<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" xml:lang="en" dtd-version="3.0">
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">TC</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>The Cryosphere</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">TC</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">The Cryosphere</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">1994-0424</issn><publisher>
    <publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
    <publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
  </publisher></journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/tc-13-373-2019</article-id><title-group><article-title>Assessment of the Greenland ice sheet–atmosphere feedbacks<?xmltex \hack{\break}?> for the next century with a regional atmospheric model coupled<?xmltex \hack{\break}?> to an ice sheet model</article-title><alt-title>Assessment of the Greenland ice sheet</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{Assessment of the Greenland ice sheet}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{S.~Le clec'h et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1 aff2">
          <name><surname>Le clec'h</surname><given-names>Sébastien</given-names></name>
          <email>sebastien.le.clech@vub.be</email>
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1203-8682</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Charbit</surname><given-names>Sylvie</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1560-6462</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Quiquet</surname><given-names>Aurélien</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6207-3043</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Fettweis</surname><given-names>Xavier</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4140-3813</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Dumas</surname><given-names>Christophe</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Kageyama</surname><given-names>Masa</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Wyard</surname><given-names>Coraline</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2949-5831</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff4">
          <name><surname>Ritz</surname><given-names>Catherine</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et de l'Environnement, LSCE/IPSL, CEA-CNRS-UVSQ,<?xmltex \hack{\break}?> Université Paris-Saclay, 91191 Gif-sur-Yvette, France</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>Earth System Science and Department Geografie, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>3</label><institution>Laboratory of Climatology, Department of Geography, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff4"><label>4</label><institution>Institut des Géosciences de l'Environnement, Université Grenoble-Alpes, CNRS, 38000 Grenoble, France</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Sébastien Le clec'h (sebastien.le.clech@vub.be)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>1</day><month>February</month><year>2019</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>13</volume>
      <issue>1</issue>
      <fpage>373</fpage><lpage>395</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>10</day><month>October</month><year>2017</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>6</day><month>November</month><year>2017</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>29</day><month>December</month><year>2018</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>6</day><month>January</month><year>2019</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        
        
