maintainer: Anita Risch

en: grazing subalpine exclusion vertebrates ecosystem-coupling grassland swiss-national-park ecosystem-multifunctionality invertebrates ecosystem-functions

en: Datafile

en:
ID: Plot ID composited of Fence & Treatment number (90 plots total)

Grassland: Name of the six subalpine grasslands where the exclosure setups were erected. In large grasslands (GRIM, MING, STAB), we established four hierarchical exclosure setups (two in short- and two in tall-grass vegetation), whereas in the small grasslands (BOTS, DADA, MARG) only one setup was erected per vegetation type. BOTS = Val dal Botsch, GRIM = Grimmels, MING = Val Mingér, STAB = Alp Stabelchod, DADA = Stabelchod da daint, MARG = Margunet

Fence: Number of exclosure setup (1 - 18). Note that uneven numbers (1,3,5,7,9,11,13,15,17) represent setups established on short-grass vegetation, even numbers (2,4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18) setups established in tall-grass vegetation
Vegetation	Vegetation type, 1 = short-grass vegetation, 2 = tall-grass vegetation; (9 replicate fences on each vegetation type)
Treatment	Progressive animal exclusion, numbers indicate which animals had access to the plot: 1 = Large/medium/small mammals, and invertebrates have access ("L/M/S/I"), 2 = Medium/small mammals, and invertebrates have access (“M/S/I”), 3 = Small mammals and invertebrates have access (“S/I”), 4 = Invertebrates have access (“I”), 5 = No animals have access (“None”)

Bulkden:	Fine fraction soil bulk density (g cm-3)

Soil.moist	: Soil moisture (%)

Soil.org.C: Rhizosphere soil C content (%)

pH: Soil pH

Nema.PC1: First principal component (PC1) of principal component analysis (PCA) of the soil nematode community composition

Nema.PC2: Second principal component (PC2) of principal component analysis (PCA) of the soil nematode community composition

Micro.PC1: 	First principal component (PC1) of principal component analysis (PCA) of the soil microbial community composition

Micro.PC2: Second principal component (PC2) of principal component analysis (PCA) of the soil microbial community composition

Abv.Inv.PC1: First principal component (PC1) of principal component analysis (PCA) of the aboveground-dwelling invertebrate community composition

Abv.Inv.PC2: Second principal component (PC2) of principal component analysis (PCA) of the aboveground-dwelling invertebrate community composition

Arthr.PC1: First principal component (PC1) of principal component analysis (PCA) of the soil arthropod community composition

Arthr.PC2: Second principal component (PC2) of principal component analysis (PCA) of the soil arthropod community composition

Plant.PC1: First principal component (PC1) of principal component analysis (PCA) of the plant community composition

Plant.PC2: Second principal component (PC2) of principal component analysis (PCA) of the plant community composition

Root.biomass: Root biomass (g m-2)

Micro.biomass	: Microbial biomass carbon (mg kg-1)

Plant.richness: Plant species richness

Plant.N: Plant tissue nitrogen content (%)

Soil.N.min: Soil net nitrogen mineralisation (kg ha-1 season)

Soil.resp: Soil carbon dioxide emissions (soil respiration; g m-2 h-1)

en:
This dataset contains all data on which the following publication below is based.

Paper Citation:
 > Risch AC, Ochoa-Hueso R, van der Putten WH, Bump JK, Busse MD, Frey B, Gwiazdowicz DJ, Page-Dumroese DS, Vandegehuchte ML, Zimmermann S, Schütz M. Size-dependent loss of aboveground animals differentially affects grassland ecosystem coupling and functions. 2018. Nature Communications 9: 3684. [doi: 10.1038/s41467-018-06105-4](https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-06105-4).

Please cite this paper together with the citation for the datafile.

