en: development-priorities urban-region strategic-plans spatial-information europe

en: Planning intentios

en:
The present dataset is part of the report titled Gradinaru S.R., Hersperger A.M., Schmid F. (2021). Deriving Planning Intentions from written planning documents. Report on CONCUR Project- From plans to land change: how strategic spatial planning contributes to the development of urban regions.
The data corresponds to the data collected as part of the DPI Method for deriving all PIs contained in a plan (open coding) as detailed in section 4 of the report. The method involved reading the plans to break down of information in meaningful discrete “incidents” or planning intentions. To identify the planning intentions, the starting points were represented by a) the structuring of the plans in chapters and sub chapters and b) the themes that the plans addressed. Thus, the collected information was not grouped according to pre-defined categories of planning intentions, but rather put together as a list of intentions as revealed by each plan. As a result, we provide, for each case study, a document (named [Urban region name] PI as defined in the plan) which contains:
	Date when the information was filled in.
	Name of the urban region and analysed strategic spatial plan .
	A list of all planning intentions contained in a plan, with each PI being addresses as follows:
	Name of PI as it appears in the plan
	Translated name of the PI (i.e. short name for easy understanding of the meaning)
	Explanation regarding the meaning of the PI
	Why the PI is considered a priority for the urban region
	Spatial information on the PI (text and cartographic representations).
In total, 14 documents are available, one for each case study. Documents contain up to 20 pages of information extracted from the plans together with explanations and notes taken during plan reading.

development-priorities

display_name: development-priorities

europe

display_name: europe

spatial-information

display_name: spatial-information

strategic-plans

display_name: strategic-plans

urban-region

display_name: urban-region

en: Planning intentions in strategic plans of European urban regions


maintainer: Frank Techel

en: natural-avalanches snowpack-model avalanche avalanche-size machine-learning

state: active

type: dataset

en: Data set DL was used for validation of the avalanche-day classifier and the avalanche-size estimator. The data set contains the quality-checked danger levels merged with the respective SNOWPACK simulations (Sections 2.3 and 3.3(2) in Mayer et al.).

format: XLS

en: Data set AV2 used for training the avalanche-size estimator (Sections 2.1.2 and 3.2 in Mayer et al.)

en: Data set AV3 was used for validation of the avalanche-day classifier (Sections 2.1.3 and 3.3(1) in Mayer et al.).

en: Data set AV1 was used for training the avalanche-day classifier (Sections 2.1.1, 2.2, and 3.1 in Mayer et al.).

en:
The data set contained in this repository was used in the analysis by Mayer et al. (2023):
Mayer, S. I., Techel, F., Schweizer, J., and van Herwijnen, A.: Prediction of natural dry-snow avalanche activity using physics-based snowpack simulations, EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-646, 2023.

avalanche

display_name: avalanche

avalanche-size

display_name: avalanche-size

machine-learning

display_name: machine-learning

natural-avalanches

display_name: natural-avalanches

snowpack-model

display_name: snowpack-model

educ

fr: Éducation, culture et sport

de: Bildung, Kultur und Sport

en: Education, culture and sport

it: Istruzione, cultura e sport

envidat

fr: EnviDat: le portail de données environnementales

de: EnviDat: das Umwelt-Datenportal

en: EnviDat: the Environmental Data Portal

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.

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.

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: Data-set for prediction of natural dry-snow avalanche activity and avalanche size using physics-based snowpack simulations


maintainer: Benjamin Reuter

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

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).

format: SERVICE

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: 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: 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: 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:
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-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

snowpack

display_name: snowpack

weissfluhjoch

display_name: weissfluhjoch

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


maintainer: Ueli Reber

en: text-corpus policy-documents biodiversity environmental--policy bgb policy-analysis switzerland

en: Replication files

en:
 Introduction

The ZIP file contains all data and code to replicate the analyses reported in the following paper.

Reber, U., Fischer, M., Ingold, K., Kienast, F., Hersperger, A. M., Grütter, R., & Benz, R. (2022). Integrating biodiversity: A longitudinal and cross-sectoral analysis of Swiss politics. *Policy Sciences*. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-022-09456-4](https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-022-09456-4)

If you use any of the material included in this repository, please refer to the paper. If you use (parts of) the text corpus, please also refer to the sources used for its compilation listed below. The content of the texts may not be changed.

 Data folder

The data folder contains the following files.

* _corpus.parquet_: Text corpus of Swiss policy documents
* _dict_de.csv_: Biodiversity dictionary (German)
* _dict_fr.csv_: Biodiversity dictionary (French)
* _dict_it.csv_: Biodiversity dictionary (Italian)
* _topic_labels.csv_: labels/codes for policy sectors
* _topics.csv_: labels/codes for policy sectors

The corpus and the dictionary were compiled by the authors specifically for this project. The labels/codes for policy sectors are based on the [coding scheme](http://ws-old.parlament.ch/affairs/topics) of the Swiss Parliament.

 Text corpus

The text corpus consists of 439,984 Swiss policy documents in German, French, and Italian from 1999 to 2018. The corpus was compiled from the following source between 2020-10-01 and 2021-01-31.

* Transcripts and parliamentary businesses (e.g. questions, motions, parliamentary initiatives) via the [Web Services (WS)](https://www.parlament.ch/de/%C3%BCber-das-parlament/fakten-und-zahlen/open-data-web-services) provided by the Swiss Parliament
* The official compilation of federal legislation ("Amtliche Sammlung", AS) via [opendata.swiss](https://opendata.swiss/de/dataset/official-compilation-of-federal-legislation-bs-as-1947-2018) provided by the Swiss Federal Archives (SFA)
* The federal gazette ("Bundesblatt") via [fedlex.admin.ch](https://www.fedlex.admin.ch/de/fga/index)
* Decisions of federal courts via [entscheidsuche.ch (ES)](https://entscheidsuche.ch/)

The corpus is stored in a single data frame to use with R saved as [PARQUET](https://parquet.apache.org/) file (corpus.parquet). The data frame has the following structure.

