en: disturbance functional-taxonomic-groups lichen-growthform elevational-gradient climate-change-impact madeira-island liverwort climate-change endemic lichen-growth-form functional-taxonomic-group lichen bryophyte endemic-species moss photobiont biodiversity bryophyte-life-strategy

en: MadCrypto – Bryophyte and macrolichen diversity in laurel forests of Madeira

en:
This dataset includes species lists of bryophytes and macrolichens (presence/absence) sampled on the forest floor and on trees in disturbed and undisturbed plots along elevation gradients in the laurel forests of Madeira island. It also contains species specific information (bryophytes: red list status, endemic status, taxonomic group, life strategy; macrolichens: photobiont type, growth form) as well as plot information (Plot_ID, sampling date, coordinates, elevation a.s.l. (m), disturbance type, sampled host tree species).

The dataset was used for the paper
Boch S, Martins A, Ruas S, Fontinha S, Carvalho P, Reis F, Bergamini A, Sim-Sim M (2019) Bryophyte and macrolichen diversity show contrasting elevation relationships and are negatively affected by disturbances in laurel forests of Madeira island. Journal of Vegetation Science.

en:
This dataset includes species lists of bryophytes and macrolichens (presence/absence) sampled on the forest floor and on trees in disturbed and undisturbed plots along elevation gradients in the laurel forests of Madeira island. It also contains species specific information (bryophytes: red list status, endemic status, taxonomic group, life strategy; macrolichens: photobiont type, growth form) as well as plot information (Plot_ID, sampling date, coordinates, elevation a.s.l. (m), disturbance type, sampled host tree species).

The dataset was used for the paper
Boch S, Martins A, Ruas S, Fontinha S, Carvalho P, Reis F, Bergamini A, Sim-Sim M (2019) Bryophyte and macrolichen diversity show contrasting elevation relationships and are negatively affected by disturbances in laurel forests of Madeira island. Journal of Vegetation Science 30: 1122–1133.

The excel file contains 5 sheets:
1) Plot information
2) Bryophyte data with species specific information, separated per substrate
3) Macrolichen data with species specific information, separated per substrate
4) Bryophyte data with species specific information (plot level data). Species lists of the two substrates were merged; if one substrate in a plot hosted a species identified only to genus level (genus spec.) but the second investigated substrate hosted an identified species of the same genus, we removed the genus spec. entry in the particular plot. The species list of sheet 2 and 4 might therefore differ slightly.
5) Macrolichen data with species specific information (plot level data). Species lists of the two substrates were merged; if one substrate in a plot hosted a species identified only to genus level (genus spec.) but the second investigated substrate hosted an identified species of the same genus, we removed the genus spec. entry in the particular plot. The species list of sheet 3 and 5 might therefore differ slightly.

biodiversity

display_name: biodiversity

bryophyte

display_name: bryophyte

bryophyte-life-strategy

display_name: bryophyte-life-strategy

climate-change

display_name: climate-change

climate-change-impact

display_name: climate-change-impact

disturbance

display_name: disturbance

elevational-gradient

display_name: elevational-gradient

endemic

display_name: endemic

endemic-species

display_name: endemic-species

functional-taxonomic-group

display_name: functional-taxonomic-group

functional-taxonomic-groups

display_name: functional-taxonomic-groups

lichen

display_name: lichen

lichen-growth-form

display_name: lichen-growth-form

lichen-growthform

display_name: lichen-growthform

liverwort

display_name: liverwort

madeira-island

display_name: madeira-island

moss

display_name: moss

photobiont

display_name: photobiont


maintainer: EnviDat Support

en: soil-chemistry grassland biodiversity plants soil bacteria restoration soil-biodiversity fungi nematodes topsoil-removal soil-biology

state: active

type: dataset

en: Distance to target results

en:
Community	biotic community (vegetation, nematoda, fungi, prokaryota)
Treatment	Treatment groups; Y.4-30= restored grasslands (time since restoration); Initial=intensively managed grasslands (I)
Comparison	within- or between-community Bray-Curtis dissimilarity distance comparison
Label	within-community distances of initial/restored grasslands: treatment abbreviation; between-communities distances of initial/restored-to-target grasslands: treatment abbreviation plus Target (T; species-rich grasslands)
mean	Mean distance to Target (6 plots per treatment group)
sd	Standard deviation of distances to Target (6 plots per treatment group)

format: XLS

en: Fungi data

en:
Sample.data
Plot.ID	consecutive numbers for plots (in total 36 plots)
Treatment	One restoration treatment and two reference treatments. Topsoil+Propagules= Topsoil removal (upper 10-30 cm) combined with introduction of target plant species; Initial=intensively managed grasslands; Target= species-rich semi-wet to semi-dry grasslands
treat.yr	Treatment abbreviation. For restored grasslands: Treatment abbreviation + time since restoration; Initial + Target = NA
yr.trt	year when topsoil was removed; Initial + Target = NA
Age	time since restoration (sampling year 2018 - yr.trt); Initial + Target = NA
Age.class	restored sites of similar age grouped into four age classes. Y.4 = Year 3+4 (recently restored); Y.18 = Year 17+19 (mid-term); Y.24 = Year 23+25 (long-term); Y.30 = Year 27+32 (long-term); Initial + Target = NA
Cluster	clustered spatial arrangment of sites in the field (see Supporting Information Fig. S1)
Site	clustered spatial arrangment (replicates) of plots per site (see Supporting Information Fig. S1)

