restoring-grassland-multifunctionality

title_for_slug: restoring-grassland-multifunctionality

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

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

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

en: Functional diversity above_belowground fauna

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


maintainer: EnviDat Support

en: ecological-indicator-values soil-mapping soil-ph soil-moisture landolt plants switzerland ecological-maps

state: active

type: dataset

en: Predictors

media_type: application/zip

en: Predictors generated and used in Descombes et al. (2020)

format: ZIP

mimetype: application/zip

en: Description

en: Description of the predictors provided in this dataset

format: XLS

en:
Ecologically meaningful predictors are often neglected in plant distribution studies, resulting in incomplete niche quantification and low predictive power of species distribution models (SDMs). Because environmental data are rare and expensive to collect, and because their relationship with local climatic and topographic conditions are complex, mapping them over large geographic extents and at high spatial resolution remains a major challenge. Here, we derived environmental data layers by mapping ecological indicator values (EIVs) in space by using a large set of environmental predictors in Switzerland.

This dataset contains the predictors (raster layers) generated and used in the following publication (Descombes et al. 2020). Only predictors for which we have the rights to share them are provided. Other datasets and predictors can be accessed via the original data provider. Details on the predictors and sources are fully described in the publication. The predictors are provided as GeoTIFF files, at 93 m spatial resolution and Mercator projection ("+proj=merc +lon_0=0 +k=1 +x_0=0 +y_0=0 +ellps=WGS84 +towgs84=0,0,0,0,0,0,0 +units=m +no_defs"). The excel file (xlsx) provides a short description of the raster layers.

Paper Citation:

Descombes, P. et al. (2020). Spatial modelling of ecological indicator values improves predictions of plant distributions in complex landscapes. Ecography. (accepted)

ecological-indicator-values

display_name: ecological-indicator-values

ecological-maps

display_name: ecological-maps

landolt

display_name: landolt

soil-mapping

display_name: soil-mapping

soil-moisture

display_name: soil-moisture

soil-ph

display_name: soil-ph

switzerland

display_name: switzerland

educ

fr: Éducation, culture et sport

de: Bildung, Kultur und 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: avalanche snowpack snow avalanche-forecast snow-stability-evaluation

en: Manually observed snow profiles

en: Manually observed snow profiles as csv-files containing depth [cm], thickness [cm], density [kg m-3], hand hardness, first grain type, second grain type, first grain size [mm], and second grain size [mm] of each layer.

en: README

media_type: text/plain

en: README file explaining data structure and content

format: TXT

mimetype: text/plain

en: Stability tests

en: Stability tests including csv-files with CT, ECT and PST experiments for each year and each field site.

en: Extracted data

en: Extracted data contain validation and results published in Richter et al. (2019).

en: SNOWPACK simulations

en: This dataset contains all SNOWPACK simulations, including input files, setup and output files.

en:
To validate the critical crack length as implemented in the snow cover model SNOWPACK, PST experiments were conducted for three winter seasons (2015-2017) at two field site above Davos, Switzerland. This dataset contains manually observed snow profiles and stability tests. Furthermore, corresponding SNOWPACK simulations are included.
These data were analyzed and results were published in Richter et al. (2019).

Please refer to the Readme file for further details on the data.

These data are the basis of the following publication:
Richter, B., Schweizer, J., Rotach, M. W., and van Herwijnen, A.: Validating modeled critical crack length for crack propagation in the snow cover model SNOWPACK, The Cryosphere, 13, 3353–3366, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-13-3353-2019, 2019.

avalanche

display_name: avalanche

avalanche-forecast

display_name: avalanche-forecast

snow

display_name: snow

snow-stability-evaluation

display_name: snow-stability-evaluation

snowpack

display_name: snowpack

en: Validating and improving the critical crack length in SNOWPACK


weather-station-davos-wolfgang

maintainer: Jörg Wieder

title_for_slug: weather-station-davos-wolfgang

en: weather relative-humidity raclets temperature pressure

en: Weather Station Davos Wolfgang

media_type: text/csv

en: The data file contains date and time (YYYY-MM-DD hh:mm:ss) in UTC, temperature (°C), relative humidity (%), pressure (hPa) at 10 m above ground and above sea level. The data was averaged over 10 minutes.

