Search for: All records

Leads play an important role in the exchange of heat, gases, vapour, and particles between seawater and the atmosphere in ice-covered polar oceans. In summer, these processes can be modified significantly by the formation of a meltwater layer at the surface, yet we know little about the dynamics of meltwater layer formation and persistence. During the drift campaign of the Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate (MOSAiC), we examined how variation in lead width, re-freezing, and mixing events affected the vertical structure of lead waters during late summer in the central Arctic. At the beginning of the 4-week survey period, a meltwater layer occupied the surface 0.8 m of the lead, and temperature and salinity showed strong vertical gradients. Stable oxygen isotopes indicate that the meltwater consisted mainly of sea ice meltwater rather than snow meltwater. During the first half of the survey period (before freezing), the meltwater layer thickness decreased rapidly as lead width increased and stretched the layer horizontally. During the latter half of the survey period (after freezing of the lead surface), stratification weakened and the meltwater layer became thinner before disappearing completely due to surface ice formation and mixing processes. Removal of meltwater during surface ice formation explained about 43% of the reduction in thickness of the meltwater layer. The remaining approximate 57% could be explained by mixing within the water column initiated by disturbance of the lower boundary of the meltwater layer through wind-induced ice floe drift. These results indicate that rapid, dynamic changes to lead water structure can have potentially significant effects on the exchange of physical and biogeochemical components throughout the atmosphere–lead–underlying seawater system.

 

Abstract. The annual sea ice freeze–thaw cycle plays a crucial role in theArctic atmosphere—ice–ocean system, regulating the seasonal energy balanceof sea ice and the underlying upper-ocean. Previous studies of the sea icefreeze–thaw cycle were often based on limited accessible in situ or easilyavailable remotely sensed observations of the surface. To better understandthe responses of the sea ice to climate change and its coupling to the upperocean, we combine measurements of the ice surface and bottom usingmultisource data to investigate the temporal and spatial variations in thefreeze–thaw cycle of Arctic sea ice. Observations by 69 sea ice mass balancebuoys (IMBs) collected from 2001 to 2018 revealed that the average ice basalmelt onset in the Beaufort Gyre occurred on 23 May (±6 d),approximately 17 d earlier than the surface melt onset. The average icebasal melt onset in the central Arctic Ocean occurred on 17 June (±9 d), which was comparable with the surface melt onset. This difference wasmainly attributed to the distinct seasonal variations of oceanic heatavailable to sea ice melt between the two regions. The overall average onsetof basal ice growth of the pan Arctic Ocean occurred on 14 November (±21 d), lagging approximately 3 months behind the surface freezeonset. This temporal delay was caused by a combination of cooling the seaice, the ocean mixed layer, and the ocean subsurface layer, as well as thethermal buffering of snow atop the ice. In the Beaufort Gyre region, both(Lagrangian) IMB observations (2001–2018) and (Eulerian) moored upward-looking sonar (ULS) observations (2003–2018) revealed a trend towardsearlier basal melt onset, mainly linked to the earlier warming of thesurface ocean. A trend towards earlier onset of basal ice growth was alsoidentified from the IMB observations (multiyear ice), which we attributed tothe overall reduction of ice thickness. In contrast, a trend towards delayedonset of basal ice growth was identified from the ULS observations, whichwas explained by the fact that the ice cover melted almost entirely by theend of summer in recent years. 

Abstract. Wind-driven redistribution of snow on sea ice alters itstopography and microstructure, yet the impact of these processes on radarsignatures is poorly understood. Here, we examine the effects of snowredistribution over Arctic sea ice on radar waveforms and backscattersignatures obtained from a surface-based, fully polarimetric Ka- and Ku-bandradar at incidence angles between 0∘ (nadir) and 50∘.Two wind events in November 2019 during the Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory forthe Study of Arctic Climate (MOSAiC) expedition are evaluated. During both events, changes in Ka- andKu-band radar waveforms and backscatter coefficients at nadir are observed,coincident with surface topography changes measured by a terrestrial laserscanner. At both frequencies, redistribution caused snow densification atthe surface and the uppermost layers, increasing the scattering at theair–snow interface at nadir and its prevalence as the dominant radar scattering surface. The waveform data also detected the presence of previousair–snow interfaces, buried beneath newly deposited snow. The additionalscattering from previous air–snow interfaces could therefore affect therange retrieved from Ka- and Ku-band satellite altimeters. With increasingincidence angles, the relative scattering contribution of the air–snowinterface decreases, and the snow–sea ice interface scattering increases.Relative to pre-wind event conditions, azimuthally averaged backscatter atnadir during the wind events increases by up to 8 dB (Ka-band) and 5 dB (Ku-band). Results show substantial backscatter variability within the scanarea at all incidence angles and polarizations, in response to increasingwind speed and changes in wind direction. Our results show that snowredistribution and wind compaction need to be accounted for to interpretairborne and satellite radar measurements of snow-covered sea ice.

