Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Soil functions”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 91 records · Page 5
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2015

Improved Absolute Radiometric Calibration of a UHF Airborne Radar

The AirMOSS airborne SAR operates at UHF and produces fully polarimetric imagery. The AirMOSS radar data are used to produce Root Zone Soil Moisture (RZSM) depth profiles. The absolute radiometric accuracy of the imagery, ideally of better than 0.5 dB, is key to retrieving RZSM, especially in wet soils where the backscatter as a function of soil moisture function tends to flatten out. In this paper we assess the absolute radiometric uncertainty in previously delivered data, describe a method to utilize Built In Test (BIT) data to improve the radiometric calibration, and evaluate the improvement from applying the method.

radar calibration↗
DOE OSTI2020

Prevalent root-derived phenolics drive shifts in microbial community composition and prime decomposition in forest soil

Phenolic compounds perform various functions in soil ranging from microbial substrate to toxin and form the basis of several plant-mediated processes. The aim of this study was to investigate how phenolics commonly exuded by tree roots influence soil organic matter (SOM) decomposition and interact with other labile forms of carbon (C) abundant in root exudates. Therefore, we performed a 38-day incubation experiment and assessed whether phenolic compounds (benzoic acid, caffeic acid and catechin) facilitated or inhibited SOM decomposition in a glucose-amended forest soil. Changes in decomposition, substrate use, fungal and bacterial community composition, and microbial abundance and activity were measured over time using 13 C-stable-isotope tracing, DNA-based molecular methods and enzyme assays. Our findings showed that phenolics inhibited microbial activity and abundance to varying degrees. Yet, benzoic acid was the only compound producing a substantial priming effect leading to a 21% increase in SOM decomposition, which was amplified in glucose-amended soils. This stimulation in microbial activity was associated with an increase in β-1,4-glucosidase activity and the bacterial genera Paraburkholderia and Caballeronia of the Burkholderiaceae family. Phenolics drove microbial community shifts in glucose-amended soils with negligible interactive effects. In conclusion, phenolic priming of SOM decomposition is associated with microbial community shifts and amplified in the presence of glucose. This evidence emphasizes the need for considering phenolics and interactions among root exudates as priming mechanisms in the rhizosphere and other soil environments where aromatics and phenolic compounds are abundant.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRS1995

Soil Polygenesis as a Function of Quaternary Climate, Northern Great Basin, USA

Polygenetic soils are those that record multiple morphological, mineralogical, and chemical imprints as the geographical pattern of climates shifts spatially and new boundaries are established. Optimal conditions for interpreting paleoclimates from polygenetic soils occur when precipitation and/or temperature changes are great enough to produce new soil properties without obliterating existing properties.

Polygenetic Soil↗
DOE OSTI2023

Taxonomic and functional restoration of tallgrass prairie soil microbial communities in comparison to remnant and agricultural soils

Abstract Restoring ecosystems requires the re-establishment of diverse soil microbial communities that drive critical ecosystem functions. In grasslands, restoration and management require the application of disturbances like fire and grazing. Disturbances can shape microbial taxonomic composition and potentially functional composition as well. We characterized taxonomic and functional gene composition of soil communities using whole genome shotgun metagenomic sequencing to determine how restored soil communities differed from pre-restoration agricultural soils and original remnant soils, how management affects soil microbes, and whether restoration and management affect the number of microbial genes associated with carbohydrate degradation. We found distinct differences in both taxonomic and functional diversity and composition among restored, remnant, and agricultural soils. Remnant soils had low taxonomic and functional richness and diversity, as well as distinct composition, indicating that restoration of agricultural soils does not re-create soil microbial communities that match remnants. Prescribed fire management increased functional diversity, which also was higher in more recently planted restorations. Finally, restored and post-fire soils included high abundances of genes encoding cellulose-degrading enzymes, so restorations and their ongoing management can potentially support functions important in carbon cycling.

