IASC Workshop
on the dynamics and mass budgetof Arctic glaciers & proglacial
marine ecosystems
Abstracts and Programme
IASC Workshop, 22-24 January 2018
University Center Obergurgl, Obergurgl, Austria.

IASC Network on Arctic Glaciology

IASC Workshop on the dynamics
and mass budget of Arctic glaciers &proglacial marine ecosystems

Abstracts and program

Network on Arctic Glaciology annual meeting &IASC cross-cutting activity on the importance of Arctic
glaciers for the Arctic marine ecosystem
22-24 January 2018, Obergurgl, Austria

Organised by Thorben Dunse and Michael Kuhn
Organizing committee of cross-cutting activity:
Thorben Dunse (NAG chair), Renate Degen (MWG), Monika K˛edra (MWG), Marit
Reigstad (MWG), Martin Sharp (CWG/NAG) and Shin Sugiyama (CWG)

Network on Arctic Glaciology

Cover photo: Basin-3 of the Austfonna ice cap, Svalbard, surging into the Barents
Sea. Landsat 8 scenes as captured from TopoSvalbard (Norwegian Polar Institute)ISBN: 978–90–393–6974–6

Contents
Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3

Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4

Posters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

8Participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

9Minutes of the Open Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

12

Minutes of the IASC-NAG Open Forum meeting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

15

Abstracts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

18

Quantification of sediment transport into Kongsfjorden due to the glaciermelt dynamics of Austre Lovenbreen using terrestrial laser scanning . . . .

18

RES ice thickness and frontal ablation of outlet glaciers in Russian Arctic .

19

Nutrient delivery from polar glaciers to downstream ecosystems . . . . . .

21

Biogeochemical and microbial variability in subglacial systems on the Devon Ice Cap, Canadian Arctic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

22

Towards a remote monitoring of surface mass balance at Freya Glacier(NE-Greenland) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

23

Controls on glacier surging and velocity variations in the St. Elias Mountains, Yukon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

26

Climate, and Surface energy and mass balance of Nordenskiöldbreen,
Svalbard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

27

A.P. Olsen Ice Cap (NE-Greenland): What drives the snow distribution? . .

28

Estimating the contribution of trace metal contaminants from Devon Ice
Cap, NU to the Ocean (2005-2015) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

29

Characterizing the ice-ocean interaction at the Upernavik Glacier using
in-situ and satellite observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

30

Particles and plankton facing the glaciers around Svalbard . . . . . . . . . .

30

10 years of mass balance over a small Arctic basin. The example of Austre
Lovénbreen (Svalbard) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

33

Using photogrammetry for quantitative glacier analyses back to the 1800’s 33
Spatio-Temporal Variability of Refreezing in Firn in Southwest Greenland .

34

An analysis of the errors in the calculation of ice discharge through flux
gates. Application to Nunavut tidewater glaciers, Canada. . . . . . . . . . .

35

The effect of glacier runoff on Arctic fjord circulation and ecosystem . . . .

37

Surge dynamics of western basin of the Vavilov Ice Cap assessed by remote sensing data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

37

Elevation changes of Greenland’s glaciers using AeroDEM, ArcticDEM and
TanDEM-X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

38

Variations in subglacial discharge and submarine melting during tidewater
glacier retreat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

39

1

Greenland, Canadian and Icelandic land-ice albedo grids (2000–2017) . . .

40Greenland ice sheet equilibrium line altitude variations: 2000–2017 . . . .

41

Mass balance of Svalbard glaciers 1957–2015 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

41

A coincidental measure of tidal stress propagation in Bowdoin Glacier,Northwest Greenland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

42

Dynamics of hydrological and hydrogeological processes on the Werenskioldbreen forefield in ablation season 2017 - short hydrological balance. . .

43

A consistent estimate of Pan-Arctic glacier frontal ablation, 2000–2015 . .

43Fresh water input to Arctic fjord - Hornsund (Svalbard) as an example . . .

44

Factors influencing asymmetric pattern of snow distribution on Hansbreen(Svalbard) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

45

Can increased meltwater fluxes ’fuel’ enhanced productivity in the North
Atlantic? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

45

A minimal model of tidewater glacier evolution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

46

Retreating glaciers impacts on Arctic marine fjord ecosystem . . . . . . . .

46

Physical and Biogeochemical ocean studies at the boundary region of Bowdoin Glacier and its Fjord, Northwestern Greenland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

49

Assesment of the current state and development of Austre Grønfjordbreen
glacier by a complex of glaciological, physico-mathematical and remotemethods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

49

Global-scale 21st century glacier mass and runoff changes . . . . . . . . . .

50Functional Trait patterns in Arctic fjord ecosystems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

51

ASTER-derived glacier volume changes in Alaska or Norway . . . . . . . . .

52

The relationship between albedo and spring warming over Canada’s largest
glaciated elevation gradient . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
Preferential water flow in snow and firn: evidences, consequences andsimulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

53

Long-term projection of Arctic valley glaciers based on finite element simulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

53

Assessment of proglacial moraine response to climate shift, an Arctic basin
as a witness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

54

Continuous monitoring of ice motion and discharge of outlet glaciers ofGreenland and Artic ice caps by Sentinel Satellites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

55

Enhanced models for mass balance and ice dynamics of Svalbard glaciers

56

The importance of shear-margin softening for abrupt velocity variations at
Upernavik Isstrøm, Greenland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

56

On the link between glacier-freshwater runoff and summer phytoplankton
growth in seas around Svalbard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

57

Preface
The success or failure of field work in the Arctic critically depends on weather conditions. That weather conditions can threaten an international workshop is a different story. Austria on the 21st of January experienced heavy snowfall and strong
winds. For the first time in 19 years, the Austrian commission for avalanche forecasting announced the highest level of avalanche danger (level 5). Several roadsin the Alps were closed, among them the 20 kilometer stretch leading via Sölden
to the alpine resort of Oberurgl. Ten early-birds, including myself, had arrived one
day ahead of the workshop. Luckily, both wind and snowfall calmed down during
Sunday afternoon, allowing the helicopter to fly and drop explosives in order torelease potentially hazardous avalanches. Most workshop participants managed
to arrive during this temporary opening of the road. The remaining participants
made it on Monday, calling for some flexibility in the original workshop program.
The 2018 annual workshop of the IASC Network on Arctic Glaciology (NAG)
took place at the Obergurgl University Center, Obergurgl, Austria. The meeting
attracted 42 participants from 16 different countries. The workshop integrated
two special activities. The first, “Understanding atmosphere-glacier-ocean interactions and their implications for the pan-Arctic glacier mass budget” represents along-term strategy of the Cryosphere Working Group and NAG. The second theme
broke new ground: an IASC cross-cutting activity of the Cryosphere and Marine
working goups of IASC, addressing “The importance of Arctic glaciers for the Arctic marine ecosystem”. Such interdisciplinary work helps to produce research
results of relevance to society, in our case especially for people living in the Arctic
or benefitting from Arctic ecosystem services, directly or indirectly. Interdisciplinary work requires that researchers from the involved disciplines get to know
each-other and learn to understand each-others scientific jargon. I am confident
that the IASC cross-cutting activity contributed in building a bridge between thecryosphere and biosphere community. I hope that we can keep up the momentum
and elaborate this initiative in the years to come, also involving members fromother relevant disciplines, such as physical oceanography, ocean biogeochemistry, as well as terrestrial ecology.
Thanks to everyone contributing to the workshop, making the program as richand diverse as the weather conditions. During the last two days, participants
continued the discussions on the local ski slopes, enjoying their extended lunch
breaks in sunshine and fantastic alpine scenery. We will be back in Obergurgl, 27–
31 January 2020. In the meantime, I hope to see you all again in Geilo, Norway,
20–24 January 2019!

February 20183

Program
The meeting takes place at the Obergurgl University Center in Obergurgl, Austria,
22 - 24 January, 2018.

Sunday 21 January
ARRIVAL
19:00 - 20:30

DinnerMonday 22 January
08:20 - 08:30

Registration: pick up your name badge and copy of program

08:30 - 08:40

Welcome Michael Kuhn and Thorben Dunse

08:40 - 10:10

The importance of Arctic glaciers for the Arctic marine
ecosystem - Part 1

Convener:

Jason Amundson

08:40 - 09:10

Keynote talk The effect of glacier runoff on Arctic fjord
circulation and ecosystem Harald Steen, H. Hop, A.Sundfjord,
P. Duarte, P. Assmy, K.M. Kovacs, C. Lydersen, G. Wing
Gabrielsen, J. Aars, A.Everett, C. Hamilton. H. Strøm, S.
Descamps, J. Kohler

09:10 - 09:30

On the link between glacier-freshwater runoff and summer
phytoplankton growth in seas around Svalbard Thorben
Dunse, K. Dong, K.S. Aas, L.C. Stige

09:30 - 09:50

Can increased meltwater fluxes ’fuel’ enhanced productivity in
the North Atlantic? Mark Hopwood, T. Browning

09:50 - 10:10

Functional Trait patterns in Arctic fjord ecosystems Renate
Degen

10:10 - 10:40

Coffee break

10:40 - 12:10

The importance of Arctic glaciers for the Arctic marine
ecosystem - Part 2

Convener:

Emilia Trudnowska

10:40 - 11:10

Keynote talk Nutrient delivery from polar glaciers todownstream ecosystems Andy Hodson

11:10 - 11:30

Biogeochemical and microbial variability in subglacial systems
on the Devon Ice Cap, Canadian Arctic Ashley Dubnick, M.
Sharp
4

11:30 - 11:50

Estimating the contribution of trace metal contaminants from
Devon Ice Cap, NU to the Ocean (2005-2015) David Burgess, J.
Zheng, W. van Wychen

11:50 - 12:10

Particles and plankton facing the glaciers around Svalbard
Emilia Trudnowska, K. Draganska-Deja, A.M. Kubiszyn, K.
Blachowiak-Samolyk

12:10 - 12:30

Physical and Biogeochemical ocean studies at the boundary
region of Bowdoin Glacier and its Fjord, Northwestern Greenland
Naoya Kanna, S. Sugiyama, D. Sakakibara, Y. Fukamachi, D.
Nomura, S. Fukumoto, S. Yamasaki, E. Podolskiy, A. Yamaguchi

12:30 - 14:40

Lunch break

14:40 - 16:00

Glacier mass balance & glacier-atmosphere interactions

Convener:

Carleen Reijmer

14:40 - 15:00

Long-term projection of Arctic valley glaciers based on finite
element simulations Songtao Ai, Z. Wang, G. Lin, Y. Yang

15:00 - 15:20

Preferential water flow in snow and firn: evidences,consequences and simulation Sergey Marchenko, V. Pohjola,
R. Pettersson, W. van Pelt, H. Machguth, C. Reijmer

15:20 - 15:40

Global-scale 21st century glacier mass and runoff changes
Regine Hock, M.Huss, B. Marzeion, A. Bliss, R. Giessen, Y.
Hirabayashi, V. Radic, A. Slangen

15:40 - 16:00

Mass balance of Svalbard glaciers 1957–2015 Jon Ove Hagen,
T. Dunse, T. Eiken, J. Kohler, G.Moholdt, C. Nuth, T.V. Schuler, T.
Østby

16:00 - 16:30

Coffee break

16:30 - 17:20

Understanding atmosphere-glacier-ocean interactions
and their implications for the pan-Arctic glacier mass
budget - Part 1

Convener:

Andreas P. Ahlstrøm

16:30 - 17:00

Keynote talk A consistent estimate of Pan-Arctic glacier frontal
ablation, 2000-2015 Luke Copland

17:00 - 17:20

An analysis of the errors in the calculation of ice discharge
through flux gates. Application to Nunavut tidewater glaciers,
Canada. P. Sánchez-Gámez, Francisco Navarro

17:20 - 17:45

Poster introduction by authors(1 slide and max. 2 minutes per person)

17:45 - 19:15

Poster session
Note: posters remain up until Wednesday

19:30 - 21:00

Dinner5

Tuesday 23 January
08:30 - 10:30
Convener:
08:30 - 09:00
09:00 - 09:20
09:20 - 10:10

The importance of Arctic glaciers for the Arctic marine
ecosystem - Part 3
Andy Hodson
Keynote talk Retreating glaciers impacts on Arctic marine fjord
ecosystem Monika K˛edra, J.M. W˛esławski, Renate Degen
Variations in subglacial discharge and submarine melting during
tidewater glacier retreat Jason Amundson, D. Carroll
Open discussion: Collaboration between glacier and marine
biology/ecology communities Moderator: Andy Hodson

10:10 - 10:40

Coffee break

10:40 - 12:00
Convener:
10:40 - 11:00

Atmosphere-glacier-ocean interactions - Part 2
Michael Kuhn
Climate, and Surface energy and mass balance of
Nordenskiöldbreen, Svalbard Carleen H. Reijmer, V. Pohjola,
W.J.J. van Pelt, R. Petterson
Spatio-Temporal Variability of Refreezing in Firn in Southwest
Greenland Federico Covi, R. Hock, G. Corti, A.K. Rennermalm,
M. Tedesco, C. Miège, J. Kingslake, S.Z. Leidman, S. Munsell
The relationship between albedo and spring warming overCanada’s largest glaciated elevation gradient Scott
Williamson, L. Copland, D. Hik, G. Clarke
A coincidental measure of tidal stress propagation in Bowdoin
Glacier, Northwest Greenland Julien Seguinot, M. Funk, S.
Sugiyama

11:00 - 11:20

11:20 - 11:40

11:40 - 12:00

12:00 - 16:00

Very long lunch break / Skiing

16:00 - 16:30

Coffee break

16:30 - 17:30
Convener:
16:30 - 16:50

Atmosphere-glacier-ocean interactions - Part 3
Federico Covi
Greenland ice sheet equilibrium line altitude variations:
2000–2017 Jason Box, H. Machguth, R.S. Fausto, W.T. Colgan,Roderik, P. Smeets, P.L. Langen
A minimal model of tidewater glacier evolution Martin Lüthi, R.
Mercenier, A. Vieli
Enhanced models for mass balance and ice dynamics of
Svalbard glaciers Thomas Zwinger, Y. Gong2 , D. Vallot, I.
Välisuo, J. Åström

16:50 - 17:10
17:10 - 17:30

17:30 - 17:45

Short break

17:45 - 19:15

IASC Network on Arctic Glaciology Open Forum meeting
Thorben Dunse, Francisco Navarro, ...