Taxonomy
OTU.ID	consecutive numbers for operational taxonomic units (OTUe 1-7794)
Taxonomic rank	Domain, Phylum, Class, Order, Family, Genus, Species

Abundance
columns	Plot.ID (see Sample.data)
rows	OTU.ID (see Taxonomy)

en: Ecosystem coupling_interactions

en:
Treatment	Treatment groups; Y.4-18 = restored grasslands; Initial = intensively managed grasslands; Target = species-rich semi-wet to semi-dry grasslands
Type	Interactions type; A.A = abiotic.abiotic; A.B = abiotic.biotic; B.B = biotic.biotic
Correlation	non-parametric Spearman rank correlations between biotic and abiotic parameters (ecological interactions)

en: Vegetation data

en:
Plot.ID	consecutive numbers for plots (in total 36 plots)
Treatment	One restoration treatment and two reference treatments. Topsoil+Propagules= Topsoil removal (upper 10-30 cm) combined with introduction of target plant species; Initial=intensively managed grasslands; Target= species-rich semi-wet to semi-dry grasslands
treat.yr	Treatment abbreviation. For restored grasslands: Treatment abbreviation + time since restoration; Initial + Target = NA
yr.trt	year when topsoil was removed; Initial + Target = NA
Age	time since restoration (sampling year 2018 - yr.trt); Initial + Target = NA
Age.class	restored sites of similar age grouped into four age classes. Y.4 = Year 3+4 (recently restored); Y.18 = Year 17+19 (mid-term); Y.24 = Year 23+25 (long-term); Y.30 = Year 27+32 (long-term); Initial + Target = NA
Cluster	clustered spatial arrangment of sites in the field (see Supporting Information Fig. S1)
Site	clustered spatial arrangment (replicates) of plots per site (see Supporting Information Fig. S1)
column I-LW	Plant abundance per species (in total 327 plant species) expressed as cover percentage estimation according to van der Maarel (vdM 1979; 7 classes: 1-7); nomenclature according to Lauber & Wagner (1996)

en: Soil properties

en:
Plot.ID	consecutive numbers for plots (in total 36 plots)
Treatment	One restoration treatment and two reference treatments. Topsoil+Propagules= Topsoil removal (upper 10-30 cm) combined with introduction of target plant species; Initial=intensively managed grasslands; Target= species-rich semi-wet to semi-dry grasslands
treat.yr	Treatment abbreviation. For restored grasslands: Treatment abbreviation + time since restoration; Initial + Target = NA
yr.trt	year when topsoil was removed; Initial + Target = NA
Age	time since restoration (sampling year 2018 - yr.trt); Initial + Target = NA
Age.class	restored sites of similar age grouped into four age classes. Y.4 = Year 3+4 (recently restored); Y.18 = Year 17+19 (mid-term); Y.24 = Year 23+25 (long-term); Y.30 = Year 27+32 (long-term); Initial + Target = NA
Cluster	clustered spatial arrangment of sites in the field (see Supporting Information Fig. S1)
Site	clustered spatial arrangment (replicates) of plots per site (see Supporting Information Fig. S1)
N.pool	Soil nitrogen pool (June 2017); corrected for bulk density and 12 cm sampling depth [kg ha-1 12cm-1]
Corg.pool	Soil organic carbon pool (June 2017); corrected for bulk density and 12 cm sampling depth [kg ha-1 12cm-1]
pH	soil pH [CaCl2]
BD	Bulk density [g cm-3]
FC	Field capacity [%]
Veg.1	principle coordinate axis 1 (vegetation)
Veg.1	principle coordinate axis 2 (vegetation)
Nem.1	principle coordinate axis 1 (nematoda)
Nem.2	principle coordinate axis 2 (nematoda)
Fun.1	principle coordinate axis 1 (fungi)
Fun.2	principle coordinate axis 2 (fungi)
Prok.1	principle coordinate axis 1 (prokaryota)
Prok.2	principle coordinate axis 2 (prokaryota)
Veg.H	Shannon diversity (vegetation)
Nem.H	Shannon diversity (nematoda)
Fun.H	Shannon diversity (fungi)
Prok.H	Shannon diversity (prokaryota)

en: Nematode data

en:
Sample.data
Plot.ID	consecutive numbers for plots (in total 36 plots)
Treatment	One restoration treatment and two reference treatments. Topsoil+Propagules= Topsoil removal (upper 10-30 cm) combined with introduction of target plant species; Initial=intensively managed grasslands; Target= species-rich semi-wet to semi-dry grasslands
treat.yr	Treatment abbreviation. For restored grasslands: Treatment abbreviation + time since restoration; Initial + Target = NA
yr.trt	year when topsoil was removed; Initial + Target = NA
Age	time since restoration (sampling year 2018 - yr.trt); Initial + Target = NA
Age.class	restored sites of similar age grouped into four age classes. Y.4 = Year 3+4 (recently restored); Y.18 = Year 17+19 (mid-term); Y.24 = Year 23+25 (long-term); Y.30 = Year 27+32 (long-term); Initial + Target = NA
Cluster	clustered spatial arrangment of sites in the field (see Supporting Information Fig. S1)
Site	clustered spatial arrangment (replicates) of plots per site (see Supporting Information Fig. S1)

Taxonomy
ASV.ID	unit number.letter code per amplicon sequence variant (in total 904)
Taxonomic rank	Phylum, Class, Order, Family, Genus, Species

