Monthly surface temperatures in the Arctic and Antarctic regions have
been derived from the 11.5-mum thermal infrared channel of the Nimbus
7 temperature humidity infrared radiometer (THIR) for a whole year in
1979 and for a winter and a summer month from 1980 through 1985. The d
ata set shows interannual variability and provides spatial details tha
t allow identification of temperature patterns over sea ice and ice sh
eet surfaces. For example, the coldest spot in the southern hemisphere
is observed to be consistently in the Antarctic plateau in the southe
rn hemisphere, while that in the northern hemisphere is usually locate
d in Greenland, or one of three other general areas: Siberia, the cent
ral Arctic, or the Canadian Archipelago. Also, in the southern hemisph
ere, the amplitude of the seasonal fluctuation of ice sheet temperatur
es is about 3 times that of sea ice, while in the northern hemisphere,
the corresponding fluctuations for the two surfaces are about the sam
e. The main sources of error in the retrieval are cloud and other atmo
spheric effects. These were minimized by first choosing the highest ra
diance value from the set of measurements during the day taken within
a 30 km by 30 km grid of each daily map. Then the difference of daily
maps was taken, and where the difference is greater than a certain thr
eshold (which in this case is 12-degrees-C), the data element is delet
ed. Overall, the monthly maps derived from the resulting daily maps ar
e spatially and temporally consistent. are coherent with the topograph
y of the Antarctic continent and the location of the sea ice edge, and
are in qualitative agreement with climatological data. Quantitatively
, THIR data are in good agreement with Antarctic ice sheet surface air
temperature station data with a correlation coefficient of 0.997 and
a standard deviation of 2.0-degrees-C. The absolute values are not as
good over the sea ice edges, but a comparison with Russian 2-m drift s
tation temperatures shows very high correlation (with correlation coef
ficient at 0.998) and a standard deviation of 1.1-degrees-C. Overall,
the rms error is estimated to be from 1-degrees to 2-degrees-C, depend
ing on the surface, while the average bias when compared with in situ
data is less than 2-degrees-C.