the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Predicted and observed glacier pulsations in the Hissar-Alay of Central Asia
Abstract. Surge-like glacier instabilities in Central Asia remain underexplored, particularly in regions where such phenomena have low intensity or are poorly captured by existing inventories. In 1980, Glazirin and Shchetinnikov (GS1980) proposed a classification method to calculate the spatial distribution of "pulsating" glaciers in the Hissar-Alay range, predicting unstable flow at 194 candidates – over 20 % of the examined sample – and claiming highly accurate detection (above 75 %). This stands in contrast to the very limited number of pulsations found in subsequent studies, which typically report fewer than 10 surge-type glaciers within the region.
Here, we address this discrepancy by reassessing the GS1980 predictions, using a newly compiled multi-sensor satellite dataset covering nearly six decades. We systematically examine glacier dynamics in the region, assessing ice flow instabilities from changes in terminus position, ice thickness, and surface morphology. We identify 171 glaciers that exhibit pulsating behavior, corresponding to 25 % of the sample. Flow instabilities tend to be modest in scale, with slow advances and long active phases (mean duration of 14 years). We find that the GS1980 model shows some ability to distinguish pulsating from stable-flowing glaciers; however, its predictive power is lower than claimed, due to the simplifying assumptions of its morphology-based approach and the uncertainties in the input data.
Our results indicate that pulsations in the region are more widespread than previously reported, but fall at the weaker end of the spectrum of glacier instability, which may not be well represented by a sharp binary classification (surge-type versus stable). As more detailed satellite records become available, we suggest that a more nuanced framework may be useful to recognize and interpret subtler instabilities of small glaciers.
- Preprint
                                        (6979 KB) 
- Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 31 Oct 2025)
- 
                     RC1:  'Comment on egusphere-2025-4068', Anonymous Referee #1, 21 Oct 2025
                        
                                
                        
            
                        
                                   reply
                            
                        
            
                            
                    
            
            
            
                        The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2025/egusphere-2025-4068/egusphere-2025-4068-RC1-supplement.pdfReplyCitation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-4068-RC1 
- 
                     RC2:  'Comment on egusphere-2025-4068', Anonymous Referee #2, 23 Oct 2025
            
                        
                                   reply
                            
                        
            
                            
                    
            
            
