Mechanism and effects of warming water in ice-covered Ngoring Lake of Qinghai-Tibet Plateau

Wang, Mengxiao; Wen, Lijuan; Li, Zhaoguo; Leppäranta, Matti; Stepanenko, Victor; Zhao, Yixin; Niu, Ruijia; Yang, Liuyiyi; Kirillin, Georgiy

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-2021-398

Preprints

https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-2021-398

Preprints

14 Feb 2022

Status: a revised version of this preprint is currently under review for the journal TC.

Mechanism and effects of warming water in ice-covered Ngoring Lake of Qinghai-Tibet Plateau

Mengxiao Wang^1,2, Lijuan Wen¹, Zhaoguo Li¹, Matti Leppäranta³, Victor Stepanenko^4,5, Yixin Zhao^1,2, Ruijia Niu^1,2, Liuyiyi Yang^1,2, and Georgiy Kirillin⁶ Mengxiao Wang et al.

Show author details

¹Key Laboratory of Land Surface Process and Climate Change in Cold and Arid Regions, Northwest Institute of Eco-Environment and Resources, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 730000 Lanzhou, China
²University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 10049 Beijing, China
³Institute of Atmospheric and Earth Sciences, University of Helsinki
⁴Research Computing Center, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia
⁵Moscow Center for Fundamental and Applied Mathematics, Moscow, Russia
⁶Department of Ecohydrology, Leibniz-Institute of Freshwater Ecology and Inland Fisheries (IGB), Berlin, Germany

Received: 30 Dec 2021 – Discussion started: 14 Feb 2022

Abstract. Ngoring Lake is the largest freshwater lake in the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau (TP). The lake water temperature was observed to be generally rising during the ice-covered period from November 2015 to April 2016. This phenomenon appeared in the whole water column, with slowing in deep water and accelerating in shallow water before ice melting. The process is different from low-altitude boreal lakes. There are few studies on its mechanism and effects on lake-atmosphere interaction. Based on the observation data of Ngoring Lake Station, ERA5-Land data, MODIS surface temperature data, and precipitation data of Maduo Station of China Meteorological Administration, the characteristics of water temperature rise in the ice-covered Ngoring Lake are analyzed. LAKE2.3 model, which is currently little used for TP lakes, is applied to explore the influence of local climate characteristics and the main physical parameters on the radiation transfer in water body. The study questions are the continuous rise of water temperature in the ice-covered period, and the effects of different water temperature profiles prior to ice breakup on the lake heat storage per unit area and sensible and latent heat release. The results show that LAKE2.3 represents well the temperature evolution and thermal stratification in Ngoring Lake, especially in the ice-covered period. The strong downward short-wave radiation plays a dominant role, low precipitation gives positive feedback, and smaller downward long-wave radiation, lower temperature and larger wind speed give negative feedback. Increase of ice albedo and ice extinction coefficient reduces the heating rate of water temperature before reaching the maximum density temperature, and increases the maximum temperature that can be reached during ice-covered period, while increasing the water extinction coefficient has little influence on water temperature. The lake temperature in Ngoring Lake rising during the ice-covered period, and the temperature at the upper layer of lake body was higher than that at the maximum density temperature before ice breaking. Compared with the characteristics of three typical ice-covered periods which the lake temperature remained fixed in each layer, and the lake temperature was less than or equal to the maximum density temperature, the difference of heat release after ice breaking lasted for 59–97 days. The higher the lake temperature before breakup, the more heat is stored in the lake, and the more sensible heat and latent heat is released when the ice melts completely and the faster is the heat release.

Mengxiao Wang et al.

Status: final response (author comments only)

RC1:
'Comment on tc-2021-398', Anonymous Referee #1, 22 Feb 2022

Review of "Mechanism and effects of warming water in ice-covered Ngoring Lake of Qinghai-Tibet Plateau"

I think this paper is trying to understand how solar radiation influences thermal stratification under lake ice on a large lake on the Tibetan Plateau. This is an admirable goal, but it isn't clear what the novelty of this paper is. I would say aspects of this process are well known, and hence introduction needs to better review existing literature and make it clearer what new contribution in this work. I would say it is well known that over winter lakes warm up under ice. This is a key point in the highly cited 2012 review by Kirillin (Who is one of the co-authors on this paper!)

