, Volume 11, Issue 7, pp 1065–1077

Ecosystem Properties of Urban Land Covers at the Aboveground–Belowground Interface



Understanding of ecological differences among urban land covers can guide the sustainable management of urbanized landscapes for conservation of ecosystem services. The objective of our study was to compare ecosystem properties at the aboveground–belowground interface of three land-cover types commonly found in residential landscapes: lawns, bark mulch, and gravel mulch. Using unmowed vegetation as a reference land cover, we measured surface soil variables (to 5 cm depth), CO2 fluxes, and ground temperatures in experimental field plots within 3 years after their creation. Each land cover had a distinctive set of ecosystem properties. Mulched plots had significantly warmer soil and surface temperatures, wetter soils and faster surface litter decomposition than vegetated plots. Variables associated with soil C and earthworm numbers were consistently lowest in gravel-covered soils, whereas bark mulch plots had highest earthworm abundances, lowest soil bulk density, and temporally variable soil organic matter dynamics. Compared to unmowed plots, lawns had higher soil carbon, CO2 fluxes, and temperatures but lower earthworm abundances especially during 2005 drought conditions. We conclude that ecosystem properties of the land covers were influenced by the composition, density, and arrangement of materials comprising their aboveground habitat structures. We discuss our results within an ecosystem services framework and suggest that interpretations of our findings depend on in situ urban environmental contexts and landscape management objectives. Future studies of urban land covers, their ecosystem properties and associated ecosystem services are needed to help provide a scientific basis for sustainable urban landscape management.


urban ecology lawns mulch habitat structure microclimate earthworms soils 

Supplementary material

10021_2008_9179_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (1.8 mb)
(PDF 1824 kb)


