, Volume 17, Issue 7, pp 1242–1256 | Cite as

Vascular Plants and Biocrusts Modulate How Abiotic Factors Affect Wetting and Drying Events in Drylands

  • Miguel BerdugoEmail author
  • Santiago Soliveres
  • Fernando T. Maestre


Understanding how organisms control soil water dynamics is a major research goal in dryland ecology. Although previous studies have mostly focused on the role of vascular plants on the hydrological cycle of drylands, recent studies highlight the importance of biological soil crusts formed by lichens, mosses, and cyanobacteria (biocrusts) as a major player in this cycle. We used data from a 6.5-year study to evaluate how multiple abiotic (rainfall characteristics, temperature, and initial soil moisture) and biotic (vascular plants and biocrusts) factors interact to determine wetting and drying processes in a semi-arid grassland from Central Spain. We found that the shrub Retama sphaerocarpa and biocrusts with medium cover (25–75%) enhanced water gain and slowed drying compared with bare ground areas (BSCl). Well-developed biocrusts (>75% cover) gained more water, but lost it faster than BSCl microsites. The grass Stipa tenacissima reduced water gain due to rainfall interception, but increased soil moisture retention compared to BSCl microsites. Biotic modulation of water dynamics was the result of different mechanisms acting in tandem and often in opposite directions. For instance, biocrusts promoted an exponential behavior during the first stage of the drying curve, but reduced the importance of soil characteristics that accentuate drying rates. Biocrust-dominated microsites gained a similar amount of water than vascular plants, although they lost it faster than vascular plants during dry periods. Our results emphasize the importance of biocrusts for water dynamics in drylands, and illustrate the potential mechanisms behind their effects. They will help to further advance theoretical and modeling efforts on the hydrology of drylands and their response to ongoing climate change.


water dynamics infiltration Retama sphaerocarpa Stipa tenacissima pulse reserve semiarid soil water 



We thank A. P. Castillo-Monroy, V. Ochoa, B. Gozalo, P. Valiente, C. Escolar, and B. Mau for maintaining the data loggers during the study period, and D. Eldridge, F. de Vries, and two anonymous reviewers for their comments and suggestions on earlier versions of this article. This research was funded by the European Research Council under the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013)/ERC Grant agreement 242658 (BIOCOM). MB was supported by a FPU fellowship from the Spanish Ministry of Education, Culture and Sports (Ref. AP2010-0759). SS was supported by the BIOCOM project. We would like to thank IMIDRA for allowing us working in its property.

Supplementary material

10021_2014_9790_MOESM1_ESM.docx (13.9 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 14183 kb)


