Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-rbxfs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-11T16:40:41.634Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Global variations of local asymmetry in glacier altitude: separation of north–south and east–west components

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 September 2017

Ian S. Evans
Affiliation:
Geography Department, Durham University, Durham DH1 3LE, UK E-mail: i.s.evans@durham.ac.uk
Nicholas J. Cox
Affiliation:
Geography Department, Durham University, Durham DH1 3LE, UK E-mail: i.s.evans@durham.ac.uk
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

North–south and east–west differences in firn-line altitude, equilibrium-line altitude or middle altitudes of glaciers can be separated by regression on the cosine and sine of glacier aspect (accumulation area azimuth). Allowing for regional trends in altitude, the north–south differences expected from radiation and shade effects can be reliably quantified from World Glacier Inventory (WGI) data. The north–south differences are greater in sunnier climates, mid-latitudes and steeper relief. Local altitude differences between north- and south-facing glaciers are commonly 70–320 m. Such asymmetry is near-universal, although weak in the Arctic and tropics. East–west contrasts are less, and found mainly in the tropics and areas most exposed to strong winds. Altitude, latitude, glacier gradient and height range, calculable from most of the WGI data, are potential controls on the degree of north–south contrast, as well as surrogates for climatic controls (temperature, precipitation, radiation and cloudiness). An asymmetric sine–cosine power model is developed to describe the variation of north–south contrast with latitude. Multiple regression over 51 regions shows altitude and latitude to be the strongest controls of this contrast. Aspect–altitude analysis for former glaciers provides new evidence of cloudiness.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © International Glaciological Society 2005
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Distribution of the regions analyzed. The two-letter region abbreviations are given in Table 3. See Figure 2 for the coalescent region at 90° E.

Figure 1

Fig. 2. Distribution of region centroids in central Asia, showing divisions of the Tien Shan and adjacent systems used in the present analysis. The two-letter region abbreviations are given in Table 3.

Figure 2

Table 1. Three regressions for mid-range altitude, Am (m) for 2777 glaciers in South Island, New Zealand; φ is latitude, λ is longitude and θ is glacier accumulation-area aspect

Figure 3

Fig. 3. First-order Fourier regressions for South Island New Zealand glaciers. Using the same vertical scale, (a) plots data for midaltitude against aspect, and (b) plots values predicted from the four-control equation (aspect and position). The curves give predictions from aspect alone, from Table 1, equation 1. The vertical variation for each aspect, shown by the histograms, gives in (a) the actual within-aspect variation due to position and other factors, and in (b) the variation accounted for by the linear trend in latitude and longitude in Table 1, equation 2. Bins are 20 m wide and, to complete the circle, data at 0° are repeated at 360°.

Figure 4

Table 2. Stability of cosine coefficients (b1 (m)) for mid-range altitude, Washington Cascades, for one-, two- and four-control equations. (φ is latitude, λ is longitude)

Figure 5

Fig. 4. Fourier curves for variation in glacier mid-altitude with aspect for broad groupings of middle-latitude Eurasian mountains. Each is based on up to five of the regions in Table 3. The aspect effect from a combined regression on aspect, latitude and longitude is added to observed mean altitude in each broad region.

Figure 6

Table 3. Cosine and sine coefficients (b1, b2) of Fourier regressions for mid-altitude, Am (including within-region trends on latitude and longitude, φ and λ), plus the means of possible explanatory variables, and abbreviations used in figures, for 51 regions ordered by latitude. Here d is height difference (range of altitude), g is gradient, ϕ is latitude, λ is longitude and Abb is abbreviated name

Figure 7

Fig. 5. Confidence intervals for coefficients from Fourier regressions including latitude and longitude trends. (a) Absolute cosine coefficients for glacier regions in middle latitudes (all have lowest glaciers on poleward aspects). (b) Cosine coefficients in low and high latitudes. All five tropical regions have lower southward- (and thus poleward-) facing glaciers: three arctic regions have lower glaciers facing equatorward, but significantly so only for Wrangel I. (c) Sine coefficients significantly different from 0 at the 0.05 level: westward components are on the left and either very weak or in tropical regions; eastward are on the right.

Figure 8

Fig. 6. Cosine coefficients with 95% confidence intervals, for gradient bands within five regions, and Tien Shan-Pamir which combines eight regions from east Tien to southwest Tien. The latter has 19 188 glaciers and was therefore divided into 5° gradient bands. Overlapping 10° bands were used for the other five regions: top and bottom classes are open-ended. Coefficients are plotted against mean gradient for each band.

Figure 9

Table 4. Models for variation of north–south asymmetry, |bi|, over 51 regions. Weighting is by number of glaciers per region (sum of weights is 66 084): φ is absolute mean latitude (i.e. N or S) and α is mean mid-altitude, per region. Power models are fitted by non-linear least squares. Unweighted results are included to show that coefficients are not greatly changed by weighting: the final models in (a) and in (b) are those preferred. Note that the standard deviation of |b1| is 58.9 m, reduced to 45.3 m after weighting. Because the overall variances differ, R2 values are not comparable before and after weighting: rmse (rms error) values are comparable, and give the better comparisons between models

Figure 10

Fig. 7. North–south glacier altitude asymmetry (cosine coefficient) as a function of mid-altitude. The two-letter region abbreviations are given in Table 3.

Figure 11

Fig. 8. North–south glacier altitude asymmetry as a function of latitude. Non-linear least-squares fits are shown for symmetric (dashed) and asymmetric (solid line) sine–cosine power functions. Fits are weighted by number of glaciers (n) per region, and the symbols therefore distinguish three sizes of region.

Figure 12

Fig. 9. Observed north–south glacier altitude asymmetry vs that predicted from latitude and altitude by the final model in Table 4b. The two-letter region abbreviations are given in Table 3. Both extreme values (NP and WI) are for small datasets.

Figure 13

Table 5. Fourier regressions for cirque floor altitudes, Ac (m); θ is cirque headwall aspect and n is number of cirques