Abundance
columns	Plot.ID (see Sample.data)
rows	ASV.ID (see Taxonomy)

en: Networks

en:
Treatment	Treatment groups; Y.4-18 = restored grasslands; Initial = intensively managed grasslands; Target = species-rich semi-wet to semi-dry grasslands
Correlation	non-parametric Spearman rank correlations
Vertex.1+2	Comparison between network components; N.pool = total soil nitrogen pool [kg ha-1 12 cm-1]; Corg.pool = soil organic carbon pool [kg ha-1 12 cm-1], pH = soil pH [CaCl2]; BD = bulk density [g cm-3]; FC = field capacity [%]
	PCoA 1 + 2 biotic communities [Veg = vegetation; Nem = nematoda; Fun = fungi; Prok = prokaryota]
Type	Interactions type; A.A = abiotic.abiotic; A.B = abiotic.biotic; B.B = biotic.biotic

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

Paper Citation:

_Resch, M.C., Schütz, M., Ochoa-Hueso, R., Buchmann, N., Frey, B., Graf, U., van der Putten, W.H., Zimmermann, S., Risch, A.C. (in review). Long-term recovery of above- and belowground interactions in restored grassland after topsoil removal and seed addition. Journal of Applied Ecology_

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

Study area and experimental design
The study was conducted in and around two nature reserves, Eigental and Altläufe der Glatt, which were located approximately 5 km apart (47°27´ to 47°29´ N, 8°37´ to 8°32´ E, 417 to 572 m a.s.l., Canton of Zurich, Switzerland; Figure S1 and S2, Table S1). Mean annual temperature and precipitation are 9.8 ± 0.6 °C and 990 ± 168 mm (Kloten climate station 1988-2018; MeteoSchweiz, 2019). TFor this study, we used a space-for-time approach based on eight restoration sites that were between 3 and 32 years old. We measured recovery and restoration success by comparing the restored grasslands with intensively managed and semi-natural grasslands. Using a space-for-time approach requires high similarities in historical properties of the site, such as soil conditions and management regimes, to assure that temporal processes are appropriately represented by spatial patterns (Walker et al., 2010). This was the case in our study. The restored sites had similar soil conditions (i.e., soil type, structure, water availability) as the targeted semi-natural grasslands, while they shared the same agricultural legacy with intensively managed grasslands, i.e., biomass harvest and fertilization (manure and/or slurry) three to five times a year as well as tillage. We randomly established three 5 m x 5 m (25-m2) plots for plant identification and three 2 m x 2 m (4-m2) subplots for soil biotic and abiotic data collection at least 2 m away from the 25-m2 plots in each restoration site. Sites of similar age were grouped into four age classes: Y.4 (3 & 4 years after restoration), Y.18 (17 & 19 years), Y.24 (23 & 25 years), and Y.30 (27 & 32 years). Six intensively managed (Initial) and six semi-natural grassland (Target) sites complemented the experimental set-up, for a total of 36 plots. All plots were sampled under similar conditions, i.e., day of the year, air temperature, soil moisture, and time since last rain event, in June/July 2017 (intensively managed and semi-natural plots) and 2018 (restored plots).

Collection of plants and selected soil biota data
Plant species cover (in %) was visually estimated in each 25-m2 plot in mid-June (Braun-Blanquet, 1964; nomenclature: Lauber & Wagner, 1996). We calculated Shannon diversity and assessed plant community structure. We included soil microbial (fungi, procaryotes) and nematodes in our study as they represent the majority of soil biotic diversity and abundance (Bardgett & van der Putten, 2014), cover various trophic levels of the soil food web (Bongers & Ferris, 1999), and play key roles in soil functioning and ecosystem processes (Bardgett & van der Putten, 2014). In particular, soil nematodes were found to be well suited belowground indicators to evaluate recovery/development after restoration (e.g. Frouz, et al. 2008; Kardol et al., 2009; Resch et al., 2019). We randomly collected ten soil cores (2.2 cm diameter x 12 cm depths; sampler from Giddings Machine Company, Windsor, USA) in the 4-m2 subplots to assess soil nematode and microbial (fungal, prokaryotic) diversities and community structures. For soil nematodes, eight of the soil cores were combined and gently homogenized, placed in coolers and stored at 4 °C and transported to the laboratory (Netherlands Institute of Ecology, NIOO, Wageningen, Netherlands) within three days after collection. Free-living nematodes were extracted from 200 g of fresh soil using Oostenbrink elutriators (Oostenbrink, 1960). After extraction, each sample was divided into three subsamples, two for molecular identification and one to determine nematode abundance (see Resch et al., 2019). For the molecular work, two subsamples were stored in 70% ethanol (final volume 10 mL each) and transported to the laboratory at the Swiss Federal Research Institute WSL (Birmensdorf, Switzerland). Each subsample was reduced to roughly 200 μL by centrifugation and removal of the supernatant. The remaining ethanol was vaporized (65 °C for 3 h). Thereafter, 180 μL ATL buffer solution (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany) was immediately added and samples were stored at 4 °C until further processing. From these samples, nematode metagenomic DNA was extracted using the DNeasy Blood & Tissue Kit (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany) according to the manufacturer`s protocol, except for the incubation step which was run at 56 °C for 4 h. PCR amplification of the V6-V8 region of the eukaryotic small-subunit (18S) was performed with 7.5 μL of genomic DNA template (ca. 1 ng/μL) in 25 μL reactions containing 5 μL PCR reaction buffer, 2.5 mM MgCL2, 0.2 mM dNTPs, 0.8 μM of each primer (NemF: Sapkota & Nicolaisen, 2015; 18Sr2b: Porazinska et al., 2009), 0.5 μL BSA, and 0.25 μL GoTaq G2 Hot Start Polymerase (Promega Corporation, Madison, USA). Amplification was using an initial DNA denaturation step of 95 °C for 2 min, followed by 35 cycles at 94 °C for 40 sec, 58 °C for 40 sec, 72 °C for 1 min, and a final elongation step at 72 °C for 10 min. Filtering, dereplication, sample inference, chimera identification, and merging of paired-end reads was implemented using the DADA2 pipeline (v.1.12; Callahan et al., 2016) to finally assign amplicon sequence variants (ASVs) as taxonomic units.
We combined and homogenized the remaining two soil cores to assess soil microbes, placed them in coolers (4 °C) and transported them to the laboratory at WSL. Metagenomic DNA was extracted from 8 g sieved soil (2 mm) using the DNAeasy PowerMax Soil Kit (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany) according to the manufacturer´s protocol. PCR amplification of the V3-V4 region of the small-subunit (16S) of prokaryotes (i.e., bacteria and archaea) and the ribosomal internal transcribed spacer region (ITS2) of fungi was performed with 1 ng of template DNA using PCR primers and conditions as previously described (Frey et al., 2016). PCRs were run in triplicates, pooled and 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, USA). Quality filtering, clustering into operational taxonomic units (OTUs, 97% similarity cutoffs) and taxonomic assignment were performed as previously described (Resch et al., 2021).Taxonomic classification of nematode, prokaryotic and fungal sequences was conducted querying against the most recent versions of PR2 (v.4.11.1; Guillou et al., 2013), SILVA (v.132; Quast et al., 2013), and UNITE (v.8; Nilsson et al., 2019) reference sequence databases. Taxonomic assignment cutoffs were set to confidence rankings ≥ 0.8 (below ranked as unclassified). Prokaryotic OTUs assigned to mitochondria or chloroplasts as well as OTUs or ASVs assigned to other than Fungi or Nematoda were manually removed prior to data analysis. The three datasets were filtered to discard singletons and doubletons. Taxonomic abundance matrices were rarefied to the lowest number of sequences per community to achieve parity of the total number of reads between samples (Prokaryotes: 10,929 reads; Fungi: 18,337 reads; Nematodes: 6,662 reads). We calculated Shannon diversity and assessed community structures for soil nematodes, prokaryotes and fungi based on their relative abundances of ASV or OTU at the taxon level.