Kirillin, Georgiy, Matti Leppäranta, Arkady Terzhevik, Nikolai Granin, Juliane Bernhardt, Christof Engelhardt, Tatyana Efremova et al. "Physics of seasonally ice-covered lakes: a review." 74, no. 4 (2012): 659-682.

Specifically they introduce idea of Winter I and winter II as periods where heating is dominated by benthic heating (early winter) or solar radiation (late winter). I would say your lake is completly consistent with a long winter II dynamic.

Another paper to better review is the GRL paper by Yang et al (2021), who introduce idea of cryomictic and cyrostratified lakes. Based on Figure 4 the lake on TP is windier than lake on Nordic tundra. there is no information on size of Kilpisjärvi Lake, but I assume that is is much smaller than 610 km^2 Ngoring Lake (which is almost same size as 720 km^2 Lake SImcoe). Based on Yang et al (2021) you'd expect Ngoring Lake to be cryomictic and start winter near 0oC before it warms up, whereas the smaller less windy Kilpisjärvi Lake to start winter nearer 4oC as a cryostratified lake.

I think the novelty of paper needs to be discussed in context of these two papers - This would change statement in abstract about warming dynamics that "The lake water temperature was observed to be generally rising during the ice-covered period from November 2015 to April 2016. This phenomenon appeared in the whole water column, with slowing in deep water and accelerating in shallow water before ice melting. The process is different from low-altitude boreal lakes. There are few studies on its mechanism and effects on lake-atmosphere interaction."

Specific comments

The section from lines 79 to 104 needs to be completely rewritten. There is no need to discuss Lake Kivu which is a tropical merimoctic lake. If you want to talk about lake catergorisations, I recommend starting with

Lewis Jr, W. M. (1983). A revised classification of lakes based on mixing. , (10), 1779-1787.

Then discuss 2012 of Kirillin and 2021 GRL paper by Wang et al. The other papers on winter dynamics of TP need to be better reviewed including

Wang, J., Huang, L., Ju, J., Daut, G., Ma, Q., Zhu, L., Haberzettl, T., Baade, J., Mäusbacher, R., Hamilton, A. and Graves, K., 2020. Seasonal stratification of a deep, high-altitude, dimictic lake: Nam Co, Tibetan Plateau. , , p.124668.

line 144 - is this lake salty like other TP lakes? this become important later when under ice temps go above 4C.

Figure 1.where is Nordic lake?

What is bathymetry of lake - we more interested in that than topography. Where is water temperature sampled?

line 168 - need to say specifically where profile was taken and add to figure 1.

Fgure 2 --Use a continuous shading, not something with 1 oC steps, when whole range of interest is really 0 - 4 oC

Line 308 - " Thereafter, the lake was mixed,.." You need a discussion in intro about Winter II and solar driven convection for this statement to make sense.

Line 329 - DOn't abbreviate Kilpisjärvi Lake as K lake. It might be better to refer to it as lake Kilpisjärvi, as jarvi just means lake in Finnish. There are also no details on this lake - how deep how wide ? Other publications on this data.

Figure 3 - use same x-axis formats for dates. Different data for temps is plotted so also hard to compare Y-axis of a and b.

Figure 4 - comment on differences in wind speeds in driving one lake to be cyrostratified and the other cyromictic. The long polar night above artic circle drives Fig 4 b, so timing of magnitude of solar raditions drives most of differrences in under ice convection.

Line 370 - this queston on under ice heating needs to better motivated by a revised introduction.

Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-2021-398-RC1
- AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Mengxiao Wang, 11 May 2022
  
  Please refer to the supplement pdf file.
  
  Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-2021-398-AC1
RC2:
'Comment on tc-2021-398', Anonymous Referee #2, 22 Mar 2022
The manuscript (TC-2021-398) by Wang et al. conducted a series of modeling experiments on the formation and development of water temperature rise during the ice-covered seasons in a large freshwater lake of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau, where lake ice processes and ice-covered lakes were less studied. It is very interesting that weather forcing data in Lake K were used to run the LAKE to simulate the water temperature regime in Lake Ngoring in order to investigate what causes the differences in lake temperature regimes. The paper concluded the intensive solar radiation and absence of snow dominate the development of temperature rising and the temperature rising has significant influence on after-ice-off lake-air heat exchange.