#Methods
Study sites
The experimental exclosure setups were installed within the SNP (IUCN category Ia preserve; Dudley 2008), in south-eastern Switzerland. The park covers 172 km2 of forests and subalpine and alpine grasslands along with scattered rock outcrops and scree slopes. The entire area has been protected from human impact (no hunting, fishing, camping or off-trail hiking) since 1914. Large, fairly homogenous patches of short- and tall-grass vegetation, which originate from different historical management and grazing regimes, cover the park’s subalpine grasslands entirely. Short-grass vegetation developed in areas where cattle used to rest (nutrient input) prior to the park’s foundation (14th century to 1914) (Schütz and others 2003, 2006) and is dominated by lawn grass species such as Festuca rubra L., Briza media L. and Agrostis capillaris L. (Schütz and others 2003, 2006). Today, this vegetation type is intensively grazed by diverse vertebrate and invertebrate communities that inhabit the park and consume up to 60% of the available biomass (Risch and others 2013). Tall-grass vegetation developed where cattle formerly grazed, but did not rest, and is dominated by rather nutrient-poor tussocks of Carex sempervirens Vill. and Nardus stricta L. (Schütz and others 2003, 2006). This vegetation type receives considerably less grazing, with only roughly 20% of the biomass consumed (Risch and others 2013). Consequently, the two vegetation types together represent a long-term trajectory of changes in grazing regimes. Underlying bedrock of all grasslands is dolomite, which renders these grasslands rather poor in nutrients regardless of former and current land-use regimes.
Experimental design
To progressively exclude aboveground vertebrate and invertebrate animals, we established 18 size-selective exclosure setups (nine in short-grass, nine in tall-grass vegetation) distributed over six subalpine grasslands across the SNP (Risch and others 2013, 2015). Elevation differences of exclosure locations did not exceed 350 m (between 1975 and 2300 m a.s.l.). The exclosures were established immediately after snowmelt in spring 2009 and were left in place for five consecutive growing seasons (until end of 2013). They were, however, temporarily dismantled every fall (late October after first snowfall) to protect them from avalanches. They were re-established in the same location every spring immediately after snowmelt. Each size-selective exclosure setup consisted of five plots (2 x 3 m) that progressively excluded aboveground vertebrates and invertebrates from large to small. The plots are labelled according to the guilds that had access to them “L/M/S/I”, “M/S/I”, “S/I”, “I”, “None”; L = large mammals, M = medium mammals, S = small mammals, I = invertebrates, None = no animals had access. As we only had permission to have the experimental setup in place for five consecutive growing seasons, the experiment had to be completely dismantled in the late fall of 2013 and all material removed from the SNP.
Our exclosure design was aimed at excluding mammalian herbivores, but naturally also excluded the few medium and small mammalian predators, as well as the entire aboveground invertebrate food web. A total of 26 large to small mammal species can be found in the SNP, but large apex predators are missing (wolf, bear, lynx) . Reptiles, amphibians and birds are scarce to absent in the subalpine grasslands under study. Only two reptile species occur in the park and they are confined to rocky areas that warm up enough for them to survive. One frog species spawns in an isolated pond far from our grasslands. Only three bird species occasionally feed on the subalpine grasslands. Using game cameras (Moultrie 6MP Game Spy I-60 Infrared Digital Game Camera, Moultrie Feeders, Alabaster, AL, USA), we did observe that the medium- and small-sized mammals (marmot/hares and mice) were not afraid to enter the fences and feed on their designated plots. We never spotted reptiles, amphibians or birds on camera. We distinguished between 59 higher aboveground-dwelling invertebrate taxa that our size-selective exclosures excluded (see also methods for aboveground-dwelling invertebrates below).
The “L/M/S/I” plot (not fenced) was located at least 5 m from the 2.1 m tall and 7 x 9 m large main electrical fence that enclosed the other four plots. The bottom wire of this fence was mounted at 0.5 m height and was not electrified to enable safe access for medium and small mammals, while fencing out the large ones. Within each main fence, we randomly established four 2 x 3 m plots separated by 1-m wide walkways from one another and from the main fence line: 1) the “M/S/I” plots were unfenced, allowing access to all but the large mammals; 2) the “S/I” plots (10 x 10 cm electrical mesh fence) excluded all medium-sized mammals. Note that the bottom 10 cm of this fence remained non-electrified to enable safe access for small mammals; 3) the “I” plots (2 x 2 cm metal mesh fence) excluded all mammals. We double-folded the mesh at the bottom 50 cm to reduce the mesh size to smaller than 1 x 1 cm openings; and 4) the “None” plots were surrounded by a 1 m tall mosquito net (1.5 x 2 mm) to exclude all animals. The top of the plot was covered with a mosquito-meshed wooden frame mounted to the corner posts (roof). We treated these plots a few times with biocompatible insecticide (Clean kill original, Eco Belle GmbH, Waldshut-Tiengen, Germany) to remove insects that might have entered during data collection or that hatched from the soil, but amounts were negligible and did not impact soil moisture conditions within these plots.
To assess whether the design of the “None” exclosure (mesh and roof) affected the response variables within the plots and, therefore, influenced the results, we established an additional six “micro-climate control” exclosures (one in each of the six grasslands) (Risch and others 2013, 2015). These exclosures were built as the “None” exclosures but were open at the bottom (20 cm) of the 3-m side of the fence facing away from the prevailing wind direction to allow invertebrates to enter. A 20-cm high and 3-m long strip of metal mesh was used to block access to small mammals. Thus, this construction allowed a comparable micro-climate to the “None” plots, but also a comparable feeding pressure by invertebrates to the “I” plots. We compared various properties within these exclosures against one another to assess if our construction altered the conditions in the “None” plots. We showed that differences in plant (e.g., vegetation height, aboveground biomass) and soil properties (e.g., soil temperature, moisture) found between the “I” and the “None” treatments were not due to the construction of the “None” exclosure, but a function of animal exclusions, although the amount of UV light reaching the plant canopy was significantly reduced (Risch and others 2013).
Aboveground invertebrate sampling
Aboveground invertebrates were sampled with two different methods to capture both ground- and plant-dwelling organisms: 1) we randomly placed two pitfall traps (67 mm in diameter, covered with a roof) filled with 20% propylene glycol in one 1 x 1 m subplot of the 2 x 3 m treatment plots in spring 2013 (May) and emptied them every two weeks until late September 2013 (Vandegehuchte and others 2017b, 2018). A pitfall trap consisted of a plastic cylinder (13 cm depth, 6.75 cm diameter). Within each cylinder we placed a 100 ml plastic vial with outer diameter 6.70 cm and on top of the cylinder we placed a plastic funnel to guide the invertebrates into the vials. Each trap was cover with a cone-shaped and transparent plastic roof to protect the trap from rain (Vandegehuchte and others 2017b, 2018). Note that in the “None” plots only one trap was placed as control to check for effectiveness of the exclosure. 2) We vacuumed all invertebrates from a 60 x 60 cm area on another 1 x 1 m subplot with a suction sampler (Vortis, Burkhard manufacturing CO, Ltd., Rickmansworth, Hertfordshire, UK) every month from June to September 2013 (Vandegehuchte and others 2017b, 2018). For this purpose, we quickly placed a square plastic frame (60 x 60 x 40 cm) with a closable mosquito mesh sleeve attached to the top edge into the plot from the outside. The suction sample was then inserted into through the sleeve and operated for 45 s to collect the invertebrates (Vandegehuchte and others 2017b, 2018).
We sorted the ≈100 000 individuals collected with both methods by hand and identified each individual morphologically to the lowest taxonomic level feasible (59 taxa, including orders, suborders, subfamilies, families; phylum for Mollusca). These taxa belonged to the following feeding types: 19 herbivores, 16 detritivores, 9 predators, 8 mixed feeders, 5 omnivores and 2 non-classified feeders (or not feeding as adults) (Vandegehuchte and others 2017b). We summed the numbers from the two pitfall traps and the suction sampling over the course of the 2013 season to represent the aboveground invertebrate abundance and community composition of a plot. Note: we did not specifically attempt to catch flying invertebrates with e.g., sticky traps, thus a few flying insects may have been missed with our vacuum sampling approach.
Sampling of plant properties
The vascular plant species composition was assessed at peak biomass every summer (July) by estimating the frequency of occurrence of each species with the pin count method in each plot (Frank and McNaughton 1990). A total of 172 taxa occurred within our 90 plots and we calculated plant species richness for each plot separately. We used the 2013 data in this study. Plant quality was assessed every year in July and September; here we use plant quality at the end of the experiment (September 2013). Two 10 x 100 cm wide strips of vegetation per plot were clipped, combined, dried at 65°C, and ground (Pulverisette 16, Fritsch, Idar-Oberstein, Germany) to pass through a 0.5 mm sieve. Twenty randomly selected samples across all treatments were analysed for N (Leco TruSpec Analyser, Leco, St. Joseph, Michigan, USA) (Vandegehuchte and others 2015). Nitrogen concentrations of the other samples were then estimated from models established for the experiment and the entire SNP relating Fourier transform-near infrared reflectance (FT-NIR) spectra to the measured values of N using a multi-purpose FT-NIR spectrometer (Bruker Optics, Fällanden, Switzerland) (Vandegehuchte and others 2015). Root biomass was sampled every fall by collecting five 2.2 cm diameter x 10 cm deep soil samples (Giddings Machine Company, Windsor, CO, USA) per plot (450 samples year-1). The samples were dried at 30 °C and roots were sorted from the sample by hand. We sorted each sample for 1 h which allowed to retrieve over 90% of all roots present in the samples (Risch and others 2013). The roots were then dried at 65 °C for 48 and weighed to the nearest mg. We averaged the values per plot and used the 2013 data only in this study.
Sampling of edaphic communities
In 2009, 2010, and 2011 we collected three composited soil samples (5 cm diameter x 10 cm depth; AMS Samplers, American Falls, ID, USA) and assessed bacterial community structure using T-RFLP profiling (Liu and others 1997; Blackwood and others 2003; Hodel and others 2014). We detected a total of 89 operational taxonomic units (OTUs). These values are in accordance with other studies reporting OTU richness (Wirthner and others 2011; Zumsteg and others 2012; Meola and others 2014) using T-RFLP profiling, a method that detects the most abundant, and thus likely, the most relevant, taxa. We averaged the data over the three years of collections for our calculations. Microbial biomass carbon (MBC) was determined with the substrate-induced method (Anderson and Domsch 1978) every fall (September) between 2009 and 2013 by collecting three mineral soil samples (5 cm diameter × 10 cm mineral soil core, AMS Samplers, American Falls, ID, USA). The three samples were combined (90 samples for each sampling year), immediately put on ice, taken to the laboratory, passed through a 2-mm sieve and stored at 4°C. Again, we only used the 2013 data in this study.
Soil samples (5 cm diameter x 10 cm depth) to extract soil arthropods were collected in June, July, and August 2011 with a soil corer lined with a plastic sleeve to ensure an undisturbed sample (total of 270 samples). The plastic line core was immediately sealed on both ends using cling film and put into a cooler. All plots were sampled within three days and the extraction of arthropods started the evening of the sampling day using a high-gradient Tullgren funnel apparatus (Crossley and Blair 1991; Vandegehuchte and others 2015). Samples were kept in the extractor for four days and the soil arthropods were collected in 95% ethanol. All individuals were counted and each individual was identified morphologically to the lowest level feasible [76 taxa, including orders, suborders, subfamilies, families (Protura, Thysanoptera, Aphidina, Psylina, Coleoptera, Brachycera, Nematocera, Auchenorryncha, Heteroptera, Formicidae); sub-phylum for Myriapoda, for Acari and Collembola also including morpho-species). Note that we also included larval stages (nine of the 76 taxa) (Vandegehuchte and others 2015). All data were summed over the season. A detailed species list for mites and collembolans is published (Vandegehuchte and others 2017a) [https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0118679.s001]. Earthworms are rare in the SNP and therefore were not included. We collected eight random 2.2 cm diameter x 10 cm deep soil cores from each plot in September 2013 to determine the soil nematode community composition. The samples were mixed and the nematodes were extracted from 100 ml of fresh soil using Oostenbrink elutriators (Oostenbrink 1960). All nematodes in a 1 ml of the 10 ml extract were counted, a minimum of 150 individuals sample-1 were identified to genus or family level using (Bongers 1988), the numbers of all nematodes were extrapolated to the entire sample and expressed for a 100 g dry sample. In total we identified 63 genus or family levels (Vandegehuchte and others 2015). The list of all the nematodes found is published (Vandegehuchte and others 2015) [http://www.oikosjournal.org/appendix/oik-03341] or DOI: [doi: 10.1111/oik.03341].
We are aware that sampling soil microbes from 2009 to 2011 and soil arthropods in 2011 was not ideal, but we are positive that this does not bias the results. Most of the parameters measured in our experiment either already showed a treatment response after the first growing season (e.g., plant biomass) or did not respond over the entire time experiment (e.g., microbial biomass C). The microbial community composition (2009 – 2011) was highly influenced by inter-annual differences in temperature and precipitation, but did not differ between treatments or vegetation types (Hodel and others 2014). We therefore felt comfortable using the 2009 through 2011 data for describing the soil microbial community in our experimental treatments. Similarly, we are positive that our soil arthropod data are representative. We did assess soil arthropods in August 2012 and found no differences to the August 2011 data. However, we did not feel comfortable combining the 2011 June, July, August data with only August data for 2012 for our analyses.
Sampling of soil properties
We collected three soil samples (5 cm diameter x 10 cm depth) in each plot in September 2013 after removing the vegetation. First, we collected the top layer of mineral soil rich in organic matter, the surface organic layer or rhizosphere, typically 1 to 3 cm in depth with a soil corer (AMS Samples, American Falls, Idaho, USA). Second, we collected a 10 cm mineral soil core beneath this surface layer. The cores for each layer were composited, dried at 65 °C for 48 h and fine-ground to pass a 0.5 mm screen. We then analysed all samples for total C using a Leco TruSpec Analyser (Leco, St. Joseph, Michigan, USA). Mineral soil pH was measured potentiometrically in 1:2 soil:CaCl2 solution with an equilibration time of 30 min.
Soil net N mineralisation was assessed during the 2013 growing season (Risch and others 2015). For this purpose, we randomly collected a 5 cm diameter x10 cm deep soil sample with a soil corer (AMS Samples, American Falls, Idaho, USA) after clipping the vegetation in June 2013. After weighing and sieving (4 mm mesh) the soil, we extracted a 20 g subsample in 1 mol l-1 KCl for 1.5 h on an end-over-end shaker and thereafter filtered it through ashless folded filter paper (DF 5895 150, ALBET LabScience, Hahnenmühle FineArt GmbH, Dassel, Germany). From these filtrates NO3- concentrations were measured colorimetrically (Norman and Stucki 1981) and NH4+with flow injection analysis (FIAS 300, Perkin Elmer, Waltham Massachusetts, USA) (Risch and others 2015). We dried the rest of the sample 105 °C to constant mass to determine fine,fraction bulk density. A second soil sample was collected within each plot in June 2013 with a corer lined with a 5 x 13 cm aluminium cylinder. The corer was driven 11.5 cm deep into the soil so that the top 1.5 cm of the cylinder remained empty. Into this space we placed a polyester bag (250 µm) filled an ion-exchanger resin to capture the incoming N. The bag was filled with a 1:1 mixture of acidic and alkaline exchanger resin (ion-exchanger I KA/ion exchanger IIIAA, Merck AG, Darmstadt, Germany). We then removed 1.5 cm soil at the bottom of the cylinder and placed a second resin exchanger bag into this space to capture the N leached from the soil column. To assure that the exchange resin was saturated with H+ and Cl- prior to filling the bags, the mixture was stirred with 1.2 ml l-1 HCl for 1 h and then rinsed with demineralized water until the electrical conductivity of the water reached 5 µm cm-1. The cylinder with the resin bags in place was reinserted into the soil with the top flush to the soil surface and incubated for three months. We recollected the cylinders in September 2013. Each resin bag and 20 g of sieved soil (4 mm mesh) from each cylinder were then separately extracted with KCl and NO3- and NH4+ concentrations were measured. Nitrate and NH4+ concentrations of all samples were then converted to a content basis by multiplying their values with fine fraction bulk density. Net N mineralisation was thereafter calculated as the difference between the N content of the samples collected at the end of the three-month incubation (including the N extracted from the bottom resin bag) and the N content at the beginning of the incubation (Risch and others 2015).
Soil CO2 emissions were measured every two weeks between 0900 and 1700 hrs from early May through late September 2013 with a PP-Systems SRC-1 soil respiration chamber (15 cm high, 10 cm diameter; closed circuit) attached to a PP-Systems EGM-4 infrared gas analyser (PP-Systems, Amesbury, MA, USA) on two locations per plot (Risch and others 2013). The chamber was placed on randomly placed, permanently installed PVC collars (10 cm diameter) driven 5 cm into the soil at the beginning of the study (Risch and others 2013). Freshly germinated plants growing within the collars were removed prior to each measurement to avoid measuring plant respiration or photosynthesis. The two measurements collected per plot and sampling date were averaged.
Soil moisture (with time domain reflectometry; Field-Scout TDR-100, Spectrum Technologies, Plainfield, Illionois, USA) and temperature (with a waterproof digital pocket thermometer; Barnstead International, Dubuque, Iowa, USA) were measured at five random locations per plot every two weeks during the growing seasons during the experiment for the 0 to 10 cm depth (Risch and others 2013, 2015). As soil moisture and soil temperature were highly negatively correlated (Risch and others 2013), we only used soil moisture for this study. We used plot-level averages of all values available to capture soil moisture variability during the five years of the experiment. The results remained unchanged when we only used soil moisture from the 2013 growing season.
Numeral calculations and statistical analyses
Ecosystem coupling. We conducted principal component analyses (PCAs; unscaled) at the complete dataset level using the abundances of each taxonomical entity to describe each of the five different communities used in this study: aboveground-dwelling invertebrates, vascular plants, soil microorganisms, soil arthropods and soil nematodes. We retained the first two components (PCA axis 1 and PCA axis 2) of each analysis as we found them to adequately represent the temporal and spatial variability of our 90 treatment plots in previous studies55,67. Together they explained a total of 71.70% of the variation for aboveground invertebrates, 44.36% for plants, 44.85% for soil microorganisms, 61.85% for soil arthropods and 77.19% for soil nematodes. In addition, we used soil pH and soil organic C content as a proxy for soil chemical properties, soil bulk density as a proxy for soil physical properties and soil moisture (negatively correlated with soil temperature) as a proxy for soil micro-climatic conditions for an overall total of fourteen constituents.
We calculated ecosystem coupling9 for each exclosure treatment within each vegetation type (i.e., 2  5 treatment combinations in total) as an integrated measure of pairwise ecological interactions between ecosystem constituents representing ecological communities and the soil abiotic environment. These ecological interactions are defined by non-parametric Spearman rank correlation analyses between two constituents, excluding interactions involving two abiotic constituents (e.g., soil pH vs. soil moisture) and interactions between the first (PC1) and second (PC2) component of each community type, as these are orthogonal by definition. Interactions between abiotic constituents were excluded from the analyses because the focus of our study was on communities and how they interact with one another and their surrounding environment; therefore, including abiotic-abiotic interactions was not of interest here. Given that the effectiveness of our experimental design resulted in that no community composition data of aboveground-dwelling invertebrates was available for the “None” plots (all animals excluded), only thirteen instead of fourteen constituents were included in the ecosystem coupling calculations for this treatment. The complete absence of aboveground invertebrates represents the most extreme case of disturbance between aboveground animal communities and the rest of the ecosystem constituents. This may have resulted in a slight overestimation of ecosystem coupling for these plots.
	Average ecosystem coupling was calculated as follows:
Ecosystem coupling=
where Xi is the absolute Coupling was calculated value of the Spearman’s rho coefficient of the ith correlation for each treatment within each vegetation type (i.e., based on nine replicates each), considering and n is the number of pairwise comparisons considered (n = a total of 80; interactions (56 in the case of the “None” treatment). We considered a total of 40 biotic-biotic interactions (i.e., concerning two community-level principal components such as plants and microbes; 24 in the case of the “None” treatment) and 40 abiotic-biotic (i.e., concerning one community-level principal component and one abiotic factor, e.g., plant community and soil properties; 32 in the case of the “None” treatment).	Coupling was calculated for each treatment within each vegetation type (i.e., based on nine replicates each), considering a total of 80 interactions (56 in the case of the “None” treatment). We considered a total of 40 biotic-biotic interactions (i.e., concerning two community-level principal components such as plants and microbes; 24 in the case of the “None” treatment) and 40 abiotic-biotic (i.e., concerning one community-level principal component and one abiotic factor, e.g., plant community and soil properties; 32 in the case of the “None” treatment).
To establish whether constituents were significantly and positively coupled within treatments (i.e., the average of their correlation coefficients were greater than in a null model where correlation only happens by chance), we calculated one-tailed p-values based on permutation tests with 999 permutations.