      <license license-type="open-access"><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ext-link></license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://tc.copernicus.org/articles/13/373/2019/tc-13-373-2019.html">This article is available from https://tc.copernicus.org/articles/13/373/2019/tc-13-373-2019.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://tc.copernicus.org/articles/13/373/2019/tc-13-373-2019.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://tc.copernicus.org/articles/13/373/2019/tc-13-373-2019.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract>
    <p id="d1e170">In the context of global warming, growing attention is paid to
the evolution of the Greenland ice sheet (GrIS) and its contribution to
sea-level rise at the centennial timescale. Atmosphere–GrIS interactions,
such as the temperature–elevation and the albedo feedbacks, have the potential
to modify the surface energy balance and thus to impact the GrIS surface mass
balance (SMB). In turn, changes in the geometrical features of the ice sheet
may alter both the climate and the ice dynamics governing the ice sheet
evolution. However, changes in ice sheet geometry are generally not
explicitly accounted for when simulating atmospheric changes over the
Greenland ice sheet in the future. To account for ice sheet–climate
interactions, we developed the first two-way synchronously coupled model
between a regional atmospheric model (MAR) and a 3-D ice sheet model (GRISLI).
Using this novel model, we simulate the ice sheet evolution from 2000 to 2150
under a prolonged representative concentration pathway scenario, RCP8.5. Changes in surface elevation and ice
sheet extent simulated by GRISLI have a direct impact on the climate
simulated by MAR. They are fed to MAR from 2020 onwards, i.e. when changes in
SMB produce significant topography changes in GRISLI. We further assess the
importance of the atmosphere–ice sheet feedbacks through the comparison of
the two-way coupled experiment with two other simulations based on simpler
coupling strategies: (i) a one-way coupling with no consideration of any
change in ice sheet geometry; (ii) an alternative one-way coupling in which
the elevation change feedbacks are parameterized in the ice sheet model
(from 2020 onwards) without taking into account the changes in ice sheet
topography in the atmospheric model. The two-way coupled experiment simulates
an important increase in surface melt below 2000 m of elevation, resulting in
an important SMB reduction in 2150 and a shift of the equilibrium line
towards elevations as high as 2500 m, despite a slight increase in SMB over
the central plateau due to enhanced snowfall. In relation with these SMB
changes, modifications of ice sheet geometry favour ice flux convergence
towards the margins, with an increase in ice velocities in the GrIS interior
due to increased surface slopes and a decrease in ice velocities at the
margins due to decreasing ice thickness. This convergence counteracts the SMB
signal in these areas. In the two-way coupling, the SMB is also influenced by
changes in fine-scale atmospheric dynamical processes, such as the increase
in katabatic winds from central to marginal regions induced by increased
surface slopes. Altogether, the GrIS contribution to sea-level rise, inferred
from variations in ice volume above floatation, is equal to 20.4 cm in 2150.
The comparison between the coupled and the two uncoupled experiments suggests
that the effect of the different feedbacks is amplified over time with the
most important feedbacks being the SMB–elevation feedbacks. As a result, the
experiment with parameterized SMB–elevation feedback provides a sea-level
contribution from GrIS in 2150 only 2.5 % lower than the<?pagebreak page374?> two-way coupled
experiment, while the experiment with no feedback is 9.3 % lower. The
change in the ablation area in the two-way coupled experiment is much larger
than those provided by the two simplest methods, with an underestimation of
11.7 % (14 %) with parameterized feedbacks (no feedback).
In addition, we quantify that computing the GrIS contribution to sea-level
rise from SMB changes only over a fixed ice sheet mask leads to an
overestimation of ice loss of at least 6 % compared to the use of a time
variable ice sheet mask. Finally, our results suggest that ice-loss
estimations diverge when using the different coupling strategies, with
differences from the two-way method becoming significant at the end of the
21st century. In particular, even if averaged over the whole GrIS the
climatic and ice sheet fields are relatively similar; at the local and
regional scale there are important differences, highlighting the importance
of correctly representing the interactions when interested in basin scale
changes.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e180">The Arctic is the region of the Earth experiencing the largest increase in
temperature since the pre-industrial era <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx73" id="paren.1"/>, with
consequences already perceptible on the mass evolution of the Arctic ice caps
and the Greenland ice sheet <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx67" id="paren.2"/>. The evolution
of the Greenland ice sheet (GrIS) is governed by variations of ice dynamics
and surface mass balance (SMB), the latter being defined as the difference
between snow accumulation that is further transformed into ice, and the ablation
processes (i.e. surface melting and sublimation). While surface melting
strongly depends on the surface energy balance, snowfall is primarily
controlled by atmospheric conditions (wind, humidity content, cloudiness, etc.).
However, various feedbacks between the atmosphere and the GrIS impact the
surface characteristics such as ice extent and thickness. This has potential
consequences on ice dynamics (e.g. due to changes in surface slopes) and may
lead to SMB variations that can therefore affect the total ice mass. These
changes may in turn alter both local and global climate. As an example,
changes in near-surface temperature and surface energy balance may occur in
response to changes in orography (temperature–elevation feedback) or changes
in ice-covered area (planetary albedo feedback; see
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx47" id="altparen.3"/> and
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx77 bib1.bibx79" id="altparen.4"/>). On the other hand,
topography changes may alter the atmospheric circulation patterns
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx17 bib1.bibx59 bib1.bibx50" id="paren.5"/> causing changes in
heat and humidity transports.</p>
      <p id="d1e198">Quantifying the balance between these different processes and feedbacks that
regulate transient ice sheet change is required to understand and project
more confidently the evolution of the GrIS under current and future global
warming. Although numerous studies highlighted the importance of correctly
representing the interactions between the GrIS topography changes and the
atmosphere
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx35 bib1.bibx2 bib1.bibx18 bib1.bibx19 bib1.bibx79" id="paren.6"/>,
only a few global or regional models have taken the GrIS topography changes
into account to compute the future evolution of the SMB and energy budget
over the GrIS. For example, the CMIP5 climate models
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx75" id="paren.7"/> unanimously represent the ice sheet component
with a fixed and constant topography, even under a warm transient climate
forcing.</p>
      <p id="d1e207">To explore the importance of SMB–elevation feedbacks for the future GrIS
evolution, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx79" id="text.8"/> used a coarse-resolution
atmosphere–ocean general circulation model (AOGCM, ECHAM5.2) coupled to an
ice sheet model (ISM, SICOPOLIS3.0) forced under different representative concentration pathway (RCP) scenarios (up
to 2100) and their extensions (from 2100 to 2300). Compared to a control
experiment in which the ISM is forced off-line by the atmospheric model run
with the fixed present-day GrIS topography, they found an amplification of
ice mass loss of 8 %–11 % and 24 %–31 % in 2100 and 2300,
respectively, when the elevation feedbacks are taken into account (i.e. in
the coupled experiment). This results from the combination of the positive
elevation–SMB feedback in low-lying areas, the negative feedback related to
the elevation–desertification effect in accumulation areas, and the changes
of surface slopes resulting from high mass loss in ablation areas and a slight
snowfall increase in the accumulation zone, enhancing the ice transport from
the central regions to the ice margins. Their study is focused on the added
value of incorporating the coupled processes. However, as specified in
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx79" id="text.9"/>, their model is not able to accurately
reproduce the observed GrIS because (1) the ice sheet model, based on the
shallow-ice approximation <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx33" id="paren.10"/>, is not designed to
properly represent fast ice flows in the outlet glaciers and (2) the resolution
of the AGCM (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.75</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) and the ice sheet model (10 km) are too
coarse to correctly capture the steep slopes at the ice margins and the
atmospheric processes acting on the SMB calculation.</p>
      <p id="d1e237">Using the AGCM NCAR-CAM3 run at different spatial resolutions (T21 to T85)
and coupled to the SICOPOLIS ice sheet model,
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx46" id="text.11"/> investigated how the atmospheric model
resolution influenced the simulated ice sheets at the Last Glacial Maximum.
They found that the North American and the Eurasian ice sheets were properly
reproduced with the only T85 run. According to the authors, this is likely
due to the inability of the atmospheric model to properly capture the
temperature and precipitation fields (used to compute the SMB) at lower
horizontal resolutions, as a consequence of the poorly resolved planetary
waves and smooth topography. However, running high-resolution atmospheric
models at the global scale requires large computing resources. To circumvent
the low resolution, some authors have used the method of elevation classes
and<?pagebreak page375?> are therefore able to offer a high resolution in the direction of the slope
gradient <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx78" id="paren.12"><named-content content-type="pre">e.g.</named-content></xref>.</p>
      <p id="d1e249">An alternative solution consists in using regional climate models (RCMs) to
produce high-resolution atmospheric fields and much more robust energy
balance and SMB calculations. A number of RCMs have been developed for the
polar regions such as MAR <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx22" id="paren.13"/>, RACMO2
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx54" id="paren.14"/>, Polar MM5 <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx8" id="paren.15"/> or HIRHAM5
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx41" id="paren.16"/>. However, the highest resolution of the RCMs
is limited by the use of the hydrostatic approximation and often remains
below the resolution of Greenland ice sheet models, which are generally
running at a 5–10 km scale
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx11 bib1.bibx32 bib1.bibx63" id="paren.17"/> or even
below <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx27" id="paren.18"><named-content content-type="pre">e.g.</named-content></xref>. This means that SMB
fields must be corrected for resolution (and thus for elevation) differences
between the RCM and the ISM. With the aim of investigating the influence of
the MAR resolution on the computed SMB fields, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx24" id="text.19"/>
developed a method to downscale each SMB MAR component (snowfall, rainfall,
runoff, sublimation and evaporation) onto a finer grid as a function of
elevation changes. An alternative approach to correct the SMB field from
surface elevation changes is based on statistical relationships between
altitude and SMB <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx19" id="paren.20"/>. Also derived with
MAR, the approach of <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx19" id="text.21"/> computes a SMB–elevation
feedback gradient for regions below and above the equilibrium line altitude
in the northern and southern parts of GrIS, with limited additional computing
resources. However, in both parameterizations by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx24" id="text.22"/>
and <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx19" id="text.23"/>, the authors only consider a strict
linear relationship between topography and SMB changes. Although changes in
temperature can be derived from a linear vertical lapse rate, other processes
governing the SMB such as those related to energy balance, precipitation or
atmospheric circulation do not follow a linear relationship with the
altitude. While this approach may be valid at the local scale for small
elevation changes, it may lead to a misrepresentation of the SMB–elevation
feedbacks for substantial changes in altitude, especially at the ice sheet
margins.</p>
      <p id="d1e288">One of the first requirements to improve the representation of
atmosphere–GrIS feedbacks is to use a high-resolution atmospheric model
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx8 bib1.bibx41 bib1.bibx54 bib1.bibx22" id="paren.24"/>
to better represent the elevation gradients and therefore the steep
topography near the ice margins in the ablation zone. Additionally, the use
of a detailed snow model such as those implemented in MAR
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx22" id="paren.25"/> or RACMO2 <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx54" id="paren.26"/>
allows a more accurate description of the surface properties (e.g. snow
cover, albedo, surface melting) and therefore a better representation of the
surface energy balance and hence of surface mass balance. RCMs developed for
polar regions are also able to represent more atmospheric and land surface
processes occurring in these regions such as bare ice albedo
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx9" id="paren.27"/> and katabatic winds
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx20 bib1.bibx53" id="paren.28"/>, being also strongly
dependent on topography and thus on resolution.</p>
      <p id="d1e306">The second fundamental requirement to describe the interactions between
atmosphere and GrIS is to represent the ice sheet topography changes in the
atmospheric model by using an ISM (instead of the fixed geometry typically
used) to take into account the effects of ice dynamics on the ice sheet
topography changes. This can be achieved through a numerical coupling between
the RCM and the ISM. More than 20 ice sheet models exist
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx70 bib1.bibx11 bib1.bibx42 bib1.bibx25 bib1.bibx16 bib1.bibx57" id="paren.29"><named-content content-type="pre">e.g.</named-content></xref>
and are currently compared in the Ice Sheet Model Intercomparison Project
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx56 bib1.bibx31" id="paren.30"/>. They represent thermodynamical
and physical processes of the GrIS with different levels of complexities
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx27 bib1.bibx71" id="paren.31"/>. They all compute
the dynamical response of the GrIS to a given climate forcing such as the SMB
and the near surface temperature (ST) fields computed by RCMs (or global
models). However, as SMB and ST from the climate models do not take into
account the GrIS evolution, the climate forcing used by the ISM could be
flawed.</p>
      <p id="d1e320">In order to explicitly represent the feedbacks between the GrIS and the
atmosphere and to evaluate their impacts on the ice sheet evolution, we
coupled the polar regional climate model MAR
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx22" id="paren.32"/> to the GRISLI ice sheet model
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx70 bib1.bibx64" id="paren.33"/>. To assess the importance
of an explicit representation of the surface elevation and albedo feedbacks,
this coupled experiment is then compared to a one-way coupling experiment, in
which the GrIS–atmosphere interactions are not taken into account, and to a
third experiment where the effects of topography changes on the simulated SMB
are parameterized.</p>
      <p id="d1e329">A description of the atmospheric and the ice sheet models is given in
Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S2"/>. Section <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S3"/> describes the experimental
setup of the three coupling methods considered in this study. The results are
presented in Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S4"/>. We first describe the coupled
experiment in detail before comparing it to the other uncoupled experiments.
These sections are followed by a discussion related to the different coupling
approaches (Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S5"/>) and the conclusions of this study
(Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S6"/>).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <title>Models</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <title>The MAR atmospheric model</title>
      <?pagebreak page376?><p id="d1e353">MAR is a regional atmospheric model fully coupled with the land surface model
SISVAT (Soil Ice Snow Vegetation Atmosphere Transfer model; see
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx28" id="altparen.34"/>), which includes the detailed one-dimensional
snow model Crocus <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx10" id="paren.35"/>, which simulates fluxes of mass
and energy between snow layers and reproduces snow grain properties and their
effect on surface albedo. MAR has been developed to simulate the GrIS SMB and
has been extensively validated against in situ observations
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx22" id="paren.36"/>. In MAR, the SMB is computed as follows:
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E1" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M3" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SMB</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SF</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RF</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SU</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RU</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where SF, RF, SU and RU represent snowfall, rainfall, sublimation and runoff,
respectively. Note that RF contributes to the SMB since liquid precipitation
may percolate and refreeze at depth either in the snowpack or in the ice
column.</p>
      <p id="d1e394">The MAR has a horizontal resolution of 25 km <inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 25 km and 24
vertical levels to describe the atmospheric column in sigma-pressure
coordinates <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx29" id="paren.37"/>. The MAR domain covers the
Greenland region (6600 grid points), from 60 to 20<inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> W and from 58
to 81<inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N. SISVAT has 30 levels to represent the snowpack
(with a depth of at least 20 m over the permanent ice area) and 7 levels for
the soil in the tundra area.</p>
      <p id="d1e425">MAR uses the solar radiation scheme of <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx51" id="text.38"/>. The
representation of the atmospheric hydrological cycle (including a cloud
microphysical model) is based on <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx45" id="text.39"/> and
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx38" id="text.40"/>. To facilitate the coupling with an ice
sheet model that has a higher resolution than MAR, each grid cell is assumed
to be covered by at least 0.001 % of tundra and at least 0.001 % of
permanent ice. This makes possible the explicit computation of ice sheet SMB
outside the original ice-sheet mask. At each time step SISVAT computes the
albedo of each surface type as well as the characteristics of the snowpack
which are weighted and averaged as a function of the snow and vegetation
coverage in each grid point before being exchanged with MAR. The present work
uses MAR version 3.6. The differences with previous MAR versions
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx21" id="normal.41"><named-content content-type="pre">e.g.</named-content></xref> are only related to adjustments of
some parameters in the representation of cloudiness and bare ice albedo.
These new parameterizations allow to better account for the positive feedback
that cloud cover exerts on surface melting <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx76" id="paren.42"/> and to
represent the impact of melt ponds that strongly reduce surface albedo
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx1" id="paren.43"/></p>
      <p id="d1e448">At its lateral boundaries, MAR is forced with 6-hourly atmospheric fields
(temperature, humidity, wind and surface pressure) and surface oceanic
conditions (sea surface temperature and sea ice extent) provided either by
the reanalysis dataset (such as ERA-interim or NCEP) to reconstruct the recent
GrIS climate <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx22" id="paren.44"><named-content content-type="pre">1900–2015,</named-content></xref>, or by
general circulation models (GCMs) to perform future projections such as those
used for the last IPCC report <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx21" id="paren.45"><named-content content-type="pre">e.g.</named-content></xref>. As a
result, the atmospheric circulation simulated by MAR over the Greenland ice
sheet is strongly dependent on the quality of the climatic fields computed by
GCMs or reanalyses as an input to the model. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx21" id="text.46"/>
have shown that GCMs which satisfactorily simulate the present-day
free-atmosphere mean summer temperature at 700 hPa and the large-scale
circulation over Greenland at 500 hPa are best suited to force MAR. For the
present study, we therefore choose to force MAR with the MIROC5 model outputs
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx80" id="paren.47"/> because it has been shown to be the best GCM
choice from the CMIP5 database to reproduce the present-day climate compared
to the results of MAR forced by reanalyses <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx21" id="paren.48"/>.
The greenhouse gas forcing used in MAR (scenario RCP8.5) is the same as that
used in the MIROC5 simulation <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx80" id="paren.49"/>. Except for the
experiment presented later in this study in which MAR is coupled to an ice
sheet model, the topography of the GrIS and the surface types (ocean,
tundra and permanent ice) are taken from the <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx6" id="text.50"/> dataset
aggregated on the 25 km grid.</p>
      <p id="d1e478">Because the snowpack in the land model requires generally longer timescale
than MAR to reach an equilibrium with the atmospheric forcing, here MAR is
spinup for 6 years forced at its lateral boundaries by outputs from MIROC5
from 1970 until 1975 and by an initialized snowpack coming from a previous
