Accelerated global glacier mass loss in the early twenty-first century

Glaciers distinct from the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets are shrinking rapidly, altering regional hydrology1, raising global sea level2 and elevating natural hazards3. Yet, owing to the scarcity of constrained mass loss observations, glacier evolution during the satellite era is known only partially, as a geographic and temporal patchwork4,5. Here we reveal the accelerated, albeit contrasting, patterns of glacier mass loss during the early twenty-first century. Using largely untapped satellite archives, we chart surface elevation changes at a high spatiotemporal resolution over all of Earth’s glaciers. We extensively validate our estimates against independent, high-precision measurements and present a globally complete and consistent estimate of glacier mass change. We show that during 2000–2019, glaciers lost a mass of 267 ± 16 gigatonnes per year, equivalent to 21 ± 3 per cent of the observed sea-level rise6. We identify a mass loss acceleration of 48 ± 16 gigatonnes per year per decade, explaining 6 to 19 per cent of the observed acceleration of sea-level rise. Particularly, thinning rates of glaciers outside ice sheet peripheries doubled over the past two decades. Glaciers currently lose more mass, and at similar or larger acceleration rates, than the Greenland or Antarctic ice sheets taken separately7,8,9. By uncovering the patterns of mass change in many regions, we find contrasting glacier fluctuations that agree with the decadal variability in precipitation and temperature. These include a North Atlantic anomaly of decelerated mass loss, a strongly accelerated loss from northwestern American glaciers, and the apparent end of the Karakoram anomaly of mass gain10. We anticipate our highly resolved estimates to advance the understanding of drivers that govern the distribution of glacier change, and to extend our capabilities of predicting these changes at all scales. Predictions robustly benchmarked against observations are critically needed to design adaptive policies for the local- and regional-scale management of water resources and cryospheric risks, as well as for the global-scale mitigation of sea-level rise.ISSN:0028-0836ISSN:1476-468

Observing glacier elevation changes from spaceborne optical and radar sensors – an inter-comparison experiment using ASTER and TanDEM-X data

Observations of glacier mass changes are key to understanding the response of glaciers to climate change and related impacts, such as regional runoff, ecosystem changes, and global sea-level rise. Spaceborne optical and radar sensors make it possible to quantify glacier elevation changes, and thus multi-annual mass changes, on a regional and global scale. However, estimates from a growing number of studies show a wide range of results with differences often beyond uncertainty bounds. Here, we present the outcome of a community-based inter-comparison experiment using spaceborne optical stereo (ASTER) and synthetic aperture radar interferometry (TanDEM-X) data to estimate elevation changes for defined glaciers and target periods that pose different assessment challenges. Using provided or self-processed digital elevation models (DEMs) for five test sites, 12 research groups provided a total of 97 spaceborne elevation-change datasets using various processing strategies. Validation with airborne data showed that using an ensemble estimate is promising to reduce random errors from different instruments and processing methods, but still requires a more comprehensive investigation and correction of systematic errors. We found that scene selection, DEM processing, and co-registration have the biggest impact on the results. Other processing steps, such as treating spatial data voids, differences in survey periods, or radar penetration, can still be important for individual cases. Future research should focus on testing different implementations of individual processing steps (e.g. co-registration) and addressing issues related to temporal corrections, radar penetration, glacier area changes, and density conversion. Finally, there is a clear need for our community to develop best practices, use open, reproducible software, and assess overall uncertainty in order to enhance inter-comparison and empower physical process insights across glacier elevation-change studies

