Letter | Published:

Repeated large-scale retreat and advance of Totten Glacier indicated by inland bed erosion

Nature volume 533, pages 385389 (19 May 2016) | Download Citation

Abstract

Climate variations cause ice sheets to retreat and advance, raising or lowering sea level by metres to decametres. The basic relationship is unambiguous, but the timing, magnitude and sources of sea-level change remain unclear; in particular, the contribution of the East Antarctic Ice Sheet (EAIS) is ill defined, restricting our appreciation of potential future change. Several lines of evidence suggest possible collapse of the Totten Glacier into interior basins during past warm periods, most notably the Pliocene epoch1,2,3,4, causing several metres of sea-level rise. However, the structure and long-term evolution of the ice sheet in this region have been understood insufficiently to constrain past ice-sheet extents. Here we show that deep ice-sheet erosion—enough to expose basement rocks—has occurred in two regions: the head of the Totten Glacier, within 150 kilometres of today’s grounding line; and deep within the Sabrina Subglacial Basin, 350–550 kilometres from this grounding line. Our results, based on ICECAP aerogeophysical data, demarcate the marginal zones of two distinct quasi-stable EAIS configurations, corresponding to the ‘modern-scale’ ice sheet (with a marginal zone near the present ice-sheet margin) and the retreated ice sheet (with the marginal zone located far inland). The transitional region of 200–250 kilometres in width is less eroded, suggesting shorter-lived exposure to eroding conditions during repeated retreat–advance events, which are probably driven by ocean-forced instabilities. Representative ice-sheet models indicate that the global sea-level increase resulting from retreat in this sector can be up to 0.9 metres in the modern-scale configuration, and exceeds 2 metres in the retreated configuration.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

References

  1. 1.

    et al. Evidence for iceberg armadas from East Antarctica in the Southern Ocean during the late Miocene and early Pliocene. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 290, 351–361 (2010)

  2. 2.

    et al. Orbital forcing of the East Antarctic ice sheet during the Pliocene and Early Pleistocene. Nature Geosci. 7, 841–847 (2014)

  3. 3.

    et al. Dynamic behaviour of the East Antarctic ice sheet during Pliocene warmth. Nature Geosci. 6, 765–769 (2013)

  4. 4.

    , & Potential Antarctic Ice Sheet retreat driven by hydrofracturing and ice cliff failure. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 412, 112–121 (2015)

  5. 5.

    , , & Extensive dynamic thinning on the margins of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets. Nature 461, 971–975 (2009)

  6. 6.

    , , & Ice shelf melting around Antarctica. Science 341, 266–270 (2013)

  7. 7.

    et al. Bedmap2: improved ice bed, surface and thickness datasets for Antarctica. Cryosphere 7, 375–393 (2013)

  8. 8.

    et al. A dynamic early East Antarctic Ice Sheet suggested by ice-covered fjord landscapes. Nature 474, 72–75 (2011)

  9. 9.

    , , & Simulated melt rates for the Totten and Dalton ice shelves. Ocean Science 10, 267–279 (2014)

  10. 10.

    et al. Observed thinning of Totten Glacier is linked to coastal polynya variability. Nature Commun. 4, 2857 (2013)

  11. 11.

    et al. Ocean access to a cavity beneath Totten Glacier in East Antarctica. Nature Geosci. 8, 294–298 (2015)

  12. 12.

    , & Ice flow of the Antarctic ice sheet. Science 333, 1427–1430 (2011)

  13. 13.

    et al. Evidence of a hydrological connection between the ice divide and ice sheet margin in the Aurora Subglacial Basin, East Antarctica. J. Geophys. Res. Earth Surface 117, F01033 (2012)

  14. 14.

    et al. Refined broad-scale sub-glacial morphology of Aurora Subglacial Basin, East Antarctica derived by an ice-dynamics-based interpolation scheme. Cryosphere 5, 551–560 (2011)

  15. 15.

    et al. The subglacial geology of Wilkes Land, East Antarctica. Geophys. Res. Lett. 41, 2390–2400 (2014)

  16. 16.

    et al. The Australo-Antarctic Columbia to Gondwana transition. Gondwana Res. 29, 136–152 (2016)

  17. 17.

