Comparisons of passive microwave remote sensing sea ice concentrations with ship-based visual observations during the CHINARE Arctic summer cruises of 2010–2018

Yuanren Xiu; Zhijun Li; Ruibo Lei; Qingkai Wang; Peng Lu; Matti Leppäranta

doi:10.1007/s13131-020-1646-5

Volume 39 Issue 9

Sep. 2020

Turn off MathJax

Article Contents

Article Navigation > Acta Oceanologica Sinica > 2020 > 39(9): 38-49

Yuanren Xiu, Zhijun Li, Ruibo Lei, Qingkai Wang, Peng Lu, Matti Leppäranta. Comparisons of passive microwave remote sensing sea ice concentrations with ship-based visual observations during the CHINARE Arctic summer cruises of 2010–2018[J]. Acta Oceanologica Sinica, 2020, 39(9): 38-49. doi: 10.1007/s13131-020-1646-5

Citation:

Yuanren Xiu, Zhijun Li, Ruibo Lei, Qingkai Wang, Peng Lu, Matti Leppäranta. Comparisons of passive microwave remote sensing sea ice concentrations with ship-based visual observations during the CHINARE Arctic summer cruises of 2010–2018[J]. Acta Oceanologica Sinica, 2020, 39(9): 38-49. doi: 10.1007/s13131-020-1646-5

Citation:

Yuanren Xiu, Zhijun Li, Ruibo Lei, Qingkai Wang, Peng Lu, Matti Leppäranta. Comparisons of passive microwave remote sensing sea ice concentrations with ship-based visual observations during the CHINARE Arctic summer cruises of 2010–2018[J]. Acta Oceanologica Sinica, 2020, 39(9): 38-49. doi: 10.1007/s13131-020-1646-5

PDF( 781 KB)

Comparisons of passive microwave remote sensing sea ice concentrations with ship-based visual observations during the CHINARE Arctic summer cruises of 2010–2018

doi: 10.1007/s13131-020-1646-5

1.
State Key Laboratory of Coastal and Offshore Engineering, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian 116024, China
2.
MNR Key Laboratory for Polar Science, Polar Research Institute of China, Shanghai 200136, China
3.
Institute of Atmospheric and Earth Sciences, University of Helsinki, Helsinki 00014, Finland

Funds: The National Major Research High Resolution Sea Ice Model Development Program of China under contract No. 2018YFA0605903; the National Natural Science Foundation of China under contract Nos 51639003, 41876213 and 41906198; the High-tech Ship Research Project of China under contract No. 350631009; the National Postdoctoral Program for Innovative Talent of China under contract No. BX20190051.

More Information

Corresponding author: E-mail: lupeng@dlut.edu.cn
Received Date: 2019-11-01
Accepted Date: 2019-12-04

Available Online: 2020-12-28

Publish Date: 2020-09-25

Abstract

Abstract

In order to apply satellite data to guiding navigation in the Arctic more effectively, the sea ice concentrations (SIC) derived from passive microwave (PM) products were compared with ship-based visual observations (OBS) collected during the Chinese National Arctic Research Expeditions (CHINARE). A total of 3 667 observations were collected in the Arctic summers of 2010, 2012, 2014, 2016, and 2018. PM SIC were derived from the NASA-Team (NT), Bootstrap (BT) and Climate Data Record (CDR) algorithms based on the SSMIS sensor, as well as the BT, enhanced NASA-Team (NT2) and ARTIST Sea Ice (ASI) algorithms based on AMSR-E/AMSR-2 sensors. The daily arithmetic average of PM SIC values and the daily weighted average of OBS SIC values were used for the comparisons. The correlation coefficients (CC), biases and root mean square deviations (RMSD) between PM SIC and OBS SIC were compared in terms of the overall trend, and under mild/normal/severe ice conditions. Using the OBS data, the influences of floe size and ice thickness on the SIC retrieval of different PM products were evaluated by calculating the daily weighted average of floe size code and ice thickness. Our results show that CC values range from 0.89 (AMSR-E/AMSR-2 NT2) to 0.95 (SSMIS NT), biases range from −3.96% (SSMIS NT) to 12.05% (AMSR-E/AMSR-2 NT2), and RMSD values range from 10.81% (SSMIS NT) to 20.15% (AMSR-E/AMSR-2 NT2). Floe size has a significant influence on the SIC retrievals of the PM products, and most of the PM products tend to underestimate SIC under smaller floe size conditions and overestimate SIC under larger floe size conditions. Ice thickness thicker than 30 cm does not have a significant influence on the SIC retrieval of PM products. Overall, the best (worst) agreement occurs between OBS SIC and SSMIS NT (AMSR-E/AMSR-2 NT2) SIC in the Arctic summer.
- sea ice concentration,
- passive microwave remote sensing,
- ship-based visual observations,
- Arctic navigation,
- summer

