the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
A monthly Arctic sea ice thickness product from 1995 to 2023 using multiple radar altimetry data
Abstract. Arctic sea ice plays a crucial role in studies of regional and global climate change. Satellite observations have shown that the extent of Arctic sea ice has been declining over the last four decades. However, long-term variations in Arctic sea ice thickness (SIT) have received less attention because SIT cannot be measured directly by satellite-based instruments. Here, we present a monthly Arctic SIT product based on multiple radar altimetry observations from ERS-2, Envisat, and CryoSat-2. To ensure the accuracy of the SIT retrievals, a novel data processing method is proposed, including leads detection, freeboard conversion to thickness, and inter-mission bias correction. Finally, the monthly SIT estimates for the Arctic Ocean from October 1995 to December 2023 are generated. The thickness estimates are posted on a 5 km resolution polar stereographic grid. The variations in Arctic SIT are analyzed in terms of spatial and temporal distributions. Furthermore, the SIT estimates are compared with observations from upward-looking sonars and airborne laser altimetry from Operation IceBridge, as well as seven publicly released Arctic SIT products. The validation results demonstrate that our SIT product has accuracy equivalent to existing products. The accuracy of our products varies from 0.2 m to 0.4 m according to the input satellite altimetry data. The SIT datasets are available on the Zenodo at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13699698 (Xiao et al., 2024).
- Preprint
(2805 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: final response (author comments only)
-
RC1: 'Comment on essd-2024-321', Anonymous Referee #1, 26 Dec 2024
This paper proposes and develops a new sea ice thickness (SIT) dataset, which is of great importance for sea ice research. Sea ice thickness is a critical indicator for studying climate change and global warming. While the dataset offers new insights and perspectives, the paper’s innovation and breakthroughs relative to the extensive existing sea ice datasets need further emphasis. Specifically, the authors should address the dataset’s uniqueness, spatiotemporal resolution, and improvements over prior datasets. The paper must explicitly highlight the technical innovations, the depth and significance of comparative analyses, and whether the new dataset effectively addresses the limitations of existing ones.
General comments:
- It is currently difficult to identify how this dataset improves upon previous SIT datasets. The authors need to articulate these improvements more clearly.
- The language and structure of the paper require refinement to enhance overall readability.
- The figures require better visual design to improve clarity and aesthetics.
Specific comments:
- Line 22: “Finally, the monthly SIT estimates for the Arctic Ocean from October 1995 to December 2023 are generated.” This statement is unclear. You only obtained SIT results from October to April of the following year. I understand that it is challenging to extract sea ice thickness during the summer, but this statement is misleading.
- Lines 85-100: What is the purpose of describing the progress in snow depth research?
- Line 111: "They have limited temporal coverage", what is the temporal coverage?
- The authors produced a SIT product with a temporal resolution of one month and a spatial resolution of 5 km. Lines 101-116: The authors should explain the issues with current products in terms of spatiotemporal resolution and coverage.
- Line 138: A reference is required here.
- There is no textual reference to Table 1 in the manuscript. It should be moved to the appendix.
- Table 2 should be moved to Line 164.
- Figure 2 is unclear: Figures (c)-(g) should be placed below (b) according to the sequence; The connections between the boxes in (a) and (b) and figures (c)-(g) are unclear. I suggest adding color-coded borders for each subfigure, corresponding to the colored boxes and arrows in (a) and (b); The font size of the coordinates in (a) and (b) is too small, and the y-axis label in (b) is reversed.
- Figure 4 appears to be a screenshot rather than an original figure. The titles for figures (a)-(c) seem incomplete.
- I understand that the primary focus of this paper is to publish a new SIT product. However, I hope you can provide explanations for sea ice variation phenomena in the results section. For instance, in Line 530, why was the average SIT in 2012/2013 the historical minimum? This could be explained by citing relevant literature.
- Figures 11-15: All these figures are line plots of SIT. Why do some include grids while others do not? Additionally, the x-axis title is “Year” in all cases, but some display "22/23," while others use "2023." My suggestion is to either unify the format or explain the differences.
- Logically, validation should precede sea ice thickness analysis.
- Figure 14: The primary focus is the WHU dataset (red line), but it is currently unclear. I suggest: (1) Increasing the color contrast for the red line. (2) Using dashed lines for other datasets to make WHU stand out.
- I cannot understand the statistical evaluation in Table 6: (1) MAE measures the average magnitude of absolute errors. (2) STD measures the variability or dispersion of the data, but what does it aim to express here? (3) ME (Mean Error) is crucial for assessing the direction of errors. (4) R (correlation coefficient) is also important for assessing the linear relationship. Therefore, both ME and R should be added to provide a more comprehensive assessment.
- Line 601: Why is October 2010 used as the dividing line for comparing two periods? Please provide justification for this choice.
- Figure 15: The x-axis labels are unclear. It is unnecessary to label every tick; you can increase the spacing between tick marks. The most important consideration is to clearly convey the information.
- I understand your intention with A-D in Table 7 and Figure 8, but you need to explain this explicitly in the table caption to ensure clarity.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-321-RC1 - RC2: 'Comment on essd-2024-321', Sara Fleury, 28 Dec 2024
Data sets
A monthly 5 km Arctic sea ice thickness product from 1995 to 2023 using multiple radar altimetry data Feng Xiao https://zenodo.org/records/12715657
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
309 | 57 | 13 | 379 | 6 | 6 |
- HTML: 309
- PDF: 57
- XML: 13
- Total: 379
- BibTeX: 6
- EndNote: 6
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1