6

19:30 - 21:00

DinnerWednesday 24 January
08:30 - 10:30

Glacier mass balance & glacier-atmosphere interactions

Convener:

Bernhard Hynek

08:30 - 08:50

The importance of shear-margin softening for abrupt velocity
variations at Upernavik Isstrøm, Greenland S. Hillerup Larsen
Andreas P. Ahlstrøm, A. Kusk, P.L. Langen, C.S. Hvidberg

08:50 - 09:10

Factors influencing asymmetric pattern of snow distribution on
Hansbreen (Svalbard) Mariusz Grabiec, D. Ignatiuk, M. Laska,
A. Uszczyk, T. Budzik

09:10 - 09:30

Dynamics of hydrological and hydrogeological processes on the
Werenskioldbreen forefield in ablation season 2017 - shorthydrological balance. Katarzyna Stachniak, S. Sitek, K. Janik,
D. Ignatiuk, J. Jania

09:30 - 09:50

10 years of mass balance over a small Arctic basin. The
example of Austre Lovénbreen (Svalbard) Eric Bernard, Sophie
Schiavone, F. Tolle, M. Griselin, A. Prokop, J.M. Friedt, D. Joly

09:50 - 10:20

Coffee break

10:20 - 11:40

Ice dynamics & glacier-elevation change

Convener:

Regine Hock

10:20 - 10:40

Assesment of the current state and development of Austre
Grønfjordbreen glacier by a complex of glaciological,
physico-mathematical and remote methods Nelly Elagina, S.
Kutuzov, R. Chernov, I. Lavrentiev, T. Vasilyeva, B. Mavlyudov, A.
Kudikov

10:40 - 11:00

ASTER-derived glacier volume changes in Alaska or Norway
Robert McNabb

11:00 - 11:20

Elevation changes of Greenland’s glaciers using AeroDEM,
ArcticDEM and TanDEM-X Jacqueline Huber, L. von Albedyll, H.
Machguth, M. Zemp

11:20 - 11:40

Continuous monitoring of ice motion and discharge of outlet
glaciers of Greenland and Artic ice caps by Sentinel Satellites
Thomas Nagler, J. Wuite, M. Hetzenecker, S. Scheiblauer, H.
Rott

11:40 - 11:50

Final words M. Kuhn / T. Dunse

11:50 -

Lunch / Skiing / Side events / Early departure

19:00 - 20:30

Dinner7

Posters
 Quantification of sediment transport into Kongsfjorden due to the glacier melt
dynamics of Austre Lovenbreen using terrestrial laser scanning Alexander
Prokop, F. Tolle, E. Bernard, J. M. Friedt
 RES ice thickness and frontal ablation of outlet glaciers in Russian Arctic A.
Glazovsky, I. Lavrentiev, E.Vasilenko, Nelli Elagina
 Towards a remote monitoring of surface mass balance at Freya Glacier(NE-Greenland) Bernhard Hynek, W.Schöner, Binder, G. Weyss
 Controls on glacier surging and velocity variations in the St. Elias Mountains,
Yukon Brittany Main, L. Copland, W. Van Wychen, C. Dow
 A.P. Olsen Ice Cap (NE-Greenland): What drives the snow distribution? DanielBinder, S. Hillerup Larsen, M. Citterio Characterizing the ice-ocean interaction at the Upernavik Glacier using in-situ
and satellite observations Dora Kovacs, A.P. Ahlstroem
 Using photogrammetry for quantitative glacier analyses back to the 1800’s
Erik S. Holmlund, P. Holmlund Surge dynamics of western basin of the Vavilov Ice Cap assessed by remotesensing data I. Bushueva, A. Glazovsky, G. Nosenko, Nelli Elagina
 Greenland, Canadian and Icelandic land-ice albedo grids (2000–2017) Jason
Box, R. Fausto, K. Mankoff, D. van As, K. Steffen, and the PROMICE project
team (GEUS)
 Fresh water input to Arctic fjord - Hornsund (Svalbard) as an example
Małgorzata Błaszczyk, D. Ignatiuk, A. Uszczyk, K. Cielecka, M. Grabiec, J.
Jania, M. Moskalik, W. Walczowski
 Assessment of proglacial moraine response to climate shift, an Arctic basin asa witness Sophie Schiavone, F. Tolle, A. Prokop, E. Bernard, J.M.l Friedt, M.
Griselin, D. Joly

8

ParticipantsGroup photo: The 2018 IASC-NAG workshop attracted 42 participants from
16 countries.

1. Alexander Prokop (Alexander.Prokop [at] UNIS.no)
The University Centre in Svalbard, Norway
2. Andreas P. Ahlstrøm (apa [at] geus.dk)
Geological Survey from Denmark and Greenland (GEUS), Danmark
3. Andy Hodson (Andrew.Hodson [at] UNIS.no)
The University Centre in Svalbard, Norway
4. Ashley Dubnick* (adubnick [at] ualberta.ca)
University of Alberta, Canada
5. Bernhard Hynek (bernhard.hynek [at] zamg.ac.at)
Zentralanstalt für Meteorologie und Geodynamik, Austria
6. Brittany Main (bmain018 [at] uottawa.ca)
University of Ottawa, Canada
7. Carleen Reijmer (c.h.tijm-reijmer [at] uu.nl)
Institute for Marine and Atmospheric research Utrecht, The Netherlands
98. Daniel Binder (dab [at] geus.dk)
Geological Survey from Denmark and Greenland (GEUS), Danmark
9. David Burgess (david.burgess [at] canada.ca)
Natural Resources Canada, Ottawa, Canada
10. Dora Kovacs* (tnp504 [at] alumni.ku.dk)
Geological Survey from Denmark and Greenland (GEUS), Danmark
11. Emilia Trudnowska* (emilia [at] iopan.pl)
IOPAS, Poland
12. Eric Bernard (eric.bernard [at] univ-fcomte.fr)
Université Bourgogne Franche-Comté, France
13. Erik S. Holmlund* (erik-holmlund [at] hotmail.com)
Stockholm University, Sweden
14. Federico Covi* (fcovi [at] alaska.edu)
University of Alaska Fairbanks, USA
15. Francisco Navarro (francisco.navarro [at] upm.es)
Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Spain
16. Harald Steen (steen [at] npolar.no)
Norwegian Polar Institute, Norway
17. Heinz Miller (Heinrich.Miller [at] awi.de)
Alfred Wegener Institute, Germany
18. Jacqueline Huber (jhuber [at] access.uzh.ch)
University of Zurich, Switzerland
19. Jan Wuite (jan.wuite [at] enveo.at)
ENVEO IT GmbH, Austria
20. Jason Amundson (jmamundson [at] alaska.edu)
University of Alaska Southeast, USA
21. Jason Box (jeb [at] geus.dk)
Geological Survey from Denmark and Greenland (GEUS), Danmark
22. Jon Ove Hagen (joh [at] geo.uio.no)
University of Oslo, Norway
23. Julien Seguinot (seguinot [at] vaw.baug.ethz.ch)
ETH Zürich, Switzerland
24. Katarzyna Stachniak* (katsta93 [at] gmail.com)
University of Silesia, Poland
25. Luke Copland (luke.copland [at] uottawa.ca)
University of Ottawa, Canada
26. Małgorzata Błaszczyk (malgorzata.blaszczyk [at] us.edu.pl)
University of Silesia, Poland
27. Mariusz Grabiec (mariusz.grabiec [at] us.edu.pl)
University of Silesia, Poland
28. Mark Hopwood (mhopwood [at] geomar.de)
GEOMAR, Germany
29. Martin Lüthi (martin.luethi [at] geo.uzh.ch)
University of Zurich, Switzerland
30. Michael Kuhn (michael.kuhn [at] uibk.ac.at)University of Innsbruck, Austria
31. Naoya Kanna (kanna [at] arc.hokudai.ac.jp)
Institute of Low Temperature Science, Hokkaido University, Japan
32. Nelly Elagina (nelly.e.elagina [at] gmail.com)

10

Russian Academy of Sciences, Russia
33. Regine Hock (rehock [at] alaska.edu)
University of Alaska Fairbanks, USA
34. Renate Degen (renate.degen [at] hotmail.com)
University of Vienna, Austria
35. Robert McNabb (robert.mcnabb [at] geo.uio.no)
University of Oslo, Norway
36. Scott Williamson* (snw [at] ualberta.ca)
University of Ottawa, Canada
37. Songtao Ai (ast [at] whu.edu.cn)
Wuhan University, China
38. Sergey Marchenko (sergey.marchenko [at] geo.uu.se)
Uppsala University, Sweden
39. Sophie Schiavone* (sophie.schiavone [at] univ-fcomte.fr)
Université Bourgogne Franche-Comté, France
40. Thomas Zwinger (zwinger [at] csc.fi)
CSC - IT Center for Science, Espoo, Finland
41. Thorben Dunse (thorben.dunse [at] geo.uio.no)
University of Oslo, Norway
42. Yuande Yang (yuandeyang [at] whu.edu.cn)
Wuhan University, China(Young scientists receiving IASC travel support are marked *).

11

Minutes of the Open Discussion: Collaboration between glacier and marine
biology/ecology communities
Moderator: Andy Hodson
Minutes: Carleen Reijmer, Renate Degen and Thorben Dunse
The cross-cutting activity The importance of Arctic glaciers for the Arctic
marine ecosystem between the Cryosphere and Marine Working Groups of IASC
was distributed over three workshop sessions (see program for full overview).
A wide range of topics was covered as part of 10 oral presentations, thereof 3
keynote talks: The effect of glacier runoff on Arctic fjord circulation and ecosystems by Harald Steen, Norwegian Polar Institute; Nutrient delivery from polar glaciers to downstream ecosystems by Andy
Hodson, The University Center in Svalbard; Retreating glaciers impacts on Arctic marine fjord ecosystem by Monika Kedra, Institute of Oceanology, Polish Academy of Sciences (presented by Renate Degen, University of Vienna

The final session of presentations lead into an open discussion.
Andy Hodson opens the discussion by providing a brief overview on changes in
the Arctic system due to climate change and their impact on the marine ecosystems and sea birds. These changes include the retreat of tidewater glaciers toform land-terminating glaciers with glacier forefields and related changes in thecharacteristics of sediment and nutrient transport, changes in glacier runoff, thelack of fast ice in fjords and rising sea-surface temperatures. These issues havealso been addressed by several speakers during the cross-cutting session. Harald Steen and Mark Hopwood give their additional views on this.
Central questions of the discussion are:
 What glaciological information/data are useful for the marine biology/ecology
community and vice versa?
 What data/information can glaciologists readily provide to the marine biology/ecology community and vice versa?
 Collaborations between glacier and marine ecology communities in field work,
etc.?

Renate Degen poses the following questions on behalf of the marine biology/ecology communities:12 Is glacier freshwater discharge uniform and predictable or dominated by unpredictable events?
 Is mineral sedimentation rate predictable and how much do mineral sedimentation rates change over time?
 Is freshwater discharge and sediment flux directly linked or independent fromeach-other?
 Is relevant data readily available? Are there data bases you can login andretrieve the data? Quick answer: there is data, but not readily available indata bases. There are papers and websites with some data. Efforts towards a
database on glacier freshwater, sediment and nutrient supply in the past andpredictions into the future would be of great interest to the marine ecology
community.

Some members of the glacier community like to learn more about the specificrequirements of the data, e.g. what are the specific data needs; is gridded data
enough; on what temporal or spatial scales; separation from surface runoff, subsurface water flow and ice berg discharge of tidewater glaciers?
Mark Hopwood mentions that coupling of models providing local meltwater
input volumes (split into ice melt, subglacial and supraglacial components) withmodels providing water dynamics in the fjords as well as the impact on chemistry and biology at a fjord scale would be valuable- but are presently beyond
reach because of the unique characteristics of each individual fjord and the factthat processes critical to controlling fjord circulation are subscale with respect toocean biogeochemical models.
Unfortunately, physical oceanography is not represented in the audience, to discuss this in greater detail. To a first degree very useful are changes in time:
diurnal cycle, the increase of the melt area in time, the impact of (increased) rainamounts. Of special interest is how this affects discharge in general and sedimentation rates, in particular. Information on where and when water enters thesystem is of interest as well, but depends on the type of study.
Sedimentation rates are not easily determined and especially difficult to determine for tidewater glaciers. Polish researchers have a long term program indetermining turbidity (with traps in the water) in Hornsund. Not all data is published yet.
Martin Lüthi suggests that a lot of the freshwater discharge is episodic innature and linked to e.g. rain events, lake drainage and other extreme events
that potentially contribute more sediment per water volume than at average rateof freshwater runoff/discharge.
Concerning sediment discharge captured in satellite-derived ocean color products, Mark Hopwood remarks that satellites only pick up sediments reaching
the surface in plumes, while a lot of the particles suspended deeper in the watercolumn are not detected and these sub-surface plumes can have important biogeochemical impacts, e.g. on organic carbon removal from the water column andon organism feeding strategies.
Harald Steen informs that the marine biology/ecology communities are interested in information on glacier freshwater, sediment and nutrient discharge, as
well as temperature and light regime in proglacial marine environments. All ofthese are more or less useful depending on the goal of the research.
13

Luke Copland reminds of the ongoing IASC-NAG initiative to provide the firstconsistent estimate of glacier frontal ablation, i.e. ice berg discharge and submarine melting of the glacier front on a pan-Arctic scale for the time period 2000 2015. Together with existing model estimates of glacier runoff from surface melt,
this will provide a complete picture of glacier freshwater discharge over the Arctic.
What can the marine biological/ecological community provide for the glaciological community?
Andreas Ahlstrøm poses the question if the history of sediment yield or thepresence of specific organism can tell us something about the changes in glacier
behavior?
Andy Hodson is interested in info on bacterial secondary production to trackcarbon. How much carbon gets buried in the sediments?
Thorben Dunse suggests that collaboration between the glacier and marine
communities offer opportunities in field investigations with respect to proglacial
marine environments. Glaciological field investigations are generally restricted
to easily and safely accessible regions of glaciers, avoiding in particular active
dynamic regions, such as crevassed terminus regions of fast flowing tidewater
glaciers. Marine investigations of proglacial marine environments approach theglacier front from the seaward side. Boat access would allow to study glacierocean interactions, including ocean forcing of frontal ablation and the magnitudeof undercutting of the calving front by submarine melting, e.g. by multi-beamecho sounding. CTD measurements provide information on freshwater discharge
and water samples insights into the nutrient content of the discharge.
Several people remark that sharing of resources on vessels is often difficult,since the amount of people and the amount of research to be done is much larger
than the time available. Renate Degen mentions that the Marine Working Groupmay function as a mediator, here.
Someone suggests that collaborations between glacier and marine biology/ecology
communities should rather be established on an individual basis. The CWG (NAG)
and MWG may, however function as a mediator.
Francisco Navarro stresses once more that a follow-up of the present activity
should try to engage physical oceanographers, not present at this meeting. Harald Steen notes that project TIGRIF (Tidewater Glacier Retreat Impact on Fjord
circulation and ecosystems) by the Norwegian Polar Institute and partner institutions succeeded in bringing together glaciologists, marine ecologist/biologists, aswell as oceanographers.
Follow-up activities of the present cross-cutting initiative were also discussed
during the IASC-NAG open forum meeting (see separate minutes).

14

Minutes of the IASC-NAG Open Forummeeting
Chair: Thorben Dunse
Minutes: Carleen Reijmer
Invited to attend: all participants of the workshop.
Agenda
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Introduction to IASC and NAG
Funding
Discussion on future possible activities
Future meetings
Book of extended Abstracts
Anything else?

