Amendments fail to hasten biocrust recovery or soil stability at a disturbed dryland sandy site

Chandler, D. G.; Day, Natalie K.; Madsen, Matthew D.; Belnap, Jayne

doi:10.1111/rec.12870

Cited by 37 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…EPS may also occur in a variety of morphologies and configurations within the soil matrix, dependent on species and conditions (Rossi, Mugnai, & De Philippis, 2017 a abundance) and functional stabilization (surface roughness and aggregate stability) may be ameliorated with the use of stabilizers in the short term ( Figure 6). Other studies have found neutral to improved cyanobacterial growth when simultaneously inoculated with stabilizers (Chandler et al, 2018;Davidson et al, 2002;Park, Li, Jia, & Hur, 2014;Peng et al, 2017), and in plots sampled for this study, microbiotic chlorophyll was marginally greater in plots with both biocrust and stabilizer. More studies are needed to determine the mechanisms by which soil-stabilizing amendments may facilitate microbiotic growth, such as by anchoring inoculum (Ballesteros, Ayerbe, Casares, Cañadas, & Lorite, 2017), providing microsubstrate for improved growth (Zaady, Katra, Barkai, Knoll, & Sarig, 2016), or improving water status or nutritional conditions (Park et al, 2016).…”

Section: Biocrust Restoration and Erosion Processessupporting

confidence: 50%

“…Many of the recorded successes correspond with periods of greater moisture availability, such as Chen et al (2006) who implemented large-scale continuous irrigation. Other studies have found little difference from natural recovery or outright failure of establishment (Chandler, Day, Madsen, & Belnap, 2018;Young, Bowker, Reed, Duniway, & Belnap, in press). Given publication bias towards significant results in ecology (Møller & Jennions, 2001), it is likely that more unsuccessful biocrust restorations exist than are reported in the literature.…”

mentioning

confidence: 91%

“…Notable successes include dune stabilization efforts in Inner Mongolia and the Tengger Desert (Chen et al, 2006;Hu, Liu, Song, & Zhang, 2002;Wang, Liu, Li, Hu, & Rao, 2009), the Colorado Plateau (Belnap, 1993), the Mojave Desert (Chiquoine, Abella, & Bowker, 2016), and Great Basin (Condon & Pyke, 2016). Other studies have found little difference from natural recovery or outright failure of establishment (Chandler, Day, Madsen, & Belnap, 2018;Young, Bowker, Reed, Duniway, & Belnap, in press). Other studies have found little difference from natural recovery or outright failure of establishment (Chandler, Day, Madsen, & Belnap, 2018;Young, Bowker, Reed, Duniway, & Belnap, in press).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The hydrological effects of both natural biocrusts and soil stabilizers have been studied extensively in the field Lee, Gantzer, Thompson, & Anderson, 2011;Tümsavas & Kara, 2011), although often independently. Other amendments, such as NaCl or polyacrymalide, have had positive effects on soil stability with neutral effects on biocrust development (Chandler et al, 2018;Davidson, Bowker, George, Phillips, & Belnap, 2002). Other amendments, such as NaCl or polyacrymalide, have had positive effects on soil stability with neutral effects on biocrust development (Chandler et al, 2018;Davidson, Bowker, George, Phillips, & Belnap, 2002).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Studies combining biocrust inoculations with stabilizers such as sodium alginate (Peng et al, 2017), hydrogels, and tackifiers (Park, Li, Jia, & Hur, 2016) have found synergistic effects on soil stability and inoculant growth in the laboratory within the short-term durations of these experiments. Other amendments, such as NaCl or polyacrymalide, have had positive effects on soil stability with neutral effects on biocrust development (Chandler et al, 2018;Davidson, Bowker, George, Phillips, & Belnap, 2002).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Hydrological function of rapidly induced biocrusts

