Warming permafrost and active layer variability at Cime Bianche , Western Alps

Introduction Conclusions References


Introduction
Permafrost degradation can induce severe feedbacks on the climate system and directly on society, the first most importantly by greenhouse gas release in sedimentary lowlands (DeConto et al., 2012;Hollesen et al., 2011;Schuur et al., 2009) and the latter by hazards from changing slope stability in densely populated mountain areas (Stoffel et al., 2014;Allen and Huggel, 2013;Haeberli, 2013;Fischer et al., 2012Fischer et al., , 2013) )  by damaging infrastructures lying on ice-rich permafrost layers or high-mountain summits (Bommer et al., 2010;Springman and Arenson, 2008).Because of this sensitivity, permafrost has been defined as an important cryospheric indicator of global climate change (e.g., Harris and Haeberli, 2001).
The study of permafrost in mountain regions has become relevant in view of ongoing climate changes (Etzelmüller, 2013;Harris et al., 2009;Gruber and Haeberli, 2007;Gruber, 2004).Although permafrost warming and increasing active layer thickness has been observed worldwide (Harris, 2003;Smith et al., 2010;Romanovsky et al., 2010;Wu and Zhang, 2008;Christiansen et al., 2010;Guglielmin and Cannone, 2012;Guglielmin et al., 2014a), in mountain areas the complex topography, the ground surface type, the snow cover, the subsurface hydrology and geology strongly influence the thermal regime of mountain permafrost (Gruber and Haeberli, 2009) altering the response to changing environmental conditions.
In the Alps a number of permafrost monitoring sites exists (e.g., Cremonese et al., 2011).At present the long-term observation of temperatures in boreholes provides the best direct evidence of permafrost state and evolution.Moreover the combination of geophysical and thermal monitoring approaches, such as electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) and boreholes temperature, have been shown to be particularly suitable for permafrost long-term monitoring (e.g., Hilbich et al., 2008;Haeberli et al., 2010;PERMOS, 2013).
The long-term monitoring of ground surface temperature and related spatial variability on differing types of land covers is also crucial because of its direct implications on the initialization, calibration and validation of numerical models (e.g., Guglielmin et al., 2003;Noetzli and Gruber, 2009;Hipp et al., 2014).Snow cover exerts an important influence on the ground thermal regime based on differing processes (Zhang, 2005;Luetschg et al., 2008;Guglielmin et al., 2014b).In mountain environment, on gently inclined slopes, it mostly causes a net increase of mean annual ground temperature due to its insulating effect during winter, but timing and thickness of first snow cover, the mean snow cover thickness as well as the timing of melt-out strongly control the local Figures magnitude of this effect (Hoelzle et al., 2003;Brenning et al., 2005;Pogliotti, 2010).In addition to the snow cover also the characteristics of the ground surface (e.g.bedrock, debris, grain size) have a major influence on both near-surface and sub-surface temperatures as well as on downward heat propagation (Gruber and Hoelzle, 2007;Gubler et al., 2011;Rödder and Kneisel, 2012;Schneider et al., 2012).
The active layer of mountain permafrost is of particular interest because of its influence on slope processes (e.g., Fischer et al., 2012) and infrastructure stability (e.g., Bommer et al., 2010).Active layer development is mainly controlled by air temperature, solar radiation, topography, ground surface characteristics, water content and by the timing, distribution and physical characteristics of the snow cover (Zhang, 2005;Luetschg et al., 2008;Scherler et al., 2010;Wollschläger et al., 2010;Zenklusen Mutter and Phillips, 2012).As a consequence it displays both high spatial and temporal variability (Anisimov et al., 2002;Wright et al., 2009).In the Swiss Alps, the thickness of the active layer typically varies between 0.5 and 8 m depth (Gruber and Haeberli, 2009;PERMOS, 2009PERMOS, , 2013)).Compared to the deeper thermal regime, which reacts to long-term changes in climate the active layer responds more to short-term variations like seasonal snow and air temperature conditions (Beltrami, 2002).
The permafrost temperature regime (at depths of 10 to 200 m) is a sensitive indicator of the decade-to-century climatic variability and long-term changes in the surface energy balance.This is because the range of inter-annual temperature variations decrease significantly with depth, while decadal and longer time-scale variations penetrate to greater depths into permafrost with less attenuation.As a result the signalto-noise ratio (i.e.long term variation vs. inter-annual variability) increases rapidly with depth and the ground acts as a natural low-pass filter of the climate signal (Romanovsky et al., 2002).However, due to the rough topography and its influence on subsurface thermal regime, the geothermal profiles in mountain permafrost are disturbed and their interpretation can be problematic (Gruber et al., 2004).In addition, most of the Alpine permafrost temperature series cover time periods shorter than 20 years since the longest borehole temperature series in the Alps started in the Murtèl-Corvatsch Introduction

Conclusions References
Tables Figures

Back Close
Full rock glacier in the late 1980s (Harris, 2003).Therefore appropriate statistical models to analyze trends of decadal or even shorter time series are needed in order to extract the maximum information from such short time series (Bence, 1995;Helsel and Hirsch, 1992).Although these time series do not yet allow long-term trend analyses, they allow first assessments on the thermal state of the permafrost and its development over the past decade (Zenklusen Mutter et al., 2010).Within this context, the monitoring site of Cime Bianche, on the Italian side of the Western Alps, has been designed for the long-term monitoring of permafrost and ground surface temperatures.The objective of this paper is to provide a first synthesis on the state and recent evolution of permafrost related variables, focusing on: (i) the spatial and temporal variability of ground surface temperatures in relation to snow cover, (ii) the small scale (20-40 m) spatial variability of the active layer thickness and (iii) the warming trend of deep permafrost temperatures.