We considered six ecosystem functions and process rates commonly used to assess ecosystem functioning (Meyer and others 2015; Manning and others 2018). Plant N content represents a measure of forage quality, while plant richness has been shown to stabilise biomass production, thus allowing the system to respond to changes in herbivory. Soil net N mineralisation, soil respiration, root biomass, and microbial biomass represent fluxes or stocks of energy. For all functions and processes higher values represent higher functioning (Manning and others 2018). All these variables were measured in the last year of the experiment (2013). We then quantified ecosystem multifunctionality using the multiple threshold approach (Byrnes and others 2014; Manning and others 2018), which considers the number of functions that are above a certain threshold, over a series of threshold values (typically 10-99%) that are defined based on the maximum value of each function. We weighted all our functions equally for these calculations (Manning and others 2018). The number of functions in a plot with values higher than a given threshold value for the respective function is summed up. The sum represents ecosystem multifunctionality for that plot. Given that choosing any particular threshold as a measure of ecosystem multifunctionality is arbitrary, we calculated the average of thresholds from 10-90% (in 10% intervals) as a more integrated representation of ecosystem multifunctionality.
We used Pearson correlations to explore the relationships between ecosystem coupling (all interactions, biotic-biotic interactions, abiotic-biotic interactions involving above- and belowground constituents, and all interactions, biotic-biotic interactions, abiotic-biotic interactions involving belowground constituents only) and ecosystem multifunctionality by calculating the slopes of all relationships between ecosystem coupling and multifunctionality for all thresholds between 10 and 99%. We also related ecosystem coupling with the average of multifunctionality at thresholds between 30-80% as explained before and considered this correlation as a robust indication of the type of association between these two variables. In addition, we explored the relationships between ecosystem coupling (all interactions, biotic-biotic interactions, abiotic-biotic interactions involving above- and belowground constituents, and all interactions, biotic-biotic interactions, abiotic-biotic interactions involving belowground constituents only) and individual ecosystem functions. The effects of exclosures and vegetation type on individual functions and multifunctionality were evaluated using linear mixed effects models ('lme' function of the nlme package), with exclosure and vegetation type as fixed effects and fence as a random factor. All statistical analyses and numerical calculations were done in R version 3.4.0 (R Core Team 2016).

#References

- Anderson J, Domsch K. 1978. A physiological method for the quantitative measurement of microbial biomass in soil. Soil Biol Biochem 10:215–21.
- Blackwood CB, Marsh T, Kim S-H, Paul EA. 2003. Terminal Restriction Fragment Length Polymorphism Data Analysis for Quantitative Comparison of Microbial Communities. Appl Environ Microbiol 69:926–32. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC143601/
- Bongers T. 1988. De nematoden von Nederland. Schoorl, The Netherlands: Pirola
- Byrnes JEK, Gamfeldt L, Isbell F, Lefcheck JS, Griffin JN, Hector A, Cardinale BJ, Hooper DU, Dee LE, Duffy JE. 2014. Investigating the relationship between biodiversity and ecosystem multifunctionality: Challenges and solutions. Methods Ecol Evol 5:111–24.
- Crossley DAJ, Blair JM. 1991. A high-efficiency low-technology Tulgren-type extractor for soil microarthopods. Agric Ecosyst Environ 34:187–92.
- Dudley N. 2008. Guidelines for applying protected area managment categories. Gland: IUCN
- Frank DA, McNaughton SJ. 1990. Aboveground biomass estimation with the canopy intercept method: A plant growth form caveat. Oikos 57:57–60.
- Haynes AG, Schütz M, Buchmann N, Page-Dumroese DS, Busse MD, Risch AC. 2014. Linkages between grazing history and herbivore exclusion on decomposition rates in mineral soils of subalpine grasslands. Plant Soil 374.
- Hodel M, Schütz M, Vandegehuchte ML, Frey B, Albrecht M, Busse MD, Risch AC. 2014. Does the aboveground herbivore assemblage influence soil bacterial community composition and richness in subalpine grasslands? Microb Ecol 68:584–95.
- Liu WT, Marsh TL, Cheng H, Forney LJ. 1997. Characterization of microbial diversity by determining terminal restriction fragment length polymorphisms of genes encoding 16S rRNA. Appl Environ Microbiol 63:4516–22. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC168770/
- Manning P, van der Plas F, Soliveres S, Allan E, Maestre FT, Mace G, Whittingham MJ, Fischer M. 2018. Redefining ecosystem multifunctionality. Nat Ecol Evol 2:427–36. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-017-0461-7
- Meola M, Lazzaro A, Zeyer J. 2014. Diversity, resistance and resilience of the bacterial communities at two alpine glacier forefields after a reciprocal soil transplantation. Environ Microbiol 16:1918–34. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1462-2920.12435
- Meyer ST, Koch C, Weisser WW. 2015. Towards a standardized Rapid Ecosystem Function Assessment (REFA). Trends Ecol Evol 30:390–7. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169534715000968
- Norman R., Stucki JW. 1981. The determination of nitrate and nitrite in soil extracts by ultraviolet spectrophotometry. Soil Sci Soc Am J 45:347–53.
- Ochoa-Hueso R. 2016. Non-linear disruption of ecological interactions in response to nitrogen deposition. Ecology 87:2802–2814.
- Oostenbrink M. 1960. Estimating nematode populations by some selected methods. In: Sasser NJ, Jenkins WR, editors. Nematology. Chapel Hill, NC, USA: University of North Carolina Press. pp 85–101.
- R Core Team. 2016. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing
- Risch AC, Haynes AG, Busse MD, Filli F, Schütz M. 2013. The response of soil CO2 fluxes to progressively excluding vertebrate and invertebrate herbivores depends on ecosystem type. Ecosystems 16:1192–202.
- Risch AC, Schütz M, Vandegehuchte ML, Van Der Putten WH, Duyts H, Raschein U, Gwiazdowicz DJ, Busse MD, Page-Dumroese DS, Zimmermann S. 2015. Aboveground vertebrate and invertebrate herbivore impact on net N mineralization in subalpine grasslands. Ecology 96:3312–22.
- Schütz M, Risch AC, Achermann G, Thiel-Egenter C, Page-Dumroese DS, Jurgensen MF, Edwards PJ. 2006. Phosphorus translocation by red deer on a subalpine grassland in the Central European Alps. Ecosystems 9:624–633.
- Schütz M, Risch AC, Leuzinger E, Krüsi BO, Achermann G. 2003. Impact of herbivory by red deer (Cervus elaphus L.) on patterns and processes in subalpine grasslands in the Swiss National Park. For Ecol Manage 181:177–88.
- Vandegehuchte ML, van der Putten WH, Duyts H, Schütz M, Risch AC. 2017a. Aboveground mammal and invertebrate exclusions cause consistent changes in soil food webs of two subalpine grassland types, but mechanisms are system-speciﬁc. Oikos 126:212–23.
- Vandegehuchte ML, Raschein U, Schütz M, Gwiazdowicz DJ, Risch AC. 2015. Indirect short- and long-term effects of aboveground invertebrate and vertebrate herbivores on soil microarthropod communities. PLoS One 10:e0118679.
- Vandegehuchte ML, Schütz M, de Schaetzen F, Risch AC. 2017b. Mammal-induced trophic cascades in invertebrate food webs are modulated by grazing intensity in subalpine grassland. J Anim Ecol 86:1434–46.
- Vandegehuchte ML, Trivellone V, Schütz M, Firn J, de Schaetzen F, Risch AC. 2018. Mammalian herbivores affect leafhoppers associated with specific plant functional types at different timescales. Funct Ecol 32:545–55.
- Wirthner S, Frey B, Busse MD, Schütz M, Risch AC. 2011. Effects of wild boar (Sus scrofa L.) rooting on the bacterial community structure in mixed-hardwood forest soils in Switzerland. Eur J Soil Biol 47:296–302. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejsobi.2011.07.003
- Zumsteg A, Luster J, Göransson H, Smittenberg RH, Brunner I, Bernasconi SM, Zeyer J, Frey B. 2012. Bacterial, Archaeal and Fungal Succession in the Forefield of a Receding Glacier. Microb Ecol 63:552–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00248-011-9991-8

ecosystem-coupling

display_name: ecosystem-coupling

ecosystem-functions

display_name: ecosystem-functions

ecosystem-multifunctionality

display_name: ecosystem-multifunctionality

exclusion

display_name: exclusion

grassland

display_name: grassland

grazing

display_name: grazing

invertebrates

display_name: invertebrates

subalpine

display_name: subalpine

swiss-national-park

display_name: swiss-national-park

vertebrates

display_name: vertebrates

educ

en: Education, culture and sport

envidat

en: EnviDat: the Environmental Data Portal

en: EnviDat is the WSL data portal providing unified and managed access to environmental monitoring and research data. The portal has the capability to host and publish data sets. Through the sharing of unique and high-value data sets worldwide, EnviDat fosters research and contributes to advancing environmental science.

