soil ecology: the dutch monitoring programme · not aiming at deriving standards for biological...

National Institutefor Public Healthand the Environment

Soil ecology: the Dutch Monitoring Programme


Biological Indicator for Soil Quality (BiSQ)

Agreement in a panel of experts in 1997

• microorganisms(biomass, activity, functional and genetic diversity)

• nematodes(numbers, diversity, trophic guilds)

• enchythraeids(numbers, diversity)

• earthworms(numbers, diversity)

• mites and springtails(numbers, diversity, trophic guilds)

• processes(N and C mineralization rates)


Dutch Soil MonitoringNetwork (DSMN)

Sampling sites BISQ / DSMNDairy farm sand organic

Dairy farm sand extensive

Dairy farm sand intensive

Dairy farm sand intensive+

Dairy farm river clay intensive

Dairy farm marine clay organic

Dairy farm marine clay intensive

Dairy farm peat organic

Dairy farm peat intensive

Dairy farm loess organic

Dairy farm loess intensive

Arable farm sand organic

Arable farm sand intensive

Arable farm marine clay organic

Arable farm marine clay intensive

Horticulture sand

Bulb-growing sand

Semi-natural grassland sand

Heathland sand

Forest sand

19 categories:

• land use x soil type

• stratified grid

• represents ~75% area of The Netherlands

Categories:

conventional or intensive farms, organic farms, nature, parks

Soil types:

sand, peat, marine + river clay


Field sampling


Type of data

• presence of species

• abundance of species

• activities / process rates

• abiotic conditions (pH, OC, soil type,…)

• type of land use (management regime)


Overviewsome data

0

20

40

60

80

Nem

atod

esto

tal n

umbe

r (n

/ g D

W s

oil) 0

200

400

600

Bac

teri

al b

iom

ass

(µg

C /

g dr

y so

il)

??

0

200

400

600E

arth

wor

ms

tota

l num

ber (

n / m

)2

0

40

80

120

Sand o

rgan

ic

Sand e

xtens

ive

Sand i

ntens

ive

Sand i

ntens

ive+

River c

lay in

tensiv

e

Marine

clay

orga

nic

Marine

clay

inten

sive

Peat o

rganic

Peat in

tensiv

e

Loes

s org

anic

Loes

s inte

nsive

Sand o

rganic

Sand i

ntens

ive

Marine

clay

orga

nic

Marine

clay

inten

sive

Horticu

lture

sand

Bulb-gr

owing

sand

Semi -na

tural

gras

s san

d

Heathl

and

sand

Mic

ro-a

rthr

opod

sto

tal n

umbe

r (n

x 10

00 /

m2 )

?

--

Fore

st sa

nd

?

sand clay peat loess sand clay sand

DAIRY FARMING ARABLEhorticulture NATURE

0

20

40

60

80

Nem

atod

esto

tal n

umbe

r (n

/ g D

W s

oil) 0

200

400

600

Bac

teri

al b

iom

ass

(µg

C /

g dr

y so

il)

??

0

200

400

600E

arth

wor

ms

tota

l num

ber (

n / m

)2

0

40

80

120

Sand o

rgan

ic

Sand e

xtens

ive

Sand i

ntens

ive

Sand i

ntens

ive+

River c

lay in

tensiv

e

Marine

clay

orga

nic

Marine

clay

inten

sive

Peat o

rganic

Peat in

tensiv

e

Loes

s org

anic

Loes

s inte

nsive

Sand o

rganic

Sand i

ntens

ive

Marine

clay

orga

nic

Marine

clay

inten

sive

Horticu

lture

sand

Bulb-gr

owing

sand

Semi -na

tural

gras

s san

d

Heathl

and

sand

Mic

ro-a

rthr

opod

sto

tal n

umbe

r (n

x 10

00 /

m2 )

?

--

Fore

st sa

nd

?

0

20

40

60

80

Nem

atod

esto

tal n

umbe

r (n

/ g D

W s

oil)

0

20

40

60

80

Nem

atod

esto

tal n

umbe

r (n

/ g D

W s

oil) 0

200

400

600

Bac

teri

al b

iom

ass

(µg

C /

g dr

y so

il)

??0

200

400

600

Bac

teri

al b

iom

ass

(µg

C /

g dr

y so

il)

??

