Jump to content

Summary of the Ninth DSCOVR EPIC and NISTAR Science Team Meeting


Recommended Posts

  • Publishers
Posted
eo-meeting-summary-banner.png?w=1037

22 min read

Summary of the Ninth DSCOVR EPIC and NISTAR Science Team Meeting

Introduction

The ninth Deep Space Climate Observatory (DSCOVR) Earth Polychromatic Camera (EPIC) and National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Advanced Radiometer [NISTAR] Science Team Meeting (STM) was held virtually October 16–17, 2023. Over 35 scientists attended, most of whom were from NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC), with several participating from other NASA field centers, U.S. universities, and U.S. Department of Energy laboratories. One international participant joined the meeting from Estonia. A full overview of DSCOVR’s Earth-observing instruments was printed in a previous article in The Earth Observer and will not be repeated here. This article provides the highlights of the 2023 meeting. The meeting agenda and full presentations can be downloaded from GSFC’s Aura Validation Data Center.

Opening Presentations

The opening session consisted of a series of presentations from DSCOVR mission leaders and representatives from GSFC and NASA Headquarters (HQ), who gave updates on the mission and the two Earth-viewing science instruments on board. Alexander Marshak [GSFC—DSCOVR Deputy Project Scientist] opened the meeting. He discussed the agenda for the meeting and mentioned that both Earth science instruments on DSCOVR are functioning normally – see Figure 1. At this time, more than 115 papers related to DSCOVR are listed on the EPIC website. Marshak emphasized the importance of making the Earth Science community more aware of the availability of the various EPIC and NISTAR science data products.

DSCVR figure 1
Figure 1. Sun-Earth-Vehicle (SEV) angle (red curve) and the distance between Earth and the DSCOVR satellite (blue curve) versus time starting from the DSCOVR launch on February 15, 2015 to April 1, 2024. These two measurements are used to track the location and orientation, respectively, of DSCOVR. The spacecraft changes its location by about 200,000 km (~124,274 mi) over about a 3-month period, and its SEV gets close to zero (which would correspond to perfect backscattering). The gap around the year 2020 was when DSCOVR was in Safe Mode for an extended period.
Figure credit: Adam Szabo (Original figure by Alexander Marshak, with data provided by Joe Park/NOAA)

Adam Szabo [GSFC—DSCOVR Project Scientist] welcomed the STM participants and briefly reported that the spacecraft, located at “L1” – the first of five Lagrange points in the Sun-Earth system – was still in “good health.” The EPIC and NISTAR instruments on DSCOVR continue to return their full science observations. Szabo gave an update on the 2023 Earth Science Senior Review, which DSCOVR successfully passed with overall science scores of ‘Excellent/Very Good.’ The Senior Review Panel unanimously supported the continuation of DSCOVR for the 2024–2026 period.

Thomas Neumann [GSFC, Earth Sciences Division (ESD)—Deputy Director] welcomed meeting participants on behalf of the ESD. Neumann noted the impressive engineering that has led to 8.5 years of operations and counting. He also commended the team on the continued production of important science results from these instruments – with nearly 110 papers in the peer-reviewed literature.

Following Neumann’s remarks, Steve Platnick [GSFC, Earth Sciences Division—Deputy Director for Atmospheres] welcomed the members of the DSCOVR ST as well as users of EPIC and NISTAR observations. He thanked NASA HQ for its continued strong interest in the mission. Platnick also expressed his appreciation for the mission team members who have worked hard to maintain operation of the DSCOVR satellite and instruments during this challenging time.

Richard Eckman [NASA HQ, Earth Science Division—DSCOVR EPIC/NISTAR Program Scientist] noted that a new call for proposals will be in ROSES-2025 and looks forward to learning about recent accomplishments by ST members, which will be essential in assessing the mission’s performance.

Jack Kaye [NASA HQ, Earth Science Division—Associate Director for Research] discussed the NASA research program that studies the Earth, using satellites, aircraft, surface-based measurements, and computer models. The two Earth science instruments on DSCOVR (EPIC and NISTAR) play an important role in the program. He highlighted the uniqueness of the DSCOVR observations from the Sun–Earth “L1” point providing context for other missions and the ability to discern diurnal variations.

Updates on DSCOVR Operations

The DSCOVR mission components continue to function nominally, with progress on several fronts, including data acquisition, processing, archiving, and release of new versions of several data products. The number of people using the content continues to increase, with a new Science Outreach Team having been put in place to aid users in several aspects of data discovery, access, and user friendliness.

Hazem Mahmoud [NASA’s Langley Research Center (LaRC)] discussed the new tools in the Atmospheric Science Data Center (ASDC). He reported on DSCOVR metrics since 2015 and mentioned the significant increase in using ozone (O3) products. He also announced that ASDC is moving to the Amazon Web Services (AWS) cloud.

Karin Blank [GSFC] covered the EPIC geolocation algorithm, including the general algorithm framework. She highlighted additional problems that needed to be resolved and detailed the various stages to refine the algorithm, emphasizing the enhancements made to improve geolocation accuracy.

Marshall Sutton [GSFC] reported on the DSCOVR Science Operations Center (DSOC) and Level-2 (L2) processing. DSOC is operating nominally. EPIC L1A, L1B, and NISTAR data files are produced daily. EPIC L1 products are processed into L2 science products using the computing power of the NASA Center for Climate Simulations (NCCS). Products include daily data images, including a cloud fraction map, aerosol map, and the anticipated aerosol height image. In addition, Sutton reported that the DSCOVR spacecraft has enough fuel to remain in operation until 2033.

EPIC Calibration

Alexander Cede [SciGlob] and Ragi Rajagopalan [LiftBlick OG] reported on the latest EPIC calibration version (V23) that includes the new flat field corrections based on the lunar observations from 2023 and an update to the dark count model. The EPIC instrument remains healthy and shows no change in parameters, e.g., read noise, enhanced or saturated pixels, or hot or warm pixels. The current operational dark count model still describes the dark count in a satisfactory way.

Liang-Kang Huang [Science Systems and Applications, Inc. (SSAI)] reported on EPIC’s July 2023 lunar measurements, which filled in the area near diagonal lines of the charged coupled device (CCD) not covered by 2021 and 2022 lunar data. With six short wavelength channels ranging from 317 to 551 nm, the two sets of lunar data are consistent with each other. For the macroscopic flat field corrections, he recommended the six fitted sensitivity change functions of radius and polar angle. 

Igor Geogdzhaev [NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS)/Columbia University] reported how continuous EPIC observations provide stable visible and near infrared (NIR) channels compared to the contemporaneous data from Visible Infrared Imaging Radiometer Suite (VIIRS) on NASA’s Suomi National Polar-orbiting Partnership (Suomi NPP) and the NASA–National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Joint Polar Satellite System (JPSS) missions. (To date, two JPSS missions have launched, JPSS-1, which is now known as NOAA-20, and JPSS-2, which is now known as NOAA-21.) Analysis of near simultaneous data from EPIC and from the Advanced Baseline Imager (ABI) on the Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite–R (GOES R) platforms showed a high correlation coefficient, good agreement between dark and bright pixels, and small regression zero intercepts. EPIC moon views were used to derive oxygen (O2) channel reflectance by interpolation of the calibrated non-absorbing channels.

Conor Haney [LaRC] reported that the EPIC sensor was intercalibrated against measurements from the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) on NASA’s Terra and Aqua platforms as well as from VIIRS on Suomi NPP and NOAA-20, using ray-matched pair radiances, and was found to be radiometrically stable when tested against two invariant calibration targets: over deep convective clouds over the tropical Pacific (dark target) and over the Libya-4 site located in the Libyan desert in Africa (bright target). The ray-matched and Earth target EPIC gain trends were found to be consistent within 1.1%, and the EPIC sensor degradation was found to be less than 1% over the seven-year record. Preliminary results intercalibrating EPIC with the Advanced Himawari Imager (AHI) on the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency’s (JAXA) “Himawari–8” Geostationary Meteorological Satellite were also promising when both subsatellite positions were close—i.e., during equinox.

NISTAR Status and Science with Its Observations

The NISTAR instrument remains fully functional and continues its uninterrupted data record. The presentations here include more details on specific topics related to NISTAR as well as on efforts to combine information from both EPIC and NISTAR.