Site description
The Cime Bianche monitoring site (CB) is located in the western Alps at the head of the Valtournenche Valley (Valle d'Aosta, Italia, 45 • 55 N-7 • 41 E) on the Italian side of the Matterhorn, at 3100 m a.s.l.(Fig. 1).The site is located on a small plateau slightly westward degrading characterized by terraccettes, convexities and depressions that result in a high spatial variability of snow cover thickness during winter.
The bedrock lithology is homogeneous, mainly consisting of garnetiferous micaschists and calcschists belonging to the upper part of the Zermatt-Saas ophiolite complex (Dal Piaz, 1992).The bedrock surface is highly weathered and fractured, locally resulting in a cover of coarse-debris deposits with a thickness ranging from few centimeters to a couple of meters.The presence of small landforms like gelifluction lobes (between 0.6 to almost 5 m in length) and sorted polygons of fine material (with diame-Introduction

Conclusions References
Tables Figures

Back Close
Full ters ranging between 0.6 to 3.4 m) suggests the potential presence of permafrost and cryotic phenomena.The climate of the area is slightly continental.The long-term mean annual precipitation is reported to be about 1000 mm year −1 for the period 1931-1996(Mercalli and Cat Berro, 2003) while the in-situ records show a mean of 1200 mm year Permafrost research in the area started in the late 1990s (Guglielmin and Vannuzzo, 1995) with repeated campaigns of BTS (Bottom Temperature of Snow) measures and glaciological observations showing that the monitoring site was probably ice-covered during the climax of the Little Ice Age.In 2003, as a preliminary investigations for site selection, the potential permafrost occurrence in the area was assessed using results from BTS, VES (Vertical Electrical Soundings) and ERT (Electrical Resistivity Tomography) and the application of numerical models like Permakart (Keller, 1992) and Permaclim (Guglielmin et al., 2003).Results of this preliminary analysis (unpublished) revealed that the area is characterized by the presence of discontinuous permafrost.

Instrumentation
The site instrumentation started in 2005 and has been progressively upgraded during the following years.The current setting is nearly unchanged since August 2008 and consists of: two boreholes, a spatial grid of ground surface temperatures measures and one automatic weather station.Introduction

Conclusions References
Tables Figures

Back Close
Full

Ground surface temperature grid (GSTgrid)
A small grid (40 m × 10 m) is used for monitoring the spatial variability of GST (Ground Surface Temperature).The grid consists of 5 nodes, 4 at the corners and 1 in the center (Fig. 1).Each node is equipped with 2 platinum resistors PT1000 (resolution 0.01 • C, accuracy ±0.05 • C) buried in the ground at depths of 0.02 and 0.3 m (according to Guglielmin, 2006).Ground temperatures are recorded hourly by a Geoprecision D-Log12 datalogger.
For the analysis, also the GST measured at the two boreholes are included, thus 7 nodes are overall considered.Ground surface at each node is mainly characterized by coarse-debris with a fine matrix of coarse-sand and fine-gravel.At each node, the sensors are placed in the matrix thus local ground conditions are nearly homogeneous between all nodes.In contrast, snow cover conditions sharply differ across the grid nodes.Based on field observations and temperature time series analysis (Schmid et al., 2012)  Full the set is divided in snow-free and snow-covered nodes.The first group includes 3 nodes characterized by shallow or intermittent winter snow cover while the latter group includes 4 nodes that clearly show a long lasting deep snow cover with a damping of temperature oscillations during winter (Fig. 1).

Automatic weather station
An automatic weather station (AWS) is installed just above the borehole SH since 2006.Air temperature and relative humidity, atmospheric pressure, wind speed and direction, incoming and outgoing short-and long-wave solar radiation and snow depth are recorded every 10 min by a Campbell Scientific CR3000 datalogger.The system is equipped with a GPRS module for the daily remote data transmission.Since September 2011 a second snow depth sensor has been installed in the surroundings of the DP borehole.Finally solid and liquid precipitations are measured since January 2009 by an OTT Pluvio 2 system.