0

200

400

600E

arth

wor

ms

tota

l num

ber (

n / m

)2

0

200

400

600E

arth

wor

ms

tota

l num

ber (

n / m

)2

0

40

80

120

Sand o

rgan

ic

Sand e

xtens

ive

Sand i

ntens

ive

Sand i

ntens

ive+

River c

lay in

tensiv

e

Marine

clay

orga

nic

Marine

clay

inten

sive

Peat o

rganic

Peat in

tensiv

e

Loes

s org

anic

Loes

s inte

nsive

Sand o

rganic

Sand i

ntens

ive

Marine

clay

orga

nic

Marine

clay

inten

sive

Horticu

lture

sand

Bulb-gr

owing

sand

Semi -na

tural

gras

s san

d

Heathl

and

sand

Mic

ro-a

rthr

opod

sto

tal n

umbe

r (n

x 10

00 /

m2 )

?

--

Fore

st sa

nd

?0

40

80

120

Sand o

rgan

ic

Sand e

xtens

ive

Sand i

ntens

ive

Sand i

ntens

ive+

River c

lay in

tensiv

e

Marine

clay

orga

nic

Marine

clay

inten

sive

Peat o

rganic

Peat in

tensiv

e

Loes

s org

anic

Loes

s inte

nsive

Sand o

rganic

Sand i

ntens

ive

Marine

clay

orga

nic

Marine

clay

inten

sive

Horticu

lture

sand

Bulb-gr

owing

sand

Semi -na

tural

gras

s san

d

Heathl

and

sand

Mic

ro-a

rthr

opod

sto

tal n

umbe

r (n

x 10

00 /

m2 )

?

--

Fore

st sa

nd

?

sand clay peat loess sand clay sand

DAIRY FARMING ARABLEhorticulture NATURE


thymidine incorp. (90%)

leucine incorp. (92%)

biomass bacteria (312%)

nitrification cap (96%)CFU (85%)

h-bacteria (72%)

div. BFnem (126%)

div. CAnem (20%)

div. HFnem (70%)

div. OMnem (25%)

div.PFnem (63%)

div. Funct. groups (78%)

Maturity Index (81%)

abund. nem (61%)

numb. taxa nem (72%)

Troph. Index nem (95%)

numb. taxa Enchy. (63%)

abund. Enchytraeids (71%) biomass Enchytraeids (44%)

numb. Friderica spec (33%)

abundance earthworms (28%)

biomass earthworms (39%)

endogé worms (70%)

epigé worms (60%)

Amoeba diagram


Loss of biodiversity 1

generalized linear models (GLMs) for nematode communities versus pH and livestock density

Ref: Mulder et al. (2005) Funct. Ecol. 17:516-525


Refs: Schouten et al (2001) RIVM report 607604002Mulder et al (2003) Funct. Ecol. 17:516-525Mulder et al (2005) Naturwissenschaften 92: 314-318

Loss of biodiversity 2

0

20

40

60

80

100

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

livestock density (cattle units / ha / year)

nem

ato

des

biod

iver

sity

(%

)

fungivore nematodes ( N x 1000 / 100 g soil )

0

1

2

3

4

2.2 2.9 3.9 5.1 6.3

0

20

40

60

80

100

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

livestock density (cattle units / ha / year)

nem

ato

des

biod

iver

sity

(%

)

fungivore nematodes ( N x 1000 / 100 g soil )

0

1

2

3

4

2.2 2.9 3.9 5.1 6.3


European soil strategy and Dutch soil policy

EU Thematic strategy on soil protection (2006):

• preventing further degradation and preserving its functions

• restoring degraded soils

� ‘recognized’ soil threats (biodiversity decline not covered yet)

The Netherlands: towards sustainable land use with references for a high soil quality

• focusing on goods and services

• building one reference framework

� pilots and knowledge transfer


VROM (Ministry of Environment) and TCB (Technical Commission on Soil Protection)1. the concept of soil health provides directions: i.e. it

leads to judgements about soil quality. However, VROM is not aiming at deriving standards for biological soil quality.

2. soil health can be derived from the performance of the ecosystem services of the soil.

3. these ecosystem services can be used by the land-userwithin boundary conditions related to sustainability.

4. to assess ecosystem services, rulers and indicatorsare required.


