JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH, VOL. 111, E06S19, doi:10.

1029/2005JE002573, 2006

Comparison of geophysical investigations for detection of massive

ground ice (pingo ice)
K. Yoshikawa,1 C. Leuschen,2 A. Ikeda,1 K. Harada,3 P. Gogineni,4 P. Hoekstra,5,6
L. Hinzman,1 Y. Sawada,7 and N. Matsuoka8
Received 3 August 2005; revised 1 November 2005; accepted 2 December 2005; published 10 June 2006.

[1] Six different geophysical investigations, (1) ground-penetrating radar, (2) DC

resistivity sounding, (3) seismic refraction, (4) very low frequency (VHF) electromagnetic,
(5) helicopter borne electromagnetic (HEM), and (6) transient electromagnetic (TEM)
techniques, were employed to obtain information on the ice body properties of pingos near
Fairbanks, Alaska. The surface nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) data were also
compared from similar sites near one of the study pingos. The geophysical investigations
were undertaken, along with core sampling and permafrost drilling, to enable
measurement of the ground temperature regime. Drilling (ground truthing) results support
field geophysical investigations, and have led to the development of a technique for
distinguishing massive ice and overburden material of the permafrost. The twodimensional DC resistivity sounding tomography and ground-penetrating radar profiling
are useful for ice detection under heterogeneous conditions. However, the DC resistivity
sounding investigation required high-quality ground contact and less area coverage. The
active layer thickness and the homogeneous horizontal structure of the overburden
material are important parameters influencing detection of massive ice in permafrost for
most methods such as seismic, TEM, or surface NMR.
Citation: Yoshikawa, K., C. Leuschen, A. Ikeda, K. Harada, P. Gogineni, P. Hoekstra, L. Hinzman, Y. Sawada, and N. Matsuoka
(2006), Comparison of geophysical investigations for detection of massive ground ice (pingo ice), J. Geophys. Res., 111, E06S19,
doi:10.1029/2005JE002573.

1. Introduction
[2] Many geophysical variables, such as dielectric constant, electrical conductivity, or P wave velocity, display
strong contrasts between frozen and unfrozen soil phases.
This presents a useful distinction to enable the study of
permafrost and to characterize areas of permanently frozen
ground [Scott et al., 1990; Dallimore and Davis, 1992;
Moorman et al., 2003]. Thus, geophysical techniques are
widely accepted in permafrost and periglacial process
studies such as those of the active layer [Doolittle et al.,
1990; Hinkel et al., 2001], rock glaciers [e.g., Vonder Muhll
and Schmid, 1993; F. Lehmann et al., unpublished manu1
Water and Environmental Research Center, University of Alaska,
Fairbanks, Fairbanks, Alaska, USA.
2
Applied Physics Laboratory, Johns Hopkins University, Laurel,
Maryland, USA.
3
Department of Environmental Sciences, School of Food, Agricultural
and Environmental Sciences, Miyagi University, Miyagi, Japan.
4
Center for Remote Sensing of Ice Sheets, University of Kansas,
Lawrence, Kansas, USA.
5
Blackhawk Geosciences, Golden, Colorado, USA.
6
Retired.
7
Institute of Low Temperature Science, Hokkaido University, Sapporo,
Japan.
8
Department of Earth Science, University of Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan.

Copyright 2006 by the American Geophysical Union.

0148-0227/06/2005JE002573$09.00

script, 1999], palsas [Doolittle et al., 1992], and pingos

[Kovacs and Morey, 1985; Ross et al., 2005].
[3] Recently, interest in water and H2O ice in permafrost
has increased substantially, owing to the discovery of
possible life on Mars. Detecting groundwater is a high
priority goal for NASAs decadal research. However, much
groundwater will exist as brine or in the solid phase at the
near surface in these extraterrestrial terrains. The focus of
this study is to detect massive ice bodies in terrestrial
permafrost regions. An open (hydraulic) system pingo is
an ice-cored mound that formed in response to sub-, or intrapermafrost artesian water pressure. Before water can reach
the ground surface it freezes, forming a core of relatively
pure and clear ice. In this paper, we examine three open
system pingos near Fairbanks (Figure 1). These pingos have
different internal and overburden structure and ice conditions. In cases of inhomogeneous ice distributions, geophysical investigations are often difficult to apply because of the
invalid approximation of lateral homogeneity used in many
modeling approaches. The goal of this study is to examine
the feasibility of using different geophysical techniques to
detect massive ground ice in Martian permafrost.

2. Methods
2.1. Ground-Penetrating Radar
[4] Ground-Penetrating Radar (GPR) investigations have
been conducted at three pingos around Fairbanks. We tested

E06S19

1 of 10

E06S19

YOSHIKAWA ET AL.: GEOPHYSICAL SURVEYS FOR PINGO ICE

E06S19

Figure 1. General information and permafrost conditions for the study of pingos around Fairbanks
Alaska.
two types of radars to detect a pingos massive ice body: a
swept-frequency radar (5 120 MHz), and an impulse type
radar (GSSI, SIR-2000 with the bistatic antenna model
3200MLF (15 80 MHz)).
[5] The swept-frequency radar unit was developed by the
University of Kansas as a prototype [Leuschen et al., 2003;
Arcone et al., 2001] for possible deployment on a rover to
characterize local stratigraphy and detect subsurface water/
ice. The transmitter subsystem used a 300-MHz directdigital synthsizer to generate a 5- to 120-MHz chirp signal
after receiving a trigger from the system controller, and the
reciever digitized the radar response using a 50 kSPS 16-bit
A/D converter. Two large (2.5 m length) bowtie antennas
were constructed for initial testing using an aluminum insect
screen that was easily rolled up for storage and transportation. The antennas operated over the frequency range 10
120 MHz.
[6] Also, a commercial impulse radar unit was used for
reference. The velocity analysis was attempted at the drill
sites using the common midpoint (CMP) method at the
center frequency of 40 or 80 MHz. The resultant stack data
(0.5-m interval) was processed with the cross-correlation
method [Yilmaz, 1987]. This method uses the Radan advanced geophysical function (velocity analysis) programs
from Geophysical Survey Systems, Inc.
2.2. DC Resistivity Sounding
[7] DC resistivity sounding was conducted at three study
pingos around Fairbanks. We employed classical onedimensional DC resistivity sounding with the Oyo Co.,
Ltd., McOHM model-2115 and two-dimensional resistivity
profiling (IRIS instruments; Syscal pro R1 48 72 channel)