en: Ecosystem coupling and multifunctionality - exclosure experiment


maintainer: Yaquan Chang

en: hypervolume habitat-heterogeneity hengduan-mountains model-residuals phytodiversity

state: active

type: dataset

en: Eurasia plant family richness map

media_type: application/zip

en: This is the plant family level richness map at the Eurasia scale calculated from https://www.nature.com/articles/s41597-021-00997-6

format: ZIP

mimetype: application/zip

en: Eurasia SR and heteorgeneity

media_type: text/csv

en: This table is used for the Eurasia scale analyses, including both family level species richness map and different heterogeneity predictors

format: CSV

mimetype: text/csv

en: HDM heterogeneity scales

en: The Heterogeneity matrics in the Hengduan mountain scale

en: Hengduan plant family richness map

en: This is the family level plant richness map in the Hengduan mountain scale at 1km resoution

en: Plant range map at Hengduan scale

en: This is the plant range map at the Hengduan mountain scale based on species distribution model, elevation, and county level distribution information

format: SERVICE

en: This research data is used to re includes 1 km resolution seed plant species range maps for the Hengduan mountain region (southwest China), elevation information for each species, family-level plant richness data, and habitat heterogeneity data at both Eurasia and Hengduan mountain regions. This research data includes 1 km resolution seed plant species range maps for the Hengduan mountain region (southwest China), elevation information for each species, family-level plant richness data, and habitat heterogeneity data at both Eurasia and Hengduan mountain regions.

habitat-heterogeneity

display_name: habitat-heterogeneity

hengduan-mountains

display_name: hengduan-mountains

hypervolume

display_name: hypervolume

model-residuals

display_name: model-residuals

phytodiversity

display_name: phytodiversity

educ

fr: Éducation, culture et sport

de: Bildung, Kultur und Sport

it: Istruzione, cultura e sport

fr: EnviDat: le portail de données environnementales

de: EnviDat: das Umwelt-Datenportal

it: EnviDat: il portale dei dati ambientali

fr: EnviDat est le portail de données du WSL; il offre un accès uniformisé et réglementé aux données de surveillance et de recherche en matière d’environnement. Ce portail est capable d’héberger et de publier des ensembles de données précieuses et uniques, qui sont partagées aux quatre coins de la planète. Ce faisant, EnviDat favorise la recherche et contribue à l’avancement des sciences environnementales.

de: EnviDat ist das Datenportal der WSL für einen einheitlichen und verwalteten Zugang zu Umweltdaten aus Monitoring- und Forschungsprojekten. Auf dem Portal können Datensätze gehostet und veröffentlicht werden. Durch die weltweite Bereitstellung einzigartiger und wertvoller Datensätze leistet EnviDat einen Beitrag zur Forschung im Bereich der Umweltwissenschaften.

it: EnviDat è il portale dati del WSL che fornisce un accesso unificato e gestito ai dati di monitoraggio ambientale e di ricerca. Il portale ha la capacità di ospitare e pubblicare serie di dati preziosi e unici che vengono condivisi in tutto il mondo. Così facendo, EnviDat promuove la ricerca e contribuisce al progresso della scienza ambientale.

political_level: other

wsl

capacity: public

type: organization

approval_status: approved

key: guid

key: uri

value: Envidat Harvester

en: Phytodiversity is associated with habitat heterogeneity from Eurasia to Hengduan


snow-drift-station-snow-and-air-data

maintainer: Benjamin Walter

title_for_slug: snow-drift-station-snow-and-air-data

en: temperature snow snow-height snow-depth raclets snow-temperature

en: Snow Surface Temperature

en: The snow surface temperature (°C) was measured with a Campbell SI-111 at 0.7 m above ground. The time is given in UTC+1.

format: XLS

en: Air Temperature

en: The air temperature (°C) was measured with a Campbell CS-215 which was mounted at a height of 2.2 m above ground. The time is given in UTC+1.

en: Snow Depth

en: The snow depth (cm) was measured with a Lufft SHM-31 which was mounted at 1.7 m above ground. The time is given in UTC+1.

en: Relative Humidity

en: The relative humidity (%) was measured with a Campbell CS-215 at a height of 2.2 m above ground. The time is given in UTC+1.

en: Snow and air data was monitored at Gotschnagrat (LON: 46.859 LAT: 9.849) by an infrarot radiometer (Campbell SI-111) for snow temperature (°C), a snow height sensor (Lufft SHM-31) for snow height change (cm) and a temperature and humidity sensor (Campbell CS-215) for air temperature (°C) and relative humidity (%). No filter was applied to the sensors and the smapling frequency was 1 Hz.

raclets

display_name: raclets

snow

display_name: snow

snow-depth

display_name: snow-depth

snow-height

display_name: snow-height

snow-temperature

display_name: snow-temperature

temperature

display_name: temperature

educ

en: Education, culture and sport

en: Snow Drift Station - Snow and Air Data


maintainer: EnviDat Support

en: free-climate-data precipitation century climate air-temperature maximum-temperature timeseries minimum-temperature climate-layers

en: CHELSA Technical Documentation

media_type: application/pdf

en: As the CHELSA project is continuously expanded, certain new parameters, time scales etc. are not included anymore in the original publication (Karger et al. 2017). We are therefore provide this document as a guideline of the current climatic parameters available and will expand it as new parameters or time periods will become available. Please refer to the version history for changes made in the document.

format: PDF

mimetype: application/pdf

en: Data Access

format: GeoTIFF

en:
CHELSAcruts is a delta change monthly climate dataset for the years 1901-2016 for mean monthly maximum temperatures, mean monthly minimum temperatures, and monthly precipitation sum. Here we use the delta change method by B-spline interpolation of anomalies (deltas) of the CRU TS 4.01 dataset. Anomalies were interpolated between all CRU TS grid cells and are then added (for temperature variables) or multiplied (in case of precipitation) to high resolution climate data from CHELSA V1.2 (Karger et al. 2017, Scientific Data). This method has the assumption that climate only varies on the scale of the coarser (CRU TS) dataset, and the spatial pattern (from CHELSA) is consistent over time. This is certainly a rather crude assumption, and for time periods for which more accurate data is available CHELSAcruts should be avoided if possible (e.g. use CHELSA V1.2 for 1979-2015). Different to CHELSA V1.2, CHELSAcruts does not take changing wind patterns, or temperature lapse rates into account, but rather expects them to be constant over time, and similar to the long term averages.

CHELSAcruts is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic (CC BY 2.0) license.

air-temperature

display_name: air-temperature

century

display_name: century

climate

display_name: climate

climate-layers

display_name: climate-layers

free-climate-data

display_name: free-climate-data

maximum-temperature

display_name: maximum-temperature

minimum-temperature

display_name: minimum-temperature

precipitation

display_name: precipitation

timeseries

display_name: timeseries

envidat

en: EnviDat: the Environmental Data Portal

en: EnviDat is the WSL data portal providing unified and managed access to environmental monitoring and research data. The portal has the capability to host and publish data sets. Through the sharing of unique and high-value data sets worldwide, EnviDat fosters research and contributes to advancing environmental science.

en: CHELSAcruts -  High resolution temperature and precipitation timeseries for the 20th century and beyond


maintainer: Avalanche Warning Service SLF

en: Avalanche fatalities per year in Switzerland since 1936/1937

en:
Attention: this data is not updated after 2022 anymore.
This dataset contains the statistics on the number of avalanche fatalities per hydrological year in Switzerland. The data set commences with the beginning of the hydrological year 1936/37 on 01/10/1936. After the completion of a hydrological year, the new data is appended to the existing dataset.
The following information is contained (by column and column title):
 - hydrological year
 - number of fatalities in the backcountry (=tour)
 - number of fatalities in terrain close to ski areas (=offpiste)
 - number of fatalities on transportation corridors including ski runs, roads, railway lines (=transportation.corridors)
 - number of fatalities in or around buildings or in settlements (= buildings)
 - sum (of all four categories)
The definition for these four categories as described in the guidelines to the avalanche accident database:
**tour**:
activities include back-country ski, snowboard or snow-shoe touring
**offpiste**:
access from ski area, generally from the top of a skilift with short hiking distances
**transportation.corridors** ([Techel et al., 2016](http://www.geogr-helv.net/71/147/2016/ )):
people travelling or recreating on open or temporarily closed
transportation corridors (e.g. a road user or a skier on a ski run) and people working on open or closed transportation corridors (e.g. maintenance crews on roads, professional rescue teams)
**buildings** ([Techel et al., 2016](http://www.geogr-helv.net/71/147/2016/ )):
people inside or just outside buildings, and workers on high alpine building
sites

avalanche-accident-statistics

display_name: avalanche-accident-statistics

avalanche-accidents

display_name: avalanche-accidents

avalanche-fatalities

display_name: avalanche-fatalities

fatalities-in-or-around-buildings

display_name: fatalities-in-or-around-buildings

fatalities-in-settlements

display_name: fatalities-in-settlements

fatalities-in-the-backcountry

display_name: fatalities-in-the-backcountry

fatalities-on-transportation-corridors

display_name: fatalities-on-transportation-corridors

en: Number of avalanche fatalities per hydrological year in Switzerland since 1936-1937


maintainer: Marcia Phillips

en: permafrost gemsstock temperature permos borehole

en: PERMOS DATA POLICY

en: Map of PERMOS borehole network

en: DATASET & PLOTS

en: Data visualiser and download service provided by PERMOS.

en:
Processed ground temperature measurements at the Gemsstock permafrost borehole in canton Uri, Switzerland. The borehole is located at 2940 m asl on a steep (50°) North-West slope (315°). The surface material is bedrock and borehole depth is 40 m. Thermistors used YSI 44008. Year of drilling 2006. This borehole is part of the Swiss Permafrost network, PERMOS (www.permos.ch). Contact phillips@slf.ch for details of processing applied.

Publications

1. A. Haberkorn, M. Phillips, R. Kenner, H. Rhyner, M. Bavay, S.P. Galos, M. Hoelzle. Thermal regime of rock and its relation to snow cover in steep Alpine rock walls: Gemsstock, central Swiss Alps. 2015. Geografiska Annaler: Series A, Physical Geography. Volume 97. Issue 3. 579–597. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/geoa.12101. 10.1111/geoa.12101.