South American Andes elevation changes from 2000 to 2018, links to GeoTIFFs

Glaciers in the Andes are among the fastest shrinking and largest contributors to sea level rise in the world. They also represent crucial water resources in many tropical and semi-arid portions of this extensive mountain range. Yet, the magnitude of the recent ice loss over the entire Andes cordillera is still debated. Here we present Andean glacier mass changes (from 10°N to 56°S) between 2000 and 2018 using time series of digital elevation models derived from ASTER stereo images. The total mass change is -22.9 ± 5.9 Gt yr-1 (-0.72 ± 0.22 m w.e. yr-1), with the most negative mass balances in the Patagonic Andes (-0.78 ± 0.25 m w.e. yr-1) and the Tropical Andes (-0.42 ± 0.24 m w.e. yr-1), and relatively moderate losses (-0.28 ± 0.18 m w.e. yr-1) in the Dry Andes. Sub-period analysis (2000-2009 vs. 2009-2018) reveals steady mass loss in the Tropics and south of 45°S. Conversely, a shift from slightly positive to strongly negative mass balance is measured between 26° and 45°S. In this latter region, the rapid glacier loss in recent years coincides with extremely dry conditions since 2010 and partially helped to mitigate the negative hydrological impacts of this severe drought. These results provide a comprehensive, high resolution and multi-decadal dataset of recent Andes-wide glacier mass changes that constitutes a relevant basis for calibration and validation of hydrological and glaciological models intended to project future glacier changes and their hydrological impacts

Author Correction: Two decades of glacier mass loss along the Andes (Nature Geoscience, (2019), 12, 10, (802-808), 10.1038/s41561-019-0432-5)

In the Supplementary Information for this Article, in Section 9 information about the hydrological datasets was missing, the following text has now been added: Mean annual runoff values were derived from mean monthly data provided by Dirección General de Aguas, Chile (http://www.dga.cl), Secretaría de Infraestructura y Política Hídrica, Argentina (https://www.argentina.gob.ar/obras-publicas/infraestructura-y-politica-hidrica), and Autoridad Nacional del Agua, Peru (https://www.ana.gob.pe). A few missing months (March to July 2013) in the Santa river record in Peru were infilled using the corresponding long-term monthly means. If necessary, missing months in the Chilean and Argentinean river records were infilled with a weighted average of monthly values from highly correlated stations within the same river basin (for details see Masiokas et al. 2019). In Supplementary Table 3, there were errors in the data for the Baker basin; the gauging station used should have been Bajo Ñadis instead of Desagüe Lago Bertrand, which affected the values of the annual mean river runoff, sub-period runoff change and the glacier imbalance contribution. For the annual mean river runoff (m3 s−1), 649.2 and 568.7 should have been 922.8 and 975.9, respectively; for the sub-period runoff change (%), −12 should have been 6; and for the glacier imbalance contribution (%), 3 and 5 should have been 2 and 3, respectively. Related to this, in the sentence beginning The two Patagonian basins... in the final paragraph of the section Influence of glacier mass loss on river runoff in the main text of the Article, 3 to 5% should have been 2 to 3%. Furthermore, in Supplementary Table 3, Condorecerro should have read Condorcerro.Fil: Dussaillant, Ines. Université de Toulouse; Francia. Universite Grenoble Alpes; FranciaFil: Berthier, Etienne. Université de Toulouse; FranciaFil: Brun, Fanny. Universite Grenoble Alpes; Francia. Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique; FranciaFil: Masiokas, Mariano Hugo. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Mendoza. Instituto Argentino de Nivología, Glaciología y Ciencias Ambientales. Provincia de Mendoza. Instituto Argentino de Nivología, Glaciología y Ciencias Ambientales. Universidad Nacional de Cuyo. Instituto Argentino de Nivología, Glaciología y Ciencias Ambientales; ArgentinaFil: Hugonnet, R.. Université de Toulouse; FranciaFil: Favier, Vincent. Universite Grenoble Alpes; FranciaFil: Rabatel, Antoine. Universite Grenoble Alpes; FranciaFil: Pitte, Pedro Miguel. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Mendoza. Instituto Argentino de Nivología, Glaciología y Ciencias Ambientales. Provincia de Mendoza. Instituto Argentino de Nivología, Glaciología y Ciencias Ambientales. Universidad Nacional de Cuyo. Instituto Argentino de Nivología, Glaciología y Ciencias Ambientales; ArgentinaFil: Ruiz, Lucas Ernesto. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Mendoza. Instituto Argentino de Nivología, Glaciología y Ciencias Ambientales. Provincia de Mendoza. Instituto Argentino de Nivología, Glaciología y Ciencias Ambientales. Universidad Nacional de Cuyo. Instituto Argentino de Nivología, Glaciología y Ciencias Ambientales; Argentin