format: CSV

mimetype: text/csv

en: The dataset contains weather parameters measured at Davos Wolfgang (LON: 9.853594, LAT: 46.835577).

pressure

display_name: pressure

raclets

display_name: raclets

relative-humidity

display_name: relative-humidity

temperature

display_name: temperature

weather

display_name: weather

educ

en: Education, culture and sport


maintainer: Avalanche Warning Service SLF

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

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

avalanche-accident-statistics

display_name: avalanche-accident-statistics

avalanche-accidents

display_name: avalanche-accidents

avalanche-fatalities

display_name: avalanche-fatalities

fatalities-in-or-around-buildings

display_name: fatalities-in-or-around-buildings

fatalities-in-settlements

display_name: fatalities-in-settlements

fatalities-in-the-backcountry

display_name: fatalities-in-the-backcountry

fatalities-on-transportation-corridors

display_name: fatalities-on-transportation-corridors

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


weissfluhjoch-dataset-for-esm-snowmip

maintainer: Nander Wever

title_for_slug: weissfluhjoch-dataset-for-esm-snowmip

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

en: ini file

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

format: SERVICE

en: Dataset Weissfluhjoch for ESM-SnowMIP

en: Conversion script

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

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

mimetype: text/x-sh

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

esm-snowmip

display_name: esm-snowmip

snow-depth

display_name: snow-depth

snow-models

display_name: snow-models

weissfluhjoch

display_name: weissfluhjoch

en: Weissfluhjoch dataset for ESM-SnowMIP


maintainer: Ana Beatriz Pierri Daunt

en: decision-making multifunctionality landscape-services planning sense-of-place green-infrastructure resilience socio-ecological-system landscape-planning landscape-ecology ecosystem-services landscape-perception literature-review pdfsearch

en: 3. Use of any early concept.

en: 1. Frequency of early concepts.

en: 5. Planning steps.

en: 6. Protocol

en: 2. Frequency of additional concepts.

en: 4. Use of any additional concept.

en:
Table of content: 1. Frequency of early concepts; 2. Frequency of additional concepts; 3. Use of any early concept; 4. Use of any additional concept, 5. Planning steps; 6. Protocol.

The present dataset is part of the published scientific paper entitled “Landscape ecological concepts in planning: review of recent developments” (Hersperger et al., 2021). The goal of this research was to review recent publications to assess the use of landscape ecological concepts in planning. Specifically, we address the following research questions: Q1. Landscape ecological concepts: What are they? How frequently are they mentioned in current research? Q2. How are landscape ecological concepts integrated in landscape planning?

We analysed all empirical and overview papers that have been published in four key academic journals in the field of landscape ecology and landscape planning in the years 2015–2019 (n = 1918). Four key journals in the field of landscape ecology were selected to conduct the analysis, respectively Landscape Ecology (LE), Landscape Online (LO), Current Landscape Ecology Reports (CLER), and Landscape and Urban Planning (LUP). The title, abstract and keywords of all papers were read in order to identify landscape ecological concepts. Then, all 1918 papers went through a keyword search to identify the use of early and additional concepts. We used the “pdfsearch” package in R programming language and searched for singular and plural forms and different variations of the concepts (see Supplementary material 1, Table A). As a result, we provided four outputs:

  1. Frequency of early concepts. This data provides the total number of times each article used each early concept (Q1). This data was used to produce the Figure 2a at the original publication.

  2. Frequency of additional concepts. This data provides the total number of times each article used each additional concept (Q1). This data was used to produce the Figure 2b at the original publication.

  3. Use of any early concept. This data provides the total number of times each article used any early concept (Q1).
This data was used to produce the Figure 3a at the original publication.

  4. Use of any additional concept. This data provides the total number of times each article used any additional concept (Q1). This data was used to produce the Figure 3b at the original publication.

