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

en: Vegetation data

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

en: Soil properties

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

en: Distance to target results

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

en: Fungi data

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

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

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

en: Ecosystem coupling_interactions

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

en: Nematode data

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

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

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

en: Networks

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

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

Paper Citation:

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

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

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

Collection of plants and selected soil biota data
Plant species cover (in %) was visually estimated in each 25-m2 plot in mid-June (Braun-Blanquet, 1964; nomenclature: Lauber & Wagner, 1996). We calculated Shannon diversity and assessed plant community structure. We included soil microbial (fungi, procaryotes) and nematodes in our study as they represent the majority of soil biotic diversity and abundance (Bardgett & van der Putten, 2014), cover various trophic levels of the soil food web (Bongers & Ferris, 1999), and play key roles in soil functioning and ecosystem processes (Bardgett & van der Putten, 2014). In particular, soil nematodes were found to be well suited belowground indicators to evaluate recovery/development after restoration (e.g. Frouz, et al. 2008; Kardol et al., 2009; Resch et al., 2019). We randomly collected ten soil cores (2.2 cm diameter x 12 cm depths; sampler from Giddings Machine Company, Windsor, USA) in the 4-m2 subplots to assess soil nematode and microbial (fungal, prokaryotic) diversities and community structures. For soil nematodes, eight of the soil cores were combined and gently homogenized, placed in coolers and stored at 4 °C and transported to the laboratory (Netherlands Institute of Ecology, NIOO, Wageningen, Netherlands) within three days after collection. Free-living nematodes were extracted from 200 g of fresh soil using Oostenbrink elutriators (Oostenbrink, 1960). After extraction, each sample was divided into three subsamples, two for molecular identification and one to determine nematode abundance (see Resch et al., 2019). For the molecular work, two subsamples were stored in 70% ethanol (final volume 10 mL each) and transported to the laboratory at the Swiss Federal Research Institute WSL (Birmensdorf, Switzerland). Each subsample was reduced to roughly 200 μL by centrifugation and removal of the supernatant. The remaining ethanol was vaporized (65 °C for 3 h). Thereafter, 180 μL ATL buffer solution (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany) was immediately added and samples were stored at 4 °C until further processing. From these samples, nematode metagenomic DNA was extracted using the DNeasy Blood & Tissue Kit (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany) according to the manufacturer`s protocol, except for the incubation step which was run at 56 °C for 4 h. PCR amplification of the V6-V8 region of the eukaryotic small-subunit (18S) was performed with 7.5 μL of genomic DNA template (ca. 1 ng/μL) in 25 μL reactions containing 5 μL PCR reaction buffer, 2.5 mM MgCL2, 0.2 mM dNTPs, 0.8 μM of each primer (NemF: Sapkota & Nicolaisen, 2015; 18Sr2b: Porazinska et al., 2009), 0.5 μL BSA, and 0.25 μL GoTaq G2 Hot Start Polymerase (Promega Corporation, Madison, USA). Amplification was using an initial DNA denaturation step of 95 °C for 2 min, followed by 35 cycles at 94 °C for 40 sec, 58 °C for 40 sec, 72 °C for 1 min, and a final elongation step at 72 °C for 10 min. Filtering, dereplication, sample inference, chimera identification, and merging of paired-end reads was implemented using the DADA2 pipeline (v.1.12; Callahan et al., 2016) to finally assign amplicon sequence variants (ASVs) as taxonomic units.
We combined and homogenized the remaining two soil cores to assess soil microbes, placed them in coolers (4 °C) and transported them to the laboratory at WSL. Metagenomic DNA was extracted from 8 g sieved soil (2 mm) using the DNAeasy PowerMax Soil Kit (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany) according to the manufacturer´s protocol. PCR amplification of the V3-V4 region of the small-subunit (16S) of prokaryotes (i.e., bacteria and archaea) and the ribosomal internal transcribed spacer region (ITS2) of fungi was performed with 1 ng of template DNA using PCR primers and conditions as previously described (Frey et al., 2016). PCRs were run in triplicates, pooled and sent to the Genome Quebec Innovation Centre (Montreal, QC, Canada) for barcoding using the Fluidigm Access Array technology (Fluidigm) and paired-end sequencing on the Illumina MiSeq v3 platform (Illumina Inc., San Diego, USA). Quality filtering, clustering into operational taxonomic units (OTUs, 97% similarity cutoffs) and taxonomic assignment were performed as previously described (Resch et al., 2021).Taxonomic classification of nematode, prokaryotic and fungal sequences was conducted querying against the most recent versions of PR2 (v.4.11.1; Guillou et al., 2013), SILVA (v.132; Quast et al., 2013), and UNITE (v.8; Nilsson et al., 2019) reference sequence databases. Taxonomic assignment cutoffs were set to confidence rankings ≥ 0.8 (below ranked as unclassified). Prokaryotic OTUs assigned to mitochondria or chloroplasts as well as OTUs or ASVs assigned to other than Fungi or Nematoda were manually removed prior to data analysis. The three datasets were filtered to discard singletons and doubletons. Taxonomic abundance matrices were rarefied to the lowest number of sequences per community to achieve parity of the total number of reads between samples (Prokaryotes: 10,929 reads; Fungi: 18,337 reads; Nematodes: 6,662 reads). We calculated Shannon diversity and assessed community structures for soil nematodes, prokaryotes and fungi based on their relative abundances of ASV or OTU at the taxon level.