MAR simulation carried out under present-day conditions (1960–1999).
However, in this paper, the MAR results will be analysed for the period
spanning from 2000 to 2150.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <title>The GRISLI ice sheet model</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2.SSS1">
  <title>Model description</title>
      <p id="d1e492">The GRISLI (GRenoble Ice Shelf and Land Ice) ice sheet model was first
developed to compute the dynamical evolution of the Antarctic ice sheet
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx70 bib1.bibx61 bib1.bibx3 bib1.bibx66" id="paren.51"/>.
It has then been successfully applied to the Northern Hemisphere ice sheets
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx60 bib1.bibx4 bib1.bibx13" id="paren.52"/>
and the Greenland ice sheet
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx64 bib1.bibx65" id="paren.53"/>. In the present work,
we use a 5 km resolution grid covering Greenland (301 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 561 grid
points) and 21 evenly spaced vertical levels in the ice and 4 levels in the
bedrock. The regular grid is projected on a polar stereographic grid with a
standard parallel at 71<inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N and a central meridian at 39<inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> W
(same as in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx6" id="altparen.54"/>). GRISLI is a 3-D
thermomechanically coupled ISM computing the temporal evolution of the ice
sheet, which is a function of surface mass balance, ice flow and basal
melting:
              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E2" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M10" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∂</mml:mo><mml:mi>H</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∂</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">∇</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mi>G</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SMB</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">melt</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
            where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is time, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:mi>H</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> the ice thickness, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mi>G</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> the vertically averaged
velocity, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">∇</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mi>G</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> the ice flux divergence, SMB the surface mass
balance and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">melt</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> the basal melting. Basal melting occurs when
the basal temperature is at the pressure melting point. The ice temperature
plays a crucial role in the dynamics of the ice sheet because it affects the
viscosity, and thus the ice flow in the entire ice column
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx69 bib1.bibx70" id="paren.55"/>. In turn, heat released by
internal ice deformation and basal dragging over the bedrock modifies the
temperature. The temperature field is computed by solving a time-dependent
heat equation both in the ice and in the bedrock, accounting for advection and
vertical diffusion processes. At<?pagebreak page377?> the surface, the boundary condition is
provided by the prescribed surface temperature. At the base of the ice sheet,
the boundary condition is given either by the geothermal heat flux or by the
temperature melting point at the ice-bed interface.</p>
      <p id="d1e643">The ice flow is computed using both the shallow ice
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx33" id="paren.56"/> and shallow shelf
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx48" id="paren.57"/> approximations to solve the Stokes equations
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx70" id="paren.58"/>. The shallow ice approximation (SIA) assumes that
ice flow is caused only by vertical shear stress, neglecting the longitudinal
stresses. This assumption is only valid for slow-flowing ice. For fast-flowing regions, vertical shearing becomes smaller than longitudinal shearing
and the shallow-shelf approximation (SSA), which neglects the vertical
stresses, is used. The ice thickness and the ice sheet surface slopes control
the SIA and the SSA velocity components, but the SSA is also governed by
basal dragging. Using a hybrid model (i.e. based on both SIA and SSA
approximations) allows for better representation of the different deformation regimes
found in an ice sheet. In GRISLI, the SSA velocity is used as a sliding
velocity <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx11" id="paren.59"/> when the basal temperature is at the
pressure melting point. In this case, we assume here a power-law basal
friction <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx81" id="paren.60"/> and the presence of sediments allowing
for viscous deformation. The relationship between the basal shear stress
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and the basal velocity (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) is expressed as follows:
              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E3" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M18" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mi>b</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
            where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is a time constant but spatially variable basal drag
coefficient. For cold base conditions, the sliding velocity is set to zero.</p>
      <p id="d1e717">The resulting velocity for every model grid point is the addition of the SIA
and SSA components. For floating ice points (ice shelves), we assume no basal
drag. In addition, if the ice thickness of the floating ice shelves is below
250 m and if no neighbouring points are grounded, the point is removed and
the corresponding ice mass loss is considered a calving flux.
Determination of the grounding line position is based on a floatation
criterion.</p>
      <p id="d1e720">The isostatic adjustment in response to ice loading changes is governed by
the relaxation of the asthenosphere with a characteristic time constant of
3000 years and by the deformation of an elastic lithosphere
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx44" id="paren.61"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e727">The climatic forcing is given by the mean annual SMB and the mean annual ST.
Because seasonal variations of surface temperature are rapidly dampened, ST
is considered as a good approximation of the bottom snowpack temperature. The
initial GrIS surface and bedrock topographies come from
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx6" id="text.62"/> and the geothermal heat flux is taken from
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx23" id="text.63"/>.</p><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2.SSS2">
  <title>Initialization procedure</title>
      <p id="d1e743">Due to the long timescale response of the ice sheet to a given climate
forcing, a proper initialization of the model is required before performing
forward experiments. For future sea-level projections, the aim of the
initialization is to start the simulations from a present-day equilibrated
ice sheet geometry as close as possible to the observed one while ensuring
consistency between internal properties of the ice sheet (e.g. basal sliding
velocities and vertical profile of temperature) with the climate forcing.
Here we use an inverse method of the basal sliding velocities in order to
reduce the mismatch between the simulated GRISLI ice thickness and the
observed one <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx6" id="paren.64"/>. The method is fully described in
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx43" id="text.65"/>. Below we only remind the reader of the basic principles of our
approach.</p>
      <p id="d1e752">The procedure starts from initial conditions (i.e. vertical temperature and
velocity profiles, first guess of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> coefficient) coming from previous
GRISLI simulations carried out within the framework of the Ice2Sea project
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx18" id="paren.66"/> and from the present-day observed topography
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx6" id="paren.67"/>. The SMB and ST climatological means computed by
MAR-MIROC5 <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx21" id="paren.68"/> are used as climate forcing.</p>
      <p id="d1e771">Our initialization procedure is based on an iterative process divided into two
main steps.
<list list-type="order"><list-item>
      <p id="d1e776">The first step consists in the iterative adjustment of the
spatially varying basal drag coefficient related to sliding velocities
through Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E3"/>). At each model time step, the ratio of modelled
to observed ice thickness (i.e. the data–model mismatch) is used to adjust
the sliding velocities via the basal drag coefficient, while the shearing
velocities (SIA velocities) remain unchanged. This adjustment is typically
performed for short time periods (a few decades).</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e782">After this adjustment phase, the model is left to freely evolve (second
step) for anywhere from a few decades to a few centuries with the last inferred basal drag
coefficient.</p></list-item></list></p>
      <p id="d1e785">At the end of this second step, we obtain a new GrIS topography and, thus, a
new data–model mismatch, which is used to start a new cycle in which the
first and the second steps are repeated. This new cycle starts with exactly
the same initial and boundary conditions as those used for the first cycle,
except for the basal drag coefficient and the data–model ice thickness
mismatch, which are inferred from the values computed at the previous cycle.
The overall process is stopped when the ice thickness root mean square error
is not significantly improved from one cycle to the other. This ensures a
good compromise between the reduction of the mismatch between observed and
simulated ice thickness and the rapidity of the convergence of the
initialization procedure. In the present paper, the best fit with
observations (RMSE <inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 63 m)<?pagebreak page378?> is obtained for a first step duration of 20
years, a duration of 200 years for the relaxation GRISLI simulation (second
step) and eight iterative cycles.</p>
      <p id="d1e796">This method is based on the same basic principles as that of
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx62" id="text.69"/> except that their basal drag coefficient is
adjusted as a function of the difference between modelled and observed ice
surface elevation while we use the ice thickness ratio instead. Moreover,
while the method suggested by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx62" id="text.70"/> requires long
(multi-millennial) integrations for the method to converge, we use an
iterative method of short (decadal to centennial) integrations starting from
the observed ice thickness allowing a more rapid convergence.</p>
      <p id="d1e805">To further reduce the model drift in terms of ice volume and before starting
the forward GRISLI experiments, a 2000-year GRISLI relaxation run is
performed as a continuation of the second step of the last iteration (i.e.
after the end of the eighth cycle). As such, the value of the basal drag
coefficient is that obtained at the end of the first step of the eighth cycle.
Over the last 150 years of this free-evolving simulation, the model drift is
only <inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mm yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> sea-level equivalent. At the end of this
2000-year simulation, the simulated GrIS topography is slightly different
from the observations (RMSE <inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 132 m; see Fig. S1). It will be referred
to hereafter as <inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ctrl</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and will be used as initial topography for
the transient GRISLI simulations described in the following.</p>
      <p id="d1e854">For all the simulations presented in this study, including those carried out
within the iterative initialization framework, we apply a strong negative SMB
value outside the observed ice sheet extent <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx6" id="paren.71"/>. This
avoids ice growth where there is none in reality and allows correction for
both the potential atmospheric model biases (e.g. positive SMB values over
tundra areas) and the initialization procedure biases (i.e. too strong ice
export towards the margins). However, for GrIS projections run the RCP8.5
forcing scenario, this condition has only a limited impact on GrIS
contribution to sea-level rise since the ice extent will likely to keep on
retreating over the next few centuries.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <title>Coupling methods</title>
      <p id="d1e868">The aim of this study is to assess to what extent accounting for the
atmosphere–GrIS interactions influences the GrIS evolution in terms of
changes in SMB, ST, ice thickness and sea-level rise. To achieve this goal, we designed
three experiments based on coupling methods of different complexities to
account for the interactions between MAR and GRISLI. For all the experiments
described below, the climatic forcing is designed as follows: MAR is forced
at its lateral boundaries by transient MIROC5 atmospheric fields from the
CMIP5 historical run (1970–2005) and RCP8.5 scenario (2006–2100). In order
to extend the MAR simulation until 2150 and in the absence of a MIROC5
simulation performed under a prolonged RCP8.5 scenario (i.e. after 2100), MAR
is forced from 2101 to 2150 with the 2095 MIROC5 climate. We chose the
year 2095 because, averaged over the entire GrIS, the 2095 mean climate is
one of the closest to the decadal 2090–2100 one. This implies that both
climate changes and large-scale inter-annual variability are neglected beyond
2100.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <title>The no feedback experiment</title>
      <p id="d1e876">The first experiment (referred hereafter to as NF) is based on a one-way coupling
approach in which GRISLI is forced by the climatic outputs (SMB and ST)
obtained from the MAR simulation spanning from 2000 to 2150. The aim of this
experiment is to examine the ice sheet response to the climatic forcing
without accounting for the feedbacks related to GrIS changes. This means
that, while the ice sheet mask and topography evolve freely in the ISM, MAR
is run throughout the simulation on a fixed observed ice sheet geometry and
does not see any changes in the ice sheet mask. Using an inverse distance
weighting method, the SMB and the ST are first interpolated on the GRISLI
grid to account for the difference of resolution between both models (25 km
vs. 5 km). To account for the differences in surface elevations between the
25 and 5 km <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx6" id="text.72"/> topographies, we also apply a vertical
correction following <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx24" id="text.73"/>, who derived a local vertical
gradient for the SMB as a function of altitude. Thus, this method allows for
the generation of a 5 km resolution SMB entirely adapted to the finer-scale features
of the 5 km <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx6" id="text.74"/> topography. While this procedure can be
followed at the daily timescale <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx55" id="paren.75"/>, in the present
study, the vertical gradients are averaged at the annual timescale and used
as corrective factors to downscale the SMB and ST fields onto the 5 km grid
at the end of each model year. Note that while the topography and the ice
sheet mask evolve freely in the ISM, MAR uses a fixed ice mask deduced from
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx6" id="text.76"/> in the NF experiment.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <title>The parameterized feedback experiment</title>
      <?pagebreak page379?><p id="d1e900">In the second experiment (referred to as PF in the following), the SMB and ST
fields simulated by MAR are corrected each year following the method of
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx24" id="text.77"/> to account for the evolution of the simulated
GRISLI topography. This correction is made from 2020 onwards, as changes in
SMB through 2006–2020 do not produce any significant topography changes in
GRISLI. The new corrected SMB and ST values are computed at the altitude
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> defined on the 5 km grid as follows:
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E4" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M27" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Bamber</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">GRISLI</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Bamber</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the present-day observed topography defined on
the 5 km GRISLI grid and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">GRISLI</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> the difference
between the altitude simulated by GRISLI at time <inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ctrl</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.
Due to the topography differences between MAR and GRISLI, this approach has
been chosen to avoid large inconsistencies between the SMB and ST fields
computed by MAR and the ones corrected to account for the GRISLI topography.</p>
      <p id="d1e1010">This method offers the possibility to account artificially for the elevation
feedbacks when using existing RCM simulations in which the topography and the
ice sheet mask are kept constant. As such, it is also transferable to any ice
sheet model. However, as in the NF experiment, the changes in GrIS geometry
have no consequence on the climate as simulated by the atmospheric model.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3">
  <title>The two-way coupling experiment</title>
      <p id="d1e1019">The third method (2W in the following) is based on a two-way coupling
strategy between MAR and GRISLI. Both models used the same boundary and
initial conditions as those of the NF and PF experiments. At the end of a MAR
model year, MAR is paused and GRISLI is forced by the downscaled SMB and ST
fields with the method of <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx24" id="text.78"/> as in PF
(Eq. <xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E4"/>). Then, GRISLI computes a new 5 km GrIS topography and
a new ice extent at a 5 km resolution. This new GrIS topography is then
aggregated (i.e. geographically averaged) at the yearly timescale onto the
25 km MAR grid. The number of ice covered GRISLI grid points within a MAR
grid cell relative to the number of ice-free GRISLI grid points is used to
compute the new ice extent in MAR and to update the fraction of tundra
relative to the ice- or snow-covered surface type for the subsequent MAR run. To
account for the differences between MAR and GRISLI topographies, the surface
elevation which is aggregated onto MAR is computed from GRISLI surface
elevation anomalies added to the present-day observed topography
(Eq. <xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E4"/>). It is then used as the updated surface elevation. As
previously mentioned, topography changes are negligible before 2020. Hence,
changes in ice sheet geometry are fed to MAR only after this date. Compared
to the NF and PF approaches, this two-way coupled method is the most accurate
to represent the GrIS–atmosphere feedbacks.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4">
  <title>Results</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1">
  <title>The Greenland ice sheet evolution in the 2W experiment</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1.SSS1">
  <title>Changes in the forcing climate</title>
      <p id="d1e1046">The evolution of the SMB and of its different components simulated in the
2W experiment (Eq. <xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E1"/>) and integrated over the entire GrIS
is displayed in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F1"/>. During the 2000–2040 period, the averaged
SMB remains positive with a mean value equal to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">280</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">95</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> Gt yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
(where the notation <inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> represents the standard deviation computed from
yearly values) but slightly decreases by 4 Gt yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. This decrease
becomes substantially stronger from 2040–2100 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>17 Gt yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> on
average), and the mean SMB reaches strong negative values (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">638</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">271</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> Gt yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> over the 2090–2100 period). As the same MIROC5 year 2095
is repeatedly used to force MAR after 2100, there is no longer inter-annual
variability and the integrated SMB remains quite stable between 2100 and 2150
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">812</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">13</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> Gt yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>). Indeed, MAR generates its own surface
boundary layer fields which are not impacted by the MIROC5 forcing,
explaining a slight SMB increase of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> Gt yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> over the last 50
years. Throughout the simulation, the evolution of the SMB signal is
dominated by surface runoff whose increase rate (in absolute value) ranges
from 5 Gt yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (2000–2040) to 19 Gt yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (2040–2100). After
2100, it slightly decreases (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> Gt yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>), explaining the slight
SMB increase.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e1240">Evolution of the SMB (black line) and its components from 2005 to
2150 (in m Gt yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) simulated by MAR in the 2W experiment and
integrated over the ice sheet mask taken from <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx6" id="text.79"/>. The
SMB components are snowfall (SF, red line), rainfall (RF, orange line),
sublimation (-SU, light blue line) and runoff (-RU, dark blue line). Dashed
lines correspond to regression lines ranging from 2000 to 2039 and from 2041
to 2099. The solid grey line corresponds to the zero line.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://tc.copernicus.org/articles/13/373/2019/tc-13-373-2019-f01.png"/>