Collection of soil physical and chemical properties
We randomly collected one undisturbed soil core (5 cm diameter, 12 cm depth) per 4-m2 subplot using a steel cylinder that fit into the soil corer. The cylinders were capped to avoid disturbance during transport and used to measure field capacity, rock content and fine earth density as previously described (Resch et al., 2021). We randomly collected another three soil cores (5 cm diameter, 12 cm depths) in each 4-m2 subplot to determine soil chemical properties. The cores were pooled, dried at 60 °C for 48 h and passed through a 2 mm sieve. We measured soil pH (CaCl2) on dried samples, total nitrogen (N) and organic carbon (C) concentration on dried and fine-ground samples (≤ 0.5 mm; for details see Resch et al., 2021). We calculated total N and organic C pools after correcting its concentration for soil depth, rock content and fine earth density.

bacteria

display_name: bacteria

biodiversity

display_name: biodiversity

fungi

display_name: fungi

grassland

display_name: grassland

nematodes

display_name: nematodes

plants

display_name: plants

restoration

display_name: restoration

soil

display_name: soil

soil-biodiversity

display_name: soil-biodiversity

soil-biology

display_name: soil-biology

soil-chemistry

display_name: soil-chemistry

topsoil-removal

display_name: topsoil-removal

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: Long-term recovery of above-and belowground interactions in restored grasslands


maintainer: Ueli Reber

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

en: Replication files

format: SERVICE

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

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

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


maintainer: Alexis Shakas

en: drone-data ert irrigation pinus-sylvestris drought

media_type: text/csv

en: This .csv file contains the soil water potential data for all treatments (irrigation, irrigation-stop and control) and for the whole year of 2022. The data is given as a mean value and with an upper and lower uncertainty bound, given from the manufacturer. The depth of the sensor is given in cm, and the measured values are in units of kPa.

format: CSV

media_type: application/zip

en: This zip file contains all raw and processed data for the electrical resistivity and drone campaigns that took place in Pfynwald, 2022

format: ZIP

en:
This collection of datasets consists of various measurements taken during the year 2022 in Pfynwald. It combines 2 electrical resistivity transects which were monitored in May and July, before and after the irrigation season. The transects transverse all treatments (irrigation, control, irrigation stop). Each transect was repeated twice during the day for a period of 3 days to a week.
In addition there are raw and post-processed drone images (and resulting PRI maps), which were used to compare the below ground responses (from resistivity) to the above ground (crown) stress.
Here, the raw data is stored and a link to a git project is provided where python code is stored to reproduce all the results the published manuscript: "Does optimality partitioning theory fail for belowground traits? Insights from geophysical imaging of a drought-release experiment in a dry Scots Pine forest", New Phytologist, Shakas et al., 2024. The in-depth explanations from each processing step are found in the code (git project).

drone-data

display_name: drone-data

drought

display_name: drought

ert

display_name: ert

irrigation

display_name: irrigation

pinus-sylvestris

display_name: pinus-sylvestris

en: Pfynwald Geoelectric Experiment 2022


maintainer: EnviDat

en: metadata-convention csv research-data-management nead meteorological-data-format

en: PyNEAD (future reference implementation)

en: MeteoIO (future reference implementation)

format: HTML

mimetype: text/html

en: NEAD on GitHub

media_type: text/html

en: NEAD syntax v0.1 (EBNF)

media_type: text/plain

format: TXT

mimetype: text/plain

en:
Acknowledgement: The NEAD format includes NetCDF metadata and is proudly inspired by both SMET and NetCDF formats. NEAD is designed as a long-term data preservation and exchange format.