Steven Lorentz [L-1 Standards and Technology, Inc.] reported that NISTAR has been measuring the irradiance from the Sun-lit Earth in three bands for more than eight years. The bands measure the outgo­ing reflected solar and total radiation from Earth at a limited range of solar angles. These measurements assist researchers in answering questions addressing Earth radiation imbalance and predicting future climate change. NISTAR continues to operate nominally, and the team is monitoring any in-orbit degradation. Lorentz explained the evolution of the NISTAR view angle over time. He also provided NISTAR shortwave (SW) and photodiode (PD) intercomparison. NISTAR has proven itself to be an extremely stable instrument – although measurements of the offsets have measurement errors. A relative comparison with the scaled-PD channel implies long-term agreement below a percent with a constant background.

Clark Weaver [University of Maryland, College Park (UMD)] discussed updates to a new reflected- SW energy estimate from EPIC. This new product uses generic Airborne Visible/Infrared Imaging Spectrometer (AVIRIS) aircraft observations over homogeneous scenes to spectrally interpolate between the coarse EPIC channels. This approach assumes the spectra from an EPIC pixel is a weighted combination of a solid cloud scene and the underlying (cloud-free) surface. Weaver and his team used a vector discrete ordinate radiative transfer model with a full linearization facility, called VLIDORT, to account for the different viewing/illumination geometry of the sensors. Each pixel residual between EPIC observations at six different wavelengths (between 340 and 780 nm) and the composite high-resolution spectrum from AVIRIS has been reduced by about 50%, since the last report. While the total reflected energy for a single EPIC image can be about 15 W/m2 different than the NISTAR measurement, by 2017 the offset bias was, on average, about 1 W/m2

Andrew Lacis [GISS] said that DSCOVR measurements of Earth’s reflected solar radiation from the “L1” position offer a unique perspective for the continuous monitoring of Earth’s sunlit hemisphere. Six years of EPIC data show the seasonal and diurnal variability of Earth’s planetary albedo – but with no discernible trend. Planetary scale variability, driven by changing patterns in cloud distribution, is seen to occur at all longitudes over a broad range of time scales. The planetary albedo variability is strongly correlated at neighboring longitudes but shows strongly anticorrelated behavior at diametrically distant longitudes.

Update on EPIC Products and Science Results

EPIC has a suite of data products available. The following subsections summarize content during the DSCOVR STM related to these products. They provide updates on several of the data products and on related algorithm improvements. 

Total Column Ozone

Natalya Kramarova [GSFC] reported on the status of the EPIC total O3 using the V3 algorithm. The absolute calibrations are updated every year using collocated observations from the Ozone Mapping and Profiling Suite (OMPS) on Suomi NPP. EPIC total O3 measurements are routinely compared with independent satellite and ground-based measurements. Retrieved EPIC O3 columns agree within ±5–7 Dobson Units (DU, or 1.5–2.5%) with independent observations, including those from satellites [e.g., Suomi NPP/OMPS, NASA’s Aura/Ozone Monitoring Instrument (OMI), European Union’s (EU) Copernicus Sentinel-5 Precursor/TROPOspheric Monitoring Instrument (TROPOMI)], sondes, and ground-based Brewer and Dobson spectrophotometers. The EPIC O3 record is stable and shows no substantial drifts with respect to OMPS. In the future, the EPIC O3 team plans to compare EPIC time resolved O3 measurements with observations from NASA’s Tropospheric Emissions Monitoring of Pollution (TEMPO) and the South Korean Geostationary Environment Monitoring Spectrometer (GEMS) – both in geostationary orbit. (Along with the EU’s Copernicus Sentinel-4 mission, expected to launch in 2024, these three missions form a global geostationary constellation for monitoring air quality on spatial and temporal scales that will help scientists better understand the causes, movement, and effects of air pollution across some of the world’s most populated areas.) 

Jerrald Ziemke [Morgan State University] explained that tropospheric column O3 is measured over the disk of Earth every 1–2 hours. These measurements are derived by combining EPIC observations with Modern-Era Retrospective Analysis for Research and Applications (MERRA2) assimilated O3 and tropopause fields. These hourly maps are available to the public from the Langley ASDC and extend over eight years from June 2015 to present. The EPIC tropospheric O3 is now indicating post-COVID anomalous decreases of ~3 DU in the Northern Hemisphere for three consecutive years (2020–2022). Similar decreases are present in other satellite tropospheric O3 products as well as OMI tropospheric nitrogen dioxide (NO2), a tropospheric O3 precursor.

Algorithm Improvement for Ozone and Sulfur Dioxide Products

Kai Yang [UMD] presented the algorithm for retrieving tropospheric O3 from EPIC by estimating the stratosphere–troposphere separation of retrieved O3 profiles. This approach contrasts with the traditional residual method, which relies on the stratospheric O3 fields from independent sources. Validated against the near-coincident O3 sonde measurements, EPIC data biased low by a few DU (up to 5 DU), consistent with EPIC’s reduced sensitivity to O3 in the troposphere. Comparisons with seasonal means of TROPOMI tropospheric O3 show consistent spatial and temporal distributions, with lows and highs from atmospheric motion, pollution, lightning, and biomass burning. Yang also showed EPIC measurements of sulfur dioxide (SO2) from recent volcanic eruptions, including Mauna Loa and Kilauea (Hawaii, U.S., 2022–2023), Sheveluch (Kamchatka, Russia, 2023), Etna (Italy, 2023), Fuego (Guatemala, 2023), Popocatépetl (Mexico, 2023), and Pavlof and Shishaldin (Aleutian Islands, U.S., 2023). Yang reported the maximum SO2 mass loadings detected by EPIC are 430 kt from the 2022 Mauna Loa and Kilauea eruptions and 351 kt from the 2023 Sheveluch eruption.

Simon Carn [University of Michigan] showed EPIC observations of major volcanic eruptions in 2022–2023 using the EPIC L2 volcanic SO2 and UV Aerosol Index (UVAI) products to track SO2 and ash emissions. EPIC SO2 and UVAI measurements during the 2023 Sheveluch eruption show the coincident transport of volcanic SO2, ash, and Asian dust across the North Pacific. The high-cadence EPIC UVAI can be used to track the fallout of volcanic ash from eruption clouds, with implications for volcanic hazards. EPIC SO2 measurements during the November 2022 eruption of Mauna Loa volcano are being analyzed in collaboration with the U.S. Geological Survey, who monitored SO2 emissions using ground-based instruments during the eruption. Carn finished by mentioning that EPIC volcanic SO2 algorithm developments are underway including the simultaneous retrieval of volcanic SO2 and ash.

Aerosols

Myungje Choi [UMD, Baltimore County (UMBC)] presented an update on the EPIC V3 Multi-Angle Implementation of Atmospheric Correction (MAIAC) algorithm to optimize smoke aerosol models and the inversion process. The retrieved smoke/dust properties showed an improved agreement with long-term, ground-based Aerosol Robotic Network (AERONET) measurements of solar spectral absorption (SSA) and with aerosol layer height (ALH) measurements from the Cloud–Aerosol Lidar with Orthogonal Projection (CALIOP) on the Cloud–Aerosol Lidar and Infrared Pathfinder Satellite Observation (CALIPSO) mission. (Update: As of the publication of this summary, both CALIPSO and CloudSat have ended operations.) Choi reported that between 60–90% of EPIC SSA retrievals are within ±0.03 of AERONET SSA measurements, and between 56–88% of EPIC ALH retrievals are within ±1km of CALIOP ALH retrievals. He explained that the improved algorithm effectively captures distinct smoke characteristics, e.g., the higher brown carbon (BrC) fraction from Canadian wildfires in 2023 and the higher black carbon (BC) fraction from agricultural fires over Mexico in June 2023.

Sujung Go [UMBC] presented a global climatology analysis of major absorbing aerosol species, represented by BC and BrC in biomass burning smoke as well as hematite and goethite in mineral dust. The analysis is based on the V3 MAIAC EPIC dataset. Observed regional differences in BC vs. BrC concentrations have strong associations with known distributions of fuels and types of biomass burning (e.g., forest wildfire vs. agricultural burning) and with ALH retrievals linking injection heights with fire radiative power. Regional distributions of the mineral dust components have strong seasonality and agree well with known dust properties from published ground soil samples.