Data analysis
This section reports a short description of the criteria applied for the calculation of the synthesis parameters used in this study.MAGT is the mean annual ground temperature at a specific depth (m) (e.g.MAGT 10 ).MAGST is the mean annual ground surface temperature.It is calculated with the sensors at 0.02 m or 0.3 m of depth (specified each time).
ALT is the active layer thickness defined as the maximum depth (m) reached by the 0 • C isotherm at the end of the warm season.It is calculated considering the maximum daily temperature at each sensor depth and interpolating between the deepest sensor with positive value and the sensor beneath.The maximum of the resulting vector and the corresponding day are named ALT and ALTday respectively.Such procedure is applied on the warmest period (in depth) of the year, here fixed from 1 August to 30 November.Introduction

Conclusions References
Tables Figures

Back Close
Full TTOP is the MAGT at the top of the permafrost table (Smith and Riseborough, 1996).It is calculated by interpolation of the MAGT at depth of the ALT that is considering the first sensors just above and the first just below the ALT.
THO is the thermal offset within the active layer and is computed as TTOP-MAGST (Burn and Smith, 1988).ZAA is the depth beneath which there is almost no annual fluctuation in ground temperature, nominally smaller than 0.1 • C (van Everdingen, 2005).The annual fluctuation (AF) is calculated at each sensor depth as the difference between annual maximum and annual minimum of the mean daily temperatures.The ZAA is calculated by interpolation between the deepest sensor with AF greater than 0.1 • C and the sensor beneath.On deep nodes time series (below 8 m), a moving average window of 360 days is applied on hourly data before the daily aggregation to remove the electrical sensor's noise (sometimes present).
All the synthesis parameters listed above, with the exception of ALT, are computed considering as reference period the hydrological year (beginning 1 October).All the analysis are performed with the free statistical software R (R Core Team, 2014).When appropriate, the variability of the results is expressed in terms of standard error (se = sd/ √ n where se is standard error, sd is standard deviation and n is the sample size).

Trend analysis
In order to look for linear trends that might reflect warming, two non-parametric methods are applied to boreholes temperatures: Mann-Kendall test (MK) (Mann, 1945;Kendall, 1948) and Sen's slope estimator (SS) (Sen, 1968).These methods are commonly used to assess trends and related significance levels in hydro-meteorological time series such as water quality, stream flow, temperature and precipitation (e.g., Gocic and Trajkovic, 2013;Kousari et al., 2013).The reason for using non-parametric statistical tests is that they are more suitable for non-normally distributed data and are not sensitive to outliers or abrupt changes.Introduction

Conclusions References
Tables Figures

Back Close
Full The procedure chosen includes (i) a pre-whiten of the data for removing the lag-1 autocorrelation components as recommended by von Storch and Navarra (1999) (see also Hamed, 2009), (ii) fitting of the trend's slope with SS and (iii) testing of trend's significance level (p value) with MK.Such a procedure is implemented in the R-package zyp (Bronaugh et al., 2013).
Given the short climatological time-span of the given borehole's observations, a seasonal detrending is recommended, as suggested by Helsel and Hirsch (1992), for better discerning the long-term linear trend over time.Thus a seasonal decomposition based on loess smoother (Cleveland, 1979;Cleveland et al., 1990) is applied on the monthly aggregated time series of each borehole before applying SS and MK (Fig. 2).Such a seasonal detrending method is implemented by the R-function stl (R Core Team, 2014).

Geophysics
At the end of the summer 2013, two geophysical surveys took place at the Cime Bianche with the objective to assess the composition of the subsurface.A first explorative geoelectric (ERT) profile was performed on 16 August 2013, and on 9 October 2013 the ERT measurement was repeated in combination with one refraction seismic tomography (RST) along the same line (see Fig. 1).Combining refraction seismic and ERT measurements enables to unambiguously identify the subsurface materials in the ground.Due to very different specific resistivities, ERT is best suited to differentiate between ice and water whereas the distinction between air and ice can more easily be accomplished by RST, because of large contrasts between their respective p wave velocities.

Electrical Resistivity Tomography (ERT)
A 94 m long electrode array composed of 48 electrodes with 2 m spacing was installed along a straight line less than two meters far from the two boreholes (Fig. 1).Current Introduction

Conclusions References
Tables Figures

Back Close
Full was injected using varying electrode pairs, and the resulting potential differences were automatically measured by a Syscal (Iris Instruments) for each quadrupole possible with the Wenner-Schlumberger configuration (529 measurements, 23 depth levels).
The electrode locations were marked with spray paint and a number of electrodes were left on site to facilitate further measurements.
The measured apparent resistivity datasets were then inverted using the RES2DINV software (Geotomosoft, 2014) with the following set-up.A robust inversion constraint was applied to avoid unrealistic smoothing of the calculated specific resistivities.Additionally the depth of the model layers was increased by a factor 1.5 and an extended model was used to match the model grid of the corresponding seismic inversion.Note, that for geometric reasons, the two lower corners of the resulting tomograms have very low sensitivity to the obtained data and should not be over-interpreted.Finally, a timelapse inversion scheme was applied to the two ERT data sets yielding the percentage of resistivity change from the first measurements to the second.Here, an unconstraint inversion was chosen, meaning that the ERT measurements were inverted independently.

Refraction Seismic Tomography (RST)
The measurements were conducted using a Geode seismometer (Geometrics) and 24 geophones placed with 4 m spacing.A seismic signal was generated in-between every second geophone pair by repeatedly hitting a steel plate with a sledge hammer.To improve the signal-to-noise ratio the signal was stacked at least 15 times at each location.Two additional offset shot points were measured (3 m before the first geophone and 6 m beyond the last one) in order to maximize the spatial resolution and match the ERT profile length and depth of investigation.
The first arrivals of the seismic p wave were manually picked for each seismogram using the software REFLEXW (Sandmeier, 2014) thetic model the travel times are calculated and compared to the measured ones.The model is then updated iteratively by minimizing the residuals between measured and calculated travel times.