The NEAD specifications were presented at the "WMO Data Conference 2020 - Earth System Data Exchange in the 21st Century" (Virtual Conference).

-----------------------

Summary:
The Non-Binary Environmental Data Archive (NEAD) format is being developed as a generic and intuitive format that combines the self-documenting features of NetCDF with human readable and writeable features of CSV. It is designed for exchange and preservation of time series data in environmental data repositories.

License: The NEAD specifications are released to the public domain under a Creative Commons CC0 "No Rights Reserved" international license. You can reuse the information contained herein in any way you want, for any purposes and without restrictions.

csv

display_name: csv

metadata-convention

display_name: metadata-convention

meteorological-data-format

display_name: meteorological-data-format

nead

display_name: nead

research-data-management

display_name: research-data-management

en: Non-Binary Environmental Archive Data (NEAD) format


maintainer: Yael Frischholz

en: winter-electricity bifaciality photovoltaic snow alps

en:
Title: Monitoring data set at A1 (test-site of Totalp), years 2018-2022
Provider: ZHAW - EKZ
Edition: Y.Frischholz, Laboratory of Cryospheric Sciences, EPFL
Last edition: 17.01.2024
File name structure:
The test site contains 6 segments named from A to F. The six files provided in the data/ subfolder follow the same naming convention (e.g. for segment A, the file name is: “A1_A.csv”). Refer to the publication for further details on the setups of the segments.
File format:
All files are provided in the CSV format.
Column headings:
	•	timestamp (datetime64): time stamp in format “YYYY-MM-DD HH:mm:ss”, time-zone: UTC
	•	poa_front (double): front plane-of-array irradiation (W/m**2)
	•	poa_back (double): rear plane-of-array irradiation (W/m**2)
	•	mod_temp (double): module’s temperature (°C)
	•	P_AC (double): output AC power (W)
Preprocessing:
	Outliers:
	⁃	Quantiles Q1 and Q99 are computed for each variable
	⁃	Values below Q1 and above Q99 are considered outliers
	⁃	Outliers are replaced by NaNs.
	Missing data:
	⁃	Data holes of less than 3 hours are interpolated linearly for all variables
	⁃	Data holes of more than 3 hours are replaced using the monthly nan-mean of the considered hour if more than 50% of the qualifying data points are available. For instance, if the data point 2022-12-12 12:12:00, is missing for a given variable and is part of a data hole larger than 3 hours, then it is replaced by the mean of all data points with hour = 12 of the month of December 2022, if 50% of all the qualifying data points are not NaN. In case more than 50% of the qualifying points are missing, the data point remains as missing (NaN).
	Wiring losses :
	⁃	As described in [1] , the test-site setup caused abnormally large wiring losses, mainly due to the distance to optimisers and to the low installed power per DC-wire.
	⁃	The wiring losses comprised between 10% and 15%, are averaged hourly and added to the measured DC power.

	Misc.:
	⁃	P_AC is computed for each segment based on the measured DC power and the average inverter’s efficiency (96.1%).
	⁃	As described in [1], the peak power of the installed module, used to compute the final yield is slightly different from the values announced by the manufacturer.
Mean uptime:
	Raw:
	⁃	95.2%
	Processed:
	⁃	100%
References:
[1] 	D. Anderegg, S. Strebel, and J. Rohrer, “Alpine Photovoltaik Versuchsanlage Davos Totalp : Erkenntnisse aus 5 Jahren Betrieb,” de, Sep. 	2023, Accepted: 2023-09-29T09:13:16Z Publisher: ZHAW Zürcher Hochschule für Angewandte Wissenschaften.DOI: 10.21256/	zhaw-2524. [Online]. Available: https://digitalcollection.zhaw.ch/handle/11475/28797 (visited on 12/15/2023).

en:
Title: Monitoring data set at A2 (utility-scale power-plant Muttsee), months 10.2022-09.2023
Provider: AXPO - IWB Industrielle Werke Basel
Last edition: 17.01.2024
Editor: Y.Frischholz, Laboratory of Cryospheric Sciences, EPFL
File name structure:
The power-plant is made of 23 string boxes (GAK) and inverters (WR) named after their given number. One file per device is provided in the data/ subfolder, following the same naming convention (e.g. for the string box number 1, the file name is: “A2_GAK01.csv” and for the corresponding inverter, the file name is “A2_WR01.csv”). Refer to the publication for further details on the setup of the power plant.
File format:
All files are provided in the CSV format.
Column headings:
	String boxes and inverters (GAK & WR):
	⁃	device_name (string): name of the device (same as file name)
	⁃	timestamp (datetime64): time stamp in format “YYYY-MM-DD HH:mm:ss”, time-zone: UTC
	String boxes (GAK):
	⁃	I_ (double): input current from the substring number (W)
	⁃	I_SUM (double): output current of string box (A)
	⁃	U_DC (double): output voltage of string box (V)
	⁃	P_DC_ (double): input DC power from the substring number (W)
	⁃	P_DC (double): output DC power of string box (W)
	⁃	$S$_T#_$T$ (double): temperature from the sensor connected to the string box (empty if not existing), placed on the “front” or “back” side (S) of table T. Two types of temperature measurements (#) are available: 1=standard cell temperature (°C) , 2=module temperature on the rear side (°C) .
	⁃	$S$_SRAD_T (double): poa irradiation (W/m**2) from the sensor connected to the string box (empty if not existing), placed on the “front” or “back” side (S) of table T.
		Inverters (WR):
	⁃	I_DC (double): input DC current(A)
	⁃	U_DC(double): input DC voltage(V)
	⁃	P_DC (double): input DC power (W)
	⁃	P_AC (double): output AC power (W)
Preprocessing:
	1. Outliers:
	⁃	Quantiles Q1 and Q99 are computed for each variable
	⁃	Values below Q1 and above Q99 are considered outliers
	⁃	Outliers are replaced by NaNs.