* _text_id_: Unique identifier for each text (source information as prefix, e.g. "t_")
* _doc_type_: Document type (see coding scheme below)
* _branch_: Government branche (1 legislative, 2 executive, 3 judicative)
* _stage_: Stage of policy process (1 drafting, 2 introduction, 3 interpretation)
* _year_: Year of publication
* _topic_: Policy sector (coding scheme in separate file in data folder)
* _lang_: Language (de, fr, it)
* _text_: Text

The following list contains the coding scheme for the doc_type variable.

* 101: Federal gazette // Draft for public consultation ("Vernehmlassungsverfahren")
* 102: Federal gazette // Explanation of draft for parliament ("Botschaft")
* 103: Federal gazette // Strategy, action plan
* 104: Federal gazette // Federal council decree ("Bundesratsbeschluss")
* 105: Federal gazette // (Simple) Federal decree ("(Einfacher) Bundesbeschluss")
* 106: Federal gazette // General decree ("Allgemeinverfügung")
* 107: Federal gazette // Treaty ("Übereinkommen")
* 108: Federal gazette // Treaty ("Abkommen")
* 109: Federal gazette // Draft for parliament ("Entwurf")
* 110: Federal gazette // Report ("Bericht")
* 111: Federal gazette // Report of parliamentary comission ("Bericht")
* 112: Federal gazette // Report of federal council ("Bericht")
* 201: Parl. businesses // Submitted text
* 202: Parl. businesses // Reason text
* 203: Parl. businesses // Federal council response
* 204: Parl. businesses // Initial situation
* 205: Parl. businesses // Proceedings
* 301: Parl. transcripts // Speech of MP
* 302: Parl. transcripts // Speech of federal council
* 401: Federal legislation // Legal text of the official compilation (law, ordinances, etc.)
* 501: Court decisions // Federal Supreme Court
* 502: Court decisions // Federal Criminal Court
* 503: Court decisions // Federal Administrative Court

 Code folder

The code folder contains all R code for the analyses. The files are numbered chronologically.

* _1_classifier_training.R_: Training of classifiers for classification of policy sectors
* _2_classifier_application.R_: Classification of documents in corpus
* _3_dictionary_application.R_: Biodiversity indexing of documents in corpus
* _4_stm_truncation.R_: Truncation of indexed documents to keep only relevant parts
* _5_stm_translation.R_: Translation of FR and IT documents to DE
* _6_stm_model.R_: Preprocesssing and structural topic model
* _7_plots.R_: Plots and numbers as included in the paper

The code/functions folder contains custom functions used in the scripts, e.g. to support topic model interpretation.

Package versions and setup details are noted in the code files.

 Contact

Please direct any questions to Ueli Reber (ueli.reber@eawag.ch).

bgb

display_name: bgb

biodiversity

display_name: biodiversity

environmental--policy

display_name: environmental--policy

policy-analysis

display_name: policy-analysis

policy-documents

display_name: policy-documents

switzerland

display_name: switzerland

text-corpus

display_name: text-corpus

educ

en: Education, culture and sport

en: Replication files for "Integrating biodiversity: A longitudinal and cross-sectoral analysis of Swiss politics"


maintainer: EnviDat Support

en: urban-landscape urban-planning land-change landscape-planning concur

en:
Book of abstracts from the virtual conference "From Plans to Land Change: Dynamics of Urban Regions"

Cities and urban regions are among the most dynamic land-use systems in the world, with dramatic consequences for the provision of ecosystem services and the livelihood of people. Planning is a multifaceted activity with extensive experience in the management of these urbanization processes. However, our understanding of planning’s contribution to shaping urban land use, form and structure is still incomplete, with serious consequences for the efficacy of urban planning and land change models.

This international conference aims to bring together the community of scholars working on planning evaluation and urban modelling. The participants are offered the opportunity to present their current research and to discuss how theoretical developments, data sources, comparative studies and modelling approaches might advance the field.

The conference was financially supported by the CONCUR project and sustained by Swiss Federal Research Institute WSL.

concur

display_name: concur

land-change

display_name: land-change

landscape-planning

display_name: landscape-planning

urban-landscape

display_name: urban-landscape

urban-planning

display_name: urban-planning

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: From Plans to Land Change: Dynamics of Urban Regions. Book of Abstracts


en: microct intercomparison icecube snow specific-surface-area

en: The file contains all data for the plot in figure 1 of the co-located density and SSA measurement at Summit, Greenland in May 2015, conducted by Schneebeli, Proksch, Schmid.

en: IceCube and MicroCT data

en: The file contains all micro-CT and IC measurements for snow types A, B, C, D and E used in our study. All samples were processed (and stored) in a cold laboratory at -15°C.

media_type: application/zip

en: SMP measurement files for snow types A, B, C and D.

format: ZIP

en: TARTES simulations

en: Jupyter notebook with TARTES simulations.

en: Grain survey of snow particles

en: The file contains all measurements of the artificial particles for snow types A, B, C, D and E, including the artificial particle mass in the Petri dish.

en: Statistics of samples

en: artificial_snow_data set

en: The file contains all micro-CT and IC measurements of the artificial snow data set. The data set was originally produced to investigate the influence of black carbon on SSA measurements.

en: Influence of black carbon on the measurement of the specific surface of snow with the near infrared method - Philipp Baumann

en: These experiments investigate different possible errors by measuring the specific surface area (SSA) of snow with the near infrared method. The influence of black carbon on this measurement was disproved, the theory was therefore validated. It shows that sunlight has no influence on the measurement with the IceCube. Wind drift snow as thin layer on the sample can increase the measured value of the specific surface by a few percent. This could be part of the error, observed in former measurements at SLF. As reference for the measured SSA values with the near infrared method, computer tomography was used to verify the SSA values.

en: The specific surface area (SSA) of different snow types were measured with the IceCube instrument and the Scanco Medical microCT 40. In addition, the snow particles created during the preparation of IceCube samples were counted. The difference in SSA between these instruments is explained by the formation of the surface particles. A numerical simulation using TARTES simulation support the observations.

