the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Assessing the sensitivity of the Vanderford Glacier, East Antarctica, to basal melt and calving
Abstract. Vanderford Glacier is the fastest retreating glacier in East Antarctica; however, the dominant driver of the observed grounding line retreat remains largely unknown. The presence of warm modified Circumpolar Deep Water offshore Vanderford Glacier suggests that grounding line retreat may be driven by ice shelf basal melt, similar to the neighbouring Totten Glacier. Here, we use an ice sheet model to assess the relative contributions of basal melt and calving to mass loss and grounding line retreat at Vanderford Glacier. We compare simulations forced both by satellite-derived estimates of basal melt and calving, and varying magnitude idealised basal melt and ice-front retreat. Observed basal melt rates are too low to drive grounding line migration; instead, basal melt rates in excess of 50 m yr−1 at the grounding line are required to generate grounding line retreat similar to observations. By contrast, calving experiments suggest that > 80 % ice-front retreat – well in excess of the observed ice-front retreat since 1996 – needs to occur to generate grounding line retreat similar to observations. Our results suggest that grounding line retreat and dynamic mass loss at Vanderford Glacier is likely to be dominated by basal melt, with an almost negligible contribution from calving. However, basal melt rates that generate grounding line retreat in our idealised experiments are twice the current estimates, highlighting the need for improved constraints on basal melting in the Vincennes Bay region.
- Preprint
(7727 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(3843 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: final response (author comments only)
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-2060', Benjamin Getraer, 21 Sep 2024
General Comments
This manuscript contains valuable information and impressively comprehensive experimental results for guiding future modeling, data collection, and interpretation of Vanderford Glacier. However, currently the takeaways are not sufficiently clear, certain aspects of the methodology need to be more clearly explained and defended, and in general the manuscript needs to be edited for clarity and some technical errors.
The results here substantially contribute to the general understanding of Vanderford Glacier retreat, showing that observed calving has occurred in passive, non-buttressing ice, and did not contribute to the observed retreat rates. The authors' conclusion that basal melting likely is responsible for the observed grounding line retreat at Vanderford Glacier is important and well supported by their sensitivity testing, which suggests that high but plausible basal melt rates can reproduce observed retreat.
The authors interpret that because altimetry based estimates of melt rates are too low to reproduce observed grounding line retreat in their model, these observational datasets may be incorrect in this region. This conclusion may be valid but ought to be supported and discussed more quantitatively---two ways this analysis could be further improved are suggested in Specific Comments.
As the manuscript discusses in a few places, there are other factors which play a significant role in the simulated grounding line dynamics, and additional observational constraints which would improve future modeling efforts, beyond the melt rate itself. The presentation of these other factors can be improved, as currently the emphasis on the melt rate as a source of error and uncertainty in the abstract and conclusion does not reflect the more balanced discussion section. I offer more specific comments on balancing the discussion of sources of error in Specific Comments.
Some of the scientific methods and assumptions need to be more clearly outlined and/or defended. These are also addressed in Specific Comments.
Specific Comments
See Supplement.
Technical Comments
See Supplement.
-
RC2: 'Reply on RC1', Benjamin Getraer, 21 Sep 2024
Additional Technical Comment
line 612: space in doi link
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2060-RC2 - AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Lawrence Bird, 05 Nov 2024
- AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Lawrence Bird, 05 Nov 2024
-
RC2: 'Reply on RC1', Benjamin Getraer, 21 Sep 2024
-
RC3: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-2060', Tyler Pelle, 09 Oct 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2024/egusphere-2024-2060/egusphere-2024-2060-RC3-supplement.pdf
- AC2: 'Reply on RC3', Lawrence Bird, 05 Nov 2024
Data sets
Supporting Data - Assessing the sensitivity of the Vanderford Glacier, East Antarctica, to basal melt and calving. Lawrence Bird https://doi.org/10.26180/26170102
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
297 | 141 | 226 | 664 | 52 | 7 | 5 |
- HTML: 297
- PDF: 141
- XML: 226
- Total: 664
- Supplement: 52
- BibTeX: 7
- EndNote: 5
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1