Mason, Cayla N. (ORCID:0000000345983824)↗
DOE OSTI2023

Metatranscriptomics sheds light on the links between the functional traits of fungal guilds and ecological processes in forest soil ecosystems

Soil fungi belonging to different functional guilds, such as saprotrophs, pathogens, and mycorrhizal symbionts, play key roles in forest ecosystems. To date, no study has compared the actual gene expression of these guilds in different forest soils. We used metatranscriptomics to study the competition for organic resources by these fungal groups in boreal, temperate, and Mediterranean forest soils. Using a dedicated mRNA annotation pipeline combined with the JGI MycoCosm database, we compared the transcripts of these three fungal guilds, targeting enzymes involved in C- and N mobilization from plant and microbial cell walls. Genes encoding enzymes involved in the degradation of plant cell walls were expressed at a higher level in saprotrophic fungi than in ectomycorrhizal and pathogenic fungi. However, ectomycorrhizal and saprotrophic fungi showed similarly high expression levels of genes encoding enzymes involved in fungal cell wall degradation. Transcripts for N-related transporters were more highly expressed in ectomycorrhizal fungi than in other groups. Here, we showed that ectomycorrhizal and saprotrophic fungi compete for N in soil organic matter, suggesting that their interactions could decelerate C cycling. Metatranscriptomics provides a unique tool to test controversial ecological hypotheses and to better understand the underlying ecological processes involved in soil functioning and carbon stabilization.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Adaptation to Environmental Extremes Structures Functional Traits in Biological Soil Crust and Hypolithic Microbial Communities

Biological soil crusts (biocrusts) are widespread in drylands and deserts. At the microhabitat scale, they also host hypolithic communities that live under semitranslucent stones. Both environmental niches experience exposure to extreme conditions such as high UV radiation, desiccation, temperature fluctuations, and resource limitation. However, hypolithic communities are somewhat protected from extremes relative to biocrust communities. Conditions are otherwise similar, so comparing them can answer outstanding questions regarding adaptations to environmental extremes. Using metagenomic sequencing, we assessed the functional potential of dryland soil communities and identified the functional underpinnings of ecological niche differentiation in biocrusts versus hypoliths. We also determined the effect of the anchoring photoautotroph (moss or cyanobacteria). Genes and pathways differing in abundance between biocrusts and hypoliths indicate that biocrust communities adapt to the higher levels of UV radiation, desiccation, and temperature extremes through an increased ability to repair damaged DNA, sense and respond to environmental stimuli, and interact with other community members and the environment. Intracellular competition appears to be crucial to both communities, with biocrust communities using the Type VI Secretion System (T6SS) and hypoliths favoring a diversity of antibiotics. The dominant primary producer had a reduced effect on community functional potential compared with niche, but an abundance of genes related to monosaccharide, amino acid, and osmoprotectant uptake in moss-dominated communities indicates reliance on resources provided to heterotrophs by mosses. Our findings indicate that functional traits in dryland communities are driven by adaptations to extremes and we identify strategies that likely enable survival in dryland ecosystems.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRS2022

Adaptation to environmental extremes structures functional traits in biological soil crust and hypolithic microbial communities

Biological soil crusts (biocrusts) are widespread in drylands and deserts. At the microhabitat scale, they also host hypolithic communities that live under semi-translucent stones. Both environmental niches experience exposure to extreme conditions such as high UV radiation, desiccation, temperature fluctuations, and resource limitation. However, hypolithic communities are somewhat protected from extremes relative to biocrust communities. Conditions are otherwise similar, so comparing them can answer outstanding questions regarding adaptations to environmental extremes. Using metagenomic sequencing, we assessed the functional potential of dryland soil communities and identified the functional underpinnings of ecological niche differentiation in biocrusts versus hypoliths. We also determined the effect of the anchoring photoautotroph (moss or cyanobacteria). Genes and pathways differing in abundance between biocrusts and hypoliths indicate that biocrust communities adapt to the higher levels of UV radiation, desiccation, and temperature extremes through an increased ability to repair damaged DNA, sense and respond to environmental stimuli, and interact with other community members and the environment. Intracellular competition appears to be crucial to both communities, with biocrust communities waging war using the Type VI Secretion System (T6SS) and hypoliths favoring diversity of antibiotics. The dominant primary producer had a reduced effect on community functional potential compared with niche, but an abundance of genes related to monosaccharide, amino acid, and osmoprotectant uptake in moss-dominated communities indicates reliance on resources provided to heterotrophs by mosses. Our findings indicate that functional traits in dryland communities are driven by adaptations to extremes and we identify strategies that likely enable survival in dryland ecosystems.

