scholarly journals The impact of melt ponds on summertime microwave brightness temperatures and sea-ice concentrations

2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 2217-2239 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan Kern ◽  
Anja Rösel ◽  
Leif Toudal Pedersen ◽  
Natalia Ivanova ◽  
Roberto Saldo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sea Ice ◽  
Open Water ◽  
Sea Ice Concentration ◽  
Melt Pond ◽  
Surface Fraction ◽  
Brightness Temperatures ◽  
Ice Surface ◽  
Melt Ponds ◽  
Ice Concentration ◽  
Ice Floes

Abstract. Sea-ice concentrations derived from satellite microwave brightness temperatures are less accurate during summer. In the Arctic Ocean the lack of accuracy is primarily caused by melt ponds, but also by changes in the properties of snow and the sea-ice surface itself. We investigate the sensitivity of eight sea-ice concentration retrieval algorithms to melt ponds by comparing sea-ice concentration with the melt-pond fraction. We derive gridded daily sea-ice concentrations from microwave brightness temperatures of summer 2009. We derive the daily fraction of melt ponds, open water between ice floes, and the ice-surface fraction from contemporary Moderate Resolution Spectroradiometer (MODIS) reflectance data. We only use grid cells where the MODIS sea-ice concentration, which is the melt-pond fraction plus the ice-surface fraction, exceeds 90 %. For one group of algorithms, e.g., Bristol and Comiso bootstrap frequency mode (Bootstrap_f), sea-ice concentrations are linearly related to the MODIS melt-pond fraction quite clearly after June. For other algorithms, e.g., Near90GHz and Comiso bootstrap polarization mode (Bootstrap_p), this relationship is weaker and develops later in summer. We attribute the variation of the sensitivity to the melt-pond fraction across the algorithms to a different sensitivity of the brightness temperatures to snow-property variations. We find an underestimation of the sea-ice concentration by between 14 % (Bootstrap_f) and 26 % (Bootstrap_p) for 100 % sea ice with a melt-pond fraction of 40 %. The underestimation reduces to 0 % for a melt-pond fraction of 20 %. In presence of real open water between ice floes, the sea-ice concentration is overestimated by between 26 % (Bootstrap_f) and 14 % (Bootstrap_p) at 60 % sea-ice concentration and by 20 % across all algorithms at 80 % sea-ice concentration. None of the algorithms investigated performs best based on our investigation of data from summer 2009. We suggest that those algorithms which are more sensitive to melt ponds could be optimized more easily because the influence of unknown snow and sea-ice surface property variations is less pronounced.

scholarly journals Influence of Melt Ponds on the SSMIS-Based Summer Sea Ice Concentrations in the Arctic

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (19) ◽  
pp. 3882
Author(s):  
Jiechen Zhao ◽  
Yining Yu ◽  
Jingjing Cheng ◽  
Honglin Guo ◽  
Chunhua Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sea Ice ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
High Concentration ◽  
Sea Ice Concentration ◽  
Melt Pond ◽  
Ice Surface ◽  
Melt Ponds ◽  
Ice Concentration ◽  
Microwave Imager

As a long-term, near real-time, and widely used satellite derived product, the summer performance of the Special Sensor Microwave Imager/Sounder (SSMIS)-based sea ice concentration (SIC) is commonly doubted when extensive melt ponds exist on the ice surface. In this study, three SSMIS-based SIC products were assessed using ship-based SIC and melt pond fraction (MPF) observations from 60 Arctic cruises conducted by the Ice Watch Program and the Chinese Icebreaker Xuelong I/II. The results indicate that the product using the NASA Team (SSMIS-NT) algorithm and the product released by the Ocean and Sea Ice Satellite Application Facility (SSMIS-OS) underestimated the SIC by 15% and 7–9%, respectively, which mainly occurred in the high concentration rages, such as 80–100%, while the product using the Bootstrap (SSMIS-BT) algorithm overestimated the SIC by 3–4%, usually misestimating 80% < SIC < 100% as 100%. The MPF affected the SIC biases. For the high MPF case (e.g., 50%), the estimated biases for the three products increased to 20% (SSMIS-NT), 7% (SSMIS-BT), and 20% (SSMIS-OS) due to the influence of MPF. The relationship between the SIC biases and the MPF observations established in this study was demonstrated to greatly improve the accuracy of the 2D SIC distributions, which are useful references for model assimilation, algorithm improvement, and error analysis.