I found this research topics fits well the scope of TC journal. The methods and data analysis are sound. But I have to say the water temperature rising/stratification dynamics is not new since some published observations on QTP lakes and review papers presented this phenomenon, its mechanism is relatively clear. But we still need validation and evaluation of current lake models to reproduce this process in lakes with large solar energy input. However, the motivation and novelty of this work are not clear, maybe largely due to its poor writing and linguistic expression. The manuscript is too long and should be more concise and focused by removing less-related and repeated parts. So I think plenty of extra work is needed to improve the overall quality of this manuscript before it can be considered for publication. Please see my comments below and I hope they would be useful for authors' consideration.

General issues:

The manuscript carried out many sensitivity experiments to varied forcing data and coefficients. But physically, from the perspective of heat budget and balance of the lake water, only the solar radiation and snow condition can directly change the water temperature, other weather variables have indirect impacts on under-ice water, such as wind, air temperature, and air humidity. I mean these meteor variables directly influence the heat and mass balance of the ice cover.

So one question is, can the LAKE model give the lake ice thickness and temperature evolution? If you look at the modeling results on lake ice evolution under all modelling experiments, it would be easier to understand why the meteor variables and coefficients have differing impacts on water temperature under the ice (like sections 6.2 and 6.3).

Another question is, when the water temperature goes beyond the temperature of maximum density, a forms (as presented in the GRL paper of the authors, ). And the regime of the dichotomy layer is of great importance to the water temperature and heat storage, but the inverse temperature gradient/structure above the temperature peak point seems unstable since the temperature crosses the temperature of maximum density. Do you have salinity profiles to look into this regime? Or did the LAKE model reproduce the dichotomy well? How does it change when the solar radiation, optical coefficients of ice and water change? Could you discuss on this? This is important to evaluate the performance of LAKE to reproduce the temperature structure beside value.

Specific comments:

I also recommend the manuscript to be language checked to erase linguistic errors (I found some as below), misunderstandings, and confusions.

Abstract: although the abstract is very long, I do not clearly get the key points on what this manuscript did, found and concluded. I suggest the authors to make the abstract more concise and more focusing. I suggest the authors follow a conventional flow line of an abstract with background, issues to be targeted, methods used, results and key conclusions.

Introduction: the introduction looks in a little disorder, so the motivation and novelty of this manuscript looks unclear. It would be better if this part focuses on reviews of typical processes/patterns of under-ice stratification, the differences in QTP lakes (I noticed some results of QTP lakes have been published), and the existing models for lake thermodynamics and their uses for under-ice water. In this way maybe the authors can deliver more clearly your novelty to readers.

L54: an area larger than 1 km2

L64-69: Please rephrase these sentences to make it more readable.

L80-86: I suggest to skip over the introduction on unfrozen lakes.

L89-102: I don’t understand how you define the difference of these two types of under-ice water temperature. I guess the water temperature stratification/structure is very dynamic under the ice cover and undergoes some typical stages as depicted/defined in Kirilllin et al (2012), Yang et al (2017, 2021), etc. So maybe it would be better if you introduce the general typical stages of lake temperature stratification through the ice-covered period in boreal, arctic, or temperate lakes, and pointed out the uniqueness or difference of that in highland lakes.

L160: 10-m wind speed

L168-169: The observed site of water temperature should be added to Figure 1. It would be better to provide basic instrumentation information of water temperature here, like apparatus, accuracy and frequency, field setup, and sensor depths.

L174: to verify the simulated results of what? Surface temperature? As you said, temperature in the MYD11C2 is a 8-day averaged value, so it could lead to uncertainty when you compare your modelling results with MYD11C2. Is there any other product on lake surface temperature that can be used to better evaluate your model results?

L384-385: the driving data time step is 30 min, why was the model time step set to 15 s?

Section 2.2.3: How was the ERA-5 Land data used in this manuscript?

L210-211: Eq (1) seems very complicated, could you please present the physical meaning of each term in the right-hand side?

Section 3.2: “Validation methods” is not a proper title of this section. This part is actually the method used to evaluate the model accuracy.

(10): the variable symbols should be consistent to Eq. (1), such as , . and is used to denote ice before and ð¥ðð is not mentioned in eq (10).

Section 4: Characteristics Analysis is not an informative title, please be specific.

L292: how much is the lowest temperature?

Figure 2: the tick spacing of the color bar seems too large so the spatially and temporally fine changes in the water profiles (including the formation and deepening of convective and dicothermal layer) can not be seen clearly as you described in L302-318.

L307&315: How did you determine the freeze-up and breakup date? From visual observation or remote sensing image (MODIS?)?