Omar Torres [GSFC] reported on the upgrades of the EPIC near-UV aerosol (EPICAERUV) algorithm. The EPICAERUV algorithm’s diurnal cycle of aerosol optical depth compared to the time and space collocated AERONET observations at multiple sites around the world. The analysis shows remarkably close agreement between the two datasets. In addition, Torres presented the first results of an improved UV-VIS inversion algorithm that simultaneously retrieves aerosol layer height, optical depth, and single scattering albedo.

Hiren Jethva [Morgan State University] discussed the unique product of absorbing aerosols above clouds (AAC) retrieved from EPIC near-UV observations between 340 and 388 nm. The validation analysis of the retrieved aerosol optical depth over clouds against airborne direct measurements from the NASA ObseRvations of Aerosols above CLouds and their intEractionS (ORACLES) campaign revealed a robust agreement. EPIC’s unique capability of providing near-hourly observations offered an insight into the diurnal variations of regional cloud fraction and AAC over “hotspot” regions. A new and simple method of estimating direct radiative effects of absorbing aerosols above clouds provided a multiyear timeseries dataset, which is consistent with similar estimations from Aura–OMI.

Jun Wang [University of Iowa] reported on the development and status of V1 of the L2 EPIC aerosol optical centroid height (AOCH) product – which is now publicly available through ASDC – and on improvements to the AOCH algorithm – which focus on the treatment of surface reflectance and aerosols models. He presented applications of this data product for both climate studies of Sahara dust layer height and air quality studies of surface particulate matter with diameter of 2.5 µm or less (PM2.5). In addition, Wang showed the comparisons of EPIC AOCH data product with those retrieved from TROPOMI and GEMS and discussed ongoing progress to reduce the AOCH data uncertainty that is estimated to be 0.5 km (0.3 mi) over the ocean and 0.8 km (0.5 mi) over land.

Clouds

Yuekui Yang [GSFC] explained the physical meaning of EPIC cloud effective pressure (CEP) in an “apples-to-apples” comparison with CEP measurements from the Global Ozone Monitoring Experiment 2 (GOME-2) on the European Operational Meteorology (MetOp) satellites. The results showed that the two products agreed well.

Yaping Zhou [UMBC] showed how current EPIC O2 A-band and B-band use Moon calibrations due to lack of in-flight calibration and other comparable in-space instruments for absolute calibration. This approach is ineffective at detecting small changes in instrument response function (IRF). This study examined the O2 band’s calibration and stability using a unique South Pole location and Radiative Transfer Model (RTM) simulations with in situ soundings and surface spectral albedo and bidirectional reflectance distribution function (BRDF) measurements as input. The results indicate EPIC simulations are within 1% of observations for non-absorption bands, but large discrepancies exist for the O2 A-band (15.63%) and O2 B-band (5.76%). Sensitivity studies show the large discrepancies are unlikely caused by uncertainties in various input, but a small shift (-0.2–0.3 nm) of IRF could account for the model observation discrepancy. On the other hand, observed multiyear trends in O2 band ratios in the South Pole can be explained with orbital shift – which means the instrument is stable.

Alfonso Delgado Bonal [UMBC] used the EPIC L2 cloud data to characterize the diurnal cycles of cloud optical thickness. To fully exploit the uniqueness of DSCOVR data, all clouds were separated in three groups depending on their optical thickness: thin (0–3), medium (3–10), and thick (3–25). Bonal explained that there is a predictable pattern for different latitudinal zones that reaches a maximum around noon local time – see Figure 2. It was also shown that that the median is a better measure of central tendency when describing cloud optical thickness.

DSCVR Figure 2
Figure 2. Daytime variability of the median liquid cloud optical thickness over the ocean for different seasons of the year derived using EPIC L2 data. The various colored curves represent data collected in different seasons of the year. The black curve represents the annual average – which is most useful for calculations of cloud optical thickness.
Figure credit: Alfonso Delgado Bonal

Elizabeth Berry [Atmospheric and Environmental Research (AER)] reported on how coincident observations from EPIC and the Cloud Profiling Radar (CPR) on CloudSat have been used to train a machine learning model to predict cloud vertical structure. A XGBoost decision tree model used input (e.g., EPIC L1B reflectance, L2 Cloud products, and background meteorology) to predict a binary cloud mask on 25 vertical levels. Berry discussed model performance, feature importance, and future improvements.

Ocean

Robert Frouin [Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California] discussed ocean surface radiation products from EPIC data. He reported that surface radiation products were developed to address science questions pertaining to biogeochemical cycling of carbon, nutrients, and oxygen as well as mixed-layer dynamics and circulation. These products include daily averaged downward planar and scalar irradiance and average cosine for total light just below the surface in the EPIC spectral bands centered on 317.5, 325, 340, 388, 443, 551, and 680 nm and integrated values over the photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) and UV-A spectral ranges. The PAR-integrated quantities were evaluated against in situ data collected at sites in the North Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea. Frouin and his colleagues have also developed, tested, and evaluated an autonomous system for collecting and transmitting continuously spectral UV and visible downward fluxes. 

Vegetation

Yuri Knyazikhin [Boston University] reported on the status of the Vegetation Earth System Data Record (VESDR) and discussed science with vegetation parameters. A new version of the VESDR software was delivered to NCCS and implemented for operational generation of the VESDR product. The new version passed tests of physics (e.g., various relationships between vegetation indices and vegetation parameters derived from the VESDR) and follow regularities reported in literature. Analysis of hotspot signatures derived from EPIC and from the Multiangle Imaging Spectroradiometer (MISR) on Terra over forests in southeastern Democratic Republic of the Congo reaffirms that long-term precipitation decline has had minimal impact on leaf area and leaf optical properties.

Jan Pisek [University of Tartu/Tartu Observatory, Estonia] reported on the verification of the previously modeled link between the directional area scattering factor (DASF) from the EPIC VESDR product and foliage clumping with empirical data. The results suggest that DASF can be accurately derived from satellite observations and provide new evidence that the photon recollision probability theory concepts can be successfully applied even at a fairly coarse spatial resolution.

Sun Glint

Tamás Várnai [UMBC] discussed the EPIC Glint Product as well as impacts of sun glint off ice clouds on other EPIC data products – see Figure 3. The cloud glints come mostly from horizontally oriented ice crystals and have strong impact in EPIC cloud retrievals. Glints increase retrieved cloud fraction, the retrieved cloud optical depth, and cloud height. Várnai also reported that the EPIC glint product is now available at the ASDC. It is expected that glints yield additional new insights about the microphysical and radiative properties of ice clouds.

DSCVR figure 3
Figure 3. EPIC image taken over Mexico on July 4, 2018. The red, white and blue spot over central Mexico is the result of Sun glint reflecting off high clouds containing ice crystals. EPIC is particularly well suited for studies of ice clouds that cause Sun glint, because unlike most other instruments, it uses a filter wheel to take images at multiple wavelengths, which means the image for each wavelength is obtained at a slightly different time. For example, it takes four minutes to cycle from red to blue. During that time, Earth moves by ~100 km (~62 mi) meaning each image will capture a slightly different scene. Brightness contrasts between images can be used to identify glint signals.
Image credit: Tamas Vanai

Alexander Kostinski [Michigan Technology University] reported on long-term changes and semi-permanent features, e.g., ocean glitter. They introduced pixel-pinned temporally and conditionally averaged reflectance images, uniquely suited to the EPIC observational circumstances. The preliminary resulting images (maps), averaged over months and conditioned on cover type (land, ocean, or clouds), show seasonal dependence at a glance (e.g., by an apparent extent of polar caps).

More EPIC Science Results

Guoyong Wen [Morgan State University] discussed spectral properties of the EPIC observations near backscattering, including four cases when the scattering angle reaches about 178° (only 2° from perfect backscattering). The enhancement addresses changes in scattering angle observed in 2020. (Scattering angle is a function of wavelength, because according to Mie scattering theory, the cloud scattering phase function in the glory region is wavelength dependent.) Radiative transfer calculations showed that the change in scattering angles has the largest impact on reflectance in the red and NIR channels at 680 nm and 780 nm and the smallest influence on reflectance in the UV channel at 388 nm – consistent with EPIC observations. The change of global average cloud amount also plays an important role in the reflectance enhancement.

