1. Understanding the importance of biotic interactions in driving the distribution and abundance of species is a central goal of plant ecology. Early vascular plants likely colonized land occupied by biocrusts -photoautotrophic, surface-dwelling soil communities comprised of cyanobacteria, bryophytes, lichens and fungi -suggesting biotic interactions between biocrusts and plants have been at play for some 2,000 million years. Today, biocrusts coexist with plants in dryland ecosystems worldwide, and have been shown to both facilitate or inhibit plant species performance depending on ecological context. Yet, the factors that drive the direction and magnitude of these effects remain largely unknown.2. We conducted a meta-analysis of plant responses to biocrusts using a global dataset encompassing 1,004 studies from six continents. 3. Meta-analysis revealed there is no simple positive or negative effect of biocrusts on plants. Rather, plant responses differ by biocrust composition and plant species traits and vary across plant ontogeny. Moss-dominated biocrusts facilitated, while lichen-dominated biocrusts inhibited overall plant performance. Plant responses also varied among plant functional groups: C 4 grasses received greater benefits from biocrusts compared to C 3 grasses, and plants without N-fixing symbionts responded more positively to biocrusts than plants with N-fixing symbionts. Biocrusts decreased germination but facilitated growth of non-native plant species. S U PP O RTI N G I N FO R M ATI O N Additional supporting information may be found online in the Supporting Information section at the end of the article. How to cite this article: Havrilla CA, Chaudhary VB, Ferrenberg S, et al. Towards a predictive framework for biocrust mediation of plant performance: A meta-analysis. J

The capture and use of water are critically important in drylands, which collectively constitute Earth's largest biome. Drylands will likely experience lower and more unreliable rainfall as climatic conditions change over the next century. Dryland soils support a rich community of microphytic organisms (biocrusts), which are critically important because they regulate the delivery and retention of water. Yet despite their hydrological significance, a global synthesis of their effects on hydrology is lacking. We synthesized 2,997 observations from 109 publications to explore how biocrusts affected five hydrological processes (times to ponding and runoff, early [sorptivity] and final [infiltration] stages of water flow into soil, and the rate or volume of runoff) and two hydrological outcomes (moisture storage, sediment production). We found that increasing biocrust cover reduced the time for water to pond on the surface (−40%) and commence runoff (−33%), and reduced infiltration (−34%) and sediment production (−68%). Greater biocrust cover had no significant effect on sorptivity or runoff rate/amount, but increased moisture storage (+14%). Infiltration declined most (−56%) at fine scales, and moisture storage was greatest (+36%) at large scales. Effects of biocrust type (cyanobacteria, lichen, moss, mixed), soil texture (sand, loam, clay), and climatic zone (arid, semiarid, dry subhumid) were nuanced. Our synthesis provides novel insights into the magnitude, processes, and contexts of biocrust effects in drylands. This information is critical to improve our capacity to manage dwindling dryland water supplies as Earth becomes hotter and drier.

Effective mentoring is a key component of academic and career success that contributes to overall measures of productivity. Mentoring relationships also play an important role in mental health and in recruiting and retaining students from groups underrepresented in STEM fields. Despite these clear and measurable benefits, faculty generally do not receive mentorship training, and feedback mechanisms and assessment to improve mentoring in academia are limited. Ineffective mentoring can negatively impact students, faculty, departments, and institutions via decreased productivity, increased stress, and the loss of valuable research products and talented personnel. Thus, there are clear incentives to invest in and implement formal training to improve mentorship in STEM fields. Here, we outline the unique challenges of mentoring in academia and present results from a survey of STEM scientists that support both the need and desire for more formal mentorship training. Using survey results and the primary literature, we identify common behaviors of effective mentors and outline a set of mentorship best practices. We argue that these best practices, as well as the key qualities of flexibility, communication, and trust, are skills that can be taught to prospective and current faculty. We present a model and resources for mentorship training based on our research, which we successfully implemented at the University of Colorado, Boulder, with graduate students and postdocs. We conclude that such training is an important and cost‐effective step toward improving mentorship in STEM fields.

No abstract