4.6 Article

Mapping snow depth within a tundra ecosystem using multiscale observations and Bayesian methods

期刊

CRYOSPHERE
卷 11, 期 2, 页码 857-875

出版社

COPERNICUS GESELLSCHAFT MBH
DOI: 10.5194/tc-11-857-2017

关键词

-

资金

  1. Office of Biological and Environmental Research in the DOE Office of Science
  2. NGEE Arctic research [DE-AC0205CH11231]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper compares and integrates different strategies to characterize the variability of end-of-winter snow depth and its relationship to topography in ice-wedge polygon tundra of Arctic Alaska. Snow depth was measured using in situ snow depth probes and estimated using ground-penetrating radar (GPR) surveys and the photogrammetric detection and ranging (phodar) technique with an unmanned aerial system (UAS). We found that GPR data provided high-precision estimates of snow depth (RMSE = 2.9 cm), with a spatial sampling of 10 cm along transects. Phodar-based approaches provided snow depth estimates in a less laborious manner compared to GPR and probing, while yielding a high precision (RMSE = 6.0 cm) and a fine spatial sampling (4cm x 4cm). We then investigated the spatial variability of snow depth and its correlation to micro-and macrotopography using the snow-free lidar digital elevation map (DEM) and the wavelet approach. We found that the end-of-winter snow depth was highly variable over short (several meter) distances, and the variability was correlated with microtopography. Microtopographic lows (i.e., troughs and centers of low-centered polygons) were filled in with snow, which resulted in a smooth and even snow surface following macrotopography. We developed and implemented a Bayesian approach to integrate the snow-free lidar DEM and multiscale measurements (probe and GPR) as well as the topographic correlation for estimating snow depth over the landscape. Our approach led to high-precision estimates of snow depth (RMSE = 6.0 cm), at 0.5m resolution and over the lidar domain (750m x 700m).

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据