Search for: All records

Drylands encompass over 40% of terrestrial ecosystems and face significant anthropogenic degradation causing a loss of ecosystem integrity, services, and deterioration of social‐ecological systems. To combat this degradation, some dryland restoration efforts have focused on the use of biological soil crusts (biocrusts): complex communities of cyanobacteria, algae, lichens, bryophytes, and other organisms living in association with the top millimeters of soil. Biocrusts are common in many ecosystems and especially drylands. They perform a suite of ecosystem functions: stabilizing soil surfaces to prevent erosion, contributing carbon through photosynthesis, fixing nitrogen, and mediating the hydrological cycle in drylands. Biocrusts have emerged as a potential tool in restoration; developing methods to implement effective biocrust restoration has the potential to return many ecosystem functions and services. Although culture‐based approaches have allowed researchers to learn about the biology, physiology, and cultivation of biocrusts, transferring this knowledge to field implementation has been more challenging. A large amount of research has amassed to improve our understanding of biocrust restoration, leaving us at an opportune time to learn from one another and to join approaches for maximum efficacy. The articles in this special issue improve the state of our current knowledge in biocrust restoration, highlighting efforts to effectively restore biocrusts through a variety of different ecosystems, across scales and utilizing a variety of lab and field methods. This collective work provides a useful resource for the scientific community as well as land managers. 

Abstract The capture and use of water are critically important in drylands, which collectively constitute Earth's largest biome. Drylands will likely experience lower and more unreliable rainfall as climatic conditions change over the next century. Dryland soils support a rich community of microphytic organisms (biocrusts), which are critically important because they regulate the delivery and retention of water. Yet despite their hydrological significance, a global synthesis of their effects on hydrology is lacking. We synthesized 2,997 observations from 109 publications to explore how biocrusts affected five hydrological processes (times to ponding and runoff, early [sorptivity] and final [infiltration] stages of water flow into soil, and the rate or volume of runoff) and two hydrological outcomes (moisture storage, sediment production). We found that increasing biocrust cover reduced the time for water to pond on the surface (−40%) and commence runoff (−33%), and reduced infiltration (−34%) and sediment production (−68%). Greater biocrust cover had no significant effect on sorptivity or runoff rate/amount, but increased moisture storage (+14%). Infiltration declined most (−56%) at fine scales, and moisture storage was greatest (+36%) at large scales. Effects of biocrust type (cyanobacteria, lichen, moss, mixed), soil texture (sand, loam, clay), and climatic zone (arid, semiarid, dry subhumid) were nuanced. Our synthesis provides novel insights into the magnitude, processes, and contexts of biocrust effects in drylands. This information is critical to improve our capacity to manage dwindling dryland water supplies as Earth becomes hotter and drier. 

Abstract Understanding the importance of biotic interactions in driving the distribution and abundance of species is a central goal of plant ecology. Early vascular plants likely colonized land occupied by biocrusts — photoautotrophic, surface‐dwelling soil communities comprised of cyanobacteria, bryophytes, lichens and fungi — suggesting biotic interactions between biocrusts and plants have been at play for some 2,000 million years. Today, biocrusts coexist with plants in dryland ecosystems worldwide, and have been shown to both facilitate or inhibit plant species performance depending on ecological context. Yet, the factors that drive the direction and magnitude of these effects remain largely unknown.We conducted a meta‐analysis of plant responses to biocrusts using a global dataset encompassing 1,004 studies from six continents.Meta‐analysis revealed there is no simple positive or negative effect of biocrusts on plants. Rather, plant responses differ by biocrust composition and plant species traits and vary across plant ontogeny. Moss‐dominated biocrusts facilitated, while lichen‐dominated biocrusts inhibited overall plant performance. Plant responses also varied among plant functional groups: C₄grasses received greater benefits from biocrusts compared to C₃grasses, and plants without N‐fixing symbionts responded more positively to biocrusts than plants with N‐fixing symbionts. Biocrusts decreased germination but facilitated growth of non‐native plant species.Synthesis. Results suggest that interspecific variation in plant responses to biocrusts, contingent on biocrust type, plant traits, and ontogeny can have strong impacts on plant species performance. These findings have important implications for understanding biocrust contributions to plant productivity and community assembly processes in ecosystems worldwide.