Inter-annual variability of soil respiration in wet shrublands:do plants modulate its sensitivity to climate?

Understanding the response of soil respiration to climate variability is critical to formulate realistic predictions of future carbon (C) fluxes under different climate change scenarios. There is growing evidence that the influence of long-term climate variability in C fluxes from terrestrial ecosystems is modulated by adjustments in the aboveground–belowground links. Here, we studied the inter-annual variability in soil respiration from a wet shrubland going through successional change in North Wales (UK) during 13 years. We hypothesised that the decline in plant productivity observed over a decade would result in a decrease in the apparent sensitivity of soil respiration to soil temperature, and that rainfall variability would explain a significant fraction of the inter-annual variability in plant productivity, and consequently, in soil respiration, due to excess-water constraining nutrient availability for plants. As hypothesised, there were parallel decreases between plant productivity and annual and summer CO2 emissions over the 13-year period. Soil temperatures did not follow a similar trend, which resulted in a decline in the apparent sensitivity of soil respiration to soil temperature (apparent Q10 values decreased from 9.4 to 2.8). Contrary to our second hypothesis, summer maximum air temperature rather than rainfall was the climate variable with the greatest influence on aboveground biomass and annual cumulative respiration. Since summer air temperature and rainfall were positively associated, the greatest annual respiration values were recorded during years of high rainfall. The results suggest that adjustments in plant productivity might have a critical role in determining the long-term-sensitivity of soil respiration to changing climate conditions

Identify the opportunities provided by developments in earth observation and remote sensing for national scale monitoring of soil quality

Defra wish to establish to what extent national-scale soil monitoring (both state and change) of a series of soil indicators might be undertaken by the application of remote sensing methods. Current soil monitoring activities rely on the field-based collection and laboratory analysis of soil samples from across the landscape according to different sampling designs. The use of remote sensing offers the potential to encompass a larger proportion of the landscape, but the signal detected by the remote sensor has to be converted into a meaningful soil measurement which may have considerable uncertainty associated with it. The eleven soil indicators which were considered in this report are pH, organic carbon, bulk density, phosphorus (Olsen P), nitrogen (total N), magnesium (extractable), potassium (extractable), copper (aqua regia extractable), cadmium (aqua regia extractable), zinc (aqua regia extractable) and nickel (aqua regia extractable). However, we also comment on the potential use of remote sensing for monitoring of soil depth and (in particular) peat depth, plus soil erosion and compaction. In assessing the potential of remote sensing methods for soil monitoring of state and change, we addressed the following questions: 1. When will these be ready for use and what level of further development is required? 2. Could remote sensing of any of these indicators replace and/or complement traditional field based national scale soil monitoring? 3. Can meaningful measures of change be derived? 4. How could remote soil monitoring of individual indicators be incorporated into national scale soil monitoring schemes? To address these questions, we undertook a comprehensive literature and internet search and also wrote to a range of international experts in remote sensing. It is important to note that the monitoring of the status of soil indicators, and the monitoring of their change, are two quite different challenges; they are different variables and their variability is likely to differ. There are particular challenges to the application of remote sensing of soil in northern temperate regions (such as England and Wales), including the presence of year-round vegetation cover which means that soil spectral reflectance cannot be captured by airborne or satellite observations, and long-periods of cloud cover which limits the application of satellite-based spectroscopy. We summarise the potential for each of the indicators, grouped where appropriate. Unless otherwise stated, the remote sensing methods would need to be combined with ground-based sampling and analysis to make a contribution to detection of state or change in soil indicators. Soil metals (copper (Cu), cadmium (Cd), zinc (Zn), nickel (Ni)): there is no technical basis for applying current remote sensing approaches to monitor either state or change of these indicators and there are no published studies which have shown how this might be achieved. Soil nutrients: the most promising remote sensing technique to improve estimates of the status of extractable potassium (K) is the collection and application of airborne radiometric survey (detection of gamma radiation by low-flying aircraft) but this should be investigated further. This is unlikely to assist in monitoring change. Based on published literature, it may be possible to enhance mapping the state of extractable magnesium (Mg), but not to monitor change, using hyperspectral (satellite or airborne) remote sensing in cultivated areas. This needs to be investigated further. There are no current remote sensing methods for detecting state or change of Olsen (extractable) phosphorus (P). Organic carbon and total nitrogen: Based on published literature, it may be possible to enhance mapping the state of organic carbon and total nitrogen (but not to monitor change), using hyperspectral (satellite or airborne) remote sensing in cultivated areas only. In applying this approach the satellite data are applied using a statistical model which is trained using ground-based sampling and analysis of soil

Identification and predictability of soil quality indicators from conventional soil and vegetation classifications