To address the second question (Q2), the title, abstract and keywords of the papers included in our sample (n=1918 articles) were screened to identify papers that might show how landscape ecological concepts are integrated into planning. We selected 52 empirical papers (see Supplementary material – 4 Integration of landscape ecological concepts into planning), and we provided two outputs:

  5. Planning steps. This data provides the number of times landscape ecological concepts were addressed in each
planning steps in 52 empirical papers analysed in detail (Q2). This data was used to produce the Figure 4 at the
original publication.

  6. Protocol for assessing the integration of landscape ecological concepts into planning. To systematically collect the
data, we used this protocol which addressed the following questions: (a) which type of planning is addressed by the
paper? (b) to which planning level does the paper refer to? (c) which concepts are integrated in any of the planning
steps described above?

decision-making

display_name: decision-making

ecosystem-services

display_name: ecosystem-services

green-infrastructure

display_name: green-infrastructure

landscape-ecology

display_name: landscape-ecology

landscape-perception

display_name: landscape-perception

landscape-planning

display_name: landscape-planning

landscape-services

display_name: landscape-services

literature-review

display_name: literature-review

multifunctionality

display_name: multifunctionality

pdfsearch

display_name: pdfsearch

planning

display_name: planning

resilience

display_name: resilience

sense-of-place

display_name: sense-of-place

socio-ecological-system

display_name: socio-ecological-system

en: The usage of landscape ecological concepts in the planning literature


en: budburst phenology spongy-month chilling hatch

en: Temperature data Spongy moth experiment

en:
4 files with hourly temperature recorded at the height of buds in each of the four temperature treatments:
- Winter6: greenhouse where temperature was kept >6°C over winter
- Winter10: greenhouse where temperature was kept >10°C over winter
- OTC_Ambient: Open Top Chamber at Ambient temperature
- OTC_Warm: Open Top Chamber at +3.5°C warmer temperature

en: 3 R-Scripts used for the analyses of the temperature, phenology and performance/preference tests

en: Phenology and performance/preference tests Data

en:
-"Synchronex_Cuttings_Pheno.txt" provides the budburst date ('Stage 2') of each twig of the six studies species in the four different temperature treatments ("ambient", "a+5"=Ambient +5°C, 'Greenhouse-5'= Greenhouse at temperature >5°C, 'Greenhouse_10' = Greenhouse at temperature >10°C); 'Success' give the percentage of buds within the twig that succeeded to reach at least stage 2 during the experiment.

'Synchronex-Gypsy.txt' provides the number of eggs that have hatched at each monitoring date (Day of the year in columns); "DOY_hatch_1" corresponds to the first DOY when at least one egg has hatched; "Replicate_egg_mass" correspond to the egg mass replicate (1 to 5)

'PerformanceTest_GypsyMoth.txt' provides the biomass in mg of the caterpillars fed with fresh leaves of each tested tree species during one week. "Fresh_alive" is the biomass of only the living caterpillars after 1 week and "Freshpermoth" corresponds the weight per living caterpillar (Fresh alive/Nalive)

'PreferenceTest_All_species.txt' provides the total surface of leaf disc of each tested tree species remaining after exposing 5 caterpillars to these leaves during 24H. "Total_area" is the surface of the disc of each species measured after 24h exposed to the spongy moth first instars. For each species 'control' means the surface of the disc after 24H without any exposure to the larvae. 'EatenPercent correspond to the percentage surface loss compared to the control.

en:
The files correspond to the data and R-script used for the analyses of the following paper "Feasting on the ordinary or starving for the exceptional: phenological synchrony between spongy moth and budburst of European trees in a warmer climate" published in Ecology and Evolution by Vitasse et al. 2023.
There are three zip files corresponding to the Temperature data, phenology/preference/performance tests and R-Scripts for the analyses.