  1. Austin AT, Yahdjian L, Stark JM, Belnap J, Porporato A, Norton U, Ravetta DA, Schaeffer SM. 2004. Water pulses and biogeochemical cycles in arid and semiarid ecosystems. Oecologia 141:221–35.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Belnap J. 2002. Nitrogen fixation in biological soil crusts from southeast Utah, USA. Biol Fertil Soils 35:128–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Belnap J. 2006. The potential roles of biological soil crusts in dryland hydrologic cycles. Hydrol Process 20:3159–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Belnap J, Welter JR, Grimm NB, Barger N, Ludwig JA. 2005. Linkages between microbial and hydrologic processes in arid and semiarid watersheds. Ecology 86:298–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Berdugo M, Castillo-Monroy A, Ochoa V, Gozalo B, Maestre FT. 2014. Data from “Vascular plants and biocrusts modulate the way abiotic factors affect wetting and drying events in drylands”. Figshare. doi: 10.6084/m9.figshare.1096219.
  6. Bergkamp G. 1998. A hierarchical view of the interactions of runoff and infiltration with vegetation and microtopography in semiarid shrublands. Catena 33(3):201–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bhark EW, Small EE. 2003. Association between plant canopies and the spatial patterns of infiltration in shrubland and grassland of the Chihuahuan Desert, New Mexico. Ecosystems 6:0185–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Breshears DD, Barnes FJ. 1999. Interrelationships between plant functional types and soil moisture heterogeneity for semiarid landscapes within the grassland/forest continuum: a unified conceptual model. Landsc Ecol 14:465–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Breshears DD, Nyham JW, Heil CF, Wilcox BP. 1998. Effects of woody plants on microclimate in a semiarid woodland: soil temperature and soil evaporation in canopy and intercanopy patches. Int J Plant Sci 159:1010–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cantón Y, Solé-Benet A, Domingo F. 2004. Temporal and spatial patterns of soil moisture in semiarid badlands of SE Spain. J Hydrol 285:199–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Castillo-Monroy AP, Maestre FT, Delgado-Baquerizo M, Gallardo A. 2010. Biological soil crusts modulate nitrogen availability in semi-arid ecosystems: insights from a Mediterranean grassland. Plant Soil 333:21–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Castillo-Monroy AP, Maestre FT, Rey A, Soliveres S, García-Palacios P. 2011. Biological soil crust microsites are the main contributor to soil respiration in a semiarid ecosystem. Ecosystems 14:835–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chamizo S, Cantón Y, Lázaro R, Solé-Benet A, Domingo F. 2012a. Crust composition and disturbance drive infiltration through biological soil crusts in semiarid ecosystems. Ecosystems 15:148–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chamizo S, Cantón Y, Miralles I, Domingo F. 2012b. Biological soil crust development affects physicochemical characteristics of soil surface in semiarid ecosystems. Soil Biol Biochem 49:96–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Chamizo S, Cantón Y, Lázaro R, Domingo F. 2013a. The role of biological soil crusts in soil moisture dynamics in two semiarid ecosystems with contrasting soil textures. J Hydrol 489:74–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Chamizo S, Cantón Y, Domingo F, Belnap J. 2013b. Evaporative losses from soils covered by physical and different types of biological soil crusts. Hydrol Process 27:324–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Contreras S, Cantón Y, Solé-Benet A. 2008. Sieving crusts and macrofaunal activity control soil water repellency in semiarid environments: evidences from SE Spain. Geoderma 145:225–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cortina J, Maestre FT. 2005. Plant effects on soils in drylands: implications on community dynamics and ecosystem restoration. In: Binkley D, Menyailo O, Eds. Implications for Global Change. NATO Science Series. Berlin: Springer. p 85–118.Google Scholar
  19. D’Odorico P, Caylor K, Okin GS, Scanlon TM. 2007. On soil moisture–vegetation feedbacks and their possible effects on the dynamics of dryland ecosystems. J Geophys Res 112:G04010. doi: 10.1029/2006JG000379.Google Scholar
  20. Domingo F, Sánchez G, Moro MJ, Brenner AJ, Puigdefábregas J. 1998. Measurement and modelling of rainfall interception by three semi-arid canopies. Agric For Meteorol 91:275–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Domingo F, Villagarcía L, Boer MM, Alados-Arboledas L, Puidefábregas J. 2001. Evaluating the long-term water balance of arid zone stream bed vegetation using evapotranspiration modeling and hillslope runoff measurements. J Hydrol 243:17–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Duchafour P. 1995. Pédologie: Sol, vegetation, enviroment. 4th edn. Paris: Masson.Google Scholar