Inter-comparison of melt pond products with melt/freeze-up dates and sea ice concentration data

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sanggyun Lee ◽  
Julienne Stroeve ◽  
Michel Tsamados
Keyword(s):  
Machine Learning ◽  
Sea Ice ◽  
Arctic Sea Ice ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Sea Ice Concentration ◽  
Solar Heat ◽  
Melt Pond ◽  
Ice Surface ◽  
Melt Ponds ◽  
Ice Concentration

&lt;p&gt;&amp;#160;Melt ponds are a dominant feature on the Arctic sea ice surface in summer, occupying up to about 50 &amp;#8211; 60% of the sea ice surface during advanced melt. Melt ponds normally begin to form around mid-May in the marginal ice zone and expand northwards as the summer melt season progresses. Once melt ponds emerge, the scattering characteristics of the ice surface changes, dramatically lowering the sea ice albedo. Since 96% of the total annual solar heat into the ocean through sea ice occurs between May and August, the presence of melt ponds plays a significant role in this transfer of solar heat, influencing not only the sea ice energy balance, but also the amount of light available under the sea ice and ocean primary productivity. Given the importance melt ponds play in the coupled Arctic climate-ecosystem, mapping and quantification of melt pond variability on a Pan-Arctic basin scale are needed. Satellite-based observations are the only way to map melt ponds and albedo changes on a pan-Arctic scale. R&amp;#246;sel et al. (2012) utilized a MODIS 8-day average product to map melt ponds on a pan-Arctic scale and over several years. In another approach, melt pond fraction and surface albedo were retrieved based on the physical and optical characteristics of sea ice and melt ponds without a priori information using MERIS.Here, we propose a novel machine learning-based methodology to map Arctic melt ponds from MODIS 500m resolution data. We provide a merging procedure to create the first pan-Arctic melt pond product spanning a 20-year period at a weekly temporal resolution. Specifically, we use MODIS data together with machine learning, including multi-layer neural network and logistic regression to test our ability to map melt ponds from the start to the end of the melt season. Since sea ice reflectance is strongly dependent on the viewing and solar geometry (i.e. sensor and solar zenith and azimuth angles), we attempt to minimize this dependence by using normalized band ratios in the machine learning algorithms. Each melt pond retrieval algorithm is different and validation ways are different as well producing somewhat dissimilar melt pond results. In this study, we inter-compare melt ponds products from different institutes, including university of Hamburg, university of Bremen, and university college London. The melt pond maps are compared with melt onset and freeze-up dates data and sea ice concentration. The melt pond maps are evaluated by melt pond fraction statistics from high resolution satellite (MEDEA) images that have not been used for the evaluation in melt pond products.&amp;#160;&lt;/p&gt;

scholarly journals Satellite Passive Microwave Sea-Ice Concentration Data Set Intercomparison for Arctic Summer Conditions

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan Kern ◽  
Thomas Lavergne ◽  
Dirk Notz ◽  
Leif Toudal Pedersen ◽  
Rasmus Tage Tonboe
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Distribution ◽  
Sea Ice ◽  
Passive Microwave ◽  
Sea Ice Concentration ◽  
Group Iii ◽  
Melt Pond ◽  
Ice Surface ◽  
Group I ◽  
Ice Concentration ◽  
Group Ii

