2. Xiao et al. 2011; Bowker and Belnap 2008; Bowker 2007; Garcia-Pichel et al. 2003; Belnap et al. 2001Xiao et al. 2011; Bowker and Belnap 2008; Bowker 2007; Garcia-Pichel et al. 2003; Belnap et al. 2001
3. Bowker et al. 2005; Eldridge et al. 2010; Yeager et al. 2004; Thomas et al. 2011; Maestre et al. 2012
4. Belnap et al. 2001; Bates and Garcia-Pichel 2009; Yeager et al. 2004, Belnap and Lange 2003
5. Belnap and Lange 2003; Darby et al. 2010; Pringault 2001; Yeager et al. 2004, Tamaru et al. 2005
15. Hernandez and Sandquist 2011; Belnap and Eldridge 2003; Bowker 2007; Rosentreter et al. 2007
16. Godefroid et al. 2011; Link et al. 2005; Bowler 1994; Cornish and Burgin 2005Godefroid et al. 2011; Irvine et al. 2013; Bhunia et al. 1991; Megharaj et al. 1988; Kremer 2009
17. Lal 2004; Hernandez and Sandquist 2011; Maestre et al. 2011; Eldridge et al. 2010
18. Bowker et al. 2011, Eldridge et al. 2010; Buttars et al. 1998; Malam Issa et al. 2007; Wang et al. 2009
19.
20.
21.
22.
23. Stanier et al. 2011, Eldridge et al. 2010; Malam Issa et al. 2007; Mazor et al. 1996
1) Large # Eco Services
2) Ecosytem Engineer alter, modify & control the physical state and chemical reactivity of the immediate environment
3) List
4) Hydrology
5) Hostile
6) Rich Biodiversity
1) Ilocally and globally
2) No longer aggregated
3) Unprotected soil
4) Desertification
5) CA 65%
6) Restoration
Problem
Intact crust
Area Description
15%
Hot Spot
SMER
Metabolically active
Colorado Plateau
Intact
CSS Hernandez
This approach requires inputs of time, manpower, plants, chemicals and water. Water is a problem with current drought. A meta-analysis by
Godefroid et. al. 2011 found that the success rate of vascular plantings after 3 years ranged was around 33% and tended to decrease with age
Herbicides inhibit growth and decrease nitrogen fixation of soil organisms. Herbicides also chelate and bind up the minerals needed for growth.
The use of these formulations affect restoration.
It is thought that the number and composition of soil micro organisms influence habitat restoration success.
Ground up Crust
Microcoleus vaginatus
No studies CSS
CSS different
We collected a few quarter-sized pieces of biological soil crust in two coastal sage scrub locations.
I did this twice
Micromoles of photons per meter squared per second
From everything I had read and experts I had consulted I expected to see multi-strand Microcoleus vaginatus.
This species is present in many biological soil crusts worldwide.
I did the dilution series, and plate streaking twice and I got the same single strand cyanobacteria each time.
Morphologically it looks like Leptolyngbya foveolarum.
I also grew this green algae in the two isolation and culturing processes. I think this is a species of Trebouxia and I am awaiting PCR confirmation. Anyway, for inoculation of CSS soil this is a great organism as green algae is even more dessication tolerant than cyanobacteria. Both organisms are found in the hyper-arid Atacama Desert and can withstand and still grow in those conditions.
In order to figure out amounts of inoculum to add to the soil I measured reference values of intact css biocrust. These reference measurements will help gauge success or failure of soil function increase after inoculation and growth in the experiment. I measured Chlorophyll a, extractable polysaccharides, and aggregate stability.
Remember chlorophyll a 15.75 ug/g soil, Extractable Polysaccharides 4,397 ug C /g soil and aggregate stability at 5.833
I divided the reference crust chlorophyll a measurement by 10 to get a good starting point for inoculation. I measured the chlorophyll a contents of the four flasks of isolated organisms and mixed them according to their values, so they were all equally represented in the inoculum. I applied 1/10 the amount of chlorophyll a per inoculated pot.
I had planned to run the experiment for three months, but there was so much growth in two months that I terminated the experiment. Here are some samples of the treatments.
I looked at the liquid inoculation treatments under the microscope and I found both the single strand cyanobacteria and the green algae were growing and proliferating, so using a mixed culture worked.
Significant differences existed between some treatments
When I took out the ground crust inoculated and just looked at autoclaved or sterilized soil versus native soil there was a significant difference and a p-value or 0.031.
To me this suggests that the health of the soil community is important for the growth of the cyanobacteria and green algae to successfully grow.
Interaction of the intact microbial community is important for the growth of photosynthesizing organisms.
When I did the same thing looking at inoculated soil compared to non-inoculated soil there was a significant difference with a p-value of 0.
Inoculation really made a difference in the growth of cyanobacteria and green algae.
There were some significant differences in stability.
Autoclaved control fell apart
Inoculated stability approached reference crusts
When I removed the
The test for extractable polysaccharides did not find any significant differences at first examination
But taking out the ground crust treatment again and looking orthogonally at inoculated versus the non-inoculated there is a significant difference of p= 0.012
Impressive increases in chlorophyll a, and stability, in inoculated soils and most impressively in native soil inoculated. Also significant was the increase in extractable polysaccharides in inoculated soils.
So this shows an increase in function of the treated soils, an increase in aggregation and signs of carbon sequestration.
Problematic genus
Polyphyletic as currently defined
Members of the genus are very small and difficult to differentiate under the microscope
Leptolyngbya is kind of a kitchen sink genus with species transferred from other genera
