the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Spatio-Temporal Patterns of Accumulation and Surface Roughness in Interior Greenland with a GNSS-IR Network
Abstract. The dry snow zone is the largest region of the Greenland Ice Sheet, yet temporally and spatially dense observations of surface accumulation and surface roughness in this area are lacking. We use the global navigation satellite system (GNSS) interferometric reflectometry (GNSS-IR) technique with a novel, low-cost GNSS network of twelve stations in the vicinity of the ice sheet summit to reveal temporal and spatial patterns of accumulation of the upper snow layer. We show that individual measurements are highly precise (±2.8 cm), while the aggregate of hundreds of daily measurements across a large spatial footprint can detect millimeter-level surface changes and are biased by -2.7 ± 3.0 cm compared to a unique validation dataset that covers a similar spatial extent as the instrument sensing footprint. Using the validation dataset, we find that the reflectometry technique is most sensitive to the surrounding 4–20 m of the surface, with the antenna at a height of 1–2 m above ground level. Along with an exceptionally high rate of accumulation at the beginning of the study, we also detect an across-slope dependence in accumulation rates at yearly timescales. For the first time, we also validate GNSS-IR sensitivity to meter-scale surface heterogeneities such as sastrugi, and we construct a time series of seasonal surface roughness evolution that may hint at a seasonal pattern of heightened wintertime roughness features in this region. These surface accumulation and roughness measurements provide a novel dataset for these critical variables and show a statistically significant (p < 0.01) relationship with occurrences of both high winds and precipitation events, but only moderate correlations, suggesting other processes must also contribute to accumulation and enhanced surface roughness in the interior region of Greenland.
- Preprint
(8620 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: final response (author comments only)
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-2898', Anonymous Referee #1, 15 Nov 2024
Nice and very extensive analysis done on a set of low cost GNSS stations near Summit Station in Greenland. The authors compare their snow accumulation measurements derived from GNSS-IR to a set of snow stakes and find only small differences between the two datasets. The authors also attempt to quantify surface roughness within the sensing footprint and find a moderate correlation.
I don't have many comments though I wonder if additional details could be included in Figure 8--specifically, if for the precip panels the points could be colored by wind speed, and vice versa. Does that help at all with understanding some of the source for the scatter?
Also, do you have any ideas for why your analysis showed minimal differences between L1 and L2 signals, whereas (as you note) the Larson research group found more substantial differences?
Finally, do you have any comment for what might happen to the reflection data if another melt event were to occur at Summit, as I believe one did in 2019?
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2898-RC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Derek Pickell, 25 Nov 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2024/egusphere-2024-2898/egusphere-2024-2898-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Derek Pickell, 25 Nov 2024
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-2898', Anonymous Referee #2, 27 Nov 2024
The authors have established and analyzed a network of low cost GNSS instruments to measure snow accumulation and surface roughness in the vicinity of the Summit Station in Greenland thought the GNSS-IR technique. The use of GNSS technology for this type of measurement is very interesting as well as the use of low cost instruments. The experiment was well designed and conducted.
I have just few minor remarks, concerning the presentation of the results.
- No information about the type of low cost GNSS used
- In the Abstract: “show a statistically significant (p < 0.01)”. What do you mean for “p”? To avoid any doubts it is better to define it
- Line 192: (n=76), I suppose that “n” means “number of observations”, isn’t? So, I suggest to write (with 76 observations), later too.
- Line 194: (p = 1.4 x10-9), please write the meaning of “p”, that is used also later
- Line 295: “(64–65 cm-1)” ==> “(64–65 cm yr-1)”
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2898-RC2 -
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Derek Pickell, 28 Nov 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2024/egusphere-2024-2898/egusphere-2024-2898-AC2-supplement.pdf
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
197 | 68 | 22 | 287 | 3 | 4 |
- HTML: 197
- PDF: 68
- XML: 22
- Total: 287
- BibTeX: 3
- EndNote: 4
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1