Abstract. We report on results of a systematic inter-comparison of 10 global sea-ice concentration (SIC) data products at 12.5 to 50.0 km grid resolution from satellite passive microwave (PMW) observations for the Arctic during summer. The products are compared against SIC and net ice-surface fraction (ISF) – SIC minus the per-grid cell melt-pond fraction (MPF) on sea ice – as derived from MODerate resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) satellite observations and observed from ice-going vessels. Like in Kern et al. (2019), we group the 10 products based on the concept of the SIC retrieval used. Group I consists of products of the EUMETSAT OSI SAF and ESA CCI algorithms. Group II consists of products derived with the Comiso bootstrap algorithm and the NOAA NSIDC SIC climate data record (CDR). Group III consists of ARTIST Sea Ice (ASI) and NASA Team (NT) algorithm products and group IV consists of products of the enhanced NASA Team algorithm (NT2). We find wide-spread positive and negative differences between PMW and MODIS SIC with magnitudes frequently reaching up to 20–25 % for groups I and III and up to 30–35 % for groups II and IV. On a pan-Arctic scale these differences may cancel out: Arctic average SIC from Group I products agrees with MODIS within 2–5 % accuracy during the entire melt period from May through September. Group II and IV products over-estimate MODIS Arctic average SIC by 5–10 %. Out of group III, ASI is similar to group I products while NT SIC under-estimates MODIS Arctic average SIC by 5–10 %. These differences, when translated into the impact computing Arctic sea-ice area (SIA), match well with the differences in SIA between the four groups reported for the summer months by Kern et al. (2019). MODIS ISF is systematically over-estimated by all products; NT provides the smallest (up to 25 %) over-estimations, group II and IV products the largest (up to 45 %) over-estimations. The spatial distribution of the observed over-estimation of MODIS ISF agrees reasonably well with the spatial distribution of the MODIS MPF and we find a robust linear relationship between PMW SIC and MODIS ISF for group I and III products during peak melt, i.e. July and August. We discuss different cases taking into account the expected influence of ice-surface properties other than melt ponds, i.e. wet snow and coarse grained snow / refrozen surface, on PMW observations used in the SIC retrieval algorithms. Based on this discussion we identify the mismatch between the actually observed surface properties and those represented by the ice tie points as the most likely reason for i) the observed differences between PMW SIC and MODIS ISF and for ii) the often surprisingly small difference between PMW and MODIS SIC in areas of high melt-pond fraction. We conclude that all 10 SIC products are highly inaccurate during summer melt. We hypothesize that the un-known amount of melt-pond signatures likely included in the ice tie points plays an important role – particularly for groups I and II – and suggest to conduct further research in this field.

scholarly journals Satellite passive microwave sea-ice concentration data set inter-comparison for Arctic summer conditions

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (7) ◽  
pp. 2469-2493 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan Kern ◽  
Thomas Lavergne ◽  
Dirk Notz ◽  
Leif Toudal Pedersen ◽  
Rasmus Tonboe
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Distribution ◽  
Sea Ice ◽  
Passive Microwave ◽  
Sea Ice Concentration ◽  
Group Iii ◽  
Melt Pond ◽  
Ice Surface ◽  
Group I ◽  
Ice Concentration ◽  
Group Ii

Abstract. We report on results of a systematic inter-comparison of 10 global sea-ice concentration (SIC) data products at 12.5 to 50.0 km grid resolution from satellite passive microwave (PMW) observations for the Arctic during summer. The products are compared against SIC and net ice surface fraction (ISF) – SIC minus the per-grid-cell melt pond fraction (MPF) on sea ice – as derived from MODerate resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) satellite observations and observed from ice-going vessels. Like in Kern et al. (2019), we group the 10 products based on the concept of the SIC retrieval used. Group I consists of products of the European Organisation for the Exploitation of Meteorological Satellites (EUMETSAT) Ocean and Sea Ice Satellite Application Facility (OSI SAF) and European Space Agency (ESA) Climate Change Initiative (CCI) algorithms. Group II consists of products derived with the Comiso bootstrap algorithm and the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) SIC climate data record (CDR). Group III consists of Arctic Radiation and Turbulence Interaction Study (ARTIST) Sea Ice (ASI) and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Team (NT) algorithm products, and group IV consists of products of the enhanced NASA Team algorithm (NT2). We find widespread positive and negative differences between PMW and MODIS SIC with magnitudes frequently reaching up to 20 %–25 % for groups I and III and up to 30 %–35 % for groups II and IV. On a pan-Arctic scale these differences may cancel out: Arctic average SIC from group I products agrees with MODIS within 2 %–5 % accuracy during the entire melt period from May through September. Group II and IV products overestimate MODIS Arctic average SIC by 5 %–10 %. Out of group III, ASI is similar to group I products while NT SIC underestimates MODIS Arctic average SIC by 5 %–10 %. These differences, when translated into the impact computing Arctic sea-ice area (SIA), match well with the differences in SIA between the four groups reported for the summer months by Kern et al. (2019). MODIS ISF is systematically overestimated by all products; NT provides the smallest overestimations (up to 25 %) and group II and IV products the largest overestimations (up to 45 %). The spatial distribution of the observed overestimation of MODIS ISF agrees reasonably well with the spatial distribution of the MODIS MPF and we find a robust linear relationship between PMW SIC and MODIS ISF for group I and III products during peak melt, i.e. July and August. We discuss different cases taking into account the expected influence of ice surface properties other than melt ponds, i.e. wet snow and coarse-grained snow/refrozen surface, on brightness temperatures and their ratios used as input to the SIC retrieval algorithms. Based on this discussion we identify the mismatch between the actually observed surface properties and those represented by the ice tie points as the most likely reason for (i) the observed differences between PMW SIC and MODIS ISF and for (ii) the often surprisingly small difference between PMW and MODIS SIC in areas of high melt pond fraction. We conclude that all 10 SIC products are highly inaccurate during summer melt. We hypothesize that the unknown number of melt pond signatures likely included in the ice tie points plays an important role – particularly for groups I and II – and recommend conducting further research in this field.

