The ingredients maps present one set of diagnostics of the five ingredients for precipitation in a 4-panel plot. The IM presented here does not require employment of these diagnostics as the only means of assessing the ingredients. In fact, at the heart of the IM is its flexibility to easily incorporate new means of diagnosing the ingredients. Many different sets of diagnostics can be used, without compromising the utility of the IM, as long as those diagnostics serve to assess the presence and strength of the ingredients. We invite extensions and improvements to the diagnostics employed for each ingredient, recognizing that any choice comes with limitations and that any one set of diagnostics will not be suitable for all forecasters in all regions. To date, several NWS WFOs have taken our ingredients scripts and tailored them to their own needs. We encourage other users to do the same.
In addition to the diagnostics for each individual ingredient, we also use a quantity to help identify regions where enhanced vertical motions can be expected due to the collocation of forcing and instability. It is well known that enhanced vertical motions might be expected where forcing for ascent and instability are collocated, and the diagnostic parameter PVQ can assist in identifying such collocations:
, computed only where both terms are negative , have a strong
likelihood for experiencing extreme precipitation events provided that sufficient moisture is
available.

Because the two quantities PVes and Q-vector divergence span a different range of values, the absolute magnitude of the quantity PVQ may be more sensitive to one than the other. Thus, PVQ is employed as an indicator of the potential for convective precipitation without regard to its absolute magnitude.
It is important to remember that PVes need not be negative for precipitation to fall. In fact, heavy snow often results from strong forcing alone. Therefore, contours of PVQ should only be used to identify areas of potentially convective snowfall. Many winter season precipitation events with sufficient forcing and moisture will be associated with postive PVes and, thus, zero PVQ.
In summary, PVQ is meant only to be a graphical aid that alerts a forecaster to the fact that two important ingredients (which can, synergistically, produce enhanced vertical motions) are coincident in time and space. When combined with an analysis of the five fundamental ingredients, PVQ can be a convenient, practical tool to help highlight where precipitation rates may be enhanced.
Through an analysis of the ingredients and PVQ on pressure surfaces and for the necessary cross-sections, the ingredients-based approach enables forecasters to address the following questions:
In addition, because all ingredient diagnostics rely on the accuracy of the model forecast, one must continually compare the model-generated ingredient parameters with observations.
Since the precipitation generation ingredients are so closely tied to the
synoptic scale, quantities such as sea level pressure, thickness, and temperature should
also be monitored to assess model verification.
Variations in these quantities from the model-predicted values could lead
to changes in the strength, timing, or location of the precipitation patterns.
The images below show the ingredients maps for the 24-hour NCEP-ETA model forecast valid at 0Z on January 27, 1996, for 800-850 hPa, 700-750 hPa, and 600-650 hPa. A key to the plots is also shown.
Ingredient Maps
Use of the ingredients based approach to forecasting winter season precipitation can be facilitated by the construction of ingredients maps that display
all ingredient diagnostics together in a convenient manner. This section introduces the ingredients
maps with an example from a convective snow event that occurred in southeastern
Wisconsin on January 26-27, 1996. Experience has shown that the application
of the IM for three thin layers in the lower- to mid-troposphere (800-850 hPa,
700-750 hPa, and 600-650 hPa) best captures the distribution of the ingredient parameters.
For storms with a deep sea level pressure
minimum or intense upper level dynamics, the 500-550 hPa analysis has proven informative.
However, there may be features in between these levels that are not captured by such an
analysis. These features can often be identified by evaluation of ingredient cross-sections
using the ingredients cross-sectional maps presented here.

850mb

700mb 
600mb
Key to the Plots:
Top Left Panel:
6-hour Model-Predicted QPF (shaded),
Mean Sea Level Pressure (mb, white),
and 500-1000mb Thickness (brown)
Top Right Panel:
Saturated Equivalent Potential Vorticity (shaded)
and Q-vector Divergence (white)
Bottom Left Panel:
Temperature (shaded 0C to -20C, yellow elsewhere)
and Full-Wind Frontogenesis (white)Bottom Right Panel:
Relative Humidity (shaded > 70%)
mixing ratio (red) and PVQ (green)
22z 26 Jan