          </fig>

      <p id="d1e1264">The SMB anomaly between the beginning and the end of the 2W experiment is
displayed in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F2"/>a. A total of 65 % of the grid points having surface
elevations higher than 2000 m are characterized by a positive SMB anomaly,
ranging from 0.07 m yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (5th percentile) to 0.2 m yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (95th
percentile) at the end of the simulation. This SMB increase is particularly
pronounced in the eastern part of the GrIS between 67 and 70<inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N and
in the northern-central part. It is due to a strong increase in snowfall (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F2"/>b), which occurs mainly during the winter
season in the east and during autumn in the north (Fig. S2). On the other
hand, 87 % of the GrIS grid points with surface elevation lower than
2000 m are dominated by an increase in surface runoff (Figs. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F2"/>c,
S3 in the Supplement) and by an increase in the fraction of rainfall over
snowfall in summer and in autumn (Fig. S4). As a result, strong negative SMB
anomalies are found in these regions ranging from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (5th
percentile) to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.1 m yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (95th percentile) and reaching more than
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> along the western and the southeastern margins
(Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F2"/>a).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e1398">Anomalies of <bold>(a)</bold> mean annual surface mass balance in
m yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, <bold>(b)</bold> annual snowfall in m yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, <bold>(c)</bold> annual
runoff in m yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and <bold>(d)</bold> mean annual surface temperature (in
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C). These anomalies are given between the last (2140–2150) and the
first (2000–2010) decade of the 2W experiment. Panels <bold>(a)</bold> and
<bold>(d)</bold> are computed on the GRISLI grid and <bold>(b)</bold> and
<bold>(c)</bold> are given on the MAR grid. The dashed lines correspond to the
500 m surface elevation iso-contours for the present-day observed
topography. The grey shading represents the non-ice-covered areas. Note for
<bold>(a)</bold>, <bold>(b)</bold> and <bold>(c)</bold> that the colour scale is not
symmetrical for positive and negative values.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=483.69685pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://tc.copernicus.org/articles/13/373/2019/tc-13-373-2019-f02.jpg"/>

          </fig>

      <p id="d1e1487">The equilibrium line altitude (ELA, i.e. altitude for which SMB <inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0)
increases significantly between the beginning and the end of the 2W
experiment, as a consequence of increased runoff for areas below 2000 m. As
an example, at around 73.5<inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, on the eastern side of the ice sheet,
the ELA moves from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>  to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2500</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/>). In
other regions, at the end of the 2W experiment, the ELA is generally
situated between 1500 and 2000 m high, except in the northern part where it
is between 1000 and 1500 m. This shift of ELA towards higher altitudes
represents an increase of 24 % of the ablation area between the beginning
and the end of the experiment.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3"><caption><p id="d1e1530">GrIS surface elevation in 2150 simulated in the 2W experiment (in
m). The solid black and purple lines represent the equilibrium line altitudes
(ELA, limit between the accumulation and the ablation zones) in the
2000–2010 and 2090–2100 mean periods, respectively, for the NF, PF and 2W
experiments. The yellow, red and orange solid lines indicate the ELA position
over 2140–2150 for the NF, PF and 2W experiments, respectively. The dashed
lines correspond to the 500 m surface elevation iso-contours for the
present-day observed topography. The grey shading represents the non
ice-covered areas.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=227.622047pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://tc.copernicus.org/articles/13/373/2019/tc-13-373-2019-f03.jpg"/>

          </fig>

      <?pagebreak page380?><p id="d1e1539">The ST anomaly (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F2"/>d) ranges from 2.2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C (5th
percentile) to 6.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C (95th percentile) and is characterized by a
south–north gradient with the highest values found in the northern part.
Beyond 78<inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N the ST anomaly locally reaches values greater than
11 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C. This temperature increase from 2000 to 2150 contributes to
the amplification of the ablation processes below the ELA. However, while the
stronger temperature anomaly is found in the northeastern part of the ice
sheet, this region is also marked by the increasing snowfall in 2150 compared
to 2000 (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F2"/>b), which counteracts the ablation processes.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4"><caption><p id="d1e1585">Ice thickness anomaly (2150–2000) simulated in the 2W experiment
(in m). The dashed lines correspond to the 500 m surface elevation
iso-contours for the present-day observed topography. The grey shading
represents the non-ice-covered areas. A non-linear colour scale is used for
positive values.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=213.395669pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://tc.copernicus.org/articles/13/373/2019/tc-13-373-2019-f04.jpg"/>

          </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1.SSS2">
  <title>Changes in Greenland ice sheet geometry</title>
      <p id="d1e1600">Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/> displays the ice thickness anomaly between the beginning
and the end of the 2W experiment. For surface<?pagebreak page381?> elevations higher than
2000 m in the northern part, and higher than 2500 m in the central and
southern parts of the ice sheet, the ice thickness increases by 5 m on
average, with the increase ranging from 1.5 m (5th percentile) to 17 m
(95th percentile). On the other hand, in regions whose surface elevation is
lower than 2000 m, the ice thickness decreases from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>248 m (5th
percentile) to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>3 m (95th percentile) with a mean value equal to
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>100 m. As a result of these GrIS ice thickness changes, the surface slope
between the central part of the ice sheet and the margins increases. On top
of that, the ice sheet mask (defined as the fraction of a MAR grid cell with
permanent ice cover, e.g. Fig. S5a) decreases by <inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.8</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %
(mean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> standard deviation computed from yearly values) over the
2140–2150 mean period compared to the 2000–2010 mean period, and some GrIS
margin regions become ice-free.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e1648">Cumulated SMB <bold>(a)</bold> and ice flux divergence <bold>(b)</bold>
throughout the entire 2W experiment (from 2000 to 2150) given in metres and
computed on the GRISLI grid. The dashed lines correspond to the 500 m
surface elevation iso-contours for the present-day observed topography. The
grey shading represents the non-ice-covered areas. A non-linear colour scale is
used for positive values.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://tc.copernicus.org/articles/13/373/2019/tc-13-373-2019-f05.jpg"/>

          </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1.SSS3">
  <title>Impact of ice flow changes</title>
      <?pagebreak page382?><p id="d1e1669">The ice thickness anomaly is due to the complex combination of changes in
surface atmospheric conditions (SMB, Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F5"/>a), ice flow (ice flux
divergence, Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F5"/>b) and basal melting (not shown), following the
continuity equation (Eq. <xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E2"/>). To quantify the role of ice flow
on the GrIS geometry (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/>), we plotted the ice flux divergence
integrated over 150 years (2000–2150; see Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F5"/>b). In particular,
over the central plateau, the cumulated SMB (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F5"/>a) reaches about
50 m, 40 m of which is transported away by the ice flow
(Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F5"/>b). As a result, the ice thickness anomaly is reduced to
only <inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m in this region (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/>). An opposite behaviour is
found near the western coast, where the runoff is partly compensated by ice
convergence, resulting in a less negative ice thickness anomaly than that
related to the SMB forcing. This shows that ice flow acts to counteract ice
loss from surface melting, as previously noticed by several authors
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx34 bib1.bibx30 bib1.bibx18" id="paren.80"/>.
As a consequence, it appears to be essential to account for ice dynamics to
accurately estimate the mass balance of the whole ice sheet.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F6" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e1704"><bold>(a)</bold> Mean surface velocity anomaly (in m yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) between
the 2140–2150 and the 2000–2010 mean periods for the 2W experiment.
<bold>(b)</bold> Mean surface velocity difference between the NF and the 2W
experiments for the 2140–2150 mean period. <bold>(c)</bold> Same as <bold>(b)</bold>
for the PF and 2W experiments. These differences are computed on the GRISLI
grid. The dashed lines correspond to the 500 m surface elevation
iso-contours for the present-day observed topography. The grey shading
represents the non-ice-covered areas. A non-linear colour scale is used for
both positive and negative values.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=426.791339pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://tc.copernicus.org/articles/13/373/2019/tc-13-373-2019-f06.png"/>

          </fig>

      <p id="d1e1736">In turn ice flow is impacted by changes in ice sheet geometry as illustrated
by the mean surface velocity anomaly (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F6"/>a). For regions with
surface altitudes between 2000 and 2500 m, the anomaly of the ice flow
increases from the inner GrIS areas towards the edges of the ice sheet. The
increase in the mean ice flow for the 2140–2150 period compared to
2000–2010 period ranges from 0.08 m yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (5th percentile) to
17 m yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (95th percentile). These faster ice velocities at the end of
the 2W experiment are mainly explained by a larger surface slope between
the central and the margin regions of the ice sheet. This is consistent with
information inferred from ice flux divergence as shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F5"/>b.</p>
      <p id="d1e1767">On the contrary, for the margin regions with altitudes lower than 1500 m,
the anomalies of surface ice velocities strongly decrease
(Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F6"/>a). Compared to the 2000–2010 period, this decrease ranges
from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>213 m yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (5th percentile) to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.2 m yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M84" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (95th
percentile), and agrees with the decrease in ice thickness
(Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/>).</p>
      <p id="d1e1814">The changes in local ice flow between the first and the last 10 years of the
2W experiment are also related to changes in surface slope and ice
thickness, particularly at the margins. To investigate the ice flow changes
at the local scale, we used the examples of the Jakobshavn (western coast)
and the Kangerlussuaq (eastern coast) glaciers, for which the fine-scale
structures of the ice velocity, obtained after the GRISLI initialization
procedure, are relatively well reproduced compared to the observations
(Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F7"/>a–b).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F7" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e1821">Regional zoom over the Jakobshavn (left panels) and the
Kangerlussuaq (right panels) glaciers for the 2W experiment. Panels <bold>(a)</bold>
and <bold>(b)</bold> are the observed velocities (in m yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M85" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) from
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx37" id="text.81"/>. Panels <bold>(c)</bold> and <bold>(d)</bold> are the simulated velocity (in
m yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M86" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) after the initialization procedure. Panels <bold>(e)</bold> to
<bold>(j)</bold> represent the velocity anomalies (in m yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M87" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) between the
2140–2150 and the 2000–2010 mean periods of the 2W experiment for the
vertically averaged surface velocity (<bold>e</bold> and <bold>f</bold>), the SIA
velocity component (<bold>g</bold> and <bold>h</bold>) and the SSA velocity component
(<bold>i</bold> and <bold>j</bold>). Note that a logarithmic scale is used for the
velocity anomalies. The dashed lines correspond to the 500 m surface
elevation iso-contours for the present-day observed topography. The grey
shading represents the non-ice-covered areas and the blue shading is the ocean
mask.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://tc.copernicus.org/articles/13/373/2019/tc-13-373-2019-f07.png"/>

          </fig>

      <?pagebreak page383?><p id="d1e1907">For the Jakobshavn glacier, the ice sheet areas located above 1500 m are
mainly characterized by an increase of more than 15 m yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M88" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (i.e.
10 %) of the vertically averaged velocity as a result of increasing
surface slopes (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F7"/>c). Conversely, areas below 1000 m are
dominated by a slow-down of the ice flow of more than 200 m yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (i.e.
29 %) due to the decreasing ice thickness (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F7"/>e). For
altitudes above 500 m, the vertically averaged velocity is mainly driven by
the SIA velocity (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F7"/>e–g). On the contrary, below 500 m, basal
sliding velocities are large due to low basal drag coefficient (see Fig. 3 in
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx43" id="altparen.82"/>) and the SSA velocity component dominates the
ice flow (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F7"/>e–i). However, while basal drag is lower in
locations below 500 m, the ice flow is limited by the strongly reduced ice
thickness (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/>).</p>
      <p id="d1e1948">The Kangerlussuaq glacier is located in regions where the bedrock is
characterized by a succession of valleys surrounded by mountains merging in a
canyon where the deepest part is located 100 km away from the coast
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx52" id="paren.83"/>. The ice flow of the Kangerlussuaq is
therefore divided in different branches with increasing ice velocities
towards the ice sheet margin and becoming even larger when merging in the
canyon (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F7"/>d). As for the Jakobshavn glacier, the ice flow
accelerates at the end of the 2W experiment as a consequence of the
increase in surface slope for high altitudes (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>–2500 m; see
Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/>). Conversely, a strong decrease of the ice flow is found in
most of margin regions (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F7"/>f) directly related to the ice
thinning (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/>). Contrary to the case of the Jakobshavn glacier
that presents large basal sliding velocities only below 500 m, the
Kangerlussuaq shows low basal drag coefficients in the entire glacier (see
Fig. 3 in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx43" id="altparen.84"/>) and thus the ice flow is mainly
governed by the SSA component (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F7"/>j).</p>
      <p id="d1e1978">These results are in line with <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx58" id="text.85"/>, who also found a
decreasing ice flux at the end of the 21st century
(w.r.t 1970) in downstream
regions of the Jakobshavn and Kangerlussuaq glaciers as a consequence of ice
sheet thinning at the margins.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS2">
  <title>Differences between the NF and the 2W experiments</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS2.SSS1">
  <title>Impact on SMB and ST</title>
      <?pagebreak page384?><p id="d1e1996">To assess the importance of the atmosphere–GrIS feedbacks, we now compare the
NF and the 2W experiments. The main SMB differences between both
experiments, averaged over the 2140–2150 period, highlight higher SMB values
in NF compared to 2W for altitudes below 2000 m, with the exception of
some margin locations in the eastern part (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F8"/>a). This SMB
difference is driven by a snowfall increase in low-altitude areas (Fig. S6)
and by the runoff decrease in NF with respect to 2W (Fig. S7). This
decreased runoff results from colder temperatures over the whole GrIS (up to
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C in the western and northern parts, Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F8"/>b),
except in the regions at the very edge of the GrIS, which sees a significant
warming (up to 8 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M93" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C, Fig. 8b) despite an increase in ice thickness
(w.r.t 2W). The cooling can be explained by the absence of the
temperature–altitude feedback in the NF experiment. Indeed, taking this
feedback into account in 2W, results in lower altitudes as the ice
thickness decreases (Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S4.SS1.SSS2"/> and Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/>) and
therefore in warmer 2W temperatures compared to NF. The warming simulated
in NF (w.r.t 2W) over the very edge of the ice sheet can be explained by
changes in atmospheric circulation.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F8" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e2035">Mean differences (NF–2W) for the 2140–2150 mean period
<bold>(a)</bold> annual surface mass balance (in m yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>), <bold>(b)</bold>
annual surface temperature (in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M95" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C), <bold>(c)</bold> ice thickness (in m)
in 2150 between NF and 2W. Note that these differences are computed on the
GRISLI grid. The dashed lines correspond to the 500 m surface elevation
iso-contours of the present-day observed topography. The grey shading
represents the non-ice-covered areas.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=483.69685pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://tc.copernicus.org/articles/13/373/2019/tc-13-373-2019-f08.png"/>

          </fig>

      <p id="d1e2074">Indeed, unlike 2W, NF allows for an explicit computation of changes in ice
sheet surface slopes due to increased melting at the margin. This has
important consequences on the atmospheric circulation and in particular on
the katabatic winds (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F9"/>). Over the ice sheet, the surface
slopes simulated in NF in 2150 are less steep compared to those simulated in
2W (discussed in Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S4.SS1.SSS2"/>) lead to a slight increase in
katabatic winds (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F9"/>). However, at the ice sheet<?pagebreak page385?> margin, i.e.
where the ice mask in MAR is below 100 %, there is a substantial decrease
in surface winds. This stems from the fact that the changes in surface
elevation seen by the atmospheric model are computed from the aggregated
changes in GRISLI at 5 km. As such, a non-zero fraction of tundra, which
presents no change in surface elevation, results in smaller elevation changes
compared to grid cells with permanent ice cover only. This induces in 2W
lower surface slopes at the margin with respect to the interior and thus
weakened surface winds in these regions. Altogether, the slightly stronger
katabatic winds over the ice sheet and their weakening at the margin lead to
a cold air convergence towards the ice sheet edge, absent in NF
(Figs. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F8"/>b, <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F9"/> and S8–S9). Another consequence of the
stronger katabatic winds in 2W (w.r.t NF) due to increased surface slopes
in the GrIS interior is to enhance the atmospheric exchanges along the slope
of the ice sheet. The area with lower atmospheric pressure generated by the
stronger katabatic winds is filled in by the warmer air coming from higher
atmospheric levels in the boundary layer. The warming of the upper part of
the boundary layer in 2W combined with the lower surface elevation
explains the ST increases in the interior of the GrIS.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F9"><caption><p id="d1e2090">Surface wind speed difference (shaded) between the NF and the 2W
experiments for the 2140–2150 mean period. Black arrows represent the wind
direction in the 2140–2150 mean period of the 2W experiment. The length of
the arrows indicates the magnitude of wind speed. The grey shaded area stands
for the extent of the region for which the permanent ice fraction is
100 % (no tundra). Red solid line indicate the ice sheet extent. The
dashed black lines correspond to the 500 m surface elevation iso-contours.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://tc.copernicus.org/articles/13/373/2019/tc-13-373-2019-f09.png"/>