scholarly journals Comparison of Passive Microwave Data with Shipborne Photographic Observations of Summer Sea Ice Concentration along an Arctic Cruise Path

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (17) ◽  
pp. 2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Qingkai Wang ◽  
Peng Lu ◽  
Yongheng Zu ◽  
Zhijun Li ◽  
Matti Leppäranta ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Remote Sensing ◽  
Sea Ice ◽  
Moving Average ◽  
Open Water ◽  
Arctic Sea Ice ◽  
Passive Microwave ◽  
Sea Ice Concentration ◽  
Melt Ponds ◽  
Ice Concentration ◽  
Arctic Navigation

Arctic sea ice concentration (SIC) has been studied extensively using passive microwave (PM) remote sensing. This technology could be used to improve navigation along vessel cruise paths; however, investigations on this topic have been limited. In this study, shipborne photographic observation (P-OBS) of sea ice was conducted using oblique-oriented cameras during the Chinese National Arctic Research Expedition in the summer of 2016. SIC and the areal fractions of open water, melt ponds, and sea ice (Aw, Ap, and Ai, respectively) were determined along the cruise path. The distribution of SIC along the cruise path was U-shaped, and open water accounted for a large proportion of the path. The SIC derived from the commonly used PM algorithms was compared with the moving average (MA) P-OBS SIC, including Bootstrap and NASA Team (NT) algorithms based on Special Sensor Microwave Imager/Sounder (SSMIS) data; and ARTIST sea ice, Bootstrap, Sea Ice Climate Change Initiative, and NASA Team 2 (NT2) algorithms based on Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer 2 (AMSR2) data. P-OBS performed better than PM remote sensing at detecting low SIC (< 10%). Our results indicate that PM SIC overestimates MA P-OBS SIC at low SIC, but underestimates it when SIC exceeds a turnover point (TP). The presence of melt ponds affected the accuracy of the PM SIC; the PM SIC shifted from an overestimate to an underestimate with increasing Ap, compared with MA P-OBS SIC below the TP, while the underestimation increased above the TP. The PM algorithms were then ranked; SSMIS-NT and AMSR2-NT2 are the best and worst choices for Arctic navigation, respectively.

scholarly journals Arctic sea ice sensitivity to lateral melting representation in a coupled climate model

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Madison Smith ◽  
Marika Holland ◽  
Bonnie Light
Keyword(s):  
Sea Ice ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Climate Model ◽  
Open Water ◽  
Arctic Sea Ice ◽  
Coupled Climate Model ◽  
Sea Ice Concentration ◽  
Arctic Sea ◽  
Ice Concentration ◽  
Ice Floes