2. R. Kenner, M. Phillips, C. Danioth, C. Denier, P. Thee, A. Zgraggen. Investigation of rock and ice loss in a recently deglaciated mountain rock wall using terrestrial laser scanning: Gemsstock, Swiss Alps. 2011. Cold Regions Science and Technology. Volume 67. Issue 3. 157–164. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.coldregions.2011.04.006. 10.1016/j.coldregions.2011.04.006.

borehole

display_name: borehole

gemsstock

display_name: gemsstock

permafrost

display_name: permafrost

permos

display_name: permos

temperature

display_name: temperature

en: Processed permafrost borehole data (2940 m asl), Gemsstock, Switzerland


maintainer: M. Carol Resch

en: long-term-experiment nematodes topsoil-removal grassland vegetation diversity restoration

en: Coordinates of one research plot were wrong. This was corrected in the current version of the file.

en: Plant community composition (plant species)

en:
Plot: Plot ID combining treatment code and plot number (in total 55 plots)

Treatment: Three restoration treatments and two reference treatments. Initial=intensively managed grasslands; Harvest only= multiple hay harvest (2-3 times) per years; Topsoil= Topsoil removal (upper 10-30 cm); Topsoil+Propagules= Topsoil removal (upper 10-30 cm) combined with introduction of target plant species; Target= species-rich ancient grasslands

column 3-252: Plant abundance per species (in total 252 plant species) expressed as cover percentage estimation according to van der Maarel (vdM 1979; 7 classes: 1-7); nomenclature according to Lauber & Wagner (1996)

en: Nematode colonizer-persister classes

en:
Plot: Plot ID combining treatment code and plot number (in total 55 plots)

Treatment: Three restoration treatments and two reference treatments. Initial=intensively managed grasslands; Harvest only= multiple hay harvest (2-3 times) per years; Topsoil= Topsoil removal (upper 10-30 cm); Topsoil+Propagules= Topsoil removal (upper 10-30 cm) combined with introduction of target plant species; Target= species-rich ancient grasslands

CP1.a: C-P (colonizer-persister) class 1 nematode abundance (individuals per 100g dry soil); C-P classification according to Bongers 1990; equivalent to enrichment indicators according to Ferris, Bongers, & de Goede 2001
CP2.a: C-P (colonizer-persister) class 2 nematode abundance (individuals per 100g dry soil); C-P classification according to Bongers 1990; equivalent to stress indicators according to Ferris, Bongers, & de Goede 2001
CP3.a: C-P (colonizer-persister) class 3 nematode abundance (individuals per 100g dry soil); C-P classification according to Bongers 1990
CP4.a: C-P (colonizer-persister) class 4 nematode abundance (individuals per 100g dry soil); C-P classification according to Bongers 1990
CP5.a: C-P (colonizer-persister) class 5 nematode abundance (individuals per 100g dry soil); C-P classification according to Bongers 1990

en: Nematode feeding types

en:
Plot: Plot ID combining treatment code and plot number (in total 55 plots)

Treatment: Three restoration treatments and two reference treatments. Initial=intensively managed grasslands; Harvest only= multiple hay harvest (2-3 times) per years; Topsoil= Topsoil removal (upper 10-30 cm); Topsoil+Propagules= Topsoil removal (upper 10-30 cm) combined with introduction of target plant species; Target= species-rich ancient grasslands

He.ecto.a: Herbivorous ectoparasite nematode abundance (individuals per 100g dry soil); classification according to Sieriebriennikov, Ferris, & de Goede, 2014

He.endo.a: Herbivorous endoparasite nematode abundance (individuals per 100g dry soil); classification according to Sieriebriennikov, Ferris, & de Goede, 2014

Ba.a: Bacterivorous nematode abundance (individuals per 100g dry soil); classification according to Sieriebriennikov, Ferris, & de Goede, 2014

Fu.a: Fungivorous nematode abundance (individuals per 100g dry soil); classification according to Sieriebriennikov, Ferris, & de Goede, 2014

Om.a: Omnivorous nematode abundance (individuals per 100g dry soil); classification according to Sieriebriennikov, Ferris, & de Goede, 2014

Ca.a: Carnivorous nematode abundance (individuals per 100g dry soil); classification according to Sieriebriennikov, Ferris, & de Goede, 2014

en: Nemadotes and vegetation

en:
Plot: Plot ID combining treatment code and plot number (in total 55 plots)

Treatment: Three restoration treatments and two reference treatments. Initial=intensively managed grasslands; Harvest only= multiple hay harvest (2-3 times) per years; Topsoil= Topsoil removal (upper 10-30 cm); Topsoil+Propagules= Topsoil removal (upper 10-30 cm) combined with introduction of target plant species; Target= species-rich ancient grasslands

X: X-Coordinate

Y: Y-Coordinate

Ri.veg: Total number of plant species

Div.veg: Shannon diversity of plant species

Ri.nem: Total number of nematode families

Div.nem: Shannon diversity of nematode families

abund: Total nematode abundance (individuals per 100g dry soil)

MI: Maturity index according to Bongers 1990; calculations done in online tool NINJA (Sieriebriennikov, Ferris, & de Goede, 2014)

PPI: Plant parasite index according to Bongers 1990; calculations done in online tool NINJA (Sieriebriennikov, Ferris, & de Goede, 2014)

PPI.MI: Plant parasite to Maturity index according to Bongers, van der Meulen, & Korthals 1997; calculations done in online tool NINJA (Sieriebriennikov, Ferris, & de Goede, 2014)

CI: Channel index according to Ferris, Bongers, & de Goede 2001 (%); calculations done in online tool NINJA (Sieriebriennikov, Ferris, & de Goede, 2014)

EI: Enrichment index according to Ferris, Bongers, & de Goede 2001 (%); calculations done in online tool NINJA (Sieriebriennikov, Ferris, & de Goede, 2014)

SI: Structure index according to Ferris, Bongers, & de Goede 2001 (%); calculations done in online tool NINJA (Sieriebriennikov, Ferris, & de Goede, 2014)

He.a: Herbivorous nematode abundance (individuals per 100g dry soil); classification according to Sieriebriennikov, Ferris, & de Goede, 2014

He.ecto.a: Herbivorous ectoparasite nematode abundance (individuals per 100g dry soil); classification according to Sieriebriennikov, Ferris, & de Goede, 2014

He.endo.a: Herbivorous endoparasite nematode abundance (individuals per 100g dry soil); classification according to Sieriebriennikov, Ferris, & de Goede, 2014

Ba.a: Bacterivorous nematode abundance (individuals per 100g dry soil); classification according to Sieriebriennikov, Ferris, & de Goede, 2014

Fu.a: Fungivorous nematode abundance (individuals per 100g dry soil); classification according to Sieriebriennikov, Ferris, & de Goede, 2014

Om.a: Omnivorous nematode abundance (individuals per 100g dry soil); classification according to Sieriebriennikov, Ferris, & de Goede, 2014

Ca.a: Carnivorous nematode abundance (individuals per 100g dry soil); classification according to Sieriebriennikov, Ferris, & de Goede, 2014

Om.Ca.a	Sum of omnivorous and carnivorous nematode abundance (individuals per 100g dry soil); classification according to Sieriebriennikov, Ferris, & de Goede, 2014
CP1.a: C-P (colonizer-persister) class 1 nematode abundance (individuals per 100g dry soil); C-P classification according to Bongers 1990; equivalent to enrichment indicators according to Ferris, Bongers, & de Goede 2001

CP2.a: C-P (colonizer-persister) class 2 nematode abundance (individuals per 100g dry soil); C-P classification according to Bongers 1990; equivalent to stress indicators according to Ferris, Bongers, & de Goede 2001

CP3.a: C-P (colonizer-persister) class 3 nematode abundance (individuals per 100g dry soil); C-P classification according to Bongers 1990

CP4.a: C-P (colonizer-persister) class 4 nematode abundance (individuals per 100g dry soil); C-P classification according to Bongers 1990

CP5.a: C-P (colonizer-persister) class 5 nematode abundance (individuals per 100g dry soil); C-P classification according to Bongers 1990

CP3-5.a: Sum of C-P3, C-P4 and C-P5 nematode abundance (individuals per 100g dry soil) equivalent to structure indicators according to Ferris, Bongers, & de Goede 2001

protect.sp.pro: plant species categorized into species of concern based on their red list status in Switzerland as well as their protection status in Switzerland and the Canton Zurich (Moser, Gygax, Bäumler, Wyler, & Palese, 2002)

tar.sp: Number of target species (all species recorded in the eleven target plots plus propagules of species applied by hand, resulting in a total of 143 species)

Indi.moist: Plant indicator values for soil moisture according to Landolt et al. 2010

Indi.nutri: Plant indicator values for soil nutrients according to Landolt et al. 2010

Management: level of mowing and manuring frequency (35-40 kg N ha-1 application-1); intensity1 = mowing once and no manure; intensity2 = 2-3 times mowing and no manure; intensity3 = 2-3 times mowing and manuring; intensity4 = 4-5 times mowing and manuring

Tillage: last time of tillage

Land.use.history: for Initial plots = recent agricultural use; for all restored sites = agricultural use before restoration
Mowing	earliest date of biomass harvesting (excluding “Initial”) based on contracts between farmers and the Nature Protection Agency of Zurich

Soil.type: based on soil mapping survey 1991 (before restoration)

Soil.texture: determined by the sediment method (Gee & Bauder 1986) and classified into soil textural classes according to FAO (1990)

pH: soil pH (CaCl2)

Slope: slope gradient classes according to FAO (1990; %)

en: Nematode families

en:
Plot: Plot ID combining treatment code and plot number (in total 55 plots)

Treatment: Three restoration treatments and two reference treatments. Initial=intensively managed grasslands; Harvest only= multiple hay harvest (2-3 times) per years; Topsoil= Topsoil removal (upper 10-30 cm); Topsoil+Propagules= Topsoil removal (upper 10-30 cm) combined with introduction of target plant species; Target= species-rich ancient grasslands

column 3-41: Nematode abundance (individuals per 100g dry soil) per family; nomenclature according to Bongers 1988

en:
This dataset contains all data on which the following publication below is based.

Paper Citation:
 > Resch, M.C., Schütz, M., Graf, U., Wagenaar, R., van der Putten, W.H., Risch, A.C. 2019. Does topsoil removal in grassland restoration benefit both soil nematode and plant communities? Journal of Applied Ecology 56: 1782-1793.

Please cite this paper together with the citation for the datafile.