for this investigation at 5-m intervals with the Wenner

electrode configuration. The electrical resistivity of soil
depends on the soil type, temperature, water content, porosity, and salinity. In general, the resistivity (r) values of frozen
soil are 10 1000 times greater than those of unfrozen or
brine soils [Harada and Yoshikawa, 1996]. DC resistivity
sounding used four electrodes for measurement. A current (I)
was delivered and received between the outer electrodes, and
the resulting potential difference (V) was measured between
the inner electrodes. For this array on the ground surface, an
apparent resistivity (ra) is calculated from
ra 2pa V=I;

where a is the distance separating the electrodes. The

inversion analysis was performed with changing values of
resistivity and layer thickness by using the linear filter
method [Das and Verma, 1980] for a one-dimensional
investigation.
[8] For the acquisition of the two-dimensional apparent
resistivity data we used multichannel, equally spaced electrodes with a standard spacing of 5 m. Each measurement
was repeated up to 16 times, depending on the variance of
the results. Two-dimensional model interpretation was performed using the software package RES2DINV (Geotomo
software), which performs smoothing and constrained inversion using finite difference forward modeling and quasiNewton techniques [Loke and Barker, 1994].
2.3. Seismic Refraction
[9] The seismic refraction technique permits us to detect
the frost table because the P wave velocity of frozen ground

2 of 10

E06S19

YOSHIKAWA ET AL.: GEOPHYSICAL SURVEYS FOR PINGO ICE

(1500 4700 m/s) is much higher than that of the dry active
layer (300 800 m/s) [e.g., Hunter, 1973].
[10] The seismic refraction measurements were conducted at three study pingos around Fairbanks. A threechannel seismograph, McSEIS-3 (Oyo Co., Ltd.) was used
for these measurements. A 4-kg sledgehammer produced a
seismic pulse. The pulses were summed at the same point
by multiple hits to improve the signal-noise ratio. The
length of survey lines depended on the size of the pingos.
The survey lines were 30 36 m for relatively small pingos
(Caribou and Grenac Creeks Pingos) and 50 m long for a
large pingo (Cripple Creek Pingo). The shotpoints were
placed at 3-m intervals for the short survey lines and 5-m
intervals for the long line. In the latter case, the shotpoints
were placed at 2.5-m intervals near the receivers. Refractor
depth and P wave velocities were calculated using the
Intercept Time Method [Palmer, 1986]. Since seismic
refraction technique presumes that the ground had a layered
structure with higher P wave velocity in a deeper layer, the
method is generally not applicable to map permafrost or ice
body base.
2.4. Very Low Frequency (VLF) Electromagnetics
[11] VLF EM investigations were conducted at Cripple
Creek Pingo. VLF electromagnetic techniques (WADI
Abem) were evaluated for their ability to delineate and
measure the thickness of shallow permafrost. The WADI
VLF system is a two-component magnetic receiver operating in the frequency range of 15 30 kHz. The sources for
these frequencies are powerful radio transmitters, similar to
those used for submarine radio-communication. In Alaskan
studies presented here, typically three different transmitters
operating at different frequencies were used. When these
transmitter signals propagate from the source positions to
the position of the measurements site, they interact in a
complex way with the two electrical conductors: the Earth
at the bottom and the ionosphere at the top. However, owing
to their small penetration (400 meters in normal granites)
compared with the distance to the sources, we can regard
the signals as plane waves propagating downward into the
earth at any receiver site. The plane wave assumption
enables a relatively simple and fast interpretation of the
data using two-dimensional models. Two magnetic components (Hx, Hz) are measured with a single antenna consisting
of two mutually orthogonal coil sensors. We used the
software package RAMAG to process data from the WADI
and transform field data. The linear filtering process used is
based on the Karous and Hjelt algorithm [Karous and Hjelt,
1983]. This filtering algorithm has been combined with a
weighted running average smoothing function.
2.5. Helicopter-Borne Electromagnetic (HEM)
[12] HEM investigations were conducted at Cripple
Creek Pingo. In the early 1970s, several studies were
conducted to map the location and thickness of permafrost
zones with ground and airborne geophysics [Hoekstra et al.,
1975]. While these studies confirm that electromagnetic
geophysical methods (EM) could be used to detect permafrost, results indicated additional progress was needed to
establish operational capabilities. Single space frequency
domain ground EM systems (e.g., EM31) were not able to
map the vertical distribution (thickness) of the permafrost

E06S19

[Hoekstra, 1978]. The airborne EM (Dighem I) used in the

early 1970s was not very effective at mapping the permafrost. It had only one frequency, 918 Hz, which would have
an upper resistivity limit of about 1000 ohm-m. In the area
of the survey, very little ground data was collected, but the
available data suggests that the permafrost distribution was
very sparse. Current Dighem (HEM) systems have five
frequencies, ranging from 400 Hz to 102,000 Hz. The depth
of penetration for each frequency is an inverse function of
frequency squared, so the subsurface zone investigated can
be five different depths. We applied HEM data at the
Cripple Creek Pingo site from State of Alaska Department
of Geological and Geophysical Surveys [Burns et al.,
2004a, 2004b, 2004c, 2004d].
2.6. Transient Electromagnetic (TEM)
[13] TEM investigations were conducted in both Cripple
Creek and Caribou Creek pingos. The TEM sounding was
performed by laying a 60-m loop of wire on the ground or
ice and driving current through it. The transient response of
the secondary magnetic field was measured in a small
receiver coil after shutting off the direct current. Owing to
ohmic losses in the resistive earth, the secondary field
gradually collapses. As the resistivity of the background is
increased, the collapse rate of the response increases. In a
high-resistivity environment like permafrost, these quick
responses and primary field effects (IP effects, magnetic
relaxation, Rx box, direct coupling with primary field)
create difficulties in estimating the resistivity structure
through a standard central induction measurement. Permafrost surveys have been conducted using TEM with a large
loop of more than 100 m [e.g., Rozenberg et al., 1985; Todd
et al., 1991; Todd and Dallimore, 1998]. Here a measurement configuration outside the transmitter loop was utilized,
to reduce the primary field effects, with a small loop for a
high production rate.
[14] For our measurements, the transient data were
recorded using a PROTEM 47 TEM system of Geonics
Limited with a receiver coil having an effective area of
31.4 m2. Decay voltages were recorded in two overlapping
time ranges (0.006813 0.06959 ms and 0.03525
2.792 ms after current is turned off) at two transmitterwaveform base frequencies (nominally 285 and 75 Hz,
respectively). A transmitter, supplied with 1.5 to 2.5 amperes
of loop current, established the precise timing by a reference
cable with a receiver.
2.7. Surface Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR)
[15] Surface NMR investigations were conducted at
Caribou Creek. A NUMIS NMR (IRIS instruments) was
used for these measurements [Hoekstra et al., 1998].
Surface NMR is presently the only geophysical technique
capable of direct detection of groundwater resources. The
surface NMR method has similarities and differences with
the NMR measurements commonly made in controlled
laboratory experiments and in the medical field. In both
experimental setups, the fact that a hydrogen molecule
(proton) has a magnetic moment and an angular momentum
is exploited [Hoekstra et al., 1998]. Hydrogen atoms are
excited by pulses of alternating current at the proper
frequency through a 100-m transmitting loop placed on
the ground. The depth of investigation is a function of the

3 of 10

E06S19

YOSHIKAWA ET AL.: GEOPHYSICAL SURVEYS FOR PINGO ICE

product of the intensity of the current at the resonance

frequency by the duration of the pulse, which gives the
moment of the excitation pulse. Hydrogen atoms of water
molecules are energized by pulses of alternative current at
the proper frequency (Larmor frequency), transmitted into a
loop laid on the ground. The magnetic field they produce in
return is measured and analyzed for various energizing
pulse moments. The relaxation field of the protons is
measured in the same loop after the excitation current is
turned off. The one-dimensional inversion provides estimates of the water content, the mean pore size, and the
depth of each layer. The time constant of the relaxation field
is related to the pore size. This allows a distinction to be
made between pore free water and clay bound water.

3. Results
3.1. Caribou Creek Pingo
[ 1 6 ] Caribou-Poker Creeks Research Watershed
(CPCRW) is located about 48 km northeast of Fairbanks.
CPCRW contains two pingos along the Caribou Creek at the
base of the north facing slopes. The thickness of the
permafrost is about 120 m and annual mean upper permafrost temperature is 0.7C. The list of the study pingos and
their physical properties is shown in Figure 1. The Caribou
Creek pingo has a 60- to 80-m base diameter, and is more
than 10 m tall. The massive ice core starts 7.35 m below the
ground surface and extends down to 23.5 m. Several
segregation and inclusive ice layers (a few centimeters to
30 cm thick) occur in the overburden silty permafrost. This
pingo survived wildfire several times. A charcoal layer was
observed 15 cm below the surface where the radiocarbon
age is 820 40 years B.P. (GX-28572). The active layer
fluctuated between 1 m (present) and 2 m (post fire
disturbance) during the Holocene. The increase in active
layer depth during climatic optimum and/or post wild fire
disturbance decreases the ice content of the upper part of
permafrost. The bedrock (schist) appeared just below the
lower horizontal contact of the massive ice. Figure 2a shows
overburden ice content and pingo structure.
[17] The radar responses at the top of the pingo are also
shown in Figure 2e. A linear gain is applied to accentuate
some of the deeper anomalies. Several reflections are
present within these waveforms, and there seems to be a
general trend of a decrease in center frequency and bandwidth from the deeper reflections. This is not unusual, as
one would expect increased attenuation at higher frequencies. From the reflection profile, the ice bodys possible
locations can be estimated.
[18] Two of the reflections indicate the top and bottom of
the pingo ice core (Figure 2e). The first is around 150 to 160 ns
and has amplitude of about 5% of the surface response. The
second is around 360 to 390 ns and has amplitude of about 4%
of the surface response. Figure 3d shows impulse radar profile
from the 80 MHZ GSSI SIR 2000 systems. Ice was observed
as free of reflection around 155 and 370 ns.
[19] Seismic refraction measurements are employed between the south-facing slope and the top of the pingo. The
direct observation with a thaw probe indicated that the
active layer was thicker at the south facing slope (>3 m)
and 2 m at the top of pingo. P wave velocity was configured
with a two-layer structure at 360 m/s and 2800 m/s. The first