Ad. 1- IASC: International Arctic Science Committee (https://iasc.info/; non-governmentalorganization promoting Arctic research in general- IASC works mainly through its five working groups: (Atmosphere, Cryosphere,
Marine, Social & Human, Terrestrial)- IASC does not fund actual research but promotes research by providing seedmoney for workshops and summer schools.
- NAG: Network Arctic Glaciology (https://nag.iasc.info/), started out as a working group in 1994, then was renamed Network, in which networks worked separately from the working groups, now NAG is integrated under the umbrella of the
Cryosphere working group. The main objective of NAG is to facilitate research on
the dynamics and mass budget of Arctic glaciers (more objectives on the website)
and its main activity is the annual meeting.
- The network has a loose organizational structure build around a chair (Thorben
Dunse), a vice chair (Martin Sharp) and national representatives from 18 countries
engaged in Arctic Research.
Ad. 2
The activities of NAG (the annual meeting) are mainly funded by grants from IASC
and its Cryosphere Working group (CWG). The Obergurgl 2018 meeting is sponsored by the CWG (AC6750) as part of its focus area on tidewater glacier dynamics
and response to climate change, focusing on atmosphere-glacier-ocean interaction. Additional funding (AC3500) comes directly from IASC being a cross cutting
initiative. Most of the funding is used for travel funds for early career scientists,
the rest (± A
C2750) for the venue (conference room and coffee breaks).
The funding structure of IASC and its working groups has changed recently. In
2017, IASC provided kA
C35 for cross cutting initiatives. In addition, the working
groups could spend kA
C20, each, of which at least kA
C5 also had to be spend on
cross cutting activities. In 2018,all funding will be distributed through the working
groups and not by IASC, directly. Each working group will allocate kA
C27, of whichkA
C12 must be spend on cross cutting initiatives. In coming years, NAG can again
15

try to get funding from IASCs CWG and maybe for cross cutting initiatives also
from other working groups.
Ad. 3
Jason Box opens the discussion by suggesting to go back / keep focusing on
atmosphere - glacier - ocean interactions, focusing on the physics. Or focus on
the role of glaciers in transport of nutrients/sediment /biochemistry. A note to
make here is that the physicists in the Marine WG did not show any interest in
joining the current activity. Mark Hopwood notes that there are no marine fjord
physicists in the Marine WG.
Martin Lüthi points out that we should not think in terms of IASC working
groups but in what we would like to do. That means including fjord physicists,even though they are not active in the Marine working group.
Mark Hopwood suggests a few names/groups that are leading in this topic for
the Arctic regions, it might be useful to include them in this initiative:- Fiamma Straneo, Scripps Institution of Oceanography- David Sutherland, Earth Sciences University of Oregon- John Mortenson, Greenland Institute of Natural Resources
Problem is to get them to the meeting since the PARCA meeting is around thesame time as this meeting and most of these people will more likely go to the
PARCA meeting.
Thorben Dunse, Jon Ove Hagen, Heinz Miller and Carleen Reijmer all
suggest to go further on the path that we are on now: thus continue the collaboration with the marine biological/ecological community. This meeting is a promising
start, we should develop some joint projects, plus continuity is important as well.
Harald Steen adds that continuity might also help to promote the existence of
this network and its activities better.
Andy Hodson suggests that perhaps not only tidewater glaciers are interestingsources of nutrients and sediments, but land terminating glaciers provide themas well through glacier fed rivers. He suggests to connect to two groups, ESSAS (Ecosystem Studies of Subarctic and Arctic Seas) and GLAC-HYDROECO-NET,
addressing marine and freshwater ecosystems, respectively. The group are, however, not related to IASC.
Martin Lüthi adds a new suggestion: add long term perspectives, perhaps
have a special session on the long time scales. Martin Sharp and Jason Box alreadyare involved in initiatives to look at processes and data sets over long time scales.
Coming back to the lack of physical oceanographers and fjord physics specialists, Renate Degen suggests to first contact people from that disciplines thatmight be interested and then involve the Marine WG in order to qualify for crosscutting funding.
Jason Amundson notes that not only physical oceanographers are missing,but also experts on sediment transport. We should perhaps also include geomorphologists in this initiative.
Francisco Navarro suggests that we should do something together in themean time, such as writing a cross-disciplinary paper, in order to get some momentum in this initiative. Else there will not be much progress until the next
meeting. Mark Hopwood had some ideas for potential synthesis papers andremains in contact with Andy Hodson and a few other workshop participants.
16

Martin Lüthi suggests to look at the need of the biologists and see if we canprovide that need. Renate Degen mentions that sedimentation rates will be very
useful, as will information to relate sedimentation rates to melt rates/flux.
Andreas Ahlstrøm mentions that there will be an IGS conference on sedimentation in May 2019.
Ad. 4
In the 2016 meeting in Maine (US), Norway was suggested to host the 2019 meeting. Another option was Japan. Timing of the meeting will be similar to this year,
in either the last two weeks of January, or the first week of February. January ispreferred regarding holidays and teaching schedules. For Norway, both Finse andGeilo are suggested. Geilo seems to be a better location with respect to access,options for outdoor activities and is also considerably cheaper. It will then be at
the same venue as the 2004 IGS conference. Thorben Dunse will contact Geilo
and, if necessary, other potential meeting venues in Norway for availability andspecific offers and follow up the arrangements.
Obergurgl is chosen unanimously as the venue for the 2020 meeting. Michael
Kuhn will arrange that.
Update: Venue and dates for the next two annuals meetings are now settled.
 2019: Bardøla Hotel, Geilo, Norway, 20–24 January 2019
 2020: University Centre Obergurgl, Obergurgl, Austria, 27–31 January 2020

The workshops will be anounced via Cryolist during late summer of the previous year and more information will also be available on the IASC-NAG website(https://nag.iasc.info/workshop).
Ad. 5
As every year, there is the possibility to submit an extended abstract for the final
book of abstracts. Deadline is 1 March 2018. Please provide the abstract in aword document and separate figure documents, and send everything to Thorben
Dunse.
Ad. 6
No other issues.

17

Abstracts
Quantification of sediment transport into Kongsfjorden
due to the glacier melt dynamics of Austre Lovenbreenusing terrestrial laser scanning
Alexander Prokop1 , Florian Tolle2 , Eric Bernard2 , Jean Michel Friedt 2
1 UNIS, The University Centre in Svalbard
2 ThéMA Laboratory - CNRS - Université Bourgogne Franche-Comté

Climate warming causes a decrease of glaciers in Svalbard. This results in significant changes of the geomorphology of areas in glacier catchments where ice
and permafrost is melting. In particular the snout of the glacier melts drasticallyand the water outflow of the glacier changes sometimes its direction. Sedimentand bed load transport forms new river beds in the moraine, and the sediments
involved are transported downstream into the fjords. In recent years terrestrial
laser scanning technology has developed significantly, so it is possible to measure the surface of a whole glacier catchment such as the Austre Lovenbreen inhigh resolution just in a few days or even in one day. The measuring range of6000 m combined with a very low beam divergence of the laser beam allows fast
and accurate measurements of an area of 4 km2 just from one scan position. Thisadvances made it possible that we could track all surface changes via differentiating digital surface models of the Austre Lovenbreen catchment using repeatedterrestrial laser scanning surveys in 20 cm resolution and with 10 cm accuracy.
In this work we show how the geomorphology of the scanned area changed injust 2 years from 2016 to 2017. In this time frame the glacier outflow changed
its riverbed and significant amounts of sediments where transported through themoraine into the fjord, which changed the morphology of the coastline as well.
Reflectance values of the laser allowed us to distinguish between snow, ice androck material. In our presentation we explain the methodology of the terrestrial
laser scanning surveys and discuss the results of how much material was removed
in the new river bed throughout the moraine, how much sediments where accumulated at the coast line and how much of the material disappeared in the fjord.

18

RES ice thickness and frontal ablation of outlet glaciersin Russian Arctic
Andrey Glazovsky1 ,Ivan Lavrentiev1 , Evgeny Vasilenko2 , Nelly Elagina1
1 Institute of Geography RAS, Department of Glaciology, Moscow, Russia
2 Institute of Industrial Research ’Akadempribor’, Uzbekistan Academy of Sciences, Tashkent, Uzbekistan

Frontal ablation (the sum of ice loss through calving and submarine melt) of tidewater glaciers and ice caps in the Russian Arctic is poorly known. Meanwhile itis an important component of their mass balance, and its knowledge is strongly
required when considering the iceberg risk in off-shore industrial activities.
Study area is located in three archipelagoes of the Russian Arctic with total
glacierized area 51,591 km2 , including Novaya Zemlya (NZ) 22,128 km2 , Franz
Josef Land (FJL) 12,762 km2 , and Severnaya Zemlya (SZ) 16,701 km2 [1].
To assess the frontal ablation the data on ice thickness, ice velocity and glacierfront change are required. Data on ice thickness of 31 glaciers (12 on NZ, 11 on
FJL, and 8 glaciers on SZ) were obtained during our airborne 20 MHz RES campaigns in 2014–2016. Data on variations of glacier fronts from 2001 to 2016 wereextracted from Landsat satellite imagery. Glacier surface velocities from 2014 to2016 were based on feature tracking on repeat Landsat-8 imagery using COSI-Corrpackage and from GoLIVE v.1 [2] data set combined with continuous records fromseven GPS beacons installed on five glaciers. ArcticDEM data on glacier ice surface combined with RES ice thickness data were used to compile glacier bedrock
maps and transects.
Frontal ablation is estimated for each glacier as a sum of the ice flux through afixed fluxgate above the position of the calving front, and the ice volume change
in the terminus below the fluxgate due to advance or retreat. The spatially fixed
fluxgate is defined approximately perpendicular to the ice flow, 250–1500 m upglacier from the actual calving front. The depth-averaged speed is extracted fromthe surface velocity field in increments of 25 m along the fluxgate and weighted bya correction factor 0.9. The ice thickness is extracted in the same points from theice thickness maps or transects. Radar two-way time data were converted to ice
thickness using radio wave propagation speed 168 m mcs−1 . We do not include in
our estimations all glaciers without RES data, and also the surging western basinof the Vavilov Ice Cap and disintegrating Matusevich Ice Shelf (both SZ). Mean
ice thickness at glacier fronts is in average: from 60 at eastern coast to 105 m
at western coast of NZ; 107 m on FJL, and 117 m on SZ. Maximum ice thickness
at glacier front has the Inostrantsev Glacier on NZ: 216 m in average (maximum∼400 m) (Fig.1).
Frontal ablation rate of RES surveyed glaciers is assessed as: 2.05 km3 a−1
on NZ (12 glaciers) including 0.51 km3 a−1 on eastern coast (4 glaciers) and1.54 km3 a−1 on western coast (8 glaciers); 1.66 km3 a−1 on FJL (11 glaciers);
and 3.07 km3 a−1 on SZ (8 glaciers). Share of terminus position changes in total
frontal ablation is: 28% on NZ (32% eastern coast and 26% western coast), 27%
on FJL, and 24% on SZ.
Our assessment of annual frontal ablation of outlet glaciers in the Russian Arctic as 7 km3 of ice is a minimal one, because it based on the data set of only 31
19

RES-surveyed glaciers. This set covers less than a quarter of calving glaciers on
NZ and SZ, and even less on FJL. But a simple increasing of our assessment inproportion to the number or area of all calving glaciers will not give the correct
overall estimate. Input of studied glaciers in our assessment is very unequal. The
following 6 glaciers provides nearly 60% of frontal losses in our estimate: No 8,
No 7 and Issledovateley Glaciers on SZ, Inostrantsev and Vershinskiy Glaciers on
NZ, and Znamenitiy Glacier on FJL (1.04, 0.63, 0.76; 0.71, 0.3; and 0.69 km a−1 ,respectively). Terminus retreat is an important component, constituting near aquarter of the frontal ablation of studied glaciers.

Figure 1. Inostrantsev Glacier, Novaya Zemlya: a) ice surface velocity (m a−1 ); b) ice
surface (m a.s.l.); c) ice thickness (m), d) bedrock elevation (m)Acknowledgments. This study is supported by the Russian National Foundation, grant 14-37-00038, and the Arctic Program of the Presidium of the Russian
Academy of Sciences. ArcticDEM is provided by the Polar Geospatial Center under NSF OPP awards 1043681, 1559691 and 1542736, and Landsat images is acourtesy of the U.S. Geological Survey. We thank Dr S. Leprince and his team for20making available their COSI-Corr.
References
1. RGI Consortium, 2017, Randolph Glacier Inventory (RGI) - A RDataset of Global Glacier
Outlines: Version 6.0. Technical Report, Global Land Ice Measurements from Space, Boulder, Colorado, USA. Digital Media. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7265/N5-RGI-60.
2. Scambos T., Fahnestock M., Moon T., Gardner A., Klinger M. Global Land Ice Velocity
Extraction from Landsat 8 (GoLIVE), Version 1. Boulder, Colorado USA. NSIDC: National
Snow and Ice Data Center. 2016. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.7265/N5ZP442B Accessed onJune 14, 2017.

Nutrient delivery from polar glaciers to downstream
ecosystems
Andy Hodson1
1 Arctic Geology, University Centre in Svalbard, Longyearbyen, Svalbard

The export of nutrients from polar glaciers to downstream ecosystems can be simplified into small fluxes of highly labile, aqueous products of microbially-mediatedrock weathering reactions, and large fluxes of sparingly labile nutrients associatedwith sediments derived from physical erosion. However, the relative importanceof the two pathways can change markedly: for example when tidewater glaciers
retreat onto land and glacial tills accumulate organic matter and evolve into soils.
At present, almost none of these changes have been integrated into models that
represent the past, present or future state of ice-marginal marine ecosystems.
This presentation therefore attempts to improve our conceptual understanding ofthese processes and help us move toward a more interdisciplinary examination ofcoastal ecosystem dynamics in glacially-influenced polar waters.
In the first part, the importance of constraining nutrient mass balance withinglacial systems will be discussed, and its advantages over basic short-term runoff
flux calculations made clear. In so doing, it will be shown how glaciers export
significant NO3- and sediment-bound (or readily extractable) Fe, P and Si fluxes
via runoff and calving. By contrast, glaciers will be shown to be significant sinksof dissolved NH4+ and PO43- after they are leached from snowpacks and subject
to assimilation and adsorption to suspended sediments. Nutrient mass balances
through proglacial floodplains will also be used to consider their potentially important regulation of riverine glacial inputs. Secondly, linked to the above, thelonger-term changes associated with the transition from active calving to riverine
glacial inputs, caused by a combination of glacio-marine sedimentation and isostatic uplift, will also be emphasised. Here attention will be given to the role ofthe sediment infills that greatly affect rock-water interaction due to the establishment of groundwater flowpaths through very reactive fine materials that, at leastin the High Arctic, also often contain marine pore waters whose mobility can beclimate-dependent due to permafrost. Finally, several case studies of polar fjords
will be used to emphasise the above issues and make clear the range of different
21

glacial influences upon polar coastal ecosystems.

Figure 1. Iron reduction in anoxic flowpaths through young tills re-oxidises before entering Cumberland Bay, South Georgia (photo: A. Hodson)

Biogeochemical and microbial variability in subglacialsystems on the Devon Ice Cap, Canadian Arctic
Ashley Dubnick1 , Martin Sharp1
1 University of Alberta

Keywords: basal ice, biogeochemistry, microbiology
Ice at the base of glaciers and ice caps can interact with the underlying substrate and produce a thin layer (up to 10s of m thick) of "basal ice" that is chemically and/or physically distinct from the overlying "glacier ice". Previously assumed to be biogeochemically inactive, basal ice and the subglacial system havebeen shown to host active microbial communities that can mediate redox reactions at glacier beds, play an active role in rock weathering, and produce and/or
consume ecologically important nutrients. However, there have been few studiesof the biogeochemistry of basal ice, the structure of the microbial communities
that are found within it, or the variability in these characteristics within and between glacier systems. This is despite the fact that basal ice may 1) supply freshly
deglaciated landscapes with sediment and meltwater from which postglacial landscapes can evolve, 2) be melted by geothermal, frictional, and conductive heatsources allowing it to influence the biogeochemistry of glacial runoff that enters22downstream aquatic ecosystems, and 3) may impart a distinctive biogeochemical signature on supraglacial meltwaters as they are routed through the subglacial
environment to downstream ecosystems. In a study of a polythermal glacier in SW
Greenland, we found that the passage of meltwater through the subglacial environment was the first-order control on the composition of microbial assemblages
exported from the glacier, while water source (i.e., supraglacial or extraglacial)and subglacial residence times were second-order controls. To more fully characterise the biogeochemistry and microbial community structure of subglacial environments under a range of physical, chemical, and hydrological conditions we investigated basal ice from 7 subglacial systems on Canada’s Devon Ice Cap. Here,
we discuss the environmental controls that might explain the observed variability
in the dissolved organic matter, inorganic nitrogen and phosphorus content of thebasal ice, and describe the variability apparent in the microbial communities weencountered.