icecube

display_name: icecube

intercomparison

display_name: intercomparison

microct

display_name: microct

snow

display_name: snow

specific-surface-area

display_name: specific-surface-area


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: Dataset Weissfluhjoch for ESM-SnowMIP

mimetype: application/zip

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: 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

weissfluhjoch

display_name: weissfluhjoch

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: Weissfluhjoch dataset for ESM-SnowMIP


maintainer: Matthias Haeni

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

en: Data plot of the field station (BTF)

media_type: application/pdf

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

format: PDF

mimetype: application/pdf

en: Data plot of the forest station (BTB)

media_type: text/csv

en: Data file.

format: CSV

mimetype: text/csv

en: Site photo of the field station (BTF)

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

mimetype: image/jpeg

en: Site photo of the forest station (BTB)

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

en: Site aerial photo (Bettlachstock)

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

en: Field station data (BTF)

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 Bettlachstock in Switzerland where one station is located within a natural mixed forest stand (BTB) with European beech (_Fagus sylvatica_; 170-190 yrs), European silver fir (_Abies alba_; 190 yrs) and Norway spruce (_Picea abies_; 200 yrs) as dominant tree species. A second station is situated in the very vicinity outside of the forest (field station, BTF). The meteorological time series are presented in hourly time resolution of air temperature, relative humidity, precipitation, photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) and wind speed. Bettlachstock 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

en: Bettlachstock, Switzerland: Long-term forest meteorological data from the Long-term Forest Ecosystem Research Programme (LWF), from 1997 onwards


maintainer: James W. Kirchner

en: diurnal-cycle sap-flow evapotranspiration ecohydrology snowmelt groundwater streamflow diel-cycle

en: MODIS EVI2 script

media_type: text/plain

en: Google Earth Engine script for computing MODIS two-band enhanced vegetation index (EVI2) values and averaging them over subcatchments.

format: TXT

mimetype: text/plain

en: 30-minute time series

en: 30-minute hydrometeorological and ecohydrological time series.

en: Metadata

en: Column descriptions for both data files, and map coordinates for all measurement locations.

en: Daily time series

en: Daily hydrometeorological and ecohydrological time series

en: Subcatchment polygons

en: Subcatchment polygons for use in the Google Earth Engine scripts.

en: MODIS NDSI script

en: Google Earth Engine script for computing MODIS normalized difference snow index (NDSI) values and averaging them over subcatchment areas.

en:
Hydrometerological and ecohydrological time series from Sagehen Creek and Independence Creek, Sierra Nevada, USA, illustrating hydrological responses to daily cycles in snowmelt and evapotranspiration forcing.

Data include 30-minute time series of

- weather variables,

- sap flow fluxes,

- groundwater levels (in two riparian transects of shallow groundwater wells),

- and stream stages (at 12 sites spanning a 500-meter elevation gradient),

and daily time series of

- temperature, precipitation, and snow water equivalent at three nearby snow telemetry stations

- diel cycle index values for groundwater levels and stream stages,

- and MODIS normalized difference snow index (NDSI) and enhanced vegetation index (EVI2) values averaged over selected subcatchments.

Google Earth Engine scripts for extracting the MODIS data are also provided.

diel-cycle

display_name: diel-cycle

diurnal-cycle

display_name: diurnal-cycle

ecohydrology

display_name: ecohydrology

evapotranspiration

display_name: evapotranspiration

groundwater

display_name: groundwater

sap-flow

display_name: sap-flow

snowmelt

display_name: snowmelt

streamflow

display_name: streamflow

educ

en: Education, culture and sport

envidat

en: EnviDat: the Environmental Data Portal

en: Daily cycles in solar flux, snowmelt, transpiration, groundwater, and streamflow at Sagehen and Independence Creeks, Sierra Nevada, USA


restoring-grassland-multifunctionality

title_for_slug: restoring-grassland-multifunctionality

en: biodiversity mineralization fungi grassland ecosystem-multifunctionality bacteria nematodes restoration plants soil-biodiversity

en: Please note that EMF, MF.below, MF.abio and Soil.hetero have been corrected.

en: Functional diversity above_belowground fauna

en: Please note that C.sto and Corg have been corrected.

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

Resch, M. C., Schütz, M., Buchmann, N., Frey, B., Graf, U., van der Putten, W. H., Zimmermann, S., Risch, A. C. 2021. Evaluating long-term success in grassland restoration – an ecosystem multifunctionality approach. Ecological Applications 31, e02271.

 Study area

The study was conducted in the Canton of Zurich, Switzerland, in and around two nature reserves Eigental and Altläufe der Glatt (47°27’ to 47°29’ N, 8°37’ to 8°32’ E, 417 to 572 m a.s.l.). All studied grasslands were located with a radius of approximately 4 km. Average monthly temperatures range from 0.7 ± 2.0 °C (January) to 19.0 ± 1.5 °C (July), and monthly precipitation range from 60 ± 42 mm (January) to 118 ± 46 mm (July [maxima]; 1989-2017; MeteoSchweiz 2018). In our study, we focused on semi-dry and semi-wet oligo- to mesotrophic grasslands characterized by high plant species richness and groundwater fluctuations throughout the year (Delarze et al. 2015, see also Resch et al. 2019).

 Experimental design and sampling

A large-scale restoration experiment to expand and reconnect isolated remnants of species-rich grasslands was initiated in the nature reserve Eigental in 1990. Twenty hectares of adjacent intensive grasslands were chosen for restoration. In 1995, three restoration methods of increasing intervention intensities were implemented. The goal of all three methods was to lower the availability of soil nutrients and hence, facilitate ecosystem development towards the targeted nutrient-poor grasslands. These methods were: Harvest only (hay harvest twice a year), Topsoil (removal of the nutrient-rich topsoil), and Topsoil+Propagules (topsoil removal combined with the application of hay from target vegetation). Plant biomass harvest (once a year in late summer/early autumn) commenced in Topsoil and Topsoil+Propagules five years after the soils were removed and is still ongoing today. We measured restoration success by comparing the three restoration methods with intensively managed (Initial) and semi-natural grasslands (Target) 22 years after restoration. Initial grassland sites share the same agricultural history as the restored sites: mowing and subsequent fertilizing (manure) up to five times a year, as well as different tillage regimes (Resch et al. 2019). Target sites were the sites from which hay for seeding the Topsoil+Propagules sites was collected. Soil conditions (i.e., soil types, soil texture) were comparable to those found in the restored grasslands (Resch et al. 2019). Additionally, Target sites were selected to represent a variety of semi-natural grasslands, including semi-dry to semi-wet conditions. In Target grasslands, biomass is harvested once a year in late summer or early autumn. Eleven 5 m x 5 m (25 m2) plots were randomly established in each of the five treatments (in total 55 plots; for a detailed map see Neff et al. 2020). An additional 2 m x 2 m (4 m2) subplot was randomly established at least 2 m away from each 25 m2 plot for destructive sampling. Data sampling took place between June and September 2017.

