Cited by 1Climate change and permafrostRemote Sensing in AgricultureCryospheric studies and observations

Fine-scale vegetation composition and structure shape spatiotemporal variation in surface albedo across a low Arctic tundra landscape

Open access
Shuman, Ian N C, Serbin, Shawn P, Erb, Angela M, Schaaf, Crystal B, Yang, Daryl·2025·Environmental Research: Ecology

Abstract

The unprecedented rate of warming in the Arctic is driving changes in the structure and composition of tundra vegetation. Increases in deciduous tall shrub cover, height, and density are of particular concern, as these changes alter local surface albedo in ways that could amplify effects on the regional surface energy budget (SEB). Despite this importance, significant uncertainties remain in understanding the interplay between fine-scale vegetation patterns and emergent albedo dynamics across space and time. Here, we address these uncertainties by (1) quantifying spatiotemporal variation in surface shortwave albedo and (2) determining the relative influence of fine-scale vegetation composition, structure, and environmental conditions on albedo across a representative low-Arctic tundra landscape on Alaska’s Seward Peninsula. To do this, we synthesized multi-scale, multi-platform remote sensing observations, including a novel Landsat-derived albedo time series, a fine-scale map of Arctic plant functional type (PFT) fractional cover, and airborne LiDAR estimates of canopy height and topography. We show that there are substantial reductions in winter albedo for pixels dominated by tall, woody PFTs (28.13%) relative to pixels dominated by non-woody vegetation, but almost no change in summer albedo (3% increase). Further, we identified a unimodal trend in the relationship between canopy height and the timing of the springtime transition from high (snowy) to low (leafy) albedo (peak at 5.5 m), possibly because of competing ‘snow-fence’ and ‘protrusion’ snow-shrub interactions. To explore the primary drivers of albedo, we constructed a random forest model and found that canopy height and the fractional cover of woody PFTs were as- or more important predictors of winter albedo than topographic features. These findings provide strong evidence for the impacts of local vegetation characteristics on regional surface albedo, highlighting the need for better quantification of snow-shrub interactions to accurately predict the Arctic’s SEB under future environmental change.

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 · 10.1088/2752-664x/ae04ef

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Tundra greening has far-reaching impacts on Arctic landscapes, wildlife habitats, biodiversity, permafrost conditions, and the livelihood of Arctic people, with implications for global climate and the carbon cycle.

    “Tundra greening has far-reaching impacts to Arctic landscapes, wildlife habitats, biodiversity, permafrost conditions, and the livelihood of Arctic people, with implications for global climate and the carbon cycle.”

    From NOAA Arctic Report Card 2025: Tundra Greenness (2025) · cites this paper as Shuman et al. 2025

    The Introduction links shrubification to Arctic greening and describes effects on permafrost and land–atmosphere interactions. The Conclusions say its effects on albedo have implications for carbon cycling and global climate. The paper does not address the claimed impacts on wildlife habitats, biodiversity, or Arctic people’s livelihoods. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Shuman, I. N. C., Serbin, S. P., Erb, A. M., Schaaf, C. B., & Yang, D.
Affiliations
  • Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory (US)
  • Goddard Space Flight Center (US)
  • University of Massachusetts Boston (US)
Venue
Environmental Research: Ecology
Published
2025-10-10
Volume
4
Issue
4
Pages
045001
ISSN
2752-664X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4414141642
Cited by
1
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1
FWCI
0.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Environmental Research Ecology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • NASA Earth Sciences Division (80NSSC22K1296, 80NCSSC18K0479, 80NSSC21K1906)
  • U.S. Geological Survey (140G0118C0010)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Climate change and permafrost
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Remote Sensing in Agriculture
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Cryospheric studies and observations
Keywords
surface albedo, Arctic tundra, plant functional types, canopy height, surface energy balance, shortwave albedo, woody vegetation cover, Seward Peninsula

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