939 75 super typhoon 23.1 2.4 II

Rose/6517 09/1965 980 50 severe typhoon 25.1 33.3 II

Mamie/6606 07/1966 987 35 typhoon 50.2 3.8 IV

Ora/6608 07/1966 970 45 severe typhoon 25.0 38.6 II

Tess/6611 08/1966 972 45 severe typhoon 20.7 49.0 II Winnie/6612 08/1966 971 35 typhoon 82.3 16.8 V

Alice/6614 09/1966 937 60 super typhoon 0.3 5.1 I Cora/6615 09/1966 917 65 super typhoon 28.6 46.1 III Anita/6702 06/1967 975 45 severe typhoon 21.6 21.5 II

Clara/6704 07/1967 960 50 severe typhoon 34.9 67.7 III

Dot/6705 07/1967 975 35 typhoon 108.8 12.9 V

Fran/6706 08/1967 970 35 typhoon 28.4 58.7 II Kate/6711 08/1967 980 35 typhoon 52.6 19.3 III Nora/6714 08/1967 982 35 typhoon 7.5 26.3 I Emma/6720 11/1967 908 65 super typhoon 7.6 3.5 I Shirley/6808 08/1968 962 40 typhoon 43.4 25.5 III Elaine/6814 10/1968 908 75 super typhoon 21.3 6.5 II Viola/6903 07/1969 896 75 super typhoon 23.7 12.9 II Betty/6906 08/1969 962 40 typhoon 13.9 21.1 I

Elsie/6911 09/1969 888 85 super typhoon 13.0 6.8 II

Georgia/7011 09/1970 904 65 super typhoon 42.1 1.5 III

Joan/7013 10/1970 901 75 super typhoon 1.5 10.5 I

Dinah/7106 05/1971 963 40 typhoon 2.1 0.6 IV

Freda/7108 06/1971 978 35 typhoon 55 34.6 IV Gilda/7109 06/1971 968 45 severe typhoon 56.6 9.6 IV Lucy/7114 07/1971 912 60 super typhoon 41.7 46.1 III

32 Nadian/7115 07/1971 896 70 super typhoon 13.1 15.8 I

Rose/7118 08/1971 959 60 super typhoon 46.4 10.8 III

Agnes/7122 09/1971 976 40 typhoon 9.6 29.1 I

Bess/7123 09/1971 905 65 super typhoon 22.5 7.7 II Ora/7202 06/1972 981 40 typhoon 8.6 10.8 I Rita/7203 07/1972 911 65 super typhoon 74.0 62.1 V Susan/7204 07/1972 980 45 severe typhoon 125.6 74.6 V Betty/7209 08/1972 910 60 super typhoon 7.5 5.5 I

Pamela/7220 11/1972 940 50 severe typhoon 43.3 30.2 III

Wilda/7301 07/1973 978 35 typhoon 1.9 32.8 I

Billie/7303 07/1973 917 65 super typhoon 48.0 37.6 III Dot/7304 07/1973 975 35 typhoon 2.6 36.6 I Georgia/7307 08/1973 960 35 typhoon 4.8 19.4 I Nora/7315 10/1973 875 70 super typhoon 30.6 32.3 III

Mary/7413 08/1974 964 35 typhoon 4.6 0.6 I

Irma/7427 12/1974 939 50 severe typhoon 30.2 35.7 II

Ora/7504 08/1975 970 40 typhoon 13.6 14.9 I

Nina/7503 08/1975 900 65 super typhoon 17.2 0.6 II

Betty/7511 09/1975 948 40 typhoon 0.8 0.5 I

Doris/7513 10/1975 970 35 typhoon 43.1 13.4 III Flossie/7515 10/1975 970 35 typhoon 7.6 64.9 I Violet/7610 07/1976 970 35 typhoon 2.5 73.2 I Billie/7613 08/1976 910 60 super typhoon 7.6 21.5 I Clara/7614 08/1976 978 35 typhoon 3.4 27.4 I Thelma/7704 07/1977 945 45 severe typhoon 28.4 13.0 II Vera/7705 08/1977 925 55 super typhoon 24.8 17.9 II