  1. Baker L, Brazel A, Byrne L, Felson A, Grove M, Hill H, Nelson KC, Walker J, Shandas V. 2007. Effects of human choices on characteristics of urban ecosystems. Bull Ecol Soc Am October:404–9Google Scholar
  2. Borken W, S Grundel, F Beese. 2000. Potential contribution of Lumbricus terrestris L. to carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide fluxes from a forest soil. Biol Fertil Soils 32: 142–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bossuyt H, J Six, PF Hendrix. 2005. Protection of soil carbon by microaggregates within earthworm casts. Soil Biol Biochem 37: 251–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Braker WL 1981. Soil survey of centre county, pennsylvania. USDA-SCS, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  5. Brown DG, KM Johnson, TR Loveland, DM Theobald. 2005. Rural land-use trends in the coterminous United States, 1950–2000. Ecol Appl 15: 1851–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Burtelow AE, PJ Bohlen, PM Groffman. 1998. Influence of exotic earthworm invasion on soil organic matter, microbial biomass and denitrification potential in forest soils of the Northeastern United States. Appl Soil Ecol 9: 197–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Byrne LB. 2006. Effects of urban habitat types and landscape patterns on ecological variables at the aboveground–belowground interface. Ph.D. Dissertation, Penn State University. Available online: Accessed 11 Feb 2008
  8. Byrne LB. 2007. Habitat structure: a fundamental concept and framework for urban soil ecology. Urban Ecosyst 10: 255–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Byrne LB, MA Bruns. 2004. The effects of lawn management on soil microarthropods. J Agr Urban Entomol 21: 150–6Google Scholar
  10. Curry JP. 2004. Factors affecting the abundance of earthworms in soil. In CA Edwards, ed. Earthworm ecology, 2nd edn. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. pp 91–114Google Scholar
  11. Dickenson NM, A Polwart. 1982. The effect of mowing regime on an amenity grassland ecosystem: above- and below-ground components. J Appl Ecol 19: 569–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fierer N, JP Schimel. 2002. Effects of drying-rewetting frequency on soil carbon and nitrogen transformations. Soil Biol Biochem 34: 777–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fontaine S, G Berdoux, L Abbadie, A Mariotti. 2004. Carbon input to soil may decrease soil carbon content. Ecol Lett 7: 314–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gallo ME, RL Sinasbaugh, SE Cabaniss. 2006. The role of ultraviolet radiation in litter decomposition in arid ecosystems. Appl Soil Ecol 34: 82–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gieger R, RH Aron, P Todhunter. 2003. The climate near the ground, 6th edn. Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc. Lanham, MDGoogle Scholar
  16. Golubiewski NE. 2006. Urbanization increases grassland carbon pools: effects of landscaping in Colorado’s Front Range. Ecol Appl 16: 555–71PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Green DM, M Oleksyszen. 2002. Enzyme activities and carbon dioxide flux in a Sonoran desert urban ecosystem. Soil Sci Soc Am J 66: 2002–8Google Scholar
  18. Grimm NB, SH Faeth, NE Golubiewski, CL Redman, J Wu, X Bai, JM Briggs. 2008. Global change and the ecology of cities. Science 319: 756–60PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Holland EA, AP Robertson, J Greenberg, PM Groffman, RD Boone, JR Grosz. 1999. Soil CO2, N2O and CH4 exchange. In GP Robertson, DC Coleman, CS Bledsoe, P Sollins, Eds. Standard Soil Methods for Long-term Ecological Research. New York: Oxford University Press, pp 185–201Google Scholar
  20. Horwath WR, EA Paul. 1994. Microbial biomass. In RW Weaver, editor. Methods of Soil Analysis Part 2: Microbiological and Biochemical Properties. Soil Science Society of America Inc., Madison, Wisconsin, pp 753–73Google Scholar
  21. Kaye JP, IC Burke, AR Mosier, JP Guerschman. 2004. Methane and nitrous oxide flues from urban soils to the atmosphere. Ecol Appl 14: 975–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kaye JP, RL McCulley, IC Burke. 2005. Carbon fluxes, nitrogen cycling, and soil microbial communities in adjacent urban, native and agricultural ecosystems. Glob Chang Biol 11: 575–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kemper WD, RC Rosenau. 1986. Aggregate stability and size distribution. In A Klute, eds. Methods of Soil Analysis Part 1: Physical and Mineralogical Methods, 2nd ed. Soil Science Society of America Inc., Madison, Wisconsin, USA. pp 425–42Google Scholar
  24. Lajtha K, SE Crow, Y Yano, SS Kaushal, E Sulzman, P Sollins, JDH Spears. 2005. Detrital controls on soil solution N and dissolved organic matter in soils: a field experiment. Biogeochemistry 76: 261–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Landi L, F Valori, J Ascher, G Renella, L Falchini, P Nannipieri. 2006. Root exudate effects on the bacterial communities, CO2 evolution, nitrogen transformations and ATP content of rhizosphere and bulk soils. Soil Biol Biochem 38: 509–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. McCauley DJ. 2006. Selling out on nature. Nature 443: 27–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Milesi C, SW Running, CD Elvidge, JB Dietz, BT Tuttle, RR Nemani. 2005. Mapping and modeling the biogeochemical cycling of turf grasses in the United States. Environ Manage 36: 426–38PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Montague T, R Kjelgren. 2004. Energy balance of six common landscape surfaces and the influence of surface properties on gas exchange of four containerized tree species. Sci Hortic 100: 229–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mueller EC, TA Day. 2005. The effect of urban ground cover on microclimate, growth and leaf gas exchange of oleander in Phoenix, Arizona. Int J Biometeorol 49: 244–55PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Palmer M, Bernhardt E, Chornesky E, Collins S, Dobson A, Duke C, and others. 2004. Ecology for a crowded planet. Science 304:1251–2Google Scholar
  31. Pavao-Zuckerman MA, DC Coleman. 2005. Decomposition of chestnut oak (Quercus prinus) leaves and nitrogen mineralization in an urban environment. Biol Fertil Soils 41: 343–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Pizl V, J Schlaghamersky. 2007. The impact of pedestrian activity on soil annelids in urban greens. Eur J Soil Biol 43: S68–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Pouyat RV, MM Carreiro. 2003. Controls on mass loss and nitrogen dynamics of oak leaf litter along an urban-rural land-use gradient. Oecologia 135: 288–98PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Pouyat RV, K Belt, D Pataki, PM Groffman, J Hom, L Band. 2006. Effects of urban land-use change on biogeochemical cycles. In Canadell P, D Pataki, L Pitelka, Eds. Terrestrial ecosystems in a changing world. Springer, Canberra, Australia, pp 55–78Google Scholar
  35. Pulleman MM, J Six, A Uyl, JCY Marinissen, AG Jongmans. 2005. Earthworms and management affect organic matter incorporation and microaggregate formation in agricultural soils. Appl Soil Ecol 29: 1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Qian Y, RF Follett. 2002. Assessing soil carbon sequestration in turfgrass systems using long-term soil testing data. Agron J 94: 930–5Google Scholar
  37. Raich JW, A Tufekcioglu. 2000. Vegetation and soil respiration: correlations and controls. Biogeochemistry 48: 71–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Scharenbroch BC, JE Lloyd, JL Johnson-Maynard. 2005. Distinguishing urban soils with physical, chemical, and biological properties. Pedobiologia 49: 283–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Shakir SH, DL Dindal. 1997. Density and biomass of earthworms in forest and herbaceous microecosystems in central New York, North America. Soil Biol Biochem 29: 275–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Shi W, S Muruganandam, D Bowman. 2006. Soil microbial biomass and nitrogen dynamics in a turfgrass chronosequence: a short term response to turfgrass clipping additions. Soil Biol Biochem 38: 2032–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Shochat E, PS Warren, SH Faeth, NE McIntyre, D Hope. 2006. From population patterns to emerging processes in mechanistic urban ecology. Trends Ecol Evol 21: 186–91PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Smetak KM, JL Johnson-Maynard, JE Lloyd. 2007. Earthworm population density and diversity in different-aged urban systems. Appl Soil Ecol 37: 161–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Szlavecz K, SA Placella, RV Pouyat, PM Groffman, C Csudzi, I Yesilonis. 2006. Invasive earthworm species and nitrogen cycling in remnant forest patches. Appl Soil Ecol 32: 54–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Vossbrink CR, DC Coleman, TA Wooley. 1979. Abiotic and biotic factors in litter decomposition in a semiarid grassland. Ecology 60: 265–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Loren B. Byrne
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
  • Mary Ann Bruns
    • 1
    • 2
  • Ke Chung Kim
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Intercollege Graduate Degree Program in EcologyThe Pennsylvania State UniversityUniversity ParkUSA
  2. 2.Department of Crop and Soil SciencesThe Pennsylvania State UniversityUniversity ParkUSA
  3. 3.Department of EntomologyThe Pennsylvania State UniversityUniversity ParkUSA
  4. 4.Department of Biology, Marine Biology and Environmental ScienceRoger Williams UniversityBristolUSA

Personalised recommendations