    Glacial Geologic Processes (Edward Arnold, 1986)

  18. 18.

    et al. Early East Antarctic Ice Sheet growth recorded in the landscape of the Gamburtsev Subglacial Mountains. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 375, 1–12 (2013)

  19. 19.

    , & The evolution of the subglacial landscape of Antarctica. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 293, 1–27 (2010)

  20. 20.

    Ice-shelf buttressing and the stability of marine ice sheets. Cryosphere 7, 647–655 (2013)

  21. 21.

    & Stability of the West Antarctic ice sheet in a warming world. Nature Geosci. 4, 506–513 (2011)

  22. 22.

    & The middle Miocene climatic transition: East Antarctic ice sheet development, deep ocean circulation and global carbon cycling. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 108, 537–555 (1994)

  23. 23.

    et al. Characterizing the sediment provenance of East Antarctica’s weak underbelly: the Aurora and Wilkes sub-glacial basins. Paleoceanography 26, PA4217 (2011)

  24. 24.

    et al. High tide of the warm Pliocene: implications of global sea level for Antarctic deglaciation. Geology 40, 407–410 (2012)

  25. 25.

    & Oxygen isotope mass-balance constraints on Pliocene sea level and East Antarctic Ice Sheet stability. Geology 43, 879–882 (2015)

  26. 26.

    et al. Simulating the Antarctic ice sheet in the late-Pliocene warm period: PLISMIP-ANT, an ice-sheet model intercomparison project. Cryosphere 9, 881–903 (2015)

  27. 27.

    , & Antarctic bedrock topography uncertainty and ice sheet stability. Geophys. Res. Lett. 42, 5372–5377 (2015)

  28. 28.

    & Modelling West Antarctic Ice Sheet growth and collapse through the past five million years. Nature 458, 329–332 (2009)

  29. 29.

    et al. The multi-millennial Antarctic commitment to future sea-level rise. Nature 526, 421–425 (2015)

  30. 30.

    et al. History of the Greenland Ice Sheet: paleoclimatic insights. Quat. Sci. Rev. 29, 1728–1756 (2010)

  31. 31.

    et al. IceBridge Riegl Laser Altimeter L2 Geolocated Surface Elevation Triplets, version 1. NASA Distributed Active Archive Center (DAAC) at the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) (NASA DAAC NSIDC, 2012, updated 2013)

  32. 32.

    , & IceBridge HiCARS 2 L2 Geolocated Ice Thickness, version 1. NASA Distributed Active Archive Center (DAAC) at the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) (NASA DAAC NSIDC, 2012, updated 2013)

  33. 33.

    , & IceBridge Geometrics 823A Cesium Magnetometer L1B Time-Tagged Magnetic Field, version 1. NASA Distributed Active Archive Center (DAAC) at the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) (NASA DAAC NSIDC, 2011, updated 2013)

  34. 34.

    , , & IceBridge BGM-3 Gravimeter L2 Geolocated Free Air Anomalies. NASA Distributed Active Archive Center (DAAC) at the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) (NASA DAAC NSIDC, 2011, updated 2014)

  35. 35.

    , , & IceBridge CMG GT-1A Gravimeter L2 Geolocated Free Air Gravity Disturbances. NASA Distributed Active Archive Center (DAAC) at the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) (NASA DAAC NSIDC, 2014)

  36. 36.

    Computation with the help of a digital computer of magnetic anomalies caused by bodies of arbitrary shape. Geophysics 30, 797–817 (1965)

  37. 37.

    SAKI: a Fortran program for generalized linear inversion of gravity and magnetic profiles. US Geol. Surv. Open-File Report, 85–122 (1985)

  38. 38.