  23. Eldridge DJ. 1993. Cryptogam cover and soil surface condition: effects on hydrology on a semiarid woodland soil. Arid Soil Res Rehabil 7:203–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Eldridge DJ, Greene RSB. 1994. Microbiotic soil crusts-a review of their roles in soil and ecological processes in the rangelands of Australia. Soil Res 32(3):389–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Eldridge DJ, Tozer ME, Slangen S. 1997. Soil hydrology is independent of microphytic crust cover: further evidence from a wooded semiarid Australian rangeland. Arid Soil Res Rehabil 11:113–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Eldridge DJ, Zaady E, Shachak M. 2000. Infiltration through three contrasting biological soil crusts in patterned landscapes in the Negev, Israel. Catena 40:323–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Eldridge DJ, Bowker MA, Maestre FT, Alonso P, Mau RL, Papadopoulos J, Escudero A. 2010. Interactive effects of three ecosystem engineers on infiltration in a semi-arid Mediterranean grassland. Ecosystems 13:499–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Fischer T, Veste M, Wiehe W, Lange P. 2010. Water repellency and pore clogging at early successional stages of microbiotic crusts on inland dunes, Brandenburg, NE Germany. Catena 80:47–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Grace JB. 2006. Structural equation modeling and natural systems. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Greene RSB, Tongway DJ. 1989. The significance of (surface) physical and chemical properties in determining soil surface condition of red earths in rangelands. Aust J Soil Res 27:213–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Harper KT, Marble JR. 1988. A role for nonvascular plants in management of arid and semiarid rangelands. In: Tueller PT, Ed. Applications for rangeland analysis and management. Vegetation science. Amsterdam: Academic Press Dordrecht. p 135–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Huxman TE, Snyder KA, Tissue D, Leffler AJ, Ogle K, Pockman WT, Sandquist DR, Potts WT, Schiwinning S. 2004. Precipitation pulses and carbon fluxes in semiarid and arid ecosystems. Oecologia 141:254–68.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. IPCC. 2007. Climate Change 2007: synthesis report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Core Writing Team, Pachauri RK, Reisinger A, Eds. Geneva (Switzerland): IPCC, p 104.Google Scholar
  34. IUSS Working Group WRB. 2006. World reference base for soil resources 2006. World Soil Resources Reports No. 103. Rome: FAO.Google Scholar
  35. Kidron GJ. 1999. Differential water distribution over dune slopes as affected by slope position and microbiotic crust, Negev Desert, Israel. Hydrol Process 13:1665–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kidron GJ. 2009. The effect of shrub canopy upon surface temperatures and evaporation in the Negev Desert. Earth Surf Process Landf 34:123–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kidron GJ, Yair A. 1997. Rainfall-Runoff relationships over encrusted dune surfaces, Nizzana, Western Negev, Israel. Earth Surf Process Landf 122:1169–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Laio F, Porporato A, Ridolfi L, Rodríguez-Iturbe I. 2001. Plants in water-controlled ecosystems: active role in hydrologic processes and response to water stress: II. Probabilistic soil moisture dynamics. Adv Water Resour 24:707–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lázaro R, Cantón Y, Solé-Benet A, Bevan J, Alexander R, Sancho LG, Puigdefábregas J. 2008. The influence of competition between lichen colonization and erosion on the evolution of soil surfaces in the Tabernas badlands (SE Spain) and its landscape effects. Geomorphology 102:252–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Li XR, Ma FY, Xiao HL, Wang XP, Kim KC. 2004. Long-term effects of revegetation on soil water content of sand dunes in arid region of Northern China. J Arid Environ 57:1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Linacre ET. 1973. A simpler empirical expression for actual evapotranspiration rates—a discussion. Agric For Meteorol 11:451–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Maestre FT, Bautista S, Cortina J. 2003. Positive, negative and net effects in grass-shrub interactions in Mediterranean semiarid grasslands. Ecology 84:3186–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Maestre FT, Bowker MA, Cantón Y, Castillo-Monroy AP, Cortina J, Escolar C, Escudero A, Lázaro R, Martínez I. 2011. Ecology and functional roles of biological soil crusts in semi-arid ecosystems of Spain. J Arid Environ 75:1282–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Maestre FT, Salguero-Gómez R, Quero JL. 2012. It is getting hotter in here: determining and projecting the impacts of global environmental change on drylands. Philos Trans R Soc B 367:3062–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Maestre FT, Escolar C, Ladrón de Guevara M, Quero JL, Lázaro R, Delgado-Baquerizo M, Ochoa V, Berdugo M, Gozalo B, Gallardo A. 2013. Changes in biocrust cover drive carbon cycle responses to climate change in drylands. Glob Change Biol 19:3835–47.Google Scholar