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In dryland ecosystems, land degradation and erosion pose severe threats to ecosystem productivity and human well-being. Bio-inoculation of degraded soils with native biological soil crusts ("biocrusts") is a promising yet relatively untested means to improve soil stability and hydrological function (i.e., increase infiltration and reduce run-off). In a degraded semiarid grassland on the Colorado Plateau, we studied the establishment and hydrological function (via simulated rainfall) of induced biocrusts grown with and without an organic soil stabilizer (psyllium, derived from Plantago sp.), after a period of 4 months. We found evidence of biocrust establishment, including significantly higher biocrust cover, chlorophyll a, and exopolysaccharides in inoculated plots compared with controls. Plots inoculated with biocrust had higher run-off and sediment yields than controls during rainfall simulation. However, this effect was mitigated in plots where stabilizer was added, resulting in greater soil aggregate stability and higher levels of infiltration (reduced total run-off). The time to ponding was significantly greater than control for all inoculated plots, suggesting that induced biocrusts may be most effective at improving infiltration under low-intensity, smaller precipitation events.Notably, the biocrusts in this study lacked rough surface microtopography, which is common in well-developed biocrusts regionally and likely instrumental in slowing overland flow and increasing infiltration for larger rain events. These results highlight the temporal lag that may exist between apparent and functional restoration of biocrusts. In addition, the simultaneous additions of stabilizing amendments with biocrust inoculum may work collectively to achieve both short-and long-term restoration targets.

show abstract

Section: Biocrust Restoration and Erosion Processessupporting

confidence: 50%

mentioning

confidence: 91%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Hydrological function of rapidly induced biocrusts

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

A false paradigm? Do biocrust types necessarily reflect ‘successional stages’?

Kidron,

Xiao

2023

Ecohydrology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The term ‘succession’ was first proposed to describe the gradual development of plants from an initial stage such as a bare ground to a well‐developed plant community, which at its peak, may reach a climax (primary succession). Accordingly, the earlier and fast growing stage (such as an annual plant community) may grant stability, organic matter and nutrients to the latter, high‐biomass and slow‐growing stages, such as trees. Commonly, reference to the different successional stages is also made once intact and disturbed communities (such as due to mechanical disturbance, tillage, fire, etc.) are compared (secondary succession). The concept was borrowed by many ecologists to describe variable biocrust types. Cyanobacterial or algal biocrust is regarded as an initial stage before turning to a later, more mature biocrust, whether composed of lichens or mosses. The underlain assumptions are that (a) the cyanobacteria provide essential stability and (b) nutrients that are required for the development of the later stages; (c) the initial biocrusts improve the water regime for the later successional stages; (d) cyanobacteria promote the lichen symbiosis; (e) due to substantial differences in the recovery time, a linear succession is inevitable, commonly from cyanobacterial/alga to lichen and lastly to moss; and (f) the cyanobacterial/algal biocrust is a temporary stage, just before being outcompeted by a later stage. It is argued hereafter that the above‐mentioned assumptions are not necessarily correct. As with higher plants, unless a direct comparison between disturbed and intact crusts justifies a reference to successional stages, different types of biocrusts commonly reflect the abiotic conditions at their site, and as such, unless the abiotic conditions change, they reflect stable communities of variable crust types. This paradigm shift may have important implications regarding inoculation efforts and directions and may explain the low success thus far obtained following inoculation experiments once performed with the more developed biocrusts, lichens and mosses.

show abstract

Induced biological soil crust controls on wind erodibility and dust (PM10) emissions

Fick

Barger

Tatarko³

et al. 2019

Earth Surf Processes Landf

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Inducing biological soil crust (biocrust) development is an appealing approach for dust mitigation in drylands due to the resistance biocrusts can provide against erosion. Using a portable device, we evaluated dust emissions from surfaces either inoculated with biocrust, amended with a plant-based soil stabilizer, or both at varying wind friction velocities. Four months after application, emissions from all treatments were either indistinguishable from or greater than controls, despite evidence of biocrust establishment. All treatments had greater surface roughness and showed more evidence of entrapment of windblown sediment than controls, factors which may have been partially responsible for elevated emissions. There was a synergistic effect of inoculation and stabilizer addition, resulting in a nearly twofold reduction in estimated emissions compared to either treatment alone. Stepwise regression analysis indicated that variables associated with surface crust strength (aggregate stability, penetration resistance) were negatively associated with emissions and variables associated with sediment supply (sand content, loose sediment cover) were positively associated with emissions. With more time to develop, the soil-trapping activity and surface integrity of biocrust inoculum and soil stabilizer mixtures is expected to increase with the accumulation of surface biomass and enhancement of roughness through freezethaw cycles.

show abstract

Amendments fail to hasten biocrust recovery or soil stability at a disturbed dryland sandy site

Cited by 37 publications

References 43 publications

Hydrological function of rapidly induced biocrusts

Hydrological function of rapidly induced biocrusts

A false paradigm? Do biocrust types necessarily reflect ‘successional stages’?

Induced biological soil crust controls on wind erodibility and dust (PM10) emissions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About