Input data:
'Synchrony_Cuttings_Pheno.txt':

budburst

display_name: budburst

chilling

display_name: chilling

hatch

display_name: hatch

phenology

display_name: phenology

spongy-month

display_name: spongy-month

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: Synchrony between spongy moth hatching and leaf phenology of temperate trees


maintainer: Anita Risch

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

en: Datafile

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

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

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

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

Soil.moist	: Soil moisture (%)

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

pH: Soil pH

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Plant.richness: Plant species richness

Plant.N: Plant tissue nitrogen content (%)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

#References

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

ecosystem-coupling

display_name: ecosystem-coupling

ecosystem-functions

display_name: ecosystem-functions

ecosystem-multifunctionality

display_name: ecosystem-multifunctionality

exclusion

display_name: exclusion

grassland

display_name: grassland

grazing

display_name: grazing

invertebrates

display_name: invertebrates

subalpine

display_name: subalpine

swiss-national-park

display_name: swiss-national-park

vertebrates

display_name: vertebrates

en: Ecosystem coupling and multifunctionality - exclosure experiment


en: metamorphism fem microstructure x-ray-tomography time-series snow

en: Simulation parameters and outputs for "A rigorous approach to the specific surface area evolution in snow during temperature gradient metamorphism"

format: ODS

en:
In the associated study [1], two time-lapse temperature gradient metamorphism series of three-dimensional micro-computed tomography images of snow (obtained by [2]) have been used to model the decrease of specific surface area (SSA) over time based on the pore-scale physics. We conducted finite element simulations of one-way coupled heat and mass diffusion in order to estimation the spatial pattern of water vapor deposition and sublimation, which controls the evolution of the SSA over time. We notably studied the influence of the condensation coefficient, a key but poorly constrained physical parameter.
This dataset provides the parameters used for the mesh generation and the finite element simulations. It also includes the ice fraction, specific surface area per unit volume and surface average of mean curvature and vapor field obtained as outputs from the mesh process and the simulations.
[1]: Braun, A., Fourteau, K., and Löwe, H.: A rigorous approach to the specific surface area evolution in snow during temperature gradient metamorphism, EGUsphere [preprint], https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1947, 2023.
[2]: Pinzer, B. R., Schneebeli, M., and Kaempfer, T. U.: Vapor flux and recrystallization during dry snow metamorphism under a steady temperature gradient as observed by time-lapse micro-tomography, The Cryosphere, 6, 1141–1155, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-6-1141-2012, 2012.

fem

display_name: fem

metamorphism

display_name: metamorphism

microstructure

display_name: microstructure

snow

display_name: snow

time-series

display_name: time-series

x-ray-tomography

display_name: x-ray-tomography

en: Simulation parameters and outputs for a rigorous approach to the specific surface area evolution in snow during temperature gradient metamorphism


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

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).

mimetype: image/jpeg

en: Field station data (NEF)

en: Data file.

en: Data plot of the forest station (NEB)

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

en: Site photo of the field station (NEF)

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

en: Forest station data (NEB)

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

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


maintainer: Frank Hagedorn

en: drought forest biogeochemical-cycling plfa microbial-biomass c13-labeling

en: Gao_Frank_C13 pulse labeling.xlsx

en:
Data of manuscript by Gao t al. : Drought resistance and resilience of rhizosphere communities in forest soils from the cellular to ecosystem scale – insights from 13C pulse labeling
Inludes data on 13C pulse-labeling experiment in young beech model ecosystems and a mature pine forest. Data of soil climate, total PLFA, 13C label strength in PLFA of pulse-labeling carried out under drought and after rewetting

en: Data of 13C-pulselabeling experiments in a young beech model ecosystem and a mature pine forest exposed to drought and rewetting. Data include microclimate during the experiment, total PLFA contents, d13C signatures in PLFA , microbial biomass, soil-respired CO2 measure during 30 days following 3-4 hour long pulse labeling with highly 13C-enriched CO2.

biogeochemical-cycling

display_name: biogeochemical-cycling

drought

display_name: drought

forest

display_name: forest

microbial-biomass

display_name: microbial-biomass

plfa

display_name: plfa

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: Gao_Drought resistance and resilience of rhizosphere communities_13C-PLFA


envidat-supports-open-science

maintainer: Ionut Iosifescu Enescu

title_for_slug: envidat-supports-open-science

en: open-science envidat juypter-notebooks wsl research-data-management

en: Article as PDF

en:
The article "EnviDat Supports Open Science" originally appeared in WSLintern No. 3 (2020), page 14-15 and it is republished here with permission from the WSLintern editorial team. It contains guidelines for WSL scientists about the main issues behind Open Science and how to pragmatically approach the complexities of doing Open Science with EnviDat’s support.