            
                        General overview This study provides an interesting and useful analysis of glacier variations in the Hissar-Alay mountain range, identifying many apparently new ‘pulsations’. I found the text to be clear and easy to follow, although I’m a bit puzzled by the focus of the paper on testing predictions by a somewhat obscure publication by Glazirin and Shchetinnikov (GS1980), which is essentially unknown in the western world. This is particularly the case when it is not even known which glaciers GS1980 performed their model training on (see L601). I don’t see what new insights this model testing provides, particularly since little information is provided in the current study about what morphological parameters are most common to pulsating glaciers. I therefore think that this paper could be much more useful, and have a more meaningful impact on our knowledge of glacier variability, if it was reorganized a bit and some key areas were addressed, particularly in relation to: - Providing clearer information as to how a glacier is defined as ‘pulsating’, and whether a ‘pulsation’ can just be caused some kind of positive mass balance, or whether it really reflects some kind of dynamic instability related to surging
- Undertaking some kind of climate analysis (which would particularly help with the previous point)
- De-emphasizing the comparisons with GS1980 as being the central focus of the paper. Comparisons with other, much more widely used, predictive models of glacier surging could also be undertaken, such as with the logit regression of Jiskoot et al. (2020).
- Clearer information should be provided of what the key morphological features are of glaciers that pulsate (e.g., length, elevation range, slope)
 More information is provided in my specific comments below. Specific comments L28: I suggest including reference to Guillet et al. (2025) here, as one of their key findings is that spatio-temporal surge patterns don’t clearly fit either Alaskan-type or Svalbard-type L32: a reference to include that assesses the importance of changes in mass balance on surging in the general study area is Copland et al. (2011): https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1657/1938-4246-43.4.503 L45: the surge-type inventory for the Karakoram provided by Bhambri et al. (2017) seems like it should be referenced here, as it’s close to the study area: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-15473-8 L59: as stated here, the Glazirin and Shchetinnikov (1980) model is virtually unknown in the glaciological literature, particularly outside of Russia. It also unknown as to which training glaciers they used (see L601). It could therefore be useful to provide an assessment of whether any of the newer, more widely known, models of glacier surging (e.g., Jiskoot et al., 2020; Sevestre and Benn, 2015) can help explain the distribution of pulsing/surging glaciers within the study area L79-L124: this section is interesting and well-written, but a bit difficult to follow as it’s provided as a single block of text. Please sub-divide into paragraphs. L210 & L291 & L292: I don’t know what the word ‘glacier-wise’ means: this isn’t a term that I’ve ever heard of in my decades of working in glaciology. Do you perhaps mean ‘glacier-wide’, rather than ‘glacier-wise’? Fig. 2: would be useful to include some lat/long markers around the edge of this figure so that a reader can easily identify the real-world location of these outlines L319: I find it a bit difficult to follow text when clauses are in brackets; it’s much less ambiguous to just write it out in a proper sentence. I therefore suggest rewriting this as: “For (3), we detected the usual patterns of downstream mass redistribution, with thinning in the reservoir area and thickening in the receiving area during the active phase, and the inverse pattern during recovery” L313-324: One thing that I’m missing is a clear definition of exactly how a glacier was identified as ‘pulsating’. You mention changes in terminus behavior, surface morphology and thickness at the start of this para, but how exactly do you define a change as being abnormal? You also don’t provide the period over which such changes need to occur to be considered significant (this can somewhat be figured from the timing of your source imagery, buts needs to be made explicit). And it would also be useful to clarify how this relates to previous definitions of glacier surging (presumably ‘pulsation’ includes all glaciers that would be defined as surging in other studies?) L341: change ‘polygong’ to ‘polygon’ Fig. 4: this is an interesting figure, but difficult to interpret as no coordinates are provided on your other figures (e.g., Figs. 1, 2, 3). It would therefore be good if you could provide coordinates on your other maps to help with this, as well as put a satellite scene as a base image behind Fig. 4 (e.g., so that semi-transparent hexagons with the number of pulsating glaciers is then superimposed on top of this). L421: what I would find very useful in your discussion is a clear statement of the morphological properties that are most common for pulsating glaciers (e.g., does pulsating occur more on larger or smaller glaciers? Steep or shallow ones? High or low elevation?). From your analyses in section 6.1, and information provided in Fig. A1, it seems that you must be able to derive what these are, but at the moment it’s difficult for a reader to discern this information. L446: while I agree that it’s difficult to establish a direct link between the GS1980 model predictors and modern theories of flow instability which include factors such as enthalpy, I think that there would be high value in comparing your results with those of others who have considered glacier morphology in their analyses of glacier surging. The study of Jiskoot et al. (2000; https://doi.org/10.3189/172756500781833115) particularly stands out in this regard, where they used multivariate logit models which provided significant insights into the connections between glacier morphology and surging propensity (e.g., fact that long glaciers with steep slopes are most likely to surge). The work of Jiskoot et al. (2000) has been highly cited, and forms the basis of many modern assessments of glacier surging, so would make your results more widely applicable than Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-4068-RC2 
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1,102 | 42 | 16 | 1,160 | 22 | 29 | 
- HTML: 1,102
- PDF: 42
- XML: 16
- Total: 1,160
- BibTeX: 22
- EndNote: 29
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % | 
|---|
| Total: | 0 | 
| HTML: | 0 | 
| PDF: | 0 | 
| XML: | 0 | 
- 1
 
 
                         
                         
                         
                        



 
                 
                 
                 
                