Vegetation properties

All plant species were identified within the 25 m2 plots (nomenclature: Lauber and Wagner 1996) in mid-June 2017 (in total 250 species). Vegetation structure and plant biomass were assessed diagonally on a transect of 2 m x 10 cm within the 25 m2 plot in early July 2017. We measured the maximum and mean height of the vegetation at the start, middle and end of the transect and calculated the standard deviation of these measures to describe vegetation structural heterogeneity (Schuldt et al. 2019). Thereafter, biomass was clipped on the entire transect to 1 cm height, sorted into five functional groups (graminoids, forbs, legumes, litter, and woody species), dried at 60 °C for 48 h, and weighed (Meyer et al. 2015).

 Aboveground arthropods

Aboveground arthropods were sampled at two locations in each 25 m2 plot in early July 2017 (see also Neff et al. 2020). Briefly, two cylindrical baskets (50 cm diameter, 67 cm height; woven fabric) were thrown simultaneously from outside the plot into two opposite corners. A closable mosquito mesh sleeve was mounted to the top of the baskets and an integrated metal ring at the bottom was fixed to the ground with metal stakes to assure that insects could not escape. A suction sampler (Vortis, Burkhard Manufacturing Co. Ltd., Hertfordshire, England) was then inserted into one of the baskets through the opening of the sleeve and the plot was “vacuumed" twice for 105 seconds with a 30 seconds break. The collected animals were immediately transferred into 70% ethanol. Arthropods were sorted and assigned to 23 taxonomic groups. Holometabolic larvae were lumped into one category while hemimetabolic larvae were grouped separately from adults in the respective taxonomic rank. We used mean values of individuals per plot for total abundance. Aboveground arthropod richness was defined by the number of different taxa to lowest taxonomic level (in total 23 taxa). All taxa were assigned to one of five trophic levels: 1) primary producers, 2) primary consumers, 3) secondary consumers, 4) tertiary consumers, and 5) quaternary consumers.

 Belowground fauna

Sampling of all belowground fauna took place in mid-July 2017. Earthworms were sampled in two 30 cm x 30 cm x 20 cm soil monoliths at two opposite corners of the 25 m2 plot (opposite to aboveground arthropod sampling). The excavated soil monolith was broken by hand, all earthworms collected and immediately transferred in a 4% formaldehyde solution. Thereafter, earthworm individuals were identified to species level (in total 10 taxa; Christian and Zicsi 1999) and species assigned to three functional groups (Bouché 1977).
To assess soil arthropod communities, we randomly collected one undisturbed soil core (5 cm diameter, 12 cm depth) in each 4 m2 subplot with a slide hammer corer lined with a plastic sleeve (AMS Samplers, American Falls, Idaho, USA). Soil arthropods were extracted using Berlese-Tullgren funnels (3 mm mesh), starting the day of sampling and lasting 14 days. Individuals were stored in 70% ethanol. Soil arthropods were assigned to 41 taxonomic groups and 4 feeding types. Holometabolic and hemimetabolic larvae were treated as previously described for aboveground arthropods. Belowground arthropod richness refers to the 41 taxonomic groups.

For soil nematode sampling, we randomly collected eight soil cores of 2.2 cm diameter (Giddings Machine Company, Windsor, CO, USA) within each 4 m2 subplot to a depth of 12 cm. The eight cores were combined, gently homogenized, placed in coolers, kept at 4 °C and transported to the laboratory at NIOO in Wageningen (NL) within one week after collection. Free-living nematodes were extracted from 200 g of fresh soil using Oostenbrink elutriator (Oostenbrink 1960) and prepared for morphological identification and quantification as described by Resch et al. (2019). Nematodes were identified to family level (39 taxa) according to Bongers (1988), assigned to 17 functional groups, 5 feeding types and 5 colonizer-persister (C-P) classes (Yeates et al. 1993, Bongers 1990, Resch et al. 2019).

We randomly collected two more soil cores (2.2 cm diameter x 12 cm depth) within each 4 m2 subplot to determine soil microbial communities. Again, the soil cores were combined, homogenized, placed in coolers and transported to the laboratory at WSL in Birmensdorf (Switzerland) where the metagenomic DNA was extracted from 8 g sieved soil (2 mm) using the DNeasy PowerMax Soil Kit (Quiagen, Hilden, NRW, GER) according to the manufacturer`s instructions. PCR amplification of the V3-V4 region of the prokaryotic small-subunit (16S) and the ribosomal internal transcribed spacer region (ITS2) of eukaryotes was performed with 1 ng of template DNA utilizing PCR primers and conditions as previously described (Frey et al., 2016). PCRs were run in triplicates and pooled. The pooled amplicons were sent to the Genome Quebec Innovation Centre (Montreal, QC, Canada) for barcoding using the Fluidigm Access Array technology (Fluidigm) and paired-end sequencing on the Illumina MiSeq v3 platform (Illumina Inc., San Diego, CA, USA). Quality filtering, clustering into operational taxonomic units (OTUs) and taxonomic assignment were performed as described by Frey et al. (2016) and Adamczyk et al. (2019). We used a customised pipeline largely based on UPARSE (Edgar 2013) implemented in USEARCH v. 9.2 (Edgar 2010). After discarding singletons of dereplicated sequences, clustering into OTUs with 97% sequence similarity was performed (Edgar 2013). Quality-filtered reads were mapped on the filtered set of centroid sequences. Taxonomic classification of prokaryotic and fungal sequences was conducted querying against most recent versions of SILVA (v.132, Quast et al. 2013) and UNITE (v.8, Nilsson et al. 2018). Only taxonomic assignments with confidence rankings equal or higher than 0.8 were accepted (assignments below 0.8 set to unclassified). Prokaryotic OTUs assigned to mitochondria or chloroplasts as well as eukaryotic OTUs assigned other than fungi were removed prior to data analysis. In addition, prokaryotic and fungal datasets were filtered to discard singletons and doubletons. Thereafter, OTU abundance matrices were rarefied to the lowest number of sequences per community, to normalize the total number of reads and achieve parity between samples (Prokaryota: 29,843 reads; Fungi: 26,690 reads). Finally, prokaryotic and fungal observed richness (number of OTUs) were estimated (Prokaryota: 14,010 OTUs; Fungi: 5,813 OTUs). For prokaryotes, we distinguished five and for fungi six functional types based on lowest taxonomic resolution (Nguyen et al. 2016, Tedersoo et al. 2014). Belowground taxon richness was defined by the total number of earthworm, arthropod, nematode, fungi, and prokaryote taxa assigned to lowest taxonomic level. Finally, all belowground taxa were assigned to the same five trophic levels as the aboveground arthropods.

