Ninth International Conference on Permafrost ... - IARC Research

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Improving the Parameterization of Snow Processes to Model the Implications ofShrub-Tundra Expansion on Soil TemperaturesCecile MenardCentre for Ecology and Hydrology, Wallingford, UKRichard EsserySchool of GeoSciences, University of Edinburgh, UKDouglas ClarkCentre for Ecology and Hydrology, Wallingford, UKIntroductionField observations, satellite remote sensing, and modelssuggest that the recent warming of the Arctic has caused anincrease in shrub cover (Sturm et al. 2005, Jia et al. 2006,Tape et al. 2006). This change in vegetation structure isexpected to significantly affect snow distributions andinteractions between the land surface and the atmosphere,with consequences for the hydrology, ecology, carbon, andenergy balances of the region. Shrubs capture wind-blownsnow, increasing snow depths, and decreasing winter waterlosses through sublimation. The low thermal conductivityof snow insulates the soil, deepening the active layer andaffecting the permafrost regime. Thus, snow/permafrostinteractions will be at the core of feedback loops leading tofurther shrub expansion. For example, warmer winter soiltemperatures lead to increased microbial activity and henceto greater nutrient availability, which will further stimulateshrub growth (Chapin et al. 2005, Tape et al. 2006). Carboncycling will also be affected, although the environmentaleffects of greater shrub abundance are uncertain. Sturmet al. (2005) suggest that the Arctic may become a carbonsink because of increasing production of above-groundshrub biomass. On the other hand, thawing of permafrostis expected to liberate large amounts of carbon currentlysequestered in frozen organic soils (Solomon et al. 2007).Land surface models (LSMs) are required to calculateenergy and water fluxes between the land and the atmospherein global climate models (GCMs), but the representation ofcryospheric processes is generally crude in current LSMs.In this paper, two different snow schemes are tested offlineto assess the implications for soil processes of the predictednorthward expansion of shrub-tundra.MethodsField siteMeteorological measurements and soil temperatures wereobtained at two sites in the Wolf Creek Research Basin(60°36′N, 134°57′W), Yukon Territory, Canada (Pomeroy etal. 2004):1. An alpine tundra site (1615 m a.s.l.), characterized by0.01–0.3 m tall vegetation (willow, dwarf birch, grass, andlichen) and bare rock, within the widespread discontinuouspermafrost zone (Lewkowicz & Ednie 2004). Soiltemperatures were measured at 3 cm depth.2. A shrub tundra site (1250 m a.s.l.), with 0.4–3 m tallvegetation (willow, sparse white spruce, dwarf birch andgrass), within a sporadic discontinuous permafrost zone.Soil temperatures were measured at 11 cm depth.Data for the one-year period starting on 1 August 1998 areused here. Air temperatures at both sites were similar fromNovember to February, but the alpine site was generally2°C colder than the shrub tundra site for the rest of the year.Because the alpine site is more exposed, the annual averagewind speed was greater by 2.3 ms -1 . Although the snowfall isalmost the same at the two sites, increased wind ablation andreduced trapping by shrubs give lower snow depths at thealpine site. The importance of snow insulation is reflectedin differences in soil temperatures; the greatest differencesoccurred in March, for which average soil temperatureswere -9°C at the alpine site but -4°C at the shrub tundrasite. Summer differences were smaller, and down to 0.4°Cin June and August (7°C at the alpine site and 6.6°C at theshrub tundra site).Model parameterizationSnow depths and soil temperatures at the two sites havebeen simulated with the JULES (Joint UK Land