E06S19

layer (360 m/s) is 3 m thick on the south-facing flank of the

pingo and 4 m thick at the top. The first layer represents
the active layer, although the thickness is different from the
direct observation. The thick organic layer on the top of the
pingo may weaken the signals, which results in the contradiction. No signal from the massive ice body was observed
because the survey line was slightly short (30 m) to enable
investigation of the deeper structure. The weak signals
through the thick organic layer prevented us from extending
the survey line more than 30 m on this site.
[20] DC resistivity profiling results were useful for
(Figure 2b) identifying the massive ice core, except at the
bedrock interface. An ice resistivity of 8600 ohm-m was
obtained, which is a reasonable value. Resistivity studies
permit better investigation of the detailed sub surface
structure, especially distinguishing the frozen silt layer
and the upper boundary of the ice core but not bedrock
contact. Results from drilling a borehole indicate the pingos
ice core contacts bedrock at 23.5 m.
3.2. Cripple Creek Pingo
[21] Cripple Creek is located about 10 km west of Fairbanks. The upstream basin has three pingos at the bottom of
the Cripple Creek valley. The thickness of the permafrost
varies between 25 m and 200 m and annual mean upper
permafrost temperature is 0.95C at the study site.
[22] The study pingo is 120 m wide and 10 m high, with a
massive ice core located 10.2 m to 26 m below the top of
the pingo. The pingos overburden has a very limited
segregation ice and inclusive ice, which are located only
6.3 6.5 m below the pingo top. Most of the overburden
permafrost contains fluvial sediment. The massive pingo ice
contains very pure ice and less bubble structure. Figure 3
shows the resistivity profiling, drill log, 40 MHz GPR
signals, HEM data, and VLF result at Cripple Creek Pingo.
[23] The area surrounding the pingo site was dense with
trees and shrubs. Owing to the dense vegetation, access to
the location was difficult and collecting data for the radar
surveys over a traverse was practically impossible. As a
result, data collection was restricted to a few discrete
locations, often separated by a meter or more. GPR measurements were employed, using the GSSI impulse system
with a 40-MHz bi-static antenna as well as velocity analysis
by CMT. Radar signals had strong refection at the top
(180 ns) and the bottom (480 ns) of the ice core. The
average speed of the wave propagation for the massive ice
core was 0.165 m/ns and was estimated at 0.08 m/ns for the
overburden material, using the velocity analysis technique.
Thus we calculated the dielectric to be 3.3 for the ice core
and 14 for overburden.
[24] The refraction seismic results were excellent at this
pingo, although the velocity of the third layer is a little
higher than typical values of ice rich permafrost (1500 to
4700 m/s). P wave velocity was configured for three layers
at 400 m/s, 1900 m/s and 6000 m/s from top to bottom. The
thickness of the first layer is 1 m at the top of the pingo and
2 m at the base of the south-facing slope. The number
corresponds well with measurements of active layer thickness by thaw probe. The base of the second layer was
located at 10 m at the top of pingo and 9.5 m at the base of
the south facing slope. These are determined by overburden
permafrost layer. Actual measurement of P wave velocity at

4 of 10

E06S19

YOSHIKAWA ET AL.: GEOPHYSICAL SURVEYS FOR PINGO ICE

E06S19

Figure 2. Surface topography of the Caribou Creek pingo and its internal structure as verified by
drilling operations. (a) Results of two-dimensional resistivity profiling. (b) Pingo ice and overburden
permafrost (7.3 m) interface; bedrock interface not shown. (c) Drill log at the top of the pingo. (d) LF
(80 Mhz) GPR image over the same cross-section as shown in Figure 2a and the resistivity transect
(Figure 2b). The GPR image clearly indicates the massive ice core as the free reflection zone. (e) Massive
ice core between 155 and 370 ns at the top of pingo.
the borehole wall depth between 4 and 6 m was 2500 m/s.
The third layer was the massive ice body, 6000 m/s. The
reasons for the much faster velocity are as follows: (1) very
few cracks in the ice, (2) most of the ice was pure and did
not contain soil layers holding unfrozen water, and (3) low
air bubble content. In addition, the ends of the traveltime
curves may include signals from underlying massive bedrock, which can result in the extraordinary high velocity for
an ice layer, although the quality of the data is not good
enough to calculate the fourth layer.
[25] A resistivity result was reasonable and ice was
estimated at more than 7000 ohm-m, which is similar to
results from the Caribou Creek pingo. Interestingly, 900-Hz
HEM results did not correspond with DC resistivity results.
The 900-Hz HEM apparent resistivity values were down to

300 ohm-m at the top of pingo, compared with surroundings

(>500 ohm-m). the 56,000-Hz and 7200-Hz HEM results
indicate massive ice core. The 900-Hz signal is most likely
responding to the water lens at the bottom of the pingo ice
(Figure 3f). 1D DC resistivity results indicated a massive ice
core, and the modeling process between Wenner and
Schlumberger arrays (Table 1) showed minor horizontal
differences. These differences were caused by heterogeneousness of the horizontal structure of the pingo.
[26] VLF surveys were conducted using WADI. Figure 3g
shows 9 m (30 feet) filtered results using the same transect
of the HEM results (Figure 3f). However, no significant
information was obtained either in-phase or quadrature from
VLF result. In-phase signals are reduced significantly at the
top of the pingo (distance 70 m in Figure 3g). The phase

5 of 10

E06S19

YOSHIKAWA ET AL.: GEOPHYSICAL SURVEYS FOR PINGO ICE

E06S19

Figure 3. (a) Field results from Cripple Creek pingo. Two-dimensional resistivity profiling defines the
massive ice core. (b) Drill operation log at the top of the pingo showing massive clear ice starting 10.2 m
below the ground surface. (c) GPR wiggle curve indicating the massive ice core between 180 and 480 ns
as the free reflection zone. (d, f) Pingos at the Cripple Creek displaying higher resistivity compared with
the surrounding valley at the 7200 Hz HEM image. (g) No significant signal obtained either in-phase or
quadrature from VLF. (e) TEM and (h) one-dimensional DC resistivity results indicating the massive ice
core; minor horizontal differences observed by the modeling process between Wenner and Schlumberger
arrays (Table 1). These differences may be caused by the diverse horizontal structure of the pingo.

change has not been demonstrated in other geophysical

investigations. The signal level was lower (6 10) during
the investigation.
3.3. Grenac Creek Pingo
[27] Grenac Creek is located about 3 km north of Fairbanks along the Farmers Loop Road. One pingo is located

at the toe of a fluvial fan. The thickness of the permafrost is

38 m, and annual mean upper permafrost temperature is
0.7C.
[28] The study pingo is 50 m wide, 6 m high, and has a
massive ice core extending from 6.5 m to 12.5 m depth from
the top of the pingo. The water lenses located between
13.5 m and 18 m at the bottom of the pingo ice. Permafrost