Ground surface temperatures
Figure 3 shows MAGST at 2 and 30 cm of depth for each hydrological year calculated on the seven GST nodes.The analysis of the GST dataset shows a mean range of the spatial variability of 2.5 ± 0.15 • C versus a mean range of the inter-annual variability of 1.6 ± 0.12 • C. Some years (e.g. 2009, 2011, 2013) show a MAGST spatial variability that can be greater than 3 • C, far exceeding the observed mean inter-annual variability.
The time series analysis of snow-covered nodes (Schmid et al., 2012) reveals that the mean duration of the insulating snow cover is about 270 days while on snow-free nodes such effect is only sporadic or absent (not shown).On average the thermal offset due to snow cover is about 1.5 ± 0.17 • C with snow covered nodes usually warmer than snow-free nodes.These observations confirm that the warming and cooling effects of respectively a thick and thin snow cover (Zhang, 2005;Pogliotti, 2010) can coexist over short distances (< 50 m) and lead to high spatial variability of the GST.
The results are similar at both depth.The difference between MAGST measured at 2 cm and 30 cm is, on average, 0.4 ± 0.11 • C with deeper sensors usually warmer than the shallower ones.

Active layer
Table 1 summarizes  in Table 1).Missing values (column %NA) in both boreholes are lower than 4 % in all years.
ALT is the variable showing the greater difference between the two boreholes with a mean of 2.75 ± 0.35 m in SH and 4.78 ± 0.26 m in DP.The mean inter-annual difference of ALT between the two boreholes is 2.03 ± 0.12 m while the mean absolute interannual variability of ALT at borehole level is 1 ± 0.13 m.In both boreholes the maximum ALT has been recorded in 2012 while the minimum in 2010.ALT-Day is normally anticipated in DP (except 2013) with differences ranging from few days (e.g.2009) to more than 3 weeks (e.g.2012).The MAGST is on average slightly lower in SH which normally shows a thinner winter snow cover compared to DP (Fig. 4).The TTOP values are very similar, around −0.9 • C. The THO is negative in both boreholes (except 2013) with a mean value of about −0.5 • C in DP and −0.
The values of Table 1 show that all the active layer variables are very similar between the two boreholes with the only exception of ALT which in DP is nearly double than in SH.To better understand the causes of this difference, the daily mean temperatures at selected depths within the active layer of both boreholes and the corresponding snow cover thickness are compared in Fig. 4. Despite a consistently thinner snow depth is recorded on SH compared to DP (mean difference ∼ 41 ± 14 cm during the winter seasons 2012 and 2013), the duration of the insulating snow cover is similar (250±16 days for SH vs. 254 ± 17 days for DP) and effectively does not determine a big difference in MAGST (Table 1).Consequently the snow cover regimes above the two boreholes can be considered equivalent and snow probably plays a major role for the inter-annual variability of ALT while the observed spatial differences must be explained otherwise.
For these reasons we hypothesize that ALT difference may be related to a greater ice/water content in SH compared to DP.This is also revealed by the geophysical survey (see Sect. 3.4 and Fig. 7) and can be inferred by temperature at greater depth.At 1.6 m (red lines, Fig. 4) a pronounced zero-curtain effect can be observed in SH (dashed lines) twice per year, (i) from snow melt to mid-summer and (ii) from the snow onset to mid-winter, while a similar behavior is missing in DP.The occurrence of the Introduction

Conclusions References
Tables Figures

Back Close
Full zero-curtain reflects a large consumption of energy, both for ice melting during summer and water freezing during winter resulting in lower temperatures of SH.Deeper down, the summer heat wave in SH is further delayed if compared to DP: at 3 m in SH (dashed blue lines) the zero-curtain effect is almost continuous from late-summer to early-winter (e.g. in 2010 and 2011) and it is not possible to see a breaking point between melting and freezing processes.Such a behavior is totally missing in DP.It is also interesting to observe that freezing zero-curtain ends nearly contemporary at 1.6 and 3 m and is followed by a rapid temperature drop.
In conclusion, the ALT at Cime Bianche shows a pronounced spatial variability probably caused by the variability of ice/water content in the sub-surface and associated energy consumption resulting from freezing and melting processes.

Permafrost temperature and warming trend
Due to the small depth reached by the borehole SH, the analysis of deep temperature and permafrost temperature is limited to the borehole DP.Looking at temperature profiles with depth (Fig. 5), the permafrost layer at Cime Bianche has a thickness greater than 40 m and a mean temperature of about −1.2 • C. The ZAA varies across years and during the observation period ranged from a minimum of 14.2 m in 2011 to a maximum of 16.2 m in 2013 (Table 2).During the observed years, both minimum (solid lines) and maximum (dashed lines) temperature profiles (deeper than 8 m) tend to progressively shift toward warmer temperatures (Fig. 5).The only exceptions are represented by the 2011's maximum and the 2009's minimum, the latter only above 10 m of depth.
The observed temperature shift is also quantitatively supported by the trend analysis performed on deeper sensors (range 8-41 m of depth, Fig. 6).The analysis has been conducted at all depths within both boreholes but only trends below 8 m have shown to be significant (Kendall's p value of the time series < 0.01) hence only DP borehole is shown.Figure 6 reveals that a pronounced warming rate is present at all depths although it exponentially decrease with depth, varying from around 0.1 • C year −1 at 8 m to 0.007 systematically unbalanced toward higher values and the lower boundaries are always above zero.This means that, at all depths, the statistical distribution of all possible fitted trends is asymmetric towards greater values and also that negative significant trend have never been fitted by the model.Based on the trend analysis, is possible to conclude that permafrost at Cime Bianche is degrading with a warming rate decreasing with depth.