FullText(HTML)

References(44)

References

[1]	Beitsch A, Kaleschke L, Kern S. 2014. Investigating high-resolution AMSR2 sea ice concentrations during the February 2013 fracture event in the Beaufort Sea. Remote Sensing, 6(5): 3841–3856. doi: 10.3390/rs6053841
[2]	Beitsch A, Kern S, Kaleschke L. 2015. Comparison of SSM/I and AMSR-E sea ice concentrations with ASPeCt ship observations around Antarctica. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 53(4): 1985–1996. doi: 10.1109/TGRS.2014.2351497
[3]	Cavalieri D J, ST. Germain K M, Swift C T 1995. Reduction of weather effects in the calculation of sea-ice concentration with the DMSP SSM/I. Journal of Glaciology, 41(139): 455–464. doi: 10.3189/S0022143000034791
[4]	Chen Ping, Zhao Jinping. 2017. Variation of sea ice extent in different regions of the Arctic Ocean. Acta Oceanologica Sinica, 36(8): 9–19. doi: 10.1007/s13131-016-0886-x
[5]	Cohen J, Screen J A, Furtado J C, et al. 2014. Recent Arctic amplification and extreme mid-latitude weather. Nature Geoscience, 7(9): 627–637. doi: 10.1038/NGEO2234
[6]	Comiso J C. 2012. Large decadal decline of the Arctic multiyear ice cover. Journal of Climate, 25(4): 1176–1193. doi: 10.1175/JCLI-D-11-00113.1
[7]	Comiso J C, Cavalieri D J, Parkinson C L, et al. 1997. Passive microwave algorithms for sea ice concentration: a comparison of two techniques. Remote Sensing of Environment, 60(3): 357–384. doi: 10.1016/S0034-4257(96)00220-9
[8]	Hao Guanghua, Su Jie. 2015. A study of multiyear ice concentration retrieval algorithms using AMSR-E data. Acta Oceanologica Sinica, 34(9): 102–109. doi: 10.1007/s13131-015-0656-1
[9]	Heygster G, Huntemann M, Ivanova N, et al. 2014. Response of passive microwave sea ice concentration algorithms to thin ice. In: 2014 IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium. Quebec City, QC, Canada: IEEE, 3618–3621, doi: 10.1109/IGARSS.2014.6947266
[10]	Huang Wenfeng, Lu Peng, Lei Ruibo, et al. 2016. Melt pond distribution and geometry in high Arctic sea ice derived from aerial investigations. Annals of Glaciology, 57(73): 105–118. doi: 10.1017/aog.2016.30
[11]	Istomina L, Heygster G, Huntemann M, et al. 2015. Melt pond fraction and spectral sea ice albedo retrieval from MERIS data: Part 1. Validation against in situ, aerial, and ship cruise data. The Cryosphere, 9(4): 1551–1566. doi: 10.5194/tc-9-1551-2015
[12]	Ivanova N, Johannessen O M, Pedersen L T, et al. 2014. Retrieval of Arctic sea ice parameters by satellite passive microwave sensors: a comparison of eleven sea ice concentration algorithms. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 52(11): 7233–7246. doi: 10.1109/TGRS.2014.2310136
[13]	Ivanova N, Pedersen L T, Tonboe R T, et al. 2015. Inter-comparison and evaluation of sea ice algorithms: towards further identification of challenges and optimal approach using passive microwave observations. The Cryosphere, 9(5): 1797–1817. doi: 10.5194/tc-9-1797-2015
[14]	Kawanishi T, Sezai T, Ito Y, et al. 2003. The advanced microwave scanning radiometer for the earth observing system (AMSR-E), NASDA’s contribution to the EOS for global energy and water cycle studies. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 41(2): 184–194. doi: 10.1109/TGRS.2002.808331