6 of 10

E06S19

YOSHIKAWA ET AL.: GEOPHYSICAL SURVEYS FOR PINGO ICE

E06S19

Table 1. Comparison of One-Dimensional DC Resistivity Modeling Between Wenner and Schlumberger Arrays and TEMa
Schlumberger
Structure

Resistivity, ohm-m

Active layer
Overburden permafrost
Massive ice
Talik
Permafrost or bedrock

500
4500
18,000
50
7000

Wener
Depth, m

Resistivity, ohm-m

1.2
1.0
28
31

542
8000
18,000
20
8000

TEM
Depth, m

Resistivity, ohm-m

Depth, m

1.7
7.7
25
30

ND
245
1944
238
1330

10.9
26.6
96.8

a
All measurements were performed on the same day around morning (0900 1300 local time on 9 August 2005). The Schlumberger array was less
influenced by horizontal structural homogeneity than the Wenner array. As compared with drilling (ground truthing), the Schlumberger array or TEM
performs better at detecting local massive ice bodies. ND, no data. Boldface denotes ice bodies.

was found between 18 m and 38 m depth. The subpermafrost groundwater is under active artesian conditions here.
The bedrock was located at a depth of about 48 m, which is
36 m below the pingos ice body. Figure 4 shows 1D, 2D
resistivity soundings, the drill log, 60-MHz GPR signals,
and swept-frequency radar results at Grenac Creek pingo.
[29] There are two easily detectable reflections occurring
at about 100 ns and 150 ns extending from the top of the
hill to about 25 m using the swept-frequency system
(Figure 4c). Shifting time zero to the surface response,
assuming an average dielectric constant of about 8, and
converting to range places these reflections at about 4 5 m
for the top and 7 8 m for the bottom. GSSI impulse system
GPR measurements are employed using the 40-MHz
bistatic antenna as well as velocity analysis by CMT. Radar
signals have strong reflection at the top (200 ns) and the
bottom (450 ns) of the ice core (Figure 4d).
[30] A seismic refraction measurement was employed at
the top of the pingo. Two layers were identified from the
traveltime curves. The upper layer has a P wave velocity of
390 m/s and the lower layer of 2300 m/s. The calculated
depth of the boundary is about 6 m, which is close to the top
of the massive ice core (6.5 m) and much deeper than the
frost table (about 2 m). The result is problematic because the
upper part of permafrost only showed P wave velocity lower
than 1000 m/s, even if a theoretically undetectable layer
from the traveltime curve was considered. One of the
traveltime curves shows a large lateral gap at the northern
part of the survey line, which possibly results from considerable melting of the permafrost, except for the northern
part of the pingo.
[31] Resistivity investigations have been conducted at this
pingo. We employed classic one-dimensional resistivity
sounding (Figure 4e) and two-dimensional resistivity profiling (Figure 4a) for these investigations with the Wenner
electrode configuration. Inversion results indicate a reasonable ice body (>6000 ohm-m) with sub pingo ice talik
(<100 ohm-m).

4. Discussion
[32] Geophysical surveys depend upon specific material
properties such as dielectric constant, resistivity, or P wave
velocity. Wet, thawing and frozen soils are favorable and
detectable targets. The water lenses beneath the younger
pingo ice core would be ideal targets for most of the
techniques, with the exception of seismic refraction.

[33] During our investigations, almost all of the techniques had different results at the different pingos. The major
interferences were caused by the heterogeneous structure of
the horizontal overburden materials. Most of the geophysical investigations use a model of defined uniform horizontal layer structure, except GPR and resistivity profiling.
However, the size of the pingo (e.g., volume of the massive
ice core) is, for most of the investigations, not big enough to
be considered a uniform structure and allow the solution to
be resolved. The geophysical properties of the upper parts
of the pingos are strongly affected by slope aspect and
historical active layer fluctuations. The variation of the ice
content of the overburden complicates the signal analysis
for each method. Thus the Cripple Creek pingo had relatively simple results for all of the geophysical investigations
because of the uniform overburden structure and size.
[34] Some combinations are difficult to distinguish, such
as dry bedrock and cold massive ice core. Applications of
the multiple geophysical survey techniques definitely help
to more accurately elucidate subsurface structures. Dielectric (GPR survey) may be affected by bubble orientation and
density in the ice. The presence of highly dense air bubbles
in the ice yields a lower dielectric constant (k = 1 3).
However, this would help distinguish ice rich silty permafrost (k = 4 8) [Arcone, 1984]. Also, the free reflections
from massive ice were observed at all of the study pingos.
[35] One of the complex structures of the upper part of the
permafrost in interior Alaska is the presence of forest fire
disturbance. The Alaskan boreal forest burns every 20 200
years [Yarie, 1981; Kasischke et al., 2000; Dyrness et al.,
1986]. Most of the study pingos developed in the Holocene,
and experienced fire. Some pingos may have been
destroyed by the post-fire disturbance. Most of the pingos
that survived wildfire had deeper active layers or talik
formation that did not reach to the massive ice. Severe fire
removes most of the surface organics and surface thermal
offset [Romanovsky and Osterkamp, 1995] changes, thawing permafrost and increasing the active layer moisture
content. As a result, severe fire has caused 3 to 4 m
of active layer thawing around the Fairbanks region
[Yoshikawa et al., 2002]. A pingo may be destroyed if the
depth of the massive ice is shallower than the maximum
thawing depth. All of the study pingos observed displayed
a sharp horizon of ice rich and dry permafrost layers,
which indicated the previous maximum active layer. The
discontinuous boundary also presents the possibility to
negate massive ice core detection by the geophysical
investigations. Seismic refraction investigations were