	2. Missing data:
	⁃	Data holes of less or equal to 3 hours are interpolated linearly for all variables
	⁃	Data holes of more than 3 hours are replaced using the monthly nan-mean of the considered hour if more than 50% of the qualifying data points are available. For instance, if the data point 2022-12-12 12:12:00, is missing for a given variable and is part of a data hole larger than 3 hours, then it is replaced by the mean of all data points with hour = 12 of the month of December 2022, if 50% of all the qualifying data points are not NaN. In case more than 50% of the qualifying points are missing, the data point remains as missing (NaN).
	3. Wiring losses:
	⁃	To be consistent with A1, wiring losses are corrected at A2. The wiring loss between the string boxes and the inverters is removed by multiplying the value of input P_DC at the inverter level (P_DC,inv) by the mean ratio P_DC,inv / P_DC,arr.
	⁃	The computed mean wiring loss is 2.3\%. It is computed from 2023-02-01 to 2023-09-30, after the long data hole in the data sets of the string boxes.

Mean uptime:
	Raw:
	⁃	WR: 98.2%
	⁃	GAK*: 38.5%
	Processed:
	⁃	WR: 99.6%
	⁃	GAK*: 56.4%

	*The uptime at the string box level (GAK) is low because PMUs at this level shut down during steady and low signal leading to unavailable data at night. In addition, the 23 days downtime of 	January 2023 could not be interpolated nor replaced.

en:
On this repository you can find the monitoring data of the 3 PV power-plants analysed in the article _"Confirmation of the power gain for solar photovoltaic systems in alpine areas"_ (doi: 10.3389/fenrg.2024.1372680) . Each folder contains the following two elements:
1. **README.txt** : describes the content of the folder. Especially it describes the plant's monitoring system's architecture and relates it to the various files included in the data sub-folder. It also provides a detailed description of all processing steps leading to the data sets as available in the data sub-folder and used in the pre-cited article.
3. **data/** : sub-folder containing the file(s) used in the referenced article.

alps

display_name: alps

bifaciality

display_name: bifaciality

photovoltaic

display_name: photovoltaic

snow

display_name: snow

winter-electricity

display_name: winter-electricity

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: Monitoring data sets of alpine photovoltaic power-plants


maintainer: Tobias Jonas

en: lidar terrain transmissivity solar-energy light-availability solar-irradiance forests shortwave-radiation radiation-transfer sky-view-fraction

en: DataLink

en:
The SwissRad10 dataset contains light availability maps at 10 m and hourly resolution across an entire annual cycle with wall-to-wall coverage across the whole of Switzerland.
Areas below and within 25 m of forests include light availability calculated for both leaf-on and leaf-off canopy structure, and terrain only data is available across the full domain.
The variables sky-view fraction and direct-beam transmissivity are both included, allowing estimation of both direct and diffuse light at the ground surface.
The dataset was calculated using the detailed synthetic hemispheric image-based ray-tracing Canopy Radiation Model (CanRad) with the latest airborne lidar and terrain surface data from the swissSURFACE3D dataset.

forests

display_name: forests

lidar

display_name: lidar

light-availability

display_name: light-availability

radiation-transfer

display_name: radiation-transfer

shortwave-radiation

display_name: shortwave-radiation

sky-view-fraction

display_name: sky-view-fraction

solar-energy

display_name: solar-energy

solar-irradiance

display_name: solar-irradiance

terrain

display_name: terrain

transmissivity

display_name: transmissivity

en: SwissRad10 Hourly light availability maps at 10 m resolution over Switzerland


maintainer: Yohann Chauvier

en: climate taxonomic-diversity soil phylogenetic-diversity grain-size ecological-indicator-values functional-diversity

en: Data access

en:
This dataset comprises a large array of ecological data for the European Alps:

  (1) Current soil and climate predictors at various resolutions.
  (2) GBIF observations of the European Alps Flora (~4,000 species).
  (3) Species habitat suitability maps (1,109 species; based on species observations filtered at 40x40-km)
  at various resolutions used in the study to generate (4); except 'expert'...
  (4) Expert, Taxonomic, phylogenetic and functional diversity of the study region at various resolutions
  (from 100-m to 40-km --> 100-m aggregated & mean to km + non-aggregated/predicted) for CLIM,
  SOIL and CLIM-SOIL models.
  (5) Ecological and altitudinal preferences of the European Alps Flora.
  (6) Data outputs of the related published article.
  (7) All scripts used for analyses.
  (8) Additional files used for analyses.
  (9) Improved set of species habitat suitability maps (~2,600 species; based on species observations
  filtered at 1x1-km) and related taxonomic diversity at 100-m resolution (aggregated to km +
  non-aggregated/predicted) for CLIM, SOIL and CLIM-SOIL models ---> not incorporated in the study.