 Soil chemical and physical properties, soil nitrogen mineralization

We randomly collected three 5 cm diameter x 12 cm depth soil samples in each 4 m2 subplot with a slide hammer corer (AMS Samplers, American Falls, Idaho, USA), pooled them and then made two subsamples. One was field-fresh and stored at 3 °C until analysis, the other was dried for 48 h at 60 °C and passed through a 4 mm mesh. From the dried sample, we measured soil pH potentiometrically in 0.01 M CaCl2 (soil:solution ratio=1:2; 30 minutes equilibration time). Total and organic carbon content were measured on fine-ground samples (≤ 0.5 mm) by dry combustion using a CN analyzer NC 2500 (CE Instruments, Wigan, United Kingdom). Inorganic carbon of samples with a pH > 6.5 was removed with acid vapor prior to analysis of organic carbon (Walthert et al. 2010). We calculated total soil carbon (C) storage after correcting its content for soil depth, stone content and density of fine earth (see below). Exchangeable cations were determined on another 5 g dry soil sample with 50 mL unbuffered 1 M NH4Cl solution (soil:solution ratio=1:10, end-over-end shaker for 1.5 hours) and measured by an ICP-OES (Optima 7300 DV, Perkin-Elmer, Waltham, Massachusetts, USA). Thereafter, cation exchange capacity (CEC) was calculated as the sum of exchangeable cations and protons (and expressed as mmolc per 1 kg soil) and used to describe nutrient retention capacity in our plots. Concentrations of exchangeable protons were calculated as the difference between total and Al-induced exchangeable acidity as determined by the KCl-method (Thomas 1982).

Ammonium (NH4+) and nitrate (NO3−) were extracted from a 20 g fresh subsample with 80 mL 1M KCl for 1.5 hours on an end-over-end shaker and filtered through ashless folded filter paper (DF 5895 150, ALBET LabScience, Hahnemühle FineArt GmbH, Dassel, Germany). NH4+ concentrations were determined colorimetrically by automated flow injection analysis (FIAS 300, Perkin-Elmer, Waltham, Massachusetts, USA). NO3− concentrations were measured colorimetrically according to Norman and Stucki (1981). Potential soil net nitrogen (N) mineralization was assessed during an 8-week incubation period under controlled moisture (60% of field capacity), temperature (20 °C) and light conditions (dark) in the laboratory. We weighed duplicate samples of fresh soil equivalent to 8 g dry soil (24 h at 104 °C) into 50 mL Falcon tubes. Soil samples were extracted for NH4+ and NO3− at the beginning and after eight weeks as described above. Soil net N mineralization was calculated as the difference between the inorganic nitrogen (NH4+ and NO3−) before and after the incubation (Hart et al. 1994), corrected for the total incubation time and represented per day values expressed as mg N kg-1 soil d-1.

To assess soil physical properties, we randomly collected one undisturbed soil core per 4 m2 subplot (5 cm diameter, 12 cm depth) in a steel cylinder that fit into the slide hammer (AMS Samplers, American Falls, Idaho, USA). The cylinder was capped in the field to avoid disturbance. We then measured field capacity in the laboratory. For this purpose, the cylinder and soil therein were saturated in a water bath and drained on a sand/silt-bed with a suction corresponding to 60 cm hydrostatic head. The moist soil was dried at 105 °C to constant weight. Field capacity was calculated by dividing the mass of water by the total mass of wet soil contained at 60 cm hydrostatic head and used to describe water holding capacity. Thereafter, samples were passed through a 4 mm mesh. Fine-earth and skeleton fractions were weighed separately to assess bulk soil density (fine-earth plus skeleton), density of fine earth, and proportion of skeleton. Particle density was determined with the pycnometer method (Blake and Hartge 1986), and total porosity and proportion of fine pores were calculated (Danielson and Sutherland 1986). Clay, silt, and sand contents were quantified with the sediment method (Gee and Bauder 1986).

Surface and soil temperature (12 cm depth, water-resistant digital pocket thermometer; IP65, H-B Instrument, Trappe, Pennsylvania, USA) as well as volumetric soil moisture content (12 cm depth, time domain reflectometry; Field-Scout TDR 300, Spectrum Technologies, Aurora, Illinois, USA) were measured at five random locations within the 4 m2 subplots every month from June to September. We calculated the standard deviation of each temperature and moisture measure over four months to describe seasonal variations. Slope inclination was determined at plot-level via GPS measurements (GPS 1200, Leica Geosystem, Heerbrugg, Switzerland) and categorized into slope gradient classes according to FAO standards (1990). Thickness of the topsoil horizon (equivalent to Ah or Aa horizon) was determined at one soil monolith (30 x 30 x 30 cm3) per 4 m2 subplot in cm and rounded to next integer.

 References

Adamczyk, M., F. Hagedorn, S. Wipf, J. Donhauser, P. Vittoz, C. Rixen, A. Frossard, J. Theurillat, and B. Frey. 2019. The soil microbiome of GLORIA mountain summits in the Swiss Alps. Frontiers in Microbiology 10:1080-1101.