Biological soil crusts↗
DOE OSTI2021

Linking soil biodiversity and ecosystem function in a Neotropical savanna

Conserving the remaining savanna ecosystems in the Brazilian savanna (Cerrado) — a global biodiversity hotspot that stores carbon and provides water to a large portion of South America — requires understanding the ecological processes maintaining their function. Nutrient cycling supports savanna function via plant litter production and decomposition by soil fauna, releasing nutrients for plant and soil organism uptake. Soil biodiversity and biogeochemistry linkages with litter dynamics in Neotropical savannas under a changing climate are poorly understood. Here, in this study, we combined two years of rainfall seasonality, leaf and wood litter production and decomposition with soil epigeic fauna abundance — the number of ground-surface dwelling invertebrates collected through pitfall traps — taxa richness, Shannon's diversity and Pielou's evenness, and 16 soil biogeochemical variables measured in 12 plots of preserved savanna. Rainfall seasonality modulated the mean soil epigeic fauna diversity and evenness across all plots, which were highest in the rainy season, in contrast to litterfall rates, which peaked in the dry season. In the dry season (April to September), the Formicidae family was the most abundant with 50% of all individuals, while in the rainy season (October to March), the Isoptera order was the most abundant with approximately 39% of individuals. Wood litter decomposition grouped with annual Hemiptera abundance, co-varying with soil epigeic fauna diversity and evenness per plot and against soil fertility variables. Leaf litter decomposition co-varied with the total epigeic fauna abundance and soil pH. We speculate that the specific need to decompose wood litter may be associated with a greater need for diversity than an abundance of soil epigeic fauna. Our work highlights the role of rainfall seasonality on soil biodiversity and physicochemistry, which is also tightly linked with litter production and decomposition. This study advances our understanding of the mechanisms governing nutrient cycling in savanna ecosystems on nutrient-impoverished soils, with implications for achieving sustainable conservation and restoration goals.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

Warming and disturbance alter soil microbiome diversity and function in a northern forest ecotone

ABSTRACT The response to global change by soil microbes is set to affect important ecosystem processes. These impacts could be most immediate in transitional zones, such as the temperate-boreal forest ecotone, yet previous work in these forests has primarily focused on specific subsets of microbial taxa. Here, we examined how bacterial and fungal communities respond to simulated above- and below-ground warming under realistic field conditions in closed and open canopy treatments in Minnesota, USA. Our results show that warming and canopy disturbance shifted bacterial and fungal community structure as dominant bacterial and fungal groups differed in the direction and intensity of their responses. Ectomycorrhizal and saprotrophic fungal communities with greater connectivity (higher prevalence of strongly interconnected taxa based on pairwise co-occurrence relationships) were more resistant to compositional change. Warming effects on soil enzymes involved in the hydrolytic and oxidative liberation of carbon from plant cell walls and nutrients from organic matter were most strongly linked to fungal community responses, although community structure–function relationships differed between fungal guilds. Collectively, these findings indicate that warming and disturbance will influence the composition and function of microbial communities in the temperate-boreal ecotone, and fungal responses are particularly important to understand for predicting future ecosystem functioning.

Microbiology↗
DOE OSTI2026

Mobile genetic elements shape microbial diversity and functions in thawing permafrost soils

Ecosystems are shaped by communities of microorganisms whose niches and impacts depend on functional profiles influenced by gene gains and losses. Culture-based experiments demonstrate that mobile genetic elements (MGEs) can mediate gene flux, but quantitative understanding of these dynamics in natural systems remains limited. Here we develop and apply a systematic, meta-omic framework to investigate MGEs in a complex natural system using an 8-year soil time series collected at Stordalen Mire, in Sweden’s thawing permafrost margin. In this climate-critical peatland, we identify ~2.1 million MGE recombinases across 89 microbial phyla and assess ecological distributions, affected functions, past mobility and current activity. This revealed an active mobilome that shapes natural genetic diversity via differential impacts on major phyla and affects a wide range of functions, including metabolic genes involved in carbon flux and nutrient cycling. These findings and this analytic framework suggest avenues towards a better understanding of MGE diversity, activity, mobility and impacts across ecosystems.