 

Sea ice growth and decay are critical processes in the Arctic climate system, but comprehensive observations are very sparse. We analyzed data from 23 sea ice mass balance buoys (IMBs) deployed during the Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate (MOSAiC) expedition in 2019–2020 to investigate the seasonality and timing of sea ice thermodynamic mass balance in the Arctic Transpolar Drift. The data reveal four stages of the ice season: (I) onset of ice basal freezing, mid-October to November; (II) rapid ice growth, December–March; (III) slow ice growth, April–May; and (IV) melting, June onward. Ice basal growth ranged from 0.64 to 1.38 m at a rate of 0.004–0.006 m d–1, depending mainly on initial ice thickness. Compared to a buoy deployed close to the MOSAiC setup site in September 2012, total ice growth was about twice as high, due to the relatively thin initial ice thickness at the MOSAiC sites. Ice growth from the top, caused by surface flooding and subsequent snow-ice formation, was observed at two sites and likely linked to dynamic processes. Snow reached a maximum depth of 0.25 ± 0.08 m by May 2, 2020, and had melted completely by June 25, 2020. The relatively early onset of ice basal melt on June 7 (±10 d), 2019, can be partly attributed to the unusually rapid advection of the MOSAiC floes towards Fram Strait. The oceanic heat flux, calculated based on the heat balance at the ice bottom, was 2.8 ± 1.1 W m–2 in December–April, and increased gradually from May onward, reaching 10.0 ± 2.6 W m–2 by mid-June 2020. Subsequently, under-ice melt ponds formed at most sites in connection with increasing ice permeability. Our analysis provides crucial information on the Arctic sea ice mass balance for future studies related to MOSAiC and beyond. 

Sea ice thickness is a key parameter in the polar climate and ecosystem. Thermodynamic and dynamic processes alter the sea ice thickness. The Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate (MOSAiC) expedition provided a unique opportunity to study seasonal sea ice thickness changes of the same sea ice. We analyzed 11 large-scale (∼50 km) airborne electromagnetic sea thickness and surface roughness surveys from October 2019 to September 2020. Data from ice mass balance and position buoys provided additional information. We found that thermodynamic growth and decay dominated the seasonal cycle with a total mean sea ice thickness increase of 1.4 m (October 2019 to June 2020) and decay of 1.2 m (June 2020 to September 2020). Ice dynamics and deformation-related processes, such as thin ice formation in leads and subsequent ridging, broadened the ice thickness distribution and contributed 30% to the increase in mean thickness. These processes caused a 1-month delay between maximum thermodynamic sea ice thickness and maximum mean ice thickness. The airborne EM measurements bridged the scales from local floe-scale measurements to Arctic-wide satellite observations and model grid cells. The spatial differences in mean sea ice thickness between the Central Observatory (<10 km) of MOSAiC and the Distributed Network (<50 km) were negligible in fall and only 0.2 m in late winter, but the relative abundance of thin and thick ice varied. One unexpected outcome was the large dynamic thickening in a regime where divergence prevailed on average in the western Nansen Basin in spring. We suggest that the large dynamic thickening was due to the mobile, unconsolidated sea ice pack and periodic, sub-daily motion. We demonstrate that this Lagrangian sea ice thickness data set is well suited for validating the existing redistribution theory in sea ice models. Our comprehensive description of seasonal changes of the sea ice thickness distribution is valuable for interpreting MOSAiC time series across disciplines and can be used as a reference to advance sea ice thickness modeling. 

The rapid melt of snow and sea ice during the Arctic summer provides a significant source of low-salinity meltwater to the surface ocean on the local scale. The accumulation of this meltwater on, under, and around sea ice floes can result in relatively thin meltwater layers in the upper ocean. Due to the small-scale nature of these upper-ocean features, typically on the order of 1 m thick or less, they are rarely detected by standard methods, but are nevertheless pervasive and critically important in Arctic summer. Observations during the Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate (MOSAiC) expedition in summer 2020 focused on the evolution of such layers and made significant advancements in understanding their role in the coupled Arctic system. Here we provide a review of thin meltwater layers in the Arctic, with emphasis on the new findings from MOSAiC. Both prior and recent observational datasets indicate an intermittent yet long-lasting (weeks to months) meltwater layer in the upper ocean on the order of 0.1 m to 1.0 m in thickness, with a large spatial range. The presence of meltwater layers impacts the physical system by reducing bottom ice melt and allowing new ice formation via false bottom growth. Collectively, the meltwater layer and false bottoms reduce atmosphere-ocean exchanges of momentum, energy, and material. The impacts on the coupled Arctic system are far-reaching, including acting as a barrier for nutrient and gas exchange and impacting ecosystem diversity and productivity. 

The formation of platelet ice is well known to occur under Antarctic sea ice, where subice platelet layers form from supercooled ice shelf water. In the Arctic, however, platelet ice formation has not been extensively observed, and its formation and morphology currently remain enigmatic. Here, we present the first comprehensive, long‐term in situ observations of a decimeter thick subice platelet layer under free‐drifting pack ice of the Central Arctic in winter. Observations carried out with a remotely operated underwater vehicle (ROV) during the midwinter leg of the MOSAiC drift expedition provide clear evidence of the growth of platelet ice layers from supercooled water present in the ocean mixed layer. This platelet formation takes place under all ice types present during the surveys. Oceanographic data from autonomous observing platforms lead us to the conclusion that platelet ice formation is a widespread but yet overlooked feature of Arctic winter sea ice growth.