Blake, G.R., and K. H. Hartge. 1986. Particle Density. Pages 377-382 in A. Klute, editor. Methods of soil analysis: Part 1—Physical and mineralogical methods. Soil Science Society of America (SSSA) Inc., Madison.

Bongers, T. 1988. De nematoden van Nederland. Stichting Uitgeverij van de Koniklijke Nederlandse Natuurhistorische Verenigung (KNNV), Utrecht.

Bongers, T. 1990. The maturity index: an ecological measure of environmental disturbance based on nematode species composition. Oecologia 83:14-19.

Bouché, M. B. 1977. Strategies lombriciennes. Ecological Bulletins 25:122-132.

Christian, E., and A. Zicsi. 1999. Ein synoptischer Bestimmungsschlüssel der Regenwürmer Österreichs (Oligochaeta: Lumbricidae). Die Bodenkultur 50:121-131.

Danielson, R. E., and P. L. Sutherland. 1986. Porosity. Pages 443-461 in A. Klute, editor. Methods of soil analysis: Part 1—Physical and mineralogical methods. Soil Science Society of America (SSSA) Inc., Madison.

Delarze, R., Y. Gonseth, S. Eggenberg, and M. Vust. 2015. Lebensräume der Schweiz: Ökologie ‐ Gefährdung ‐ Kennarten, Ott Verlag, Bern.

Edgar, R. C. 2010. Search and clustering orders of magnitude faster than BLAST. Bioinformatics 26:2460–2461.

Edgar, R. C. 2013. UPARSE: highly accurate OTU sequences from microbial amplicon reads. Nature Methods 10:996–998.

FAO. 1990. Guidelines for soil description, third ed. Land and Water Development Division at the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Rome.

Frey, B., T. Rime, M. Phillips, B. Stierli, I. Hajdas, F. Widmer, and M. Hartmann. 2016. Microbial diversity in European alpine permafrost and active layers. FEMS Microbiology Ecology 92:fiw018.

Gee, G.W., and J. W. Bauder. 1986. Particle-size analysis. Pages 383-411 in A. Klute, editor. Methods of soil analysis: Part 1—Physical and mineralogical methods. Soil Science Society of America (SSSA) Inc., Madison.

Hart, S. C, J. M. Stark, E. A. Davidson, and M. K. Firestone. 1994. Nitrogen mineralization, immobilization, and nitrification. Pages 985-1016 in R. W. Weaver, S. Angle, P. Bottomley, D. Bezdicek, S. Smith, A. Tabatabai, and A. Wollum, editors. Methods of soil analysis: Part 2—Microbiological and biochemical properties. Soil Science Society of America (SSSA) Inc., Madison.

Lauber, K., Wagner, G., 1996. Flora Helvetica. Flora der Schweiz. Haupt Verlag, Bern.

MeteoSchweiz, 2018. Klimabulletin Jahr 2017. MeteoSchweiz, Zürich.

Meyer, S. T., C. Koch, and W. W. Weisser. 2015. Towards a standardized rapid ecosystem function assessment (REFA). Trends in Ecology and Evolution 30:390-397.

Neff, F., M. C. Resch, A. Marty, J. Rolley, M. Schütz, A. C. Risch, and M. M. Gossner. 2020. Long-term restoration success of insect herbivore communities in semi-natural grasslands – a functional approach. Ecological Applications 0:e02133

Nguyen, N.H., Z. W. Song, S. T. Bates, S. Branco, L. Tedersoo, J. Menke, J. S. Schilling, and P. G. Kennedy. 2016. FUNGuild: an open annotation tool for parsing fungal community datasets by ecological guild. Fungal Ecology 20:241–248.

Nilsson, R. H., K.-H. Larsson, A. F. S. Taylor, J. Bengtsson-Palme, T. S. Jeppesen, D. Schigel, P. G. Kennedy, K. Picard, F. O. Glöckner, L. Tedersoo, I. Saar, U. Kõljalg, and K. Abarenkov. 2018. The UNITE database for molecular identification of fungi: handling dark taxa and parallel taxonomic classifications. Nucleic Acids Research 47:259–264.

Norman, R. J., and J. W. Stucki. 1981. The Determination of Nitrate and Nitrite in Soil Extracts by Ultraviolet Spectrophotometry. Soil Science Society of America Journal 45:347-353.

Oostenbrink, M. 1960. Estimating nematode populations by some selected methods. Pages 81-101 in J. J. Sasser, and W. R. Jenkins, editors. Nematology. Univ. of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill.

Quast, C., E. Pruesse, P. Yilmaz, J. Gerken, T. Schweer, P. Yarza, J. Peplies, and F. O. Glöckner. 2013. The SILVA ribosomal RNA gene database project: improved data processing and web-based tools. Nucleic Acids Research 41:590-596.

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

Schuldt, A., A. Ebeling, M. Kunz, M. Staab, C. Guimarães-Steinicke, D. Bachmann, N. Buchmann, W. Durka, A. Fichtner, F. Fornoff, W. Härdtle, L. R. Hertzog, A-N. Klein, C. Roscher, J. Schaller, von G. Oheimb, A. Weigelt, W. Weisser, C.Wirth, J. Zhang, H. Bruelheide, and N. Eisenhauer. 2019. Multiple plant diversity components drive consumer communities across ecosystems. Nature Communications 10:1460.

Tedersoo, L., M. Bahram, S. Põlme, U. Kõljalg, N. S. Yorou, R. Wijesundera, L. Villarreal Ruiz, A. M. Vasco-Palacios, P. Q. Thu, A. Suija, M. E. Smith, C. Sharp, E. Saluveer, A. Saitta, M. Rosas, T. Riit, D. Ratkowsky, K. Pritsch, K. Põldmaa, M. Piepenbring, C. Phosri, M. Peterson, K. Parts, K. Pärtel, E. Otsing, E. Nouhra, A. L. Njouonkou, R. H. Nilsson, L. N. Morgado, J. Mayor, T. W. May, L. Majuakim, D. J. Lodge, S. See Lee, K.-H. Larsson, P. Kohout, K. Hosaka, I. Hiiesalu, T. W. Henkel, H. Harend, L.-D. Guo, A. Greslebin, G. Grelet, J. Geml, G. Gates, W. Dunstan, C. Dunk, R. Frenkhan, L. Dearnaley, A. De Kesel, T. Dang, X. Chen, F. Buegger, F. Q. Brearley, G. Bonito, S. Anslan, S. Abell, and K. Abarenkov. 2014. Global diversity and geography of soil fungi. Science 346:1256688.

