Spatially distributed snow depth, bulk density, and snow water equivalent from ground-based and airborne sensor integration at Grand Mesa, Colorado, USA
-
Published:2024-07-22
Issue:7
Volume:18
Page:3253-3276
-
ISSN:1994-0424
-
Container-title:The Cryosphere
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:The Cryosphere
Author:
Meehan Tate G., Hojatimalekshah AhmadORCID, Marshall Hans-Peter, Deeb Elias J., O'Neel ShadORCID, McGrath DanielORCID, Webb Ryan W.ORCID, Bonnell RandallORCID, Raleigh Mark S.ORCID, Hiemstra Christopher, Elder Kelly
Abstract
Abstract. Estimating snow mass in the mountains remains a major challenge for remote-sensing methods. Airborne lidar can retrieve snow depth, and some promising results have recently been obtained from spaceborne platforms, yet density estimates are required to convert snow depth to snow water equivalent (SWE). However, the retrieval of snow bulk density remains unsolved, and limited data are available to evaluate model estimates of density in mountainous terrain. Toward the goal of landscape-scale retrievals of snow density, we estimated bulk density and length-scale variability by combining ground-penetrating radar (GPR) two-way travel-time observations and airborne-lidar snow depths collected during the mid-winter NASA SnowEx 2020 campaign at Grand Mesa, Colorado, USA. Key advancements of our approach include an automated layer-picking method that leverages the GPR reflection coherence and the distributed lidar–GPR-retrieved bulk density with machine learning. The root-mean-square error between the distributed estimates and in situ observations is 11 cm for depth, 27 kg m−3 for density, and 46 mm for SWE. The median relative uncertainty in distributed SWE is 13 %. Interactions between wind, terrain, and vegetation display corroborated controls on bulk density that show model and observation agreement. Knowledge of the spatial patterns and predictors of density is critical for the accurate assessment of SWE and essential snow research applications. The spatially continuous snow density and SWE estimated over approximately 16 km2 may serve as necessary calibration and validation for stepping prospective remote-sensing techniques toward broad-scale SWE retrieval.
Funder
Engineer Research and Development Center Earth Sciences Division
Publisher
Copernicus GmbH
Reference90 articles.
1. Andrews, D. F.: A robust method for multiple linear regression, Technometrics, 16, 523–531, https://doi.org/10.1080/00401706.1974.10489233, 1974. 2. Bentley, J. L.: Multidimensional Binary Search Trees Used for Associative Searching, Commun. ACM, 18, 509–517, https://doi.org/10.1145/361002.361007, 1975. 3. Besso, H., Shean, D., and Lundquist, J. D.: Mountain snow depth retrievals from customized processing of ICESat-2 satellite laser altimetry, Remote Sens. Environ., 300, 113 843, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2023.113843, 2024. 4. Bonnell, R., McGrath, D., Hedrick, A. R., Trujillo, E., Meehan, T. G., Williams, K., Marshall, H. P., Sexstone, G., Fulton, J., Ronayne, M. J., Fassnacht, S. R., Webb, R. W., and Hale, K. E.: Snowpack relative permittivity and density derived from near-coincident lidar and ground-penetrating radar, Hydrol. Process., 37, e14996, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.14996, 2023. 5. Bonner, H. M., Raleigh, M. S., and Small, E. E.: Isolating forest process effects on modelled snowpack density and snow water equivalent, Hydrol. Process., 36, e14475, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.14475, 2022.
|
|