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

bacteria

display_name: bacteria

fungi

display_name: fungi

grassland

display_name: grassland

nematodes

display_name: nematodes

plants

display_name: plants

restoration

display_name: restoration

soil

display_name: soil

soil-biodiversity

display_name: soil-biodiversity

soil-biology

display_name: soil-biology

soil-chemistry

display_name: soil-chemistry

topsoil-removal

display_name: topsoil-removal

educ

en: Education, culture and sport

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


maintainer: Esther R. Frei

en: picea-abies climate-change g-tree treeline forest stillberg larix-decidua swiss-alps seedling-recruitment

state: active

type: dataset

media_type: text/plain

en: climate data G-TREE experiment, Davos, Switzerland

format: TXT

mimetype: text/plain

en:
 Background information
Climate change-induced range expansion of treeline populations depends on their successful recruitment, which requires dispersal of viable seeds followed by successful establishment of individual propagules. The Global Treeline Range Expansion Experiment (G-TREE) is a global initiative involving researchers from Europe, North America, Australia and New Zealand (Brown et al., 2013). At 15 alpine and Arctic treeline sites worldwide the mechanisms determining the elevational and latitudinal distribution of tree populations are studied using a standardized experimental approach. In summer 2013, a multifactorial seedling recruitment experiment has been established at the Stillberg ecological treeline research site. The aim of this experiment, is to quantify the effect of multiple abiotic and biotic drivers on emergence, survival, and growth of *Larix decidua* and *Picea abies* seedlings in replicated plots along an elevation gradient with three sites below (1930 m a.s.l.), at (2090 m a.s.l.), and above treeline (2410 m a.s.l.; Frei et al., 2018). All plots have been surveyed annually to count seedlings and to measure their total height. Additional environmental factors, such as soil temperature, have been recorded.

 Experimental design
The Stillberg research area is located in the Eastern Swiss Alps near Davos, Switzerland. The site has been used for several long-term monitoring as well as experimental studies for the last four decades. Our G-TREE experiment consists of a lowest site located in a subalpine Larch-Spruce forest (*Larici-Picetum*) dominated by *Larix decidua* and *Picea abies* (1930 m a.s.l.), a transition zone site dominated by alpine shrubs (2100 m a.s.l.), and an uppermost site in an alpine meadow with some dwarf shrubs (2390 m a.s.l.). The three experimental sites were set up following the standard protocol of the global G-TREE initiative (Brown et al., 2013). In a split-plot design, 20 plots (224 cm × 45 cm) were established at each site, which were randomly assigned to the 2 × 2 treatment combinations of the main factors seeding and scarification (i.e. seeding and scarification, seeding only, scarification only, and full control), resulting in five replications per main treatment combination. Each plot was divided into 16 split-plots (22.5 cm × 28 cm), to which treatment combinations of four additional two-level factors species (larch and spruce), provenance (low- and high-elevation), herbivore exclosure (with and without exclosure), and seeding year (2013, 2014) were randomly assigned, which resulted in a total of 960 split-plots (Details see Frei et al. 2018).

 Data description
All plots have been surveyed annually to count seedlings and to measure their total height. Seedling height was assessed with a hand ruler as the total length from the original emerging point to the apical meristem (Details see Frei et al. 2018). Additionally, soil temperature at each site, has been continuously recorded since 2013. Here, we present data from eight years (2013–2021).

climate-change

display_name: climate-change

forest

display_name: forest

g-tree

display_name: g-tree

larix-decidua

display_name: larix-decidua

picea-abies

display_name: picea-abies

seedling-recruitment

display_name: seedling-recruitment

stillberg

display_name: stillberg

swiss-alps

display_name: swiss-alps

treeline

display_name: treeline

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: G-TREE: Global Treeline Range Expansion Experiment Davos, Switzerland


vegetation-height-model-nfi

maintainer: Christian Ginzler

title_for_slug: vegetation-height-model-nfi

en: point-cloud vegetation-height-model photogrammety 3d forest

en: 2015 Vegetation Height Model NFI (2010-2015)

en:
Vegetation Height Model of Switzerland for the year 2015 (cloud optimized geotiff)
and Metadata file with information about acquisition date of used images for tiles of 500 x 500 m (geopackage).

format: SERVICE

en: 2022 Vegetation Height Model NFI (2017-2022)

en:
Vegetation Height Model of Switzerland for the year 2022 (cloud optimized geotiff)
and Metadata file with information about acquisition date of used images for tiles of 500 x 500 m (geopackage).

en: 2016 Vegetation Height Model NFI (2011-2016)

en:
Vegetation Height Model of Switzerland for the year 2016 (cloud optimized geotiff)
and Metadata file with information about acquisition date of used images for tiles of 500 x 500 m (geopackage).

en: 2023 Vegetation Height Model NFI (current)

en:
Vegetation Height Model of Switzerland for the year 2023 (cloud optimized geotiff)
and Metadata file with information about acquisition date of used images for tiles of 500 x 500 m (geopackage).