 Methods
 Study area and experimental settings
The study was conducted in a nature reserve (Eigental: 47° 27’ to 47° 29’ N, 8° 37’ E, 461 to 507 m a.s.l.) that is located on the Swiss Central plateau close to Zurich airport (Canton Zurich, Switzerland). The mean annual temperature in this area ranges from 8.9 to 10.6 °C, mean annual precipitation from 910 to 1260 mm [10-year average (2007-2017); MeteoSchweiz, 2018]. The main soil types are calcaric to gleyic Cambisol and Gleysols. The reserve was established in 1967 to protect small remnants of oligotrophic semi-natural grasslands (roughly 12 ha). The plant community can be characterized as Molinion and Mesobromion (semi-wet to semi-dry), depending on the site-specific groundwater level and slope inclination (Delarze, Gonseth, Eggenberg, & Vust, 2015). These remnants represent species-rich islands in an otherwise intensively managed agricultural landscape. Semi-natural grasslands covered an area of 60,000 ha in the Canton Zurich in 1939, however, by 2005 only roughly 600 ha remained (Baudirektion Kanton Zürich, 2007). In 1990, the government of Canton Zurich decided to enlarge the nature reserve Eigental. The goal was to incorporate eleven patches of 20 ha adjacent intensively farmed land and transform these patches into semi-natural grasslands. The patches had a different agricultural history, ranging from permanent (no tillage for >50 years) to temporary grassland (as part of crop rotation; last tillage <5 years). On all freshly integrated patches fertilization was stopped in 1992 and from then on biomass was harvested three times a year and removed. After 5 years without noticeable effects on vegetation composition, the Nature Conservation Agency of Canton Zurich decided to increase the restoration efforts. In 1995, a large-scale experiment was initialized to evaluate if certain treatments can facilitate restoration within a reasonable timeframe of 5 to 10 years after treatment implementation.
The three restoration treatments used were:
i. “Harvest only”: Plots are being mowed two to three times a year and the biomass is removed.
ii. “Topsoil”: Topsoil was removed to a depth of 10 to 20 cm, depending on the depth of the O and A horizon, in four randomly selected areas within each of the eleven patches in late autumn 1995. The size of each topsoil removal area depended on individual patch size and was between 2700 and 7000 m2.
iii. “Topsoil+Propagules”: Propagules from target vegetation were added on half of the area where topsoil was removed, using fresh, seed-containing hay originating from a mixture of semi-dry to semi-wet species-rich grasslands of local provenance (within a radius of 7 km). Hay applications were conducted twice in 1995 and 1996. Repeated applications were chosen to account for the low quantity of available plant material per transfer, since area ratio between receptor and donor sites was roughly 1:1. In addition, hand-collected propagules from 15 selected target species of regional provenance (within a radius of 30 km) were equally applied in 1996 and 1997.
“Topsoil” and “Topsoil+Propagules” plots are mowed once a year, and the biomass is removed. Mowing on these plots started five years after the treatment was implemented.
Eleven permanent plots of 5 m x 5 m were randomly established in each treatment to monitor the vegetation development. The experiment was complemented with 11 control plots that represent the initial state of intensively managed grasslands, further referred to as “Initial”, and 11 control plots that represent the targeted state of donor sites for “Topsoil+Propagules”, further referred to as “Target”. Consequently, the experiment consists of 55 plots (5 treatments x 11 replicates). Management of intensively used grasslands includes mowing and fertilizing (manure) between two to five times a year, as well as different tillage regimes (no tillage for >50 years; last time of tillage <5 years).

 Nematode and plant sampling
Soil nematodes were sampled in 2 m x 2 m plots, randomly established at least 2 m away from the vegetation plots. We collected eight soil cores with a 2.2 cm diameter soil core sampler (Giddings Machine Company, Windsor, CO, USA) to a depth of 12 cm (representing the majority of the plant rooting system) in each plot at the beginning of July 2017. The eight cores within each replicate plot were combined, gently homogenized, placed in coolers and transported to the laboratory of NIOO in Wageningen, the Netherlands, within one week. Free-living nematodes were extracted from 200 g of fresh soil using Oostenbrink elutriator (Oostenbrink, 1960) and concentrated, resulting in 6 mL nematode solution. The nematode solution was subdivided into three subsamples, two for morphological identification and quantification, and one for molecular work (not used in this study). For morphological identification and quantification, nematodes were heat-killed at 90 °C and fixed in 4 % formaldehyde solution (final volume 10 mL per subsample). All nematodes in 1 mL of formaldehyde solution were counted, and a minimum of 150 individuals per 1 mL sample (or all if less nematodes were present) were identified to family level using Bongers (1988). We then extrapolated the numbers of each nematode taxa identified to the entire sample and expressed them per 100 g dry soil for further analyses.
We calculated number of nematode taxa and Shannon diversity and assessed nematode community composition. In addition, we classified the nematode taxa into feeding types (herbivores, bacterivores, fungivores, omni-carnivores), structural and functional guilds (Table S4). Structural guilds assign nematode taxa according to life-history traits into five colonizer-persister (C-P) classes, ranging from one (early colonizers of new resources) to five (persisters in undisturbed habitats; Bongers 1990). C-P classes can be categorized as indicators for nutrient-enriched (C-P1), stressed (C-P2) and structured (C-P3 + C-P4 + C-P5) soil conditions (Ferris, Bongers, & de Goede, 2001). Functional guilds assign nematode taxa according to their C-P classification combined with their feeding habits (Ferris, Bongers, & de Goede, 2001). Based on the structural and functional guild classification we calculated five additional indices to assess soil nutrient status, disturbance and food web characteristics using NINJA (Sieriebriennikov, Ferris, & de Goede, 2014). 1) The Maturity index indicates the degree of different environmental perturbations (e.g., tillage, nutrient enrichment, pollution) and is used to monitor colonization and subsequent succession after disturbances (Bongers, 1990). 2) The ratio between the Plant Parasite (C-P of herbivorous nematodes only) to Maturity index is used to monitor the recovery of disturbed habitats incorporating information of life-history traits for all feeding types (Bongers, van der Meulen, & Korthals, 1997). 3) The Enrichment index indicates nutrient-enriched soils and agricultural management practices (Ferris, Bongers, & de Goede, 2001). 4) The Structure index provides information about the succession stage of the soil food web and therefore correlates with the degree of maturity of an ecosystem (Ferris, Bongers, & de Goede, 2001). 5) The Channel index provides information about the predominant decomposition pathways, where higher values stand for a higher proportion of energy transformed through the slow fungal decomposition channel (Ferris, Bongers, & de Goede, 2001). In addition, the Structure and Enrichment indices can be displayed in a biplot where nematode assemblages are plotted along a structure (x-axis) and enrichment (y-axis) trajectory (increasing index values). Each biplot quadrat reflects different levels of disturbance, soil nutrient pools and decomposition pathways (Ferris, Bongers, & de Goede, 2001).
The plant surveys were conducted on the 25 m2 permanent plots in June 2017. Plant species cover was visually assessed according to the semi-quantitative cover-abundance scale of Braun-Blanquet (1964; nomenclature: Lauber & Wagner, 1996). We calculated number of species and Shannon diversity, and assessed plant community composition. We also counted the number of target species (all species recorded in the eleven target plots plus propagules of species applied by hand, resulting in a total of 143 species) and categorized plant species into species of concern based on their red list status in Switzerland as well as their protection status in Switzerland and the Canton Zurich (Moser, Gygax, Bäumler, Wyler, & Palese, 2002). Furthermore, we calculated indicator values for soil moisture and soil nutrients for each species according to Landolt et al. (2010).

 References
Baudirektion Kanton Zürich (2007). 10 Jahre Naturschutz-Gesamtkonzept für den Kanton Zürich 1995-2005 – Stand der Umsetzung. Zürich: Baudirektion Kanton Zürich.
Bongers, T. (1988). De nematoden van Nederland. Utrecht: Stichting Uitgeverij Koninklijke Nederlandse Natuurhistorische Vereniging.
Bongers, T. (1990). The maturity index: an ecological measure of environmental disturbance based on nematode species composition. Oecologia, 83, 14-19. doi:10.1007/BF00324627
Bongers, T., van der Meulen, H., & Korthals, G. (1997). Inverse relationship between the nematode maturity index and plant parasite index under enriched nutrient conditions. Applied Soil Ecology, 6, 195-199. doi:10.1016/S0929-1393(96)00136-9
Braun-Blanquet, J. (1964). Pflanzensoziologie, Grundzüge der Vegetationskunde (3rd ed.). Wien: Springer.
Delarze, R., Gonseth, Y., Eggenberg, S., & Vust, M. (2015). Lebensräume der Schweiz: Ökologie - Gefährdung - Kennarten (3rd ed.). Bern: Ott.
Ferris, H., Bongers, T., & de Goede, R.G.M. (2001). A framework for soil food web diagnostics: extension of the nematode faunal analysis concept. Applied Soil Ecology, 18, 13-29. doi:10.1016/S0929-1393(01)00152-4
Landolt, E., Bäumler, B., Erhardt, A., Hegg, O., Klötzli, F., Lämmler, W., … Wohlgemuth, T. (2010). Flora indicativa. Ecological indicator values and biological attributes of the Flora of Switzerland and the Alps (2nd ed.). Bern: Haupt.
Lauber, K., & Wagner, G. (1996). Flora Helvetica. Flora der Schweiz. Bern: Haupt.
MeteoSchweiz (2018). Klimabulletin Jahr 2017, Zürich: MeteoSchweiz.
Moser, D., Gygax, A., Bäumler, B., Wyler, N., & Palese, R. (2002) Rote Liste der gefährteten Farn- und Blütenpflanzen der Schweiz. Bern: BUWAL.
Oostenbrink, M. (1960). Estimating nematode populations by some selected methods. In N.J. Sasser & W.R. Jenkins (Eds.), Nematology (pp. 85-101). Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
Sieriebriennikov, B., Ferris, H., & de Goede, R.G.M (2014). NINJA: An automated calculation system for nematode-based biological monitoring. European Journal of Soil Biology, 61, 90-93. doi:10.1016/j.ejsobi.2014.02.004

diversity

display_name: diversity

grassland

display_name: grassland

long-term-experiment

display_name: long-term-experiment

nematodes

display_name: nematodes

restoration

display_name: restoration

topsoil-removal

display_name: topsoil-removal

vegetation

display_name: vegetation

educ

en: Education, culture and sport

en: Grassland restoration: nematodes and plant communities


maintainer: Lisa Hülsmann

en: inventory-data tree-growth empirical-mortality-models forest-reserves tree-mortality

en: Calibration data

en:
A set of three consecutive inventories was used to generate records for the calibration of mortality models based on trees that were alive in the first and second inventory and either dead or alive in the third inventory.

 Meta data
Reserve: Name of the forest reserve

Plot: Permanent plot number

 Tree data
Species: Latin species name (or species group, cf. _Quercus_ spp.)

y: Status of the tree with 0 = alive and 1 = dead

dt: Length of the mortality period (years)

DBH: Diameter at breast height (mm) of the second inventory

relBAI: Annual relative basal area increment (-) calculated based on the first and the second DBH measurement as the compound annual growth rate of the trees basal area

 Stand data
_All stand variables were calculated for the second inventory._

mDBH: Mean diameter at breast height (mm)

iqrDBH: Interquartile range of diameter at breast height (mm)

BA: Basal area per hectare (m2 ha-1)

N: Number of trees per hectare (ha-1)

 Climate data
_Both climate variables were calculated for the period between the second and the third inventory._

P: Mean annual precipitation sum (mm)

mT: Mean annual air temperature (°C)

en:
The dataset comprises > 90 000 records from inventories in 54 strict forest reserves in [Switzerland](https://www.wsl.ch/de/wald/biodiversitaet-naturschutz-urwald/naturwaldreservate.html) and [Lower Saxony / Germany](http://naturwaelder.de/) along a considerable environmental gradient. It was used to develop parsimonious, species-specific mortality models for 18 European tree species based on tree size and growth as well as additional covariates on stand structure and climate.

 Inventory data
Measurements had been conducted repeatedly on up to 14 permanent plots per reserve for up to 60 years with re-measurement intervals of 4 - 27 years. The permanent plots vary in size between 0.03 and 3.47 ha. The inventories provide diameter measurements at breast height (DBH) and information on the species and status (alive or dead) of trees with DBH ≥ 4 cm for Switzerland and ≥ 7 cm for Germany.

