Précédent|Prochain

Assessment of Arctic remote sensing ice motion products based on ice drift buoys

  • role： First author第一作者
  • Affiliation：

    Physical Oceanography Laboratory, Ocean University of China, Qingdao 266100, China

    Qingdao National Laboratory for Marine Science and Technology, Qingdao 266100, China

    Polar Joint Research Center of Chinese Universities, Beijing 100000, China

  • Email：shiqianouc@126.com
  • Introduction：施骞，1991年生，男，博士，研究方向为极地海冰被动微波遥感反演。E-mail: shiqianouc@126.com
SHI Qian123,  
  • role： Corresponding author通信作者
  • Affiliation：

    Physical Oceanography Laboratory, Ocean University of China, Qingdao 266100, China

    Qingdao National Laboratory for Marine Science and Technology, Qingdao 266100, China

    Polar Joint Research Center of Chinese Universities, Beijing 100000, China

  • Email：sujie@ouc.edu.cn
  • Introduction：苏洁，1966年生，女，教授，研究方向为海冰数值模拟和遥感反演。E-mail: sujie@ouc.edu.cn
SU Jie123*

résumé

Sea ice motion derived from remote sensing is a key parameter for sea ice. Systematic comparison and assessment of satellite remote sensing ice motion products are still deficient because of limited data length.This study examines the performance of remote sensing ice velocity products with different time intervals in the central Arctic.The region around Fram Straitare systematically evaluated by employing the International Arctic Buoy Programme(IABP) buoy data from 2009 to 2017.The results show that for the central Arctic, the NSIDC ice velocity with one-day interval hasgreater error in winter than that in summer.In winter, the western icemotion in the southern part of the Beaufort Seais overestimated,whereasthe transpolar drift stream from the Kara Sea to the northern armof Greenland is underestimated. For five ice motion products with two-day interval, the accuracy does not depend completely on resolutions of source data.The improvement of the ice motion retrieval algorithm and the merging method can also improve the accuracy of the ice velocity.The order of the root mean square errors (RMSE) is OSISAF-Merged <OSISAF-AMSR<Ifremer-AMSR< OSISAF-SSM<OSISAF-ASCAT.The RMSEs of ice motion products with three-day interval, which employ the same retrieval algorithm, aredependent on the spatial resolution of the source data. Ifremer-AMSR has the lowest RMSEbecause of its source data has high spatial resolution. Ice velocity products with three-day interval canneglect sea ice movement in a short-time scale.The RMSE of ice velocity acquired is lower than that of thetwo-day interval. In Fram Strait, the other ice velocity products except for Ifremer-AMSR have large meridionalbiases and RMSEs.Moreover, theice velocity is fast in the strait, andthe RMSE of the ice velocity product depends on the resolution of the source data.

mots-clés

Arctic;ice drift buoy;sea ice motion;assessment of remote sensing products;Fram Strait

References

  1. 1.
    Comiso J C. 2012. Large decadal decline of the Arctic multiyear ice cover. Journal of Climate, 25(4): 1176-1193
  2. 2.
    Dai M R, Arbetter T E and Meier W N. 2006. Data assimilation of sea-ice motion vectors: sensitivity to the parameterization of sea-ice strength. Annals of Glaciology, 44: 357-360
  3. 3.
    Dybkjaer G. 2009. Validation and Monitoring Document for OSI SAF Medium Resolution Sea IceDrift Product-v0.0. EUMETSAT OSI SAF-Ocean and Sea Ice Satellite Application Facility, December
  4. 4.
    Ezraty R, Girard-Ardhuin F and Croizé-Fillon D. 2007. Sea ice drift in the central Arctic estimated using the 89 GHz brightness temperatures of the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer-User’s manual, v2.0. ERS d’Arch. et de Trait., Inst. Fr. de Rech. pour l’Exploit. de la Mer, Brest, France
  5. 5.
    Fowler C, Emery W, and Tschudi M. 2003. Polar Pathfinder daily 25 km EASE-grid sea ice motion vectors
  6. 6.
    Haarpaintner J, and Spreen G. 2007. Use of enhanced-resolution QuikSCAT/SeaWinds data for operational ice services and climate research: Sea ice edge, type, concentration, and drift. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 45(10), 3131-3137
  7. 7.
    Hwang B. 2013. Inter-comparison of satellite sea ice motion with drifting buoy data. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 34(24): 8741-8763
  8. 8.
    Krumpen T, Gerdes R, Haas C, Hendricks S, Herber A, Selyuzhenok V, Smedsrud L and Spreen G. 2016. Recent summer sea ice thickness surveys in Fram Strait and associated ice volume fluxes. The Cryosphere, 10(2): 523-534
  9. 9.
    Kwok R, Curlander J C, McConnell R, and Pang S S. 1990. An ice-motion tracking system at the Alaska SAR facility. IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering, 15(1), 44-54
  10. 10.
    Kwok R, Schweiger A, Rothrock D A, Pang S and Kottmeier C. 1998. Sea ice motion from satellite passive microwave imagery assessed with ERS SAR and buoy motions. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 103(C4): 8191-8214
  11. 11.
    Kwok R, Cunningham G F, Wensnahan M, Rigor I, Zwally H J, and Yi D. 2009. Thinning and volume loss of the Arctic Ocean sea ice cover: 2003-2008. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 114(C7): C07005
  12. 12.
    Kwok R, Spreen G and Pang S. 2013. Arctic sea ice circulation and drift speed: decadal trends and ocean currents. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 118(5): 2408-2425
  13. 13.
    Lavergne T, Eastwood S, Teffah Z, Schyberg Hand Breivik L A. 2010. Sea ice motion from low‐resolution satellite sensors: an alternative method and its validation in the Arctic. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 115(C10): C10032
  14. 14.
    LiuA K, Zhao Y, and Wu, S Y. 1999. Arctic sea ice drift from wavelet analysis of NSCAT and special sensor microwave imager data. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 104(C5): 11529-11538
  15. 15.
    Maslanik J A, Fowler C, Stroeve J, Drobot S, Zwally J, Yi D, and Emery W. 2007. A younger, thinner Arctic ice cover: Increased potential for rapid, extensive sea‐ice loss. Geophysical Research Letters, 34(24):L24501
  16. 16.
    Rampal P, Weiss J and Marsan D. 2009. Positive trend in the mean speed and deformation rate of Arctic sea ice, 1979-2007. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 114(C5): C05013
  17. 17.
    Stark J D, Ridley J, Martin M andHines A. 2008. Sea ice concentration and motion assimilation in a sea ice-ocean model. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 113(C5) [DOI: 10.1029/2007JC 004224]
  18. 18.
    Stoffelen A. 1998. Toward the true near‐surface wind speed: Error modeling and calibration using triple collocation. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 103(C4): 7755-7766
  19. 19.
    Sumata H, Lavergne T, Girard‐Ardhuin F, Kimura N, Tschudi M A, Kauker F, Karcher M and Gerdes R. 2014. An intercomparison of Arctic ice drift products to deduce uncertainty estimates. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 119(8): 4887-4921
  20. 20.
    Thomas D. 1999. The quality of sea ice velocity estimates. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 104(C6): 13627-13652
  21. 21.
    Tschudi M, Fowler C, Maslanik J, Stewart J S and Meier W. 2016. Polar Pathfinder Daily 25 km EASE-Grid Sea Ice Motion Vectors, Version 3. [s.l.]: National Snow and Ice Data Center Distributed Active Archive Center
  22. 22.
    Wei J F, Zhang X D and Wang Z M. 2018. Impacts of extratropical storm tracks on Arctic sea ice export through Fram Strait. Climate Dynamics, 52(3): 2235-2246

Lire l'article complet

The above content is generated by Large Model Translation. The translated content is for reference only. We do not assume any commercial or legal responsibilty for any consequences arising from the use of our website