en: 2020 Vegetation Height Model NFI (2013-2020)

en:
Vegetation Height Model of Switzerland for the year 2020 (cloud optimized geotiff)
and Metadata file with information about acquisition date of used images for tiles of 500 x 500 m (geopackage).

en:
Vegetation Height Model of Switzerland for the year 2021 (cloud optimized geotiff)
and Metadata file with information about acquisition date of used images for tiles of 500 x 500 m (geopackage).

en: Countrywide Stereo-Image Matching for Updating Digital Surface Models in the Framework of the Swiss National Forest Inventory

media_type: application/pdf

format: PDF

en: Thumbnail

mimetype: image/jpeg

en: 2012 Vegetation Height Model NFI (2007-2012)

en:
Vegetation Height Model of Switzerland for the year 2012 (cloud optimized geotiff)
and Metadata file with information about acquisition date of used images for tiles of 500 x 500 m (geopackage).

en: 2019 Vegetation Height Model NFI (2013-2019)

en:
Vegetation Height Model of Switzerland for the year 2019 (cloud optimized geotiff)
and Metadata file with information about acquisition date of used images for tiles of 500 x 500 m (geopackage).

en:
Countrywide **vegetation height models (VHM)** were generated for Switzerland based on **stereo aerial images**, acquired by the Federal Office of Topography swisstopo.
From the ADS-80/100 sensor data, first a digital surface model (DSM) with a spatial resolution of 1 × 1 m is processed. This DSM is then normalized using the digital terrain model (DTM) swissALTI3D (swisstopo). Buildings and other artificial objects are masked out from the nomalized DSM (nDSM) using information from the topogrphic landscape model - TLM (swisstopo) to obtain the actual vegetation height model (VHM).
These VHM's are produced in the framework of the Swiss National forest Inventory (NFI). Each year about 1/6 of Switzerland's surface is updated using the leaf-on aerial images acquired by swisstopo (may - october).
Further information on the creation of the VHM NFI can be found in the paper Ginzler and Hobi (2015, https://doi.org/10.3390/rs70404343).

photogrammety

display_name: photogrammety

point-cloud

display_name: point-cloud

vegetation-height-model

display_name: vegetation-height-model

en: Vegetation Height Model NFI


maintainer: EnviDat Support

en: mass-flux blowing-snow eddy-covariance-measurements turbulence micro-rain-radar large-eddy-simulations antarctica meteorological-data drifting-snow

en: Measurement data from snow particle counter at MRR site

en: Near-surface observations of drifting snow from a Snow Particle Counter (SPC) installed at the location of the Micro Rain Radar.

en: Simulation data for a situation with significant snow transport

en: Data from two LES-LSM simulations called Drift_1 and Drift_2, which reproduce the conditions observed at the S17 site on 11th January 2019, 00:40 to 00:50 UTC.

en: Simulation data for a situation with negligible snow transport

en: Results from two LES-LSM simulations called NoDrift_1 and NoDrift_2, which reproduce the conditions observed at the S17 site on 12th January 2019, 05:40 to 05:50 UTC.

en: Source code of the large-eddy simulations coupled with a Lagrangian stochastic model (LES-LSM), available on GitLab.

en: Measurement data from micro-meteorological station

en: Automatic in-situ measurements of micro-meteorology and snow transport

en: Measurement data from Micro Rain Radar (MRR)

en: Remote sensing data of blowing snow from a Micro Rain Radar (MRR).

en: Readme

en: Meta data

en:
This dataset contains measurement and simulation data. The measurements characterize the standard meteorology, turbulence, and snow transport at the S17 site near Syowa Station in East Antarctica during an expedition in austral summer 2018/2019. Large-eddy simulations with sublimating particles provide additional insight into the latent and sensible heat exchange between snow and air in two example situations observed at the S17 site.

A part of the measurement data was recorded by an automatic measurement station from 10th January 2019 to 26th January 2019. This measurement station was equipped with standard meteorological sensors, a three-dimensional ultrasonic anemometer, an open-path infrared gas analyzer, a snow particle counter, an infrared radiometer for measurements of the surface temperature, and a sonic ranging sensor measuring changes in snow surface elevation.

At a horizontal distance of approximately 500 m, a Micro Rain Radar (MRR) was installed in a tilted configuration with an elevation angle of 7° for remote sensing of blowing snow between 25th December 2018 and 24th January 2019. In addition, near-surface in-situ measurements of snow transport were performed at the location of the MRR by deploying a snow particle counter from 27th December 2018 to 24th January 2019.