License: This article is released by WSL and the EnviDat team to the public domain under a Creative Commons 4.0 CC0 "No Rights Reserved" international license. You can reuse the information contained herein in any way you want, for any purposes and without restrictions.

display_name: envidat

juypter-notebooks

display_name: juypter-notebooks

open-science

display_name: open-science

research-data-management

display_name: research-data-management

wsl

display_name: wsl

en: EnviDat Supports Open Science


en: rarity endemic conservation-priority europe bryophytes range-size red-list

en: This dataset provides data on the occurrence of 672 European bryophyte species in European countries or territories. All species which are considered threatened or near threatened according to the European Red List (Hodgetts et al. 2019) are included (553 species). Further, all species evaluated in the European Red List assessed as LC, DD, NE and EX, which at the same time are either endemic, near endemic or globally rare, are included (119 species). Therefore, the list contains not only all European bryophyte species that are threatened or near threatened, but also all species endemic or near endemic to Europe as well as all globally rare species occurring in Europe. For each of the 553 threatened or near threatened species, we provide a conservation a priority score which was calculated based the Red List status and the proportion of the European population of the global population or the global rarity of the species. For details on the prioritisation approach see Bisang et al. (2025).

bryophytes

display_name: bryophytes

conservation-priority

display_name: conservation-priority

endemic

display_name: endemic

europe

display_name: europe

range-size

display_name: range-size

rarity

display_name: rarity

red-list

display_name: red-list

en: Priority ranking for the conservation of all European bryophyte species - dataset


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

en: Field station data (SCF)

en: Data file.

en: Forest station data (SCB)

en: Data plot of the forest station (SCB)

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

en: Further details on the data repository

en: Meta data documentation.

en: Site photo of the forest station (SCB)

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

en: Data plot of the field station (SCF)

en: Site aerial photo (Schänis)

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

en: Site photo of the field station (SCF)

en: Site photo of the field station from above (viewing downwards the slope).

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 Schänis in Switzerland where one station is located within a natural mixed forest stand (SCB) with European beech (_Fagus sylvatica_; 130-150 yrs), European silver fir (_Abies alba_; 130-150 yrs) and European ash (_Fraxinus excelsior_; 130-150 yrs) as dominant tree species. A second station is situated in the very vicinity outside of the forest (field station, SCF). The meteorological time series are presented in hourly time resolution of air temperature, relative humidity, precipitation, photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) and wind speed. Schänis is part of the Long-term Forest Ecosystem Research Programme (LWF) established and maintained by the Swiss Federal Research Institute WSL.

climate-change

display_name: climate-change

long-term

display_name: long-term

meteo

display_name: meteo

meteorology

display_name: meteorology

par

display_name: par

precipitation

display_name: precipitation

relative-humidity

display_name: relative-humidity

swiss-forest-lab

display_name: swiss-forest-lab

temperature

display_name: temperature

wind-speed

display_name: wind-speed

en: Schänis, Switzerland: Long-term forest meteorological data from the Long-term Forest Ecosystem Research Programme (LWF), from 1998 onwards


maintainer: Stephan Zimmermann

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

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

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: Base cation dynamics in an Oriental beech forest


maintainer: Elisabeth Hafner

en: natural-hazard satellite snow hazard-mapping avalanche

en: SPOT6 Avalanche Outlines 16 January 2019

en: Shapefile of the manually mapped avalanche outlines. Please only use this data together with the example key document provided with this dataset and within the limitations of the dataset described in the publications.

format: SHP

en:
Outlines of 6'041 avalanches mapped from SPOT6 satellite data over the Swiss Alps on 16 January 2019. The dataset was acquired following a period with very high avalanche danger. The outlines have different attributes described in the data example key (ExampleKey_AvalMapping16012019.pdf)

The generation of the data is described in:

Bühler, Y., E. D. Hafner, B. Zweifel, M. Zesiger, and H. Heisig (2019), Where are the avalanches? Rapid SPOT6 satellite data acquisition to map an extreme avalanche period over the Swiss Alps, The Cryosphere, 13(12), 3225-3238, doi:10.5194/tc-13-3225-2019.

