Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-2dmjx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-10T14:10:04.452Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Arise (Antarctic Remote Ice Sensing Experiment) in the East 2003: validation of Satellite-derived Sea-ice data products

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 September 2017

Robert A. Massom
Affiliation:
Antarctic Climate and Ecosystems CRC, Centenary Building, University of Tasmania, Sandy Bay, Tasmania 7005, Australia, E-mail: r.massom@utas.edu.au
Anthony Worby
Affiliation:
Antarctic Climate and Ecosystems CRC, Centenary Building, University of Tasmania, Sandy Bay, Tasmania 7005, Australia, E-mail: r.massom@utas.edu.au Australian Antarctic Division, Channel Highway, Kingston, Tasmania 7050, Australia
Victoria Lytle
Affiliation:
CliC International Project Office, Norwegian Polar Institute, Polar Environmental Centre, NO-9296 Tromsø, Norway
Thorsten Markus
Affiliation:
NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Code 971, Greenbelt, MD 20771, UsA
Ian Allison
Affiliation:
Antarctic Climate and Ecosystems CRC, Centenary Building, University of Tasmania, Sandy Bay, Tasmania 7005, Australia, E-mail: r.massom@utas.edu.au Australian Antarctic Division, Channel Highway, Kingston, Tasmania 7050, Australia
Theodore Scambos
Affiliation:
National Snow and Ice Data Center, CIREs Campus Box 449, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO 80309-0449, UsA
Hiroyuki Enomoto
Affiliation:
Kitami Institute of Technology, Koen-cho 165, Kitami, Hokkaido 090-8507, Japan
Takeshi Tamura
Affiliation:
Graduate School of Environmental Earth Science, Hokkaido University, Sapporo 060-0819, Japan
Kazutaka Tateyama
Affiliation:
Kitami Institute of Technology, Koen-cho 165, Kitami, Hokkaido 090-8507, Japan
Terence Haran
Affiliation:
National Snow and Ice Data Center, CIREs Campus Box 449, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO 80309-0449, UsA
Josefino C. Comiso
Affiliation:
NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Code 971, Greenbelt, MD 20771, UsA
Andreas Pfaffling
Affiliation:
Graduate School of Environmental Earth Science, Hokkaido University, Sapporo 060-0819, Japan
Atsuhiro Muto
Affiliation:
Center for Environmental Remote Sensing, Chiba University, Inage-ku, Chiba 263-8522, Japan
Pannir Kanagaratnam
Affiliation:
Center for Remote Sensing of Ice Sheets, University of Kansas, 2335 Irving Hill Road, Lawrence, Ks 66045-7612, UsA
Barry Giles
Affiliation:
Antarctic Climate and Ecosystems CRC, Centenary Building, University of Tasmania, Sandy Bay, Tasmania 7005, Australia, E-mail: r.massom@utas.edu.au Australian Antarctic Division, Channel Highway, Kingston, Tasmania 7050, Australia
Neal Young
Affiliation:
Antarctic Climate and Ecosystems CRC, Centenary Building, University of Tasmania, Sandy Bay, Tasmania 7005, Australia, E-mail: r.massom@utas.edu.au Australian Antarctic Division, Channel Highway, Kingston, Tasmania 7050, Australia
Glenn Hyland
Affiliation:
Antarctic Climate and Ecosystems CRC, Centenary Building, University of Tasmania, Sandy Bay, Tasmania 7005, Australia, E-mail: r.massom@utas.edu.au Australian Antarctic Division, Channel Highway, Kingston, Tasmania 7050, Australia
Erica Key
Affiliation:
Remote Sensing Laboratory, MPO Division, Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science, University of Miami, 4600 Rickenbacker Causeway, Miami, FL 33149-1098, UsA
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Preliminary results are presented from the first validation of geophysical data products (ice concentration, Snow thickness on Sea ice (hs) and ice temperature (TI) from the NASA EOS Aqua AMSR-E Sensor, in East Antarctica (in September–October 2003). The challenge of collecting Sufficient measurements with which to validate the coarse-resolution AMSR-E data products adequately was addressed by means of a hierarchical approach, using detailed in situ measurements, digital aerial photography and other Satellite data. Initial results from a circumnavigation of the experimental Site indicate that, at least under cold conditions with a dry Snow cover, there is a reasonably close agreement between Satellite- and aerial-photo-derived ice concentrations, i.e. 97.2±3.6% for NT2 and 96.5±2.5% for BBA algorithms vs 94.3% for the aerial photos. In general, the AMSR-E concentration represents a Slight overestimate of the actual concentration, with the largest discrepancies occurring in regions containing a relatively high proportion of thin ice. The AMSR-E concentrations from the NT2 and BBA algorithms are Similar on average, although differences of up to 5% occur in places, again related to thin-ice distribution. The AMSR-E ice temperature (TI) product agrees with coincident Surface measurements to approximately 0.5˚C in the limited dataset analyzed. Regarding Snow thickness, the AMSR hs retrieval is a Significant underestimate compared to in situ measurements weighted by the percentage of thin ice (and open water) present. For the case Study analyzed, the underestimate was 46% for the overall average, but 23% compared to Smooth-ice measurements. The Spatial distribution of the AMSR-E hs product follows an expected and consistent Spatial pattern, Suggesting that the observed difference may be an offset (at least under freezing conditions). Areas of discrepancy are identified, and the need for future work using the more extensive dataset is highlighted.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) [year] 2006 
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Map of the Study area Showing experimental grid delineated by the array of Satellite-tracked ice beacons deployed on 26 September 2003 (numbered 1–8), and the drift tracks and array Shape on 16 October. The inset Shows the location of the Study region in East Antarctica.