The simulations cover a 18 x 18 x 6 m³ domain and reproduce the steady-state conditions during a 10-min interval with significant snow transport and another 10-min interval with negligible snow transport. We provide the model source code and the post-processed simulation data, i.e., horizontally averaged quantities as a function of height and time.

antarctica

display_name: antarctica

blowing-snow

display_name: blowing-snow

drifting-snow

display_name: drifting-snow

eddy-covariance-measurements

display_name: eddy-covariance-measurements

large-eddy-simulations

display_name: large-eddy-simulations

mass-flux

display_name: mass-flux

meteorological-data

display_name: meteorological-data

micro-rain-radar

display_name: micro-rain-radar

turbulence

display_name: turbulence

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: Meteorology and snow transport at S17 near Syowa, Antarctica, in austral summer 2018/2019


en: discharge low-flow hydrological-simulations prevah drought-2018 precipitation soil-moisture

en: Discharge

en: Simulated discharge for the 307 medium-sized catchments. The first column provides the date in the format YYYYMMDD. One column corresponds to one catchment. Unit: mm/d.

en: Shapefile of 307 catchments in Switzerland

media_type: application/zip

en: Shapefile of 307 catchments for which simulations of precipitation, discharge, soil moisture, and low flow are provided. The OBJECTID entry corresponds to the data columns in the textfiles of the simulated data provided.

format: ZIP

mimetype: application/zip

en: Precipitation

en: Simulated precipitation for the 307 medium-sized catchments. The first column provides the date in the format YYYYMMDD. One column corresponds to one catchment. Unit: mm/d.

en: Low-flow storage

en: Simulated low-flow storage for the 307 medium-sized catchments. The first column provides the date in the format YYYYMMDD. One column corresponds to one catchment. Unit: mm.

en: Soil moisture

en: Simulated plant-available soil moisture for the 307 medium-sized catchments. The first column provides the date in the format YYYYMMDD. One column corresponds to one catchment. Unit: mm.

en: The dataset provides simulated 1) precipitation, 2) discharge, 3) soil moisture, and 4) low-flow simulations for 307 medium-sized catchments in Switzerland for the period 1981-2018. The data were simulated using the hydrological model PREVAH in its gridded-version. The simulated time series are provided at daily resolution. A detailed description of the modeling approach can be found in Brunner et al. 2019 submitted to NHESS.

discharge

display_name: discharge

hydrological-simulations

display_name: hydrological-simulations

low-flow

display_name: low-flow

precipitation

display_name: precipitation

prevah

display_name: prevah

soil-moisture

display_name: soil-moisture

en: Hydro-meteorological simulations for the period 1981-2018 for Switzerland


maintainer: Leonie Schönbeck

en: acclimation photosynthesis pinus-sylvestris vpd fluorescence gas-exchange drought

en: Methods ACi curves

media_type: text/csv

en:
Parameters and methods for CO2 response curves of Photosynthesis.

Metatdata format by
Ely et al (2021). A reporting format for leaf-level gas exchange data and metadata. Ecological Informatics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoinf.2021.101232

format: CSV

en: Methods diurnal measurements

en:
Parameters and methodology for diurnal measurements

Metadata format from
Ely et al (2021). A reporting format for leaf-level gas exchange data and metadata. Ecological Informatics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoinf.2021.101232

en: Methods fluorescence

en:
Parameters and methodology for Fluorescence measurements

Metadata format from
Ely et al (2021). A reporting format for leaf-level gas exchange data and metadata. Ecological Informatics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoinf.2021.101232

en: Variable names and units

en: Variable names, description and units for the Pfynwald Gas exchange data

format: XLS

en: Pfynwald gas exchange

en:
Full dataset of Pfynwald gas exchange data taken in the period from June 2013 to October 2020.
All metdata can be found in attached documents.
Data uploaded after quality control using guidelines by Ely et al (2021). A reporting format for leaf-level gas exchange data and metadata. Ecological Informatics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoinf.2021.101232

en: Methods survey

en: Parameters and methods for point measurements / survey measurements

en: Methods light response

en: Methods and parameters for light response curves

en: Instrument details

en:
Instrument details for all LiCor instruments used during collection of dataset.

Metatdata created following guidelines from
Ely et al (2021). A reporting format for leaf-level gas exchange data and metadata. Ecological Informatics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoinf.2021.101232

en:
Gas exchange was measured on control, irrigated and irrigation-stop trees at the irrigation experiment Pfynwald, during the years 2013, 2014, 2016-2020. The measurement campaigns served different purposes, resulting in a large dataset containing survey data, CO2 response curves of photosynthesis, light response curves of photosynthesis, and fluorescence measurements. Measurements were done with LiCor 6400 and LiCor 6800 instruments. Until 2016, measurements were done on excised branches or branches lower in the canopy. From 2016 onwards, measurements were done in the top of the canopy using fixed installed scaffolds.
All metadata can be found in the attached documents.

acclimation

display_name: acclimation

drought

display_name: drought

fluorescence

display_name: fluorescence

gas-exchange

display_name: gas-exchange

photosynthesis

display_name: photosynthesis

pinus-sylvestris

display_name: pinus-sylvestris

vpd

display_name: vpd

educ

en: Education, culture and sport

en: 2013-2020 gas exchange at Pfynwald


maintainer: Mahdi Jafari

en: openfoam numerical-simulation convection-in-snow vapor-transport snow-density-profile

en: snowpackBuoyantPimpleFoam

en:
This zipped folder includes (1) the source code files, (2) an example case for simulation, and (3) an instruction how to compile and use the new solver.

