Carrivick, JL orcid.org/0000-0002-9286-5348, Andreassen, LM, Nesje, A et al. (1 more author) (2022) Corrigendum to: “A reconstruction of Jostedalsbreen during the Little Ice Age and geometric changes to outlet glaciers since then” [Quat. Sci. Revs. 284 (2022) 107501]. Quaternary Science Reviews, 292. 107673. ISSN 0277-3791
Abstract
It has been brought to our attention that Table 2 in the paper by Carrivick et al. (2022) “A reconstruction of Jostedalsbreen during the Little Ice Age and geometric changes to outlet glaciers since then” contains errors. The errors specifically concern the records of seven glaciers listed in Table 2. The errors arose because the outlines of glaciers (year 2006 inventory) that were apparently coalesced during the LIA (according to our mapping) had not been merged. That has meant that the comparisons of ‘LIA’ and ‘2006’ presented in Table 2 did not evaluate the correct glacier area (and hence other attributes) in each time period against each other. Merging outlines of glaciers that were coalesced during the LIA is part of the workflow for reconstructing LIA ice surfaces and estimating glacier-specific volume loss between the LIA and a more modern glacier inventory that has been developed and employed for several other World regions; e.g. see analysis in Carrivick et al. (2019, 2020) and Lee et al. (2021). The values that have changed are for the glaciers Austerdalsbreen (merged local IDs 2327, 2331), Briksdalsbreen (2322, 2316), Bergsetbreen (2309, 2318), Erdalsbreen (2246, 2481), Langedalsbreen (2329, 2341, 2332), Lodalsbreen (2271, 2266, 2283) and Sygneskarsbreen (2455, 2467, 2458, 2453, 2461). These glacier-specific quantities are a result of aggregating the datasets (e.g., grids of elevation change, ice thickness) in a slightly different way/discriminating slightly different zone extents/outlines. Therefore, the values reported for Jostedalsbreen ice cap as a whole do not change. The only statement that needs modifying in the manuscript is: “The largest glacier volume loss as a percentage of the original volume has occurred at Bergsetbreen and Lodalsbreen, which both have lost entire tributary ice falls” (in the Discussion, page 7). That sentence should now state that “The largest glacier volume loss as a percentage of the original volume has occurred at Langedalsbreen and Lodalsbreen; both of which have lost tributary ice falls, and at Tverrbyttnbreen, Vesledalsbreen and Sikilbreen; all of which are at the northernmost part of the Jostedalsbeen ice cap”. The revised Table 2 is as below: [Table presented]
Metadata
Item Type: | Article |
---|---|
Authors/Creators: |
|
Commentary on: | Carrivick, JL orcid.org/0000-0002-9286-5348, Andreassen, LM, Nesje, A et al. (1 more author) (2022) A reconstruction of Jostedalsbreen during the Little Ice Age and geometric changes to outlet glaciers since then. Quaternary Science Reviews, 284. 107501. ISSN 0277-3791 |
Dates: |
|
Institution: | The University of Leeds |
Academic Units: | The University of Leeds > Faculty of Environment (Leeds) > School of Geography (Leeds) > River Basin Processes & Management (Leeds) |
Funding Information: | Funder Grant number Research Council of Norway 302458 |
Depositing User: | Symplectic Publications |
Date Deposited: | 06 Sep 2022 12:17 |
Last Modified: | 06 Sep 2022 12:17 |
Status: | Published |
Publisher: | Elsevier |
Identification Number: | 10.1016/j.quascirev.2022.107673 |
Open Archives Initiative ID (OAI ID): | oai:eprints.whiterose.ac.uk:190733 |
Commentary/Response Threads
-
Carrivick, JL, Andreassen, LM, Nesje, A and Yde, JC
A reconstruction of Jostedalsbreen during the Little Ice Age and geometric changes to outlet glaciers since then. (deposited 03 May 2022 13:55)
- Carrivick, JL, Andreassen, LM, Nesje, A and Yde, JC Corrigendum to: “A reconstruction of Jostedalsbreen during the Little Ice Age and geometric changes to outlet glaciers since then” [Quat. Sci. Revs. 284 (2022) 107501]. (deposited 06 Sep 2022 12:17) [Currently Displayed]