Towards a remote monitoring of surface mass balance
at Freya Glacier (NE-Greenland)
Bernhard Hynek1 , Daniel Binder1,3 , Michele Citterio 3 , Wolfgang Schöner2
1 Zentralanstalt für Meteorologie und Geodynamik (ZAMG), Wien
2 Institut für Georgraphie und Raumforschung, Universität Graz
3 Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland (GEUS), Copenhagen

Keywords:
glacier mass balance, automatic weather station, automatic cameras
The aim of the combined research and education project GLACIO-LIVE is to install a widely automatic glacier measurement system, which is able to measure
the glacier mass changes on a daily or hourly basis in near real time and present
the results on the web to a broader public. To make the data available in realtime, students are developing a peripheral wireless data network, which is able tocollect data of various measurement stations on the glacier and transmit the data
via Iridium on a daily timescale. In a next step all the data from automatic kameras and automatic weather stations (AWS) is assimilated into a distributed massbalance model, which calculates the acutal rate of mass change of the glacier.
In a final step students are developing a website, where the actual state of theglacier will be presented to a broader public. This operational system has been
installed on 3 Alpine glaciers and on Freya Glacier in Northeast Greenland.
Freya (Fröya) Glacier is a 6km long valley glacier situated on Clavering Island
10km southeast of the Zackenberg research station at the northeastern coast ofGreenland. Its surface area is 5.3 km2 (2013), reaching from 1300 m to 280 ma.s.l. and mainly oriented to NW with two seperated accumulation areas oriented
to NE and NW. The thickest ice found during a GPR survey in May 2008 is 200m,
located at the confluence of the two accumulation areas. GPR-data suggest, that
Freya Glacier is a polythermal glacier with temperate ice in a limited area only,at the ELA near the bottom of the glacier. Mass Balance Monitoring was initiated23during IPY in 2007. Figure 1 shows the current monitoring network on Freya glacierand the mass balance time series (Hynek, 2014).

Figure 1: Current monitoring network on Freya Glacier with ablation stakes, an automatic weather station (Promice type) and 2 automatic cameras with Iridium data connection. The barplot shows the timeseries of winter and annual mass balance.

Within the project Glacio-Live two automatic stations have been put up on theglacier in May 2016. An automatic weather station that measures the surface
energy balance and the surface height change and two automatic cameras thatmonitor the snowline retreat during summer. Both stations transmit the data innear real time via Iridium Satellite network. Figure 2 shows the surface heightchange during the last two years and figure 3 show pictures of the automatic
cameras in spring and late summer of 2017. After having completed the installation of an appropriate station network for a remote mass balance monitoring on
Freya Glacier we currently work on the assimilation of all data into an operational
glacier mass balance model and on the visualisation of near real time data andmodel output via glacio-live.at
This research is carried out within the Sparkling Science project Glacio-Live,funded by the Austrian Federal Ministry of Science, Research and Economy. We
thank the staff of the Zackenberg Research Station for providing logistic support
during field work and Gerhard Keuschnig and Flori Radlherr from foto-webcam.eu
for the good collaboration and especially their commitment and efforts to adapt
the automatic camera system to Arctic conditions.
Hynek, Bernhard; Weyss, Gernot; Binder, Daniel; Schöner, Wolfgang; Abermann, Jakob;
Citterio, Michele (2014): Mass balance of Freya Glacier, Greenland since 2007/2008. Zentralanstalt für Meteorologie und Geodynamik, Wien, PANGAEA,
https://doi.org/10.1594/PANGAEA.831035

24

Figure 2: The surface height change at the AWS from May 2016 to March 2018. In
summer 2016 there was 63cm of firn ablation, and in summer 2017 we had 8cm of accumulation at the AWS at an elevation of 688m a.s.l. Repeated heavy snowfall events in
February 2018 accumulated a snowheight of at least 3.7 meters and burried the AWS insnow.

Figure 3: Fotos of the two Webcams on Freya Glacier, which have been installed fornear realtime snowline monitoring on the glacier. Top: Fotos from 7.5.2017. Bottom:
Fotos from 14.8.2017, showing the end of summer snow cover on the glacier. Fotos areavailable online here: foto-webcam.eu/webcam/freya1 and /freya2

25

Controls on glacier surging and velocity variations in
the St. Elias Mountains, Yukon
Brittany Main1 , Luke Copland1 , Wesley Van Wychen2 , Christine Dow3
1 Department of Geography, Environment and Geomatics, University of Ottawa
2 Defence Research and Development Canada, Department of National Defence
3 Department of Geography and Environmental Management, University of Waterloo

Keywords:
glaciology, surge glaciers, remote sensing, glacier dynamics
Records of glacier velocities and their variation through time are crucial formonitoring watershed resources, managing local hazards, and initializing flow
models, which are used to refine future projections of sea level rise. In addition,a major uncertainty is whether glaciers will respond dynamically to changes inclimate: some argue that increased surface melt will lead to glacier acceleration
through increased basal lubrication, but others argue that increased melt will result in a net slowdown due to an increase in efficiency of the subglacial drainage
system. Dynamic change processes are especially complicated for surge-type
glaciers as the main influences on motion are inadequately understood. The
largest cluster of surge-type glaciers in Canada occurs in the St. Elias Mountains,
Yukon, a region that has been experiencing rapid reductions in glacier mass. The
main objective of this research is to understand the mechanisms that control thesurging of these glaciers, quantify changes in ice motion across this region overtime, and assess whether the periodicity of glacier surging is changing in a warming climate.
Using speckle-tracking of ALOS PALSAR imagery for the winters of 2007-08 and2009-10, and speckle tracking of Radarsat-2 imagery for winters since, glaciervelocity maps for the St. Elias Mountains were generated. An icefall between the
Lowell and Dusty Glaciers is explored as a possible dynamic connection between
the two glaciers, which appears to have implications for the surge behaviours ofboth. New information concerning the development and progression of the 200910 surge of Lowell Glacier is also presented, and placed in regional context ofother recent surges. Future work will include in-situ monitoring of Lowell Glacierthrough a complete surge event with a centreline network of dGPS receivers, froma quiescent period through the active surge stage. This provides new insights into
the controls on ice motion in this region.

26

Climate, and Surface energy and mass balance of Nordenskiöldbreen, Svalbard
Carleen H. Reijmer1 , V. Pohjola2 , W.J.J. van Pelt1 and R. Petterson2
1 Institute for Marine and Atmospheric research Utrecht, Utrecht University, The Netherlands
2 Department of Earth Sciences, Uppsala University, Sweden

Keywords:
Svalbard, climate change , observations, energy balance modelling
In spring 2006 a climate monitoring program on Nordenskiöldbreen, Svalbard,
was initiated, which is still on going. The program focuses on the dynamics andmass budget of the glacier, and includes mass balance (stake and sonic height
ranger) and automatic weather station (AWS) observations (AWS since 2009). At
the AWS site (∼550 m a.s.l.) the average annual temperature is ∼ −6.7◦ C. Annual mean wind speed is ∼4.5 ms-1 and is predominantly directed down glacierwith a directional constancy of ∼0.59, a predominant katabatic wind. The annual mean temperature on the glacier over this period (2009-2016) increases with
0.16◦ C/year. However, this increase is not significant due to the short observational period and large inter-annual variability.
The AWS observations are used to calculate the individual surface energy fluxes
using a surface energy balance model. From all energy fluxes, net radiation contributes about 80% to melt, with sensible heat as the second important flux contributing most of the remaining 20%. The calculated amount of energy available
in the summer months corresponds to a total melt of about 1.5 m w.e. of which
1.1 m w.e. is ice melt. The total melt is a bit higher than derived from the stakeobservations (1.1 m w.e. of which 0.8 m w.e. is ice melt), which is partly explainedby multiple melting of the same mass due to refreezing of melt water in the wintersnow pack. Although not significant, there is a positive trend in melt and runoff.
Furthermore, the melt season appears to be shifting in time, with start of melt
later in spring and especially with melt occurring later in the autumn and even in
winter. This is likely related to the decrease in sea ice in the fjord in front of theglacier. Based on the stake observations the summer, winter and annual massbalance of the total glacier is derived, which shows large inter-annual variability,
but no significant trends. The same holds for the Equilibrium Line Elevation which
varies between 550 and 800 m a.s.l with no visible trend.

27

Figure 1. Photo of the Automatic weather station on Nordenskiöldbreen in April 2011.
(Photo: A. Waxegard)

A.P. Olsen Ice Cap (NE-Greenland): What drives thesnow distribution?
Daniel Binder1 , Signe Hillerup Larsen 1 , Michele Citterio 1
1 Geological Survey from Denmark and Greenland (GEUS)

Keywords:
mass balance, GPR, snow distribution, snow variability
A.P. Olsen ice cap (74.6◦ N, 21.5◦ W) is situated about 30 km inland of the Zackenberg Research Station in Northeast Greenland. Since 2008 the GlacioBasisproject is running a mass balance monitoring programme which focuses on theSE outlet of the A.P. Olsen ice cap. Mass balance is measured by the glaciologicalmethod based on an ablation stake network and three automatic weather stations.
Every spring the over the winter season accumulated snow mass is determined
for the SE outlet by a GPR survey and snow pits. However, adequate interpolationand modelling approaches are necessary to convey measured field data to thewhole ice cap.
Spatially distributed winter snow accumulation is a crucial input parameter for28

mass balance modelling. First results of the A.P. Olsen ice cap’s snow distribution
show high interannual and spatial variability. Snow depth-elevation correlations
show a non-linear behavior with minimum snow depths at half way of the terminus
to the summit region. We hypothesize that A.P. Olsen ice cap’s spatial variability
is mainly driven by the dominant topography surrounding the ice cap’s outlets
and the redistribution by wind. Seven years of GPR-derived snow depths provide
the data base to further investigate the interannual and spatial variability. Furthermore, the potential of modelling the spatial snow depth variability by basic
assumptions of wind-redistribution based on terrain-based parameters is evaluated.

Estimating the contribution of trace metal contaminantsfrom Devon Ice Cap, NU to the Ocean (2005-2015)
David Burgess1 , James Zheng1 , Wesley van Wychen2
1 Natural Resources Canada, Ottawa, Canada
2 Defence Research and Development Canada

Keywords:
Arctic, ice cap, contaminants, freshwater
Natural and anthropogenic contaminants that accumulate in glaciers and ice
caps are highly susceptible to re-mobilization through melting, run-off, and ice dynamics. Intense melting of Arctic glaciers and ice caps since the mid-2000’s has
significantly increased the volume of glacier meltwater released from ice caps andtidewater glaciers implying a strong potential for increases in the mass of contaminants at point locations where glacier meltwater and/or glacier ice is discharged
directly into the ocean. Through combined knowledge of the concentration ofcontaminants in the ice, firn, and snow of Devon Ice Cap (DIC) found in ice corestudies, and the rates of surface melting and iceberg calving fluxes from the major drainage basins of the DIC, we provide a first-order estimate of the amount oftrace metals (Pb, Cd and Sb) discharged to the ocean. Ice and meltwater fluxes
are modeled for the period 2005–2015 using a combination of output from theRegional Atmospheric Climate Model (RACMO) 2.3 and annual in-situ glacier measurements. Rates of iceberg calving derived in previous studies are used to estimate glacier ice flux discharged from main tidewater glaciers draining the DIC.
Of particular concern are contaminants deposited since the industrial revolution,
which have been stored in high elevation firn as they are particularly vulnerable toremobilization due to upward migration of the long-term equilibrium line altitude(ELA). Results from this work provide a first order estimation of the total mass of
trace metals removed from the DIC over the past 15 years, into the local marine
ecosystems and eventually to Oceans.

29Characterizing the ice-ocean interaction at the Upernavik Glacier using in-situ and satellite observations
Dora Kovacs1 , Andreas Peter Ahlström1 , Aslak Grindted2
1 Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland
2 Niels Bohr Institute, University of Copenhagen

Keywords:
glacier-ocean interaction, calving, satellite and time-lapse imagery
Quantifying the calving mass loss at marine-terminating glaciers is a non-trivial
first step in understanding the physical processes behind the mass loss at theice-ocean interface. Here we present the first results from combining Extreme
Ice Survey hourly time-lapse imagery from the Greenland ice sheet outlet glacier
Upernavik Isstrøm with satellite imagery from COSMO-SkyMed to quantify the volumetric mass loss over a melt season. Other sources of data ranging from in-situ
weather stations, on-ice glacier trackers and tidal models will be compared to themass loss record to examine the causes and consequences of calving on glacierflow and its relation to observed sudden changes in glacier velocity.

Particles and plankton facing the glaciers around Svalbard
Emilia Trudnowska1 , Rafal Boehnke1 , Katarzyna Draganska-Deja1 , Anna Maria Kubiszyn1 ,Kajetan Deja1 , Katarzyna Blachowiak-Samolyk1
1 Institute of Oceanology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Sopot, Poland

Keywords:
particles, plankton, Arctic, glacier
Most of Svalbard coastal waters are strongly affected by the intensified glacierretreat as an effect of progressing climate warming. The glacial runoff, observed
as ’brown plumes’, is transporting large amounts of fresh waters and suspended
matter over many kilometres, which has a substantial impact on many physicaland ecological processes occurring in the marine ecosystems. However the recognition of this phenomenon is still unresolved and remains a matter of conceptualand methodological challenge. Therefore our aim was to study the marine plankton and particles in the close vicinity of glacier fronts.
The abundance and composition of various components of the ’glacial soup’,i.e. protists, zooplankton, particles and marine aggregates were analysed inside
the fjords affected by intense glacier retreat (Hornsund, Kongsfjord, Vijdefjord, Rijpfjord) as well as in coastal waters close to the glaciers that terminate on large
islands (Nordaustlandet, Edgeøya) (Fig. 1).The investigation was performed in the30

summer of 2016 along the transects that spread from the glacier fronts towards
clear open waters. The size spectra and abundance of particles and plankton wereassessed via the high resolution automatic measurements of the Laser Optical
Plankton Counter (LOPC), which was equipped with CTD and fluorometer sensors
in order to analyse the hydrographical and algal conditions. Traditional plankton
samples via nets and Niskin bottles were collected at stations to investigate nanoto mesoplankton taxonomic composition and abundance. Additionally, at some locations the underwater camera was used.

Figure 1. A map presenting the sampling locations.

As expected, the lowest salinity of seawater was observed at stations locatednear the glacier fronts, which were characterized by very high abundances of particles as well as marine aggregates. Protists and zooplankton were rather abundant at most of the glacier front stations. However, the multivariate statistics
performed either on protists, zooplankton or on particles indicated no effect of
the station locations, which suggested that all of the investigated stations werehighly influenced by the glacier runoff. Only vertical distribution of particles andplankton seemed to differed significantly between the upper (50 m) and lower
water layers. It was mainly caused by the high abundances and different composition of protists, zooplankton and particles in the upper layers contrary to thelower parts of the water column (Fig. 2). Analyses of fauna and flora taxonomic
composition, underwater camera observations and particle characteristics modelling, showed that the upper water layer was full of typical summertime protists
and zooplankton taxa, accompanied by the swarms of sea snail (Limacina helicina) and small particles. Whereas the highly abundant benthic larvae occurred
together with large particle aggregates within the lower layers of the water column. Our observations indicate that the horizontal extent of glacier plumes canreach tens of kilometres and that their vertical range is very extensive near the31front and is getting shallower moving away from the glacier.

