• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

MODELING THE DISTRIBUTION OF MOUNTAIN PERMAFROST IN THE CENTRAL ANDES, SAN JUAN, ARGENTINA by Erika A.P. Schreiber A thesis submitted to the Faculty of the University of Delaware in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Geography Summer 2015 © 2015 Erika A.P. Schreiber All Rights Reserved ProQuest Number: 1602371 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. ProQuest 1602371 Published by ProQuest LLC (2015). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346 MODELING THE DISTRIBUTION OF MOUNTAIN PERMAFROST IN THE CENTRAL ANDES, SAN JUAN, ARGENTINA by Erika A.P. Schreiber Approved: Michael A. O’Neal, Ph.D. Professor in charge of thesis on behalf of the Advisory Committee Approved: Tracy L. DeLiberty, Ph.D. Chair of the Department of Geography Approved: Mohsen Badiey, Ph.D. Acting Dean of the College of Earth, Ocean, and Environment Approved: James G. Richards, Ph.D. Vice Provost for Graduate and Professional Education ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am immensely grateful for all of the support I have received throughout my two years at the University of Delaware. This thesis would not have been possible without a large number of people. First and foremost I would like to thank my advisor, Dr. Michael O’Neal, for the numerous research opportunities he has provided, as well as his invaluable guidance and support in developing and implementing this project. I would also like to thank Dr. Brian Hanson for his assistance throughout this process and for all he has taught me as a professor and mentor. I am grateful also for the feedback I received from Dr. Daniel Leathers and Dr. Andres Meglioli in completing this thesis. Furthermore I would like to extend my gratitude to Dr. Tracy DeLiberty, Dr. Dana Veron, and the rest of the Geography Department faculty for creating such a supportive environment in which to attain my degree. The data utilized in this study would have been unattainable if not for the efforts and expertise of Dr. Andres Meglioli. I am enormously thankful to him for giving me the oppor- tunity to conduct research in such a remote environment and for his assistance throughout the field campaigns. I am grateful, too, for the field assistance of Daniel Hubacz and Renato Kane, as well as Renato’s unending advice and support. I would also like to acknowledge Tessa Montini for her commiserations as we completed our degrees together, along with the rest of the Geography graduate student community for their continuing friendship and en- couragement. Additionally, I want to express my deep gratitude to Jimmy Moore and all other friends I have found here in Delaware. I could not have asked for a better network of wonderful people and I am extremely thankful to have had the opportunity to meet and learn from so many individuals in and out of my department. Finally, I wish to recognize my parents and siblings for their constant support and inspiration; without them I would not have made it so far on this academic journey. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ................................. vi LIST OF FIGURES ................................ vii ABSTRACT ..................................... x Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION ............................... 1 2 STUDY AREA ................................. 3 3 METHODS ................................... 5 3.1 Ground Surface Temperature Measurements ................ 5 3.2 Temperature Data Reduction ........................ 5 3.3 Model Radiation and Geographic Data for Sensor Sites .......... 6 3.4 Statistical Analyses of all Field, Radiation, and Geographic Data ..... 7 4 RESULTS .................................... 9 4.1 Ground Surface Temperature Measurements ................ 9 4.2 Model Radiation and Geographic Data for Sensor Sites .......... 9 4.3 Spatial Modeling of Temperature Values .................. 10 4.4 Permafrost Distribution and Comparison with Observations ........ 11 5 DISCUSSION .................................. 13 5.1 Accuracy of Models ............................ 13 5.1.1 ASTER vs. SRTM ......................... 14 5.1.2 MAGT vs. BTS .......................... 15 5.2 Evaluating Permafrost as a Water Resource ................ 17 5.3 Future ................................... 18 iv FIGURES ...................................... 19 TABLES ....................................... 52 REFERENCES ................................... 59 Appendix TEMPERATURE SENSOR RECORDS .................... 