          </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS2.SSS2">
  <title>Impact on ice thickness and ice dynamics</title>
      <p id="d1e2105">The most important ice thickness difference between the last decade of the
NF and the 2W experiments is a higher ice thickness in NF compared to 2W.
As mentioned in the previous section, this is mainly explained by the
positive SMB–elevation feedback in 2W that results in increased surface
temperatures compared to NF, and thus increased runoff, when surface
elevation decreases. Areas with this type of behaviour cover most of the
Greenland ice sheet slopes and reach the interior of the ice sheet from the
western or the northeastern margins. The largest changes occur over the
western edge of the GrIS, where the thickening between NF and 2W reaches
more than 50 m (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F8"/>c). The ice thickness difference pattern is
essentially mimicking the SMB differences between NF and 2W
(Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F8"/>a), suggesting that the two-way coupling induces only a
relatively limited change in ice flow, as shown by the ice flux divergence
anomaly (Fig. S10), although the surface velocities (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F6"/>b) are
slightly higher in NF due to higher ice thickness (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F8"/>c).</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS3">
  <title>The PF experiment</title>
      <p id="d1e2123">As previously described (see Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S3.SS2"/>), the PF experiment
is based on a parameterization of the surface elevation feedbacks. In this
section, we present the differences PF–2W in SMB, ST and ice thickness
averaged over the 2140–2150 period (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F10"/>), so as to examine the
efficiency of this parameterization. The first key feature is that the
PF–2W SMB difference (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F10"/>a) is less positive than the NF–2W
one (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F8"/>a). This results from the fact that the decreasing
altitude is taken into account in PF through the altitude feedback
parameterization, leading to smaller differences with the 2W<?pagebreak page386?> experiment.
In most margin areas, the SMB simulated in PF has even become lower compared
to 2W due to a much complex representation of the ice sheet climate
interactions. Indeed, as mentioned in Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S4.SS2.SSS1"/>, in the
2W experiment the GRISLI topography feedbacks onto the MAR simulated
climate lead to a cold air convergence at the ice sheet margins, and thus to
a higher simulated SMB. Cumulated over the entire GrIS, the PF–2W SMB
difference is 28 Gt yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M96" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (149 Gt yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for NF–2W). In the same
way, the PF–2W differences in ST and ice thickness (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F10"/>b–c)
are also less pronounced than the NF–2W differences (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F8"/>b–c),
highlighting the importance of the elevation feedbacks. These results show
that over <inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">150</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> years the topography correction used in PF makes it
possible to obtain  simulated fields from an uncoupled experiment close to
those of the 2W coupled experiment.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F10" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e2177">Mean differences (PF–2W) for the 2140—2150 mean period
<bold>(a)</bold> annual surface mass balance (in m yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M99" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>), <bold>(b)</bold> annual surface temperature (in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C) and <bold>(c)</bold> ice thickness (in m)
in 2150 between PF and 2W. Note that these differences are computed on the
GRISLI grid. The dashed lines correspond to the 500 m surface elevation
iso-contours of the present-day observed topography. The grey shading
represents the non-ice-covered areas.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=483.69685pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://tc.copernicus.org/articles/13/373/2019/tc-13-373-2019-f10.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e2216">To illustrate the spatial variability of the ice thickness response to the
different coupling methods, we plotted the ice thickness differences between
NF and 2W (red dots, Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F11"/>a), NF and PF (green dots,
Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F11"/>a) and PF and 2W (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F11"/>b) as a function of the
ice sheet altitude. The NF–PF ice thickness differences are mostly positive,
while the NF–2W (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F11"/>a) and PF–2W (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F11"/>b)
differences yield both positive and negative values, while the NF–PF
differences are positive, illustrating the stronger variability in the 2W
experiment. For both the 2W and PF experiments, the regions at low to
medium elevations are the most sensitive to the coupling approach with the
stronger spatial variability of the ice thickness found for altitudes below
1000 m. For example, the NF–2W ice thickness difference ranges between
31.9 m (5th percentile) and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M101" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>6.5 m (95th percentile), and between 27.8 m
(5th percentile) and 0 m (95th percentile) for the NF–PF case. Overall, the
ice thickness differences decrease with increasing altitudes
(Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F11"/>a) and increase with time (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F11"/>b).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F11" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e2244">Ice thickness difference (m) as a function of the GrIS surface
elevation (m) for the three coupling experiments. In <bold>(a)</bold> the red and
green dots represent the NF–2W and the NF–PF differences in 2150;
<bold>(b)</bold> ice thickness difference (PF–2W) in the 2050 (purple dots), 2100
(light blue dots) and 2150 (orange dots) mean periods.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://tc.copernicus.org/articles/13/373/2019/tc-13-373-2019-f11.jpg"/>

        </fig>

<table-wrap id="Ch1.T1" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e2261">Greenland ice sheet contribution (in cm) computed from ice thickness
variations simulated with the 2W, NF and PF experiments in 2050, 2100 and
2150, relative to 2000 (first three lines) and from integrated NF SMB values
accumulated over the entire GrIS defined by a fixed ice sheet mask
(SMB<inline-formula><mml:math id="M102" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">MSK</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NF</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) and by the time-evolving ice sheet mask
(SMB<inline-formula><mml:math id="M103" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">MSK</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">W</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) simulated in the 2W experiment (last two lines).</p></caption><oasis:table frame="bottom"><oasis:tgroup cols="5">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col3" nameend="col5" align="center">GrIS contribution to SLR (in cm) </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Name of experiment</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2050</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">2100</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2150</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">From ice thickness</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">2W</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">7.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">20.4</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">NF</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">7.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">18.5</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">PF</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">7.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">19.9</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">From SMB</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">SMB<inline-formula><mml:math id="M104" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">MSK</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NF</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">9.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">22.1</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">SMB<inline-formula><mml:math id="M105" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">MSK</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">W</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">9.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">20.8</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS4">
  <title>Impact on GrIS contribution to sea-level rise and ice sheet mask</title>
      <?pagebreak page388?><p id="d1e2462">At the end of the simulation (i.e. after 150 model years), the GrIS
contribution to sea-level rise (computed from the change in GRISLI ice
volume), simulated in the 2W experiment, reaches 20.4 cm, against 18.5 and
19.9 cm in the NF and PF experiments, respectively (Table 1 and
Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F12"/>). Owing to the negligible model drift (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M106" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mm yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M107" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>; see Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S2.SS2.SSS2"/>), these differences
only result from the better representation of the GrIS–atmosphere feedbacks
in 2W leading to increased runoff due to warmer temperatures (see
Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S4.SS2"/>). In 2100 (Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T1"/>), the differences
between the three experiments are smaller, with the NF and PF contributions
being, respectively, 4.4 % and 0.4 % lower than the 2W contribution,
against 9.3 % and 2.5 % in 2150. These results reflect several key
aspects. First they show that the GrIS mass loss substantially accelerates
from the second half of the 21st century onwards and that the effect of the
different feedbacks, as simulated in 2W, is enhanced over time.
Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F12"/>b displays the sea-level anomalies between 2000 and 2100 to
better illustrate the divergence of the three experiments as soon as
2025–2030. Secondly they illustrate the effect of the feedbacks themselves.
As an example, accounting for the parameterized feedbacks (PF) leads to an
additional SLR contribution (w.r.t NF) of 4.2 % in 2100 (7.6 % in
2150). This is smaller than that reported in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx12" id="text.86"/>,
who also used the MAR model to force the hybrid SICOPOLIS3.3 including a
representation of subglacial hydrology. However, our estimate is comparable
with the 4.3 % additional contribution found by
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx18" id="text.87"/> for 2100, who used ECHAM5 and HadCM3 to force MAR
simulations under the SRES A1B scenario and five ISM projections, and within
the range of uncertainties of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M108" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">8</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % additional surface mass
loss reported in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx21" id="text.88"/>. As for
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx79" id="text.89"/>, they also conclude that the melt–elevation
feedbacks, simulated with the ECHAM5.2-SICOPOLIS3.0 coupled model under the
RCP8.5 scenario, contribute to 11 % to SMB changes and to 8 % to SLR.
While the importance of the SMB–elevation feedback may be dependent on the
model itself, the larger contribution found in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx79" id="text.90"/>
compared to our own study could be explained by the coarser resolutions of
ECHAM5.2 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M109" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.75</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M110" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) and SICOPOLIS3.0 (for the GrIS, 10 km) with
respect to MAR and GRISLI resolutions, implying for example that ablation
areas or processes such as katabatic winds are less well represented. Our
results also suggest that, at the centennial timescale, the SMB–elevation
feedback is the most important since its parameterization in PF allows for
the reduction of the mismatch between the 2W and NF GrIS SLR contributions by
73.7 % (91.4 %) in 2150 (2100), the remaining
contributions being attributed to atmospheric feedbacks. However, to more accurately assess the relative importance of the elevation feedbacks, a more
appropriate procedure would be to cut off the elevation feedbacks in the 2W
experiment.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F12" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e2552"><bold>(a)</bold> Contribution of the GrIS to sea-level rise (in cm) as
simulated in the NF (blue line), PF (red line) and 2W (orange line)
experiments and inferred from the ice thickness changes between the 2000 and
2150. Green and purple arrows indicate the projected contribution from GrIS
inferred from SMB changes integrated over the same period over a fixed ice
sheet mask (SMB<inline-formula><mml:math id="M111" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">MSK</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NF</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) and a time variable ice sheet mask
(SMB<inline-formula><mml:math id="M112" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">MSK</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">W</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>). <bold>(b)</bold> Zoom of the differences of GrIS
contributions to sea-level rise between the NF and the PF experiments (green
line), between the NF and the 2W experiments (purple line) and between the
PF and the 2W experiments (light blue line).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://tc.copernicus.org/articles/13/373/2019/tc-13-373-2019-f12.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e2595">Compared to the NF and the PF experiments for which the ice sheet mask is
fixed to observations from 2000 to 2150, the 2W ice sheet extent is reduced
by <inline-formula><mml:math id="M113" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % in 2150 as a result of increased ablation. As MAR sees the
ice sheet retreating over time in 2W concomitantly with the increase in
bare ground or tundra fractions (Fig. S5b), the albedo feedback takes place
favouring further the ice melting, though counteracted by the katabatic wind
anomalies (see Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S4.SS2"/>). Although the ice sheet retreats, the
extent of the ablation zone increases with time. This process is faster in
2W than in NF and PF. In 2150, the ablation zone is 14 % (11.7 %) larger in 2W than in NF (PF) causing 112 Gt yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M114" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
of extra ice ablation in 2W (w.r.t NF). As a consequence, the ELA is
located further inland in 2W compared to NF with a maximum inland retreat
of 120 km located in northeastern Greenland (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/>).</p>
      <p id="d1e2624">A widely used method to estimate the GrIS contribution to global sea-level
rise is to compute the GrIS mass loss as the time integral of the SMB
computed by an atmospheric model over a fixed ice sheet mask
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx21 bib1.bibx14 bib1.bibx49" id="paren.91"/>. In
the present study, we use a more complex method since the ice mass variations
related to SMB changes are computed by MAR over a changing ice sheet mask and
topography as simulated by GRISLI. However, in both the NF and the PF
experiments, the atmospheric model does not account for the variations in the
ice sheet extent simulated in GRISLI and the ice sheet mask, taken from the
observations <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx6" id="paren.92"/>, is kept constant throughout the
simulation. Taking the changes in ice sheet mask into account may have strong
impacts on the computed GrIS contribution to sea-level rise. To illustrate
the influence of the ice sheet mask, we used the SMB outputs from the NF
experiment at the MAR resolution and applied the integrated SMB method over
the fixed observed ice sheet mask (SMB<inline-formula><mml:math id="M115" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">MSK</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NF</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) and over the
updated 2W mask (SMB<inline-formula><mml:math id="M116" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">MSK</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">W</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>). Differences in SMB values exceed
23 % in 2150 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M117" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>842 Gt yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M118" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for SMB<inline-formula><mml:math id="M119" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">MSK</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NF</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> against
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M120" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>647 Gt yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M121" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for SMB<inline-formula><mml:math id="M122" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">MSK</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">W</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>). In the same way, compared
to a time variable ice sheet mask, the use of a fixed ice sheet mask
overestimates the sea-level rise by <inline-formula><mml:math id="M123" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % in 2150. Though a bit
lower, this error has a similar magnitude compared to errors made when the
SMB–elevation feedbacks are not taken into account (i.e. 7.6 %) and when
all the feedbacks are ignored (i.e. 9.3 %). This strongly suggests that
realistic SLR projections cannot neglect the evolution of the ice sheet
extent, only accounted for through the use of an ice sheet model.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5">
  <title>Discussion</title>
      <p id="d1e2748">The evolution of the GrIS and its contribution to sea-level rise presented in
this study are the first ones inferred from a regional atmospheric model
synchronously coupled to an ice sheet model, thus accounting for the
GrIS–atmosphere feedbacks. To evaluate the added value of a coupled RCM–ISM, we explored the importance of the GrIS–atmosphere feedbacks by
comparing the results of the coupled experiment to those coming from two
uncoupled experiments, PF (parameterized elevation feedbacks) and NF (no
feedback). We showed that the impact of taking the feedbacks into account
increases over time. This study is a necessary step toward a more
accurate assessment of the contribution of Greenland to future sea-level rise
and of its impact on the climate system. However, future refinements can be
envisaged.</p>
      <?pagebreak page389?><p id="d1e2751"><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>One of the main uncertainties in assessing the GrIS contribution to future
sea-level rise comes from the climate projections themselves. For example,
using five different global climate models to force MAR at its lateral
boundaries under RCP8.5 conditions, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx21" id="text.93"/> provide
SMB-inferred estimates of this contribution ranging from 4.6 to 13.1 cm in
2100. This range is fully comparable to that reported by
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx12" id="text.94"/>, who used MAR simulations (forced by three GCMs
chosen from the <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx21" id="altparen.95"/> sample) to force the
SICOPOLIS ice sheet model. Whatever the experimental design, the large spread
in SLR projections highlights the great uncertainty associated with the
choice of the global climate model used to force MAR at its lateral
boundaries. It raises the question of to what extent the differences between
2W and PF or NF experiments would be amplified (mitigated) with a
stronger (weaker) climate forcing than that simulated by MIROC5.
Another question concerns the impact of a constant MIROC5 climate used to
force MAR beyond 2100. As outlined in Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S3"/>, this results
in discarding the continued change that the climate will likely undergo
beyond 2100 suggesting that our SLR projections are underestimated. Another
consequence is that inter-annual variability is neglected after 2100. This
can lead to conservative estimates of the Greenland contribution to sea-level
rise in the future due to non-linearities of the SMB. On the other hand, the
imprint of the 2095 MIROC5 climate may amplify regional changes of the GrIS
response. There is therefore a strong need for iterating the present study
with different global climate simulations run under an extended RCP8.5
scenario, but also with different regional climate models that may have
different sensitivities, to more accurately assess the impact of the
different GrIS–atmosphere feedbacks and to better evaluate the uncertainty
associated with the projected sea-level rise contribution from the GrIS.</p>
      <?pagebreak page390?><p id="d1e2766">Another limitation is related to the 2000-year relaxation GRISLI experiment,
run at the end of the initialization procedure to reduce the model drift in
terms of ice volume. This produces residual differences with the observed
topography <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx6" id="paren.96"/> used in the MAR simulations. This has
important consequences on the MAR simulated climate. In particular, the
steeper slopes existing in the GRISLI topography (i.e. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M124" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ctrl</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)
tend to produce unrealistic katabatic winds. Therefore, we have chosen in
this study to use an anomaly method of the surface elevation onto which the
SMB and ST fields are downscaled at the 5 km resolution grid
(Eq. <xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E4"/>). The objective of this approach was first to maintain
the realism of the simulated present-day climate computed on the observed
topography <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx6" id="paren.97"/> and, secondly, to avoid inconsistencies
between the climate simulated by MAR and that which was used to force GRISLI. However,
this implies that the forcing climate is not fully consistent with the GRISLI
topography. This should be taken into consideration in a future work to
improve the quality of our results. As an example, a reasonable compromise to
avoid the use of anomaly method would be to use the topography obtained at
the end of the iterative initialization process (rather than
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M125" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ctrl</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) as initial MAR topography to keep the mismatch with the
observed topography as low as possible, and to initialize and perform MAR
simulations with this new topography. Moreover, the use of an anomaly method
to account for the change in topography is incompatible with a conservative
coupling between the ice sheet model and the climate model. This is further
amplified by the fact that we use a flux correction outside the present-day
ice margin to force ice removal. This methodology has been followed to limit
the impact of biases from the atmospheric model and from the initialization
procedure, but the imposed ice removal outside the present-day ice mask may
locally bias the model response towards increased ice thinning. Since our
simulations are run under the RCP8.5 forcing scenario, this probably has a
negligible impact because the GrIS is likely to experience a retreat from the
present-day ice margin. However, further studies with alternative scenarios
and/or GCM forcing, and even more paleoclimate studies, should ideally avoid
using this kind of flux correction.</p>
      <p id="d1e2799">In addition, difference of resolution between MAR (25 km) and GRISLI (5 km)
can cause artefacts in the results, especially at the edges of the ice sheet.
Indeed, in the corresponding MAR grid cells, a fraction of permanent ice
cover may coexist with a non-zero fraction of tundra. Since the surface
elevation changes computed in MAR from the aggregated GRISLI topography are
weighted as a function of the fraction of the different surface areas, they
may be underestimated as the tundra soil type is not subject to any change in
altitude. This artefact has been illustrated in Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S4.SS2.SSS1"/> with
the example of the behaviour of katabatic winds that are artificially reduced
in our simulation at the ice sheet margin. Moreover, since the margin regions
are those experiencing the strongest changes in altitude, they are also the
most sensitive to climate change. As a consequence, an improper estimation of
the topography changes may induce improper SMB changes. This underlines the
need for increasing the atmospheric model resolution as far as possible to
avoid such artefacts and to better represent the fine-scale
atmospheric-topography feedbacks impacting the SMB. Indeed, higher spatial
resolution could resolve finer-scale ice sheet dynamics to better represent
the ice flow in outlet glacier or better represent fine-scale
atmospheric-topography feedbacks impacting the SMB in these regions. However,
a compromise must be reached between the additional computing resources and
the required degree of accuracy of sea-level projections.</p>
      <p id="d1e2805">Regarding the ice sheet model, a 5 km horizontal resolution does not permit
the capture of the complex ice flow patterns of smallest outlet glaciers, whose
characteristic length scale can be less than 1 km
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx5" id="paren.98"/> and to accurately quantify the ice discharge
at the marine front. This may have large implications in the sea-level rise
estimates. Using a 3-D ice sheet model with prescribed outlet glacier
retreat, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx30" id="text.99"/> found an additional SLR
contribution from outlet glaciers of 0.8 to 1.8 cm in 2100 and 1.3 to
3.8 cm in 2200, with the influence of their dynamics on SLR projections
decreasing with time and with the increasing importance of the atmospheric
forcing. This is in line with the fact that ice flow acts to counteract ice
loss from surface melting (see Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S4.SS2"/>), as previously
outlined by several authors
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx34 bib1.bibx30 bib1.bibx18" id="paren.100"/>.
However, despite the possible decreasing influence of marine terminating
glaciers at the centennial timescale, it is essential to more accurately evaluate the impact of ice dynamics and to better capture the complex
geometry of fjords surrounding the marine-terminating glaciers.</p>
      <p id="d1e2819">There is a growing amount of evidence for attributing the acceleration of
outlet glaciers to the intrusion of warm waters from adjacent oceans in the
fjord systems or in the cavity of floating ice tongues
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx36 bib1.bibx74 bib1.bibx68" id="paren.101"><named-content content-type="pre">e.g.</named-content></xref>
that can destabilize the glacier front and/or favour the ice-shelf breakup
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx26" id="paren.102"/>, thereby decreasing the buttressing effect
and increasing the ice calving. In turn, the released freshwater flux in
ocean may impact sea-surface temperatures, oceanic circulation and sea-ice
cover. Moreover, atmosphere–ocean feedbacks also have an impact on the GrIS.
As an example, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx21" id="text.103"/> showed that the disappearance
of Arctic sea ice in summer induced by ocean warming enhances surface melting
in northern Greenland through a decrease of surface albedo and the subsequent
atmospheric warming. Thus, the absence of the oceanic component in our
modelling setup appears as a limiting factor, although the direct impact of
ocean via sub-shelf melt at the ice sheet margin will likely be limited in
the future as a result of inland retreat of GrIS.</p>
      <p id="d1e2833">Our initialization method adjusts the basal drag coefficient in such a way
that the departure between the observed and the initial GRISLI topographies
is reduced. The resulting <inline-formula><mml:math id="M126" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> coefficient is spatially varied but is
taken constant in time. This<?pagebreak page391?> assumption may likely be valid for short-term
forward simulations but is probably overly simplistic. On the one hand, the
basal drag tends to be smaller towards the margins with respect to the
interior. As the ice sheet retreats inland, a reduction in basal drag for a specific location can be expected, due for example to a decreasing effective
pressure. On the other hand, changing basal hydrological conditions can also
alter the basal drag. This can occur as a result of rainfall or surface
meltwater infiltration that can refreeze at depth or propagate all the way to
the bottom of the ice sheet and increase basal lubrication
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx40" id="paren.104"/>. Therefore, a time constant basal drag
coefficient inferred under present-day conditions may underestimate the ice
flow acceleration. A few models describing the vertical inflow exist
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx15 bib1.bibx7 bib1.bibx39" id="paren.105"><named-content content-type="pre">e.g.</named-content></xref>
but are generally run at the regional scale and at very high spatial
resolution (a few tens to a few hundred metres at most). Implementing
such models in large-scale ice sheet models is currently outside the realm of
possibilities. However, as there is a growing interest in performing ice
sheet projections over multi-centennial timescale, large-scale ice sheet
models would undoubtedly benefit from the implementation of simplified
infiltration schemes <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx30" id="paren.106"><named-content content-type="pre">e.g.</named-content></xref>, so as to
account for the impact of ongoing changes in surface meltwater on ice flow.</p>
      <p id="d1e2856">An additional limitation related to the choice of our spin-up procedure is
that the glacial–interglacial signature of past climatic changes is ignored.
Neglecting the climate history of the Greenland ice sheet implies ice temperatures that are too warm. This may have an impact on the future GrIS evolution and on
its contribution to sea-level rise. Indeed, the basal drag coefficient
inferred from the inverse method may be too high so as to compensate the
errors induced by the artificial warming. However, using a higher-order ice
flow model, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx72" id="text.107"/> showed that at the centennial
timescale the basal conditions and the GrIS projections are only weakly
sensitive to the initial vertical temperature profile but are critically
dependent on atmospheric conditions.</p>
      <p id="d1e2862">Despite these limitations, the sea-level projections performed with GRISLI
compare well with those conducted with more sophisticated ice sheet models
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx19" id="paren.108"/>, and the simulated surface ice velocities
present a good agreement with the observed ones (Fig. S11). It appears thus
as a good numerical tool to be coupled with a regional climate model with a
reasonably good representation of the ice dynamics and limited computational
resources.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S6" sec-type="conclusions">
  <title>Conclusions</title>
      <p id="d1e2874">This study is based on the first regional atmosphere–ice sheet coupled
model that allows the GrIS–atmosphere feedbacks to be accounted for. Using this
new model, we investigated the GrIS evolution and its contribution to
sea-level rise from 2000 to 2150 under a prolonged RCP8.5 scenario (2W
experiment). The importance of the GrIS–atmosphere feedbacks has been
assessed through the comparison of the two-way coupled experiment with two
other simulations based on simpler coupling strategies: the NF experiment in
which the MAR outputs are directly used as GRISLI forcing and the PF
experiment in which the elevation feedbacks are parameterized. In both NF and
PF experiments, changes in topography simulated by GRISLI are not updated in
the atmospheric model. The main conclusions drawn from this study as follows.
<list list-type="bullet"><list-item>
      <p id="d1e2879">Accounting for the GrIS–atmosphere feedbacks amplifies the ice mass loss and changes in
ice sheet geometry, with increased surface slopes from the central regions to margin areas, as well as consequences
on Greenland ice velocities.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e2883">The effect of accounting for the feedbacks between GrIS and the atmosphere increases with time and becomes
significant at the end of the 21st century, as illustrated by the 2W–NF difference in GrIS contribution
to sea-level rise in 2150, i.e. 1.9 cm, against 0.3 cm in 2100.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e2887">Accounting for the parameterized elevation feedbacks in the PF experiment leads to an additional SLR
contribution of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M127" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7.6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % in 2150 compared to NF. On the other hand, the parameterization used in PF allows for the
reduction of the mismatch (in terms of SLR projections) between the one-way and the two-way coupled approaches by 73.7 % in 2150,
showing that at this timescale, changes in ice sheet geometry appear to be dominated by the SMB–elevation feedback.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e2901">Finally, with our modelling setup, we showed that estimating the GrIS contribution over a fixed ice sheet mask
(as in PF and NF experiments) overestimates the SLR contribution by <inline-formula><mml:math id="M128" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %, suggesting that most of RCM-based
studies have probably overestimated the ice loss computed from changes in SMB.</p></list-item></list></p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><notes notes-type="dataavailability">