Figure 2. The results of zooplankton abundance and composition, contribution of particles, assessed as detritus index and the mean size of the aggregates (mm), presented
as averages of the upper 50 m layer and water column underneath.

32

10 years of mass balance over a small Arctic basin. The
example of Austre Lovénbreen (Svalbard)
Eric Bernard1 , Sophie SCHIAVONE1 , Florian TOLLE1 , Madeleine GRISELIN1 , Alexander
PROKOP1 , Jean Michel FRIEDT1 , Daniel JOLY1
1 CNRS

Keywords: Mass balance, glaciology, climate shift
Arctic glaciers are good indicators of the ongoing climate change as their dynamics are strongly linked to it. This study focuses on the Austre Lovén glacier,in the Brøgger peninsula (Spitsbergen, 79◦ N), which have been systematically instrumented and monitored since 2007. The aim of this presentation is to highlightthe response of the glacier through 10 years of mass balance measurements. Under climate shift impacts, both temperatures and precipitations strongly vary in avery short time frame. In that framework, we will also discuss climatic and snow
conditions and their combination as explaining factors of the measured mass balance each year.
The Austre Lovén glacier (4,5km2 ) is equipped with a fine measurement network. Mass balance is measured yearly at the end of September with evenlyspaced 36 stakes. At the end of April, before the start of the melting season, snow
accumulation is also measured through drillings. Air temperatures have beenrecorded continuously since 2007 with 20 sensors on the glacier. Precipitation
data is acquired by the Ny Alesund station (6km away). Thanks to several collaborations and the growing interest into new technologies, Terrestrial Laser Scanning
data and aerial images acquired by UAV have contributed significantly to the understanding of the glacier basin dynamics (from hillsides to the moraine). Manymorphological features (volumes, snow densities, front lineĚ) were firstly used inthis study in order to evaluate the overall evolution of the Austre Lovén glacierover ten years. Then, a statistical study based on explanatory modelling were ran
to identify and quantify the combination of factors that played a role on the massbalance over time and space.

Using photogrammetry for quantitative glacier analyses back to the 1800’s
Erik S. Holmlund1 , Per Holmlund1
1 Department of Natural Geography, Stockholm University

Keywords: photogrammetry, structure from motion, glacier change, historicalimagery
In 2012–2016, we digitalised about 10000 old photographs taken 1861-1980 on
glaciers and alpine environments in Sweden and on Svalbard. Using the modern
33

Structure from Motion photogrammetrical workflow, new quantitative measurements can be made on almost any image sequence, provided enough overlap ispresent. These include measurements of volume, terminus positions, area estimates and analyses of the glaciers’ appearances. With new data from the last
turn of the century, considered the maximum of the Little Ice Age in Sweden andon Svalbard, we open potential for a higher understanding of their prior dynamics,
and their latter response to climate change. If modern elevation data are available, a single image of a glacier’s terminus can be orthorectified and measured,
increasing the potential temporal resolution and range of terminus measurements
in frequently visited regions. Tarfala is a well-researched valley in northern Sweden, with image material dating as far back as 1886. In 1910, a geography student photographed the valley photogrammetrical purpose, whose photographs
have now been used for quantitative reconstruction. Comparing the surface withelevation data from 2015 shows a mean elevation decrease of 57 meters over thethree largest glaciers. Several glacier fronts were also reconstructed in 3D fromphotographs, not taken with photogrammetry in mind, between 1945 and 1948
around Tarfala. Plans include expanding these reconstructions to other areas in
Sweden and on Svalbard. Modern photogrammetrical software, such as Agisoft
PhotoScan, makes historical photogrammetry increasingly simple. We presenta short summary of these workflows, going from scanned images to DEM’s, orthophotos and surface change analyses.

Spatio-Temporal Variability of Refreezing in Firn in Southwest Greenland
Federico Covi1 , Regine Hock1 , Giovanni Corti2 , Asa K. Rennermalm3 , Marco Tedesco4 ,Clément Miège5 , Jonathan Kingslake4 , Sasha Z. Leidman3 , Steven Munsell1
1 University of Alaska Fairbanks
2 Reed College
3 Rutgers University New Brunswick
4 Lamont Doherty Earth Observatory, Columbia University
5 University of Utah
6 Prescott College

Half of the current annual mass loss from the Greenland Ice Sheet is currently estimated to be due to surface losses. Most of surface runoff happens in the ablationarea, where exposed bare ice is impermeable to meltwater. At higher elevations,in the percolation zone, a significant portion of surface meltwater percolates, refreezes, and is stored in the firn. During the last decade, increased melting has
caused the formation of near surface thick (>5 m) ice layers in the firn. Theselayers can seal off underlying porous firn, forcing meltwater to generate runoff
instead of refreezing.
To investigate the spatio-temporal variability of refreezing in firn, field observations were conducted in the spring of 2017 in proximity of the DYE-2 site, inthe percolation zone of the Southwest Greenland ice sheet at elevations between
1963 and 2355 m a.s.l.. Here, we present initial results from the field season.

34

Five 20-m deep firn cores were extracted and analyzed for density and stratigraphy, two full energy balance weather stations were deployed, equipped with 16 mlong thermistor strings to measure firn temperature, and over 300 km of ground
penetrating radar data were collected. Preliminary firn cores analysis reveals increasing frequency and thickness of ice lenses toward lower ice-sheet elevations,in agreement with other recent work in the area. The collected data will facilitate
advances in our understanding of the spatio-temporal distribution and variabilityof firn refreezing and its role in the surface mass balance of the Greenland Ice
Sheet.

An analysis of the errors in the calculation of ice discharge through flux gates. Application to Nunavut tidewater glaciers, Canada.
Pablo Sánchez-Gámez1 , Francisco Navarro1
1 Dept. Matemática Aplicada a las TIC, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, ETSI de Telecomunicación, Av. Complutense, 30, 28040 Madrid, Spain

Keywords:
ice discharge, flux gate, error estimate, Canadian Arctic
Frontal ablation of tidewater glacier, whose main components are calving andsubmarine melting at the glacier front, is an important mechanism of mass loss
from Arctic glaciers. Frontal ablation is usually estimated calculating the ice discharge through predefined flux gates close to the glacier terminus. However,published results often lack a detailed error estimate. In the flux calculation,
both errors in cross-sectional area and errors in velocity are relevant. While for
estimating the errors in velocity there are well-established procedures, the calculation of the error in the cross-sectional area requires the availability of ground
penetrating radar (GPR) profiles transverse to the ice-flow direction and close to
the glacier terminus. Yet quite often there are only available GPR profiles collectedalong the centreline of glaciers, and thus it is necessary to make some assumption about the cross-sectional shape and area. In this contribution, we use GPR
ice-thickness data from the IceBridge operation collected in Ellesmere and Devon
Islands, Nunavut, Canada, to compare the cross-sectional areas estimated using
various approaches (parabolic, quartic) with the cross-sections estimated from theobserved ice thickness data. These error estimates are combined with those for
ice-velocities calculated from Sentinel-1 SAR data, to get the error in ice discharge.

35

Figure 1. Study area: Ellesmere and Devon islands, Nunavut, Canadian Arctic.

Our results indicate that the velocity field is the main error source for small
glaciers with low velocities, while for large glaciers with high velocities the error in cross-sectional area dominates. Ice thinning or thickening between timesof ice-thickness and glacier velocity measurements should be considered, as it
implies systematic errors up to 8% in our case study. The U-shaped parabolic
approach, with allowance for ice-thickness measurement point displaced from theglacier centerline, performs best, with small bias and admissible standard error. In
general, the quartic U-shaped approach tends to overestimate the cross-sectionalarea, though it works best for large glaciers.
Regarding ice discharge results, we observe an increase of ice discharge fromthe main glaciers of the Prince of Wales Icefield (Trinity and Wykeham) from 2015
to 2016, by 5% and 20%, respectively, followed by a decrease in 2017, by 10%
and 15% respectively. Belcher glacier, in the Devon Ice Cap, maintains similar
discharges during 2015–2017.
The focus of this contribution was the analysis of the errors in the calculationof ice discharge through given flux gates. However, other factors might influence
the approximation of the frontal ablation by the mentioned method. Among thesefactors are the surface mass balance between the flux gate and the calving front,
the ice-thickness changes, the front position changes and the seasonal and interannual variations of ice velocity. The ice discharge corrections for these factors
can be large and should therefore not be disregarded.
Acknowledgements: This project has received funding from the European
Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 727890 and by project CTM2014-56473-R of the Spanish State Plan for
R&D. Ground-penetrating radar data used in this paper were acquired by NASA’s
Operation IceBridge Project. Copernicus Sentinel data 2016-2017.
36

The effect of glacier runoff on Arctic fjord circulationand ecosystem
Harald Steen1 , Haakon Hop1 , Arild Sundfjord1 , Pedro Duarte1 , Philipp Assmy1 , Kit M.
Kovacs1 , Christian Lydersen1 , Jon Aars1 , Geir Wing Gabrielsen1 , Alistair Everett1 , Charmain Hamilton1 , Hallvard Strøm1 , Sebastien Descamps1 , Jack Kohler1
1 Norwegian Polar InstituteAs the Arctic sea-ice is diminishing the arctic environment in front of tidewater
glaciers may become a refuge for arctic species. Tidewater glaciers terminatingin fjords create a local ”arctic“ environment and affect the fjord circulation throughkatabatic wind and sub-glacial melt water discharge. The resulting upwelling of
nutrient-rich water from the deeper part of the fjord contributes to sustaining
phytoplankton productivity throughout the summer. In contrast, land-terminating
glaciers lack upwelling mechanisms and is characterized by lower productivity,
as has been shown for glaciers in Greenland fjords. We will present a multidisciplinary study aiming at understanding the mechanisms through which the tidewater glacier affect the fjord circulation, nutrient dynamics, primary production,
zooplankton availability and ultimately fish and top predators. Birds, seals andpolar bears are iconic to the arctic environment and we will show how loss of fjord
ice causes diet shifts in birds and divergent spatial use by seals and polar bears.

Surge dynamics of western basin of the Vavilov Ice Cap
assessed by remote sensing data
Irina Bushueva1 , Andrey Glazovsky1 , Gennady Nosenko1 , Nelly Elagina1
1 Institute of Geography RAS, Department of Glaciology, Moscow, Russia

The glaciers and ice caps in the Arctic are experiencing significant changes, manifested, in particular, in the intensification of their dynamic instability.
Here we present data on a large-scale surge in the western basin of the Vavilov
ice cap on Severnaya Zemlya. The ice cap is located at 79.30◦ N, 95.47◦ E, withtotal ice cap area 1781.4 km2 according the Randolph Glacier Inventory (Fig. 1a).
The data were derived from satellite imagery (Landsat-1, 5, 7, 8, Terra ASTER,
Sentinel-1 and Corona), goLIVE and Sentinrel-1 ice velocity data sets, and also
from our airborne RES survey in 2014.
Analysis of 28 space images from 1963 to 2017 showed that front advance has
evolved during all this period (Fig. 1b). In the first decade from 1963 to 1973
the advance was very slow from 2-5 to 12 m a−1 . Since the 1980s, the advancebegan to accelerate from the first tens of m a−1 to the first of hundreds m−1 inthe 2000s. The turning point came in 2012, when the front was advancing witha velocity about 0.5 km a−1 . In 2014 the volume of advanced snout was at least
4 km3. The rate of advance reached the maximum of 7 km a−1 in 2016. From37

1963 to 2017 the glacier front moved forward by 11.7 km and its area increased
by 134,1 km2 (by 47% relative to basin area in 1963), that was accompanied byspreading of crevasse zone up the glacier.

Figure 1. Vavilov ice Cap, Severnaya Zemlya: a) ice cap location and outlines of its western basin; b) glacier front position from 1963 to 2017.
Ice surface velocity reached a maximum of 25.4 m d−1 in 2016, and in 2017 reduced
to 6.8 m d−1 . We assume that the initial activation of the southern and western margins of the ice cap in second half of XX c. might be a response to the climate signal
occurred possibly several centuries ago. As a result, the ice crevassing accompanied withcryo-hydrologic warming and reinforced by positive feedback, led to the instability of theglacier and displacement of the marginal stagnant belt of debris-laden ice frozen to thebed. The surge was facilitated by change of bedrock conditions as the ice lobe progressed
offshore from permafrost coastal zone to the area of soft marine bottom sediments withlow shear strength. The surge seems to be also stimulated by anomalously warm summerof 2012.
Acknowledgements: This study is supported by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research, grant 16-35-00333, and by Russian National Foundation, grant 14-37-00038.

Elevation changes of Greenland’s glaciers using AeroDEM, ArcticDEM and TanDEM-X
Jacqueline Huber1 , Luisa von Albedyll2 , Horst Machguth1,3 , Frank Paul1 , Michael Zemp1
1 World Glacier Monitoring Service, Department of Geography, University of Zurich, Zürich, Switzerland
2 Institute of Environmental Physics, University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany
3 Department of Geosciences, University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland

Keywords: Greenland, glaciers, geodetic mass balance
Greenland peripheral glaciers and ice caps are sensitive key indicators of climatechance but recent evolution of ice volume along Greenland’s periphery is still poorly un-38derstood. The restricted number of geodetic glacier thickness changes on Greenland isprobably related to the absence of digital elevation models (DEM) of sufficient accuracy.
In this study we used the reanalyzed AeroDEM (late 1970s to mid-1980s) and the two recently released high resolution DEMs ArcticDEM (2012–2015) and TanDEM-X (2010–2014)
to calculate geodetic glacier elevation changes. Thereby, the main challenge was to appropriately deal with the data voids and artefacts occurring in all three DEMs. In theframework of a pilot study, the ArcticDEM was subtracted from the AeroDEM over theHolm Land ice cap, northeast Greenland. The data voids were filled (A) by spatial interpolation and (B) by interpolating the mean of the respective elevation bin, resulting in amean elevation changes of 9.3 m and 9.9 m, respectively. Based on the results of thispilot study, we are applying these approaches to calculate glacier elevation changes forlarger regions on Greenland.
This work is carried out in the framework of the Copernicus Climate Change Service(https://climate.copernicus.eu/about-c3s) for which the World Glacier Monitoring Service(WGMS) aims at generating glacier specific elevations changes for regions around theworld.

Variations in subglacial discharge and submarine melting during tidewater glacier retreat
Jason Amundson1 , Dustin Carroll2
1 University of Alaska Southeast
2 NASA-JPL

Keywords: tidewater glacier; subglacial discharge; submarine melting
To first order, subglacial discharge depends on climate, which determines precipitation
fluxes and glacier mass balance, and the rate of glacier volume change. For tidewater
glaciers, large and rapid changes in glacier volume can occur independent of climatechange due to strong glacier dynamic feedbacks. Using an idealized tidewater glaciermodel, we show that these feedbacks produce secular variations in subglacial dischargethat are influenced by subglacial topography. Retreat along retrograde bed slopes (intodeep water) results in rapid surface lowering and coincident increases in subglacial discharge of up to ∼20%. Since subglacial discharge is a key driver of nutrient-rich upwelling plumes, these topographically modulated variations in subglacial discharge may
have consequences for fjord ecosystems. Moreover, submarine melting of glacier termini,
which depends on subglacial discharge, also increases during retreat into deep water. Our
results therefore indicate that submarine melting acts in concert with iceberg calving tocause tidewater glacier termini to be unstable on retrograde beds. The full impact ofsubmarine melting on tidewater glacier stability remains uncertain, however, due to poor
understanding of the coupling between submarine melting and iceberg calving.

