Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-x2lbr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-08T16:51:00.215Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Non-linear glacier response to calving events, Jakobshavn Isbræ, Greenland

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 November 2018

RYAN CASSOTTO*
Affiliation:
Department of Earth Sciences, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH, USA
MARK FAHNESTOCK
Affiliation:
Geophysical Institute, University of Alaska Fairbanks, Fairbanks, AK, USA
JASON M. AMUNDSON
Affiliation:
Department of Natural Sciences, University of Alaska Southeast, Juneau, AK, USA
MARTIN TRUFFER
Affiliation:
Geophysical Institute, University of Alaska Fairbanks, Fairbanks, AK, USA
MARGARET S. BOETTCHER
Affiliation:
Department of Earth Sciences, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH, USA
SANTIAGO DE LA PEÑA
Affiliation:
Byrd Polar & Climate and Research Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
IAN HOWAT
Affiliation:
Byrd Polar & Climate and Research Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
*
Correspondence: Ryan Cassotto <Ryan.Cassotto@Colorado.edu>
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Jakobshavn Isbræ, a tidewater glacier that produces some of Greenland's largest icebergs and highest speeds, reached record-high flow rates in 2012 (Joughin and others, 2014). We use terrestrial radar interferometric observations from August 2012 to characterize the events that led to record-high flow. We find that the highest speeds occurred in response to a small calving retreat, while several larger calving events produced negligible changes in glacier speed. This non-linear response to calving events suggests the terminus was close to flotation and therefore highly sensitive to terminus position. Our observations indicate that a glacier's response to calving is a consequence of two competing feedbacks: (1) an increase in strain rates that leads to dynamic thinning and faster flow, thereby promoting destabilization, and (2) an increase in flow rates that advects thick ice toward the terminus and promotes restabilization. The competition between these feedbacks depends on temporal and spatial variations in the glacier's proximity to flotation. This study highlights the importance of dynamic thinning and advective processes on tidewater glacier stability, and further suggests the latter may be limiting the current retreat due to the thick ice that occupies Jakobshavn Isbræ’s retrograde bed.

Information

Type
Papers
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 2018
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Differential interferogram superimposed on a Landsat 8 image of Jakobshavn Isbræ shows displacement during a 3 minute interval. The black polygon along the southern branch outlines the study region. (Inset) Photograph of the GPRI2 at the study site. Map projections are in Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM), zone 22 North.

Figure 1

Fig. 2. Corrections to unwrapped phase. (a) Time series of raw unwrapped data (gray) at a discrete pixel show numerous unwrapping errors that manifest as 2π offsets; target phase reference ranges are indicated by cyan rectangles. (b) Sample target reference map with location of pixel used in this figure (cyan triangle). (c–e) Subsets of (a) showing the results after the first (orange), second (yellow) and third (purple) corrections. (f) The full time series, now with the spline curve (red) used to produce the final corrected unwrapped data (black). This example shows the correction for a single pixel, in practice the correction is applied to each pixel in the two-dimensional interferogram and for each time step.

Figure 2

Table 1. MLI acquisition times used for phase-correction target integer maps

Figure 3

Fig. 3. Topographic phase correction for DEM alignment errors. (a) One-hour stack of topographic interferograms in polar coordinates before correcting for tilt (range) and bowtie (azimuth) effects. Sample corrections in (b) azimuth and (c) range applied to each mean phase map.

Figure 4

Table 2. Characterization of calving events

Figure 5

Fig. 4. Time series of speed. (a) Center flowline speeds along Jakobshavn Isbræ’s terminus; the location of the calving front (black diamonds) and timing of calving events (black lines) are shown. (b) Speed at 0.5 km steps along the profile. Location of the flowline is shown in Figure 6.

Figure 6

Fig. 5. Characterization of calving events. (a) Polygons highlighting calving area losses for select events; (b) the relative size and spatial distribution of all calving events mapped by the centroid; (c) change in speed during calving events; legend indicates the time and areal size of events; (d) instantaneous change in speed vs calving area loss.

Figure 7

Fig. 6. Variations in surface elevation. (a) Map of surface elevations with the location of a profile (white line) sampled in (b–d). (b) Cross-sections of surface elevations along the profile for five different epochs, dashed lines show interpolated values for missing data; note the reverse surface slope prior to calving in the early record. (c) A time series of surface elevations along the profile. (d) Time series of elevations 0.5 km along the profile. Diamonds in (b) and (c) indicate the location of the calving front.

Figure 8

Fig. 7. Bed topographic trigger to fast flow: step changes in speed occurred as the terminus retreated into subtly wider region of the bed. Longitudinal strain rates (a) before and (b) after the 2 August 23:10 calving event; purple indicates extension, green compression, yellow arrows show the location of calving event. (c) Front positions (colored lines) and Morlighem and others, (2017) bed model (yellow contours) overlain on an MLI image.

Figure 9

Fig. 8. Spatiotemporal variations around 2 August 23:10 calving event. (a) Speeds, (b) longitudinal strain rates (purple = extension, green = compression), (c) surface elevation changes, (d) height above flotation (HAF) with the corresponding (white lines) and 30 July 16:22 (white dashed line) front positions shown for reference, (e) tidal admittance amplitude, and (f) tidal admittance phase lag. Contours in (b) represent bed elevations from Morlighem and others, (2017); polygon in (c) indicates 9 km2 sample area shown in time series in Figure 9b; colored triangles in (f) show the location of tidal admittance sampled in time series in Figure 9.

Figure 10

Fig. 9. Variations in stability through feedbacks along the terminus. Time series of (a) mean front position relative to 2012 maximum, (b) speed and surface elevation changes measured from beginning of the record over a 9 km2 patch of the ice stream (Fig. 8), (c–e) the phase lag between tides and ice speeds, and (f) admittance amplitude for three locations along the terminus (Fig. 8f); black lines in (f) indicate the tidal amplitude (see text). Gray vertical lines throughout indicate the timing of calving events.

Figure 11

Fig. 10. Long-term implications of short-term perturbations. (a) Seventeen-year history of terminus positions with a time series of mean front positions in (b); (c) 2012 mean front positions from satellite and GPRI; (d) time series of satellite-derived speeds from NASA MEaSUREs.

Supplementary material: File

Cassotto et al. supplementary material

Cassotto et al. supplementary material 1

Download Cassotto et al. supplementary material(File)
File 184.1 MB