@article{1db260fa84d54de48b4a34adda83fa16,
title = "Biocrust and the soil surface: Influence of climate, disturbance, and biocrust recovery on soil surface roughness",
abstract = "Biocrust communities promote soil surface roughness, a key functional characteristic for soil ecology. However, the spatial scales at which biocrust communities contribute to surface roughness are not well understood. To refine our understanding of the spatial dynamics between biocrust and soil surface roughness, we used mm-resolution terrestrial LiDAR to measure micro-topographic roughness at seven sub-meter, 3-dimensional kernels (spatial scales) for undisturbed and disturbed biocrusts within the cool Great Basin and the hot Chihuahuan Deserts of western North America. This multi-scalar approach applied within the different desert regions allowed us to explore two objectives: 1) assess the relative importance of climate and disturbance on biocrust roughness, and 2) evaluate how soil surface roughness evolves with biocrust recovery. For objective 1, we found that undisturbed cool desert biocrust was up to three times rougher than hot desert biocrust. Much of the difference in roughness between the two desert biocrust communities appeared to be from climate or other regional factors. However, positive correlations between roughness and biocrust indicators, including soil chlorophyll-a and the field-based Level of Development (LOD) index, suggested that differences in roughness at spatial scales ≤ 10 cm are directly related to biocrust development. Mechanical disturbance aimed at removing biocrust resulted in significant reductions in roughness and removed much of the observed differences in roughness between cool and hot desert soils. We evaluated biocrust recovery within the cool desert study area two years after mechanical disturbance and found that the disturbed soil increased in roughness up-to 300%. The increased surface roughness at spatial scales ≤ 10 cm were positively correlated with increased aggregate stability and indicators of biocrust reestablishment. We found that topographic change area was also an important contributor to roughness at all spatial scales, particularly at spatial scales ≥ 20 cm where it was the most important factor evaluated. These results provide insight into how biocrust interacts with other biophysical processes to influence soil surface roughness and how soil surfaces evolve at time scales relevant to soil restoration activities.",
keywords = "Biological soil crust, Change detection, LiDAR, Remote sensing, Soil restoration, Surface processes",
author = "Joshua Caster and Sankey, {Temuulen Ts} and Sankey, {Joel B.} and Bowker, {Matthew A.} and Daniel Buscombe and Duniway, {Michael C.} and Nichole Barger and Akasha Faist and Taylor Joyal",
note = "Funding Information: We are grateful to Russell Lawrence and Jace Taylor for help with field logistics and planning at Hill UTTR Air Force Base along with all the other logistics coordinators and personnel at UTTR and JER who helped with planning and access. We gratefully acknowledge the effort by Jessica Mikenas, who assisted with the LiDAR surveys and collection of aggregate stability measurements as well as the field and lab crews within the U.S. Geological Survey{\textquoteright}s Southwest Biological Science Center and University of Colorado, Boulder who were supported by Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program funding (W912HQ-13-C-0035-P00005 RC-2329). We thank the U.S. Geological Survey Ecosystems Mission Area and the Northern Arizona University School of Earth and Sustainability who supported work on this manuscript and our internal and external reviewers for helping to improve it. Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the US Government. This manuscript is submitted for publication with the understanding that the US Government is authorized to reproduce and distribute reprints for Governmental purposes. Data products associated with this manuscript are provided on the U.S. Geological Survey ScienceBase ( Caster et al., 2021 ; https://doi.org/10.5066/P9CNLJ25 ). Funding Information: We are grateful to Russell Lawrence and Jace Taylor for help with field logistics and planning at Hill UTTR Air Force Base along with all the other logistics coordinators and personnel at UTTR and JER who helped with planning and access. We gratefully acknowledge the effort by Jessica Mikenas, who assisted with the LiDAR surveys and collection of aggregate stability measurements as well as the field and lab crews within the U.S. Geological Survey's Southwest Biological Science Center and University of Colorado, Boulder who were supported by Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program funding (W912HQ-13-C-0035-P00005 RC-2329). We thank the U.S. Geological Survey Ecosystems Mission Area and the Northern Arizona University School of Earth and Sustainability who supported work on this manuscript and our internal and external reviewers for helping to improve it. Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the US Government. This manuscript is submitted for publication with the understanding that the US Government is authorized to reproduce and distribute reprints for Governmental purposes. Data products associated with this manuscript are provided on the U.S. Geological Survey ScienceBase (Caster et al. 2021; https://doi.org/10.5066/P9CNLJ25). Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2021",
year = "2021",
month = dec,
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.geoderma.2021.115369",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "403",
journal = "Geoderma",
issn = "0016-7061",
publisher = "Elsevier",
}