Nick Gorkavyi [SSAI] talked about future plans to deploy a wide-angle camera and a multislit spectrometer on the Moon’s surface for whole-Earth observations to complement EPIC observations. Gorkavyi explained that the apparent vibrational movement of Earth in the Moon’s sky complicates observations of Earth. This causes the center of Earth to move in the Moon’s sky in a rectangle, measuring 13.4° × 15.8° with a period of 6 years. 

Jay Herman [UMBC] reported on EPIC O3 and trends from combining Nimbus 7/Solar Backscatter Ultraviolet (SBUV), the SBUV-2 series, and OMPS–Nadir Mapper (NM) data. (OMPS is made up of three instruments: a Nadir Mapper (NM), Nadir Profiler, and Limb Profiler. OMPS NM is a total ozone sensor). Herman compared EPIC O3 data to OMPS NM data, which showed good agreement (especially summer values) for moderate solar zenith angle (SZA). Comparison with long-term O3 time series (1978–2021) revealed that there were trends and latitude dependent O3 turn-around dates (1994–1998). Herman emphasized that global O3 models do not show this effect but rather have only a single turn-around date around 2000.

Alexander Radkevich [LaRC] presented a poster that showed a comparative analysis of air quality monitoring by orbital and suborbital NASA missions using the DSCOVR EPIC O3 product as well as Pandora total O3 column retrievals. Comparison of the June 2023 total column O3 from EPIC data to the same periods in previous years revealed a significant – around 50 DU – increase of total O3 column in the areas impacted by the plume from 2023 Canadian wildfires.

Conclusion

At the end of the meeting Alexander Marshak, Jay Herman, and Adam Szabo discussed how to make the EPIC and NISTAR instruments more visible in the community. The EPIC website now allows visitors to observe daily fluctuations of aerosol index, cloud fraction, and the ocean surface – as observed from the “L1” point,  nearly one million miles away from Earth! More daily products, (e.g., cloud and aerosol height, total leaf area index, and sunlit leaf area index) will be added soon.

The 2023 DSCOVR EPIC and NISTAR Science Team Meeting provided an opportunity to learn the status of DSCOVR’s Earth-observing instruments, EPIC and NISTAR, the status of recently released L2 data products, and the science results being achieved from the “L1” point. As more people use DSCOVR data worldwide, the ST hopes to hear from users and team members at its next meeting. The latest updates from the mission are found on the EPIC website. (UPDATE: The next DSCOVR EPIC and NISTAR STM will be held on October 16–18, 2024. Check the website for more details as the date approaches.)

Alexander Marshak
NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center
alexander.marshak@nasa.gov


Adam Szabo
NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center
adam.szabo@nasa.gov

View the full article

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Similar Topics

    • By NASA
      A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket carrying Northrop Grumman’s Cygnus XL spacecraft is launched on NASA’s Northrop Grumman Commercial Resupply Services 23 mission to the International Space Station on Sunday, Sept. 14, 2025.Credit: NASA NASA is sending more science, technology demonstrations, and crew supplies to the International Space Station following the successful launch of the agency’s Northrop Grumman Commercial Resupply Services 23 mission, or Northrop Grumman CRS-23.
      The company’s Cygnus XL spacecraft, carrying more than 11,000 pounds of cargo to the orbiting laboratory, lifted off at 6:11 p.m. EDT Sunday on a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket from Space Launch Complex 40 at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station in Florida. This mission is the first flight of the larger, more cargo-capable version of the solar-powered spacecraft. 
      Cygnus XL is scheduled to be captured at 6:35 a.m. on Wednesday, Sept. 17, by the Canadarm2 robotic arm, which NASA astronaut Jonny Kim will operate with assistance from NASA astronaut Zena Cardman. Following capture, the spacecraft will be installed to the Unity module’s Earth-facing port for cargo unloading.
      The resupply mission is carrying dozens of research experiments that will be conducted during Expedition 73, including materials to produce semiconductor crystals in space and equipment to develop improvements for cryogenic fuel tanks. The spacecraft also will deliver a specialized UV light system to prevent the growth of microbe communities that form in water systems and supplies to produce pharmaceutical crystals that could treat cancer and other diseases.
      These are just a sample of the hundreds of scientific investigations conducted aboard the station in the areas of biology and biotechnology, Earth and space science, physical sciences, as well as technology development and demonstrations. For nearly 25 years, NASA has supported a continuous U.S. human presence aboard the orbiting laboratory, where astronauts have learned to live and work in space for extended periods of time. The space station is a springboard for developing a low Earth economy and NASA’s next great leaps in exploration, including Artemis missions to the Moon and American astronaut missions to Mars.
      NASA’s arrival, capture, and installation coverage are as follows (all times Eastern and subject to change based on real-time operations):
      Wednesday, Sept. 17
      5 a.m. – Arrival coverage begins on NASA+, Amazon Prime, and more.
      6:35 a.m. – Capture of Cygnus XL with the space station’s robotic arm.
      8 a.m. – Installation coverage begins on NASA+, Amazon Prime, and more.
      All coverage times are estimates and could be adjusted based on operations after launch. Follow the space station blog for the most up-to-date information.
      Cygnus XL is scheduled to remain at the orbiting laboratory until March 2026, before it departs and disposes of several thousand pounds of trash through its re-entry into Earth’s atmosphere, where it will harmlessly burn up. The spacecraft is named the S.S. William “Willie” C. McCool, in honor of the NASA astronaut who perished in 2003 during the space shuttle Columbia accident.
      Learn more about this NASA commercial resupply mission at:
      https://www.nasa.gov/mission/nasas-northrop-grumman-crs-23/
      -end-
      Josh Finch / Jimi Russell
      Headquarters, Washington
      202-358-1100
      joshua.a.finch@nasa.gov / james.j.russell@nasa.gov
      Steven Siceloff
      Kennedy Space Center, Fla.
      321-876-2468
      steven.p.siceloff@nasa.gov
      Sandra Jones / Joseph Zakrzewski
      Johnson Space Center, Houston
      281-483-5111
      sandra.p.jones@nasa.gov / joseph.a.zakrzewski@nasa.gov
      Share
      Details
      Last Updated Sep 14, 2025 LocationNASA Headquarters Related Terms
      International Space Station (ISS) Commercial Resupply ISS Research Johnson Space Center Northrop Grumman Commercial Resupply View the full article
    • By NASA
      Ames Science Directorate’s Stars of the Month: September 2025