Biological and medical sciences↗
DOE OSTI2021

Microbial Functional Responses Explain Alpine Soil Carbon Fluxes under Future Climate Scenarios

Soil microorganisms are sensitive to temperature in cold ecosystems, but it remains unclear how microbial responses are modulated by other important climate drivers, such as precipitation changes. Here, we examine the effects of six in situ warming and/or precipitation treatments in alpine grasslands on microbial communities, plants, and soil carbon fluxes. These treatments differentially affected soil carbon fluxes, gross primary production, and microbial communities. Variations of soil CO 2 and CH 4 fluxes across all sites significantly (r > 0.70, P < 0.050) correlated with relevant microbial functional abundances but not bacterial or fungal abundances. Given tight linkages between microbial functional traits and ecosystem functionality, we conclude that future soil carbon fluxes in alpine grasslands can be predicted by microbial carbon-degrading capacities.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Pump House in East River Watershed, Colorado 2019-2024

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors near Pump House at Mount Crested Butte in the East River Watershed. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format ER-X-Y, where ER refers to East River, X is the location identifier, and Y is the depth identifier at the same X (shallow Y=1). Specifically, ER-PHS, ER-LMC, ER-LMF, and ER-SMN are associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and ER-RBTn (upslope n=1) are sampling transects during the 2019 Rootball Campaign. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the three sampling methods – (1) intact cores, (2) repacked samples, or (3) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. Both intact cores and repacked samples were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores and in-situ soil sensors could be prioritized because these sampling methods are less destructive. While the repacked samples were packed to the target bulk density (estimated post-sampling, when sample volume was known), these samples had altered pore structures. Nevertheless, intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method also has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Snodgrass Mountain in East River Watershed, Colorado 2020-2025

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors at Snodgrass Mountain. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format SG-X-Y, where SG refers to Snodgrass Mountain, X is the location identifier, and Y is the depth identifier at the same X (shallow Y=1). Specifically, SG-EHS is associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and SG-ERTn (upslope n=1) are points along the Snodgrass electrical resistivity tomography transect not associated with the existing site names in the directory. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the three sampling methods – (1) intact cores, (2) repacked samples, or (3) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. Both intact cores and repacked samples were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores and in-situ soil sensors could be prioritized because these sampling methods are less destructive. While the repacked samples were packed to the target bulk density (estimated post-sampling, when sample volume was known), these samples had altered pore structures. Nevertheless, intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method also has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Trail Creek in Taylor River Watershed, Colorado 2024-2025

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors near Trail Creek. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format TR-X-Y, where TR refers to Trail Creek, X is the treatment block identifier, and Y is the location identifier. Specifically, TR-ASCC1 is the control treatment block under the Adaptive Silviculture for Climate Change (ASCC) project, and TR-ASCC2 is the clear-cut treatment block. TR-ASCC-EHSn is associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and TR-ASCC-ERTn (upslope n=1) are ecohydrology sites along the electrical resistivity tomography transects. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv, and the data from the soil sensors will be included in a future data version when the observation period becomes sufficiently long for data analysis. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the two sampling methods – (1) intact cores or (2) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. The intact cores were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2023

(Fe, Cr)(OH) 3 Coprecipitation in Solution and on Soil: Roles of Surface Functional Groups and Solution pH

The simultaneous precipitation of (Fe, Cr)(OH) 3 nanoparticles in solution (homogeneous) and on soil surfaces (heterogeneous), which controls Cr transport in soil and aquatic systems, was quantified for the first time in the presence of model surfaces, i.e., bare and natural organic matter (NOM)-coated SiO 2 and Al 2 O 3 . Various characterization techniques were combined to explore the surface-ion-precipitate interactions and the controlling mechanisms. (Fe, Cr)(OH) 3 accumulation on negatively charged SiO 2 was mainly governed by electrostatic interactions between hydrolyzed ion species or homogeneous (Fe, Cr)(OH) 3 and surfaces. The elevated pH through protonation of Al 2 O 3 surface hydroxyls resulted in higher Cr/Fe ratios in both homogeneous and heterogeneous coprecipitates. Here, due to ignorable NOM adsorption onto SiO 2 , the amounts of (Fe, Cr)(OH) 3 precipitates on bare/NOM-SiO 2 were similar; contrarily, attributed to favored NOM adsorption onto Al 2 O 3 and consequently carboxyl association with metal ions or (Fe, Cr)(OH) 3 nanoparticles, remarkably more heterogeneous precipitates harvested on NOM-Al 2 O 3 than bare-Al 2 O 3 . With the same solution supersaturation, the total amounts of homogeneous and heterogeneous precipitates were similar irrespective of the substrate type. With lower pH, decreased electrostatic forces between substrates and precipitates shifted (Fe, Cr)(OH) 3 distribution from heterogeneous to homogeneous phases. The quantitative knowledge of (Fe, Cr)(OH) 3 distribution and the controlling mechanisms can assist in better Cr sequestration in natural and engineered settings.