Thomas, G.W. 1982. Exchangeable cations. Pages 159-165 in A. L. Page, R. H. Miller, and D. R. Keeney, editors. Methods of Soil Analysis: Part 2—Chemical and microbiological properties. Soil Science Society of America (SSSA) Inc., Madison.

Walthert, L., U. Graf, A. Kammer, J. Luster, D. Pezzotta, S. Zimmermann, and F. Hagedorn. 2010. Determination of organic and inorganic carbon, δ13C, and nitrogen in soils containing carbonates after acid fumigation with HCl. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Sciences 173:207-216.

Yeates, G. W., T. Bongers, R. G. M. de Goede, D. W. Freckman, and S. S. Georgieva. 1993. Feeding habits in soil nematode families and genera – an outline for soil ecologists. Journal of Nematology 25:315-331.

bacteria

display_name: bacteria

biodiversity

display_name: biodiversity

ecosystem-multifunctionality

display_name: ecosystem-multifunctionality

fungi

display_name: fungi

grassland

display_name: grassland

mineralization

display_name: mineralization

nematodes

display_name: nematodes

plants

display_name: plants

restoration

display_name: restoration

soil-biodiversity

display_name: soil-biodiversity

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: Restoring grassland multifunctionality


digitizing-historical-plague

maintainer: Christian Ginzler

title_for_slug: digitizing-historical-plague

en: black-death plague-mapping bubonic-plague palaeo-epidemiology yersinia-pestis historical-plague plague-outbreaks plague-inventory

en: We present newly digitized data on 6,929 plague outbreaks that occurred between 1347 and 1900 AD across Europe. The data base on an inventory initially published 1976. For georeferencing the information of Tele Atlas 2009 was used. The coordinates are in the reference systems ETRS89 and WGS84.

black-death

display_name: black-death

bubonic-plague

display_name: bubonic-plague

historical-plague

display_name: historical-plague

palaeo-epidemiology

display_name: palaeo-epidemiology

plague-inventory

display_name: plague-inventory

plague-mapping

display_name: plague-mapping

plague-outbreaks

display_name: plague-outbreaks

yersinia-pestis

display_name: yersinia-pestis

en: Digitizing historical plague


en: antarctica gridded-data terrestrial-laser-scans depth-of-snowfall terrestiral-laserscanning

en: Scan from 11 January 2019, 10 cm resolution, version 2

en: Scan from 2 January 2019, 10 cm resolution

en: Scan from 4 January 2019, 1 mm resolution

en: Scan from 27 December 2018, 1 mm resolution

en: Deprecated: Scan from 11 January 2019, 10 cm resolution, version 1

en: This resource is deprecated. It contains erroneous data.

en: Scan from 21 December 2018, 10 cm resolution

en: Scan from 27 December 2018, 10 cm resolution

en: Scan from 2 January 2019, 1 mm resolution

en: Scan from 11 January 2019, 1 mm resolution

en: Scan from 4 January 2019, 10 cm resolution

en: Scan from 21 December 2018, 1 mm resolution

en:
Surface topography maps (spatial extent: 400 m x 400 m) obtained at approximately 300 m from the top of the Hammarryggen Ice Rise in Dronning Maud Land, East Antarctica, using a Riegl VZ-6000 Terrestrial Laser Scanner (TLS). Scans were obtained on 5 days in the 2018-2019 Austral summer: on December 21 and 27, and January 2, 4 and 11. By using reflectors installed on bamboo poles, scans were registered with respect to the reflectors, such that the difference between two successive scans reveals the spatial patterns of erosion and deposition of snow. On each scan day, we used multiple scan positions to create one combined point cloud. After applying an octree filter on the point cloud, a 3D surface was obtained. For each day, the dataset contains a 1 mm and a 10 cm octree filter resolution file, only including points in a 400 m x 400 m area centered around the scan positions.

Notes:

* All files in the dataset are in the same coordinate system. However, this coordinate system is arbitrary (i.e., not related to any global coordinate system).

* From the installed reflectors, 4 reflectors could be used over the full period. The scan accuracy is generally higher within the area enclosed by the reflectors.

* The scans from January 2 were found to have exhibited small tilt during the scan and are of lesser accuracy.

* By walking along fixed corridors, disturbance of the snow was limited.

antarctica

display_name: antarctica

depth-of-snowfall

display_name: depth-of-snowfall

gridded-data

display_name: gridded-data

terrestiral-laserscanning

display_name: terrestiral-laserscanning

terrestrial-laser-scans

display_name: terrestrial-laser-scans

en: Terrestrial laser scans on Hammarryggen Ice Rise, Dronning Maud Land, East Antarctica


maintainer: Elisabeth Hafner

en: remote-sensing avalanche-mapping avalanche-size-estimation reliability avalanche

en: AvalancheReliabilityData

en: The .zip contains all data used to conduct the reliability study as well as the results, a detailed description of the included files is contained in the included pdf. All geospatial data is provided in the Swiss Coordinate System: CH1903+ / LV95 (EPSG 2056). For any use of the data the proper citation provided is obligatory!

mimetype: application/x-zip-compressed

en:
This dataset contains the data used and collected to investigate the reliability of avalanche size estimates and avalanche outlines (see related publications). Namely this is

 Avalanche size estimates

* the 10 pictures depicting avalanches
* the survey results from the 170 participants

 Avalanche outlines mapped from oblique photographs
* the pictures of the six avalanches
* the avalanche outlines mapped by the 10 participants
* the reference mapped from the georeferenced photographs

 Avalanche outlines from remotely-sensed imagery
* the orthophotos in the four different resolutions (2m, 1m, 50cm, 25cm)
* the area of interest (AoI) delimiting the research area
* the avalanche mappings in each resolution for all five participants
* the shade masks used to separate illuminated and shaded areas