39

Greenland, Canadian and Icelandic land-ice albedo grids(2000–2017)
Jason Box1 , Robert Fausto1 , Kenneth Mankoff1 , Dirk van As1 , Konrad Steffen2 , and the
PROMICE project team (GEUS)
1 Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland
2 WSL

Keywords: albedo Greenland MODIS Sentinel-3
Albedo, Latin for ”whiteness“, is a term used to describe the amount of sunlight reflected by the ground. Fresh snow albedo can exceed 85%, making it among the most reflective natural substances. Warm conditions promote snow crystal metamorphosis that,like the presence of liquid water, bring snow albedo down below 65%. With the darkening, caused by the metamorphosis, absorbed solar energy thus increases by roughlya factor of two. Seasonal snow melts over the lower reaches of a glacier leading to the
exposure of bare ice with albedo below 55%. Impurities such as dust, black carbon or
microbes can bring glacier-ice albedo be-low 30%, meaning that snow ablation gives way
to impurityrich, bare glacier ice which increases absorbed sunlight by more than a factorof three.
The thickness of the winter snow layer and the intensity of spring melt are important
determinants of the annual glacier-ice melt, as the amount of snow cover governs thetiming of darker ice exposure; the earlier the exposure, the more ice can melt. Becausesnow and ice albedo properties make it an amplifier of climate change, surface albedo has
been designated as an Essential Climate Variable and a Target Requirement for climate
monitoring (WMO 2011).
Polar orbiting satellites facilitate albedo mapping with Arctic coverage multiple times
per day in clear-sky conditions. Satellite-based retrievals of surface albedo depend on
accurate compensation of the intervening atmosphere. Thus, without ground truth, thesatellite retrievals are uncertain. In Greenland, snow and ice albedo is monitored by automatic weather stations (AWSs) from The Greenland Climate Network (GC-Net; Steffen etal. 1996) since 1995 and after 2007 from The Programme for Monitoring of the Greenland
Ice Sheet (PROMICE; van As et al. 2013). Using the GC-Net data, satellite-derived albedo
values are compared with ground data (e.g. Stroeve et al. 2013). Here, we present comparisons of daily GC-Net and PROMICE albedo data to satellite-derived albedo from theNASA Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradio- meter (MODIS) MOD10A1 product (Hallet al. 1995). MOD10A1 data have been available since May 2000 and are here de-noised,gap-filled and calibrated into a daily 500 × 500 m grid covering Greenland, Iceland andthe Canadian Arctic glaciers.

40

Greenland ice sheet equilibrium line altitude variations:
2000–2017
Jason Box1 , Horst Machguth2,3 , Robert S. Fausto1 , William T. Colgan1 , Roderik4 , Paul
Smeets5 , Peter L. Langen5
1 Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland (GEUS), Copenhagen, Denmark
2 World Glacier Monitoring Service (WGMS), Department of Geography, University of Zurich, Switzerland
3 Department of Geosciences, University of Fribourg, Switzerland
4 Institute for Marine and Atmospheric research Utrecht (IMAU), University of Utrecht, The Netherlands
5 Danish Meteorological Institute (DMI)

Keywords: MODIS PROMICE HIRHAM
In this study, the position of daily snow (or firn) line around the Greenland ice sheet isclassified using NASA MODIS MOD10A1 daily albedo data where values are equal to average bare ice onset value of 0.544±0.082 observed in 44 station-years of PROMICE groundstation data. The maximum snowline each year (hereafter “FirnlineMODIS”) is taken as
an estimate for equilibrium-line altitude (ELA). FirnlineMODIS is cross validated using 41
independent ELA estimates from PROMICE ice ablation values and 18 values from thewest Greenland ice sheet K-trasect in 18 mass balance years (1999/2000 to 2016/2017).
The validation work indicates FirnlineMODIS can underestimate ELA in some areas wheremultiyear superimposed ice occurs. Comparison with historical ELA values beginning in
the 1950s are few and via comparing coincident FirnlineMODIS averages do not indicate along term ELA shift because the RMS differences are larger than the average differences.
The technique exhibits a satisfactory spatial varion (correlation above 0.95). The only
statistically significant FirnlineMODIS changes in time over 2000-2017 indicate an overall
increasing ELA. The western ice sheet FirnlineMODIS change has increased of 138ś99 mfrom 2000 to 2017. On the eastern slope, the increase is insignificant (35±81 m).

Mass balance of Svalbard glaciers 1957–2015
Jon Ove Hagen1, Thorben Dunse1 , Trond Eiken1 , Jack Kohler2 , Geir Moholdt2 , Chris Nuth1 , Thomas V.
Schuler1 and Torbjørn Østby1
1 Department of Geosciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
2 Norwegian Polar Institute, Tromsø, Norway

The most recent inventory of Svalbard glaciers show reduced ice masses and gives anarea of 33775 km2 of glaciers covering 57% of the total land area of the archipelago. The
glacierized area over the entire archipelago has decreased by an average of 80 km2 yr−1
over the past ∼30 years, representing a reduction of 7 %. Mass balance monitoring wasstarted by the Norwegian Polar Institute in 1950 at Finsterwalderbreen in West Spitsbergen by measurements every second year until 1968. Since then a number of massbalance measurement have been conducted in different periods on selected glaciers, thelongest and most continuous on glaciers in the Kongsfjorden area since 1967. However,they cover only a small fraction (< 2 %) of the total glaciated area. The larger glaciers41are in general less negative than the small, since their accumulation area ratio is higher.
On all glaciers, summer ablation is more variable than winter accumulation, thus summer
temperatures provide most of the control on the net balance. However, summer snowfall
may significantly reduce ablation by increasing the surface albedo and thus lowering thesummer melt.
Geodetic mass balance over entire Svalbard has been obtained by analyzing the Ice,
Cloud, and land Elevation Satellite (ICESat) data from 2003–2009 and by combining satellite data with older maps. This shows that most glacier regions in Svalbard have experienced low-elevation thinning combined with high-elevation balance or thickening, butwith large regional variability.
Mass balance modelling has been run for the period 1957–2014, forced by ERA–40 and
ERA–Interim reanalysis data, and downscaled to 1 km resolution. The modelling showsa general positive surface mass balance in the period from 1957 to early 1980ies andnegative since then with a linear climatic mass balance trend of -1.4 ± 0.4 cm w eq. yr−1 .
The calving loss is an important part of the overall mass budget and estimates varies
from 4 to 8 Gt yr−1 (12 to 24 cm w eq. yr−1 ) Many glaciers are of surge-type and surges
may alter the area-altitude distribution and for calving glaciers give a temporary increased mass loss. The current total mass loss estimates of Svalbard glaciers vary from
-5 to -12 Gt yr−1 or -14 to - 36 cm w eq. yr−1 .

A coincidental measure of tidal stress propagation in
Bowdoin Glacier, Northwest Greenland
Julien Seguinot1 , Martin Funk1 , Shin Sugiyama2
1 Laboratory of Hydraulics, Hydrology and Glaciology, ETH Zürich, Switzerland
2 Institute of Low Temperature Science, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan

Keywords: glacier, tide, pressure, monitoring
The observed acceleration, thinning and retreat of marine-terminating outlet glaciersof the Greenland ice sheet account for about half of its mass loss. This so-called dynamic
thinning, which has now propagated along much of the ice margin, nevertheless involves
feedback processes between ice thickness, basal sliding, subglacial water and oceanictides, that are not yet fully understood.
Here, we present a three-year record of ice pressure measured en-glacially at Bowdoin
Glacier, a small and relatively accessible tidewater glacier in Northwest Greenland which
has been monitored continuously since 2014. Although Bowdoin Glacier appears to havebeen very stable since its frontal position was first documented by late 19th century
explorers, its calving front has recently experienced a rapid retreat of ca. 2 km between
2007 and 2013, followed by a continued surface lowering since then.
About 2 km upstream from the calving front, two boreholes were drilled and equippedwith thermistors, inclinometers and pressure sensors. Although pressure sensors weremeant to locate instruments in the water-filled boreholes immediately after the drilling,
they continued to record after the complete refreezing of the boreholes and the stabilisation of ice temperatures well below the pressure melting point. All sensors recorded
in-phase pressure variations with clear 12–hour and 14–day periodicities, leaving no doubt
on the tidal nature of the signal. Surprisingly, the amplitude of pressure variations
recorded in ice is comparable to that of sea level tides measured 130 km away at Pituffik.
This lets us conclude, that tidal stresses applying to marine calving fronts can propagate

42

several kilometres upstream in subfreezing glacier ice.

Dynamics of hydrological and hydrogeological processeson the Werenskioldbreen forefield in ablation season
2017 - short hydrological balance.
Katarzyna Stachniak1 , Sławomir Sitek1 , Krzysztof Janik1 , Dariusz Ignatiuk1,2 , Jacek
Jania1,2
1 Faculty of Earth Sciences, University of Silesia, Poland
2 2Centre for Polar Studies, University of Silesia, Poland

Studies on the Werenskioldbreen (catchment - 44.1 km2 , glacier area - 27.1 km2 , forefield- 6 km2 ), located on the Wedel Jarlsberg Land (Spitsbergen) have been conducted formore than 60 years. The main aims of glaciological and hydrological researchers werefocus on: identifying the catchment hydrography, determining the hydrological balanceof the catchment, estimating the amount of glacial meltwaters, calculating outflow incomparison to glacier mass balance and modelling of surface energy balance.
Complex set of interdisciplinary studies have been conducted on Werenskioldbreen
during ablation season in 2017. Measurement of permafrost thaw, sedimentology analysis and GPR profiles have been made, to recognize the hydrogeological and physicalproperties of the periglacial sediments. Studies have been supplemented by additional
measurements of the water inflow and outflow from the catchment, the groundwaterlevel, glacier mass balance and meteorological conditions on glacier and its forefield.
Our results provide unique hydrogeological data for glacier forefield. The first analysis
allow us to create model which will help to reduce inconsistencies in the hydrologicalbalance of the glacier’s catchment and better understanding of processes occurring in
expanding zone between glacier and sea during the global warming.

A consistent estimate of Pan-Arctic glacier frontal ablation, 2000–2015
Luke Copland1
1 University of Ottawa

Keywords: Frontal ablation, glacier dynamics, icebergs
Over the last several decades, glaciers and ice caps in the Arctic have been losing massat an accelerating rate. However, the way in which this mass is being lost is inadequately
understood, particularly for tidewater glaciers, where the relative importance of surface
runoff vs. frontal ablation is not well quantified. This information is required to properly
quantify glacier and ice cap contributions to sea level rise, to assess freshwater fluxes
to the ocean (in both liquid and solid form), and to understand the future evolution of
tidewater glaciers in a warming climate.

43This presentation will provide a review of a project designed to provide the first consistent pan-Arctic estimate of frontal ablation for the period 2000–2015. This will include
all regions where glaciers and ice caps terminate in the ocean (i.e. Alaska, Canadian Arctic, Russian Arctic, Svalbard), as well the periphery of Greenland. To achieve this goal,measurements of the width, depth, velocity and terminus retreat rate of every tidewater
glacier in the Arctic is required. Recent satellite and airborne measurements make thispossible for many locations, although data gaps remain in locations where information on
ice thicknesses is poor, such as the Russian Arctic. Methods that can be used to addressthese data gaps, recommendations for common methodologies, and preliminary results,
will be presented.

Fresh water input to Arctic fjord - Hornsund (Svalbard)
as an example
Małgorzata Błaszczyk 1 , Dariusz Ignatiuk1 , Aleksander Uszczyk1 , Katarzyna Cielecka1 ,Mariusz Grabiec1 , Jacek Jania1 , Mateusz Moskalik2 , Waldemar Walczowski3
1 University of Silesia, Faculty of Earth Sciences, Sosnowiec, Poland
2 Institute of Geophysics, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warszawa, Poland
3 Institute of Oceanology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Sopot, Poland

Keywords: Frontal ablation, glacier dynamics, icebergs
Significant retreat and mass volume loss of glaciers have been observed in the drainage
basin of Hornsund (Southern Spitsbergen, Svalbard) over last decades. Melting of glaciers
has its consequences in increased discharge of fresh water to Svalbard fjords. Here, we
present the leading and minor sources of the freshwater supply to Hornsund. Evaluation
were based on glaciological and meteorological data from the period 2006–2015.
Long-term yearly average input of fresh water to Hornsund is 2517 Mt a−1. Maincomponents are: surface ablation (986 Mt a−1) and frontal ablation of the glaciers (634
Mt a−1). In studied period tidewater glaciers in Hornsund lose c. 40 % of their mass byfrontal ablation. Terminus retreat component contributed c. 30 % of the mass loss byfrontal ablation, ranging between 17 and 44 % due to influence of marine, atmosphericand geomorphic factors. Thus, in multiannual scale, input of freshwater due to calving inindividual seasons can significantly deviate from the average. Liquid precipitation overthe land (520 Mt a−1), total precipitation over the fjord area (180 Mt a−1) and ablationof snow cover on unglaciated area (197 Mt a−1) have smaller contribution than glacial
factors. According to recent climate models, the freshwater supply to the sea will increasein the near future, while importance of individual components may alternate.

44Factors influencing asymmetric pattern of snow distribution on Hansbreen (Svalbard)
Mariusz Grabiec 1 , Dariusz Ignatiuk1 , Michal Laska1 , Aleksander Uszczyk1 , Tomasz
Budzik1
1 University of Silesia in Katowice, Faculty of Earth Sciences, Sosnowiec, Poland

Defining the factors controlling the snow cover properties has a great importance for understanding glacial systems, mainly their mass balance, heat exchange and temporary
water retention. The snow cover characteristics were studied on Hansbreen, an outlet glacier in southern Spitsbergen, over winter seasons 2011–2017. Shallow radio-echosounding has been used in order to determine spatial snow distribution. Additionallymeteorological data from automatic weather stations working on the glacier as well as
topographic properties of glacier and its surroundings have been analysed.
Obtained results confirmed that asymmetrical snow distribution pattern on Hansbreen,with the maximum accumulation in the western part of the glacier, is constant over longer
period. Lower accumulation and smaller interseasonal variability of snow depth occur inthe remaining parts of the glacier. The snow distribution is controlled by the topographyof the area surrounding the glacier, especially the orographic barriers in its western andsouth-western parts. Predominating advection of moist air masses from these directions
produces orographic precipitation. That results into favourable conditions for snow deposition on the leeward side of the obstacles (western part of Hansbreen). The central
and eastern parts of the glacier, on the other hand, are exposed, which favours snowdrift.
Even though winds from the east prevail, their transport capabilities are limited due tothe lack of mobile material to be redeposited. Mobile snow particles are available mostly
during snowfall or shortly afterwards. Deposited snowpack undergoes a rapid compaction
and further displacement of snow particle is hardly feasible.