Note that the most updated version of snowpackBuoyantPimpleFoam can be found in the WSL/SLF GitLab repository: https://gitlabext.wsl.ch/snow-models/snowpackbuoyantpimplefoam

en: snowpackBuoyantPimpleFoam is a two-phase solver implemented to model convection of water vapor with phase change in snowpacks. This new solver is based on the standard solver of buoyantPimpleFoam in the open-source fluid dynamics software, OpenFOAM 5.0 (www.openfoam.org).

convection-in-snow

display_name: convection-in-snow

numerical-simulation

display_name: numerical-simulation

openfoam

display_name: openfoam

snow-density-profile

display_name: snow-density-profile

vapor-transport

display_name: vapor-transport

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: snowpackBuoyantPimpleFoam: an OpenFOAM Eulerian–Eulerian two-phase solver for modelling convection of water vapor in snowpacks


maintainer: Frank Hagedorn

en: soil-nutrients plant-community biomass-dynamics treeline-ecosystems climate-change plant-traits

en: Data on soils, tree biomass, plant nutrients, rock mineralogy, climate of treeline ecosystems in Khibiny mountains, Kola Penninsula, Russia

en: Data on soil nutrients and charcteristics, tree and understory biomass, foliage nutrients, mineralogy, soil temperature and moisture along an elevation gradient from boreal forest to mountain tundra in teh Khibiny mountains (Kola Penninsula, Russia). Samples were taken along two gradients at 7 elevation level either under tree canopy (tree) and in open areas (open).

biomass-dynamics

display_name: biomass-dynamics

climate-change

display_name: climate-change

plant-community

display_name: plant-community

plant-traits

display_name: plant-traits

soil-nutrients

display_name: soil-nutrients

treeline-ecosystems

display_name: treeline-ecosystems


maintainer: Felix Gugerli

en: monitoring conservation-genetics melanargia-galathea genetic-structure genetic-diversity

en:
Individual genotypes assessed at six nuclear microsatellite loci (two alleles per locus) for individuals of the butterfly Melanargia galathea (Marbled white) that were collected throughout Switzerland, along the regular grid of the Biodiversity Monitoring (BDM) of Switzerland. For each individual, the sampling site (number) and the genotype are given. Note that due to privacy restrictions, the original geographic coordinates remain disclosed. For original coordinates, data holders should be contacted (Swiss Federal Office for the Environment; Biodiversity Monitoring Switzerland).
The data refer to the following publication: Terzer et al., Distinct spatial patterns of genetic structure and diversity in the butterfly Marbled White (Melanargia galathea) inhabiting fragmented grasslands. Conservation Genetics, https://doi.org/0.1007/s10592-023-01593-4.

conservation-genetics

display_name: conservation-genetics

genetic-diversity

display_name: genetic-diversity

genetic-structure

display_name: genetic-structure

melanargia-galathea

display_name: melanargia-galathea

monitoring

display_name: monitoring

en: Nuclear microsatellite genotypes of the butterfly Melanargia galathea


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

en: Site photo of the forest station (VOB)

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

en: Site aerial photo (Vordemwald)

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

en: Field station data (VOF)

en: Data file.

mimetype: text/csv

en: Data plot of the field station (VOF)

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

mimetype: application/pdf

en: Data plot of the forest station (VOB)

en: Forest station data (VOB)

en: Site photo of the field station (VOF)

en: Site photo of the field stationfrom the side.

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

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


en: dsm gletscher orthoimage alps glacier uav findelengletscher drone dem orthophoto sankt-annafirn griesgletscher

en:
This .zip folder contains:

 - An orthoimage (oi) of 0.1m resolution

- A Digital Surface Model (dsm) of 0.1m resolution

- The Agisoft Photoscan automatic processing report

for the UAV field campaign conducted on the Griesgletscher on the 26th of September 2015.

en:
This .zip folder contains:

 - An orthoimage (oi) of 0.1m resolution

- A Digital Surface Model (dsm) of 0.1m resolution

- The Agisoft Photoscan automatic processing report

for the UAV field campaign conducted on the Findelengletscher on the 22th of September 2016.

en:
This .zip folder contains:

 - An orthoimage (oi) of 0.1m resolution

- A Digital Surface Model (dsm) of 0.1m resolution

- The Agisoft Photoscan automatic processing report

for the UAV field campaign conducted on the Findelengletscher on the 2nd of July 2016.

en:
This .zip folder contains:

 - An orthoimage (oi) of 0.1m resolution

- A Digital Surface Model (dsm) of 0.1m resolution

- The Agisoft Photoscan automatic processing report

for the UAV field campaign conducted on the Findelengletscher on the 30th of August 2016.

en:
This .zip folder contains:

 - An orthoimage (oi) of 0.1m resolution

- A Digital Surface Model (dsm) of 0.1m resolution

- The Agisoft Photoscan automatic processing report

for the UAV field campaign conducted on the Griesgletscher on the 15th of August 2015.

en: This folder contains all UAV flights paths that we created for the Sankt Annafirn, the Findelengletscher and Griesgletscher. They have been created with the software eMotion2, that was developped for the eBee platform from Sensefly.

en:
This .zip folder contains:

 - An orthoimage (oi) of 0.1m resolution

- A Digital Surface Model (dsm) of 0.1m resolution

- The Agisoft Photoscan automatic processing report

for the UAV field campaign conducted on the Sankt Annafirn on the 28th of September 2015.

en:
This .zip folder contains:

 - An orthoimage (oi) of 0.1m resolution

- A Digital Surface Model (dsm) of 0.1m resolution

- The Agisoft Photoscan automatic processing report

for the UAV field campaign conducted on the Sankt Annafirn on the 15th of July 2015.

en:
This .zip folder contains:

 - An orthoimage (oi) of 0.1m resolution

- A Digital Surface Model (dsm) of 0.1m resolution

- The Agisoft Photoscan automatic processing report

for the UAV field campaign conducted on the Griesgletscher on the 3rd of August 2015.

en:
This .zip folder contains:

 - An orthoimage (oi) of 0.1m resolution

- A Digital Surface Model (dsm) of 0.1m resolution

- The Agisoft Photoscan automatic processing report

for the UAV field campaign conducted on the Findelengletscher on the 21th of July 2015.

en:
This .zip folder contains:

 - An orthoimage (oi) of 0.1m resolution

- A Digital Surface Model (dsm) of 0.1m resolution

- The Agisoft Photoscan automatic processing report

for the UAV field campaign conducted on the Griesgletscher on the 13th of September 2016.

en: This .pdf contains an orthoimage for each dataset as well as a Table which displays the number of flights made, image acquired, number of GCP set and the total area covered.

en: Bulk Data Access

en: Link to the S3 bucket where all the data resources can be downloaded in bulk

en:
This .zip folder contains:

 - An orthoimage (oi) of 0.1m resolution

- A Digital Surface Model (dsm) of 0.1m resolution

- The Agisoft Photoscan automatic processing report

for the UAV field campaign conducted on the Sankt Annafirn on the 15th of April 2015.

en:
This .zip folder contains:

 - An orthoimage (oi) of 0.1m resolution

- A Digital Surface Model (dsm) of 0.1m resolution

- The Agisoft Photoscan automatic processing report

for the UAV field campaign conducted on the Findelengletscher on the 19th of April 2016.

en:
This .zip folder contains:

 - An orthoimage (oi) of 0.1m resolution

- A Digital Surface Model (dsm) of 0.1m resolution

- The Agisoft Photoscan automatic processing report

for the UAV field campaign conducted on the Findelengletscher on the 09th of April 2015.

en:
This .zip folder contains:

 - An orthoimage (oi) of 0.1m resolution

- A Digital Surface Model (dsm) of 0.1m resolution

- The Agisoft Photoscan automatic processing report

for the UAV field campaign conducted on the Findelengletscher on the 15th of September 2015.

en:
 UAV-derived DSMs and orthoimages

Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) surveys were conducted between 2015 and 2016 on the Sankt Annafirn, Findelen- and Griesgletscher, situated in the Swiss Alps. Three surveys at the Sankt Annafirn allowed for a full glacier coverage, four surveys at Griesgletscher allowed an almost full glacier coverage and seven surveys at Findelengletscher allowed for a partial coverage of the glacier tongue (see individual datasets for exact extent). For each survey, a high resolution orthoimage and a Digital Surface Model (DSM) was created.

 UAV surveys:

Prior flight, Ground Control Points (GCPs) were deployed on the glacier surface and measured with a differential GPS (Trimble R7 or Leica GPS 1200). They allowed precise georeferencing of the UAV-derived datasets. UAV flight plans were planned with the software *eMotion 2* and a SenseFly eBee was used as surveying platform. The images were then processed with the software Agisoft Photoscan Pro 1.1.6 .

The location and dates of each survey can be found in the table together with the number of flights performed (Nflights), the number of acquired images (Nimages), the number of GCPs set (NGCPs) and the surveyed area.

A folder for each dataset is available (see folder name in table), which contains:

- An orthoimage *glacier_date_photoscan_oi_CH1903+_LV95_0.1m.tif*

- A Digital Surface Model *glacier_date_photoscan_dsm_CH1903+_LV95_0.1m.tif*

- The Agisoft Photoscan automatic processing report  *glacier_date_photoscan_report.pdf*

where:

- *glacier* is the name of the surveyed glacier

- *date* is the date of the UAV image acquisition

- *photoscan* is the name of the photogrammetric software

- *oi* or *dsm* the type of dataset

- *CH1903+_LV95* is the coordinate system and datum of the dataset

- *0.1m* is the resolution of the dataset in meter

- *.tif* is the extention of the dataset

Details about the UAV surveys, the image processing and the accuracy of the UAV-derived products can be found in this publication below.

Paper Citation:
 > _Gindraux et al. 2017. Accuracy Assessment of Digital Surface Models from Unmanned Aerial Vehicles’Imagery on Glaciers, Remote Sensing, 9, 186, 1-15, [doi: 10.3390/rs9020186](https://doi.org/10.3390/rs9020186)._

The folder UAV_flight_paths.zip contains all UAV flights performed on the Sankt Annafirn, Findelengletscher and Griesgletscher. The flights were planned with the software eMotion2 and have the .afp extention.

