the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
DebDab: A database of supraglacial debris thickness and physical properties
Abstract. Rocky debris covers around 7.3 % of the global glacier area, influencing ice melt rates and the surface mass balance of glaciers, making the dynamics and hydrology of debris-covered glaciers distinct from those of clean-ice glaciers. Accurate representation of debris in models is challenging, as measurements of the physical properties of supraglacial debris are scarce. Here, we compile a database of measured and reported physical properties and thickness of supraglacial debris that we call DebDab and that is open to community submissions. The majority of the database (90 %) is compiled from 172 sources in the literature, and the remaining 10 % has not been published before. DebDab contains 8,737 data entries for supraglacial debris thickness, of which 1,941 entries also include sub-debris ablation rates, 177 data entries of thermal conductivity of debris, 160 of aerodynamic surface roughness length, 79 of debris albedo, 59 of debris emissivity and 37 of debris porosity. The data are distributed over 83 glaciers in 13 regions in the Global Terrestrial Network for Glaciers. We show regional differences in the distribution of debris thickness measurements in DebDab, and fit Østrem curves for the 19 glaciers with sufficient debris thickness and ablation data. DebDab can be used for energy balance, melt, and surface mass balance studies by incorporating site-specific debris properties, or to evaluate remote sensing estimates of debris thickness and surface roughness. It can also help future field campaigns on debris-covered glaciers by identifying observation gaps. DebDab’s uneven spatial coverage points to sampling biases in community efforts to observe debris-covered glaciers, with some regions (e.g. Central Europe and South Asia) well-sampled, but gaps in other regions with prevalent debris (e.g. Andes and Alaska). Debris thickness measurements are mostly concentrated at lower elevations, leaving higher-elevation debris-covered areas under-sampled, suggesting that our knowledge of debris properties might not be representative of the entire manifestations of debris across elevations. DebDab is an openly available dataset that aims at evolving and being updated with community submissions as new data of supra-glacial properties become available. Data described in this manuscript can be accessed at Zenodo under https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14224835 (Groeneveld et al., 2024).
- Preprint
(1207 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (extended)
-
RC1: 'Comment on essd-2024-559', Morgan Jones, 24 Jan 2025
reply
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://essd.copernicus.org/preprints/essd-2024-559/essd-2024-559-RC1-supplement.pdf
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Adrià Fontrodona-Bach, 26 Mar 2025
reply
Dear Dr. Morgan Jones,
We thank you for your time and appreciate your review of our manuscript. We are happy you find the dataset an excellent resource and valuable contribution to debris-covered glacier research, and we thank you for the comments to improve the manuscript. We essentially agree with all your suggestions for improvement, which mostly regard technical errors and textual or figure suggestions, and we will revise our manuscript to include them all.Regarding the suggestion to rename the dataset title to “DebDB” instead of “DebDab”, we would like to suggest an intermediate name: “DebDaB”. We acknowledge that DB is a more common acronym for database, but we also find “debdab” an appealing and pronounceable acronym, which we believe will make communication and visibility of the dataset name easier.
We also agree with you that the analysis in Lines 205-210 and Figure A2 do not add much to the manuscript and the presentation of the dataset. We tried to find links between debris properties but this is out of the scope for this paper and anyway no links were found with the data presented. We will remove it in the revised manuscript. We will instead add a sentence in section 5.1 (potential applications) indicating that when more fully populated, the database could form the basis for investigating links between debris parameters.
We find the suggestion to revise all instances of “the debris” or “debris properties” to incorporate the terms “layer” or “bulk” very appropriate, as we agree that most data in DebDaB concern the entire supraglacial debris layer or the bulk properties of the layer, instead of individual clasts.
Regarding the rest of textual suggestions and corrections, we will incorporate these all upon submission of the revised manuscript.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-559-AC1
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Adrià Fontrodona-Bach, 26 Mar 2025
reply
-
CC1: 'Incorporation of thermal conductivity values available for other glacier(s) in Zanskar, Ladakh Himalaya (Region 14)', Basharat Nabi, 08 Mar 2025
reply
The paper provides detailed and valuable information on supraglacial debris. However, the authors should include available thermal conductivity values for glaciers in the Zanskar region of the Himalaya. A relevant reference for this data is the study by Romshoo et al., 2024 titled "Influence of Debris Cover on Glacier Melting in the Himalaya", published in Cold Regions Science and Technology (2024). The authors may find it useful to incorporate insights from this paper (DOI: 10.1016/j.coldregions.2024.104204) to strengthen their discussion on the thermal properties of supraglacial debris.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-559-CC1 -
AC2: 'Reply on CC1', Adrià Fontrodona-Bach, 26 Mar 2025
reply
Dear Dr. Basharat Nabi,
We highly appreciate your feedback on the paper and your suggestion to include thermal conductivity values from the study by Romshoo et al. (2024) in the Zanskar region in the Himalaya, and we thank you for making those data available through your manuscript. We will incorporate the thermal conductivity values, as well as the debris thickness measurements, into DebDaB. We will reach out to you as we incorporate these data into our database. Indeed, we find the discussion in Romshoo et al. (2024) about the estimated thermal conductivities useful, and we find it interesting that the calculated values of 0.9 and 1.1 W/m/K fall exactly within the mode range of thermal conductivity values in DebDaB (see Figure 5a).
This is exactly the type of feedback we would expect from the community to expand the database and make it a living, evolving tool, and we thank you for starting this already during the review process.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-559-AC2 -
CC2: 'Reply on AC2', Basharat Nabi, 27 Mar 2025
reply
Thank you for your response. In addition to considering the thermal conductivity values in Fig. 5a, please include this value in Fig. 3 as well, specifically for region 14.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-559-CC2
-
CC2: 'Reply on AC2', Basharat Nabi, 27 Mar 2025
reply
-
AC2: 'Reply on CC1', Adrià Fontrodona-Bach, 26 Mar 2025
reply
Data sets
DebDab: A database of supraglacial debris thickness and physical properties Lars Groeneveld et al. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14224835
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
317 | 68 | 10 | 395 | 9 | 9 |
- HTML: 317
- PDF: 68
- XML: 10
- Total: 395
- BibTeX: 9
- EndNote: 9
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1