7 of 10

E06S19

YOSHIKAWA ET AL.: GEOPHYSICAL SURVEYS FOR PINGO ICE

E06S19

Figure 4. Field results from Grenac Creek pingo. (a) Two-dimensional resistivity profiling showing
reasonable results at both the upper and lower boundaries of the ice. (b) Drill operation log indicating that
a water saturated layer (talik) was observed at the bottom of the ice core (13.5 18 m depth). (c, d) The
GPR wiggle curve at the LF (60 MHz) signal indicating the massive ice core as free reflection zone.
(e) Wenner array one-dimensional resistivity result showing the pingo ice and the overburden permafrost
(6.5 m).
strongly affected by the depth of ice rich permafrost. In a
seismic survey, if a faster wave velocity layer exists, it is
very difficult to quantify the structure of a lower layer.
[36] Recent climatic warming also affected the thermokarst process, especially on south facing slopes. Most of the
resistivity surveys show south-facing slopes of the pingo
had lower resistivity (wet) than the north-facing slope of
pingo.
[37] Surface NMR is a direct method for groundwater
detection, as it directly measures the response of the water

itself (H protons). One feature of surface NMR is the

nonlinear relationship between the measured signal and
the energizing pulse intensity. This means that doubling
the pulse current does not mean doubling the signal; instead
it increases the depth of investigation. On the other hand,
the surface NMR signal is linearly related to the water
content of the layers. In investigations at the Caribou Creek
site, surface NMR indicated a reasonable aquifer location
between the bedrock and eolian silt interface in the permafrost. However, the ice content of the frozen silt did not

8 of 10

E06S19

YOSHIKAWA ET AL.: GEOPHYSICAL SURVEYS FOR PINGO ICE

E06S19

Table 2. Summary of Geophysical Investigations for Pingosa

Parameter
One-dimensional
resistivity
Two-dimensional
resistivity
Impulse-type radar
Swept-frequency
radar
Seismic
HEM
TEM
VHF
SNMR

Ice
Value at
Caribou Creek

Ice
Value at
Cripple Creek

Ice
Value at
Grenac Creek

Ground
Contact

Ice
Detection

Spatial
Sampling,
m

resistivity, ohm m

ND

18,000

5000

need

good

>100

resistivity, ohm m

8600

10,000

4555

need

excellent

dielectric constant
dielectric constant

ND
8

3.3
ND

4.6
8

no
no

excellent
excellent

<5
<5

p-wave velocity, m/s

resistivity, ohm m
resistivity, ohm m
resistivity, ohm m
hydrogen spin, nV

2800
ND
ND
ND
<10 nV

6000
650
1944
high noise
ND

2300
ND
ND
ND
ND

need
no
no
no
no

good
good
fair
fair
fair

60
135
25 50
75
100 200

ND, no data.

respond at all, even at conditions warmer than 1C. One

of the difficulties of this method is using the Earths
magnetic field to rotate the dipoles of water molecules.
That is a very small intensity field compared, for example,
with that used in medical imaging. Particularly at the time
we made the measurements in Caribou Creek, the Earths
magnetic field changed considerably. Tuning to the Lamar
frequency was therefore difficult.
[38] Some of the characteristics of Interior Alaskan permafrost include a fairly thick active layer, taliks, and
heterogeneous structures. Subsurface investigations have
demonstrated a great deal of material contrast.
[39] This research provides results from the several geophysical investigations at the same location to determine the
capability of distinguishing distinct features such as permafrost, massive ice and talik formations. Delineating massive
ice from frozen ground is useful information for Martian
permafrost studies. A wide variety of pingo forms have been
tentatively identified on Mars [Lucchitta, 1981; Cabrol et
al., 2000; Rice et al., 2002; Tanaka et al., 2003; Sakimoto,
2005; Soare et al., 2005]. An analogue study and geophysical investigations of terrestrial pingos would provide support in correct identification of pingos on Mars. Identifying
Martian pingos would provide information on ground ice
distribution, groundwater potentials, and climate change. In
the reality of the planetary exploration, the free ground
contact investigation methods will be a very important
factor in these investigations. Table 2 shows a summary
of an ideal system for Martian subsurface exploration. Both
radars are excellent candidates for implementation of these
methods. However, a high brine layer may exist near
surface at higher latitudes on Mars. High brine content will
attenuate radar signals. Airborne EM will be a secondary
choice of the free contact methods and capable of larger area
coverage. Recently developed prototype airborne TEM will
be an interesting technique for future planetary explorations.

5. Conclusion
[40] Massive ice and overburden permafrost can be discriminated by the resistivity sounding and GPR investigations. The seismic refraction method is useful and
reasonable, if the size of the massive ice is big enough
(>50 m). The presence of the heterogeneous horizon of the

pingo presents a complex structure and complicates massive

ice detection using seismic method. Our results indicate that
seismic velocities of permafrost vary between 1900 m/s and
4200 m/s and are dependent on ice content and temperature.
The seismic velocity for massive ice was found to be
between 3200 m/s and 6000 m/s (Table 2).VLF methods
suffered from a lack of resolution of the near-surface effects.
[41] GPR can detectable the pingos massive ice structure
by using a lower-frequency (<80 MHz) system. The boundary between the pingo ice and frozen soil is detectable;
however, it is not sharp. One of the biggest benefits of the
radar method is that it does not require ground contact and
the system is relatively lightweight.
[42] Resistivity profiling is one of the most powerful tools
for detecting massive ice bodies, but its need for superior
ground contact makes it useful in limited areas. The
weakness of the resistivity method is its ability to distinguish between ice body and the bedrock underneath the
massive ice. The resistivities of these materials are very
high compared with surface materials. One-dimensional DC
resistivity sounding was relatively difficult to obtain reasonable subsurface structure information, because of the
lacking of horizontal homogeneity. However, twodimensional resistivity profiling works well to distinguish
heterogeneous conditions., A recent inversion model provides dramatically improved subsurface two- or threedimensional resistivity profiles. Massive ice and water
lenses shapes are clearly visualized using this method that
includes elevation correction, but it is still difficult to
distinguished bedrock and ice.
[43] In case of resistivity parameters, TEM and HEM can
be a better method for mapping ice distribution in variable
areas because of free ground contact and much deeper
sounding. However, these methods are poor for detailed
study of heterogeneous conditions, especially near-surface
sounding (Table 2). It is possible that a large amount of
water exists in a solid phase beneath the surface of Mars and
the geophysical methods presented here present may present
useful tools for Martian exploration.
[44] Acknowledgments. This research was funded in part under the
FWI CHAMP (NSF0229705) program and the International Arctic Research Center (IARC) through a Cooperative Agreement with the National
Science Foundation. We would also like to thank WERC staff and Gary
Schikora for their field support, and L. Burn (DGGS, State of Alaska), and

9 of 10

E06S19

YOSHIKAWA ET AL.: GEOPHYSICAL SURVEYS FOR PINGO ICE

Paul Costello (Alaska North Star Borough) for their help with HEM data
and land use permission and an anonymous reviewer for their review
comments. The Fugro Airborne Surveys Dighem system was funded by the
State of Alaska Department of Geological and Geophysical Surveys for
mapping mine resources.

