the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Five decades of Abramov glacier dynamics reconstructed with multi-sensor optical remote sensing
Abstract. Reference glacier sites with systematic in situ monitoring provide crucial information to understand trends in regional change. Throughout Central Asia, several sites have been established over the past 15 years, often restarting long-term time series interrupted after the Soviet Union collapse. The region also features widespread ice flow instabilities, including surge-type glaciers. Unstable ice dynamics have been usually observed within large-scale remote sensing studies, with limited ground validation or historical observations. This hampers interpretation of the driving factors of glacier change, their interaction with mass balance, and regional representativity of single glaciers. Here, we reconstruct ice dynamics at the reference Abramov glacier using satellite-based optical remote sensing. The glacier, monitored in situ over 1967–1999 and again since 2011, experienced a well-documented episode of fast flow in 1972–1973. We compile a 55-year dataset of digital elevation models (DEMs) and orthoimages by processing raw and analysis-ready imagery from multiple archives. Our estimates for glacier length and volume changes agree well with previous in situ, remote sensing, and model studies. We describe a second unobserved pulsation (2000–2005) at subseasonal scale, not resolved by Landsat or ASTER products. We also measure the buildup to a third active phase, with doubling of mean annual velocity since 2011 despite a continued mass loss of −0.55 ± 0.06 m w.e. yr−1. The collected evidence indicates that Abramov is a surge-type glacier with a recurrence time of 20–30 years, challenging its representativity for regional mass balance. However, our results also suggest a potential ongoing transition towards more stable dynamics.
- Preprint
(5827 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-2169', Anonymous Referee #1, 20 Aug 2024
See attached file.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2169-RC1 -
RC2: 'Reply on RC1', Anonymous Referee #1, 20 Aug 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2024/egusphere-2024-2169/egusphere-2024-2169-RC2-supplement.pdf
-
AC4: 'Reply on RC2', Enrico Mattea, 04 Nov 2024
Please see attached comment to first message
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2169-AC4
-
AC4: 'Reply on RC2', Enrico Mattea, 04 Nov 2024
- AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Enrico Mattea, 04 Nov 2024
-
RC2: 'Reply on RC1', Anonymous Referee #1, 20 Aug 2024
-
RC3: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-2169', Anonymous Referee #2, 06 Sep 2024
In this paper, the authors have utilized an impressive array of remote sensing datasets and applied a range of techniques to produce a 50+ year record of surface ice velocity, elevation change, and terminus position change for Abramov glacier. I found this paper very easy to read and follow, with both the data processing and characterization of uncertainty well-explained. The results are well-demonstrated, and provide good support for (almost) all of the conclusions. As such, I have only relatively minor comments on the manuscript that should be easy to address.
- l. 11: "unobserved" pulsation. In the comparison with Mandychev et al. (2017), you show that those authors observed an advance of the glacier, reported as beginning in 2000 (rather than 2002, as you have shown). This seems to be a contradiction with the claim here (and in the conclusions), that this pulsation is "unobserved". The claim that this is better captured by your data/observations than in previous global datasets or other studies is not quite the same thing, so I feel that this claim should be softened somewhat.
- l. 38-39: suggest "... found that data inconsitencies and regional simplifications hinder interpretation ..."
- l. 258: "within bins": what size are the bins used here?
- Fig. 4: would it be possible to include different symbols/patterns to help differentiate the colors here?
- Fig. 5: same comment for panels (c, d) and (g, h) as for Fig. 4
- Appendix E: I think this is worth moving to the main text. Similar to another recent TC paper (Liu et al., 2024), it demonstrates that while global-scale products are phenomenal achievements and resources for the community, there can be some limitations to that can be improved with additional data and/or more bespoke processing.
References
- Liu, J., Gendreau, M., Enderlin, E. M., and Aberle, R.: Improved records of glacier flow instabilities using customized NASA autoRIFT (CautoRIFT) applied to PlanetScope imagery, The Cryosphere, 18, 3571–3590, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-3571-2024, 2024.