[15]	Kern S, Kaleschke L, Clausi D A. 2003. A comparison of two 85-GHz SSM/I ice concentration algorithms with AVHRR and ERS-2 SAR imagery. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 41(10): 2294–2306. doi: 10.1109/TGRS.2003.817181
[16]	Khon V C, Mokhov I I. 2010. Arctic climate changes and possible conditions of Arctic navigation in the 21st century. Izvestiya, Atmospheric and Oceanic Physics, 46(1): 14–20. doi: 10.1134/S0001433810010032
[17]	Khon V C, Mokhov I I, Semenov V A. 2017. Transit navigation through Northern Sea Route from satellite data and CMIP5 simulations. Environmental Research Letters, 12(2): 024010. doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/aa5841
[18]	Knuth M A, Ackley S F. 2006. Summer and early-fall sea-ice concentration in the Ross Sea: comparison of in situ ASPeCt observations and satellite passive microwave estimates. Annals of Glaciology, 44: 303–309. doi: 10.3189/172756406781811466
[19]	Kwok R, Comiso J C, Martin S, et al. 2007. Ross Sea polynyas: Response of ice concentration retrievals to large areas of thin ice. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 112(C12): C12012. doi: 10.1029/2006JC003967
[20]	Lei Ruibo, Xie Hongjie, Wang Jia, et al. 2015. Changes in sea ice conditions along the Arctic Northeast Passage from 1979 to 2012. Cold Regions Science and Technology, 119: 132–144. doi: 10.1016/j.coldregions.2015.08.004
[21]	Li Lanyu, Ke Changqing, Xie Hongjie, et al. 2017. Aerial observations of sea ice and melt ponds near the North Pole during CHINARE2010. Acta Oceanologica Sinica, 36(1): 64–72. doi: 10.1007/s13131-017-0994-2
[22]	Markus T, Cavalieri D J. 2000. An enhancement of the NASA Team sea ice algorithm. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 38(3): 1387–1398. doi: 10.1109/36.843033
[23]	Mathew N, Heygster G, Melsheimer C. 2009. Surface emissivity of the Arctic sea ice at AMSR-E frequencies. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 47(12): 4115–4124. doi: 10.1109/TGRS.2009.2023667
[24]	McIntire T J, Simpson J J. 2002. Arctic sea ice, cloud, water, and lead classification using neural networks and 1.6-μm data. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 40(9): 1956–1972. doi: 10.1109/TGRS.2002.803728
[25]	Meier W N, Ivanoff A. 2017. Intercalibration of AMSR2 NASA Team 2 algorithm sea ice concentrations with AMSR-E slow rotation data. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing, 10(9): 3923–3933. doi: 10.1109/JSTARS.2017.2719624
[26]	Overland J, Francis J A, Hall R, et al. 2015. The melting Arctic and midlatitude weather patterns: are they connected?. Journal of Climate, 28(20): 7917–7932. doi: 10.1175/JCLI-D-14-00822.1
[27]	Ozsoy-Cicek B, Ackley S F, Worby A, et al. 2011. Antarctic sea-ice extents and concentrations: comparison of satellite and ship measurements from International Polar Year cruises. Annals of Glaciology, 52(57): 318–326. doi: 10.3189/172756411795931877
[28]	Ozsoy-Cicek B, Xie Hongjie, Ackley S F, et al. 2009. Antarctic summer sea ice concentration and extent: comparison of ODEN 2006 ship observations, satellite passive microwave and NIC sea ice charts. The Cryosphere, 3(1): 1–9. doi: 10.5194/tc-3-1-2009
[29]	Peng G, Meier W N, Scott D J, et al. 2013. A long-term and reproducible passive microwave sea ice concentration data record for climate studies and monitoring. Earth System Science Data, 5(2): 311–318. doi: 10.5194/essd-5-311-2013