Babe/7708 09/1977 906 70 super typhoon 45.0 51.8 IV

33 Trix/7805 07/1978 970 40 typhoon 1.3 3.5 I

Agnes/7807 07/1978 960 40 typhoon 63.0 12.3 IV

Elaine/7812 08/1978 965 35 typhoon 21.8 72.3 II Hope/7908 08/1979 898 70 super typhoon 27.9 11.6 III Kim/8009 07/1980 908 60 super typhoon 8.9 13.5 I Norris/8012 08/1980 954 45 severe typhoon 7.8 18.4 I Percy/8015 09/1980 915 60 super typhoon 9.3 3.8 I Clara/8116 09/1981 924 60 super typhoon 25.5 17.7 I Dot/8212 08/1982 971 35 typhoon 22.7 36.9 III Wayne/8304 07/1983 912 65 super typhoon 21.6 12.0 I Ellen/8309 09/1983 928 60 super typhoon 40.2 0.0 III Ed/8406 07/1984 947 55 super typhoon 29.0 8.5 II Ike/8410 09/1984 947 50 severe typhoon 3.0 25.0 I Hal/8504 06/1985 958 40 typhoon 39.1 17.5 III Jeff/8506 07/1985 965 40 typhoon 16.8 2.7 II Mamie/8509 08/1985 980 35 typhoon 54.4 55.9 IV Nelson/8510 08/1985 955 50 severe typhoon 8.4 22.5 I Tess/8515 09/1985 965 40 typhoon 9.2 23.5 I Peggy/8607 07/1986 900 65 super typhoon 6.2 36.6 I Ruth/8702 06/1987 982 35 typhoon 13.6 39.4 I Alex/8707 07/1987 970 35 typhoon 15.9 15.1 II Gerald/8712 09/1987 955 45 severe typhoon 28.7 5.5 III Lynn/8719 10/1987 910 70 super typhoon 15.8 104.2 II Warren/8805 07/1988 945 55 super typhoon 26.7 6.2 II

Bill/8807 08/1988 970 35 typhoon 18.8 26.9 II

Kit/8817 09/1988 970 35 typhoon 32.4 6.0 III Brenda/8903 05/1989 970 35 typhoon 25.3 0.1 II Gordon/8908 07/1989 920 65 super typhoon 24.4 18.6 II Hope/8909 07/1989 975 40 typhoon 17.7 16.8 II Ofelia/9005 06/1990 965 40 typhoon 30.2 4.9 II Percy/9006 06/1990 950 45 severe typhoon 14.0 35.7 I Tasha/9009 07/1990 970 35 typhoon 13.1 23.0 I Yancy/9012 08/1990 955 45 severe typhoon 39.9 27.5 IV

Abe/9015 08/1990 955 45 severe typhoon 12.9 7.8 I

Amy/9107 07/1991 930 55 super typhoon 12.5 7.2 I

34 Brendan/9108 07/1991 975 35 typhoon 42.7 19.7 III Nat/9119 10/1991 940 50 severe typhoon 54.9 16.9 IV Gary/9207 07/1992 975 35 typhoon 76.0 34.6 IV Omar/9215 09/1992 925 55 super typhoon 10.6 28.1 I

Polly/9216 08/1992 975 35 typhoon 32.3 4.6 III

Ted/9219 09/1992 975 35 typhoon 57.9 15.6 IV Irma/9302 06/1993 920 60 super typhoon 7.1 25.2 I Tasha/9309 08/1993 970 35 typhoon 96.2 76.1 IV Abe/9315 09/1993 945 50 severe typhoon 31.1 26.3 III Becky/9316 09/1993 975 35 typhoon 42.0 17.9 III Dot/9318 09/1993 965 40 typhoon 44.6 99.8 III Ira/9323 11/1993 950 45 severe typhoon 22.1 25.4 II

Tim/9406 07/1994 935 55 super typhoon 17.1 32.3 II

Doug/9414 08/1994 935 50 severe typhoon 3.2 172.7 I

Ellie/9415 08/1994 960 40 typhoon 68.4 6.4 IV

Fred/9417 08/1994 935 55 super typhoon 13.8 29.4 I

Gladys/9418 09/1994 950 45 severe typhoon 18.1 18.9 II

Lois/9509 08/1995 945 50 severe typhoon 40.5 24.0 III

Sibyl/9515 10/1995 975 33 typhoon 44.4 5.4 III Gloria/9607 07/1996 965 40 typhoon 6.5 29.5 I Herb/9608 08/1996 935 55 super typhoon 13.4 43.2 I Sally/9615 09/1996 935 50 severe typhoon 19.8 2.0 II Winnie/9711 08/1997 920 60 super typhoon 7.2 11.5 I Amber/9714 08/1997 940 50 severe typhoon 3.6 36.8 I Todd/9806 09/1998 960 40 typhoon 22.8 42.1 II Leo/9902 05/1999 970 35 typhoon 68.8 58.5 IV Maggie/9903 06/1999 960 40 typhoon 14.3 42.7 I Sam/9908 08/1999 975 33 typhoon 20.6 28.2 II Dan/9914 10/1999 965 40 typhoon 86.1 45.8 IV Jelawat/0008 08/2000 950 45 severe typhoon 1.7 37.8 I Bilis/0010 08/2000 930 55 super typhoon 12.6 7.8 I Durian/0103 07/2001 970 35 typhoon 74.0 37.4 IV

