Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 557

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Remote sensing estimates of glacier mass balances in the Himachal Pradesh (Western Himalaya, India)

BERTHIER, E, ARNAUD, Y, KUMAR, R, AHMAD, S, WAGNON, P, CHEVALLIER, P·2007·Remote Sensing of Environment

Abstract

Abstract Although they correspond to an important fraction of the total area of mountain glaciers (33,000 km2 out of 546,000 km2), Himalayan glaciers and their mass balance are poorly sampled. For example, between 1977 and 1999, the average area surveyed each year on the field was 6.8 km2 only. No direct mass balance measurement is available after 1999. To contribute to fill this gap, we use remote sensing data to monitor glacier elevation changes and mass balances in the Spiti/Lahaul region (32.2°N, 77.6°E, Himachal Pradesh, Western Himalaya, India). Our measurements are obtained by comparing a 2004 digital elevation model (DEM) to the 2000 SRTM (Shuttle Radar Topographic Mission) topography. The 2004 DEM is derived from two SPOT5 satellite optical images without any ground control points. This is achieved thanks to the good on-board geolocation of SPOT5 scenes and using SRTM elevations as a reference on the ice free zones. Before comparison on glaciers, the two DEMs are analyzed on the stable areas surrounding the glaciers where no elevation change is expected. Two different biases are detected. A long wavelength bias affects the SPOT5 DEM and is correlated to an anomaly in the roll of the SPOT5 satellite. A bias is also observed as a function of altitude and is attributed to the SRTM dataset. Both biases are modeled and removed to permit unbiased comparison of the two DEM on the 915 km2 ice-covered area digitized from an ASTER image. On most glaciers, a clear thinning is measured at low elevations, even on debris-covered tongues. Between 1999 and 2004, we obtain an overall specific mass balance of − 0.7 to − 0.85 m/a (water equivalent) depending on the density we use for the lost (or gained) material in the accumulation zone. This rate of ice loss is twice higher than the long-term (1977 to 1999) mass balance record for Himalaya indicating an increase in the pace of glacier wastage. To assess whether these ice losses are size-dependant, all glaciers were classified into three samples according to their areal extent. All three samples show ice loss, the loss being higher for glaciers larger than 30 km2. In the case of the benchmark Chhota Shigri glacier, a good agreement is found between our satellite observations and the mass balances measured on the field during hydrological years 2002–2003 and 2003–2004. Future studies using a similar methodology could determine whether similar ice losses have occurred in other parts of the Himalaya and may allow evaluation of the contribution of this mountain range to ongoing sea level rise.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.rse.2006.11.017

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 557

Metadata

Authors
BERTHIER, E., ARNAUD, Y., KUMAR, R., AHMAD, S., WAGNON, P., & CHEVALLIER, P.
Venue
Remote Sensing of Environment
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2007-06-15
Volume
108
Issue
3
Pages
327-338
ISSN
0034-4257 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2142374438
Cited by
557
References
0
FWCI
6.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Remote sensing estimates of glacier mass balances in the Himachal Pradesh (Western Himalaya, India). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.rse.2006.11.017
The paper
BERTHIER, E., ARNAUD, Y., KUMAR, R., AHMAD, S., WAGNON, P., & CHEVALLIER, P. (2007). Remote sensing estimates of glacier mass balances in the Himachal Pradesh (Western Himalaya, India). Remote Sensing of Environment. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2006.11.017

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.