      The NASA Ames Science Directorate recognizes the outstanding contributions of (pictured left to right) Taejin Park, Lydia Schweitzer, and Rachel Morgan. Their commitment to the NASA mission represents the entrepreneurial spirit, technical expertise, and collaborative disposition needed to explore this world and beyond.
      Earth Science Star: Taejin Park
      Taejin Park is a NASA Earth eXchange (NEX) research scientist within the Biospheric Science Branch, for the Bay Area Environmental Research Institute (BAERI). As the Project Scientist for the Wildfire, Ecosystem Resilience, & Risk Assessment (WERK) project, he has exhibited exemplary leadership and teamwork leading to this multi-year study with the California Natural Resources Agency (CNRA) and California Air Resources Board (CARB) to develop tracking tools of statewide ecological condition, disturbance, and recovery efforts related to wildfires.
      Space Science and Astrobiology Star: Lydia Schweitzer
      Lydia Schweitzer is a research scientist within the Planetary Systems Branch for the Bay Area Environmental Research Institute (BAERI) as a member of the Neutron Spectrometer System (NSS) team with broad contributions in instrumentation, robotic rovers and lunar exploration. Lydia is recognized for her leadership on a collaborative project to design and build a complex interface unit that is crucial for NSS to communicate with the Japanese Space Agency’s Lunar Polar eXploration rover mission (LUPEX). In addition, she is recognized for her role as an instrument scientist for the Volatiles Investigating Polar Exploration Rover (VIPER) and MoonRanger missions.
      Space Science and Astrobiology Star: Rachel Morgan
      Rachel Morgan is an optical scientist in the Astrophysics Branch for the SETI Institute. As AstroPIC’s lead experimentalist and the driving force behind the recently commissioned photonic testbed at NASA Ames, this month she achieved a record 92 dB on-chip suppression on a single photonic-integrated chip (PIC) output channel. This advances critical coronagraph technology and is a significant milestone relevant to the Habitable Worlds Observatory.
      View the full article
    • By NASA
      Explore This Section Earth Earth Observer Editor’s Corner Feature Articles Meeting Summaries News Science in the News Calendars In Memoriam Announcements More Archives Conference Schedules Style Guide 21 min read
      Summary of the 11th ABoVE Science Team Meeting
      Introduction
      The NASA Arctic–Boreal Vulnerability Experiment (ABoVE) is a large-scale ecological study in the northern regions of North America (Alaska and western Canada) that was developed to understand environmental changes in the region and the implications of those changes for society. Funded primarily by the NASA Terrestrial Ecology Program, this 10-year campaign has included field, airborne, and satellite remote sensing research to address its overarching scientific question of how environmental change in the Arctic and boreal region of western North America will affect vulnerable ecosystems and society.
      ABoVE deployed in three phases: 1) ecosystem dynamics (2015–2018); 2) ecosystem services (2017–2022); and 3) analysis and synthesis (2023–present). Now in the last year of the third phase, the Science Team (ST) consists of 67 active NASA-funded projects with more than 1000 individuals participating. The ABoVE ST has met yearly to discuss the progress of individual teams, plan joint field work, and discuss synthesis activities. ABoVE was featured in a 2019 The Earth Observer article, titled “Summary of the 2019 ABoVE Science Team Meeting” [July–August 2019, Volume 31, Issue 4, pp. 19–22], as well as a 2022 The Earth Observer article, titled “Summary of the Eighth ABoVE Science Team Meeting” [September–October 2022, Volume 34, Issue 5, pp. 28–33].
      Meeting Overview
      The 11th – and final – ABoVE Science Team Meeting (ASTM11) was held May 12–15, 2025, with 96 registered in-person attendees meeting at the University of Alaska, Fairbanks (UAF) and 67 registered virtual attendees – see Photo 1. The meeting included presentations from Phase 3 projects and synthesis reports from thematic working groups (WGs). ABoVE partners, including collaborators [e.g., the Department of Energy’s Next Generation Ecosystem Experiment-Arctic (NGEE-Arctic), Polar Knowledge Canada (POLAR), the Canadian Forest Service (CFS), and the Government of the Northwest Territories (GNWT)] and representatives from upcoming NASA campaigns focusing on the Arctic, shared updates on their activities. Additionally, the meeting featured sessions highlighting cross-project activities, e.g., ABoVE’s participation in regional fire workshops. The meeting also focused on collaborations with the Scotty Creek Research Station in Canada, the many types of science communication activities during ABoVE, and projects conducting collaborative research with community or regional partners.
      Photo 1.The 11th Arctic–Boreal Vulnerability Experiment Science Team (ABoVE) meeting group photo of in-person and virtual participants. Photo credit: Peter Griffith, Leane Kending, and David Stroud The meeting included additional team activities designed to encourage collaboration and understanding between team members. There were opportunities for multiple field trips for in-person attendees, including visits to the Alaska Satellite Facility (ASF) at the Geophysical Institute, the Permafrost Tunnel operated by the Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory (CRREL), the Yankovich Road Fire Interpretive Trail, and the Arctic Research Open House at UAF – see ABove Field Trips section to learn more. The meeting offered early career researchers a chance to receive feedback on their posters and participate in an Early Career lunch event. The meeting even hosted an ABoVE bingo competition, which encouraged attendees to make new scientific and social connections – see Photo 2.
      Photo 2. Scott Goetz [University of Northern Arizona—ABoVE Science Team Lead] poses with ABoVE BINGO winner Wanwan Liang [University of Utah]. Photo credit: Wanwan Liang Meeting Opening
      The first day of the meeting began with a series of opening remarks from the ABoVE leadership team. Peter Griffith [NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC)/Science Systems and Applications, Inc. (SSAI)—Chief Scientist, Carbon Cycle and Ecosystems Office (CCEO)], Scott Goetz [Northern Arizona University (NAU)—ABoVE ST Lead], and Ryan Pavlick [NASA Headquarters (HQ)—ABoVE Program Manager] all noted the significance of this final meeting and discussed the major scientific advances of ABoVE made possible through the dedication of ST members, WG leads, planning committees, and contributors who have made ABoVE a success. Goetz reviewed the meeting goals and objectives:
      receive updates about currently funded projects; receive reports on Thematic WG advances with an emphasis on multiple WG and cross-phase synthesis activities; receive updates on research connections with partners and collaborators; discuss, reflect, and document the history of ABoVE, including major advances, lessons learned, and items to accomplish in the time remaining; and celebrate ABoVE success stories, with advice for potential future NASA large-scale coordinated campaigns. Working Group Presentations and Breakouts
      Throughout the first few days of the meeting, leads for the thematic working groups (WG) presented synthetic overviews of the research efforts of their group members, identified current gaps in planned or completed research, and discussed potential future work. Following these presentations, breakout groups convened to discuss future activities of the WGs. Short summaries of each presentation are available below. Together, these presentations demonstrate the highly interconnected nature of carbon cycles, hydrology, permafrost dynamics, and disturbance regimes in Arctic–boreal ecosystems. The presentations also showcase the substantial ongoing WG efforts to synthesize findings and identify critical knowledge gaps for future research priorities.
      Vegetation Dynamics Working Group
      WG Leads: Matthew Macander [Alaska Biological Research, Inc. (ABR)] and Paul Montesano [GSFC/ADNET Systems Inc.]
      The Vegetation Dynamics WG discussed new advances in understanding Arctic–boreal vegetation structure and function that have been made over the past 10 years through comprehensive biomass maps and multidecadal trend analyses. ABoVE research revealed a critical boreal forest biome shift with greening in nitrogen-rich northern forests and browning in drought-stressed southern forests. The group has identified key knowledge gaps in predicting post-fire vegetation recovery and detecting pervasive declines in vegetation resilience across southern boreal forests. The results suggest higher vulnerability to abrupt forest loss that could dampen the expected increase in carbon sequestration under future climate scenarios.
      Spectral Imaging Working Group
      WG Leads: Fred Huemmrich [GSFC/University of Maryland Baltimore County] and Peter Nelson [Laboratory of Ecological Spectroscopy (LECOSPEC)]
      Over the past year, the Spectral Imaging WG focused on the fundamental scale problem in Arctic ecology, which refers to the mismatch between observation scales and ecological process scales, which span spatial scales from leaf level to larger study areas and temporal scales from minutes to decades. The Airborne Visible/Infrared Imaging Spectrometer – Next Generation (AVIRIS-NG) and AVIRIS-3 datasets provide the first broad-area and high-spatial and spectral resolution coverage of high-latitude terrestrial ecosystems. The WG is now completing a scaling synthesis paper and preparing for the new era of data-rich spectral imaging with improved capabilities in data management, machine learning, and modeling applications for high-latitude research.