EnvironmentSimulator; Blyth et al. 2006) LSM using two different snowschemes. Simulations were first performed with the presentversion of JULES, which represents snow as a compositewith the top soil layer. The insulating properties of snoware incorporated by adjusting the thermal conductivity andthickness of the layer (Cox et al. 1999). The temperature ofthis top layer is taken to be at the layer midpoint, whethersnow is present or not, hence it may reflect the soil or thesnow temperature depending on snow depth. A new snowmodel using a multilayer representation of snow has nowbeen developed for JULES. Simple representations of snowcompaction, and retention and refreezing of liquid water, allof which were neglected in the original model, have beenincluded.Model resultsFigures 1 and 2 compare simulated snow depths and soiltemperatures with measurements. Simulations with theoriginal snow model underestimate winter soil temperatures,particularly for the alpine site where the measurement depthlies within the model’s composite snow-soil layer, but alsofor the shrub tundra site where the measurements are belowthis layer. The greater snow insulation simulated by the newmodel greatly improves the soil temperature simulations,209
Ni n t h In t e r n at i o n a l Co n f e r e n c e o n Pe r m a f r o s tSoil temperature ( o C)Snow depth (m)20100-10-20-300.80.60.40.200 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360Day after 1 August 1998Figure 1. Daily average soil temperatures and snow depths fromobservations (dotted lines), the composite snow model (grey lines),and the multilayer snow model (black lines) for the alpine site.Soil temperature ( o C)Snow depth (m)20100-10-20-300.80.60.40.2ReferencesBlyth, E.M. et al. 2006. JULES: a new community landsurface model. IGBP Newsletter 66: 9-11.Cox, P.M. et al. 1999. The impact of new land surfacephysics on the GCM simulation of climate and climatesensitivity. Climate Dynamics 15: 183-203.Chapin, F.S. et al. 2005. Role of land-surface changes inArctic summer warming, Science 310: 657-660.Jia, G.J., Epstein, H.E. & Walker, D.A. 2006. Spatialheterogeneity of tundra vegetation response to recenttemperature changes. Global Change Biology 12: 42-55.Lewkowicz, A.G. & Ednie, M. 2004. Probability mappingof mountain permafrost using the BTS method, WolfCreek, Yukon Territory, Canada. Permafrost andPeriglacial Processes 15: 67-80.Pomeroy, J., Essery, R. & Toth, B. 2003. Implications ofspatial distributions of snow mass and melt rate onsnowcover depletion: observations in a sub-arcticmountain catchment. Annals of Glaciology 38(1):195-201.Solomon, S. et al. (eds.). 2007. IPCC 2007, Climate Change2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution ofWorking Group I to the Fourth Assessment Reportof the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Sturm, M. et al. 2005. Winter biological processes couldhelp convert arctic tundra to shrubland. Bioscience55: 17-26.Tape, K., Strum, M. & Racine, C. 2006. The evidence forshrub expansion in Northern Alaska and the Pan-Arctic. Global Change Biology 12: 686-702.00 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360Day after 1 August 1998Figure 2. As Figure 1, but for the shrub tundra site.except for periods such as November when the simulatedsnow depth is underestimated at both sites.Additional runs will be made to assess how much of thesoil temperature variation between sites can be explained bymeteorology and how much by vegetation cover. One way toaddress this will be to perform simulations with vegetationcharacteristics at one site used as model input at the other.AcknowledgmentsField data were supplied by John Pomeroy, Universityof Saskatchewan. Cecile Menard is supported by a NERCstudentship.210
Page 1:
NICOP 2008 Ninth <
Page 6 and 7:
ContentsPreface ...................
Page 8 and 9:
Mapping and Modeling the Distributi
Page 10 and 11:
Satellite Observations of Frozen Gr
Page 13 and 14:
xiiIce Wedge Thermal Regime in Nort
Page 15 and 16:
xivPermafrost Response to Dynamics
Page 17 and 18:
xvi
Page 19 and 20:
NICOP SponsorsUniversitiesUniversit
Page 22 and 23:
Deep Permafrost Studies at the Lupi
Page 24 and 25:
Effect of Fire on Pond Dynamics in
Page 26 and 27:
Cryological Status of Russian Soils
Page 28 and 29:
Acoustical Surveys of Methane Plume
Page 30 and 31:
Permafrost Delineation Near Fairban
Page 32 and 33:
Preparatory Work for a Permanent Ge
Page 34 and 35:
A Provisional Soil Map of the Trans
Page 36 and 37:
Martian Permafrost Depths from Orbi
Page 38 and 39:
Time Series Analyses of Active Micr
Page 40 and 41:
Impact of Permafrost Degradation on
Page 42 and 43:
DC Resistivity Soundings Across a P
Page 44 and 45:
Modeling Thermal and Moisture Regim
Page 46 and 47:
A Provisional Permafrost Map of the
Page 48 and 49:
Alpine Permafrost Distribution at M
Page 50 and 51:
Cryogenic Formations of the Caucasu
Page 52 and 53:
Modeling Potential Climatic Change
Page 54 and 55:
A Hypothesis: A Condition of Growth
Page 56 and 57:
Modeled Continual Surface Water Sto
Page 58 and 59:
Freeze/Thaw Properties of Tundra So
Page 60 and 61:
Discontinuous Permafrost Distributi
Page 62 and 63:
Thermal Regime Within an Arctic Was
Page 64 and 65:
Seasonal and Interannual Variabilit
Page 66 and 67:
Twelve-Year Thaw Progression Data f
Page 68 and 69:
Continued Permafrost Warming in Nor
Page 70 and 71:
Landsliding Following Forest Fire o
Page 72 and 73:
A Permafrost Model Incorporating Dy
Page 74 and 75:
Seasonal Sources of Soil Respiratio
Page 76 and 77:
Greenland Permafrost Temperature Si
Page 78 and 79:
The Importance of Snow Cover Evolut
Page 80 and 81:
The Account of Long-Term Air Temper
Page 82 and 83:
The Combined Isotopic Analysis of L
Page 84 and 85:
Adaptating and Managing Nunavik’s
Page 86 and 87:
Human Experience of Cryospheric Cha
Page 88 and 89:
HiRISE Observations of Fractured Mo
Page 90 and 91:
A Soil Freeze-Thaw Model Through th
Page 92 and 93:
Mapping and Modeling the Distributi
Page 94 and 95:
First Results of Ground Surface Tem
Page 96 and 97:
Historical Changes in the Seasonall
Page 98 and 99:
Rock Glaciers in the Kåfjord Area,
Page 100 and 101:
Snowpack Evolution on Permafrost, N
Page 102 and 103:
Climate Change in Permafrost Region
Page 104 and 105:
Maximizing Construction Season in a
Page 106 and 107:
Pleistocene Sand-Wedge, Composite-W
Page 109 and 110:
Ni n t h In t e r n at i o n a l Co
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Ni N t h iN t e r N at i o N a l Co
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180: Ni n t h In t e r n at i o n a l Co
Page 217 and 218: Ni N t h iN t e r N at i o N a l Co
Page 229: Ni n t h In t e r n at i o n a l Co
Page 253: Ni n t h In t e r n at i o n a l Co
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284:
Page 285 and 286:
Page 287 and 288:
Page 289 and 290:
Page 291 and 292:
Page 293 and 294:
Page 295 and 296:
Page 297 and 298:
Page 299 and 300:
Page 301 and 302:
Page 303 and 304:
Page 305 and 306:
Page 307 and 308:
Page 309 and 310:
Page 311 and 312:
Page 313 and 314:
Page 315 and 316:
Page 317 and 318:
Page 319 and 320:
Page 321 and 322:
Page 323 and 324:
Page 325 and 326:
Page 327 and 328:
Page 329 and 330:
Page 331 and 332:
Page 333 and 334:
Page 335 and 336:
Page 337 and 338:
Page 339 and 340:
Page 341 and 342:
Page 343 and 344:
Page 345 and 346:
Page 347 and 348:
Page 349 and 350:
Page 351 and 352:
Page 353 and 354:
Page 355 and 356:
Page 357 and 358:
Page 359 and 360:
Page 361 and 362:
Page 363 and 364:
Page 365 and 366:
Page 367 and 368:
Page 369 and 370:
Page 371 and 372:
Page 373 and 374:
Page 375 and 376:
Page 377 and 378:
Page 379 and 380:
Page 381 and 382:
Page 383 and 384:
Page 385 and 386:
Page 387 and 388:
Page 389 and 390:
Page 391 and 392:
370Huang, B. 339Hugelius, G. 105, 1
Page 393:
372
show all

Ninth International Conference on Permafrost ... - IARC Research

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?