      <p id="d1e2918">The model output from the simulations described in this
paper are freely available from the authors. The source
code of MAR version 3.7 is available on the MAR website:
<uri>https://mar.cnrs.fr</uri> (last access: 24 January 2019, CNRS, 2019). The GRISLI source code is hosted
at <uri>https://forge.ipsl.jussieu.fr/grisli</uri> (last access: 24 January 2019, IPSL, 2019), but is not
publicly available due to copyright restrictions. Access can be granted by request to Christophe Dumas (christophe.dumas@lsce.ipsl.fr).</p>
  </notes><app-group>
        <supplementary-material position="anchor"><p id="d1e2927">The supplement related to this article is available online at: <inline-supplementary-material xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-13-373-2019-supplement" xlink:title="zip">https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-13-373-2019-supplement</inline-supplementary-material>.</p></supplementary-material>
        </app-group><notes notes-type="authorcontribution">

      <?pagebreak page392?><p id="d1e2936">The implementation of the three coupling methods as well as the simulations was done by XF and CW.
SL, SC and AQ analysed the results and wrote the manuscript with
contributions from MK, CD and XF. The GRISLI model was developed by CR.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests">

      <p id="d1e2942">The authors declare that they have no conflict of
interest.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e2948">The authors are very grateful to Jeremy Fyke and two anonymous
reviewers for their numerous and fruitful comments that helped to improve the
manuscript. Sébastien Le clec'h, Masa Kageyama, Sylvie Charbit and
Christophe Dumas acknowledge the financial support from the French–Swedish
GIWA project and the ANR AC-AHC2, as well as the CEA for Sébastien Le
clec'h's PhD funding. A Quiquet is funded by the European Research Council
grant ACCLIMATE no. 339108. Computational resources (MAR and GRISLI) have
been provided by the Consortium des Équipements de Calcul Intensif
(CÉCI), funded by the Fonds de la Recherche Scientifique de Belgique
(F.R.S.-FNRS) under grant no. 2.5020.11 and the Tier-1 supercomputer (Zenobe)
of the Fédération Wallonie Bruxelles infrastructure was funded by the
Wallonia Region under grant agreement no. 1117545. Sebastien Le clec'h also acknowledges the iceMOD project funded
by the Research Foundation – Flanders (FWO-Vlaanderen). <?xmltex \hack{\newline}?><?xmltex \hack{\newline}?> Edited by: Valentina Radic <?xmltex \hack{\newline}?> Reviewed by:
Jeremy Fyke and two anonymous referees</p></ack><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bibx1"><label>Alexander et al.(2014)</label><mixed-citation>Alexander, P. M., Tedesco, M., Fettweis, X., van de Wal, R. S. W., Smeets, C.
J. P. P., and van den Broeke, M. R.: Assessing spatio-temporal variability
and trends in modelled and measured Greenland Ice Sheet albedo (2000–2013),
The Cryosphere, 8, 2293–2312, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-8-2293-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/tc-8-2293-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx2"><label>Alley and Joughin(2012)</label><mixed-citation>Alley, R. B. and Joughin, I.: Modeling Ice-Sheet Flow, Science, 336,
551–552, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1220530" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1126/science.1220530</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx3"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{Alvarez-Solas et~al.(2011{\natexlab{a}})}}?><label>Alvarez-Solas et al.(2011a)</label><mixed-citation>Alvarez-Solas, J., Charbit, S., Ramstein, G., Paillard, D., Dumas, C., Ritz,
C., and Roche, D. M.: Millennial-scale oscillations in the Southern Ocean
in response to atmospheric <inline-formula><mml:math id="M129" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> increase, Glob. Planet. Change, 76,
128–136, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2010.12.004" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.gloplacha.2010.12.004</ext-link>, 2011a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx4"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{Alvarez-Solas et~al.(2011{\natexlab{b}})}}?><label>Alvarez-Solas et al.(2011b)</label><mixed-citation>Alvarez-Solas, J., Montoya, M., Ritz, C., Ramstein, G., Charbit, S., Dumas,
C.,
Nisancioglu, K., Dokken, T., and Ganopolski, A.: Heinrich event 1: an example
of dynamical ice-sheet reaction to oceanic changes, Clim. Past, 7,
1297–1306, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-7-1297-2011" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/cp-7-1297-2011</ext-link>, 2011b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx5"><label>Aschwanden et al.(2016)</label><mixed-citation>Aschwanden, A., Fahnestock, M. A., and Truffer, M.: Complex Greenland
outlet
glacier flow captured, Nat. Commun., 7, 10524,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms10524" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/ncomms10524</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx6"><label>Bamber et al.(2013)</label><mixed-citation>Bamber, J. L., Griggs, J. A., Hurkmans, R. T. W. L., Dowdeswell, J. A.,
Gogineni, S. P., Howat, I., Mouginot, J., Paden, J., Palmer, S., Rignot, E.,
and Steinhage, D.: A new bed elevation dataset for Greenland, The
Cryosphere, 7, 499–510, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-7-499-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/tc-7-499-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx7"><label>Banwell et al.(2016)</label><mixed-citation>Banwell, A., Hewitt, I., Willis, I., and Arnold, N.: Moulin density controls
drainage development beneath the Greenland ice sheet: Moulin Density
and Subglacial Drainage, J. Geophys. Res.-Earth,
121, 2248–2269, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JF003801" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2015JF003801</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx8"><label>Box(2013)</label><mixed-citation>Box, J. E.: Greenland Ice Sheet Mass Balance Reconstruction. Part
II: Surface Mass Balance (1840–2010), J. Clim., 26,
6974–6989, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00518.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00518.1</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx9"><label>Box et al.(2012)</label><mixed-citation>Box, J. E., Fettweis, X., Stroeve, J. C., Tedesco, M., Hall, D. K., and
Steffen, K.: Greenland ice sheet albedo feedback: thermodynamics and
atmospheric drivers, The Cryosphere, 6, 821–839,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-6-821-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/tc-6-821-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx10"><label>Brun et al.(1992)</label><mixed-citation>
Brun, E., David, P., Sudul, M., and Brunot, G.: A numerical model to simulate
snow-cover stratigraphy for operational avalanche forecasting, J.
Glaciol., 38, 13–22,  1992.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx11"><label>Bueler and Brown(2009)</label><mixed-citation>Bueler, E. and Brown, J.: Shallow shelf approximation as a “sliding law” in
a thermomechanically coupled ice sheet model, J. Geophys.
Res., 114, F03008, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JF001179" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2008JF001179</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx12"><label>Calov et al.(2018)</label><mixed-citation>Calov, R., Beyer, S., Greve, R., Beckmann, J., Willeit, M., Kleiner, T.,
Rückamp, M., Humbert, A., and Ganopolski, A.: Simulation of the future
sea level contribution of Greenland with a new glacial system model, The
Cryosphere, 12, 3097–3121, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-12-3097-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/tc-12-3097-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx13"><label>Charbit et al.(2013)</label><mixed-citation>Charbit, S., Dumas, C., Kageyama, M., Roche, D. M., and Ritz, C.: Influence
of
ablation-related processes in the build-up of simulated Northern
Hemisphere ice sheets during the last glacial cycle, The Cryosphere, 7,
681–698, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-7-681-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/tc-7-681-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx14"><label>Church et al.(2013)</label><mixed-citation>
Church, J. A., Clark, P. U., Cazenave, A., Gregory, J. M., Jevrejeva, S.,
Levermann, A., Merrifield, M. A., Milne, G. A., Nerem, R. S., Nunn, P. D.,
Payne, A. J., Pfeffer, W. T., Stammer, D., and Unnikrishnan, A. S.: Sea level change, Tech. Rep., PM Cambridge University Press,
2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx15"><label>Clason et al.(2015)</label><mixed-citation>Clason, C. C., Mair, D. W. F., Nienow, P. W., Bartholomew, I. D., Sole, A.,
Palmer, S., and Schwanghart, W.: Modelling the transfer of supraglacial
meltwater to the bed of Leverett Glacier, Southwest Greenland, The
Cryosphere, 9, 123–138, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-9-123-2015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/tc-9-123-2015</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx16"><label>de Boer et al.(2014)</label><mixed-citation>de Boer, B., Stocchi, P., and van de Wal, R. S. W.: A fully coupled 3-D
ice-sheet-sea-level model: algorithm and applications, Geosci. Model Dev., 7,
2141–2156, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-7-2141-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-7-2141-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx17"><label>Doyle and Shapiro(1999)</label><mixed-citation>Doyle, J. D. and Shapiro, M. A.: Flow response to large-scale topography: the
Greenland tip jet, Tellus A, 51,
728–748, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusa.v51i5.14471" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3402/tellusa.v51i5.14471</ext-link>, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx18"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{Edwards et~al.(2014{\natexlab{a}})}}?><label>Edwards et al.(2014a)</label><mixed-citation>Edwards, T. L., Fettweis, X., Gagliardini, O., Gillet-Chaulet, F., Goelzer,
H.,
Gregory, J. M., Hoffman, M., Huybrechts, P., Payne, A. J., Perego, M., Price,
S., Quiquet, A., and Ritz, C.: Effect of uncertainty in surface mass
balance-elevation feedback on projections of the future sea level
contribution of the Greenland ice sheet, The Cryosphere, 8, 195–208,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-8-195-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/tc-8-195-2014</ext-link>, 2014a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page393?><ref id="bib1.bibx19"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{Edwards et~al.(2014{\natexlab{b}})}}?><label>Edwards et al.(2014b)</label><mixed-citation>Edwards, T. L., Fettweis, X., Gagliardini, O., Gillet-Chaulet, F., Goelzer,
H.,
Gregory, J. M., Hoffman, M., Huybrechts, P., Payne, A. J., Perego, M., Price,
S., Quiquet, A., and Ritz, C.: Probabilistic parameterisation of the surface
mass balance-elevation feedback in regional climate model simulations of
the Greenland ice sheet, The Cryosphere, 8, 181–194,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-8-181-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/tc-8-181-2014</ext-link>, 2014b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx20"><label>Ettema et al.(2010)</label><mixed-citation>Ettema, J., van den Broeke, M. R., van Meijgaard, E., and van de Berg, W. J.:
Climate of the Greenland ice sheet using a high-resolution climate model
– Part 2: Near-surface climate and energy balance, The Cryosphere, 4,
529–544, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-4-529-2010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/tc-4-529-2010</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx21"><label>Fettweis et al.(2013)</label><mixed-citation>Fettweis, X., Franco, B., Tedesco, M., van Angelen, J. H., Lenaerts, J.
T. M.,
van den Broeke, M. R., and Gallée, H.: Estimating the Greenland ice sheet
surface mass balance contribution to future sea level rise using the regional
atmospheric climate model MAR, The Cryosphere, 7, 469–489,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-7-469-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/tc-7-469-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx22"><label>Fettweis et al.(2017)</label><mixed-citation>Fettweis, X., Box, J. E., Agosta, C., Amory, C., Kittel, C., Lang, C., van
As,
D., Machguth, H., and Gallée, H.: Reconstructions of the 1900–2015
Greenland ice sheet surface mass balance using the regional climate MAR
model, The Cryosphere, 11, 1015–1033, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-11-1015-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/tc-11-1015-2017</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx23"><label>Fox Maule et al.(2005)</label><mixed-citation>Fox Maule, C., Purucker, M. E., Olsen, N., and Mosegaard, K.: Heat Flux
Anomalies in Antarctica Revealed by Satellite Magnetic Data,
Science, 309, 464–467, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1106888" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1126/science.1106888</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx24"><label>Franco et al.(2012)</label><mixed-citation>Franco, B., Fettweis, X., Lang, C., and Erpicum, M.: Impact of spatial
resolution on the modelling of the Greenland ice sheet surface mass balance
between 1990–2010, using the regional climate model MAR, The Cryosphere,
6, 695–711, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-6-695-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/tc-6-695-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx25"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{F\"{u}rst et~al.(2013)}}?><label>Fürst et al.(2013)</label><mixed-citation>Fürst, J. J., Goelzer, H., and Huybrechts, P.: Effect of higher-order
stress
gradients on the centennial mass evolution of the Greenland ice sheet, The
Cryosphere, 7, 183–199, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-7-183-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/tc-7-183-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx26"><label>Gagliardini et al.(2010)</label><mixed-citation>Gagliardini, O., Durand, G., Zwinger, T., Hindmarsh, R. C. A., and Le Meur,
E.:
Coupling of ice-shelf melting and buttressing is a key process in ice-sheets
dynamics, Geophys. Res. Lett., 37, 14501, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GL043334" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2010GL043334</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx27"><label>Gagliardini et al.(2013)</label><mixed-citation>Gagliardini, O., Zwinger, T., Gillet-Chaulet, F., Durand, G., Favier, L., de
Fleurian, B., Greve, R., Malinen, M., Martín, C., Råback, P.,
Ruokolainen, J., Sacchettini, M., Schäfer, M., Seddik, H., and Thies, J.:
Capabilities and performance of Elmer/Ice, a new-generation ice sheet model,
Geosci. Model Dev., 6, 1299–1318, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-1299-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-6-1299-2013</ext-link>,
2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx28"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{Gall\'{e}e and Duynkerke(1997)}}?><label>Gallée and Duynkerke(1997)</label><mixed-citation>
Gallée, H. and Duynkerke, P. G.: Air-snow interactions and the surface
energy and mass balance over the melting zone of west Greenland during the
Greenland Ice Margin Experiment, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 102, 13813–13824, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx29"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{Gall\'{e}e and Schayes(1994)}}?><label>Gallée and Schayes(1994)</label><mixed-citation>Gallée, H. and Schayes, G.: Development of a three-dimensional
meso-<inline-formula><mml:math id="M130" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">γ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>
primitive equation model: katabatic winds simulation in the area of Terra
Nova Bay, Antarctica, Mon. Weather Rev., 122, 671–685, 1994.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx30"><label>Goelzer et al.(2013)</label><mixed-citation>Goelzer, H., Huybrechts, P., Fürst, J., Nick, F., Andersen, M., Edwards,
T.,
Fettweis, X., Payne, A., and Shannon, S.: Sensitivity of Greenland ice
sheet projections to model formulations, J. Glaciol., 59, 733–749,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3189/2013JoG12J182" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3189/2013JoG12J182</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx31"><label>Goelzer et al.(2018)</label><mixed-citation>Goelzer, H., Nowicki, S., Edwards, T., Beckley, M., Abe-Ouchi, A.,
Aschwanden,
A., Calov, R., Gagliardini, O., Gillet-Chaulet, F., Golledge, N. R., Gregory,
J., Greve, R., Humbert, A., Huybrechts, P., Kennedy, J. H., Larour, E.,
Lipscomb, W. H., Le clec'h, S., Lee, V., Morlighem, M., Pattyn, F., Payne,
A. J., Rodehacke, C., Rückamp, M., Saito, F., Schlegel, N., Seroussi, H.,
Shepherd, A., Sun, S., van de Wal, R., and Ziemen, F. A.: Design and results
of the ice sheet model initialisation experiments initMIP-Greenland: an
ISMIP6 intercomparison, The Cryosphere, 12, 1433–1460,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-12-1433-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/tc-12-1433-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx32"><label>Greve et al.(2011)</label><mixed-citation>
Greve, R., Saito, F., and Abe-Ouchi, A.: Initial results of the SeaRISE
numerical experiments with the models SICOPOLIS and IcIES for the
Greenland ice sheet, Ann. Glaciol., 52, 23–30, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx33"><label>Hutter(1983)</label><mixed-citation>
Hutter, K.: Theoretical glaciology: material science of ice and the mechanics
of glaciers and ice sheets, vol. 1, Springer, 1983.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx34"><label>Huybrechts and de Wolde(1999)</label><mixed-citation>
Huybrechts, P. and de Wolde, J.: The dynamic response of the Greenland and
Antarctic ice sheets to multiple-century climatic warming, J.
Clim., 12, 2169–2188, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx35"><label>Huybrechts et al.(2002)</label><mixed-citation>
Huybrechts, P., Janssens, I., Poncin, C., and Fichefet, T.: The response of
the
Greenland ice sheet to climate changes in the 21st century by interactive
coupling of an AOGCM with a thermomechanical ice-sheet model, Ann.
Glaciol., 35, 409–415, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx36"><label>Johnson et al.(2011)</label><mixed-citation>Johnson, H. L., Münchow, A., Falkner, K. K., and Melling, H.: Ocean
circulation and properties in Petermann Fjord, Greenland, J.
Geophys. Res., 116, C01003, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JC006519" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2010JC006519</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx37"><label>Joughin et al.(2018)</label><mixed-citation>Joughin, I., Smith, B. E., and Howat, I. M.: A complete map of Greenland ice velocity derived from satellite data collected over 20
years, J. Glaciol., 64, 1–11, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1017/jog.2017.73" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1017/jog.2017.73</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx38"><label>Kessler(1969)</label><mixed-citation>
Kessler, E.: On the distribution and continuity of water substance in
atmospheric circulations,   Springer, 1–84,  1969.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx39"><label>Koziol et al.(2017)</label><mixed-citation>Koziol, C., Arnold, N., Pope, A., and Colgan, W.: Quantifying supraglacial
meltwater pathways in the Paakitsoq region, West Greenland, J.
Glaciol., 63, 464–476, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1017/jog.2017.5" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1017/jog.2017.5</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx40"><label>Kulessa et al.(2017)</label><mixed-citation>Kulessa, B., Hubbard, A. L., Booth, A. D., Bougamont, M., Dow, C. F., Doyle,
S. H., Christoffersen, P., Lindbäck, K., Pettersson, R., and Fitzpatrick,
A. A.: Seismic evidence for complex sedimentary control of Greenland Ice
Sheet flow, Sci. Adv., 3, e1603071, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1603071" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1126/sciadv.1603071</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx41"><label>Langen et al.(2015)</label><mixed-citation>Langen, P. L., Mottram, R. H., Christensen, J. H., Boberg, F., Rodehacke,
C. B., Stendel, M., van As, D., Ahlstrøm, A. P., Mortensen, J., Rysgaard,
S., Petersen, D., Svendsen, K. H., Aðalgeirsdóttir, G., and Cappelen, J.:
Quantifying Energy and Mass Fluxes Controlling Godthåbsfjord
Freshwater Input in a 5-km Simulation (1991–2012), J. Clim., 28,
3694–3713, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-14-00271.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JCLI-D-14-00271.1</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx42"><label>Larour et al.(2012)</label><mixed-citation>Larour, E., Seroussi, H., Morlighem, M., and Rignot, E.: Continental scale,
high order, high spatial resolution, ice sheet modeling using the Ice
Sheet System Model (ISSM), J. Geophys. Res.-Earth, 117, F01022, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JF002140" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2011JF002140</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx43"><label>Le clec'h et al.(2018)</label><mixed-citation>Le clec'h, S., Quiquet, A., Charbit, S., Dumas, C., Kageyama, M., and Ritz,
C.:
A rapidly converging spin-up method for the present-day Greenland ice sheet
using the GRISLI ice-sheet model, 1–21,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2017-322" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-2017-322</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx44"><label>Le Meur and Huybrechts(1996)</label><mixed-citation>Le Meur, E. and Huybrechts, P.: A comparison of different ways of dealing
with
isostasy: examples from modelling the Antarctic ice sheet during the last
glacial cycle, Ann. Glaciol., 23, 309–317,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1017/S0260305500013586" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1017/S0260305500013586</ext-link>, 1996.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page394?><ref id="bib1.bibx45"><label>Lin et al.(1983)</label><mixed-citation>
Lin, Y.-L., Farley, R. D., and Orville, H. D.: Bulk parameterization of the
snow field in a cloud model, J. Clim. Appl. Meteorol., 22,
1065–1092, 1983.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx46"><label>Lofverstrom and Liakka(2018)</label><mixed-citation>Lofverstrom, M. and Liakka, J.: The influence of atmospheric grid resolution
in
a climate model-forced ice sheet simulation, The Cryosphere, 12, 1499–1510,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-12-1499-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/tc-12-1499-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx47"><label>Lunt et al.(2004)</label><mixed-citation>Lunt, D. J., de Noblet-Ducoudré, N., and Charbit, S.: Effects of a melted
greenland ice sheet on climate, vegetation, and the cryosphere, Clim.
Dynam., 23, 679–694, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-004-0463-4" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s00382-004-0463-4</ext-link>, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx48"><label>MacAyeal(1989)</label><mixed-citation>
MacAyeal, D. R.: Large-scale ice flow over a viscous basal sediment: Theory
and application to ice stream B, Antarctica, J. Geophys.
Res.-Sol. Ea., 94, 4071–4087, 1989.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx49"><label>Meyssignac et al.(2017)</label><mixed-citation>Meyssignac, B., Fettweis, X., Chevrier, R., and Spada, G.: Regional Sea
Level Changes for the Twentieth and the Twenty-First Centuries
Induced by the Regional Variability in Greenland Ice Sheet
Surface Mass Loss, J. Clim., 30, 2011–2028,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0337.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0337.1</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx50"><label>Moore and Renfrew(2005)</label><mixed-citation>Moore, G. W. K. and Renfrew, I. A.: Tip Jets and Barrier Winds: A
QuikSCAT Climatology of High Wind Speed Events around
Greenland, J. Clim., 18, 3713–3725, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI3455.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JCLI3455.1</ext-link>,
2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx51"><label>Morcrette et al.(2008)</label><mixed-citation>Morcrette, J.-J., Barker, H. W., Cole, J. N. S., Iacono, M. J., and Pincus,
R.:
Impact of a New Radiation Package, McRad, in the ECMWF Integrated
Forecasting System, Mon. Weather Rev., 136, 4773–4798,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/2008MWR2363.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/2008MWR2363.1</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx52"><label>Morlighem et al.(2017)</label><mixed-citation>Morlighem, M., Williams, C. N., Rignot, E., An, L., Arndt, J. E., Bamber,
J. L., Catania, G., Chauché, N., Dowdeswell, J. A., Dorschel, B., Fenty, I.,
Hogan, K., Howat, I., Hubbard, A., Jakobsson, M., Jordan, T. M., Kjeldsen,
K. K., Millan, R., Mayer, L., Mouginot, J., Noël, B. P. Y., Cofaigh, C. o.,
Palmer, S., Rysgaard, S., Seroussi, H., Siegert, M. J., Slabon, P., Straneo,
F., van den Broeke, M. R., Weinrebe, W., Wood, M., and Zinglersen, K. B.:
BedMachine v3: Complete bed topography and ocean bathymetry mapping of
Greenland from multi-beam echo sounding combined with mass conservation:
BedMachine Greenland v3, Geophys. Res. Lett., 44, 11051–11061,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL074954" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2017GL074954</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx53"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{No\"{e}l et~al.(2014)}}?><label>Noël et al.(2014)</label><mixed-citation>Noël, B., Fettweis, X., van de Berg, W. J., van den Broeke, M. R., and
Erpicum, M.: Sensitivity of Greenland Ice Sheet surface mass balance to
perturbations in sea surface temperature and sea ice cover: a study with the
regional climate model MAR, The Cryosphere, 8, 1871–1883,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-8-1871-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/tc-8-1871-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx54"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{No\"{e}l et~al.(2015)}}?><label>Noël et al.(2015)</label><mixed-citation>Noël, B., van de Berg, W. J., van Meijgaard, E., Kuipers Munneke, P.,
van de
Wal, R. S. W., and van den Broeke, M. R.: Evaluation of the updated regional
climate model RACMO2.3: summer snowfall impact on the Greenland Ice
Sheet, The Cryosphere, 9, 1831–1844, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-9-1831-2015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/tc-9-1831-2015</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx55"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{No\"{e}l et~al.(2016)}}?><label>Noël et al.(2016)</label><mixed-citation>Noël, B., van de Berg, W. J., Machguth, H., Lhermitte, S., Howat, I.,
Fettweis, X., and van den Broeke, M. R.: A daily, 1 km resolution data set of
downscaled Greenland ice sheet surface mass balance (1958–2015), The
Cryosphere, 10, 2361–2377, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-10-2361-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/tc-10-2361-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx56"><label>Nowicki et al.(2016)</label><mixed-citation>Nowicki, S. M. J., Payne, A., Larour, E., Seroussi, H., Goelzer, H.,
Lipscomb, W., Gregory, J., Abe-Ouchi, A., and Shepherd, A.: Ice Sheet Model
Intercomparison Project (ISMIP6) contribution to CMIP6, Geosci. Model Dev.,
9, 4521–4545, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-4521-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-9-4521-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx57"><label>Pattyn(2017)</label><mixed-citation>Pattyn, F.: Sea-level response to melting of Antarctic ice shelves on
multi-centennial timescales with the fast Elementary Thermomechanical
Ice Sheet model (f.ETISh v1.0), The Cryosphere, 11, 1851–1878,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-11-1851-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/tc-11-1851-2017</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx58"><label>Peano et al.(2017)</label><mixed-citation>Peano, D., Colleoni, F., Quiquet, A., and Masina, S.: Ice flux evolution in
fast flowing areas of the Greenland ice sheet over the 20th and 21st
centuries, J. Glaciol., 63, 499–513, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1017/jog.2017.12" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1017/jog.2017.12</ext-link>,
2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx59"><label>Petersen et al.(2003)</label><mixed-citation>
Petersen, G. N., Ólafsson, H., and Kristjánsson, J. E.: Flow in the
lee of
idealized mountains and Greenland, J. Atmos. Sci., 60,
2183–2195, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx60"><label>Peyaud et al.(2007)</label><mixed-citation>Peyaud, V., Ritz, C., and Krinner, G.: Modelling the Early Weichselian
Eurasian Ice Sheets: role of ice shelves and influence of ice-dammed lakes,
Clim. Past, 3, 375–386, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-3-375-2007" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/cp-3-375-2007</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx61"><label>Philippon et al.(2006)</label><mixed-citation>Philippon, G., Ramstein, G., Charbit, S., Kageyama, M., Ritz, C., and Dumas,
C.: Evolution of the Antarctic ice sheet throughout the last deglaciation:
A study with a new coupled climate–north and south hemisphere ice sheet
model, Earth   Planet. Sci. Lett., 248, 750–758,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsl.2006.06.017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.epsl.2006.06.017</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx62"><label>Pollard and DeConto(2012)</label><mixed-citation>Pollard, D. and DeConto, R. M.: A simple inverse method for the distribution
of
basal sliding coefficients under ice sheets, applied to Antarctica, The
Cryosphere, 6, 953–971, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-6-953-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/tc-6-953-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx63"><label>Price et al.(2011)</label><mixed-citation>Price, S. F., Payne, A. J., Howat, I. M., and Smith, B. E.: Committed
sea-level
rise for the next century from Greenland ice sheet dynamics during the past
decade, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 108, 8978–8983, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1017313108" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1073/pnas.1017313108</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx64"><label>Quiquet et al.(2012)</label><mixed-citation>Quiquet, A., Punge, H. J., Ritz, C., Fettweis, X., Gallée, H., Kageyama,
M.,
Krinner, G., Salas y Mélia, D., and Sjolte, J.: Sensitivity of a Greenland
ice sheet model to atmospheric forcing fields, The Cryosphere, 6, 999–1018,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-6-999-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/tc-6-999-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx65"><label>Quiquet et al.(2013)</label><mixed-citation>Quiquet, A., Ritz, C., Punge, H. J., and Salas y Mélia, D.: Greenland ice
sheet contribution to sea level rise during the last interglacial period: a
modelling study driven and constrained by ice core data, Clim. Past,
9, 353–366, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-9-353-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/cp-9-353-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx66"><label>Quiquet et al.(2018)</label><mixed-citation>Quiquet, A., Dumas, C., Ritz, C., Peyaud, V., and Roche, D. M.: The GRISLI
ice sheet model (version 2.0): calibration and validation for
multi-millennial changes of the Antarctic ice sheet, Geosci. Model Dev., 11,
5003–5025, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-5003-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-11-5003-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx67"><label>Rignot et al.(2011)</label><mixed-citation>Rignot, E., Velicogna, I., van den Broeke, M. R., Monaghan, A., and Lenaerts,
J. T. M.: Acceleration of the contribution of the Greenland and Antarctic
ice sheets to sea level rise, Geophys. Res. Lett., 38,  L05503,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011GL046583" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2011GL046583</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx68"><label>Rignot et al.(2015)</label><mixed-citation>Rignot, E., Fenty, I., Xu, Y., Cai, C., and Kemp, C.: Undercutting of
marine-terminating glaciers in West Greenland, Geophys. Res.
Lett., 42, 5909–5917, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GL064236" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2015GL064236</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx69"><label>Ritz et al.(1996)</label><mixed-citation>
Ritz, C., Fabre, A., and Letréguilly, A.: Sensitivity of a Greenland
ice
sheet model to ice flow and ablation parameters: consequences for the
evolution through the last climatic cycle, Clim. Dynam., 13, 11–23,
1996.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page395?><ref id="bib1.bibx70"><label>Ritz et al.(2001)</label><mixed-citation>
Ritz, C., Rommelaere, V., and Dumas, C.: Modeling the evolution of
Antarctic
ice sheet over the last 420,000 years: Implications for altitude changes in
the Vostok region, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 106,
31943–31964, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx71"><label>Saito et al.(2016)</label><mixed-citation>Saito, F., Abe-Ouchi, A., Takahashi, K., and Blatter, H.: SeaRISE
experiments
revisited: potential sources of spread in multi-model projections of the
Greenland ice sheet, The Cryosphere, 10, 43–63,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-10-43-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/tc-10-43-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx72"><label>Seroussi et al.(2013)</label><mixed-citation>Seroussi, H., Morlighem, M., Rignot, E., Khazendar, A., Larour, E., and
Mouginot, J.: Dependence of century-scale projections of the Greenland ice
sheet on its thermal regime, J. Glaciol., 59, 1024–1034,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3189/2013JoG13J054" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3189/2013JoG13J054</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx73"><label>Serreze and Barry(2011)</label><mixed-citation>Serreze, M. C. and Barry, R. G.: Processes and impacts of Arctic
amplification: A research synthesis, Glob. Planet. Change, 77,
85–96, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2011.03.004" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.gloplacha.2011.03.004</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx74"><label>Straneo et al.(2012)</label><mixed-citation>Straneo, F., Sutherland, D. A., Holland, D., Gladish, C., Hamilton, G. S.,
Johnson, H. L., Rignot, E., Xu, Y., and Koppes, M.: Characteristics of ocean
waters reaching Greenland's glaciers, Ann. Glaciol., 53, 202–210,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3189/2012AoG60A059" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3189/2012AoG60A059</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx75"><label>Taylor et al.(2012)</label><mixed-citation>Taylor, K. E., Stouffer, R. J., and Meehl, G. A.: An Overview of CMIP5
and
the Experiment Design, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc.,
93, 485–498, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-11-00094.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/BAMS-D-11-00094.1</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx76"><label>Van Tricht et al.(2016)</label><mixed-citation>Van Tricht, K., Lhermitte, S., Lenaerts, J. T., Gorodetskaya, I. V.,
L'Ecuyer, T. S., Noël, B., van den Broeke, M. R., Turner, D. D., and
Van Lipzig, N. P.: Clouds enhance Greenland ice sheet meltwater runoff,
Nat. Commun., 7, 10266, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms10266" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/ncomms10266</ext-link>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx77"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{Vizca\'{\i}no et~al.(2008)}}?><label>Vizcaíno et al.(2008)</label><mixed-citation>Vizcaíno, M., Mikolajewicz, U., Gröger, M., Maier-Reimer, E.,
Schurgers, G.,
and Winguth, A. M. E.: Long-term ice sheet-climate interactions under
anthropogenic greenhouse forcing simulated with a complex Earth System
Model, Clim. Dynam., 31, 665–690, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-008-0369-7" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s00382-008-0369-7</ext-link>,
2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx78"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{Vizca\'{\i}no et~al.(2013)}}?><label>Vizcaíno et al.(2013)</label><mixed-citation>Vizcaíno, M., Lipscomb, W. H., Sacks, W. J., van Angelen, J. H.,
Wouters, B.,
and van den Broeke, M. R.: Greenland Surface Mass Balance as
Simulated by the Community Earth System Model. Part I: Model
Evaluation and 1850–2005 Results, J. Clim., 26, 7793–7812,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00615.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00615.1</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx79"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{Vizca\'{\i}no et~al.(2015)}}?><label>Vizcaíno et al.(2015)</label><mixed-citation>Vizcaíno, M., Mikolajewicz, U., Ziemen, F., Rodehacke, C. B., Greve, R.,
and
van den Broeke, M. R.: Coupled simulations of Greenland Ice Sheet and
climate change up to A.D. 2300, Geophys. Res. Lett., 42,
3927–3935, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2014GL061142" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2014GL061142</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx80"><label>Watanabe et al.(2010)</label><mixed-citation>Watanabe, M., Suzuki, T., O'ishi, R., Komuro, Y., Watanabe, S., Emori, S.,
Takemura, T., Chikira, M., Ogura, T., Sekiguchi, M., Takata, K., Yamazaki,
D., Yokohata, T., Nozawa, T., Hasumi, H., Tatebe, H., and Kimoto, M.:
Improved Climate Simulation by MIROC5: Mean States, Variability,
and Climate Sensitivity, J. Clim., 23, 6312–6335,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/2010JCLI3679.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/2010JCLI3679.1</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx81"><label>Weertman(1957)</label><mixed-citation>
Weertman, J.: On the sliding of glaciers, J. Glaciol., 3, 33–38,
1957.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Assessment of the Greenland ice sheet–atmosphere feedbacks for the next century with a regional atmospheric model coupled to an ice sheet model</article-title-html>
<abstract-html><p>In the context of global warming, growing attention is paid to
the evolution of the Greenland ice sheet (GrIS) and its contribution to
sea-level rise at the centennial timescale. Atmosphere–GrIS interactions,
such as the temperature–elevation and the albedo feedbacks, have the potential
to modify the surface energy balance and thus to impact the GrIS surface mass
balance (SMB). In turn, changes in the geometrical features of the ice sheet
may alter both the climate and the ice dynamics governing the ice sheet
evolution. However, changes in ice sheet geometry are generally not
explicitly accounted for when simulating atmospheric changes over the
Greenland ice sheet in the future. To account for ice sheet–climate
interactions, we developed the first two-way synchronously coupled model
between a regional atmospheric model (MAR) and a 3-D ice sheet model (GRISLI).
Using this novel model, we simulate the ice sheet evolution from 2000 to 2150
under a prolonged representative concentration pathway scenario, RCP8.5. Changes in surface elevation and ice
sheet extent simulated by GRISLI have a direct impact on the climate
simulated by MAR. They are fed to MAR from 2020 onwards, i.e. when changes in
SMB produce significant topography changes in GRISLI. We further assess the
importance of the atmosphere–ice sheet feedbacks through the comparison of
the two-way coupled experiment with two other simulations based on simpler
coupling strategies: (i) a one-way coupling with no consideration of any
change in ice sheet geometry; (ii) an alternative one-way coupling in which
the elevation change feedbacks are parameterized in the ice sheet model
(from 2020 onwards) without taking into account the changes in ice sheet
topography in the atmospheric model. The two-way coupled experiment simulates
an important increase in surface melt below 2000&thinsp;m of elevation, resulting in
an important SMB reduction in 2150 and a shift of the equilibrium line
towards elevations as high as 2500&thinsp;m, despite a slight increase in SMB over
the central plateau due to enhanced snowfall. In relation with these SMB
changes, modifications of ice sheet geometry favour ice flux convergence
towards the margins, with an increase in ice velocities in the GrIS interior
due to increased surface slopes and a decrease in ice velocities at the
margins due to decreasing ice thickness. This convergence counteracts the SMB
signal in these areas. In the two-way coupling, the SMB is also influenced by
changes in fine-scale atmospheric dynamical processes, such as the increase
in katabatic winds from central to marginal regions induced by increased
surface slopes. Altogether, the GrIS contribution to sea-level rise, inferred
from variations in ice volume above floatation, is equal to 20.4&thinsp;cm in 2150.
The comparison between the coupled and the two uncoupled experiments suggests
that the effect of the different feedbacks is amplified over time with the
most important feedbacks being the SMB–elevation feedbacks. As a result, the
experiment with parameterized SMB–elevation feedback provides a sea-level
contribution from GrIS in 2150 only 2.5&thinsp;% lower than the two-way coupled
experiment, while the experiment with no feedback is 9.3&thinsp;% lower. The
change in the ablation area in the two-way coupled experiment is much larger
than those provided by the two simplest methods, with an underestimation of
11.7&thinsp;% (14&thinsp;%) with parameterized feedbacks (no feedback).
In addition, we quantify that computing the GrIS contribution to sea-level
rise from SMB changes only over a fixed ice sheet mask leads to an
overestimation of ice loss of at least 6&thinsp;% compared to the use of a time
variable ice sheet mask. Finally, our results suggest that ice-loss
estimations diverge when using the different coupling strategies, with
differences from the two-way method becoming significant at the end of the
21st century. In particular, even if averaged over the whole GrIS the
climatic and ice sheet fields are relatively similar; at the local and
regional scale there are important differences, highlighting the importance
of correctly representing the interactions when interested in basin scale
changes.</p></abstract-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>Alexander et al.(2014)</label><mixed-citation>
Alexander, P. M., Tedesco, M., Fettweis, X., van de Wal, R. S. W., Smeets, C.
J. P. P., and van den Broeke, M. R.: Assessing spatio-temporal variability
and trends in modelled and measured Greenland Ice Sheet albedo (2000–2013),
The Cryosphere, 8, 2293–2312, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-8-2293-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-8-2293-2014</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>Alley and Joughin(2012)</label><mixed-citation>
Alley, R. B. and Joughin, I.: Modeling Ice-Sheet Flow, Science, 336,
551–552, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1220530" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1220530</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>Alvarez-Solas et al.(2011a)</label><mixed-citation>
Alvarez-Solas, J., Charbit, S., Ramstein, G., Paillard, D., Dumas, C., Ritz,
C., and Roche, D. M.: Millennial-scale oscillations in the Southern Ocean
in response to atmospheric CO<sub>2</sub> increase, Glob. Planet. Change, 76,
128–136, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2010.12.004" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2010.12.004</a>, 2011a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>Alvarez-Solas et al.(2011b)</label><mixed-citation>
Alvarez-Solas, J., Montoya, M., Ritz, C., Ramstein, G., Charbit, S., Dumas,
C.,
Nisancioglu, K., Dokken, T., and Ganopolski, A.: Heinrich event 1: an example
of dynamical ice-sheet reaction to oceanic changes, Clim. Past, 7,
1297–1306, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-7-1297-2011" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-7-1297-2011</a>, 2011b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>Aschwanden et al.(2016)</label><mixed-citation>
Aschwanden, A., Fahnestock, M. A., and Truffer, M.: Complex Greenland
outlet
glacier flow captured, Nat. Commun., 7, 10524,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms10524" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms10524</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>Bamber et al.(2013)</label><mixed-citation>
Bamber, J. L., Griggs, J. A., Hurkmans, R. T. W. L., Dowdeswell, J. A.,
Gogineni, S. P., Howat, I., Mouginot, J., Paden, J., Palmer, S., Rignot, E.,
and Steinhage, D.: A new bed elevation dataset for Greenland, The
Cryosphere, 7, 499–510, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-7-499-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-7-499-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>Banwell et al.(2016)</label><mixed-citation>
Banwell, A., Hewitt, I., Willis, I., and Arnold, N.: Moulin density controls
drainage development beneath the Greenland ice sheet: Moulin Density
and Subglacial Drainage, J. Geophys. Res.-Earth,
121, 2248–2269, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JF003801" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JF003801</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>Box(2013)</label><mixed-citation>
Box, J. E.: Greenland Ice Sheet Mass Balance Reconstruction. Part
II: Surface Mass Balance (1840–2010), J. Clim., 26,
6974–6989, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00518.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00518.1</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>Box et al.(2012)</label><mixed-citation>
Box, J. E., Fettweis, X., Stroeve, J. C., Tedesco, M., Hall, D. K., and
Steffen, K.: Greenland ice sheet albedo feedback: thermodynamics and
atmospheric drivers, The Cryosphere, 6, 821–839,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-6-821-2012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-6-821-2012</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>Brun et al.(1992)</label><mixed-citation>
Brun, E., David, P., Sudul, M., and Brunot, G.: A numerical model to simulate
snow-cover stratigraphy for operational avalanche forecasting, J.
Glaciol., 38, 13–22,  1992.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>Bueler and Brown(2009)</label><mixed-citation>
Bueler, E. and Brown, J.: Shallow shelf approximation as a “sliding law” in
a thermomechanically coupled ice sheet model, J. Geophys.
Res., 114, F03008, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JF001179" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JF001179</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>Calov et al.(2018)</label><mixed-citation>
Calov, R., Beyer, S., Greve, R., Beckmann, J., Willeit, M., Kleiner, T.,
Rückamp, M., Humbert, A., and Ganopolski, A.: Simulation of the future
sea level contribution of Greenland with a new glacial system model, The
Cryosphere, 12, 3097–3121, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-12-3097-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-12-3097-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>Charbit et al.(2013)</label><mixed-citation>
Charbit, S., Dumas, C., Kageyama, M., Roche, D. M., and Ritz, C.: Influence
of
ablation-related processes in the build-up of simulated Northern
Hemisphere ice sheets during the last glacial cycle, The Cryosphere, 7,
681–698, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-7-681-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-7-681-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>Church et al.(2013)</label><mixed-citation>
Church, J. A., Clark, P. U., Cazenave, A., Gregory, J. M., Jevrejeva, S.,
Levermann, A., Merrifield, M. A., Milne, G. A., Nerem, R. S., Nunn, P. D.,
Payne, A. J., Pfeffer, W. T., Stammer, D., and Unnikrishnan, A. S.: Sea level change, Tech. Rep., PM Cambridge University Press,
2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>Clason et al.(2015)</label><mixed-citation>
Clason, C. C., Mair, D. W. F., Nienow, P. W., Bartholomew, I. D., Sole, A.,
Palmer, S., and Schwanghart, W.: Modelling the transfer of supraglacial
meltwater to the bed of Leverett Glacier, Southwest Greenland, The
Cryosphere, 9, 123–138, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-9-123-2015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-9-123-2015</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>de Boer et al.(2014)</label><mixed-citation>
de Boer, B., Stocchi, P., and van de Wal, R. S. W.: A fully coupled 3-D
ice-sheet-sea-level model: algorithm and applications, Geosci. Model Dev., 7,
2141–2156, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-7-2141-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-7-2141-2014</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>Doyle and Shapiro(1999)</label><mixed-citation>
Doyle, J. D. and Shapiro, M. A.: Flow response to large-scale topography: the
Greenland tip jet, Tellus A, 51,
728–748, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusa.v51i5.14471" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusa.v51i5.14471</a>, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>Edwards et al.(2014a)</label><mixed-citation>
Edwards, T. L., Fettweis, X., Gagliardini, O., Gillet-Chaulet, F., Goelzer,
H.,
Gregory, J. M., Hoffman, M., Huybrechts, P., Payne, A. J., Perego, M., Price,
S., Quiquet, A., and Ritz, C.: Effect of uncertainty in surface mass
balance-elevation feedback on projections of the future sea level
contribution of the Greenland ice sheet, The Cryosphere, 8, 195–208,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-8-195-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-8-195-2014</a>, 2014a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>Edwards et al.(2014b)</label><mixed-citation>
Edwards, T. L., Fettweis, X., Gagliardini, O., Gillet-Chaulet, F., Goelzer,
H.,
Gregory, J. M., Hoffman, M., Huybrechts, P., Payne, A. J., Perego, M., Price,
S., Quiquet, A., and Ritz, C.: Probabilistic parameterisation of the surface
mass balance-elevation feedback in regional climate model simulations of
the Greenland ice sheet, The Cryosphere, 8, 181–194,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-8-181-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-8-181-2014</a>, 2014b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>Ettema et al.(2010)</label><mixed-citation>
Ettema, J., van den Broeke, M. R., van Meijgaard, E., and van de Berg, W. J.:
Climate of the Greenland ice sheet using a high-resolution climate model
– Part 2: Near-surface climate and energy balance, The Cryosphere, 4,
529–544, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-4-529-2010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-4-529-2010</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>Fettweis et al.(2013)</label><mixed-citation>