      Modeling Working Group
      WG Lead: Josh Fisher [Chapman University]
      The Modeling WG aims to reduce model uncertainties in simulations and projections in the Arctic–boreal region across all ABoVE ecosystem indicators. The WG had polled the ST to determine the variables most needed for their Earth system models and is now using the field, airborne, and satellite datasets to better constrain these models. This WG discussed the benefits to the modeling community of transforming the more than 100 ABoVE datasets into a common grid and projection format used by modelers.
      Carbon Dynamics Working Group
      WG Leads: Jonathan Wang [University of Utah] and Jennifer Watts [Woodwell Climate Research Center (WCRC)]
      The Carbon Dynamics WG has focused its recent work on three areas: decadal syntheses of carbon dioxide (CO2) fluxes from eddy covariance towers, machine learning approaches to upscaling wetland and lake methane (CH4) emissions, and carbon flux modeling across the Arctic–boreal zone. The research integrated atmospheric CO2 observations to improve carbon flux estimates and examined wildfire impacts on both carbon emissions and albedo changes. A significant component of the work involved comparing top-down versus bottom-up carbon flux models, with particular attention to permafrost and peatland regions.
      Hydrology-Permafrost-Wetlands Working Group
      WG Leads: Laura Bourgeau-Chavez [Michigan Technological University], David Butman [University of Washington], John Kimball [University of Montana], and Melissa Schwab [University of California, Irvine]
      The Hydrology–Permafrost–Wetlands WG focused on the processes controlling changes in permafrost distribution and properties and their impacts. There was discussion about the nature, causes, and consequences of hydrologic change (e.g. water storage, mobility, and distribution) and about ecosystem water, energy, and carbon cycle linkages. The presenters mentioned integration of ABoVE datasets with NASA satellite missions [e.g., NASA–Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) Synthetic Aperture Radar (NISAR) and Surface Water and Ocean Topography (SWOT) missions]. WG members discussed the connections between ABoVE research and several crosscutting initiatives, including two NASA Arctic coastlines efforts [e.g., Frontlines Of Rapidly Transforming Ecosystems Earth Venture Suborbital (FORTE EVS) campaign and NASA’s Arctic-COastal Land Ocean InteRactionS (COLORS)] and the WCRC’s Permafrost Pathways.
      Disturbance Working Group
      WG Leads: Dong Chen [University of Maryland, College Park] and Jinhyuk Kim [University of California, Irvine]
      The Disturbance WG leads presented their decade-long perspective on disturbance-related research in the ABoVE domain. The presentation incorporated artificial intelligence (AI)-generated summaries of ABoVE-affiliated research across multiple disturbance types, including boreal wildfires, tundra wildfires, and thermokarst/permafrost degradation processes. Chen and Kim acknowledged the extensive contributions from researchers and WG members while outlining future directions for disturbance research.
      Success Stories
      Four “Success Story” presentations and panels took place during ASTM11, which showcased efforts of ABoVE ST members and the leadership team to create and coordinate engagement efforts that spanned individual projects.
      Success Story 1: ABoVE Participation in Regional Fire Workshops
      A substantial portion of ABoVE research has focused on wildfire, and many members of the ST have participated in domestic and international wildfire efforts, connecting researchers with land managers across Alaska and Canada. Randi Jandt [UAF] discussed the Alaska Fire Science Consortium workshops (held in 2017 and 2022). Jenn Baltzer [Wilfred Laurier University (WLU), Canada] discussed Northwest Territories workshops (held in 2014 and 2025), both of which occurred in response to extreme fire seasons in the region. Laura Bourgeau-Chavez outlined ABoVE’s participation in all of these workshops. The workshops facilitated knowledge exchange and collaboration on critical wildfire management priorities, including fire risk assessment, real-time modeling, post-fire effects, and climate change impacts on fire regimes. Key features included small focus groups, field trips to command centers and fire-affected areas, and integration of Indigenous knowledge with new technologies to inform management practices and climate preparedness strategies.
      Success Story 2: Collaborations with Scotty Creek Research Station (SCRS)
      ASTM11 participants watched the film, “Scotty Creek Research Community – The Spirit of Collaboration,” about the SCRS, Canada’s first and only Indigenous-led research station. Following the film, station team members participated in a panel discussion. Ramona Pearson [Ramona Pearson Consulting, Canada], Maude Auclair [WLU], Mason Dominico [WLU], Michael McPhee [Sambaa K’e First Nation, Canada], and William “Bill” Quinton [WLU] discussed their decade-long collaboration with ABoVE. The partnership involved ABoVE collecting airborne hyperspectral, lidar, and radar imagery, while SCRS researchers provided field data for calibration and validation. In 2022, management of the station transitioned to Łı́ı́dlı̨ı̨ Kų́ę́ First Nation (LKFN, Canada), and ABoVE continued collaborating through knowledge exchange, including with early-career researchers and interns. When a 2022 fire destroyed the field station and surrounding area, ABoVE flew additional flights to capture airborne imagery observations to allow comparison of pre- and post-fire conditions.
      Success Story 3: Science Communication
      During the ABoVE field campaign, ST members and CCEO staff engaged in multiple strategies to communicate research results to the public. The activities included interactive engagement through airborne open houses and guest flights, ST member narratives in the “Notes from the Field” blog posts on the NASA Earth Observatory website, and professional multimedia production, including Earth Observatory content and award-winning videos. This multifaceted strategy demonstrates effective scientific communication through direct public engagement and high-quality, multimedia storytelling, making complex research accessible to diverse audiences.
      Success Story 4: Engagement Activities
      This session highlighted several examples of community engagement across the ABoVE domain. Gerald “J.J.” Frost [ABR] discussed synthesizing ecosystem responses and elder observations in western Alaska for his ABoVE project. In another example, ABoVE researchers from Michigan Tech Research Institute (MTRI) partnered with Ducks Unlimited Canada (DUC) and local organizations. Dana Redhuis [MTRI] and Rebecca Edwards [DUC] described their on-the-land camps that provide hands-on training for Northwest Territories youth in wetlands education and ecological monitoring. Kevin Turner [Brock University, Canada] showcased his work with members of the Vuntut Gwitchin First Nation in Old Crow Flats, Yukon, evaluating how climate and land cover change influence water dynamics and carbon balance. These activities demonstrate collaborative research that integrates Indigenous and Western knowledge approaches to address climate change impacts.
      ABoVE Phase 3 Project Presentations
      Project leads of the 20 NASA-funded ABoVE Phase 3 projects presented updates that were organized by scientific theme. The presentations spanned multiple days of the meeting. Table 1 below provides all the project titles, presenter names, and links to each project and presentation. Science results from four of the presentations are shown in Figures 1–4 below as indicated in the table.
      Table 1. An overview ofABoVE Phase 3 projects and presenters. The Project name includes the last name of the Principal Investigator, NASA funding program (TE for Terrestrial Ecology), the year of the NASA solicitation funding the research, and provides a hyperlink to the Project Profile. A hyperlink to each presentation is provided as either PowerPoint (PPT) file or PDF.
      Project   Carbon Presenter(s) Bloom (TE 2021): Using CO2, CH4 and land-surface constraints to resolve sign and magnitude of northern high latitude carbon-climate feedbacks [PDF] Eren Bilir [NASA/Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL)]; Principal Investigator (PI): Alexis (Anthony) Bloom [NASA/Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL)] Butman (TE 2021): Do changing terrestrial-aquatic interfaces in Arctic-boreal landscapes control the form, processing, and fluxes of carbon? [PPT] David Butman [University of Washington] – see Figure 1 Watts (TE 2021): Contributions of tundra and boreal systems to radiative forcing in North America and Russia under contemporary and future conditions [PPT] Jennifer Watts [Woodwell Climate Research Center] Miller-S (TE 2021): A synthesis and reconciliation of greenhouse gas flux estimates across the ABoVE domain [PDF] Scot Miller [Johns Hopkins University] Michalak (TE 2021): Quantifying climate sensitivities of photosynthesis and respiration in Arctic and boreal ecosystems from top-down observational constraints [PDF] Wu Sun and Jiaming Wen [both Carnegie Institution for Science, CI]; PI: Anna Michalak, [Carnegie Institution for Science] Fire Presenter(s) Bourgeau-Chavez (TE 2021): Integrating remote sensing and modeling to better understand the vulnerability of boreal-taiga ecosystems to wildfire [PPT] Laura Bourgeau-Chavez [Michigan Technological University (MTU)] Walker (TE 2021): Drivers and Impacts of Reburning in boreal forest Ecosystems (DIRE) [PDF] Jeremy Forsythe [Northern Arizona University (NAU)]; PI: Xanthe Walker [NAU] Wang (TE 2021): Quantifying disturbance and global change impacts on multi-decadal trends in aboveground biomass and land cover across Arctic-boreal North America [PPT] Jonathan Wang [University of Utah]– see Figure 2  Wildlife Presenter(s) Boelman (TE 2021): The future of the Forest-Tundra Ecotone: A synthesis that adds interactions among snow, vegetation, and wildlife to the equation [PPT] Natalie Boelman [Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, Columbia University] French (TE 2021): Informing wetland policy and management for waterfowl habitat and other ecosystem services using multi-frequency synthetic aperture radar [PPT] Nancy French [MTU] – see Figure 3 Hydrology / Permafrost Presenter(s) Du (TE 2021): High resolution mapping of surface soil freeze thaw status and active layer thickness for improving the understanding of permafrost dynamics and vulnerability [PPT] Jinyang Du [University of Montana] Miller (TE 2021): Enhanced methane emissions in transitional permafrost environments: An ABoVE phase 3 synthesis investigation [PPT] Charles “Chip” Miller [NASA/JPL] Tape (TE 2021): Characterizing a widespread disturbance regime in the ABoVE domain: Beaver engineering [PPT] Kenneth Tape [University of Alaska, Fairbanks] Zhuang (TE 2021): Role of linked hydrological, permafrost, ground ice, and land cover changes in regional carbon balance across boreal and Arctic landscapes [PDF] Qianlai Zhuang [Purdue University]  Vegetation Structure Presenter(s) Duncanson (TE 2021): Mapping boreal forest biomass recovery rates across gradients of vegetation structure and environmental change [PPT] Paul Montesano [GSFC/ADNET Systems Inc]; PI: Laura Duncanson [University of Maryland]—see Figure 4 Lara (TE 2021): ABoVE-Ground characterization of plant species succession in retrogressive thaw slumps using imaging spectroscopy [PPT] Mark Lara [University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign]  Vegetation Dynamics  Presenter(s) Frost (TE 2021): Towards a warmer, less frozen future Arctic: Synthesis of drivers, ecosystem responses, and elder observations along bioclimatic gradients in western Alaska [PPT] Gerald “J.J.” Frost [ABR] Goetz (TE 2021): Mapping and modeling attributes of an Arctic-boreal biome shift: Phase-3 applications within the ABoVE domain [PPT] Scott Goetz [NAU] Liu (TE 2021): Characterizing Arctic-boreal vegetation resilience under climate change and disturbances [PPT] Yanlan Liu [The Ohio State University] Townsend (TE 2021): Functional diversity as a driver of gross primary productivity variation across the ABoVE domain [PPT] Philip Townsend [University of Wisconsin] Determining Aboveground Biomass Density Using ICESat-2 Data and Modeling
      Figure 1. Despite their relatively small coverage, surface water extent across boreal and arctic lowlands significantly impacts landscape-scale estimates of carbon emissions. The red points on the map in the figure indicates locations of available lake chemistry data derived from ABoVE-supported research, from collaborators, and from a preliminary literature search. Figure credit. David Butman Figure 2. The Arctic-boreal carbon cycle is inextricably linked to vegetation composition and demography, both of which are being altered by climate change, rising levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide, and climate-induced changes in disturbance regimes. The map in the figure shows above-ground biomass (AGB) change across Arctic-boreal North America (2022–1984) created using a machine learning model of AGB trained on from more than 45,000 field plots and 200,000 km2 of airborne lidar data. Figure credit:  Wanwan Liang Figure 3.  Wetlands provide many ecosystem services, including waterfowl habitat, carbon sequestration, and water quality. Northern wetlands Iin the ABovE study area) are threatened from both land use expansion and climate change disruptions, prompting the need for informed management strategies.  Copernicus Sentinel 1 synthetic aperture radar (SAR) data have been used to create this map of flooding (hydroperiod) in wetland areas around the Great Slave Lake in Canada  The color code on the map corresponds to the number of times the SAR imagery indicated a place was flooded (inundated). Such information is helpful for predicting within-season changes in wetland extent. Figure credit: Nancy French Figure 4. Advances have been made in mapping aboveground biomass density (AGBD). Shown here as an example is an AGBD map created using stata from the   ICESat-2 pan-Boreal 30-m (98-ft) tree height and biomass data product [left] and the ensemble mean of the standard deviation of AGBD, aggregated to modelling tiles [right]. Current research aims to expand these maps and understand regional vegetation changes.  Figure credit. Laura Duncanson/data from ORNL DAAC ASTM11 Poster Sessions
      ASTM11 featured 41 research posters across three sessions, organized by thematic area – see Table 3 and Photo 3. The Poster Session agenda details the range of topics that spanned airborne synthetic aperture radar (SAR) and satellite imagery to northern ecosystem fieldwork. Key research topics that emerged included CO2 and CH4 emissions from terrestrial and aquatic systems, ongoing permafrost thaw, fire impacts on carbon cycling, vegetation mapping and biomass estimation, and the impacts of wildlife on the landscape.
      Table 2. A breakdown of ASTM11 poster presentations by science theme.
      Poster Theme Poster Count Carbon Dynamics 5 Crosscutting, Modeling, or Other 6 Fire Disturbance 5 Permafrost, Hydrology, and Wetlands 13 Vegetation Dynamics and Distribution 7 Vegetation Structure and Function 4 Wildlife and Ecosystem Services 1 Photo 3. Poster presentations and sessions during ASTM11 offered opportunities for presenters to share their latest research findings with meeting participants. Photo credit: Elizabeth Hoy ABoVE Field Trips
      ASTM11 offered multiple field trip options across the Fairbanks region of Alaska. The fieldtrips provided ST members an opportunity to interact with the research community – see Photo 4.
      Trip to Alaska Satellite Facility (ASF) and Geophysical Institute
      ASF is a data archive for many SAR datasets from a variety of sensors and has multiple ground station facilities. During the tour, participants visited the ASF operations room and ASF rooftop antenna. The Geophysical Institute tour also featured the Alaska Earthquake Center, Wilson Alaska Technical Center, and Alaska Center for Unmanned Aircraft Systems Integration.
      Trip to Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory (CRREL) Permafrost Tunnel
      The U.S. Army Core of Engineers CRREL Permafrost Tunnel is located in Fox, AK – about 15 km (9 mi) north of Fairbanks. Over 300 m (984 ft) of tunnel have been excavated, exposing Pleistocene ice and carbon-rich yedoma permafrost that ranges in age from 18,000 to 43,000 years old. The tunnel exposes mammoth and bison bones and a variety of permafrost soils. Ongoing projects in the tunnel cover a range of topics, including engineering and geophysical work, Mars analog studies, and biogeochemistry and microbiology of permafrost soils.
      Wildfire Walk: Yankovich Road Fire Interpretive Trail
      On July 11, 2021, a wildfire burned 3.5 acres (14,164 m2) of UAF land. In 2024, the UAF Alaska Fire Science Consortium, Bureau of Land Management Alaska Fire Service, and local artist Klara Maisch collaborated with others to develop the Wildfire Walk at the site. The interpretive trail is an outdoor learning experience with interpretive wayside markers that describe the fire incident, the relationship between wildfire and the boreal forest, fire science and environmental change, and wildfire prevention – see Figure 1.
      UAF Arctic Research Open House
      The UAF Arctic Research Open House was an opportunity for ST members and the public to explore the wide range of research happening at UAF and meet other scientists. ABoVE hosted an information table at the event.
      Photo 4: Collage of images collected during a series of field trips, including [top] the Wildfire Walk along the Alaska Fire Science Consortium, [middle] the Permafrost Tunnel with Tom Douglas [Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory], [bottom left] UAF Arctic Open House ABoVE Table with Margaret “Maggie” Wooton [NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC)/Science System and Applications, Inc. (GSFC/SSAI)], Elizabeth Hoy [GSFC/Global Science & Technology Inc.], and Qiang Zhou [GSFC/SSAI], talking with Logan Berner [Northern Arizona University], [bottom right] the Alaska Satellite Facility ground receiving antenna. Photo credit: Elizabeth Hoy Research Connections
      The success of ABoVE as a large-scale research study over the Arctic and boreal regions within and outside the United States depended on collaboration with multiple organizations. Many of the ABoVE collaborators were able to present at ASTM11.
      Andrew Applejohn [Polar Knowledge Canada (POLAR)] provided details about the scope, mandate, and facilities available through POLAR, a Canadian government agency that has partnered with the ABoVE ST for the duration of the campaign.
      Ryan Connon [Government of the Northwest Territories (GNWT)] discussed the decade-long collaboration between ABoVE and the GNWT, including knowledge sharing of wildlife collar data, field-data ground measurements, and remote sensing analyses.
      Gabrielle Gascon [Canadian Forest Service (CFS), Natural Resources Canada] explained the scope of Canada’s National Forest Inventory and the current CFS focus on wildfire and the CFS’s other areas of research related to the northern regions. Another presentation featured information about various vegetation mapping initiatives where Matthew Macander discussed an Alaska-based effort called AKVEG Map, a vegetation plot database, and Logan Berner [NAU] detailed a pan-Arctic plant aboveground biomass synthesis dataset.
      Brendan Rogers [WCRC] showcased research from Permafrost Pathways, designed to bring together permafrost-related science experts with local communities to inform Arctic policy and develop adaptation and mitigation strategies to address permafrost thaw. NGEE-Arctic is another U.S. government effort that partnered specifically with ABoVE for the duration of the two efforts, and Bob Bolton [Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL)] provided updates on the project.
      Tomoko Tanabe [Japan’s National Institute of Polar Research (JNIPR)] gave a presentation about NIPR to better inform ABoVE scientists about other international Arctic efforts, including a new Japanese Arctic research initiative called the Arctic Challenge for Sustainability III (ArCS III), designed to address social issues related to environmental and social changes in the Arctic.
      Additional Presentations
      An additional presentation aimed to keep the ABoVE ST informed of future NASA Arctic research efforts. Kelsey Bisson [NASA HQ—Program Scientist for the Ocean Biology and Biogeochemistry Program] discussed NASA Arctic-COLORS and Maria Tzortziou [City University of New York/Columbia University, LDEO] discussed the FORTE EVS campaign. The proposed Arctic-COLORS field campaign would quantify the biogeochemical and ecological response of Arctic nearshore systems to rapid changes in terrestrial fluxes and ice conditions. The NASA FORTE EVS campaign will fill a critical gap in understanding Alaska’s northernmost ecosystems by investigating eroding coastlines, rivers, deltas, and estuaries that connect land and sea systems, using airborne platforms.
      Scott Goetz continued with a presentation on U.S. efforts to plan the International Polar Year, scheduled for 2032–2033. Ryan Pavlick provided details on the NISAR mission, which launched after the meeting on July 30, 2025, and discussed other possible future NASA missions.
      A Career Trajectory panel featured Jennifer Watts, Jonathan Wang, Brendan Rogers, and Xiaoran “Seamore” Zhu [Boston University]. The panelists discussed opportunities for researchers from different academic backgrounds and at different career stages, and they provided details about how ABoVE has impacted their careers. They also discussed how NASA campaigns offer opportunities for early career scientists to join a team of peers to grow their abilities throughout the duration of the decade-long research.
      Klara Maisch, a local artist, discussed her work creating science-informed artwork through interdisciplinary collaborations with scientists and other creators – see Figure 5. Maisch described the benefits of partnering with artists to share science with a broad audience and showcased artwork she has created.
      Figure 5. Lower Tanana Homelands – 2022 Yankovich Fire – Plot Painting [left], with original plot reference photograph [right]. Image Credit: Klara Maisch Overarching Presentations
      A series of presentations on the overall structure and outcomes of ABoVE were held during ASTM11. Charles “Chip” Miller [NASA/JPL—Deputy ABoVE ST Lead, ABoVE Airborne Lead] provided details about SAR, hyperspectral, and lidar airborne measurements collected between 2017 and 2024 for the ABoVE Airborne Campaign.
      ABoVE Logistics Office members Daniel Hodkinson [GSFC/SSAI], Sarah Dutton [GSFC/SSAI], and Leanne Kendig [GSFC/Global Science & Technology, Inc. (GST, Inc.)] discussed the many field teams and activities supported during ABoVE. Overall, more than 50 teams were trained in field safety topics, with more than 1,200 training certificates awarded. Elizabeth Hoy [NASA GSFC/GST, Inc.] and Debjani Singh [ORNL] discussed the more than 250 data products developed during the ABoVE program and how to access them through NASA Earthdata. Example visualizations of ABoVE data products can be found in Figure 6.
      Figure 6. ABoVE logo created with different data products from the campaign used to compose each letter.A: Active Layer Thickness from Remote Sensing Permafrost Model, Alaska, 2001-2015;. Tree (inside A): Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) Trends across Alaska and Canada from Landsat, 1984-2012;. B: Landsat-derived Annual Dominant Land Cover Across ABoVE Core Domain, 1984-2014;; O: Wildfire Carbon Emissions and Burned Plot Characteristics, NWT, CA, 2014-2016;; V: AVHRR-Derived Forest Fire Burned Area-Hot Spots, Alaska and Canada, 1989-2000;; E: Lake Bathymetry Maps derived from Landsat and Random Forest Modeling, North Slope, AK; and Underline (under O): Plot lines from the ABoVE Planning Tool visualizer. Figure credit: Caitlin LaNeve The Collaborations and Engagement WG held a plenary discussion to highlight the many activities that ABoVE researchers have been involved in over the past decade. The discussion highlighted the need for individual projects and campaign leadership to work together to ensure participation and understanding of planned research at local and regional levels.
      A highlight of the meeting was the “Legacy of ABoVE” panel discussion moderated by Nancy French [MTU]. Panelists included Eric Kasischke [MTU], Scott Goetz, Chip Miller, Peter Griffith, Libby Larson [NASA GSFC/SSAI], and Elizabeth Hoy. Each panelist reflected on their journey to develop ABoVE, which included an initial scoping study developed more than 15 years ago. Members of the panel – all a part of the ABoVE leadership team – joined the campaign at different stages of their career. Each panelist arrived with different backgrounds, bringing their unique perspective to the group that helped to frame the overall campaign development. Following the panel, all ST members who have been a part of ABoVE since its start over a decade ago came to the front for a group photo – see Photo 5.
      Following the panel, the ABoVE ST leads presented their overall thoughts on the meeting and facilitated a discussion with all participants at the meeting. Participants noted the important scientific discoveries made during ABoVE and enjoyed the collegial atmosphere during ASTM11.
      Photo 5. A group photo of participants who have been with ABoVE since its inception: [left to right] Ryan Pavlick, Chip Miller, Elizabeth Hoy, Libby Larson, Peter Griffith, Fred Huemmrich, Nancy French, Scott Goetz, Laura Bourgeau-Chavez, Eric Kasischke, and Larry Hinzman. Photo credit: Peter Griffith Conclusion 
      Overall, ASTM11 brought together an interdisciplinary team for a final team meeting that showcased the many accomplishments made over the past decade. The group outlined current gaps and needs in Arctic and boreal research and discussed possibilities for future NASA terrestrial ecology campaigns. The synthesis science presentations at ASTM11 highlighted the advances ABoVE has made in understanding carbon and ecosystem dynamics in Arctic and boreal regions. It also highlighted the need for further study of cold season and subsurface processes. While this was the last meeting of this ST, research for some projects will continue into 2026, and more publications and data products are expected from ST members in the near term.
      Elizabeth Hoy
      NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center/Global Science & Technology Inc. (GSFC/GST,Inc.)
      elizabeth.hoy@nasa.gov
      Libby Larson
      NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center/Science System and Applications, Inc. (GSFC/SSAI)
      libby.larson@nasa.gov
      Annabelle Sokolowski
      NASA GSFC Office of STEM Engagement (OSTEM) Intern
      Caitlin LaNeve
      NASA GSFC Office of STEM Engagement (OSTEM) Intern
      Share








      Details
      Last Updated Sep 10, 2025 Related Terms
      Earth Science View the full article
    • By NASA
      Science Launching on Northrop Grumman's 23rd Cargo Resupply Mission to the Space Station
    • By European Space Agency
      The European Space Agency’s Jupiter Icy Moons Explorer (Juice) is on track for its gravity-assist flyby at Venus on 31 August, following the successful resolution of a spacecraft communication anomaly that temporarily severed contact with Earth.
      The issue, which emerged during a routine ground station pass on 16 July, temporarily disrupted Juice’s ability to transmit information about its health and status (telemetry).
      Thanks to swift and coordinated action by the teams at ESA’s European Space Operations Centre (ESOC) in Darmstadt, Germany, and Juice’s manufacturer, Airbus, communication was restored in time to prepare for the upcoming planetary encounter.
      View the full article
  • Check out these Videos

×
×
  • Create New...