Main content area

Biocrusts resist runoff erosion through direct physical protection and indirect modification of soil properties

Gao, Liqian, Sun, Hui, Xu, Mingxiang, Zhao, Yunge
Journal of soils and sediments 2020 v.20 no.1 pp. 133-142
biological soil crusts, biomass, chlorophyll, cohesion, cropland, developmental stages, hydraulic flumes, mosses and liverworts, prediction, runoff, sediments, semiarid zones, soil density, soil organic matter, soil stabilization, water erosion, China
PURPOSE: Biological soil crusts (biocrusts) are ubiquitous in arid and semi-arid regions and play many critical roles in soil stabilization and erosion prevention, greatly decreasing soil loss. Although sediments may be completely controlled by well-developed biocrusts, runoff loss is observed. Consequently, it is important to study how biocrusts resist runoff erosion in different developmental stages to evaluate and manage water erosion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In the Loess Plateau Region, we sampled 32 biocrust plots representing eight stages of biocrust development and 5 slope cropland soil plots as bare soil control plots. We then used a rectangular open channel hydraulic flume to test the effects of biocrust development on runoff erosion. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: As expected, the establishment of biocrusts enhanced soil stability, and accordingly, soil anti-scourability significantly increased with biocrust development. Biocrusts exhibiting more than 36% or 1.22 g dm⁻² of moss coverage or biomass fully protected the soil from runoff erosion. Moreover, soil properties, such as soil organic matter, soil cohesion and soil bulk density, were also important in reducing erosion. The findings indicated that biocrusts inhibited runoff erosion through direct physical protection related to biocrust cover and biomass and through the indirect modification of soil properties. In the early biocrust development stage (when moss cover was less than 36%), cyanobacterial biocrust played a primary role in providing resistance to runoff erosion, with resistance being positively related to cyanobacterial biomass (chlorophyll a) and influenced by soil properties. CONCLUSIONS: The relationship between soil anti-scourability and moss coverage or biomass can be divided into two stages based on a moss cover or biomass threshold. The capacity of biocrusts to resist runoff erosion was limited when moss cover was below the threshold value. Therefore, the stage corresponding to this level of moss cover should be of concern when estimating, predicting and managing water erosion.