23z 26 Jan

00z 27 Jan

01z 27 Jan 
Discussion of 0Z January 27 Ingredient Maps:
The 24-hour forecast of mean sea level pressure valid at 0Z on January 27, 1996
(shown on ingredients maps above) contained a well-developed mid-latitude cyclone
centered just south of the Wisconsin-Illinois border. This forecast will be used
in the remainder of this section to introduce the use of ingredients maps
in the ingredients-based methodology for winter season precipitation.
1. Precipitation Onset and Duration
If an area of vertical motion forcing coincides with relative humidity values of 80% or greater,
some precipitation
is likely. The ingredients maps valid at 0Z on January 27
show that QG forcing overlapped the contours of relative humidity greater than 80% over all
of Wisconsin except the northwestern corner. For this storm, this
agreement was observed throughout
the 850-600 hPa atmospheric layer. In some other cases, significant
variation in the vertical distribution of moisture requires additional consideration.
The surface observations for Wisconsin show that at 0Z and 1Z on
January 27, 1996, precipitation was
indeed reported throughout most of Wisconsin with the exception of the far northwestern portion
of the state.
Where nonzero PVQ overlaps sufficient moisture, heavy precipitation and possibly thunderstorms can occur. Although the region of positive PVQ in southeastern Wisconsin was close to the boundary of sufficient moisture, with only 70-80% relative humidity predicted for Milwaukee, moisture was abundant at lower levels and the strong vertical motions at 850 hPa and 700 hPa would have supplied the 600 hPa layer with ample moisture.
Thus, based on these ingredients maps, heavy precipitation and possible convection would be expected in southeast Wisconsin. Observations from this time indicate that thundersnow and heavy snow were indeed reported in the Milwaukee area at 0Z and 1Z (see surface observations).
Precipitation intensity can also be modulated by the efficiency ingredient. The 600 hPa and 700 hPa temperature in the ingredients maps can be used to assess the microphysical characteristics. If a region with sufficient moisture and upward vertical motion coincides with the temperature of maximum depositional ice crystal growth (-15 C) enhanced precipitation rates may result. In this case, the 600-650 hPa layer average air temperature in the vicinity of the PVQ maximum in southeast Wisconsin was -15C to -16C, providing additional evidence of the potential for high precipitation intensity.
Table 2: Example of a table for organizing the values of some winter precipitation ingredient parameters for the 0- to 48-hour forecasts of a numerical model (adapted from Wetzel, 2000)
The analysis of the ingredients maps requires considerable subjective judgment, however, certain guidelines have been found to apply in most situations.
Based on the information filled into the ingredients table, the ingredients approach enables the forecaster to answer the following questions:
The GM was designed to answer the question of "how much," but not the question of "where" (Garcia, 1994). It predicts the maximum accumulation for a region that has been pre-defined as an "area of concern" for snow. From an ingredients perspective, this area of concern constitutes the area where forcing for ascent is expected. By leaving the diagnosis of this element to forecasters, GM lends itself nicely to an incorporation with the ingredients approach. In fact, Garcia (1994) states that "the isentropic forecast procedure outlined in this paper is not a stand-alone technique but should be part of a comprehensive approach." Here, the physical basis and flexibility of the ingredients approach is incorporated with the quantitative prediction ability of GM to obtain reasonable estimates of snowfall over a broad region.
A discussion of the procedure for integrating GM with the ingredients
based approach is presented on pp. 106-114 of Wetzel (2000), available on
the download page or here as pdf (1 Mb) or postscript (6.6 Mb).
Step 6: Re-evaluate ingredient parameters as new model data becomes available and
note changes.
It is recommended that a forecaster perform all steps once initially and then modify the
results by indicating changes and trends as needed when new model data becomes available, as
opposed to repeating the whole
process for each new version of data. This aids in a comparison between
the new and the old model scenarios and decreases the amount of work required after the
first forecast is prepared.
Step 7: Monitor conditions as the storm develops to decide how well the ingredients are verifying.
As the storm begins, verification and modification become important.
Each forecasted ingredient should be compared to observable quantities to identify
problems in model verification or behavior that is not QG.
Since the smaller-scale precipitation generation mechanisms are so closely tied to the
synoptic scale, quantities such as sea level pressure, thickness, and temperature should
also be monitored. Variations in these quantities from the model prediction could lead
to changes in the strength, timing, or location of the precipitation patterns.
Additionally, as the precipitation develops outside of your forecast area, evaluate if this
is occurring as you'd expect based on the forecasted ingredients in those areas.
Are the signs of instability (convection, soundings) consistent with regions of negative PVes?