35 Utor/0104 07/2001 965 35 typhoon 43.6 19.3 III Yutu/0107 07/2001 975 33 typhoon 58.0 14.5 IV Nari/0116 09/2001 960 40 typhoon 4.2 68.8 I Fengsheng/0209 07/2002 925 55 super typhoon 70.3 19.0 IV Sinlaku/0216 09/2002 950 45 severe typhoon 18.4 15.7 II Imbudo/0307 07/2003 945 50 severe typhoon 45.0 23.2 III Dujuan/0313 09/2003 950 45 severe typhoon 18.9 19.8 II Rananim/0414 08/2004 950 45 severe typhoon 20.5 21.1 II Aere/0418 08/2004 960 40 typhoon 4.6 82.1 I Haitang/0505 07/2005 920 60 super typhoon 5.0 15.3 I Matsa/0509 08/2005 950 45 severe typhoon 47.3 32.5 IV Talim/0513 09/2005 935 55 super typhoon 8.8 13.9 I Khanun/0515 09/2005 945 50 severe typhoon 35.0 6.9 III Longwang/0519 10/2005 935 55 super typhoon 13.6 0.4 II

*Listed in the table are the storm name/number, occurring time, lowest sea level pressure

(LSLP), maximum wind speed (MWS), storm category, track deviation angle 1 for land- temperature-predicted track and 2 for steering-flow-predicted track, and the corresponding track group.

Table S2 The mean deviation angles 1 (2 ) (unit: degree) of land-temperature-predicted (steering-flow-predicted) tracks compared against the observed tracks for different categories of typhoons making landfalls on the mainland of China during 1960-

2009.These mean deviation angles 1 (2 ) are averaged over different latitude at the distance L between the typhoon position at the time of two days before landing and the landing location. Category of TC 15°~20° 20°~25° 25°~30° (Num of Events) Super_Typhoon (30) 29.22(17.05) 18.22(20.62) 17.90(28.80) L<800km Strong_Typhoon (23) 34.91(27.34) 38.51(31.08) 13.60(34.17) Typhoon (51) 32.02(27.74) 36.46(36.97) 19.48(30.83) Total (104) 32.05(24.04) 31.06(29.55) 16.99(31.27) Super_Typhoon (29) 20.57(17.17) 14.37(16.15) 41.93(29.82) L>800km Strong_Typhoon (20) 29.87(17.78) 16.73(18.68) NaN(NaN) 36 Typhoon (23) 31.49(21.47) 16.13(24.30) 12.05(22.80) Total (72) 27.31(18.81) 15.75(19.71) 26.99(26.31)

5. References： S1. G. Cressman, An operational objective analysis system. Mon. Wea. Rev. 87, 367–374 (1959). S2. Y. H. Ding, Y. Z. Liu, The effect of vertical transports of heat and moisture by cumulus convection in typhoon. Advances in Atmospheric Sciences 4(3), 278-286 (1987). S3. W.C. Skamarock, J. B. Klemp, J. Dudhia, D. O. Gill, D. M. Barker, M. G. Duda X.-Y. Huang, W. Wang, J. G. Powers, A description of the Advanced Research WRF version 3, NCAR Technical Note NCAR/TN-475+STR, Boulder, Colorado (2008).

37 S4. J. Michalakes, J. Dudhia, D. Gill, J. Klemp, W. Skamarock, Design of a next- generation regional weather research and forecast model. Towards Teracomputing, World Scientific, River Edge, New Jersey 117–124 (1998). S5. G. Thompson, P. R. Field, R. M. Rasmussen, W. D. Hall, Explicit Forecasts of Winter Precipitation Using an Improved Bulk Microphysics Scheme. Part II: Implementation of a New Snow Parameterization. Mon. Wea. Rev., 136, 5095-5115 (2008). S6. J. S. Kain, J. M. Fritsch, A one-dimensional entraining/detraining plume model and its application in convective parameterization. J. Atmos. Sci. 47, 2784–2802 (1990) S7. J. S. Kain, J. M. Fritsch, Convective parameterization for mesoscale models: The Kain-Fritcsh scheme, in The representation of cumulus convection in numerical models, edited by K. A. Emanuel and D. J. Raymond, p. 246, Amer. Meteor. Soc. (1993). S8. J. S. Kain, The Kain–Fritsch Convective Parameterization: An Update. J. Appl. Metor. 43, 170-181 (2004). S9. M.-D. Chou, M. J. Suarez, An efficient thermal infrared radiation parameterization for use in general circulation models. NASA Tech. Memo, 104606, 3 (1994). S10. E. J. Mlawer, S. J. Taubman, P. D. Brown, M. J. Iacono, S. A. Clough, Radiative transfer for inhomogeneous atmosphere: RRTM, a validated correlated-k model for the longwave. J. Geophys. Res. 102 (D14), 16663–16682 (1997). S11. S.-Y. Hong, Y. Noh, J. Dudhia, A new vertical diffusion package with an explicit treatment of entrainment processes. Mon. Wea. Rev. 134, 2318–2341 (2006). S12. F. Chen, J. Dudhia, Coupling an Advanced Land Surface–Hydrology Model with the Penn State–NCAR MM5 Modeling System. Part I: Model Implementation and Sensitivity. Mon. Wea. Rev. 129, 569-585 (2001).