Geophysics
Figure 7 shows the final distribution of specific resistivity for the two ERT measurements, the percentage of change in the model resistivity between the two time steps and the p wave velocity distribution over the same subsection.Additionally, the surface characteristics and a detailed analysis of the geophysical properties at the two borehole locations (SH and DP, Fig. 8) are included in the analysis.
The overall characteristics of both ERT profiles are very similar (Fig. 7a and b) and can be divided into three main zones: a low resistive layer directly below the surface varying between 2.5 m thickness at the top of the slope to 7 m thickness at the bottom, respectively, two high resistive areas with values exceeding 20 000 Ω m located below the superficial layer (from the start of the subsection to the superficial borehole, 0-34 m and between 40-52 m) and a less high resistive area on the lower part of the profile below 5 m depth.
Comparing the two ERT data sets (cf.also the time-lapse image in Fig. 7c), one can observe a clear increase of the uppermost low resistive layer between August and October which is coherent with a thickening of the active layer observed in the borehole temperature during this period.Another main difference between the two measurements is the apparition of two low resistive zones at 34 m and 60 m visible down to 10 m and 15 m depth, respectively.These areas can also be seen in the ERT tomogram from August, but much less developed and limited to a few meters.In addition, the very high resistive area located in the upper part of the profile is much smaller and displaced of about 5 m towards the lower part of the profile in the second measurement.Introduction

Conclusions References
Tables Figures

Back Close
Full These changes are clearly visible in blue (increase) and red (decrease) colors in Fig. 7c.As said before the two datasets were inverted independently within the timelapse scheme.A constrained inversion (results not shown here) would yield very similar overall distribution of resistivity changes the only difference being a much smaller range of values.The large area of resistivity increase located just above the superficial borehole location and reaching down to the bottom of the profile corresponds to the displacement of the high resistive area observed in the ERT tomograms.
The RST tomogram exhibits much less lateral variations than the ERT results (see Fig. 7d), pointing to the influence of liquid water in the ERT results.One can clearly see a relatively slow layer with velocities between 300 and 1500 m s −1 (red and dark red colors) just below the surface with varying thickness between 3 and 5 m.This layer is thickest in the vicinity of the shallow borehole (SH) and thinnest at DP (64 m).Below this first layer the velocities increase steadily until reaching the maximum (around 6400 m s −1 ).The rate of velocity increase is strongest around 40 m and there is a clear distinction between the upper part of the profile (until 45 m) and the lower one.At depth the high velocity zone is present in the upper part and not in the lower part of the profile.
Conversely the velocities at the surface are much higher in the lower part (especially around DP) than in the upper part.
Both geophysical profiles show clear differences in the subsurface properties at the boreholes locations.To relate in detail the results yielded by the geophysics and the measured temperature, the vertical distribution of specific resistivity, seismic velocity and ground temperature at SH and DP are shown in Fig. 8.

Ground surface temperatures
In this study both the inter-annual and the spatial variability of MAGST within a restricted area have been analyzed and compared: the results show that, at Cime

Conclusions References
Tables Figures

Back Close
Full Bianche, the mean range of spatial variability (2.5 ± 0.15 • C) far exceeds the mean range of observed inter-annual variability (1.6 ± 0.12 • C).Given the comparatively homogeneous characteristics of the ground surface at the sensors' locations, such a variability is essentially caused by the heterogeneity of the snow cover thickness both in space (effect of wind redistribution and micro-morphology) and time (effect of variable weather conditions and precipitations).
The thermal effect of snow cover on ground surface temperature has been extensively analyzed (e.g., Goodrich, 1982;Keller and Gubler, 1993;Zhang, 2005;Luetschg et al., 2008).In recent years, with the advances of mini-loggers technology, the number of field experiments aimed at the characterization of the spatial variability of GST has grown.Recently Gubler et al. (2011) observed a spatial variability of more than 2.5 • C within a number of square homogeneous areas of 10 m×10 m.In Norway, Isaksen et al. (2011) report that MAGST varied by 1.5-3.0 • C over distances of 30-100 m in a region characterized by mountain permafrost.Rödder and Kneisel (2012) observed ranges exceeding 4.3 • C between adjacent loggers (< 50 m), although this values include inhomogeneities of surface characteristics.Similar results were obtained by Gisnås et al. (2014) who observed a variability of the MAGST of up to 6 • C within heterogeneous areas of 0.5 km 2 .The inter-annual variability of MAGST caused by snow is also well known and documented by a number of studies (Romanovsky et al., 2003;Hoelzle et al., 2003;Karunaratne and Burn, 2004;Brenning et al., 2005;Etzelmüller, 2007;Ødegård and Isaksen, 2008;Schneider et al., 2012) but rarely has been explicitly analyzed and quantified.An exception in the Alps is represented by Hoelzle et al. (2003) who reported an inter-annual variability of ±2.7 • C measured during two seasons on 8 mini-loggers with differing surface characteristics in the Murtèl-Corvatsch area.Our results thus report a more robust quantification of the mean inter-annual GST variability (1.6 ± 0.12 • C), based on a longer time series (7 years).
The obtained results are very similar at both measurement depth.Given such a small difference and the agreement of temperature fluctuations between 2 and 30 cm, it is Introduction

Conclusions References
Tables Figures

Back Close
Full arguable that to describe the spatial variability of GST and run long-term GST observations, measures at two or more depth are not needed.