The physical, chemical and biological attributes of a soil combined with abiotic factors (e.g. climate and topography) drive pedogenesis and some of these attributes have been used as proxies to soil quality. Thus, we investigated: (1) whether appropriate soil quality indicators (SQIs) could be identified in soils of Great Britain, (2) whether conventional soil classification or aggregate vegetation classes (AVCs) could predict SQIs and (3) to what extent do soil types and/ or AVCs act as major regulators of SQIs. Factor analysis was used to group 20 soil attributes into six SQI which were named as; soil organic matter (SOM), dissolved organic matter (DOM), soluble N, reduced N, microbial biomass, DOM humification (DOMH). SOM was identified as the most important SQI in the discrimination of both soil types and AVCs. Soil attributes constituting highly to the SOM factor were, microbial quotient and bulk density. The SOM indicator discriminated three soil type groupings and four aggregate vegetation class groupings. Among the soil types, only the peat soils were discriminated from other groups while among the AVCs only the heath and bog classes were isolated from others. However, the peat soil and heath and bog AVC were the only groups that were distinctly discriminated from other groups. All other groups heavily overlapped with one another, making it practically impossible to define reference values for each soil type or AVC. The two-way ANOVA showed that the AVCs were a better regulator of the SQIs than the soil types. We conclude that conventionally classified soil types cannot predict the SQIs defined from large areas with differing climatic and edaphic factors. Localised areas with similar climatic and topoedaphic factors may hold promise for the definition of SQI that may predict the soil types or AVCs

Fragmentation and thresholds in hydrological flow‐based ecosystem services

Loss and fragmentation of natural land cover due to expansion of agricultural areas is a global issue. These changes alter the configuration and composition of the landscape, particularly affecting those ecosystem services (benefits people receive from ecosystems) that depend on interactions between landscape components. Hydrological mitigation describes the bundle of ecosystem services provided by landscape features such as woodland that interrupt the flow of runoff to rivers. These services include sediment retention, nutrient retention and mitigation of overland water flow. The position of woodland in the landscape and the landscape topography are both important for hydrological mitigation. Therefore, it is crucial to consider landscape configuration and flow pathways in a spatially explicit manner when examining the impacts of fragmentation. Here we test the effects of landscape configuration using a large number (>7,000) of virtual landscape configurations. We created virtual landscapes of woodland patches within grassland, superimposed onto real topography and stream networks. Woodland patches were generated with user‐defined combinations of patch number and total woodland area, placed randomly in the landscape. The Ecosystem Service model used hydrological routing to map the “mitigated area” upslope of each woodland patch. We found that more fragmented woodland mitigated a greater proportion of the catchment. Larger woodland area also increased mitigation, however, this increase was nonlinear, with a threshold at 50% coverage, above which there was a decline in service provision. This nonlinearity suggests that the benefit of any additional woodland depends on two factors: the level of fragmentation and the existing area of woodland. Edge density (total edge of patches divided by area of catchment) was the best single metric in predicting mitigated area. Distance from woodland to stream was not a significant predictor of mitigation, suggesting that agri‐environment schemes planting riparian woodland should consider additional controls such as the amount of fragmentation in the landscape. These findings highlight the potential benefits of fragmentation to hydrological mitigation services. However, benefits for hydrological services must be balanced against any negative effects of fragmentation or habitat loss on biodiversity and other services

Options for a new integrated natural resources monitoring framework for Wales. Phase 1 project report

Healthy natural resources underpin significant economic sectors in Wales including agriculture, fisheries, tourism and forestry, they also make a significant contribution across Cabinet policies including the health and well-being agenda. In order to develop policies that build social, economic and environmental resilience and to evaluate policy implementation, a robust natural resources monitoring framework is required. Current monitoring activities are of varying quality, not sufficiently aligned to the new legislative and policy landscape, disjointed and when considered as a whole, potentially not as cost-effective as they could be. This project was tasked with identifying options and developing recommendations for an integrated natural resources monitoring framework for Wales reflecting the ambitions and integrating principles of the Environment Act and Well Being of Future Generations Act. The monitoring community, the Welsh Government and Natural Resources Wales Core Evidence Group, the project team, stakeholders and partners, have agreed on a set of recommendations

Comparing strengths and weaknesses of three ecosystem services modelling tools in a diverse UK river catchment

Ecosystem services modelling tools can help land managers and policy makers evaluate the impacts of alternative management options or changes in land use on the delivery of ecosystem services. As the variety and complexity of these tools increases, there is a need for comparative studies across a range of settings, allowing users to make an informed choice. Using examples of provisioning and regulating services (water supply, carbon storage and nutrient retention), we compare three spatially explicit tools – LUCI (Land Utilisation and Capability Indicator), ARIES (Artificial Intelligence for Ecosystem Services) and InVEST (Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services and Tradeoffs). Models were parameterised for the UK and applied to a temperate catchment with widely varying land use in North Wales. Although each tool provides quantitative mapped output, can be applied in different contexts, and can work at local or national scale, they differ in the approaches taken and underlying assumptions made. In this study, we focus on the wide range of outputs produced for each service and discuss the differences between each modelling tool. Model outputs were validated using empirical data for river flow, carbon and nutrient levels within the catchment. The sensitivity of the models to land-use change was tested using four scenarios of varying severity, evaluating the conversion of grassland habitat to woodland (0–30% of the landscape). We show that, while the modelling tools provide broadly comparable quantitative outputs, each has its own unique features and strengths. Therefore the choice of tool depends on the study question

Plant and soil communities are associated with the response of soil water repellency to environmental stress