Measuring glacier mass changes from space - a review

International audienceGlaciers distinct from the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets are currently losing mass rapidly with direct and severe impacts on the habitability of some regions on Earth as glacier meltwater contributes to sea-level rise and alters regional water resources in arid regions. In this review, we present the different techniques developed during the last two decades to measure glacier mass change from space: digital elevation model (DEM) differencing from stereo-imagery and synthetic aperture radar interferometry, laser and radar altimetry and space gravimetry. We illustrate their respective strengths and weaknesses to survey the mass change of a large Arctic ice body, the Vatnajökull Ice Cap (Iceland) and for the steep glaciers of the Everest area (Himalaya). For entire regions, mass change estimates sometimes disagree when a similar technique is applied by different research groups. At global scale, these discrepancies result in mass change estimates varying by 20%–30%. Our review confirms the need for more thorough inter-comparison studies to understand the origin of these differences and to better constrain regional to global glacier mass changes and, ultimately, past and future glacier contribution to sea-level rise

Measuring glacier mass changes from space - a review

International audienceGlaciers distinct from the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets are currently losing mass rapidly with direct and severe impacts on the habitability of some regions on Earth as glacier meltwater contributes to sea-level rise and alters regional water resources in arid regions. In this review, we present the different techniques developed during the last two decades to measure glacier mass change from space: digital elevation model (DEM) differencing from stereo-imagery and synthetic aperture radar interferometry, laser and radar altimetry and space gravimetry. We illustrate their respective strengths and weaknesses to survey the mass change of a large Arctic ice body, the Vatnajökull Ice Cap (Iceland) and for the steep glaciers of the Everest area (Himalaya). For entire regions, mass change estimates sometimes disagree when a similar technique is applied by different research groups. At global scale, these discrepancies result in mass change estimates varying by 20%–30%. Our review confirms the need for more thorough inter-comparison studies to understand the origin of these differences and to better constrain regional to global glacier mass changes and, ultimately, past and future glacier contribution to sea-level rise

Measuring glacier mass changes from space—a review

Glaciers distinct from the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets are currently losing mass rapidly with direct and severe impacts on the habitability of some regions on Earth as glacier meltwater contributes to sea-level rise and alters regional water resources in arid regions. In this review, we present the different techniques developed during the last two decades to measure glacier mass change from space: digital elevation model (DEM) differencing from stereo-imagery and synthetic aperture radar interferometry, laser and radar altimetry and space gravimetry. We illustrate their respective strengths and weaknesses to survey the mass change of a large Arctic ice body, the Vatnajökull Ice Cap (Iceland) and for the steep glaciers of the Everest area (Himalaya). For entire regions, mass change estimates sometimes disagree when a similar technique is applied by different research groups. At global scale, these discrepancies result in mass change estimates varying by 20%–30%. Our review confirms the need for more thorough inter-comparison studies to understand the origin of these differences and to better constrain regional to global glacier mass changes and, ultimately, past and future glacier contribution to sea-level rise

Rationale, design, and baseline characteristics in Evaluation of LIXisenatide in Acute Coronary Syndrome, a long-term cardiovascular end point trial of lixisenatide versus placebo

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular (CV) disease is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Furthermore, patients with T2DM and acute coronary syndrome (ACS) have a particularly high risk of CV events. The glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist, lixisenatide, improves glycemia, but its effects on CV events have not been thoroughly evaluated. METHODS: ELIXA (www.clinicaltrials.gov no. NCT01147250) is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multicenter study of lixisenatide in patients with T2DM and a recent ACS event. The primary aim is to evaluate the effects of lixisenatide on CV morbidity and mortality in a population at high CV risk. The primary efficacy end point is a composite of time to CV death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or hospitalization for unstable angina. Data are systematically collected for safety outcomes, including hypoglycemia, pancreatitis, and malignancy. RESULTS: Enrollment began in July 2010 and ended in August 2013; 6,068 patients from 49 countries were randomized. Of these, 69% are men and 75% are white; at baseline, the mean ± SD age was 60.3 ± 9.7 years, body mass index was 30.2 ± 5.7 kg/m(2), and duration of T2DM was 9.3 ± 8.2 years. The qualifying ACS was a myocardial infarction in 83% and unstable angina in 17%. The study will continue until the positive adjudication of the protocol-specified number of primary CV events. CONCLUSION: ELIXA will be the first trial to report the safety and efficacy of a glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist in people with T2DM and high CV event risk