Can increased meltwater fluxes ’fuel’ enhanced productivity in the North Atlantic?
Mark Hopwood1 , Tom Browning1
1 GEOMAR

Keywords: Nutrients, Chlorophyll, limitation, biogeochemistry
Whilst much attention has been paid to the nutrient content of meltwater and the potential effect of increased nutrient supply to shelf areas of the high latitude North Atlantic
from increasing meltwater fluxes, it is not clear to what extent such a supposed ’increase’can positively affect marine primary production. Here we demonstrate that all meltwater sources (icebergs, surface runoff, sub-glacial discharge) are an imbalanced nutrient
supply enriched in lithogenic Si and Fe, but with negligible direct contributions to marine
NO3 and PO4 budgets. In several cases the supposed ’increase’ in nutrient supply exists only as a calculated mass flux, because stratification by low NO3/low PO4 meltwater
actually lowers the macronutrient content of surface coastal waters. Furthermore, in allcases (NO3/PO4/Si/Fe) fluxes are non-linear with respect to meltwater input due to thephenomenon of localized upwelling which depends strongly on the grounding line depth45

of marine terminating glaciers. Non-conservative estuarine behavior for Si (approximately
10% enrichment), Fe (90-99% removal) and possible also a modest PO4 sink (some evidence of a PO4-Fe sink from Svalbard) then further moderates these inputs. In addition to
supplying modest quantities of Si and Fe to the marine environment, freshwater input hasother effects on the marine environment (acidification, stratification, localized upwelling,
suppression of light) which are inter-connected with nutrient availability. Here using asatellite derived data product to assess the balance between NO3 and Fe co-limitation ona regional scale in the North Atlantic, and the results of fieldwork around Greenland andSvalbard, we will provide a synopsis of how Atlantic ecosystems may respond to increasing freshwater fluxes with respect to both changes to the glacial supply of, and biologicaldemand for, the nutrients Fe and NO3 which can be used to explain observed patterns ofsurface productivity across the Atlantic.

A minimal model of tidewater glacier evolution
Martin Lüthi1 , Rémy Mercenier1 , Andreas Vieli1
1 University of Zurich

Keywords: calving, tidewater, minimal model
The iceberg calving process influences the geometry of a tidewater glacier,and is inturn controlled by the terminus geometry through the stress field which controls damage
and fracture of the ice. We analyze the feedbacks in this intricately coupled process withan explicitly formulated model, consisting of evolution equations for three state variables
representing glacier geometry. The simplicity of the model allows for formal investigationof stability of glacier states on different basal geometries during advance and retreat. Thismodel, complemented with a simple parametrization of glacier calving rates, can also be
used to understand tidewater glacier change rates. Model runs on realistic bathymetries
yield evolution histories which compare favorably with recorded tidewater glacier histories.

Retreating glaciers impacts on Arctic marine fjord ecosystem
Monika K˛
edra1 , Jan Marcin W˛esławski1 , Renate Degen2
1 Institute of Oceanology, Polish Academy of Sciences
2 University of Vienna

Keywords: glacier retreat, ecosystem functioning, biodiversity, fjord
Arctic fjords often host rich and diverse communities that further supply upper trophic
level animals. Glaciers’ activity is among one of the most important factors shaping
Arctic marine fjord ecosystems influencing both pelagic and benthic communities, theirstructure and diversity.
The key physical - chemical phenomena that are connected with the retreating glaciers
include massive summer discharge of meltwater, strong stratification, extreme turbidity,46

enhanced mineral and organic carbon sedimentation, reduction of euphotic zone, and extreme acoustic climate. All those factors result in steep environmental gradients along thefjords’ axes with highest disturbance in areas close to the glaciers and in the glacial bays.
Data collected from over 30 glacial bays of Svalbard shows, that soft bottom benthos,
micro- and mesozooplankton follow the same pattern - with a distinct impoverishmentof biomass, density and species diversity compared to outer part of the fjord (Lydersen
et al., 2014). Within glacial fjords phototrophic microplankton in the outer and central
parts of the fjords is replaced by mixotrophic microplankton in glacial bays. The latter
have distinct microplankton composition with prevalence of small mixo- and heterotrophes like cryptophytes and other nanoflagellates (Piwosz et al., 2015; Piwosz et al., 2009;
Wiktor and Wojciechowska, 2005). Also, the glacier meltwater discharge leads to low
chl a concentrations but high mesozooplankton concentrations (Trudnowska et al., 2014).
As the meltwater driven estuarine circulation leads to an entrapment of zooplankton in
the inner fjord basin, mass mortality events of stenohaline zooplankton are observed in
the glacial bays (W˛esławski et al., 2000). Up to 15% of standing plankton biomass during the 100 days of melting season is removed from the water column due to osmotic
shock (W˛esławski et al., 2000; Zajaczkowski and Legeżyńska, 2001). The sinking deadzooplankton fuels the high abundance of scavenging benthic fauna in the glacial bays
(Zajaczkowski and Legeżyńska, 2001). Krill avoids freshwater outflow and aggregates below 20 m in the glacial bays (W˛esławski et al., 2000), thus attracting predators like fish,seabirds, seals and white whales (Lydersen et al., 2014). Fjords are also home to specific benthic fauna, which in large is characteristic for fjords only (Włodarska-Kowalczuk
et al., 2012). The benthic fauna follows the environmental gradients in the fjord withhighest macrobenthic diversity in the transition zone and impoverished species and functional diversity in the glacial bays (Włodarska-Kowalczuk et al., 2005). Similar trends ofincreasing abundance and biomass along with increasing distance from the glacier are
observed for foraminifera, meiofauna and macrofauna (Grzelak et al., 2016; K˛edra et al.,2013; Włodarska-Kowalczuk et al., 2013). A multifrequency acoustic survey showed thatlarge fish were present in the outer deep part of fjords (Kongsfjorden and Hornsund), whilesmaller fish dominated in the shallower waters (Szczucka et al., 2017). Glacier cracking
and calving is a very strong source of underwater noise with unknown effect on animalhydrolocation.
With ongoing climate warming, glaciers’ retreat, accompanied by an increase in meltwater outflow and flux of inorganic particles, is predicted to strongly influence both pelagic
and benthic fjord communities including the upper trophic levels of the food chain. Lossof transition zones between inner (highly stressed) and outer (stable conditions) parts
might be expected (K˛edra et al. 2010). The retreat of tidewater glacier on land results increation of tidal flat, brackish lagoons and loss of the glacial bay typical fauna, thus theecosystem functions. On the other hand, permanent cold water pockets near the glacierfronts may also provide refugia for the Arctic species in warming fjords.
Here we present an overview of functioning of the Svalbard marine fjord ecosystems
and include results from large project conducted at IOPAN Marine Ecology Department
during last 20 years (e.g. GAME http://www.iopan.gda.pl/projects/Game/project-pl.html,
GLAERE http://www.iopan.gda.pl/projects/GLAERE/). We include the influence of glaciers’
and their retreat on the fjord communities, and present predicted future scenarios for thewarming Arctic.
References:
Grzelak, K., M. Gluchowska, K. Gregorczyk, A. Winogradow and J.M. Weslawski, 2016.
Nematode biomass and morphometric attributes as biological indicators of local environmental conditions in Arctic fjords. Ecological Indicators 69, 368-380.
K˛
edra, M., Włodarska-Kowalczuk, M, and J.M. W˛esławski, 2010. Decadal change in softbottom community structure in high arctic fjord (Kongsfjorden, Svalbard), Polar Biology
33, 1-1147

K˛
edra, M., P.E. Renaud, H. Andrade, I. Goszczko and W.G. Ambrose Jr., 2013. Benthic
community structure, diversity and productivity in the shallow Barents Sea bank (Svalbard
Bank). Marine Biology 160, 805-819.
Lydersen, C., P. Assmy, S. Falk-Petersen, J. Kohler, K.M. Kovacs, M. Reigstad, H. Steen,
H. StrØm, A. Sundfjord, Ø. Varpe, W. Walczowski, J.M. Weslawski and M. Zajaczkowski,
2014. The importance of tidewater glaciers for marine mammals and seabirds in Svalbard,
Norway. Journal of Marine Systems 129, 452-471.
Piwosz, K., W. Walkusz, R. Hapter, P. Wieczorek, H. Hop and J. Wiktor, 2009. Comparison of productivity and phytoplankton in a warm (Kongsfjorden) and a cold (Hornsund)Spitsbergen fjord in mid- summer 2002. Polar Biology 32, 549-559.
Piwosz, K., K. Spich, J. Całkiewicz, A. Weydmann, A.M. Kubiszyn and J.M. Wiktor, 2015.
Distribution of small phytoflagellates along an Arctic fjord transect. Environmental Microbiology 17, 2393-2406.
Szczucka, J., Ł. Hoppe, B. Schmidt and D.P. Fey, 2017. Acoustical estimation of fish
distribution and abundance in two Spitsbergen fjords. Oceanologia 59, 585-591.
Trudnowska, E., S.L. Basedow and K. Blachowiak-Samolyk, 2014. Mid-summer mesozooplankton biomass, its size distribution, and estimated production within a glacial Arctic
fjord (Hornsund, Svalbard). Journal of Marine Systems 137, 55-66.
W˛esławski, J.M., G. Pedersen, S.F. Petersen and K. Porazinski, 2000. Entrapment ofmacroplankton in an Arctic fjord basin, Kongsfjorden, Svalbard. Oceanologia 42, 57-69.
Wiktor, J. and K. Wojciechowska, 2005. Differences in taxonomic composition of summer phytoplankton in two fjords of West Spitsbergen, Svalbard. Polish Polar Research 26,
259-268.
Włodarska-Kowalczuk, M., T.H. Pearson and M.A. Kendall, 2005. Benthic response tochronic natural physical disturbance by glacial sedimentation in an Arctic fjord. Marine
Ecology Progress Series 303, 31-41.
Włodarska-Kowalczuk, M., P.E. Renaud, J.M. W˛esławski, S.K.J. Cochrane and S.G. Denisenko,
2012. Species diversity, functional complexity and rarity in Arctic fjordic versus open shelfbenthic systems. Marine Ecology Progress Series 463, 73-87. https://doi.org/10.3354/meps09858
Włodarska-Kowalczuk, M., J. Pawłowska and M. Zajaczkowski,
˛
2013. Do foraminifera
mirror diversity and distribution patterns of macrobenthic fauna in an Arctic glacial fjord?
Marine Micropaleontology 103, 30-39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marmicro.2013.07.002
Zajaczkowski, M. and J. Legeżyńska, 2001. Estimation of zooplankton mortality causedby an Arctic glacier outflow. Oceanologia 43, 341-351.

48

Physical and Biogeochemical ocean studies at the boundary region of Bowdoin Glacier and its Fjord, Northwestern Greenland
Naoya Kanna1 , Shin Sugiyama1 , Daiki Sakakibara2 , Yasushi Fukamachi1 , Daiki Nomura3 ,Sungo Fukumoto4 , Shintaro Yamasaki1 , Evgeniy Podolskiy2 , Atsushi Yamaguchi3
1 Institute of Low Temperature Science, Hokkaido University
2 Arctic Research Center, Hokkaido University
3 Faculty of Fisheries Sciences, Hokkaido University
4 Graduate School of Environmental Science, Hokkaido University
5 Kitami Institute of Technology

Keywords: Plume, mooring, biogeochemistry, nuritient
The boundary region between a tidewater glacier and a fjord is a key to understandglacier-ocean interaction in the Arctic. In terms of physical oceanography, ocean heataffects the glaciers by controlling subaquaous melt rate of the ice front. In terms ofbiogeochemistry, glacial meltwater discharge affects the ocean by controlling nutrient
cycles and consequent marine ecosystems in the fjord. Despite the widely recognized
importance, these processes occurring near the glacier front are poorly understood because of the difficulty of oceanographic observations in this boundary region. As a partof Japanese interdisciplinary Arctic research project ArCS (Arctic Challenge for Sustainability), we performed physical and biogeochemical observations in proglacial fjords innorthwestern Greenland. In the summer 2017, we conducted oceanographic measurements in the fjord in front of Bowdoin Glacier, a tidewater glacier near Qaanaaq. We
installed temperature, conductivity, and pressure sensors in the fjord, by lowering thesensors with 200-m long cables from the edge of the glacier calving front. The instruments successfully recorded changes in water properties at the ice-water boundary forten days. Another mooring system was deployed in the fjord approximately 1 km off thecalving front to monitor water properties for an year. Fjord water was sampled near thecalving front using a ∼5-m long boat to analyze biogeochemical components (nutrient,
trace metal (e.g. iron), dissolved inorganic carbon, methane and so on). We also utilized an ROV (Remotely Operated Vehicle) to perform zooplankton sampling within 100 mfrom the glacier front. In this contribution, we present an overview of our research activities in Bowdoin Fjord, and show results obtained by the campaign in the summer 2017.

Assesment of the current state and development ofAustre Grønfjordbreen glacier by a complex of glaciological, physico-mathematical and remote methods
Nelly Elagina1 , Stanislav Kutuzov1 , Robert Chernov1 , Ivan Lavrentiev1 , Tatiana Vasilyeva1 ,Bulat Mavlyudov1 , Arseny Kudikov1
1 Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia

Keywords: mass balance, modelling49

Recent efforts by the Institute of Geography RAS have been aimed at establishingmass balance observation at Austre Grønfjordbreen (7.6 km2 ) located 16 km south ofBarentsburg. The Arctic archipelago Svalbard consists of a vast glacierized area which
contributes significantly to the sea level rise outside of Greenland and Antarctica due torecent warming. The glaciers of Svalbard have already experienced an unprecedented
increase in average summer temperatures, melt periods, and rainfall in late autumn andearly summer.
Current goal is to determine the most appropriate approach for mass balance simulations and its application for long time periods assessments by comparing uncertainties ofphysical modeling with the results obtained from temperature-index simulations.
We apply spatially distributed model A-MELT (Rets et al., 2012) using all available
glaciological and meteorological measurements carried out since 2012 and energy balance determination according to spatial grid. The empirical model implies the use ofan extended methodology for calculating seasonal mass balance in relation to temperature and radiation and calibrating by data obtained from stakes measurements. The
obtained mass balance gradients are compared with the geodetic mass balance changes
in 1990–2015 and recent Arctic DEM data. All available satellite imagery has been used
to reconstruct the snowline elevation changes from 1986 to 2017. Remarkably almost a
total absence of accumulation area has been registered in recent years.
Acknowledgements: This research was supported by the Government Contract No.
01201352474 (0148-2014-0006), and the Program of Presidium of RAS No. 55. Field studies on Svalbard were conducted with financial support from the state assignment andlogistical assistance of the Russian Scientific Center on Spitsbergen (RSCS).