The data was comprehensivly validated in a subset area in

Hafner, E.D.; Techel, F.; Leinss, S.; Bühler, Y., 2021: Mapping avalanches with satellites - evaluation of performance and completeness. Cryosphere, 15, 2: 983-1004. doi: 10.5194/tc-15-983-2021

avalanche

display_name: avalanche

hazard-mapping

display_name: hazard-mapping

natural-hazard

display_name: natural-hazard

satellite

display_name: satellite

snow

display_name: snow

en: SPOT6 Avalanche outlines 16 January 2019


disdrometer-data-gotschnagrat

title_for_slug: disdrometer-data-gotschnagrat

en: hydrometeors raclets disdrometer visibility precipitation

en: Disdrometer Data Gotschnagrat

en: The zip folder contains one netCDF file per day for Gotschnagrat from February 11 to March 27 2019 with a temporal resolution of 30 seconds (time in UTC). The naming convention for the files is Gotschna_YYYYMMDD.nc and the files include the following: characteristics of hydrometeors (e.g. diameter, fall velocity, amount per diameter class,...), precipitation rate, radar reflectivity, visibility range, weather codes and instrument performance.

en: A laser optical disdrometer (Parsivel² , OTT Hydromet) was deployed at Gotschnagrat (LON: 9.849, LAT: 46.859) to measure hydrometeors by extinction when passing a laser beam. The instrument can classify eight different kinds of precipitation, including rain, hail, snow, drizzle, and hybrid forms. The dataset contains information on precipitation amount and type for the period of February 11 to March 27 2019 at Gotschnagrat.

disdrometer

display_name: disdrometer

hydrometeors

display_name: hydrometeors

raclets

display_name: raclets

visibility

display_name: visibility


maintainer: Virginie Marques

en: teleo marine fish-composition environmental-dna indian-ocean coral-reef edna laperouse

en: Data access

en: Please use cyberduck to download for the moment

en:
Fish environmental DNA data set collected in the shallow seamount of La Pérouse located between Madagascar and Réunion Island

In 2019, we sampled the shallow seamount of La Pérouse, located between Madagascar and Réunion Island in the WIO. La Pérouse is an extinct volcano with a summit depth at 60 m below the sea surface. The plateau of the summit has a maximum length of 12 km and a maximum width of 4 km. One side of the seamount might have collapsed in the past, leading to a less common crescent-shaped summit. The abyssal plains that surround this isolated pinnacle are at a depth of 5000 m. Despite its proximity to Réunion Island (160 km northwest), La Pérouse and its surroundings are still poorly studied.
To sample eDNA in this location we used a submersible pump (Subspace, Geneva, Switzerland; nominal flow of ~ 1.0 L/min) to collect samples at various depths during close circuit rebreather dives. The pump has an internal battery and can be activated underwater allowing in situ filtration directly at the targeted habitat and depth. The filtration lasted for 30 min to collect a total water volume of ~ 30 L. During close circuit rebreather dives, water samples from various depths, ranging from 60 to 140 m below the sea surface, were collected using only the Submersible method (eight stations: no replicates). Out of the eight water samples, six were collected during the day, while two were collected at night (IS2_1 at 62 m and IS7_1 at 100–125 m). We applied this filtration protocols to collect and filter water throughout a VigiDNA® 0.2 μM cross-flow filtration capsule (SPYGEN, le Bourget du Lac, France) using disposable sterile tubing for each filtration capsule. After the filtration process, the remaining water in the capsules was emptied. The capsules were then filled with 80 ml of lysis conservation buffer (CL1 buffer SPYGEN, le Bourget du Lac, France) and stored at room temperature in the dark. At La Pérouse, a total of eight water samples were collected during the MONT LA PÉROUSE expedition (https://gombessa-expeditions.com/mont-la-perouse/) on board the ship La Curieuse to the seamount La Pérouse from October 27th to November 5th 2019. We followed a strict contamination control protocol in both field and laboratory stages. Each water sample processing included the use of disposable gloves and single-use filtration equipment to avoid any risk of contamination. Libraries were prepared with ligation using the MetaFast protocol (Fasteris).
Data content:
	* rawdata/: contains the raw reads for each individual sample. One archive contains the paired-end reads specified by the _R1 or _R2 suffix as well as individually tagged PCR replicates (if available) together with an archive containing all extraction and PCR blank samples of the library. Reads have been demultiplexed using cutadapt but not trimmed, individual demultiplexing tags and primers remain present in the sequences.
	* taxadata/: contains the table with all detected taxonomy for each sample after bioinformatic processing (see Polanco et al. 2020 for details; https://doi.org/10.1002/edn3.140) and associated field metadata.
	* metadata/: contains two metadata files, one related to the data collected in the field for each filter, and the second related to the sequencing process in the lab (including the tag sequence, library name, and marker information for each sample)