Section 4.1.2: Do we have to explain here why the weather conditions are different or similar in the two lakes using complicated geographic or geo-statistic experiences? This is not the key point. I think it would be the best if you present general results on the lake information, ice processes, and the water stratification dynamics through the whole ice season, and more importantly, their differences with that of Ngoring Lake.

L409-410: “but the whole ice season was shifted to occur about half a month earlier than observed”. Can you say a little more on how the LAKE calculate the freeze-up and breakup date, e.g. in the method section? Can you explain why the model gave half-month earlier freeze-up?

L453: delete “with CTL”

L468: was reflected…, enters…

L502: please specify here what the opposite effect is, leading to a decreasing water temperature? In figs. 6b,c,e,f,h, all modeled temperature the upper water layer kept increasing during the ice-covered period.

L514-515: delete “When the lake is….Polashenski 2012)” since you didn’t consider the snow layer.

L536-537: I do not understand this sentence. An increment of 0.1 in albedo means an extend of 15-30 d in ice season?

L558-563: From conventional experiences, with a constant transmitted solar radiation flux, change in light extinction coefficient of water will of course cause changes in water temperature profile, so also you said “”, the top water layer should get a higher temperature maximum because the solar energy is used to heat a thinner water layer. If you look at the simulated temperature contours of the whole water column, you may find this regime. But from the point of heat balance, when changing the extinction coefficient of water, the increment in water heat storage doesn’t change. I think the authors should elaborate this part.

Fig 8b: Why were there sharp drops in all scenarios on ~ April 14? In the text, you stated that the ice broke-up on Mar 31-April 1. I guess Fig. 8b showed wrong dates along x-axis.

Section 6.4: (1) How did you estimate the turbulent sensible and latent heat fluxes? Based on Monin-Obulhov theory? (2) Since you stated that the water structure or continuous warming of upper water before the ice breakup has lasting influences on turbulent heat fluxes on the following 1-2 months, could you please say more on why, through what processes? Right after the breakup, based on heat budget and balance of the lake water, can you estimate quantitatively the contribution of heat storage before the breakup to the turbulent heat change? e.g. comparison between the heat storage and the accumulated heat release to the atmosphere by turbulent sensible and latent exchange.

L646: “where the air temperature is comparable”. I guess not all low-altitude northern lakes have comparable air temperature with QTP lakes. Perhaps some lakes have comparable winter-averaged air temperature, the temporal patterns of air temperatures are different (e.g. even in Fig. 4f).

L665-666: again, what is the “negative feedback”? Besides, feedback is not an accurate word here, maybe influence, impact, or contribution is better.

L674-679: this sentence is too long, please rephrase it to be more readable. By the way, what do you mean by “the difference… lasted for 59-67 days…”? do you mean the under-ice temperature profiles have subsequent impacts on turbulent heat exchange at the air-lake interface after the ice breakup?
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-2021-398-RC2
- AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Mengxiao Wang, 11 May 2022
  
  Please refer to the supplement pdf file.
  
  Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-2021-398-AC2

Mengxiao Wang et al.

Viewed

Total article views: 381 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)

HTML	PDF	XML	Total	BibTeX	EndNote
290	70	21	381	7	7

HTML: 290
PDF: 70
XML: 21
Total: 381
BibTeX: 7
EndNote: 7

Views and downloads (calculated since 14 Feb 2022)

Month	HTML	PDF	XML	Total
Feb 2022	127	26	9	162
Mar 2022	64	16	4	84
Apr 2022	42	15	0	57
May 2022	57	13	8	78

Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 14 Feb 2022)

Month	HTML	PDF	XML	Total
Feb 2022	127	26	9	162
Mar 2022	64	16	4	84
Apr 2022	42	15	0	57
May 2022	57	13	8	78

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 364 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 364 with geography defined and 0 with unknown origin.

Country	#	Views	%

Latest update: 24 May 2022

Short summary

The ice-on temperature of Ngoring Lake has been rising, which is different from other boreal lakes. We obtained the results show that strong downward shortwave radiation is the main meteorological factor and Precipitation, wind speed, downward longwave radiation, air temperature, ice albedo and ice extinction coefficient have an impact on the range and rate of lake temperature rise. Once the ice breaks, the lake body releases more energy than other lakes whose water temperatre remain horizontal.


Total:	0
HTML:	0
PDF:	0
XML:	0