Active layer
In this study both thaw depth and temperature fluctuations within the active layer of two adjacent boreholes have been compared.Such experimental design provides direct evidence of the small-scale spatial variability of the ALT and allow to compare the effect of snow cover and ice/water content on sub-surface temperatures.
From 2009 to 2013 the ALT at Cime Bianche varied within 2 and 5.5 m with a mean inter-annual variability of 1 ± 0.13 m.These ranges of thaw depth are comparable to those recorded in other alpine sites (PERMOS, 2013) and the same is true for the observed inter-annual variability (Anisimov et al., 2002;Christiansen, 2004;Schneider et al., 2012;Smith et al., 2010).
ALT in the borehole SH is systematically lower than in DP (mean difference 2.03 ± 0.15 m) even though all the active layer parameters (MAGST, TTOP, THO see Table 1) are very similar between the two boreholes.On one side such a similarity suggests that snow cover regimes above the two boreholes are nearly equivalent thus snow probably plays a major role just for the inter-annual variability of ALT.On the other side the pronounced spatial variability of ALT is probably caused by the variability of ice/water content in the sub-surface and associated variation of energy consumption resulting from freezing and melting processes.Probably snowmelt and meltwater infiltration along preferential discontinuities (a borehole acts a discontinuity itself) is different between SH and DP.Hilbich et al. (2008) observed at Schilthorn (Swiss Alps) a similar situation between two boreholes 15 m apart, ascribing the lower ALT of one borehole to the higher moisture contents (and related freezing) caused by preferential water flow paths from the surrounding slopes.Schneider et al. (2012) analyzed the thermal regime of four adjacent boreholes drilled on differing material (coarse debris, fine debris and bedrock) at Murtèl-Corvatsch (Swiss Alps) and recognized meltwater and ice content as the main responsible for the observed ALT spatial variability.Introduction

Conclusions References
Tables Figures

Back Close
Full The different amount of available water in the active layer of the two boreholes is also reflected by the occurrence of the zero-curtain in the borehole SH and its absence in the borehole DP.In the upper part of the active layer a pronounced zero-curtain can be observed two times per year, (i) from snow melt to mid-summer (spring zero-curtain) and (ii) from the snow onset to mid-winter (autumn zero-curtain).Recently Zenklusen Mutter and Phillips (2012) deeply analyzed similar behaviors on a sample of 10 boreholes in Switzerland observing that, on average, the duration of the spring zero-curtain is usually shorter than the autumn one and is strongly dependent on snow depth at the end of the winter.At Cime Bianche, in the deeper part of the active layer such a distinction between spring and autumn zero-curtain is not always possible.As observed also by Rist and Phillips (2005) it may happen that, below a certain depth, the ground temperature does not become positive because the energy from the summer heat wave is not sufficient to melt all ice before the onset of the subsequent winter season.This continuous zero-curtain is more probable when an higher amount of meltwater is available (Scherler et al., 2010;Kane et al., 2001) and can occur at differing depth from year to year strongly influencing the resulting ALT.

Permafrost temperature and warming trend
In order to look for trends that might reflect warming, two non-parametric methods have been applied to boreholes temperatures time series.The detected linear trends are statistically significant (Kendall's p value < 0.01) only at depth below 8 m and span the range 0.1-0.01• C year −1 decreasing exponentially with depth.The latter evidence suggests that at Cime Bianche the permafrost is warming from surface.
As discussed also by Zenklusen Mutter et al. ( 2010), the detection of trends on time series covering a short time-span needs caution and adoption of specific criteria.Moreover the estimation of uncertainties and significance levels are also fundamental to facilitate the comparisons of trends between differing sites and for reproducing trend's detection methods on others datasets.Introduction