Abstract. The melting of sea ice floes from the edges (lateral melting) results in open water formation and subsequently increases absorption of solar shortwave energy. However, lateral melt plays a small role in the sea ice mass budget in both hemispheres in most climate models (Keen et al., 2020). This is likely influenced by simple parameterizations of this process in sea ice models that are constrained by limited observations. Here we use a coupled climate model (CESM2.0) to assess the sensitivity of modeled sea ice state to the lateral melt parameterization. The results show that sea ice is sensitive both to the parameters determining the effective lateral melt rate, as well as the nuances in how lateral melting is applied to the ice pack. Increasing the lateral melt rate within the range of reasonable values is largely compensated by decreases in the basal melt rate, but can still result in a significant decrease in sea ice concentration and thickness, particularly in the marginal ice zone. We suggest that it is important to consider the efficiency of melt processes at forming open water, which drives the majority of the ice-albedo feedback. Melt processes are more efficient at forming open water in thinner ice scenarios (as we are likely to see in the future), suggesting the importance of well representing thermodynamic evolution. Revisiting model parameterizations of lateral melting with observations will require finding new ways to represent important physical processes.

scholarly journals Retrieval of Summer Sea Ice Concentration in the Pacific Arctic Ocean from AMSR2 Observations and Numerical Weather Data Using Random Forest Regression

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (12) ◽  
pp. 2283
Author(s):  
Hyangsun Han ◽  
Sungjae Lee ◽  
Hyun-Cheol Kim ◽  
Miae Kim
Keyword(s):  
Random Forest ◽  
Sea Ice ◽  
Arctic Ocean ◽  
Open Water ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Atmospheric Effects ◽  
Sea Ice Concentration ◽  
Air Temperatures ◽  
The Pacific ◽  
Ice Concentration

The Arctic sea ice concentration (SIC) in summer is a key indicator of global climate change and important information for the development of a more economically valuable Northern Sea Route. Passive microwave (PM) sensors have provided information on the SIC since the 1970s by observing the brightness temperature (TB) of sea ice and open water. However, the SIC in the Arctic estimated by operational algorithms for PM observations is very inaccurate in summer because the TB values of sea ice and open water become similar due to atmospheric effects. In this study, we developed a summer SIC retrieval model for the Pacific Arctic Ocean using Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer 2 (AMSR2) observations and European Reanalysis Agency-5 (ERA-5) reanalysis fields based on Random Forest (RF) regression. SIC values computed from the ice/water maps generated from the Korean Multi-purpose Satellite-5 synthetic aperture radar images from July to September in 2015–2017 were used as a reference dataset. A total of 24 features including the TB values of AMSR2 channels, the ratios of TB values (the polarization ratio and the spectral gradient ratio (GR)), total columnar water vapor (TCWV), wind speed, air temperature at 2 m and 925 hPa, and the 30-day average of the air temperatures from the ERA-5 were used as the input variables for the RF model. The RF model showed greatly superior performance in retrieving summer SIC values in the Pacific Arctic Ocean to the Bootstrap (BT) and Arctic Radiation and Turbulence Interaction STudy (ARTIST) Sea Ice (ASI) algorithms under various atmospheric conditions. The root mean square error (RMSE) of the RF SIC values was 7.89% compared to the reference SIC values. The BT and ASI SIC values had three times greater values of RMSE (20.19% and 21.39%, respectively) than the RF SIC values. The air temperatures at 2 m and 925 hPa and their 30-day averages, which indicate the ice surface melting conditions, as well as the GR using the vertically polarized channels at 23 GHz and 18 GHz (GR(23V18V)), TCWV, and GR(36V18V), which accounts for atmospheric water content, were identified as the variables that contributed greatly to the RF model. These important variables allowed the RF model to retrieve unbiased and accurate SIC values by taking into account the changes in TB values of sea ice and open water caused by atmospheric effects.

scholarly journals A Field Study of Brine Drainage and Oil Entrainment in First-Year Sea Ice

1979 ◽  
Vol 22 (88) ◽  
pp. 473-502 ◽  
Author(s):  
Seelye Martin
Keyword(s):  
Sea Ice ◽  
Growth And Development ◽  
Salt Transport ◽  
First Year ◽  
Field Observations ◽  
Melt Pond ◽  
Ice Surface ◽  
Melt Ponds ◽  
Brine Channel ◽  
Horizontal Layers