Global-scale 21st century glacier mass and runoff changes
Regine Hock 1 , Matthias Huss2,3 , Ben Marzeion4 , Andy Bliss5 , Rianne Giessen6 , Yukiko
Hirabayashi7 , Valentina Radic8 , Aimee Slangen9
1 Geophysical Institute, University of Alaska Fairbanks, Fairbanks, Alaska, USA
2 Laboratory of Hydraulics, Hydrology and Glaciology (VAW), ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
3 Department of Geosciences, University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland
4 Institute of Geography, University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany
5 Department of Anthropology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA
6 Institute for Marine and Atmospheric research Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
7 Institute of Engineering Innovation, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
8 Earth, Ocean and Atmospheric Sciences Department, University of British Columbia, Vancouver,
Canada9 Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research, Utrecht, The Netherlands

Glaciers other than the ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica cover an area of 705,000
km2 and include approximately 210,000 individual glaciers. Worldwide these glaciers arelosing mass at an accelerating pace with profound implications for global sea-level rise.
Although only making up less than 1% of the Earth’s global ice volume (<0.5 m sea-level
equivalent), these glaciers contributed almost just as much to sea-level rise during thefirst decade of this century as the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets combined, and are
expected to remain significant contributors for decades to come.
Modeling future glacier changes on a global scale is challenging due to scarcity of data
for model initialization and calibration, and biases in climate data in complex mountainous
terrain. Here we project the mass changes of all glaciers over the 21st century based on

50

transient climate projections. We compare six global glacier models published in theliterature including a range of different modeling approaches. Using forcing from 8 to 15
Global Circulation Models and four different emission scenarios, the glacier models projectmulti-model mean net mass losses of all glaciers between 7 cm and 24 cm sea-level
equivalent by the end of the 21st century. Projected mass losses vary greatly dependingon the choice of the forcing climate and emission scenario. Insufficiently constrainedmodel parameters likely are an important reason for large differences found among thesestudies even when forced by the same emission scenario, especially on regional scales.
A “Targeted Activit” under WCRP’s Climate and Cryosphere (CliC) program of the World
Climate Research Program (WCRP), seeks to understand these differences, and for the
first time provides a framework for a coordinated intercomparison of global-scale glaciermass change models with the ultimate goal to foster model improvements and reduce
uncertainties in global glacier projections and associated contributions to sea-level rise.
Using one of the models we also project the response of glacier runoff to future climate change. We define glacier runoff as all runoff from the initially glacierized area
and assess the changes in runoff amounts, timing and seasonality for all 56 macro-scaledrainage basins outside Antarctica and Greenland (>5,000 km2 ) with at least 30 km2 ofice cover and >0.01% glacierization. We find substantial regional differences in the timingof annual peak runoff. In many basins future glacier runoff is projected to increase in earlysummer but decrease in late summer. Overall, we find that even in macro-scale basins
with minimal ice-cover fraction (mostly <3%), the downstream hydrological effects of continued glacier mass loss can be substantial, but projected changes vary greatly among
basins and throughout the melt season.

Functional Trait patterns in Arctic fjord ecosystems
Renate Degen1
1 University of Vienna

Keywords: Marine communities, Arctic fjords, Functional Traits
Glaciers have a strong impact on the marine ecosystem in Arctic fjords. Turbidity,
water temperature, stratification and sea ice and iceberg distribution are thereby often
considered the most important environmental factors in structuring marine fjord communities. With ongoing warming, glacial freshwater water runoff is predicted to increase, andother parameters to change along with it. Although marine fjord communities have beenstudied extensively in the past, we are currently not able to predict how marine communities and the ecosystem functions they control will be affected by these changes. One
reason is that our insight into the functional composition of fjord communities is still limited. Here we show based on benthic community data from several fjords on the Svalbard
archipelago how trait-based approaches (i.e. such that consider the functional composition of a community and its relationship to environmental parameters) can enhance ourinsight into current fjord ecosystem functioning and aid our attempt to predict future scenarios.

51

ASTER-derived glacier volume changes in Alaska or Norway
Robert McNabb1 ,1 Dept. of Geosciences, University of Oslo

TBD

The relationship between albedo and spring warming
over Canada’s largest glaciated elevation gradient
Scott Williamson1 , Luke Copland1 , David Hik2 , Garry Clarke3
1 University of Ottawa
2 University of Alberta
3 University of British Columbia

Keywords: Albedo, Amplified warming, MODIS
Atmospheric warming appears to be amplified at high elevations and in the Arctic,
but the contribution from declining snow cover and albedo or changes in cloud cover remain elusive. The amount of warming related to snow and ice albedo decline is difficult
to measure because the decline is both a response and a cause of warming. To further
complicate the issue, daytime cloud cover changes, which modifies the surface energy
budget, can warm or cool the Earth’s surface. Much of the problem in attributing warming to specific processes is related to determining the accuracy of the measurements ofchange, particularly in glaciated and high elevation locations where few measurementsof energy balance or albedo have been made. Here, we report on an ongoing project thataims to attribute the causal factors of temperature amplification through a quantitative
comparison of surface feedbacks and warming rates between a latitudinal and elevational
gradient in northern Canada.
In the initial stage of the project we analysed downscaled surface temperature and
MODIS infrared temperature, albedo, snow cover and cloud cover for a 5000m forestto-icefield elevation gradient in the St. Elias Mountains, Yukon, to compare temperaturepatterns across elevational bands characterized by differential spring snowmelt between
2000 and 2014. Over this period, we show differential surface warming of 0.01◦ C yr1 1000 m-1 in May (from 0.14◦ C yr-1 at 1000m to 0.19◦ C yr-1 at 5000m), and uniform
cooling of 0.09◦ C yr-1 in June for all elevations. In May, the albedo trend for the St.
Elias Icefield was increasingly negative with elevation and the trend in daytime cloud
cover was negative at higher elevation, but positive at lower elevation. In June, negative temperature trends occurred while daytime cloud cover increased and albedo trends
were negative or unchanging. May temperature trends at different elevations were highly
correlated despite different albedo changes. Furthermore, snow cover mediated albedo
declines resulted in infrared temperature increase, as expected with a feedback, howeverthese were insufficient to alter monthly average air temperature. These findings indicatethat monthly averaged temperature and snow albedo trends are largely insensitive to thesnow albedo feedback and that a synoptic influence is responsible for surface temperature variation.

52

Preferential water flow in snow and firn: evidences,consequences and simulation
Sergey Marchenko1 , Veijo Pohjola1 , Rickard Pettersson1 , Ward van Pelt1 , Horst Machguth2 ,Carleen Reijmer3
1 Uppsala University
2 Zurich University
3 Utrecht Univesity

Keywords: firn, preferential flow, water infiltration
Infiltration and refreezing of liquid water in accumulation zones of glaciers can significantly affect the subsurface temperature, density as well as the amount of runoff. It
thus has to be taken into account by the models describing mass and energy fluxes at
glaciers in local, regional and global scales. Although it is common to assume that water
infiltration is laterally uniform, field observations suggest highly horizontal variability inrate of vertical water flow. Subsurface temperature, stratigraphy and GPR data from thesnow/firn pack at Lomonosovfonna, Svalbard, provide evidences of preferential flow. Potential implications for modelling of the subsurface processes in the accumulation zones
of glaciers are discussed and possible parameterization strategies are suggested.

Long-term projection of Arctic valley glaciers based on
finite element simulations
Songtao Ai1 , Zemin Wang1 , Guobiao Lin1 , Yuande Yang1
1 Chinese Antarctic Center of Surveying and Mapping, Wuhan University

Keywords: Arctic, Austre Lovénbreen, IPCC scenario, Finite element simulation
In order to study the response of Arctic mountain glaciers to the global climate change,
a long-term projection of Arctic Austre Lovénbreen was carried out using finite element
simulations, which is a systematic answer to when and how will the glacier retreat anddisappear. Firstly, a steady state simulation was solved to select the best parameters
related to the ice flow model, then transient state simulations were solved to project the
future glacial evolution.

53

Figure 1. Mesh of Austre Lovénbreen for simulation
The long-term evolutions, including the area, volume, thickness and ice-flow velocities,
were estimated based on three climatic scenarios: the pessimistic, the very likely andthe optimistic ones. Simulated results show that the Austre Lovénbreen will continue todiminish until death in all the three scenarios, and the extinction time is 126, 185, and
218 years, respectively. In other words, the glacier will disappear between 2135 and
2227, very likely around 2194.

Acknowledgement: This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (41476162, 41531069) and the Chinese Polar Environment Comprehensive Investigation and Assessment Programmes (CHINARE2017)

Assessment of proglacial moraine response to climate
shift, an Arctic basin as a witness
Sophie Schiavone1 , Florian Tolle1 , Alexander Prokop1 , Eric Bernard1 , Jean-Michel Friedt1 ,Madeleine Griselin1 , Daniel Joly1
1 ThéMA Laboratory - Université Bourgogne Franche-Comté

TBD

54

Continuous monitoring of ice motion and discharge ofoutlet glaciers of Greenland and Artic ice caps by Sentinel Satellites
Thomas Nagler1 , Jan Wuite1 , Markus Hetzenecker1 , Stefan Scheiblauer1 , Helmut Rott1
1 ENVEO IT GmbH

Keywords: ice velocity; ice discharge; Arctic ice caps, Sentinel satellites
The Sentinel-1A and 1B satellite constellation offers excellent opportunities for operational monitoring of the Earth’s surface, including ice sheets, ice caps and their outlet
glaciers. The Interferometric Wide Swath (IWS) mode of Sentinel-1 is the standard operation mode over land surfaces and inland ice. Applying Terrain Observation by Progressive
Scans (TOPS) acquisition technology, it provides spatial resolution of about 4 m and 22
m in slant range and azimuth, respectively, with a swath width of 250 km. With thesepowerful imaging capabilities, in combination with a coordinated acquisition strategy, theSentinel-1A and 1B constellation has become the main source for regular and comprehensive monitoring of ice motion and discharge of Greenland and the Arctic Ice caps.
The Sentinel-1 acquisition planning for Greenland includes an annual ice sheet wide
campaign with 4 to 6 repeat acquisitions for each track. During winter 2016/2017 thethird ice sheet wide Sentinel-1 campaign was carried out, which was the first campaign
including both, Sentinel-1A and 1B, satellites providing 6-day repeat pass observations.
From January to March 2018 the next annual campaign with full 6-day repeat coverage isplanned. For generating ice sheet velocity, we apply an iterative offset tracking algorithm
using coherent and incoherent image cross-correlation. The full spectrum of flow velocities is mapped by using variable matching windows sizes. We present Sentinel-1 velocity
maps of Greenland, with 250 m pixel spacing, for 2015, 2016 and 2017, and show firstdata of the 2018 winter campaign. Besides, we also present annual velocity maps of themain Arctic ice caps in the Canadian Arctic, Svalbard, Iceland, Franz-Josef Land, Novaya
Zemlya, and Severnaya Zemlya.
The Sentinel-1 ice velocities agree very well with velocities derived from high-resolution
TerraSAR-X Stripmap mode data which are available for several outlet glaciers. We show
also dense time series of Sentinel-1 flow velocities, documenting on short-term variations
and temporal trends for outlet glaciers in Greenland and on Arctic ice caps. The timeseries prior to the Sentinel-1 era are based on other SAR sensors (PALSAR, TerraSAR-X,
TanDEM-X, ERS). Especially the continuous 6-day repeat observations of Sentinel-1A and1B reveal remarkable short-term, weekly to seasonal, variations of ice velocities of outlet
glaciers, with striking differences even between adjacent glaciers. We will show examples
for several major outlet glaciers of Greenland and marine terminating glaciers of Svalbard
and Russian Arctic ice caps. For major outlet glaciers we compiled time series of ice discharge based on ice thickness data from airborne RES campaigns and ice velocities acrossflux gates.

55

Enhanced models for mass balance and ice dynamics of
Svalbard glaciersThomas Zwinger1 , Yongmei Gong2 , Dorothèe Vallot3 , Ilona Välisuo4 , Jan Åström1
1 CSC - IT Center for Science, Espoo, Finland
2 University of Helsinki
3 University of Upsala
4 Finnish Meteorological Institute

Keywords: Mass balance, Calving, Simulation
We present several recently established simulation techniques concerning the massbalance of land and marine terminated glacier: 1) an inversely determined surface massbalance distribution from a series of DEM’s supported by flow simulations using a fullstress Stokes model applied to Midtre Lovènbreen 2) a mixed continuum and discreteelement approach to determine either the crevassing used to identify potential waterrouting paths to trigger surge behaviour at Austfonna, Basin 3 or the calving behaviour ofa tidewater glacier (Kronebreen).

The importance of shear-margin softening for abrupt
velocity variations at Upernavik Isstrøm, Greenland
Signe Hillerup Larsen1,2 , Andreas P. Ahlstrøm1 , Anders Kusk3 , Peter L. Langen 4 , Christine S. Hvidberg 4,2
1 GEUS
2 Univ. Copenhagen
3 DTU Space
4 DMI

Keywords:
Outlet glacier dynamics, ice velocity variations, marine mass loss, Greenland ice sheet
Understanding the physical mechanisms behind rapid velocity variations of marineterminating outlet glaciers is key to the correct representation of marine mass loss inlarge scale ice sheet models. While the penetration of surface meltwater to the bed ofglaciers is known to affect ice velocity, ice streams represent an extreme case with a spatially complicated velocity and temperature structure. Here we use an observed abrupt
synchronous slowdown event at three neighboring ice streams in Northwest Greenland
in late summer 2014 to evaluate different hypotheses regarding the spatial sensitivity ofice flow to changes in surface melt rates through changes in resistive forces. Using the
Ice Sheet System Model (ISSM; Larour et al., 2012) we investigate the sensitivity in thevelocity of the three ice streams to changes in meltwater production through perturbations of basal friction and shear margin softness. We find that to best capture the spatial
structure of the observed slowdown, basal friction has to change relatively more in the ice
stream trough compared to the upstream area and increasingly so towards the front. Additionally, our results indicate that changes in the shear margin softness and the internal
heat production are likely playing an important role for the ice flow sensitivity to changes

56

in friction.

On the link between glacier-freshwater runoff and summer phytoplankton growth in seas around Svalbard
Thorben Dunse1 , Kaixing Dong2 , Kjetil Schanke Aas1 , Leif Christian Stige2
1 Department of Geosciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
2 Centre for Ecological and Evolutionary Synthesis, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway

Keywords:
Glacier runoff, marine ecosystem, ocean color/chlorophyll
Socio-economic impacts of glacier-mass loss are not limited to sea-level rise. Glacial
freshwater discharge into the ocean also affects the physical and chemical properties ofthe fjord systems and adjacent shelves and enhances estuarine circulation and nutrient
input, with effects on biological productivity. Ocean primary production, i.e. the production rate of organic carbon or phytoplankton, is an important measure of biologicalproductivity. Phytoplankton dynamics in the Arctic are commonly linked to a strong seasonality in environmental conditions. The return of daylight in springtime and the decline
in sea ice cover triggers a typical spring bloom in phytoplankton biomass. Recent pilot
studies in Greenland revealed a second primary-production bloom, coincident with thepeak meltwater runoff from the Greenland ice sheet.
Here, we focus on Svalbard in the Eurasian Arctic, where glaciers cover 34000 km2 or
57% of the total land area. Tidewater glaciers drain 68% of the glacierized area, with a
total calving-front length of ∼740 km. We divide Svalbard into 14 hydrological regions
for each of which we investigate the relationship between surface chlorophyll-a concentrations (an indicator of phytoplankton biomass) and glacier meltwater runoff. We also
consider other known drivers of phytoplankton dynamics, such as sea-ice fraction, seasurface temperature and mixed-layer depth. Freshwater runoff for the period 2003 to2013 is extracted from a 10-year simulation of the climatic mass balance of all glacierson Svalbard using a coupled atmosphere-glacier model. Surface chlorophyll-a concentrations derived from ocean colour, as well as physical ocean and sea-ice variables for theperiod 1998–2014 are provided by the Copernicus Marine Environmental Monitoring Service. We use a statistical model to identify significant relationships between chlorophyll-aconcentrations and the various environmental factors during summer months. Significant positive correlation between chlorophyll-a and glacier runoff exists for 6 out of 14
regions and within 10 km distance from the coast. These 6 regions can be characterized
as sheltered fjord systems, where the glacier meltwater is distributed over a relatively
small marine area and freshwater residence time is anticipated to be long.
Acknowledgements: This study was supported by the NordForsk-funded project ’Green
Growth Based on Marine Resources: Ecological and Sociological Economic Constraints’(GreenMAR, 61582, Nordic Top-level Research Initiative (TRI)).

57