Conclusions References
Tables Figures
Recently in the Alps Zenklusen Mutter et al. ( 2010) detected linear trends applying generalized least-square methods on daily temperature time series of two boreholes in the Muot da Barba Peider ridge (Eastern Swiss Alps).For the deep frozen bedrock between 8 and 17.5 m a general warming trend was found, with significant (p value < 0.05) values ranging respectively from 0.042 to 0.025 • C year −1 .At Cime Bianche a similar range of warming rate exists between 16 and 20 m.The substantial difference between the two sites is that the Swiss boreholes are drilled at the top of a NW-oriented ridge with a mean slope of 38 • thus with a strong 3-D thermal effect induced by topography (Noetzli et al., 2007).In the mountains of Scandinavia Isaksen et al. (2007) reports linear warming trends between 20 and 60 m of depth ranging from about 0.05 to 0.005 • C year −1 respectively over three sites while Isaksen et al. (2011) found an increase in mean ground temperature between 6 and 9 m of depth at two sites, with rates ranging from about 0.015 to 0.095 • C year −1 .Recently at Tarfala mountain station (Sweden) Jonsell et al. (2013) found linear trends over 11 years (2001)(2002)(2003)(2004)(2005)(2006)(2007)(2008)(2009)(2010)(2011) ranging from 0.047 to 0.002 • C year −1 between 20 and 100 m of depth respectively.
The absolute values of warming rates are difficult to compare because of differing site characteristics, differing geographical regions and differing methods used for trend's detection.Nevertheless, some similitudes exist between our and the above mentioned case studies: (i) trends are difficult to detect at shallower depth because of the higher seasonal variability of temperatures (ii) warming trends are mainly significant below 8-

Conclusions References
Tables Figures

Back Close
Full

Geophysics
Given the relatively high resistivity and P wave velocities along the profiles, the presence of permafrost observed in the borehole data is confirmed by the geophysics over the whole profile length (Fig. 7).Moreover a clear discrepancy between the upper part of the profile, where SH is located, and the lower one with borehole DP can be seen in both, the ERT and the RST data.
At DP the P wave velocities indicates the presence of weathered bedrock close to the surface whereas at SH a layer of coarse-debris deposits in the uppermost 5 m is confirmed by very low P wave velocities.Conversely, P wave velocities at depth are higher for SH (∼ 6000 m s −1 ) than for DP (∼ 5000 m s −1 , see also Fig. 8).This difference, also seen in the resistivity data (around 17 000 Ω m at SH and 13 000 Ω m at DP), would indicate that a larger ice content is present in the upslope part of the profile than in the lower part.This is in good agreement with the spatial variation of ALT highlighted in Sect.3.2 and the zero curtain phase observed only at SH (see Fig. 4).
The low resistivity and low velocity layer near the surface, which thickness increases visibly between August and October in the ERT data, is considered to be the active layer.Figure 8 compares the vertical distribution of specific electrical resistivity, P wave velocity and temperature for both boreholes and dates.On the first glance, there seems to be a mismatch between resistivity and temperature regarding ALT for SH.However, in SH borehole temperatures in August show constant values at the freezing point between 1 and 3 m depth (between 2 and 4 m in October), the deeper level being the depth of the sharply increasing resistivity values.As resistivity is sensitive to the liquid water content its values will not increase significantly before most of this liquid water has been frozen, coinciding with a temperature increase to values below the freezing point (e.g., Hauck, 2002).Due to the higher water/ice content in SH, this phenomena (∼ vertical zero-curtain) is only seen in SH and not in DP.
In addition, considering the P wave velocities (500 m s −1 at SH and 3000 m s −1 at DP), one can assume that the remaining discrepancies observed between geophysics

TCD Introduction Conclusions References
Tables Figures

Back Close
Full and temperature data are due to very different surface and subsurface properties.The general description of the surface constitution (Fig. 7e) is already an indication of these differences: DP is located in-between two zones with big blocks (from pluri-decimetric to metric), whereas SH is located at the junction between medium size blocks (from pluri-centimetric to decimetric) mixed and non-mixed with soil.These differences in subsurface material are likely to cause the strong differences in P wave velocities at the two borehole locations.
The two low resistive areas (34-40 m and 53-60 m) visible already in August and more pronounced on the second ERT profile in October are interpreted as preferential water flow path.Since the melt water cannot infiltrate through the two ice-rich (high resistive) bodies close by (at 20-33 and 40-52 m horizontal distance), it is forced to follow a preferential path in between.The lower infiltration area is constrained in the upper part by the ice rich zone and in the lower one by the presence of bedrock near the surface.
Finally the displacement of the high resistive area observed near SH (blue zone at depth on the time-lapse tomogram) is most likely an inversion artefact (overcompensation) due to the appearance of the low resistive area in the second ERT profile.

Conclusions
This paper presents a first synthesis on the thermal state and recent evolution of permafrost in the monitoring site of Cime Bianche.The analysis has been focused on: the tematically colder than those with a long lasting deep snow cover; (ii) the snow cover variability alone can leads to a spatial variability of MAGST greater than its inter-annual variability.
The analysis of ALT spatial variability has been conducted within two adjacent boreholes considering 6 years of observations as well as by the analysis of ERT and seismic profiles.The results show that ALT at Cime Bianche has a pronounced spatial variability caused by a different ice/water content in the sub-surface while the snow cover probably plays a role just in the inter-annual variability of ALT.
The warming rates of ground temperatures time series below 8 m of depth have been analyzed by two non-parametric methods considering 5 years of monthly data.
The results show that permafrost at Cime Bianche is degrading with a warming rate which is higher at 8 m depth and exponentially decreasing with depth.Detected trends are similar to those observed recently in others boreholes both in the Alps and northern mountain environments.Moreover a review of the existing literature reveals a number of similitudes between our findings and the existing studies.
The Supplement related to this article is available online at doi:10.5194/tcd-8-4033-2014-supplement.

