How to handle glacier area change in geodetic mass balance

Innovations in geodesy enable widespread analysis of glacier surface elevation change and geodetic mass balance. However, coincident glacier area data are less widely available, causing inconsistent handling of glacier area change. Here we quantify the bias introduced into meters water equivalent (m...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of Glaciology
Main Authors: Caitlyn Florentine, Louis Sass, Christopher McNeil, Emily Baker, Shad O'Neel
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:English
Published: Cambridge University Press
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1017/jog.2023.86
https://doaj.org/article/0d079ba073ca42ac8af2133ea1b3592c
id ftdoajarticles:oai:doaj.org/article:0d079ba073ca42ac8af2133ea1b3592c
record_format openpolar
spelling ftdoajarticles:oai:doaj.org/article:0d079ba073ca42ac8af2133ea1b3592c 2024-02-11T09:54:50+01:00 How to handle glacier area change in geodetic mass balance Caitlyn Florentine Louis Sass Christopher McNeil Emily Baker Shad O'Neel https://doi.org/10.1017/jog.2023.86 https://doaj.org/article/0d079ba073ca42ac8af2133ea1b3592c EN eng Cambridge University Press https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0022143023000862/type/journal_article https://doaj.org/toc/0022-1430 https://doaj.org/toc/1727-5652 doi:10.1017/jog.2023.86 0022-1430 1727-5652 https://doaj.org/article/0d079ba073ca42ac8af2133ea1b3592c Journal of Glaciology, Pp 1-7 glacier mapping glacier mass balance mountain glaciers Environmental sciences GE1-350 Meteorology. Climatology QC851-999 article ftdoajarticles https://doi.org/10.1017/jog.2023.86 2024-01-21T01:42:05Z Innovations in geodesy enable widespread analysis of glacier surface elevation change and geodetic mass balance. However, coincident glacier area data are less widely available, causing inconsistent handling of glacier area change. Here we quantify the bias introduced into meters water equivalent (m w.e.) specific geodetic mass balance results when using a fixed, maximum glacier area, and illustrate the bias for five North American glaciers. Sites span latitudes from the northern U.S. Rocky Mountains (48°N) to the Central Alaska Range (63°N) between 1948 and 2021. Results show that fixed (maximum) area treatment subdues the m w.e. mass change signal, underestimating mass balance by up to 19% in our test cases. This bias scales with relative glacier area change and the mass balance magnitude. Thus, the bias for specific geodetic mass balances will be most pronounced across rapidly deglaciating regions. Our analysis underscores the need for temporally resolved glacier area in geodetic mass balance studies. Article in Journal/Newspaper alaska range glacier glaciers Journal of Glaciology Alaska Directory of Open Access Journals: DOAJ Articles Journal of Glaciology 1 19
institution Open Polar
collection Directory of Open Access Journals: DOAJ Articles
op_collection_id ftdoajarticles
language English
topic glacier mapping
glacier mass balance
mountain glaciers
Environmental sciences
GE1-350
Meteorology. Climatology
QC851-999
spellingShingle glacier mapping
glacier mass balance
mountain glaciers
Environmental sciences
GE1-350
Meteorology. Climatology
QC851-999
Caitlyn Florentine
Louis Sass
Christopher McNeil
Emily Baker
Shad O'Neel
How to handle glacier area change in geodetic mass balance
topic_facet glacier mapping
glacier mass balance
mountain glaciers
Environmental sciences
GE1-350
Meteorology. Climatology
QC851-999
description Innovations in geodesy enable widespread analysis of glacier surface elevation change and geodetic mass balance. However, coincident glacier area data are less widely available, causing inconsistent handling of glacier area change. Here we quantify the bias introduced into meters water equivalent (m w.e.) specific geodetic mass balance results when using a fixed, maximum glacier area, and illustrate the bias for five North American glaciers. Sites span latitudes from the northern U.S. Rocky Mountains (48°N) to the Central Alaska Range (63°N) between 1948 and 2021. Results show that fixed (maximum) area treatment subdues the m w.e. mass change signal, underestimating mass balance by up to 19% in our test cases. This bias scales with relative glacier area change and the mass balance magnitude. Thus, the bias for specific geodetic mass balances will be most pronounced across rapidly deglaciating regions. Our analysis underscores the need for temporally resolved glacier area in geodetic mass balance studies.
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author Caitlyn Florentine
Louis Sass
Christopher McNeil
Emily Baker
Shad O'Neel
author_facet Caitlyn Florentine
Louis Sass
Christopher McNeil
Emily Baker
Shad O'Neel
author_sort Caitlyn Florentine
title How to handle glacier area change in geodetic mass balance
title_short How to handle glacier area change in geodetic mass balance
title_full How to handle glacier area change in geodetic mass balance
title_fullStr How to handle glacier area change in geodetic mass balance
title_full_unstemmed How to handle glacier area change in geodetic mass balance
title_sort how to handle glacier area change in geodetic mass balance
publisher Cambridge University Press
url https://doi.org/10.1017/jog.2023.86
https://doaj.org/article/0d079ba073ca42ac8af2133ea1b3592c
genre alaska range
glacier
glaciers
Journal of Glaciology
Alaska
genre_facet alaska range
glacier
glaciers
Journal of Glaciology
Alaska
op_source Journal of Glaciology, Pp 1-7
op_relation https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0022143023000862/type/journal_article
https://doaj.org/toc/0022-1430
https://doaj.org/toc/1727-5652
doi:10.1017/jog.2023.86
0022-1430
1727-5652
https://doaj.org/article/0d079ba073ca42ac8af2133ea1b3592c
op_doi https://doi.org/10.1017/jog.2023.86
container_title Journal of Glaciology
container_start_page 1
op_container_end_page 19
_version_ 1790607521023524864