64 v LIST OF TABLES 1 Summary of changes to elevation values at sensor sites due to probe location adjustments into neighboring DEM cells ............ 52 2 Values of root mean square error and mean absolute error used to evaluate insolation model success in capturing the integrations of direct radiation values (W/m2) .............................. 53 3 Summary of parameters used for the local radiation model ....... 54 4 Coefficients and related statistics of multiple linear regression equations derived from MAGT values ....................... 55 5 Coefficients and related statistics of multiple linear regression equations derived from BTS values ......................... 56 6 Percentage land area of modeled permafrost based on both DEMs and methods of calculation at each study site ................. 57 7 Lowest elevations reached by modeled permafrost extent ........ 58 vi LIST OF FIGURES 1 Locations of El Altar and Los Azules study sites in the high Andes of Argentina ................................ 19 2 Marshy "vegas" located in a valley at one of the research field sites ... 20 3 Examples of cryogenic landforms found at the field sites ........ 21 4 Temperature sensor distribution across the El Altar study site ...... 22 5 Temperature sensor distribution across the Los Azules study site .... 23 6 Elevation and aspect distribution of temperature sensors across the El Altar and Los Azules field sites ..................... 24 7 Distribution of temperature sensors across El Altar and their usability for temperature modeling .......................... 25 8 Distribution of temperature sensors across Los Azules and their usability for temperature modeling ........................ 26 9 Periods of individual temperature sensor data collection plotted against each probe’s local elevation ....................... 27 10 Comparisons of modeled and recorded average daily incoming solar radiation values at the three weather stations ............... 28 11 MAGT values (◦C) at El Altar site based on the multiple linear regression equation developed with the ASTER DEM ............... 29 12 MAGT values (◦C) at El Altar site based on the multiple linear regression equation developed with the SRTM DEM ................ 30 13 MAGT values (◦C) at Los Azules site based on the multiple linear regression equation developed with the ASTER DEM .......... 31 vii 14 MAGT values (◦C) at Los Azules site based on the multiple linear regression equation developed with the SRTM DEM .......... 32 15 BTS values (◦C) at El Altar site based on the multiple linear regression equation developed with the ASTER DEM ............... 33 16 BTS values (◦C) at El Altar site based on the multiple linear regression equation developed with the SRTM DEM ................ 34 17 BTS values (◦C) at Los Azules site based on the multiple linear regression equation developed with the ASTER DEM ............... 35 18 BTS values (◦C) at Los Azules site based on the multiple linear regression equation developed with the SRTM DEM ................ 36 19 Absolute differences in calculated temperature (◦C) at El Altar site based on the multiple linear regression equations developed using ASTER and SRTM information for BTS values .................... 37 20 Differences in elevation (m) between the ASTER and SRTM digital elevation models at the El Altar site ................... 38 21 Differences in elevation (m) between the ASTER and SRTM digital elevation models at the Los Azules site ................. 39 22 Distribution of permafrost across the landscape at El Altar based on MAGT thresholds using the ASTER DEM ................ 40 23 Distribution of permafrost across the landscape at El Altar based on MAGT thresholds using the SRTM DEM ................ 41 24 Distribution of permafrost across the landscape at Los Azules based on MAGT thresholds using the ASTER DEM ................ 42 25 Distribution of permafrost across the landscape at Los Azules based on MAGT thresholds using the SRTM DEM ................ 43 26 Distribution of permafrost across the landscape at El Altar based on BTS thresholds using the ASTER DEM .................... 44 27 Distribution of permafrost across the landscape at El Altar based on BTS thresholds using the SRTM DEM .................... 45 viii 28 Distribution of permafrost across the landscape at Los Azules based on BTS thresholds using the ASTER DEM ................. 46 29 Distribution of permafrost across the landscape at Los Azules based on BTS thresholds using the SRTM DEM .................. 47 30 Comparison of known El Altar ice locations with predicted permafrost extent based on MAGT ........................

Load more

  100

Copy Link