climate

display_name: climate

ecological-indicator-values

display_name: ecological-indicator-values

functional-diversity

display_name: functional-diversity

grain-size

display_name: grain-size

phylogenetic-diversity

display_name: phylogenetic-diversity

soil

display_name: soil

taxonomic-diversity

display_name: taxonomic-diversity

en: Resolution in species distribution models shapes spatial patterns of plant multifaceted diversity


maintainer: Esther Frei

en: mountain-forest long-term-experiment stillberg treeline afforestation

mimetype: application/x-zip-compressed

en:
 Background information

The Stillberg ecological treeline research site in the Swiss Alps was established in 1975, with the aim to develop ecologically, technically, and economically sustainable reforestation techniques at the treeline to reduce the risk of snow avalanches. In the course of time, additional research aspects gained importance, such as the ecology of the treeline ecotone under global change. Long-term monitoring of the large-scale high-elevation afforestation has generated data about tree growth, survival, and vitality. In addition, detailed characteristics of the microsite conditions of the research were conducted. Besides providing a scientific basis and practical guidelines for high-elevation afforestation, this research has contributed to a comprehensive understanding of ecological processes in the treeline ecotone.

 Experiment description

The Stillberg afforestation experiment was established in 1975 by planting 92,000 seedlings of *Larix decidua*, *Pinus cembra* and *Pinus mugo* ssp. *uncinata* in the alpine treeline ecotone. The afforestation site is located on a northeast-facing slope with steep, topographically highly structured terrain and covers elevations from 2075 to 2230 m a.s.l. The afforestation site was divided into 4052 square plots of 3.5 × 3.5 m, arranged in a regular species-alternating pattern over the whole area. Each plot contained 25 trees of one species (1350 plots per species), and the seedlings were systematically planted 70 cm apart. The trees have been monitored since 1975. Specifically, tree mortality was assessed annually from 1975 until 1995 and has been documented every ten years since then, with surveys in 2005 and 2015 (the next survey is due in 2025). Height of the surviving trees was measured in 1975, 1979, 1982, 1985, 1990, 1995, 2005, and 2015. In 1995, 2005, and 2015, drivers of tree vitality were assessed for a subset of trees per plot. Additionally, an extensive set of environmental parameters characterizing microsite conditions of the afforestation area were recorded before and after the planting of the trees.

 Data description

The five datasets from the afforestation experiment comprise ecological and environmental data from the main afforestation experiment in five datasets with accompanying metadata (Stillberg_afforestation_all_metadata.xlsx). All data and metadata files are bundled in a ZIP-file (Stillberg_afforestation_v1.zip). In particular, a first dataset contains environmental data characterising microsite conditions of the 4000 plots with regard to soil, topography, vegetation and microclimatic conditions (Stillberg_afforestation_plot_data_v1.csv; Stillberg_afforestation_plot_metadata_v1.csv. In each plot, the natural tree regeneration was assessed by counting seedings of several tree species in 2005 and 2015 (Stillberg_afforestation_regeneration_data_v1.csv; Stillberg_afforestation_regeneration_metadata_v1.csv). Furthermore, specific information about each of the 92’000 planted trees of the tree species is available (Stillberg_afforestation_tree_parameter_data_v1.csv; Stillberg_afforestation_tree_parameter_metadata_v1.csv). Survival data for each of the 92’000 individual trees can be found in a separate dataset (Stillberg_afforestation_tree_survival_data_v1.csv; Stillberg_afforestation_tree_survival_metadata_v1.csv). Tree growth and vitality parameters are available for all trees from 1995, and for subsets of trees for 2005 and 2015 (Stillberg_afforestation_tree_measurements_data_v1.csv; Stillberg_afforestation_tree_measurements_metadata_v1.csv).

afforestation

display_name: afforestation

long-term-experiment

display_name: long-term-experiment

mountain-forest

display_name: mountain-forest

stillberg

display_name: stillberg

treeline

display_name: treeline

en: Long-term afforestation experiment at the Alpine treeline site Stillberg, Switzerland


maintainer: Aline Frossard

en: microbial-respiration soil-respiration microbial-biodiversity beta-diversity ecosystem-functions

en: Fungal amplicon sequencing

en: Fungal ASVs and taxonomic tables

en: Bacterial amplicon sequencing

en: Bacterial ASVs and taxonomic tables

en: Microbial functions and metadata

en: Extracellular enzyme activities, respiration and sites metadata

en: Structural and functional changes of microbial communities in ephemeral stream sediments and adjacent soils between was assessed in an artificial newly created catchment at 3 and 13 years after catchment construction. Bacterial and fungal communities, respiration and extracellular enzyme activities were assessed.

beta-diversity

display_name: beta-diversity

ecosystem-functions

display_name: ecosystem-functions

microbial-biodiversity

display_name: microbial-biodiversity

microbial-respiration

display_name: microbial-respiration

soil-respiration

display_name: soil-respiration

en: Chicken Creek 10 years


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

en: Forest station data (NEB)

en: Data file.

mimetype: text/csv

en: Site aerial photo (Neunkirch)

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

mimetype: image/jpeg

en: Site photo of the field station (NEF)

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

en: Data plot of the field station (NEF)

media_type: application/pdf

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

format: PDF

mimetype: application/pdf

en: Site photo of the forest station (NEB)

en: Site photo of the forest station from below (viewing upwards the slope).