 Data selection
We excluded three permanent plots where at least 80 % of the trees died during an interval of 10 years, and mortality could be clearly assigned to a disturbance agent. Mortality in the remaining stands was rather low, with a mean annual mortality rate of 1.5 % and strong variation between plots from 0 to 6.5 % (assessed for trees of all species with DBH ≥ 7 cm).
We only used data from permanent plots with at least 20 trees per species to obtain reliable plot-level mortality rates even for species with low mortality rates (about 5 % during 10 years), and selected tree species occurring on at least 10 plots to cover sufficient ecological gradients. This led to a dataset of 197 permanent plots and 18 tree or shrub species: _Abies alba_ Mill., _Acer campestre_ L., _Acer pseudoplatanus_ L., _Alnus incana_ Moench., _Betula pendula_ Roth, _Carpinus betulus_ L., _Cornus mas_ L., _Corylus avellana_ L., _Fagus sylvatica_ L., _Fraxinus excelsior_ L., _Picea abies_ (L.) Karst, _Pinus mugo_ Turra, _Pinus sylvestris_ L., _Quercus pubescens_ Willd., _Quercus_ spp. (_Q. petraea_ Liebl. and _Q. robur_ L.; not properly differentiated in the Swiss inventories), _Sorbus aria_ Crantz, _Tilia cordata_ Mill. and _Ulmus glabra_ Huds..

 Predictors of tree mortality
We considered tree size and growth as key indicators for mortality risk. Radial stem growth between the first and second inventory and DBH at the second inventory were used to predict tree status (alive or dead) at the third inventory. To this end, the annual relative basal area increment (relBAI) was calculated as the compound annual growth rate of the trees basal area. Additional covariates on stand structure and climate comprise mean annual precipitation sum (P), mean annual air temperature (mT), the mean and the interquartile range of DBH (mDBH, iqrDBH), basal area (BA) and the number of trees (N) per hectare.

 Further information
For further information, refer to Hülsmann _et al_. (in press) How to kill a tree – Empirical mortality models for eighteen species and their performance in a dynamic forest model. _Ecological Applications_.

empirical-mortality-models

display_name: empirical-mortality-models

forest-reserves

display_name: forest-reserves

inventory-data

display_name: inventory-data

tree-growth

display_name: tree-growth

tree-mortality

display_name: tree-mortality

envidat

en: EnviDat: the Environmental Data Portal

en: EnviDat is the WSL data portal providing unified and managed access to environmental monitoring and research data. The portal has the capability to host and publish data sets. Through the sharing of unique and high-value data sets worldwide, EnviDat fosters research and contributes to advancing environmental science.

en: Calibration data for empirical mortality models of 18 European tree species


maintainer: Stephanie Mayer

en: snowpack-simulation failure-layer rutschblock snow-profiles snow-instability snow-stratigraphy snowpack

en: Simulated snow profiles

en: Simulated snow stratigraphy in form of one *.csv-file per snow profile from the DAV and SWISS data sets (in respective subfolders). Each file is named after the profile ID which allows identifying the corresponding observed profile in the "observed_profiles" folder. One row corresponds to one simulated snow layer. The content of the columns 1-7 is described in Table 3 of the ReadMe file. The remaining columns (8-31) contain all features that were used in the development of the RF model and are described in Table 1 of the ReadMe file.

en: DAV data set: Properties of observed snow profiles and simulated failure layers

en:
For each profile pair from the DAV data set, this file contains one row with information on the observed snow stability and all extracted features describing the simulated failure layers. The content of the columns is explained in Table 1 of the ReadMe file. Only those profile pairs which fulfilled predefined similarity criteria (column
"similarity_obs_sim" = 1) and which belonged to the stability classes "stable" and "unstable" (column "stability_class"
= 0 or 1) were used to train the RF model. Please note that for each of the two snow profiles with RB score 7 (profile
IDs 7228 and 9526), three additional layers were included in this data set to obtain a balanced set of training data (73
unstable and 73 stable profiles).

en: ReadMe

en: ReadMe file explaining data structure and content

en: Observed snow profiles

en: Observed snow stratigraphy in form of one *.csv-file per snow profile from the DAV and SWISS data sets (in respective subfolders). Each file is named after the profile ID which allows identifying the corresponding simulated profile in the "simulated_profiles" folder. One row corresponds to one observed snow layer. The content of the columns is described in Table 2 of the ReadMe file.

en: SWISS data set: Properties of observed snow profiles and simulated failure layers

en: For each profile pair from the SWISS data set, this file contains one row with information on the observed snow stability and all extracted features describing the simulated failure layers. Please note that only those profile pairs which fulfilled the similarity criteria (column similarity_obs_sim = 1, 121 profiles) were used to validate the RF model. The content of the columns is explained in Table 1 of the ReadMe file.

en:
This data set includes information on all observed and simulated snow profiles that were used to train and validate the
random forest model described in Mayer et al. (2022). The RF model was trained to assess snow instability from simulated snow stratigraphy. The data set contains observed snow profiles from the region of Davos (DAV subset, 512 profiles) and from all over Switzerland (SWISS subset, 230 profiles). For each observed snow profile, there is a corresponding simulated profile which was obtained using meteorological input data for the numerical snow cover model SNOWPACK. The information on the observed snow profile contains a Rutschblock test result including the depth of the failure interface. As part of the study described in Mayer et al. (2022), each observed snow profile was manually compared to its simulated counterpart and the simulated layer corresponding to the Rutschblock failure layer was identified.

The data are provided in the following form: one file each per observed and simulated snow profile (2x512 files DAV, 2x230 files SWISS), two files (1 file DAV, 1 file SWISS) containing the observed information on snow instability, the allocation between observed and simulated failure layer, and all features extracted from the simulated weak layers that were used to develop the RF model.

failure-layer

display_name: failure-layer

rutschblock

display_name: rutschblock

snow-instability

display_name: snow-instability

snow-profiles

display_name: snow-profiles

snow-stratigraphy

display_name: snow-stratigraphy

snowpack

display_name: snowpack

snowpack-simulation

display_name: snowpack-simulation

en: Observed and simulated snow profile data


maintainer: Joan Casanelles Abella

en: trap-nest antwerp poznan zurich dna-metabarcoding cavity-nesting-bees osmia-cornuta paris osmia-bicornis plant-pollinator-interactions hylaeus-communis urban-ecology chelostoma-florisomne tartu

en: Explanation data variables

en: Larval food composition

en: Urbanization poses threats and opportunities for the biodiversity of wild bees. A main gap relates to the food preferences of wild bees in urban ecosystems, which usually harbour large numbers of plant species, particularly at the larval stage. This data sets describes the larval food of four wild bee species (i.e. Chelostoma florisomne, Hylaeus communis, Osmica bicornis and Osmia cornuta) and three genera (i.e. Chelostoma sp., Hylaeus sp, and Osmia sp.) common in urban areas in five different European cities (i.e. Antwerp, Paris, Poznan, Tartu and Zurich). This data results from a European-level study aimed at understanding the effects of urbanization on biodiversity across different cities and citiscapes, and a Swiss project aimed at understanding the effects of urban ecosystems in wild bee feeding behaviour. Wild bees were sampled using standardized trap-nests in 80 sites (32 in Zurich and 12 in each of the remaining cities), selected following a double gradient of available habitat at local and landscape scales. Larval pollen was obtained from the bee nests and identified using DNA metabarconding. The data provides the plant composition at the species or genus level of the different bee nests of the studied species in the studied sites of the five European cities. For Hylaeus communis, this is the first study in reporting larval food composition.

antwerp

display_name: antwerp

cavity-nesting-bees

display_name: cavity-nesting-bees

chelostoma-florisomne

display_name: chelostoma-florisomne

dna-metabarcoding

display_name: dna-metabarcoding

hylaeus-communis

display_name: hylaeus-communis

osmia-bicornis

display_name: osmia-bicornis

osmia-cornuta

display_name: osmia-cornuta

paris

display_name: paris

plant-pollinator-interactions

display_name: plant-pollinator-interactions

poznan

display_name: poznan

tartu

display_name: tartu

trap-nest

display_name: trap-nest

urban-ecology

display_name: urban-ecology

zurich

display_name: zurich

educ

en: Education, culture and sport

en: Larval food composition of four wild bee species in five European cities


maintainer: Benjamin Reuter

en: avalanche-activity snowpack snow-cover-modeling crocus snow-instability weissfluhjoch avalanche avalanche-danger snow avalanche-problem-type

en: 2015-2016 Avalanche problem types from Crocus

en:
Avalanche problem types were derived from a snow cover simulation with the model Crocus for the winter season 2015-2016 at the Weissfluhjoch study plot, Davos, CH.
The data cover the period 01.01.2016-30.04.2016. The binary indicator (0,1) tells whether an avalanche problem type was identified in the snow cover simulation (1) or not (0).
The data are presented in Figure 7 in Reuter et al. (2021).

en: 2015-2016 Avalanche problem types from SNOWPACK

en:
Avalanche problem types were derived from a snow cover simulation with the model SNOWAPCK for the winter season 2015-2016 at the Weissfluhjoch study plot, Davos, CH.
The data cover the period 01.01.2016-30.04.2016. The binary indicator (0,1) tells whether an avalanche problem type was identified in the snow cover simulation (1) or not (0).
The data are presented in Figure 7 in Reuter et al. (2021).

en: 1999-2017 Avalanche problem types from Crocus

en:
Avalanche problem types were derived from snow cover simulations with the model Crocus at the Weissfluhjoch study plot, Davos, CH.
The data cover the winter seasons between 1999-2017 and include the simulated annual frequencies of new snow, wind slab, persistent weak layer, aging-persistent weak layer and wet snow problem types.
The data are presented in Figure 8 in Reuter et al. (2021).

en: 1999-2017 Avalanche problem types from SNOWPACK

en:
Avalanche problem types were derived from snow cover simulations with the model SNOWPACK at the Weissfluhjoch study plot, Davos, CH.
The data cover the winter seasons between 1999-2017 and include the simulated annual frequencies of new snow, wind slab, persistent weak layer, aging-persistent weak layer and wet snow problem types.
The data are shown in Figure 8 in Reuter et al. (2021).

en: 2015-2016 Seismic avalanche acitivity catalogue

en:
Avalanches were indentified in seismic data recorded by two seismic arrays, one deployed at Wannengrat (2,500 m) and another one deployed in the Dischma valley (2,000 m).
The data cover the period from 01.01.2016 - 30.04.2016 and are presented in Figure 7 in Reuter et al. (2021).

en:
Avalanche problem types were derived from snow cover simulations with the models Crocus and SNOWPACK at the Weissfluhjoch study plot, Davos, CH. The data include annual frequencies of avalanche problem types for the seasons 1999-2017 and daily presence of avalanche problem types for the period 01.01.2016 - 30.04.2016.
Avalanche activity was derived from two seismic sensor arrays deployed no further than 15 km from Weissfluhjoch, Davos, CH. The data cover the period 01.01.2016 - 30.04.2016.

avalanche

display_name: avalanche

avalanche-activity

display_name: avalanche-activity

avalanche-danger

display_name: avalanche-danger

avalanche-problem-type

display_name: avalanche-problem-type

crocus

display_name: crocus

snow

display_name: snow

snow-cover-modeling

display_name: snow-cover-modeling

snow-instability

display_name: snow-instability

weissfluhjoch

display_name: weissfluhjoch

envidat

en: EnviDat: the Environmental Data Portal

en: EnviDat is the WSL data portal providing unified and managed access to environmental monitoring and research data. The portal has the capability to host and publish data sets. Through the sharing of unique and high-value data sets worldwide, EnviDat fosters research and contributes to advancing environmental science.

en: Simulated avalanche problem types and seismic avalanche activity around Weissfluhjoch


en: tree-mortality forest-inventory primeval-forests forest-reserves fagus-sylvatica mortality-models

en: Ukrainian data

en:
READ ME for

Hülsmann L, Bugmann H, Commarmot B, Meyer P, Zimmermann S, Brang P
Data from: Does one model fit all? Patterns of beech mortality in natural forests of three European regions.
Ecological Applications http://dx.doi.org/10.5061/dryad.h4s6t

Forest inventory data of beech for the development of individual-tree mortality models from strict forests reserves in Switzerland, Germany and Ukraine.