  46. Mayor AG, Bautista S, Bellot J. 2009. Factors and interactions controlling infiltration, runoff, and soil loss at the microscale in a patchy Mediterranean semiarid landscape. Earth Surf Process Landf 34(12):1702–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Michalet R. 2007. Highlighting the multiple drivers of change in interactions along stress gradients. New Phytol 173:3–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Miralles-Mellado I, Cantón Y, Solé-Benet A. 2011. Two-dimensional porosity of crusted silty soils: indicators of soil quality in semiraid rangelands? Soil Sci Soc Am J 75:1330–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Noy-Meir I. 1973. Desert ecosystems: environment and producers. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 4:25–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Porporato A, D’Odorico P, Laio F, Ridolfi L, Rodríguez-Iturbe I. 2002. Ecohydrology of water-controlled ecosystems. Adv Water Resour 25:1335–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Prieto I, Kikvidze Z, Pugnaire FI. 2010. Hydraulic lift: soil processes and transpiration in the Mediterranean leguminous shrub Retama sphaerocarpa (L.) Boiss. Plant Soil 329:447–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Prieto I, Padille FM, Armas C, Pugnaire FI. 2011. The role of hydraulic lift on seedling establishment under a nurse plant species in a semi-arid environment. Perspect Plant Ecol Evol Syst 13:181–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Pugnaire FI, Haase P, Puigdefábregas J. 1996. Facilitation between higher plant species in a semiarid environment. Ecology 77:1420–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Puigdefábregas J, Solé A, Gutierrez L, Barrio G, Boer M. 1999. Scales and processes of water and sediment redistribution in drylands: results from the Rambla Honda field site in Southeast Spain. Earth Sci Rev 48:39–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Ramírez DA, Bellot J, Domingo F, Blasco A. 2007. Can water responses in Stipa tenacissima L. during the summer season be promoted by non-rainfall water gains in soil? Plant Soil 291:67–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Reynolds FJ, Kemp PR, Tenhunen JD. 2000. Effects of long-term rainfall variability on evapotranspiration and soil water distribution in the Chihuahuan Desert: a modeling analysis. Plant Ecol 150:145–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Reynolds JF, Kemp PR, Ogle K, Fernández RJ. 2004. Modifying the ‘pulse–reserve’paradigm for deserts of North America: precipitation pulses, soil water, and plant responses. Oecologia 141:194–210.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Rodríguez-Caballero E, Cantón Y, Chamizo S, Afana A, Solé-Benet A. 2012. Effects of biological soil crusts on surface roughness and implications for runoff and erosion. Geomorphology 145:81–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Searle SR, Speed FM, Milliken GA. 1980. Population marginal means in the linear model: an alternative to least squares means. Am Stat 34:216–21.Google Scholar
  60. Thurow TL, BlackBurn WH, Warren SD, Taylor CA. 1987. Rainfall interception by midgrass, shortgrass and live oak mottes. J Range Manag 40:455–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Tongway DJ, Valentin C, Seghieri J, Eds. 2001. Banded vegetation patterning in arid and semiarid environments: ecological processes and consequences for management. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  62. Verrechia E, Yair A, Kidron GJ, Verrechia K. 1995. Physical properties of the psammophile cryptogamic crust and their consequences to the water regime of sandy softs, north-western Negev Desert, Israel. J Arid Environ 9:427–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Warren SD. 2003. Synopsis: influence of biological soil crust on arid land hydrology and soil stability. In: Belnap J, Lange OL, Eds. Biological soil crust: structure, function and management. Berlin: Springer. p 349–60.Google Scholar
  64. Whitford WD. 2002. Ecology of desert systems. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  65. Yepez EA, Huxman TE, Ignace DD, English NB, Weltzin JF, Castellanos AE, Williams DG. 2005. Dynamics of transpiration and evaporation following a moisture pulse in semiarid grassland: a chamber-based isotope method for partitioning flux components. Agric For Meteorol 132:359–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Miguel Berdugo
    • 1
    Email author
  • Santiago Soliveres
    • 1
    • 2
  • Fernando T. Maestre
    • 1
  1. 1.Área de Biodiversidad y Conservación, Departamento de Biología y Geología, Física y Química Inorgánica y AnalíticaUniversidad Rey Juan CarlosMóstolesSpain
  2. 2.Institute of Plant SciencesUniversity of BernBernSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations