USGS Science⌕ Search

USGS · 1013395

Estimating the time of melt onset and freeze onset over Arctic sea-ice area using active and passive microwave data

Abstract

Accurate calculation of the time of melt onset, freeze onset, and melt duration over Arctic sea-ice area is crucial for climate and global change studies because it affects accuracy of surface energy balance estimates. This comparative study evaluates several methods used to estimate sea-ice melt and freeze onset dates: (1) the melt onset database derived from SSM/I passive microwave brightness temperatures ( T b s) using Drobot and Anderson's [J. Geophys. Res. 106 (2001) 24033] Advanced Horizontal Range Algorithm (AHRA) and distributed by the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC); (2) the International Arctic Buoy Program/Polar Exchange at the Sea (IABP/POLES) surface air temperatures (SATs); (3) an elaborated version of the AHRA that uses IABP/POLES to avoid anomalous results (Passive Microwave and Surface Temperature Analysis [PMSTA]); (4) another elaborated version of the AHRA that uses T b variance to avoid anomalous results (Mean Differences and Standard Deviation Analysis [MDSDA]); (5) Smith's [J. Geophys. Res. 103 (1998) 27753] vertically polarized T b algorithm for estimating melt onset in multiyear (MY) ice (SSM/I 19V–37V); and (6) analyses of concurrent backscattering cross section ( σ °) and brightness temperature ( T b ) from OKEAN-01 satellite series. Melt onset and freeze onset maps were created and compared to understand how the estimates vary between different satellite instruments and methods over different Arctic sea-ice regions. Comparisons were made to evaluate relative sensitivities among the methods to slight adjustments of the T b calibration coefficients and algorithm threshold values. Compared to the PMSTA method, the AHRA method tended to estimate significantly earlier melt dates, likely caused by the AHRA's susceptibility to prematurely identify melt onset conditions. In contrast, the IABP/POLES surface air temperature data tended to estimate later melt and earlier freeze in all but perennial ice. The MDSDA method was least sensitive to small adjustments of the SMMR–SSM/I inter-satellite calibration coefficients. Differences among methods varied by latitude. Freeze onset dates among methods were most disparate in southern latitudes, and tended to converge northward. Surface air temperatures (IABP/POLES) indicated freeze onset well before the MDSDA method, especially in southern peripheral seas, while PMSTA freeze estimates were generally intermediate. Surface air temperature data estimated latest melt onset dates in southern latitudes, but earliest melt onset in northern latitudes. The PMSTA estimated earliest melt onset dates in southern regions, and converged with the MDSDA northward. Because sea-ice melt and freeze are dynamical transitional processes, differences among these methods are associated with differing sensitivities to changing stages of environmental and physical development. These studies contribute to the growing body of documentation about the levels of disparity obtained when Arctic seasonal transition parameters are estimated using various types of microwave data and algorithms.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Gennady I. Belchansky, David C. Douglas, Ilia N. Mordvintsev, Nikita G. Platonov. 2004. Estimating the time of melt onset and freeze onset over Arctic sea-ice area using active and passive microwave data. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2004.05.001

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

On-demand global Landsat evapotranspiration product: Development, evaluation, and dissemination

Global actual evapotranspiration (ET) is one of the essential climate variables needed to understand and manage the relationships among food, energy, and water resources. The U.S. Geological Survey Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) Center launched a provisional ET product in 2020, offering on-demand, field-scale global coverage derived from Landsat data through the EROS Science Processing Architecture (ESPA) platform. The ESPA interface provides ET data for cloud-free Landsat overpasses starting in 1982 with Landsat 4 through the current Landsat 9. The ET data are delivered as a Provisional Level-3 Science product created using the Operational Simplified Surface Energy Balance (SSEBop) model. Landsat surface temperature and reference ET are the main model drivers along with vegetation index and net radiation for model parameterization. A large volume of Landsat-based ET orders (e.g., over 1,200,000 images from June 2020 through December 2025) around the world indicate increasing awareness and application of the ET data. The ESPA platform enables land and water resource managers and researchers to access a first-order ET product without requiring advanced knowledge of remote sensing technology or evapotranspiration modeling. We present the methodology and workflow of the on-demand Landsat ET product and its performance evaluations over diverse hydro-climatic settings. The product can help estimate field-scale consumptive water use and thus quickly and consistently assess historical water use, allocation, and budget to inform water management under changing environments. Future ET data aggregated to monthly and seasonal time scales are expected to enhance integration with decision-making tools and procedures.

Remote Sensing of Environment↗

A framework for integrating spatiotemporal deep learning methods with landsat for annual land cover and impervious surface mapping

Land cover information is essential for understanding Earth’s surface dynamics and how vegetation, water, soil, climate, and terrain interact. The National Land Cover Database (NLCD) has been the authoritative source for consistent U.S. land cover mapping. To extend NLCD’s temporal resolution and reduce production latency, we developed the Land Cover Artificial Mapping System (LCAMS)—a prototype spatiotemporal deep learning framework piloted as the foundation for the new Annual NLCD. LCAMS builds on concepts from legacy NLCD and the U.S. Geological Survey Land Change Monitoring, Assessment, and Projection (LCMAP) initiatives. It employs a loosely coupled two-stage architecture consisting of independent but functionally interdependent spatial and temporal models. Spatial models extract per-year information from Landsat data, while the temporal models refine the spatial outputs to enforce inter-annual consistency—critical for reliable land change monitoring. LCAMS produces annual 30 m resolution land cover and impervious surface outputs, with region-specific fine-tuning to generalize across diverse landscapes and temporal dynamics. Validation was conducted using an independent dataset of 1925 randomly sampled plots from five U.S. Landsat Analysis Ready Data (ARD) tiles spanning 1985-2021, selected for spatial and temporal variability. This dataset was used consistently to evaluate LCAMS, Legacy NLCD, and LCMAP. Using the NLCD legend, LCAMS achieved 72.1 ± 1.60% overall agreement, compared to 71.1 ± 1.7% agreement for Legacy NLCD. Using the LCMAP legend, LCAMS achieved 83.4 ± 1.22% agreement, compared to 84.6 ± 1.11% agreement for LCMAP. Overall, LCAMS delivers comparable accuracy while offering higher thematic resolution, longer temporal coverage, and automated production of annual 30 m CONUS land cover.

Remote Sensing of Environment↗

Towards global mapping of dynamic surface water extents using Sentinel-1 SAR data

We introduce a fully automated and scalable method for mapping surface water extents from single-acquisition Sentinel-1 synthetic aperture radar (SAR) imagery. This approach integrates adaptive thresholding of radiometric terrain-corrected SAR backscatter data, fuzzy-logic classification, region growing, dark land estimation, and a bimodality test to minimize false positives in low-backscattering areas and false negatives in high-backscattering areas. By combining these steps, the algorithm achieves classification accuracies exceeding 85% in detecting surface water extents across diverse environmental conditions. Accuracy was first assessed at meter scale using 52 PlanetScope scenes acquired worldwide in September–October 2019; the algorithm achieved 93% overall accuracy, 86% user's accuracy, and 94% producer's accuracy. Global robustness was then evaluated by processing every Sentinel-1 acquisition from 1 to 12 November 2023 and cross-comparing the resulting maps with 6561 temporally matched observational products for end-users from remote sensing analysis (OPERA) dynamic surface water extent from Harmonized Landsat and Sentinel-2 (DSWx-HLS) products. This large-scale test yielded 90% user's and 94% producer's accuracies, confirming reliable performance at continental extent. Additional case studies demonstrate the algorithm's ability to handle surface water extent in sand-dominated deserts, to track seasonal amplitude in Folsom Lake (California), drought-induced loss in Cerro Prieto Reservoir (Mexico), and rapid filling of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam. These results show that the method scales across local to global domains and maintains high accuracy, providing a practical tool for near-real-time monitoring of floods, droughts, and water-resource management. Because the approach is sensor-agnostic, it can be ported to forthcoming L- and S-band missions such as NASA-ISRO synthetic aperture radar (NISAR), broadening its applicability to future hydrologic observations.

Remote Sensing of Environment↗