alps

display_name: alps

dem

display_name: dem

drone

display_name: drone

dsm

display_name: dsm

findelengletscher

display_name: findelengletscher

glacier

display_name: glacier

gletscher

display_name: gletscher

griesgletscher

display_name: griesgletscher

orthoimage

display_name: orthoimage

orthophoto

display_name: orthophoto

sankt-annafirn

display_name: sankt-annafirn

uav

display_name: uav

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: UAV-derived Digital Surface Models and orthoimages for three alpine glaciers


en: boundary-layer-winds snow-cover snow-depth vertical-wind-motion saltation

en: Data Compilation

en: Compressed TXT files

en:
The data correspond to the experiments presented and discussed in a paper regarding the interaction between turbulent wind fluctuations and snow saltation mass-fluxes (Paterna, 2016). Each of the nine data files corresponds to a different experiment presented in the paper and conducted in the winter 2014/2015 in the WSL/SLF cold wind tunnel in Davos. For each file the five columns indicate the time from the beginning of the experiment, the streamwise (u’) and the vertical (w’) wind velocity fluctuations, the streamwise (qx) and the vertical (qz) snow mass-flux components. From these time-series the scales of the snow saltation and of the turbulent flow are obtained with respect to the eddy-cycles and snow saltation cycles. From spectral analysis of the time-series a decoupling of the snow saltation from the turbulence forcing reveals two regimes of interaction: a turbulence-dependent regime occurring with weak saltation, and a turbulence-independent regime with strong saltation. Further details can be found at the link below.

Publication http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016GL068171/abstract

boundary-layer-winds

display_name: boundary-layer-winds

saltation

display_name: saltation

snow-cover

display_name: snow-cover

snow-depth

display_name: snow-depth

vertical-wind-motion

display_name: vertical-wind-motion

en: Wind tunnel measurement data of drifting snow and turbulent wind fluctuations


en: albedo irradiance energy photovoltaic snow mountain reflection

en: PV Data

en: Windows users use the 7-zip app to extract the zip-file.

en:
 Overview
The SUNWELL Modelling Environment is a combination of data and code that models electricity production from satellite-derived irradiance data and other spatial data sets for all of Switzerland. This ensemble accompanies the publication "The bright side of PV production in snow-covered mountains", published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science and reproduces all results and figures of. Code and resources are in their original form (with documentation). A new version with a more generalized application to PV modelling and with more flexibility in terms of input and output formats will be released in the coming months.

 Format
All code is written and has to be executed in Matlab. The input and output data sets are also in the Matlab-specific .mat format. Whenever publicly available, the original data is provided as geotif, .xlsx or other common format.
This is the case for:

- Digital Elevation Model (InputsFromMatlab/MSG/OriginalData/ASTERDEM),
- Landsurface cover type (InputsFromMatlab/MSG/OriginalData/CORINE),
- Population Density (InputsFromMatlab/MSG/OriginalData/popdensRaster,
- Electricity production from three of our validation sites (/Validation/WSL),
- Measured irradiance for two validation sites (/Validation/ASRB)
The ‘Metadata’ documents in the respective folders provide further information about the data sources and processing. Figures are produced either in .pdf or .png format.

 Structure
The central level of the SUNWELL environment holds the 5 Mains, which run the different modelling aspects of the paper; each code is documented separately. Additional code is located in the ‘DataProcessing’ and the ‘functions’ folder. Functions are called in the different Mains.

‘InputsFromMatlab’ contains the radiation and albedo input data sets in separate subfolders (SIS/SISDIR/ALB). The original data is not publicly available, but can be requested for research purposes free of charge. We provide a processed subset of the data set that was used to run the SUNWELL simulations. The MSG subfolder contains additional spatial input data sets.

‘Outputs’ contains the output files from the different mains (matching names, Main_CHallpixels.m  Prod_CHallpixels)

‘Publication_figures’ contains all individual figures from the PNAS publication, as well as the generating code (/code_plot) and the power point figures (/ppts) that provide the combined final figures.

‘Validation’ contains the data sets used in the model validation:

- Electricity production from three of our validation sites (/WSL),
- Measured irradiance for two validation sites (/ASRB)

Electricity production from a validation site at Lac des Toules in Wallis (/LDT), this data set was provided under an NDA and cannot be made publicly available.

Paper Citation:
 > _Annelen Kahl; Jérôme Dujardin; Michael Lehning (2018). Dataset on PV Production in Snow Covered Mountains. PNAS - Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. (in press)_

albedo

display_name: albedo

energy

display_name: energy

irradiance

display_name: irradiance

mountain

display_name: mountain

photovoltaic

display_name: photovoltaic

reflection

display_name: reflection

snow

display_name: snow


maintainer: Anita Risch

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

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


maintainer: Izabela Bujak-Ozga

en: dataset precipitation water-level data catchment dynamics drainage-network drainage channel catchment-data erlenbach

en: The dataset contains time series of water levels, precipitation measured in the two sub-catchments of the Erlenbach catchment and its vicinity during summer and autumn 2021, as well as flowing drainage network lengths calculated for these areas using the CEASE method developed by the authors. Detailed description of the dataset is provided in the documentation.