    & Werner deconvolution for automated magnetic interpretation and its refinement using Marquardt’s inverse modeling. Geophysics 48, 754–774 (1983)

  39. 39.

    , & Australia’s Moho: a test of the usefulness of gravity modelling for the determination of Moho depth. Tectonophysics 609, 468–479 (2013)

  40. 40.

    , , , & Resolution-dependent performance of grounding line motion in a shallow model compared with a full-Stokes model according to the MISMIP3d intercomparison. J. Glaciol. 60, 353–360 (2014)

  41. 41.

    , & Comparing ice discharge through West Antarctic Gateways: Weddell vs. Amundsen Sea warming. Cryosphere Discuss. 9, 1705–1733 (2015)

  42. 42.

    & Fracture field for large-scale ice dynamics. J. Glaciol. 58, 165–176 (2012)

  43. 43.

    et al. Kinematic first-order calving law implies potential for abrupt ice-shelf retreat. Cryosphere 6, 273–286 (2012)

  44. 44.

    Spatial and seasonal effects of temperature variability in a positive degree-day glacier surface mass-balance model. J. Glaciol. 59, 1202–1204 (2013)

  45. 45.

    & Vital role of daily temperature variability in surface mass balance parameterizations of the Greenland ice sheet. Cryosphere 8, 575–585 (2014)

Download references

Acknowledgements

Collection of ICECAP data was supported by: National Science Foundation grant PLR-0733025; National Aeronautics and Space Administration grants NNX09AR52G, NNG10HPO6C and NNX11AD33G (Operation Ice Bridge and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act); Australian Antarctic Division projects 3013 and 4077; National Environment and Research Council grant NE/D003733/1; the Jackson School of Geosciences; the G. Unger Vetlesen Foundation; and the Australian Government’s Cooperative Research Centres Programme through the Antarctic Climate & Ecosystems Cooperative Research Centre (ACE CRC). Ice-sheet modelling was funded under contract VUW1203 of the Royal Society of New Zealand’s Marsden Fund. We thank S. Jamieson for comments and for supplying model images for comparison. This is the University of Texas Institute of Geophysics contribution 2950.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. School of Earth and Environment, University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia 6008, Australia

    • A. R. A. Aitken
  2. Australian Antarctic Division, Kingston, Tasmania 7050, Australia

    • J. L. Roberts
    •  & T. D. van Ommen
  3. Antarctic Climate & Ecosystems Cooperative Research Centre, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania 7005, Australia

    • J. L. Roberts
    •  & T. D. van Ommen
  4. University of Texas Institute for Geophysics, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas 78758, USA

    • D. A. Young
    • , J. S. Greenbaum
    •  & D. D. Blankenship
  5. Antarctic Research Centre, Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington 6140, New Zealand

    • N. R. Golledge
  6. GNS Science, Avalon, Lower Hutt 5011, New Zealand

    • N. R. Golledge
  7. The Grantham Institute and Department of Earth Science and Engineering, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK

    • M. J. Siegert

Authors

  1. Search for A. R. A. Aitken in:

  2. Search for J. L. Roberts in:

  3. Search for T. D. van Ommen in:

  4. Search for D. A. Young in:

  5. Search for N. R. Golledge in:

  6. Search for J. S. Greenbaum in:

  7. Search for D. D. Blankenship in:

  8. Search for M. J. Siegert in:

Contributions

A.R.A.A. undertook data processing, analysis and modelling and wrote the paper. D.D.B., T.D.v.O. and M.J.S. coordinated and planned the fieldwork and led the ICECAP programme. J.L.R., D.A.Y. and J.S.G. undertook the field program and implemented data collection, quality control and initial data processing. N.R.G. conducted the ice-sheet modelling. All authors contributed significantly to interpretation and discussion of the data and manuscript preparation.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. R. A. Aitken.

Extended data

About this article

Publication history

Received

Accepted

Published

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1038/nature17447

Further reading

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.