A warming climate and expected changes in average and extreme rainfall emphasise the importance of understanding how the land surface routes and stores surface water. The availability and movement of water within an ecosystem is a fundamental control on biological and geophysical activity, and influences many climatic feedbacks. A key phenomenon influencing water infiltration into the land surface is soil hydrophobicity, or water repellency. Despite repellency dictating the speed, volume and pattern of water infiltration, there is still major uncertainty over whether this critical hydrological process is biologically or physicochemically controlled. Here we show that soil water repellency is likely driven by changes in the plant and soil microbial communities in response to environmental stressors. We carried out a field survey in the summers of 2013 to 2016 in a variety of temperate habitats ranging across arable, grassland, forest and bog sites. We found that moderate to extreme repellency occurs in 68% of soils at a national scale in temperate ecosystems, with 92% showing some repellency. Taking a systems approach, we show that a wetter climate and low nutrient availability alter plant, bacterial and fungal community structure, which in turn are associated with increased soil water repellency across a large-scale gradient of soil, vegetation and land-use. The stress tolerance of the plant community and associated changes in soil microbial communities were more closely linked to changes in repellency than soil physicochemical properties. Our results indicate that there are consistent responses to diverse ecosystem stresses that will impact plant and microbial community composition, soil properties, and hydrological behaviour. We suggest that the ability of a biological community to induce such hydrological responses will influence the resilience of the whole ecosystem to environmental stress. This highlights the crucial role of above-belowground interactions in mediating climatic feedbacks and dictating ecosystem health

Review of existing information on the interrelations between soil and climate change. (ClimSoil). Final report

Carbon stock in EU soils – The soil carbon stocks in the EU27 are around 75 billion tonnes of carbon (C); of this stock around 50% is located in Sweden, Finland and the United Kingdom (because of the vast area of peatlands in these countries) and approximately 20% is in peatlands, mainly in countries in the northern part of Europe. The rest is in mineral soils, again the higher amount being in northern Europe. 2. Soils sink or source for CO2 in the EU – Both uptake of carbon dioxide (CO2) through photosynthesis and plant growth and loss of CO2 through decomposition of organic matter from terrestrial ecosystems are significant fluxes in Europe. Yet, the net terrestrial carbon fluxes are typically 5-10 times smaller relative to the emissions from use of fossil fuel of 4000 Mt CO2 per year. 3. Peat and organic soils - The largest emissions of CO2 from soils are resulting from land use change and especially drainage of organic soils and amount to 20-40 tonnes of CO2 per hectare per year. The most effective option to manage soil carbon in order to mitigate climate change is to preserve existing stocks in soils, and especially the large stocks in peat and other soils with a high content of organic matter. 4. Land use and soil carbon – Land use and land use change significantly affects soil carbon stocks. On average, soils in Europe are most likely to be accumulating carbon on a net basis with a sink for carbon in soils under grassland and forest (from 0 - 100 billion tonnes of carbon per year) and a smaller source for carbon from soils under arable land (from 10 - 40 billion tonnes of carbon per year). Soil carbon losses occur when grasslands, managed forest lands or native ecosystems are converted to croplands and vice versa carbon stocks increase, albeit it slower, following conversion of cropland. 5. Soil management and soil carbon – Soil management has a large impact on soil carbon. Measures directed towards effective management of soil carbon are available and identified, and many of these are feasible and relatively inexpensive to implement. Management for lower nitrogen (N) emissions and lower C emissions is a useful approach to prevent trade off and swapping of emissions between the greenhouse gases CO2, methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O). 6. Carbon sequestration – Even though effective in reducing or slowing the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere, soil carbon sequestration is surely no ‘golden bullet’ alone to fight climate change due to the limited magnitude of its effect and its potential reversibility; it could, nevertheless, play an important role in climate mitigation alongside other measures, especially because of its immediate availability and relative low cost for 'buying' us time. 7. Effects of climate change on soil carbon pools – Climate change is expected to have an impact on soil carbon in the longer term, but far less an impact than does land use change, land use and land management. We have not found strong and clear evidence for either overall and combined positive of negative impact of climate change (atmospheric CO2, temperature, precipitation) on soil carbon stocks. Due to the relatively large gross exchange of CO2 between atmosphere and soils and the significant stocks of carbon in soils, relatively small changes in these large and opposing fluxes of CO2, i.e. as result of land use (change), land management and climate change, may have significant impact on our climate and on soil quality. 8. Monitoring systems for changes in soil carbon – Currently, monitoring and knowledge on land use and land use change in EU27 is inadequate for accurate calculation of changes in soil carbon contents. Systematic and harmonized monitoring across EU27 and across relevant land uses would allow for adequate representation of changes in soil carbon in reporting emissions from soils and sequestration in soils to the UNFCCC. 9. EU policies and soil carbon – Environmental requirements under the Cross Compliance requirement of CAP is an instrument that may be used to maintain SOC. Neither measures under UNFCCC nor those mentioned in the proposed Soil Framework Directive are expected to adversely impact soil C. EU policy on renewable energy is not necessarily a guarantee for appropriate (soil) carbon management