coral-reef

display_name: coral-reef

edna

display_name: edna

environmental-dna

display_name: environmental-dna

fish-composition

display_name: fish-composition

indian-ocean

display_name: indian-ocean

laperouse

display_name: laperouse

marine

display_name: marine

teleo

display_name: teleo

en: Environmental DNA Marine France LaPerouse 2019


en: numerical-simulation cosmo-wrf high-resolution complex-terrain meteoswiss

en: WRFrun

en: Scripts to run COSMO-WRF simulation (see Section 6 in COSMOWRFdocumentation.pdf)

en: MeteorologicalData

en: Scripts to process meteorological data (see Section 2 in COSMOWRFdocumentation.pdf).

en: StaticData

en:
Scripts to process geographical/static data (see Section 3 in COSMOWRFdocumentation.pdf).
- ascii_to_bin_landuse.f90
- ascii_to_bin_soiltype.f90
- ascii_to_bin_topo_wgs84_ws2sf1.f90
- see_slopes.ncl
- soiltype_writing.py
- toposmooth_wgs84_cosmobound.ncl
- write_geogrid.o

en: WPSSetup

en: Scripts that need to be changed to compile WPS (see COSMOWRFdocumentation.pdf, Section 4)

en: WPSrun

en: Scripts to run the WRF pre-processing (WPS) for COSMO-WRF simulation (see Section 5 in COSMOWRFdocumentation.pdf)

en: COSMO-WRF documentation v1.0

en:
Gerber, Franziska; Sharma, Varun (2018). Running COSMO-WRF on very-high resolution over complex terrain. EnviDat. doi:10.16904/envidat.35

Documentation about the procedure to run COSMO-WRF

en: Postprocessing

en: Postprocessing scripts to map WRF output on swiss coordinates (see Section 7 in COSMOWRFdocumentation.pdf)

en: This is a technical documentation of the procedure to run the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model over complex alpine terrain using Consortium for Small-Scale Modeling (COSMO) reanalysis by the Federal Office of Meteorology and Climatology (MeteoSwiss) as initial and boundary conditions (COMSO-WRF). The setup is adapted for very high resolution simulations based on COSMO-2 (2.2 km resolution) reanalysis. This document gives an overview over steps to setup COSMO-WRF and adaptations needed to run COSMO-WRF. Additionally, the calculation of precipitation rate at a horizontal plane and remapping COSMO-WRF output on Swiss coordinates are documented.

complex-terrain

display_name: complex-terrain

cosmo-wrf

display_name: cosmo-wrf

high-resolution

display_name: high-resolution

meteoswiss

display_name: meteoswiss

numerical-simulation

display_name: numerical-simulation

educ

en: Education, culture and sport

envidat

en: EnviDat: the Environmental Data Portal