catchment

display_name: catchment

catchment-data

display_name: catchment-data

channel

display_name: channel

data

display_name: data

dataset

display_name: dataset

drainage

display_name: drainage

drainage-network

display_name: drainage-network

dynamics

display_name: dynamics

erlenbach

display_name: erlenbach

precipitation

display_name: precipitation

water-level

display_name: water-level

educ

en: Education, culture and sport

envidat

en: EnviDat: the Environmental Data Portal

en: Short-term Drainage Density Dynamics Dataset for the Erlenbach Catchment


en: agri-pv sweet-edge plane-of-array solar-irradiance speed2zero alpine-pv rooftop-pv

en:
Contains seasonal and annual statistics (mean and sum) derived from the CH-POA300 dataset.
File naming conventions:
yyyy_agg_period_hourly_stat.nc : statistic <stat> for aggregation period <agg_period> in year <yyyy>
all_agg_period_stat_mean.nc : statistic <stat> for aggregation period <agg_period> computed over the entire dataset (all years)
Definitions:
yyyy = year (2004–2020)
agg_period = winter, summer, annual
stat = mean, sum

en: This document provides an in-depth description of the CH-POA300 dataset. It includes methodology and validation details.

en: Data 2016

en:
Contains seasonal and annual statistics (mean, sum) of the CH-POA300 dataset.
- "yyyy_agg_period_hourly_stat.nc": statistic <stat> for the period <agg_period> of the year <yyyy>
- "all_agg_period_stat_mean.nc": statistic <stat> for the period <agg_period> reduced on the entire dataset (all years).
\
yyyy: [2004, 2020]
agg_period: [winter, summer, annual]
stat: [mean, sum]

en:
**CH-POA300** is a dataset of hourly solar irradiance maps projected onto tilted surfaces (analogous to monofacial solar panels).
- **Spatial resolution:** 300 m
- **Coverage:** Switzerland
Two temporal extents are available, depending on the number of surface orientations (azimuth–tilt combinations):
 1. Long-term
- **Period:** 2004–2020
- **Orientations:**
 - Azimuth: 180° (South)
 - Tilts: 0°, 35°, 60°, 90°
 2. Typical year
- **Period:** 2016
- **Orientations:**
 - Azimuths: 0° (North), 90° (East), 135°, 180° (South), 225°, 270° (West)
 - Tilts: 0°, 3°, 8°, 15°, 25°, 35°, 45°, 60°, 80°, 90°
 Notes
- Azimuth angles: 0° = North, 90° = East, 180° = South, 270° = West
- Tilt angles: 0° = horizontal, 90° = vertical
 Additional data
- Seasonal and annual statistics derived from the maps are included.
- Methodology and quality assessment are documented in *CH-POA300-v#-specs.pdf*.

agri-pv

display_name: agri-pv

alpine-pv

display_name: alpine-pv

plane-of-array

display_name: plane-of-array

rooftop-pv

display_name: rooftop-pv

solar-irradiance

display_name: solar-irradiance

sweet-edge

display_name: sweet-edge

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: CH-POA300 -- Hourly Plane-of-Array Solar Irradiance at High Resolution for Switzerland


en: edna chondrichthyes metabarcoding bay-biscay actinopterygii teleo atlantic-region fish-composition

en: Data access

en: Please use cyberduck to download for the moment

en:
Environmental DNA complements scientific trawling in surveys of marine fish biodiversity (Dataset 2021)

At the end of October and the beginning of November 2021, we selected 18 sites from the 2021 EVHOE survey for eDNA sampling. The French international EVHOE bottom trawl survey is conducted annually in autumn in the Bay of Biscay (BoB) to monitor demersal fish resources. All selected sites were located on the continental shelf at depths ranging from 30 to 230 m. At each site, we sampled seawater using an underwater pump equipped with two peristaltic heads (subspace), mounted on Ifremer’s Pagure sledge. We collected approximately 30 liters of water directly from the seabed at a flow rate of 1.0 L min⁻¹. For filtration, we used VigiDNA 0.20 μm filtration capsules (SPYGEN, Le Bourget-du-Lac, France) along with disposable sterile tubing. Each filtration device processed water along a transect, representing two replicates per sampling site. To prevent contamination during fieldwork, we adhered to strict protocols, including the use of disposable gloves and single-use filtration equipment. At the end of each filtration, we emptied the remaining water from the capsule and replaced it with 80 mL of CL1 conservation buffer before storing the samples at room temperature. We processed the eDNA capsules at SPYGEN, following the protocol outlined by Polanco-Fernández et al. (2020). Library preparation and sequencing were performed at Fasteris (Geneva, Switzerland). Specifically, we prepared four libraries using the MetaFast protocol (a ligation-based method) and sequenced them separately. Paired-end sequencing was conducted using a MiSeq sequencer (2 × 125 bp, Illumina, San Diego, CA, USA) on two MiSeq Flow Cell Kits (v3; Illumina), following the manufacturer’s instructions. We analyzed the sequence reads using the OBITools package (http://metabarcoding.org/obitools; Boyer et al., 2016), following the protocol described by Valentini et al. (2016).

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)

actinopterygii

display_name: actinopterygii

atlantic-region

display_name: atlantic-region

bay-biscay

display_name: bay-biscay

chondrichthyes

display_name: chondrichthyes

edna

display_name: edna

fish-composition

display_name: fish-composition

metabarcoding

display_name: metabarcoding

teleo

display_name: teleo

en: Environmental DNA Marine France Evhoe 2021