Ruler and indicator• An indicator provides information about state conditions

• A ruler is required for interpretation of the state

A B C D

A = negative referenceB = actual situationC = policy targetD = positive reference

Length of the ruler

deficit of quality0 % 100 %


Ecosystem services for land-usersthe basic four, and sub-divisions:

1. Production (soil fertility, gardens, nature, recreation, etc.) • nutrient retention and balance• soil structure• disease and pest control

2. Resistance and resilience• stress resistance• adaptability, change in land-use

3. Environment (soil as a buffer and reactor, etc)• fragmentation and mineralization of OM• natural attenuation• water balance (small and large scale)• climatic function (humid and clean air, temp., etc.)

4. Habitat function, biodiversity, living system (incl. ethics)

�� Services partly overlapping !!�� Services not equally important !!


Domain of soil quality expertsDomain of land users, stakeholders, authorities

Land use

Nature- heath land- meadows- forests

Agriculture- grass (dairy)- arable fields

Green areas- rest

Ecosystem services

Production function- nutrient retention and release- soil structure- disease and pest control

Resistance and resilience- resistance (continuity of land use)- adaptability (change of land use)

Environmental functions- fragmentation degradation OM- natural attenuation- water balance in soil- climate functions

Habitat function, biodiversity- intrinsic and ethical values

Regulation functions (life support)

- nutrient cycling (C, N, P, S, K) - resistance and resilience- soil aggregate formation, stability- soil profile- water retention- functional diversity- biodiversity (structural)- natural pests regulation

soilecosystem

chemicalfeatures

biological

featuresphysicalfeatures

Domain of soil quality expertsDomain of land users, stakeholders, authorities

Land use

Nature- heath land- meadows- forests

Agriculture- grass (dairy)- arable fields

Green areas- rest

Ecosystem services

Production function- nutrient retention and release- soil structure- disease and pest control

Resistance and resilience- resistance (continuity of land use)- adaptability (change of land use)

Environmental functions- fragmentation degradation OM- natural attenuation- water balance in soil- climate functions

Habitat function, biodiversity- intrinsic and ethical values

Regulation functions (life support)

- nutrient cycling (C, N, P, S, K) - resistance and resilience- soil aggregate formation, stability- soil profile- water retention- functional diversity- biodiversity (structural)- natural pests regulation

soilecosystem

chemicalfeatures

biological

featuresphysicalfeatures

Framework for sustainable land-use


Concern about loss of biodiversity

Agreement at the Earth Summit in Rio (1992)

� Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD):

• conservation and sustainable use

• biodiversity and goods and services through biodiversity

The Netherlands: 70% agricultural area (small nature areas)

� Strategic Action Plan (SPA, 1994):

• focus on soil organisms and processes (life support functions)

• monitoring in a network


Life support functions in Dutch soil (selection 1997)

• Decomposition of organic material

- Fragmentation

- Transformation of organic substrate

• Cycling of nutrients (N, C, P, S, K, Fe, H2O)

• Availability of nutrients for plants

• Formation of soil structure

- bioturbation

- aggregate formation

• Stability of soil ecosystemand food web


Reference system for Dutch soils

• Data from the BiSQ

• Based on sites or farms (not on experimental plots; not per indicator/parameter)

• Based on expert judgments from different disciplines (agronomists, farmers, soil ecologists etc.)

�Pragmatic assumption: performance of ecosystem services can be assessed via the soil parameters (e.g. from BiSQ)

�Pilot projects (e.g. Hoeksche Waard)


� ��

��

� ��

� ��

� ��

��

� ��

� ��

��

� �� !"� ��

� ��

� ��#��

� �� $��%�� &� ��

��

� ��

Performance of soil ecosystem services in HW


Amoeba (average performance, 4 farms)

soil structure 72%

water retention 79%

climate functions 116%

nutrient retention 69%

disease and pest control 93%

resistance resilience 89%

adaptation 73%

turn over OM 76 %

natural attenuation 109%

biodiversity 84%


Preliminary conclusions for the Hoeksche Waard pilot study

• Differences between neighbor farms due to differences in soil management (no difference in land use, nor soil type)

• Assessment of soil ecosystem services seems possible

• Without clear incentives, establishing changes in soil management remains our major challenge

� Need for valuation of soil ecosystem services ??


Outlook

2007 handbook soil ecosystem types, containing:

- descriptions of land use, soil type and soil ecosystem

- average values for Dutch soil ecosystems

- reference values for a ‘healthy’ soil

Urgently needed:

- Handles � for providing a perspective on the improvement of soil quality through adaptive soil management (only fragmented knowledge available now)

soil ecology: the dutch monitoring programme · not aiming at deriving standards for biological...

Documents