Fettweis, X., Franco, B., Tedesco, M., van Angelen, J. H., Lenaerts, J.
T. M.,
van den Broeke, M. R., and Gallée, H.: Estimating the Greenland ice sheet
surface mass balance contribution to future sea level rise using the regional
atmospheric climate model MAR, The Cryosphere, 7, 469–489,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-7-469-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-7-469-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>Fettweis et al.(2017)</label><mixed-citation>
Fettweis, X., Box, J. E., Agosta, C., Amory, C., Kittel, C., Lang, C., van
As,
D., Machguth, H., and Gallée, H.: Reconstructions of the 1900–2015
Greenland ice sheet surface mass balance using the regional climate MAR
model, The Cryosphere, 11, 1015–1033, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-11-1015-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-11-1015-2017</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>Fox Maule et al.(2005)</label><mixed-citation>
Fox Maule, C., Purucker, M. E., Olsen, N., and Mosegaard, K.: Heat Flux
Anomalies in Antarctica Revealed by Satellite Magnetic Data,
Science, 309, 464–467, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1106888" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1106888</a>, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>Franco et al.(2012)</label><mixed-citation>
Franco, B., Fettweis, X., Lang, C., and Erpicum, M.: Impact of spatial
resolution on the modelling of the Greenland ice sheet surface mass balance
between 1990–2010, using the regional climate model MAR, The Cryosphere,
6, 695–711, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-6-695-2012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-6-695-2012</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>Fürst et al.(2013)</label><mixed-citation>
Fürst, J. J., Goelzer, H., and Huybrechts, P.: Effect of higher-order
stress
gradients on the centennial mass evolution of the Greenland ice sheet, The
Cryosphere, 7, 183–199, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-7-183-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-7-183-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>Gagliardini et al.(2010)</label><mixed-citation>
Gagliardini, O., Durand, G., Zwinger, T., Hindmarsh, R. C. A., and Le Meur,
E.:
Coupling of ice-shelf melting and buttressing is a key process in ice-sheets
dynamics, Geophys. Res. Lett., 37, 14501, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GL043334" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GL043334</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>Gagliardini et al.(2013)</label><mixed-citation>
Gagliardini, O., Zwinger, T., Gillet-Chaulet, F., Durand, G., Favier, L., de
Fleurian, B., Greve, R., Malinen, M., Martín, C., Råback, P.,
Ruokolainen, J., Sacchettini, M., Schäfer, M., Seddik, H., and Thies, J.:
Capabilities and performance of Elmer/Ice, a new-generation ice sheet model,
Geosci. Model Dev., 6, 1299–1318, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-1299-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-1299-2013</a>,
2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>Gallée and Duynkerke(1997)</label><mixed-citation>
Gallée, H. and Duynkerke, P. G.: Air-snow interactions and the surface
energy and mass balance over the melting zone of west Greenland during the
Greenland Ice Margin Experiment, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 102, 13813–13824, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>Gallée and Schayes(1994)</label><mixed-citation>
Gallée, H. and Schayes, G.: Development of a three-dimensional
meso-<i>γ</i>
primitive equation model: katabatic winds simulation in the area of Terra
Nova Bay, Antarctica, Mon. Weather Rev., 122, 671–685, 1994.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>Goelzer et al.(2013)</label><mixed-citation>
Goelzer, H., Huybrechts, P., Fürst, J., Nick, F., Andersen, M., Edwards,
T.,
Fettweis, X., Payne, A., and Shannon, S.: Sensitivity of Greenland ice
sheet projections to model formulations, J. Glaciol., 59, 733–749,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.3189/2013JoG12J182" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3189/2013JoG12J182</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>Goelzer et al.(2018)</label><mixed-citation>
Goelzer, H., Nowicki, S., Edwards, T., Beckley, M., Abe-Ouchi, A.,
Aschwanden,
A., Calov, R., Gagliardini, O., Gillet-Chaulet, F., Golledge, N. R., Gregory,
J., Greve, R., Humbert, A., Huybrechts, P., Kennedy, J. H., Larour, E.,
Lipscomb, W. H., Le clec'h, S., Lee, V., Morlighem, M., Pattyn, F., Payne,
A. J., Rodehacke, C., Rückamp, M., Saito, F., Schlegel, N., Seroussi, H.,
Shepherd, A., Sun, S., van de Wal, R., and Ziemen, F. A.: Design and results
of the ice sheet model initialisation experiments initMIP-Greenland: an
ISMIP6 intercomparison, The Cryosphere, 12, 1433–1460,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-12-1433-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-12-1433-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>Greve et al.(2011)</label><mixed-citation>
Greve, R., Saito, F., and Abe-Ouchi, A.: Initial results of the SeaRISE
numerical experiments with the models SICOPOLIS and IcIES for the
Greenland ice sheet, Ann. Glaciol., 52, 23–30, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>Hutter(1983)</label><mixed-citation>
Hutter, K.: Theoretical glaciology: material science of ice and the mechanics
of glaciers and ice sheets, vol. 1, Springer, 1983.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>Huybrechts and de Wolde(1999)</label><mixed-citation>
Huybrechts, P. and de Wolde, J.: The dynamic response of the Greenland and
Antarctic ice sheets to multiple-century climatic warming, J.
Clim., 12, 2169–2188, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>Huybrechts et al.(2002)</label><mixed-citation>
Huybrechts, P., Janssens, I., Poncin, C., and Fichefet, T.: The response of
the
Greenland ice sheet to climate changes in the 21st century by interactive
coupling of an AOGCM with a thermomechanical ice-sheet model, Ann.
Glaciol., 35, 409–415, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>Johnson et al.(2011)</label><mixed-citation>
Johnson, H. L., Münchow, A., Falkner, K. K., and Melling, H.: Ocean
circulation and properties in Petermann Fjord, Greenland, J.
Geophys. Res., 116, C01003, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JC006519" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JC006519</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>Joughin et al.(2018)</label><mixed-citation>
Joughin, I., Smith, B. E., and Howat, I. M.: A complete map of Greenland ice velocity derived from satellite data collected over 20
years, J. Glaciol., 64, 1–11, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/jog.2017.73" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1017/jog.2017.73</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>Kessler(1969)</label><mixed-citation>
Kessler, E.: On the distribution and continuity of water substance in
atmospheric circulations,   Springer, 1–84,  1969.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>Koziol et al.(2017)</label><mixed-citation>
Koziol, C., Arnold, N., Pope, A., and Colgan, W.: Quantifying supraglacial
meltwater pathways in the Paakitsoq region, West Greenland, J.
Glaciol., 63, 464–476, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/jog.2017.5" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1017/jog.2017.5</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>Kulessa et al.(2017)</label><mixed-citation>
Kulessa, B., Hubbard, A. L., Booth, A. D., Bougamont, M., Dow, C. F., Doyle,
S. H., Christoffersen, P., Lindbäck, K., Pettersson, R., and Fitzpatrick,
A. A.: Seismic evidence for complex sedimentary control of Greenland Ice
Sheet flow, Sci. Adv., 3, e1603071, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1603071" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1603071</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>Langen et al.(2015)</label><mixed-citation>
Langen, P. L., Mottram, R. H., Christensen, J. H., Boberg, F., Rodehacke,
C. B., Stendel, M., van As, D., Ahlstrøm, A. P., Mortensen, J., Rysgaard,
S., Petersen, D., Svendsen, K. H., Aðalgeirsdóttir, G., and Cappelen, J.:
Quantifying Energy and Mass Fluxes Controlling Godthåbsfjord
Freshwater Input in a 5-km Simulation (1991–2012), J. Clim., 28,
3694–3713, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-14-00271.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-14-00271.1</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>Larour et al.(2012)</label><mixed-citation>
Larour, E., Seroussi, H., Morlighem, M., and Rignot, E.: Continental scale,
high order, high spatial resolution, ice sheet modeling using the Ice
Sheet System Model (ISSM), J. Geophys. Res.-Earth, 117, F01022, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JF002140" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JF002140</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>Le clec'h et al.(2018)</label><mixed-citation>
Le clec'h, S., Quiquet, A., Charbit, S., Dumas, C., Kageyama, M., and Ritz,
C.:
A rapidly converging spin-up method for the present-day Greenland ice sheet
using the GRISLI ice-sheet model, 1–21,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2017-322" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2017-322</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>Le Meur and Huybrechts(1996)</label><mixed-citation>
Le Meur, E. and Huybrechts, P.: A comparison of different ways of dealing
with
isostasy: examples from modelling the Antarctic ice sheet during the last
glacial cycle, Ann. Glaciol., 23, 309–317,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/S0260305500013586" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1017/S0260305500013586</a>, 1996.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>Lin et al.(1983)</label><mixed-citation>
Lin, Y.-L., Farley, R. D., and Orville, H. D.: Bulk parameterization of the
snow field in a cloud model, J. Clim. Appl. Meteorol., 22,
1065–1092, 1983.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib46"><label>Lofverstrom and Liakka(2018)</label><mixed-citation>
Lofverstrom, M. and Liakka, J.: The influence of atmospheric grid resolution
in
a climate model-forced ice sheet simulation, The Cryosphere, 12, 1499–1510,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-12-1499-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-12-1499-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib47"><label>Lunt et al.(2004)</label><mixed-citation>
Lunt, D. J., de Noblet-Ducoudré, N., and Charbit, S.: Effects of a melted
greenland ice sheet on climate, vegetation, and the cryosphere, Clim.
Dynam., 23, 679–694, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-004-0463-4" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-004-0463-4</a>, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib48"><label>MacAyeal(1989)</label><mixed-citation>
MacAyeal, D. R.: Large-scale ice flow over a viscous basal sediment: Theory
and application to ice stream B, Antarctica, J. Geophys.
Res.-Sol. Ea., 94, 4071–4087, 1989.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib49"><label>Meyssignac et al.(2017)</label><mixed-citation>
Meyssignac, B., Fettweis, X., Chevrier, R., and Spada, G.: Regional Sea
Level Changes for the Twentieth and the Twenty-First Centuries
Induced by the Regional Variability in Greenland Ice Sheet
Surface Mass Loss, J. Clim., 30, 2011–2028,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0337.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0337.1</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib50"><label>Moore and Renfrew(2005)</label><mixed-citation>
Moore, G. W. K. and Renfrew, I. A.: Tip Jets and Barrier Winds: A
QuikSCAT Climatology of High Wind Speed Events around
Greenland, J. Clim., 18, 3713–3725, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI3455.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI3455.1</a>,
2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib51"><label>Morcrette et al.(2008)</label><mixed-citation>
Morcrette, J.-J., Barker, H. W., Cole, J. N. S., Iacono, M. J., and Pincus,
R.:
Impact of a New Radiation Package, McRad, in the ECMWF Integrated
Forecasting System, Mon. Weather Rev., 136, 4773–4798,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/2008MWR2363.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/2008MWR2363.1</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib52"><label>Morlighem et al.(2017)</label><mixed-citation>
Morlighem, M., Williams, C. N., Rignot, E., An, L., Arndt, J. E., Bamber,
J. L., Catania, G., Chauché, N., Dowdeswell, J. A., Dorschel, B., Fenty, I.,
Hogan, K., Howat, I., Hubbard, A., Jakobsson, M., Jordan, T. M., Kjeldsen,
K. K., Millan, R., Mayer, L., Mouginot, J., Noël, B. P. Y., Cofaigh, C. o.,
Palmer, S., Rysgaard, S., Seroussi, H., Siegert, M. J., Slabon, P., Straneo,
F., van den Broeke, M. R., Weinrebe, W., Wood, M., and Zinglersen, K. B.:
BedMachine v3: Complete bed topography and ocean bathymetry mapping of
Greenland from multi-beam echo sounding combined with mass conservation:
BedMachine Greenland v3, Geophys. Res. Lett., 44, 11051–11061,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL074954" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL074954</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib53"><label>Noël et al.(2014)</label><mixed-citation>
Noël, B., Fettweis, X., van de Berg, W. J., van den Broeke, M. R., and
Erpicum, M.: Sensitivity of Greenland Ice Sheet surface mass balance to
perturbations in sea surface temperature and sea ice cover: a study with the
regional climate model MAR, The Cryosphere, 8, 1871–1883,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-8-1871-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-8-1871-2014</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib54"><label>Noël et al.(2015)</label><mixed-citation>
Noël, B., van de Berg, W. J., van Meijgaard, E., Kuipers Munneke, P.,
van de
Wal, R. S. W., and van den Broeke, M. R.: Evaluation of the updated regional
climate model RACMO2.3: summer snowfall impact on the Greenland Ice
Sheet, The Cryosphere, 9, 1831–1844, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-9-1831-2015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-9-1831-2015</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib55"><label>Noël et al.(2016)</label><mixed-citation>
Noël, B., van de Berg, W. J., Machguth, H., Lhermitte, S., Howat, I.,
Fettweis, X., and van den Broeke, M. R.: A daily, 1&thinsp;km resolution data set of
downscaled Greenland ice sheet surface mass balance (1958–2015), The
Cryosphere, 10, 2361–2377, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-10-2361-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-10-2361-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib56"><label>Nowicki et al.(2016)</label><mixed-citation>
Nowicki, S. M. J., Payne, A., Larour, E., Seroussi, H., Goelzer, H.,
Lipscomb, W., Gregory, J., Abe-Ouchi, A., and Shepherd, A.: Ice Sheet Model
Intercomparison Project (ISMIP6) contribution to CMIP6, Geosci. Model Dev.,
9, 4521–4545, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-4521-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-4521-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib57"><label>Pattyn(2017)</label><mixed-citation>
Pattyn, F.: Sea-level response to melting of Antarctic ice shelves on
multi-centennial timescales with the fast Elementary Thermomechanical
Ice Sheet model (f.ETISh v1.0), The Cryosphere, 11, 1851–1878,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-11-1851-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-11-1851-2017</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib58"><label>Peano et al.(2017)</label><mixed-citation>
Peano, D., Colleoni, F., Quiquet, A., and Masina, S.: Ice flux evolution in
fast flowing areas of the Greenland ice sheet over the 20th and 21st
centuries, J. Glaciol., 63, 499–513, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/jog.2017.12" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1017/jog.2017.12</a>,
2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib59"><label>Petersen et al.(2003)</label><mixed-citation>
Petersen, G. N., Ólafsson, H., and Kristjánsson, J. E.: Flow in the
lee of
idealized mountains and Greenland, J. Atmos. Sci., 60,
2183–2195, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib60"><label>Peyaud et al.(2007)</label><mixed-citation>
Peyaud, V., Ritz, C., and Krinner, G.: Modelling the Early Weichselian
Eurasian Ice Sheets: role of ice shelves and influence of ice-dammed lakes,
Clim. Past, 3, 375–386, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-3-375-2007" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-3-375-2007</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib61"><label>Philippon et al.(2006)</label><mixed-citation>
Philippon, G., Ramstein, G., Charbit, S., Kageyama, M., Ritz, C., and Dumas,
C.: Evolution of the Antarctic ice sheet throughout the last deglaciation:
A study with a new coupled climate–north and south hemisphere ice sheet
model, Earth   Planet. Sci. Lett., 248, 750–758,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsl.2006.06.017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsl.2006.06.017</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib62"><label>Pollard and DeConto(2012)</label><mixed-citation>
Pollard, D. and DeConto, R. M.: A simple inverse method for the distribution
of
basal sliding coefficients under ice sheets, applied to Antarctica, The
Cryosphere, 6, 953–971, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-6-953-2012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-6-953-2012</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib63"><label>Price et al.(2011)</label><mixed-citation>
Price, S. F., Payne, A. J., Howat, I. M., and Smith, B. E.: Committed
sea-level
rise for the next century from Greenland ice sheet dynamics during the past
decade, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 108, 8978–8983, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1017313108" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1017313108</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib64"><label>Quiquet et al.(2012)</label><mixed-citation>
Quiquet, A., Punge, H. J., Ritz, C., Fettweis, X., Gallée, H., Kageyama,
M.,
Krinner, G., Salas y Mélia, D., and Sjolte, J.: Sensitivity of a Greenland
ice sheet model to atmospheric forcing fields, The Cryosphere, 6, 999–1018,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-6-999-2012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-6-999-2012</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib65"><label>Quiquet et al.(2013)</label><mixed-citation>
Quiquet, A., Ritz, C., Punge, H. J., and Salas y Mélia, D.: Greenland ice
sheet contribution to sea level rise during the last interglacial period: a
modelling study driven and constrained by ice core data, Clim. Past,
9, 353–366, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-9-353-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-9-353-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib66"><label>Quiquet et al.(2018)</label><mixed-citation>
Quiquet, A., Dumas, C., Ritz, C., Peyaud, V., and Roche, D. M.: The GRISLI
ice sheet model (version 2.0): calibration and validation for
multi-millennial changes of the Antarctic ice sheet, Geosci. Model Dev., 11,
5003–5025, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-5003-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-5003-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib67"><label>Rignot et al.(2011)</label><mixed-citation>
Rignot, E., Velicogna, I., van den Broeke, M. R., Monaghan, A., and Lenaerts,
J. T. M.: Acceleration of the contribution of the Greenland and Antarctic
ice sheets to sea level rise, Geophys. Res. Lett., 38,  L05503,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011GL046583" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2011GL046583</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib68"><label>Rignot et al.(2015)</label><mixed-citation>
Rignot, E., Fenty, I., Xu, Y., Cai, C., and Kemp, C.: Undercutting of
marine-terminating glaciers in West Greenland, Geophys. Res.
Lett., 42, 5909–5917, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GL064236" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GL064236</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib69"><label>Ritz et al.(1996)</label><mixed-citation>
Ritz, C., Fabre, A., and Letréguilly, A.: Sensitivity of a Greenland
ice
sheet model to ice flow and ablation parameters: consequences for the
evolution through the last climatic cycle, Clim. Dynam., 13, 11–23,
1996.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib70"><label>Ritz et al.(2001)</label><mixed-citation>
Ritz, C., Rommelaere, V., and Dumas, C.: Modeling the evolution of
Antarctic
ice sheet over the last 420,000 years: Implications for altitude changes in
the Vostok region, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 106,
31943–31964, 2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib71"><label>Saito et al.(2016)</label><mixed-citation>
Saito, F., Abe-Ouchi, A., Takahashi, K., and Blatter, H.: SeaRISE
experiments
revisited: potential sources of spread in multi-model projections of the
Greenland ice sheet, The Cryosphere, 10, 43–63,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-10-43-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-10-43-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib72"><label>Seroussi et al.(2013)</label><mixed-citation>
Seroussi, H., Morlighem, M., Rignot, E., Khazendar, A., Larour, E., and
Mouginot, J.: Dependence of century-scale projections of the Greenland ice
sheet on its thermal regime, J. Glaciol., 59, 1024–1034,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.3189/2013JoG13J054" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3189/2013JoG13J054</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib73"><label>Serreze and Barry(2011)</label><mixed-citation>
Serreze, M. C. and Barry, R. G.: Processes and impacts of Arctic
amplification: A research synthesis, Glob. Planet. Change, 77,
85–96, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2011.03.004" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2011.03.004</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib74"><label>Straneo et al.(2012)</label><mixed-citation>
Straneo, F., Sutherland, D. A., Holland, D., Gladish, C., Hamilton, G. S.,
Johnson, H. L., Rignot, E., Xu, Y., and Koppes, M.: Characteristics of ocean
waters reaching Greenland's glaciers, Ann. Glaciol., 53, 202–210,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.3189/2012AoG60A059" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3189/2012AoG60A059</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib75"><label>Taylor et al.(2012)</label><mixed-citation>
Taylor, K. E., Stouffer, R. J., and Meehl, G. A.: An Overview of CMIP5
and
the Experiment Design, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc.,
93, 485–498, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-11-00094.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-11-00094.1</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib76"><label>Van Tricht et al.(2016)</label><mixed-citation>
Van Tricht, K., Lhermitte, S., Lenaerts, J. T., Gorodetskaya, I. V.,
L'Ecuyer, T. S., Noël, B., van den Broeke, M. R., Turner, D. D., and
Van Lipzig, N. P.: Clouds enhance Greenland ice sheet meltwater runoff,
Nat. Commun., 7, 10266, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms10266" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms10266</a>, 2016.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib77"><label>Vizcaíno et al.(2008)</label><mixed-citation>
Vizcaíno, M., Mikolajewicz, U., Gröger, M., Maier-Reimer, E.,
Schurgers, G.,
and Winguth, A. M. E.: Long-term ice sheet-climate interactions under
anthropogenic greenhouse forcing simulated with a complex Earth System
Model, Clim. Dynam., 31, 665–690, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-008-0369-7" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-008-0369-7</a>,
2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib78"><label>Vizcaíno et al.(2013)</label><mixed-citation>
Vizcaíno, M., Lipscomb, W. H., Sacks, W. J., van Angelen, J. H.,
Wouters, B.,
and van den Broeke, M. R.: Greenland Surface Mass Balance as
Simulated by the Community Earth System Model. Part I: Model
Evaluation and 1850–2005 Results, J. Clim., 26, 7793–7812,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00615.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00615.1</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib79"><label>Vizcaíno et al.(2015)</label><mixed-citation>
Vizcaíno, M., Mikolajewicz, U., Ziemen, F., Rodehacke, C. B., Greve, R.,
and
van den Broeke, M. R.: Coupled simulations of Greenland Ice Sheet and
climate change up to A.D. 2300, Geophys. Res. Lett., 42,
3927–3935, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2014GL061142" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2014GL061142</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib80"><label>Watanabe et al.(2010)</label><mixed-citation>
Watanabe, M., Suzuki, T., O'ishi, R., Komuro, Y., Watanabe, S., Emori, S.,
Takemura, T., Chikira, M., Ogura, T., Sekiguchi, M., Takata, K., Yamazaki,
D., Yokohata, T., Nozawa, T., Hasumi, H., Tatebe, H., and Kimoto, M.:
Improved Climate Simulation by MIROC5: Mean States, Variability,
and Climate Sensitivity, J. Clim., 23, 6312–6335,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/2010JCLI3679.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/2010JCLI3679.1</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib81"><label>Weertman(1957)</label><mixed-citation>
Weertman, J.: On the sliding of glaciers, J. Glaciol., 3, 33–38,
1957.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