[30]	Pithan F, Mauritsen T. 2014. Arctic amplification dominated by temperature feedbacks in contemporary climate models. Nature Geoscience, 7(3): 181–184. doi: 10.1038/NGEO2071
[31]	Polashenski C, Perovich D K, Frey K E, et al. 2015. Physical and morphological properties of sea ice in the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas during the 2010 and 2011 NASA ICESCAPE missions. Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography, 118: 7–17. doi: 10.1016/j.dsr2.2015.04.006
[32]	Shi Lijiang, Lu Peng, Cheng Bin, et al. 2015. An assessment of arctic sea ice concentration retrieval based on “HY-2” scanning radiometer data using field observations during CHINARE-2012 and other satellite instruments. Acta Oceanologica Sinica, 34(3): 42–50. doi: 10.1007/s13131-015-0632-9
[33]	Shibata H, Izumiyama K, Tateyama K, et al. 2013. Sea-ice coverage variability on the Northern Sea Routes, 1980-2011. Annals of Glaciology, 54(62): 139–148. doi: 10.3189/2013AoG62A123
[34]	Smith D M. 1996. Extraction of winter total sea-ice concentration in the Greenland and Barents Seas from SSM/I data. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 17(13): 2625–2646. doi: 10.1080/01431169608949096
[35]	Spreen G, Kaleschke L, Heygster G. 2008. Sea ice remote sensing using AMSR-E 89-GHz channels. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 113(C2): C02S03. doi: 10.1029/2005JC003384
[36]	Sui Cuijuan, Zhang Zhanhai, Yu Lejiang, et al. 2017. Sensitivity and nonlinearity of Eurasian winter temperature response to recent Arctic sea ice loss. Acta Oceanologica Sinica, 36(8): 52–58. doi: 10.1007/s13131-017-1018-y
[37]	Surussavadee C, Staelin D H. 2010. Global precipitation retrieval algorithm trained for SSMIS using a numerical weather prediction model: design and evaluation. In: 2010 IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium. Honolulu, HI, USA: IEEE, 2341–2344, doi: 10.1109/IGARSS.2010.5649699
[38]	Vihma T. 2014. Effects of Arctic sea ice decline on weather and climate: a review. Surveys in Geophysics, 35(5): 1175–1214. doi: 10.1007/s10712-014-9284-0
[39]	Wang Yunhe, Bi Haibo, Huang Haijun, et al. 2019. Satellite-observed trends in the Arctic sea ice concentration for the period 1979–2016. Journal of Oceanology and Limnology, 37(1): 18–37. doi: 10.1007/s00343-019-7284-0
[40]	Wang Qingkai, Li Zhijun, Lu Peng, et al. 2019. 2014 summer Arctic sea ice thickness and concentration from shipborne observations. International Journal of Digital Earth, 12(8): 931–947. doi: 10.1080/17538947.2017.1421720
[41]	Weissling B, Ackley S, Wagner P, et al. 2009. EISCAM—Digital image acquisition and processing for sea ice parameters from ships. Cold Regions Science and Technology, 57(1): 49–60. doi: 10.1016/j.coldregions.2009.01.001
[42]	Worby A, Allison I, Dirita V. 1999. A technique for making ship-based observations of Antarctic sea ice thickness and characteristics. Antarctic CRC Research Report No. 14. Hobart, Australia: Antarctic CRC
[43]	Worby A P, Comiso J C. 2004. Studies of the Antarctic sea ice edge and ice extent from satellite and ship observations. Remote Sensing of Environment, 92(1): 98–111. doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2004.05.007
[44]	World Meteorological Organization (WMO). 1970. WMO sea-ice nomenclature: terminology, codes and illustrated glossary. Geneva, Switzerland: World Meteorological Organization