References
Arcone, S. A. (1984), Pulse transmission through frozen silt, report, Cold
Reg. Res. and Eng. Lab., Hanover N. H.
Arcone, S., C. Leuschen, and S. P. Gogineni (2001), Comparative permafrost radar tests: Fairbanks, Alaska, report, Cold Reg. Res. and Eng. Lab.,
Hanover N. H.
Burns, L. E., Fugro Airborne Surveys, and Stevens Exploration
Management Corporation (2004a), 900 Hz coplanar apparent resistivity
of the Fairbanks mining district, interior Alaska, 3A, 2 sheets, scale
1:63,360, Geophys. Rep. 2004-1-3A, Alaska Div. of Geol. and Geophys.
Surv., Fairbanks.
Burns, L. E., Fugro Airborne Surveys, and Stevens Exploration Management Corporation (2004b), 900 Hz coplanar apparent resistivity of the
Fairbanks mining district, interior Alaska, 3B, 2 sheets, scale 1:63,
Geophys. Rep. 2004-1-3B, Alaska Div. of Geol. and Geophys. Surv.,
Fairbanks.
Burns, L. E., Fugro Airborne Surveys, and Stevens Exploration Management Corporation (2004c), 7200 Hz coplanar apparent resistivity of the
Fairbanks mining district, interior Alaska, 2B, 2 sheets, scale 1:63,360,
Geophys. Rep. 2004-1-2B, Alaska Div. of Geol. and Geophys. Surv.,
Fairbanks.
Burns, L. E., Fugro Airborne Surveys, and Stevens Exploration Management Corporation (2004d), 7200 Hz coplanar apparent resistivity of the
Fairbanks mining district, interior Alaska, 2A, 2 sheets, scale 1:63,360,
Geophys. Rep. 2004-1-2A, Alaska Div. of Geol. and Geophys. Surv.,
Fairbanks.
Cabrol, N. A., E. A. Grin, and W. H. Pollard (2000), Possible frost mounds
in an ancient Martian lake bed, Icarus, 145, 91 107.
Dallimore, S. R., and J. L. Davis (1992), Ground penetrating radar investigations of massive ground ice, in Ground Penetrating Radar, edited by
J. Pilon, Pap. 90-4, pp. 41 48, Geol. Surv. of Can., Ottawa.
Das, U. C., and S. K. Verma (1980), Digital linear filter for computing type
curves for the two-electrode system of resistivity sounding, Geophys.
Prospect., 28, 610 619.
Doolittle, J. A., M. A. Hardisky, and M. F. Gross (1990), A ground penetrating radar study of active layer thicknesses in areas of moist sedge and
wet sedge tundra near Bethel, Alaska, U.S.A., Arct. Alp. Res., 22, 175
182.
Doolittle, J. A., M. A. Hardisky, and S. Black (1992), A ground-penetrating
radar study of Goodream palsas, Newfoundland, Canada, Arct. Alp. Res.,
24, 173 178.
Dyrness, C. T., L. A. Viereck, and K. Van Cleve (1986), Fire in taiga
communities of interior Alaska, in Forest Ecosystems in the Alaskan
Taiga, edited by K. Van Cleve et al., pp. 74 86, Springer, New
York.
Harada, K., and K. Yoshikawa (1996), Permafrost age and thickness near
Adventfjorden, Spitsbergen, Polar Geogr., 20(4), 267 281.
Hinkel, K. M., J. A. Doolittle, J. G. Bockheim, F. E. Nelson, R. Paetzold,
J. M. Kimble, and R. Travis (2001), Detection of subsurface permafrost
features with ground-penetrating radar, Barrow, Alaska, Permafrost Periglacial Proc., 12, 179 190.
Hoekstra, P. (1978), Electromagnetic methods for mapping shallow permafrost, Geophysics, 43, 782 787.
Hoekstra, P., P. V. Sellmann, and A. Delaney (1975), Ground and airborne
resistivity surveys of permafrost near Fairbanks, Alaska, Geophysics, 40,
641 656.
Hoekstra, P., R. Blohm, and M. Blohm (1998), Tests of surface nuclear
magnetic resonance imaging to map unfrozen zones in discontinuous
permafrost at sites in the vicinity of Fairbanks, Alaska, Rep. 9821CRR,
35 pp., Blackhawk Geometrics Proj., Golden, Colo.
Hunter, J. A. M. (1973), The application of shallow seismic methods to
mapping of frozen surficial materials, paper presented at 2nd International Conference on Permafrost, Natl. Acad. of Sci., Washington, D. C.
Karous, M., and S. E. Hjelt (1983), Linear filtering of VLF dip-angle
measurements, Geophys. Prospect., 31, 782 794.
Kasischke, E. S., N. F. French, K. P. ONeill, D. D. Richter, L. L. BourgeauChavez, and P. A. Harrell (2000), Influence of fire on long-term patterns
of forest succession in Alaskan boreal forests, in Fire, Climate Change
and Carbon Cycling in the Boreal Forest, Ecol. Stud. Ser., edited by E. S.
Kasischke and B. J. Stocks, pp. 214 238, Springer, New York.
Kovacs, A., and R. M. Morey (1985), Impulse radar sounding of frozen
ground, in Workshop on Permafrost Geophysics, edited by J. Brown,
M. C. Metz, and P. Hoekstra, Spec. Rep. 85-5, pp. 28 40, Cold Reg.
Res. Lab., Hanover, N. H.