Figure 1

Fig. 2. Plots of average Snow thickness on (a) ‘rough’ floes and (b) ‘smooth’ floes, from data acquired at helicopter mini-stations randomly located within the experimental gridcells.

Figure 2

Fig. 3. Plot of Snow–ice interface temperature vs Snow depth for three mini-station floes.

Figure 3

Table 1. Summary statistics of snow-depth measurements within each experimental gridcell at helicopter mini-stations, and as a function of ‘rough’ and ‘smooth’ ice. ‘Other’ refers to measurements outside the experimental gridboxes

Figure 4

Table 2. Summary Statistics of Snow–ice interface temperature measurements (in ˚C) acquired within each experimental gridcell at helicopter mini-stations. ‘Other’ refers to measurements outside the experimental grid area

Figure 5

Table 3. Summary of average Snow and ice measurements (to one Standard deviation) from full ice Stations on ARIsE 2003. hs is in Situ Snow thickness, hi is ice thickness. ‘Other’ refers to Stations just outside the experimental grid. Number of measurements is in parentheses. Time is Greenwich Mean Time (Z). Station 6 is a Short Station and the results are not included here

Figure 6

Fig. 4. A NAsA EOs Terra Modis channel 2 image from 8 October 2003 at 0110 Z (0.25km resolution, polar Stereographic projection) Showing ice conditions at the time of the aerial-photography/radiometer overflight (flight 4), with the helicopter flight path (0030–0445 Z) Superimposed in red. The Sectors in Figures 5, 7 and 8 are marked along the track: A = images 1–65; B = 66–115; C = 116–145; D = 146–175; E = 176–330; and F = 331–445. The approximate location and image numbers of the aerial-photo images in Figure 6 are marked on the flight-line in italics. Helicopter mini-station data on this day were collected within the box marked by the white dashed lines.

Figure 7

Fig. 5. (a) Plot Showing total ice concentrations retrieved from digital aerial photography, and the percentage of thin Snow-free ice. Sequential image numbers along the flight-line of aerial photo flight 4 (8 October 2003) are Shown on the x axis. See Figure 4 for a map of the flight track. Please See the text for an explanation of a–e. (b) Plot of AMSR ice concentrations retrieved along the flight 4 transect on 8 October using the NT2 and BBA algorithms. Sectors A–F Separated by vertical dashed lines correspond to those in Figures 4, 7 and 8.

Figure 8

Fig. 6. Example aerial photo images, acquired at an altitude of 5000 ft (1.5 km) on 8 October 2003, from (a) Sector A, (b) Sector B, (c) Sector E and (d) Sector F. The image locations are marked in Figure 4. The round Spots Show the approximate ground coverage of the airborne thermal IR radiometer footprint (approximately 65 m radius), with temperatures marked. The accuracy of the measurements is > ±0.5˚C. Aerial-photo pixel Size is 0.4 m, and the image dimensions are approximately 1200×780 m.

Figure 9

Fig. 7. Plot of AMSR-derived Snow thickness, from orbital Swath data, at locations equivalent to the flight track of flight 4 (see Fig. 6), 8 October 2003, and as a function of aerial-photo image number. Sectors A–F are equivalent to those in Figures 4, 5 and 8.

Figure 10

Fig. 8. Plots of (a) AMSR TI and (b) Skin Surface temperature (from helicopter thermal IR radiometer measurements), along the track of aerial-photo flight 4, 8 October 2003. Sectors A–F are equivalent to those in Figures 4, 7 and 8.

Figure 11

Table 4. Averages (and one Standard deviation) of AMSR- and aerial-photo-derived total Sea-ice concentration, aerial-photo-derived thin ice concentration, AMSR hs and TI, and helicopter radiometer-derived Surface temperature along the track of aerial-photo flight 4 (8 October 2003), and for each of the Sectors A–F in Figures 4, 5,7 and 8