Conclusions References
Tables Figures

Conclusions References
Tables Figures

Back Close
Full  Full  and 0.02, 0.3, 0.6, 1, 1.6, 2, 2.6, 3, 3.6, 4,  6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40        to the bottom of the profile corresponds of the high resistive area observed in the 535 The RST tomogram exhibits much less la the ERT results (see Figure 7d), pointin liquid water in the ERT results.One ca tively slow layer with velocities betwee (red and dark red colors) just below the s Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | . A Simultaneous Iterative Reconstruction Technique (SIRT) algorithm was then used to reconstruct a 2-D tomogram of p wave velocity distribution based on the obtained travel times.Starting from a syn-Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | the active layer variables observed in the two boreholes.Since August 2008 data are available at both SH and DP boreholes hence results of ALT can be compared over 6 years while MAGST, TTOP and THO over 5 years (shaded rows Introduction Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | • C year −1 at 41 m.The upper boundaries of the confidence intervals (CI) are Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | spatial and temporal variability of MAGST, the small scale (20-40 m) spatial variability of ALT and the warming rate of deep permafrost temperatures.The analysis of MAGST has been conducted considering seven years of monitoring on 7 sensors located in nearly homogeneous conditions in terms of both topographic and ground surface characteristics.Such experimental design allowed to quantify the thermal effect essentially due to the snow cover variability alone.Results show that: (i) the sensors characterized by shallow or intermittent winter snow cover are sys-Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Anisimov, O., Shiklomanov, N., and Nelson, F.: Variability of seasonal thaw depth in permafrost regions: a stochastic modeling approach, Ecol.Model., 153, 217-227, doi:10.1016/S0304-3800(02)00016-9,2002.4036, 4050 Beltrami, H.: Climate from borehole data: Energy fluxes and temperatures since 1500, Geophys.Res.Lett., 29, 2111, doi:10.1029/2002GL015702,2002.Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Zenklusen Mutter, E. and Phillips, M.: Active layer characteristics at ten borehole sites in Alpine permafrost terrain, Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | gliotti: Warming Permafrost and Active Layer Variability 3 Geophysics re 1. Overview of the Cime Bianche monitoring site warmest months.The site is very windy and mainly inced by NE-NW air masses.The wind action strongly ributes to the high spatial variability of snow cover thick-.afrost research in the area started in the late 1990s glielmin and Vannuzzo, 1995) with repeated campaigns equipped with thermistor chains based on resistors type YSI 44031 (resolution 0.01 • C, absolute accuracy ±0.05 • C and relative accuracy ±0.02 • C).Sensors depths in meters from the surface are 0.02, 0.3, 0.6, 1, 1.6, 2, 2.3, 2.6, 3, 3.3, 3.6,   200    4, 4.6, 5.9 for SH , 41 for DP.

Figure 3 .Figure 4 .
Figure 3. Mean annual ground surface temperatures at 2 cm (red) and 30 cm (blue) of depth.Star symbols indicate snow-covered nodes while bullets indicate snow-free nodes.The horizontal lines indicate the mean of all MAGST for each year and each depth.Black rectangles are used to highlight the min-max envelope for inter-annual comparison.

Figure 4 .
Figure 4. Fluctuations of snow cover thickness (Hs) and ground temperatures (daily mean) at selected depths in the active layers of Cime Bianche from 1 October 2010 to 30 September 2013.Lines type: dashed is for SH, solid is for DP.Colors: red is for shallower temperatures (1.6 m), blu is for deeper temperature (3 m), grey is for snow.

540
thickness between 3 and 5 meters.This the vicinity of the shallow borehole (SH (64m).Below this first layer the velocit until reaching the maximum (around 64 velocity increase is strongest around 40m 545 distinction between the upper part of the and the lower one.At depth the high velo in the upper part and not in the lower par versely the velocities at the surface are lower part (especially around DP) than i 550 Both geophysical profiles show clear dif surface properties at the boreholes locati tail the results yielded by the geophysic temperature, the vertical distribution of seismic velocity and ground temperatur 555 shown in Figure 8. 4 Discussion

Figure 6 .
Figure 6.Warming rate below 8 m in the borehole DP as a function of depth.Black dots represent linear trends as • C year −1 .The uncertainty of trend values is represented by the dashed bars which indicate the lower and upper boundaries of the 95 % confidence interval (CI) of the fitting model (see Sect. 2.4 for details).

Figure 7 .
Figure 7. Tomograms of the specific resistivities for both ERT measurements: (a) 16.08.2013and (b) 09.10.2013,(c) percentage change in model resistivity between the two dates and (d) seismic velocities.The location of SH and DP is figured with vertical black lines of respective length.A rough description of the surface aspect along the profile is also shown (e).

Figure 8 .Figure 8 .
Figure 8. Vertical distribution of specific resistivity and P-wave velocity at the borehole locations extracted from the tomograms shown in Figure 7 as well as borehole temperatures for the dates of the ERT and RST measurements.The horizontal lines represent the active layer thickness at the respective time periods.
Mean monthly air temperatures are positive from June to September while February and July are respectively the coldest and the warmest months.The site is very windy and mainly influenced by NE-NW air masses.The wind action strongly contributes to the high spatial variability of snow cover thickness.

Table 2 .
Interpolated ZAA depths and corresponding mean temperatures in the borehole DP.