(Fe, Cr)(OH)3 distribution↗
DOE OSTI2024

Storage and persistence of organic carbon in the upper three meters of soil under arable and native prairie land use

Aims: Land use change from native grasslands to arable lands globally impacts soil ecosystem functions, including the storage of soil organic carbon (SOC). Understanding the factors affecting SOC changes in topsoil and subsoil due to land use is crucial for effective mitigation strategies. We determined SOC storage and persistence as affected by land use change from native prairies to arable lands. Methods: Here we examined SOC stocks, soil δ 13 C and Δ 14 C signatures, microbial communities (bacteria and fungi), and soil mineral characteristics under native prairies and long-term arable lands (i.e., > 40 years) down to 3 m in the U.S. Midwest. Results: Native prairie soils had higher SOC stocks in the A horizon and 0–50 cm depth increment than arable soils. For both land use types, the δ 13 C and Δ 14 C values significantly decreased with depth, with the latter pointing towards highly stabilized SOC, especially in the B- and C-horizons. Analysis of the microbial communities indicated that the diversity of bacteria and fungi decreased with increasing soil depth. The content of oxalate soluble Al appeared to be the single most important predictor of SOC across horizons and land use types. Conclusion: Our data suggest that most SOC gains and losses and transformation and translocation processes seem to be restricted to the uppermost 50 cm. Increasing SOC retention in the A and B horizons within the 0–50 cm depth would enhance organic material serving as substrate and nutrients for microbes and plants (A horizon) and facilitate long-term SOC storage in the subsoil (B horizon).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Routes and rates of bacterial dispersal impact surface soil microbiome composition and functioning

Abstract Recent evidence suggests that, similar to larger organisms, dispersal is a key driver of microbiome assembly; however, our understanding of the rates and taxonomic composition of microbial dispersal in natural environments is limited. Here, we characterized the rate and composition of bacteria dispersing into surface soil via three dispersal routes (from the air above the vegetation, from nearby vegetation and leaf litter near the soil surface, and from the bulk soil and litter below the top layer). We then quantified the impact of those routes on microbial community composition and functioning in the topmost litter layer. The bacterial dispersal rate onto the surface layer was low (7900 cells/cm2/day) relative to the abundance of the resident community. While bacteria dispersed through all three routes at the same rate, only dispersal from above and near the soil surface impacted microbiome composition, suggesting that the composition, not rate, of dispersal influenced community assembly. Dispersal also impacted microbiome functioning. When exposed to dispersal, leaf litter decomposed faster than when dispersal was excluded, although neither decomposition rate nor litter chemistry differed by route. Overall, we conclude that the dispersal routes transport distinct bacterial communities that differentially influence the composition of the surface soil microbiome.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Microbial O 2 consumption as a function of pore structure in soils of sorghum, switchgrass, and prairie vegetation systems

Abstract Microscale O 2 availability in soil, a main factor influencing microbial processing of soil carbon and nitrogen, is a function of O 2 diffusion and microbial O 2 consumption. While O 2 diffusivity is widely studied, it is difficult to quantify the rate of microbial O 2 consumption ( MO ). In this study, we quantified the MO using O 2 microsensor profiling to compare MO in different soils and vegetation systems while manipulating the soil pore structure. Soil samples were collected from three bioenergy vegetation systems, sorghum ( Sorghum bicolor L. Moench), switchgrass ( Panicum virgatum L.), and prairie, at an experimental site in Southeast Michigan, and from switchgrass and prairie systems at two sites in South and North Wisconsin. We prepared soil cores with two contrasting pore structures, that is, large (>30 µm Ø) pore‐dominated soil (LP) and small (<10 µm Ø) pore‐dominated soil (SP), from the same 1‐ to 2‐mm soil size fraction. We quantified MO (nmol O 2 cm −3 s −1 ) using a microprofiler with an oxygen (OX‐100 µm) microsensor (Unisense) pre‐ and post‐38‐day incubation. Across all studied systems, there was a trend for a decrease in SP MO post‐incubation, suggesting a change in microbial metabolism to lower O 2 utilization. However, sizeable microbial O 2 consumption continued in the LP soils, further corroborated by a positive correlation between the C‐CO 2 emission rate and the post‐incubation MO , highlighting that LP provided a better physical microenvironment for the soil microbes.

Chakraborty, Poulamee [Department of Plant Soil an↗