224 From the Cosmos and Back: Quantifying Processes and Rates of Landscape Change (Posters)

This session explores how methods such as cosmogenic nuclides, apatite (U-Th)/He thermochronometry, U-series geochemistry, luminescence, and chemical mass balances quantify relationships between climate, tectonics, and erosion.

Tuesday, 21 October 2025
8:00 AM - 5:30 PM
HBGCC, Hall 1

Measurements of glacial erosion rates: Pitfalls, uncertainties, and strategies for comparing erosion rates derived from different methods

Paper number: 224-0
Program: Technical Sessions
Time: 8:00 AM – 8:00 AM

Authors

Abstract

Rates of glacial erosion are measured in a variety of ways, including: (i) the flux of sediments in proglacial streams, (ii) the volume of sediments accumulated in proglacial basins, the exhumation of bedrock recorded by (iii) cosmogenic nuclides or (iv) low temperature thermochronometers, and (v) the relief or morphology of glacial landscapes. Comparing erosion rates across methods is difficult because each method fundamentally measures a different indirect phenomenon purported to reflect glacial erosion. This is of particular concern because each method is typically applied to different timescales (ranging from ~100 to 107 years), meaning that the inferred timescale-dependence (Koppes and Montgomery, 2009) or lack thereof (Wilner et al., 2024) of glacial erosion rates may be obscured by biases or limitations inherent to each measurement method. Here, we expand upon and refine existing compilations of glacial erosion rates, and contextualize the information gained from each measurement method to identify likely sources of over- or under-estimates of subglacial bedrock erosion. We categorize erosion rate measurements based on the glacial erosional environment (e.g. Sugden, 1974) to identify confounding variables that may bias the inferred timescale dependence of glacial erosion rates. We suggest strategies for comparing erosion rates derived from different methods that attempts to reconcile the different physical phenomena measured. We conclude that uncertainties are considerable when comparing glacial erosion rates across different methods, motivating future field studies designed to directly compare erosion rates from multiple independent methods.

Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs. Vol. 57, No. 6

doi: 10.1130/abs/2025AM-412645

© Copyright 2025 The Geological Society of America (GSA), all rights reserved. Permission is hereby granted to the author(s) of this abstract to reproduce and distribute it freely, for noncommercial purposes. Permission is hereby granted to any individual scientist to download a single copy of this electronic file and reproduce up to 20 paper copies for noncommercial purposes advancing science and education, including classroom use, providing all reproductions include the complete content shown here, including the author information. All other forms of reproduction and/or transmittal are prohibited without written permission from GSA Copyright Permissions.