The acquisition of the orthophotos has been partially supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF; Grant N°200021_172800).

avalanche

display_name: avalanche

avalanche-mapping

display_name: avalanche-mapping

avalanche-size-estimation

display_name: avalanche-size-estimation

reliability

display_name: reliability

remote-sensing

display_name: remote-sensing

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: Data reliability study: avalanche size estimates and outlines


en: biomass tree-volume single-tree terrestiral-laserscanning lidar forest-inventory

en: Individual tree parameters and volume estimates based on TLS point clouds and allometric models

en:
"ASM" denotes volume estimates calculated by allometric scaling models (as used in Swiss NFI), based on tree height, DBH and D7.
"QSM" denotes volume estimates derived from TLS point clouds by quantitative structure models (QSM).
The remaining variables are geometrical features directly calculated from single tree TLS point clouds.
For more detailed variable descriptions see related publication.

en:
 Dataset
This dataset is based on terrestrial laser scanning (TLS) data acquired during winter 2020/2021 in leaf-off conditions, with a Leica BLK 360 instrument following a tree-centric scanning pattern.
The data was acquired on two sites (47.42°N 8.49°E and 47.504°N, 7.78°E), both of which were managed mixed temperate forest stands.
Individual trees were semi-automatically segmented from the co-registered TLS point clouds.

 Background
Accurate estimates of individual tree volume or biomass within forest inventories are essential for calibration and validation of biomass mapping products based on Earth observation data.
Terrestrial laser scanning (TLS) enables detailed and non-destructive volume estimation of individual trees, with existing approaches ranging from simple geometrical features to virtual 3D reconstruction of entire trees. Validating such approaches with weight measurements is a key step before the integration of TLS or other close-range technologies into operational applications such as forest inventories.
In this study, we firstly evaluate individual tree volume estimation approaches based on 3D reconstruction through quantitative structure models (QSM) against destructive reference data of 60 trees and compare them to operational allometric scaling models (ASM).
Secondly, we determine the explanatory power of TLS-derived geometric parameters regarding total tree, stem, coarse wood and fine branch volume.

biomass

display_name: biomass

forest-inventory

display_name: forest-inventory

lidar

display_name: lidar

single-tree

display_name: single-tree

tree-volume

display_name: tree-volume

en: Individual tree TLS point clouds for tree volume estimation


photogrammetric-drone-data-gruenbodeli

title_for_slug: photogrammetric-drone-data-gruenbodeli

en: dsm uav wingtra snow-depth-mapping orthophoto photogrammetry drone-data

en: Data Access

en:
- ortho (3 cm/25 mm resolution)
- DSM (10 cm resolution)
- HS (10 cm resolution)
- RGB images
- Agisoft Metashape Project Report

All products are also available as a cloud optimized geotiff.

en:
We conducted various drone flights at Grüenbödeli near Davos with the Sony RX1R II mounted on a Wingtra drone during 2020/21/22. The data was processed with the Agisoft Metashape Professional Software.
The following products are available for download:
- DSM 10cm resolution
- Orthomosaic 3cm/25mm resolution
- Snow Raster 10cm resolution
- original RGB images

drone-data

display_name: drone-data

dsm

display_name: dsm

orthophoto

display_name: orthophoto

photogrammetry

display_name: photogrammetry

snow-depth-mapping

display_name: snow-depth-mapping

uav

display_name: uav

wingtra

display_name: wingtra

en: Photogrammetric Drone Data Grüenbödeli


en: arma-noise irf time-series-analysis de-mixing greens-function irfnnhsr system-identification nonlinear-deconvolution impulse-response-function deconvolution transfer-function

en: Benchmark demonstration scripts and results

en: Impulse Response Function script

en: README file for IRFnnhs.R and benchmark demonstration scripts

en:
The R script IRFnnhs.R, which efficiently estimates impulse response functions for environmental systems that are nonlinear, nonstationary, or heterogeneous, based on their input and output time series.

Scripts and results for a series of benchmark tests are also provided, to accompany Kirchner, J.W., Impulse response functions for heterogeneous, nonstationary, and nonlinear systems, estimated by deconvolution and demixing of noisy time series, _Sensors_, 22(9), 3291, https://doi.org/10.3390/s22093291, 2022.

arma-noise

display_name: arma-noise

de-mixing

display_name: de-mixing

deconvolution

display_name: deconvolution

greens-function

display_name: greens-function

impulse-response-function

display_name: impulse-response-function

irf

display_name: irf

irfnnhsr

display_name: irfnnhsr

nonlinear-deconvolution

display_name: nonlinear-deconvolution

system-identification

display_name: system-identification

time-series-analysis

display_name: time-series-analysis

transfer-function

display_name: transfer-function

en: Impulse response functions for nonlinear nonstationary and heterogeneous systems


en: saltation-parameterizations aerodynamic-entrainment drifting-snow large-eddy-simulation snow-saltation splash

en: Code and input files to reproduce the simulations in Melo et al. (2024), as well as the post-processing scripts used in the analysis.

en:
This dataset includes the necessary files to reproduce the results presented in Melo et al. (2024):
- code version used in the simulations (also available at the institutional [GitLab repository](https://gitlabext.wsl.ch/atmospheric-models/les-lsm) - tag 'r2024')
- input files to run the simulations
- post-processing scripts (MATLAB and FORTRAN)
- selected raw output files
- post-processed results (MATLAB data files).
 	**Note:** Direct model outputs are not provided because of their size, but they can be shared upon request. They can be reproduced by running the code. The post-processed results allow you to reproduce all figures in Melo et al. (2024).

aerodynamic-entrainment

display_name: aerodynamic-entrainment

drifting-snow

display_name: drifting-snow

large-eddy-simulation

display_name: large-eddy-simulation

saltation-parameterizations

display_name: saltation-parameterizations

snow-saltation

display_name: snow-saltation

splash

display_name: splash

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: Understanding snow saltation parameterizations - Reproducibility


maintainer: Anita Risch

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

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

en: Ecosystem coupling and multifunctionality - exclosure experiment