en: Data plot of the forest station (NEB)

en: Field station data (NEF)

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 Neunkirch in Switzerland where one station is located within a natural deciduous forest stand (NEB) with European beech (_Fagus sylvatica_; 160 yrs), sycamore maple (_Acer pseudoplatanus_; 160 yrs) and lime trees (_Tilia sp._; 110 yrs) as dominant tree species. A second station is situated in the very vicinity outside of the forest (field station, NEF). The meteorological time series are presented in hourly time resolution of air temperature, relative humidity, precipitation, photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) and wind speed. Neunkirch is part of the Long-term Forest Ecosystem Research Programme (LWF) established and maintained by the Swiss Federal Research Institute WSL.

climate-change

display_name: climate-change

long-term

display_name: long-term

meteo

display_name: meteo

meteorology

display_name: meteorology

par

display_name: par

precipitation

display_name: precipitation

relative-humidity

display_name: relative-humidity

swiss-forest-lab

display_name: swiss-forest-lab

temperature

display_name: temperature

wind-speed

display_name: wind-speed

educ

en: Education, culture and sport

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


maintainer: M. Carol Resch

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

en: Nematode feeding types

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

en: Nematode families

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

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

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

en: Nematode colonizer-persister classes

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

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

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

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

en: Nemadotes and vegetation

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

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

X: X-Coordinate

Y: Y-Coordinate

Ri.veg: Total number of plant species

Div.veg: Shannon diversity of plant species

Ri.nem: Total number of nematode families

Div.nem: Shannon diversity of nematode families

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Tillage: last time of tillage

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

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

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

pH: soil pH (CaCl2)

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

en: Plant community composition (plant species)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

diversity

display_name: diversity

grassland

display_name: grassland

long-term-experiment

display_name: long-term-experiment

nematodes

display_name: nematodes

restoration

display_name: restoration

topsoil-removal

display_name: topsoil-removal

vegetation

display_name: vegetation

en: Grassland restoration: nematodes and plant communities


en: diversitat flechten bryolich lichens bryophytes moose garten

en: Im Rahmen des Bryolich-Projekts “Moose und Flechten in Gärten” wurden möglichst vollständige Artenlisten von Moosen und Flechten in 26 bzw. 7 Gärten um Wohnhäuser erstellt. In 5 dieser Gärten wurden beide Artengruppen erfasst. Zusätzlich wurden Informationen über unterschiedliche Lebensräume innerhalb der Gärten (z.B. Fläche mit Gehölzen, Fläche von Blumenbeeten) und weitere Garten-Charakteristika (z.B. Fläche des Gartens, Alter des Gartens, Einsatz von Dünger) erfasst. Details zum Projekt und den erfassten Daten können im zugehörigen Artikel (Bergamini et al. 2024) und auf der Webseite von Bryolich gefunden werden (https://www.bryolich.ch/mfig/mfig_de.html).

bryolich

display_name: bryolich

bryophytes

display_name: bryophytes

diversitat

display_name: diversitat

flechten

display_name: flechten

garten

display_name: garten

lichens

display_name: lichens

moose

display_name: moose

educ

en: Education, culture and sport

envidat

en: EnviDat: the Environmental Data Portal

en: Daten Bryolich-Projekt Moose und Flechten in Gärten


maintainer: Stephan Zimmermann

en: fagus-orientalis-lipsky potassium calcium biogeochemical-cycling magnesium

en: Concentrations of Ca, Mg, K, and Na in throughfall, litterflow and soil solution of a Hyrcanian forst in Northern Iran

en:
Throughfall, litterflow and soil solution were sampled during one whole year under five Oriental beech trees in a mixed Hyrcanian beech forest. The amounts of Ca2+, Mg2+, K+ and Na+ in these fluxes were calculated based on their concentrations and the sampled volumes, and subsequently compared with the respective fluxes in the rainfall and soil solution of an adjacent forest gap.
In addition six soil profiles, one close to every single tree and one in the forest gap, were analyzed for pH, CaCO3, organic matter and texture.

biogeochemical-cycling

display_name: biogeochemical-cycling

calcium

display_name: calcium

fagus-orientalis-lipsky

display_name: fagus-orientalis-lipsky

magnesium

display_name: magnesium

potassium

display_name: potassium

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: Base cation dynamics in an Oriental beech forest


modeling-snow-failure-with-dem

title_for_slug: modeling-snow-failure-with-dem

en: snow snow-micro-mechanics discrete-element-modelling snow-avalanche snow-failure

en: Python file

en: Python file to reproduce the figures in Bobillier et al. (2019)

mimetype: text/x-python

en: Read-me

en: The read-me file contains a description of all the data provided in the zip file.

en: Dataset

en: The zip file contains the data underlying the figures presented in Bobillier et al. (2019). The figures can be reproduced with the python file, which is also provided.

mimetype: application/zip

en: This data set includes the modeling results described in the research article by Bobiller et al. (2020). All the figures in the article can be reproduced with the data provided.

discrete-element-modelling

display_name: discrete-element-modelling

snow

display_name: snow

snow-avalanche

display_name: snow-avalanche

snow-failure

display_name: snow-failure

snow-micro-mechanics

display_name: snow-micro-mechanics

en: Modeling snow failure with DEM


restoring-grassland-multifunctionality

title_for_slug: restoring-grassland-multifunctionality

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

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

en: Functional diversity above_belowground fauna

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

educ

en: Education, culture and sport

en: Restoring grassland multifunctionality