The data package provides the files
CH_reduced: inventory data of the reduced dataset from Switzerland that was used to assess the influence of additional environmental and stand characteristics on beech mortality
CH: inventory data from strict forest reserves in Switzerland
DE: inventory data from strict forest reserves in Germany
UA: inventory data from a primeval beech forest in Ukraine

A set of three consecutive inventories was used to generate records for the calibration of mortality models based on trees that were alive in the first and second inventory and either dead or alive in the third inventory.
Diameter at breast height: dbh (mm)
Annual relative basal area increment: relBAI (), calculated based on the first and the second dbh measurement as the compound annual growth rate of the trees basal area (Bigler and Bugmann 2004)
Status of the tree: y, 0 = alive, 1 = dead
Length of the mortality period: dt (years)

Additional environmental and stand characteristics were derived for the reduced Swiss dataset.
Note the varying seasonal level of the covariates considering the entire year, the growing season from April to September (G) and the winter month January to March (W).
All climatic covariates were calculated for both the ‘growth’ (2) and the ‘mortality’ period (3). The stand covariates were derived for the second inventory of each record (2).

Mean diameter at breast height: dbh.mean.2 (mm)
Interquartile range of diameter at breast height: dbh.IQR.2 (mm)
Median diameter at breast height: dbh.median.2 (mm)
Basal area per hectare: BA.2 (m2 ha-1)
Number of trees per hectare: N.2 (ha-1)
pH-value: pH ()
Available water capacity in the soil: AWC (mm)
Mean annual precipitation sum: P.2, P.3 (mm)
Mean precipitation sum during growing season: PG.2, PG.3 (mm)
Mean annual air temperature: mT.2, mT.3 (°C)
Mean air temperature during growing season: mTG.2, mTG.3 (°C)
Mean air temperature during winter months: mTW.2, mTW.3 (°C)
Mean growing degree-days: GDD.2, GDD.3 ()
Mean number of months during growing season with water deficit: mDEFdurG.2, mDEFdurG.3 ()
Mean annual maximum water deficit: mDEFmax.2, mDEFmax.3 (mm)
Overall maximum of the annual maximum water deficit: maxDEFmax.2, maxDEFmax.3 (mm)
Mean of cumulative water deficit during growing season: mDEFcumG.2, mDEFcumG.3 (mm)
Overall maximum of cumulative water deficitduring growing season: maxDEFcumG.2, maxDEFcumG.3 (mm)
Percentage of years with at least one month water deficit: percDEF.2, percDEF.3 (%)

en: German data

en: Swiss data full

en: Swiss data reduced

en:
The datasets comprise nearly 19’000 trees of European beech (_Fagus sylvatica_ L.) from unmanaged forests in Switzerland, Germany / Lower Saxony and Ukraine. Tree death was modelled as a function of size and growth, i.e., stem diameter (DBH) and relative basal area increment (relBAI). To explain the spatial and temporal variability in mortality patterns, we considered a large set of environmental and stand characteristics.

 Inventory data
The strict forest reserves in Switzerland and Germany had been established in the period of 1961-1975 and 1971-1974, respectively. Every reserve included up to 10 permanent plots ranging from 0.09 to 1.8 ha in size, with slightly irregular re-measurement intervals. Permanent plots with pure or mixed beech stands were selected from the reserves of both networks. Reserves with considerable wind disturbance during the monitored intervals were excluded from the analysis. In addition to data from the Swiss and German reserves, data from a 10 ha plot in the primeval beech forest Uholka in Western Ukraine including three remeasurements were used. The inventory data provide diameter measurements at breast height (dbh) for revisited trees with a diameter of more than 4, 7 and 6 cm for Switzerland, Germany and Ukraine, respectively.

 Mortality predictors
A set of three consecutive inventories was used to generate records for the calibration of mortality models based on trees that were alive in the first and second inventory and either dead or alive in the third inventory. As an explanatory variable, the annual relative basal area increment (relBAI) was calculated based on the first and the second dbh measurement as the compound annual growth rate of the trees basal area. Tree dbh in the second inventory was used in addition to relBAI to model tree status (alive or dead) of the third inventory.

To increase the generality of the mortality models, we selected environmental variables that are known to have a considerable influence on growth and mortality of beech. We emphasized the effects of water availability using a large set of drought characteristics that were calculated based on the local site water balance. We also related beech mortality to soil pH, temperature, precipitation and growing degree-days. Additionally, we considered stand characteristics that reflect the development stage, competition and structure of the forests.

 Further information
For further information, refer to Hülsmann _et al_. (2016) Does one model fit all? patterns of beech mortality in natural forests of three European regions. _Ecological Applications_.

fagus-sylvatica

display_name: fagus-sylvatica

forest-inventory

display_name: forest-inventory

forest-reserves

display_name: forest-reserves

mortality-models

display_name: mortality-models

primeval-forests

display_name: primeval-forests

tree-mortality

display_name: tree-mortality

educ

en: Education, culture and sport

en: Data from: Does one model fit all? patterns of beech mortality in natural forests of three European regions


weissfluhjoch-dataset-for-esm-snowmip

maintainer: Nander Wever

title_for_slug: weissfluhjoch-dataset-for-esm-snowmip

en: snow-depth weissfluhjoch snow-models snow esm-snowmip

en: Conversion script

en:
Use this script to convert WFJ_optimaldataset_v6.smet to wfj.smet, the file that is used for the ESM-SnowMIP project. It also requires the file: WFJ_AirPressure_Data.zip

Use: bash create_wfj_dataset.sh > input/wfj.smet

mimetype: text/x-sh

en: Dataset Weissfluhjoch for ESM-SnowMIP

en: ini file

en: This ini file is required by data-converter from MeteoIO version 1887 (http://models.slf.ch/p/meteoio/)

en: This Weissfluhjoch dataset is a processed version of the Weissfluhjoch dataset version 6 from https://doi.org/10.16904/6. This dataset was specially created for the ESM-SnowMIP project. Here it is documented how this dataset has been created.

esm-snowmip

display_name: esm-snowmip

snow-depth

display_name: snow-depth

snow-models

display_name: snow-models

en: Weissfluhjoch dataset for ESM-SnowMIP


maintainer: Henning Löwe

en: granular-snow discrete-element-modelling fast-sintering angle-of-repose grain-shape

en: Angle of repose and 3D CT images

en:
5 Snow types were examined and glass beads as a cohesion-less reference, named as follows:

RG: rounded grains (sieved with 0.7 - 1.4 mm)

FC: faceted grains (1.4 - 2 mm)

FCS: small faceted grains (0.7 - 1.4 mm)

IB: ice beads (4 mm)

IBS: small ice beads (2 - 2.2 mm)

GB: glass beads(2 mm)

media_type: text/plain

format: TXT

mimetype: text/plain

en:
Angle of repose experiments were performed with different snow types at temperatures between -2 and -40°C. They were used to examine granular snow dynamics on the grain-scale with focus on the role of grain shape and cohesion. The angle of repose was observed by sieving snow onto a round, freestanding base until a stationary heap was formed.

This dataset consists of 1) the images of the experimental heaps that were taken to determine the angle of repose, 2) one binary 3D micro computed tomography image of each snow type. The CT images were taken with the SLF micro-CT40 to characterize snow properties and grain shape.

The experiments with natural snow types (rounded and faceted grains) and spherical model snow allowed for an examination of the differences in granular properties between natural grain shapes and spherical particles in view of Discrete Element Modelling. With the chosen temperatures, the effect of sintering could be observed that increases the angle of repose with increasing temperature.

angle-of-repose

display_name: angle-of-repose

discrete-element-modelling

display_name: discrete-element-modelling

fast-sintering

display_name: fast-sintering

grain-shape

display_name: grain-shape

granular-snow

display_name: granular-snow

envidat

en: EnviDat: the Environmental Data Portal

en: EnviDat is the WSL data portal providing unified and managed access to environmental monitoring and research data. The portal has the capability to host and publish data sets. Through the sharing of unique and high-value data sets worldwide, EnviDat fosters research and contributes to advancing environmental science.

en: Angle of repose experiments with natural and spherical snow


en: par long-term climate-change temperature meteo wind-speed precipitation swiss-forest-lab relative-humidity meteorology

en: Site aerial photo (Vordemwald)

en: Site aerial photo from both Vordemwald stations. Source: Google. 2016. Site aerial photo from both Vordemwald stations. Retrieved November 11, 2016, from https://www.google.ch/maps

mimetype: image/jpeg

en: Forest station data (VOB)

en: Data file.

en: Site photo of the forest station (VOB)

en: Site photo of the forest station from the side.

en: Site photo of the field station (VOF)

en: Site photo of the field stationfrom the side.

en: Field station data (VOF)

en: Data plot of the field station (VOF)

en: Data overview for air temperature, relative humidity, precipitation, PAR, wind speed.

en: Data plot of the forest station (VOB)

en: High quality meteorological data are needed for long-term forest ecosystem research, particularly in the light of global change. The long-term data series published here comprises almost 20 years of measurements for two meteorological stations in Vordemwald in Switzerland where one station is located within a natural mixed forest stand (VOB) with European silver fir (_Abies alba_; 110 yrs) and oak trees (_Quercus sp._; 190-210 yrs) as dominant tree species. A second station is situated in the very vicinity outside of the forest (field station, VOF). The meteorological time series are presented in hourly time resolution of air temperature, relative humidity, precipitation, photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) and wind speed. Vordemwald is part of the Long-term Forest Ecosystem Research Programme (LWF) established and maintained by the Swiss Federal Research Institute WSL.

climate-change

display_name: climate-change

long-term

display_name: long-term

meteo

display_name: meteo

meteorology

display_name: meteorology

par

display_name: par

precipitation

display_name: precipitation

relative-humidity

display_name: relative-humidity

swiss-forest-lab

display_name: swiss-forest-lab

temperature

display_name: temperature

wind-speed

display_name: wind-speed

educ

en: Education, culture and sport

en: Vordemwald, Switzerland: Long-term forest meteorological data from the Long-term Forest Ecosystem Research Programme (LWF), from 1996 onwards