AbstractFrom field observations this paper describes the growth and development of first-year sea ice and its interaction with petroleum. In particular, when sea ice initially forms, there is an upward salt transport so that the ice surface has a highly saline layer, regardless of whether the initial ice is frazil, columnar, or slush ice. When the ice warms in the spring, because of the eutectic condition, the surface salt liquifies and drains through the ice, leading to the formation of top-to-bottom brine channels and void spaces in the upper part of the ice. If oil is released beneath winter ice, then the oil becomes entrained in thin lenses within the ice. In the spring, this oil flows up to the surface through the newly-opened brine channels and distributes itself within the brine-channel feeder systems, on the ice surface, and in horizontal layers in the upper part of the ice. The paper shows that these layers probably form from the interaction of the brine drainage with the percolation of melt water from surface snow down into the ice and the rise of the oil from below. Finally in the summer, the oil on the surface leads to melt-pond formation. The solar energy absorbed by the oil on the surface of these melt ponds eventually causes the melt pond to melt through the ice, and the oil is again released into the ocean.

scholarly journals An analytical model for wind-driven Arctic summer sea ice drift

2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 227-244 ◽  
Author(s):  
H.-S. Park ◽  
A. L. Stewart
Keyword(s):  
Sea Ice ◽  
Analytical Model ◽  
Surface Wind ◽  
Open Water ◽  
Sea Ice Concentration ◽  
Efficient Calculation ◽  
Sea Ice Drift ◽  
Wind Input ◽  
Ice Floes ◽  
Arctic Summer

Abstract. The authors present an analytical model for wind-driven free drift of sea ice that allows for an arbitrary mixture of ice and open water. The model includes an ice–ocean boundary layer with an Ekman spiral, forced by transfers of wind-input momentum both through the sea ice and directly into the open water between the ice floes. The analytical tractability of this model allows efficient calculation of the ice velocity provided that the surface wind field is known and that the ocean geostrophic velocity is relatively weak. The model predicts that variations in the ice thickness or concentration should substantially modify the rotation of the velocity between the 10 m winds, the sea ice, and the ocean. Compared to recent observational data from the first ice-tethered profiler with a velocity sensor (ITP-V), the model is able to capture the dependencies of the ice speed and the wind/ice/ocean turning angles on the wind speed. The model is used to derive responses to intensified southerlies on Arctic summer sea ice concentration, and the results are shown to compare closely with satellite observations.

scholarly journals Melt pond distribution and geometry in high Arctic sea ice derived from aerial investigations

2016 ◽  
Vol 57 (73) ◽  
pp. 105-118 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. Huang ◽  
P. Lu ◽  
R. Lei ◽  
H. Xie ◽  
Z. Li
Keyword(s):  
Sea Ice ◽  
Ground Truth ◽  
High Arctic ◽  
Arctic Sea Ice ◽  
Melt Pond ◽  
Melt Ponds ◽  
Ice Concentration ◽  
Areal Fraction ◽  
Pond Size ◽  
Arctic Ice

ABSTRACTAerial photography was conducted in the high Arctic Ocean during a Chinese research expedition in summer 2010. By partitioning the images into three distinct surface categories (sea ice/snow, water and melt ponds), the areal fraction of each category, ice concentration and the size and geometry of individual melt ponds, are determined with high-spatial resolution. The ice concentration and melt pond coverage have large spatial deviations between flights and even between images from the marginal ice zone to the pack ice zone in the central Arctic. Ice concentration and pond coverage over high Arctic (from 84°N to north) was ~75% and ~6.8%, respectively, providing ‘ground truth’ for the unusual transpolar reduction strip of ice indicated concurrently by AMSR-E data and for the regions (north of 88°N) where no passive microwave sensors can cover. Melt pond size and shape distributions are examined in terms of pond area (S), perimeter (P), mean caliper dimension (MCD) (L), roundness (R), convex degree (C), the ratio of P/S and fractal dimension (D). Power-law relationships are developed between pond size and number. Some general trends in geometric metrics are identified as a function of pond area including R, C, P/S and D. The scale separation of pond complexity is demonstrated by analyzing area-perimeter data. The results will potentially help the modelling of melt pond evolution and the determination of heterogeneity of under-ice transmitted light fields.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document