- Mandychev, A. N., Usubaliev, R. A., and Azisov, E. A.: Changes of the Abramov Glacier (Alay Ridge) from 1850 to 2014, Ice and Snow,
57, 326–333, https://doi.org/10.15356/2076-6734-2017-3-326-333, 2017.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2169-RC3 - AC2: 'Reply on RC3', Enrico Mattea, 04 Nov 2024
-
RC4: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-2169', Benoît Lauzon, 30 Sep 2024
- AC3: 'Reply on RC4', Enrico Mattea, 04 Nov 2024
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-2169', Anonymous Referee #1, 20 Aug 2024
See attached file.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2169-RC1 -
RC2: 'Reply on RC1', Anonymous Referee #1, 20 Aug 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2024/egusphere-2024-2169/egusphere-2024-2169-RC2-supplement.pdf
-
AC4: 'Reply on RC2', Enrico Mattea, 04 Nov 2024
Please see attached comment to first message
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2169-AC4
-
AC4: 'Reply on RC2', Enrico Mattea, 04 Nov 2024
- AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Enrico Mattea, 04 Nov 2024
-
RC2: 'Reply on RC1', Anonymous Referee #1, 20 Aug 2024
-
RC3: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-2169', Anonymous Referee #2, 06 Sep 2024
In this paper, the authors have utilized an impressive array of remote sensing datasets and applied a range of techniques to produce a 50+ year record of surface ice velocity, elevation change, and terminus position change for Abramov glacier. I found this paper very easy to read and follow, with both the data processing and characterization of uncertainty well-explained. The results are well-demonstrated, and provide good support for (almost) all of the conclusions. As such, I have only relatively minor comments on the manuscript that should be easy to address.
- l. 11: "unobserved" pulsation. In the comparison with Mandychev et al. (2017), you show that those authors observed an advance of the glacier, reported as beginning in 2000 (rather than 2002, as you have shown). This seems to be a contradiction with the claim here (and in the conclusions), that this pulsation is "unobserved". The claim that this is better captured by your data/observations than in previous global datasets or other studies is not quite the same thing, so I feel that this claim should be softened somewhat.
- l. 38-39: suggest "... found that data inconsitencies and regional simplifications hinder interpretation ..."
- l. 258: "within bins": what size are the bins used here?
- Fig. 4: would it be possible to include different symbols/patterns to help differentiate the colors here?
- Fig. 5: same comment for panels (c, d) and (g, h) as for Fig. 4
- Appendix E: I think this is worth moving to the main text. Similar to another recent TC paper (Liu et al., 2024), it demonstrates that while global-scale products are phenomenal achievements and resources for the community, there can be some limitations to that can be improved with additional data and/or more bespoke processing.
References
- Liu, J., Gendreau, M., Enderlin, E. M., and Aberle, R.: Improved records of glacier flow instabilities using customized NASA autoRIFT (CautoRIFT) applied to PlanetScope imagery, The Cryosphere, 18, 3571–3590, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-3571-2024, 2024.
- Mandychev, A. N., Usubaliev, R. A., and Azisov, E. A.: Changes of the Abramov Glacier (Alay Ridge) from 1850 to 2014, Ice and Snow,
57, 326–333, https://doi.org/10.15356/2076-6734-2017-3-326-333, 2017.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2169-RC3 - AC2: 'Reply on RC3', Enrico Mattea, 04 Nov 2024
-
RC4: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-2169', Benoît Lauzon, 30 Sep 2024
- AC3: 'Reply on RC4', Enrico Mattea, 04 Nov 2024
Model code and software
Software pipelines developed for the publication Enrico Mattea https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.12731407
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
395 | 148 | 209 | 752 | 8 | 10 |
- HTML: 395
- PDF: 148
- XML: 209
- Total: 752
- BibTeX: 8
- EndNote: 10
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1