E06S19

Leuschen, C., P. Kanagaratnam, K. Yoshikawa, S. Arcone, and S. Gogineni

(2003), Design and field experiments of a surface-penetrating radar for
Mars exploration, J. Geophys. Res., 108(E4), 8034, doi:10.1029/
2002JE001876.
Loke, M. H., and R. D. Barker (1994), Rapid least-squares inversion of
apparent resistivity pseudosections (abstract), paper presented at 56th
Meeting, Intl. Permafrost Assoc., Vienna, Austria.
Lucchitta, B. K. (1981), Mars and Earth: Comparison of cold-climate features, Icarus, 45, 264 303.
Moorman, B. J., S. D. Robinson, and M. M. Burgess (2003), Imaging
periglacial conditions with ground-penetrating radar, Permafrost Periglacial Proc., 14, 319 329.
Palmer, D. (1986), Handbook of Geophys. Explor., Seismic Explor., vol. 13,
Refraction Seismics, 269 pp., Geophys. Press, London.
Rice, J. W., T. J. Parker, A. J. Russell, and O. Knudsen (2002), Morphology
of fresh outflow channel deposits on Mars, Lunar Planet Sci. [CD-ROM],
XXXIII, abstract 2026.
Romanovsky, V. E., and T. E. Osterkamp (1995), Interannual variations of
the thermal regime of the active layer and near surface permafrost in
Northern Alaska, Permafrost Periglacial Proc., 6, 313 335.
Ross, N., C. Harris, P. J. Brabham, and H. H. Christiansen (2005), Ground
penetrating radar investigations of open system pingos, Adventdalen,
Svalbard, Nor. Geogr. Tidsskr., 59, 129 138, doi:10.1080/
00291950510020600.
Rozenberg, G., J. D. Henderson, A. N. Sartorelli, and A. S. Judge (1985),
Some aspects of transient electromagnetic soundings for permafrost
delineation, in Workshop on Permafrost Geophysics, edited by J. Brown,
M. C. Metz, and P. Hoekstra, Spec. Rep. 85-5, pp. 74 90, Cold Reg. Res.
Lab., Hanover, N. H.
Sakimoto, S. E. H. (2005), Central mounds in Martian impact craters:
Assessment as possible perennial permafrost mounds (pingos), Lunar
Planet Sci. [CD-ROM], XXXVI, abstract 2009.
Scott, W., P. Sellmann, and J. Hunter (1990), Geophysics in the study
of permafrost, in Geotechnical and Environmental Geophysics, edited
by S. Ward, pp. 355 384, Soc. of Explor. Geophys., Tulsa, Okla.
Soare, R. J., D. M. Burr, and J. M. Wan Bun Tseung (2005), Pingos and a
possible periglacial landscape in northwest Utopia Planitia, Mars, Icarus,
174, 373 382.
Tanaka, K. L., J. A. Skinner, T. M. Hare, T. Joyal, and A. Wenker (2003),
Resurfacing of the northern plains of Mars based on geologic mapping of
Mars Global Surveyor data, J. Geophys. Res., 108(E4), 8043,
doi:10.1029/2002JE001908.
Todd, B. J., and S. R. Dallimore (1998), Electromagnetic and geological
transect across permafrost terrain, Mackenzie River Delta, Canada, Geophysics, 63, 1914 1924.
Todd, B. J., S. E. Pullan, and J. A. Hunter (1991), Electromagnetic studies
across lakes and rivers in permafrost terrain, Mackenzie River Delta,
Northwest Territories, Canada (abstract), paper presented at 61st Annual
International Meeting, Soc. of Explor. Geophys., Tulsa, Okla.
Vonder Muhll, D., and W. Schmid (1993), Geophysical and photogrammetrical investigations of rock glacier Muragl I, Engadin, Swiss Alps, paper
presented at VI International Conference on Permafrost, Beijing.
Yarie, J. (1981), Forest fire cycles and life tables: A case study from interior
Alaska, Can. J. For. Res., 11, 554 562.
Yilmaz, O. (1987), Investigations in Geophysics, vol. 2, Seismic Data
Processing, Soc. of Explor. Geophys., Tulsa, Okla.
Yoshikawa, K., W. R. Bolton, V. E. Romanovsky, M. Fukuda, and L. D.
Hinzman (2002), Impacts of wildfire on the permafrost in the boreal
forests of Interior Alaska, J. Geophys. Res., 107, 8148, doi:10.1029/
2001JD000438, [printed 108(D1), 2003].


P. Gogineni, Center for Remote Sensing of Ice Sheets, University of

Kansas, 2335 Irving Hill Road, Lawrence, KS 66045-7612, USA.
(gogineni@cresis.ku.edu)
K. Harada, Department of Environmental Sciences, School of
Food, Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Miyagi University,
Hatatate 2-2-1, Sendai Miyagi 982-0215, Japan. (haradak@myu.ac.jp)
L. Hinzman, A. Ikeda, and K. Yoshikawa, Water and Environmental
Research Center, University of Alaska Fairbanks, P.O. Box 755860,
Fairbanks, AK 99775-5860, USA. (ffky@uaf.edu)
P. Hoekstra, Blackhawk Geosciences, Golden, CO 80401, USA
C. Leuschen, Johns Hopkins University, Applied Physics Laboratory,
11100 Johns Hopkins Road, Laurel, MD 20723, USA. (carl.leuschen@
jhuapl.edu)
N. Matsuoka, Department of Earth Science, University of Tsukuba,
Ibaraki 305-8572, Japan. (matsuoka@atm.geo.tsukuba.ac.jp)
Y. Sawada, Institute of Low Temperature Science, Hokkaido University,
Kita 19, Nishi 8, Kita-ku, Sapporo 0600819, Japan. (ysawada@pop.
lowtem.hokudai.ac.jp)

10 of 10