No abstract

Exergy estimations based on biomass and information for organisms can with good approximation be found as: Ex = βc, where c is the concentration of biomass and β the weighting factor, that accounts for the information that the organisms carry [Jørgensen, S.E., 2002. Integration of Ecosystem Theories: A Pattern, vol. 432, 3rd ed. Kluwer Academic Publishing Company, Dordrecht, The Netherlands]. The determination of β for various organisms has been based on the number of coding genes, but recent research has shown that some of the non-coding genes are crucial for the control, maintenance and development of the organisms. The results [Eichler, E.E., Sankoff, D., 2003. Structural dynamics of eukaryotic chromosome evolution. Science 301, 793-797.] of ongoing whole-genome projects have therefore be applied in order to obtain more accurate β-values. These new β-values are several times bigger than the previously applied values. The number of amino acids coding per gene has probably been underestimated in the previous calculations. However, applications of the former values, for instance in ecosystem health assessment, where exergy is used as ecological indicator (referred as exergy index) and in the development of structurally dynamic models, are still valid. Because the exergy calculations were applied only as relative measures. This paper presents several indirect methods to determine β-values. It is shown that the β-values are well correlated to the age of the organisms (mya), to the number of cell types, to the minimum DNA-content, to the ratio non-coding genes versus total number of genes [Mattick, J.S., 2003. Challenging the dogma: the hidden layer of non-protein-coding RNAs in complex organisms. Bioassays 25, 930-939.] and to the β-values, determined by Fonseca et al. on basis of the total amount of DNA. Indirect determinations were therefore able to expand and improve the previous list of β-values. The previous list had only 19 values, while the list based on the whole-genome project has 16 β-values. The expanded list presented in this paper contains 56 β-values.To reduce the uncertainty of the values, although assuming an apparent loss of discriminating power, it was decided to lump some organisms together in one group when it was know from the evolutionary tree that the organisms were closely related. It implies that the averages of β-values determined by different methods were applied, which should give a higher certainty.

No abstract

Soil and its ecosystem functions play a societal role in securing sustainable food production while safeguarding natural resources. A functional land management framework has been proposed to optimize the agro-environmental outputs from the land and specifically the supply and demand of soil functions such as (a) primary productivity, (b) carbon sequestration, (c) water purification and regulation, (d) biodiversity and (e) nutrient cycling, for which soil knowledge is essential. From the outset, the LANDMARK multi-actor research project integrates harvested knowledge from local, national and European stakeholders to develop such guidelines, creating a sense of ownership, trust and reciprocity of the outcomes. About 470 stakeholders from five European countries participated in 32 structured workshops covering multiple land uses in six climatic zones. The harmonized results include stakeholders' priorities and concerns, perceptions on soil quality and functions, implementation of tools, management techniques, indicators and monitoring, activities and policies, knowledge gaps and ideas. Multi-criteria decision analysis was used for data analysis. Two qualitative models were developed using Decision EXpert methodology to evaluate "knowledge" and "needs". Soil quality perceptions differed across workshops, depending on the stakeholder level and regionally established terminologies. Stakeholders had good inherent knowledge about soil functioning, but several gaps were identified. In terms of critical requirements, stakeholders defined high technical, activity and policy needs in (a) financial incentives, (b) credible information on improving more sustainable management practices, (c) locally relevant advice, (d) farmers' discussion groups, (e) training programmes, (f) funding for applied research and monitoring, and (g) strengthening soil science in education. K E Y W O R D S DEX model, farmers and multi-stakeholders, locally relevant advice, participatory research, soil quality This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

With increasing societal demands for food security and environmental sustainability on land, the question arises: to what extent do synergies and trade‐offs exist between soil functions and how can they be measured across Europe? To address this challenge, we followed the functional land management approach and assessed five soil functions: primary productivity, water regulation and purification, climate regulation, soil biodiversity and nutrient cycling. Soil, management and climate data were collected from 94 sites covering 13 countries, five climatic zones and two land‐use types (arable and grassland). This dataset was analysed using the Soil Navigator, a multicriteria decision support system developed to assess the supply of the five soil functions simultaneously. Most sites scored high for two to three soil functions, demonstrating that managing for multifunctionality in soil is possible but that local constraints and trade‐offs do exist. Nutrient cycling, biodiversity and climate regulation were less frequently delivered at high capacity than the other two soil functions. Using correlation and co‐occurrence analyses, we also found that synergies and trade‐offs between soil functions vary among climatic zones and land‐use types. This study provides a new framework for monitoring soil quality at the European scale where both the supply of soil functions and their interactions are considered.Highlights Managing and monitoring soil multifunctionality across Europe is possible. Synergies and trade‐offs between soil functions exist, making it difficult to maximize the supply of all five soil functions simultaneously. Synergies and trade‐offs between soil functions vary by climatic zone and land‐use type. Climate regulation, biodiversity and nutrient cycling are less frequently delivered at high capacity.

No abstract

No abstract

van Leeuwen et al. Soil Biodiversity management. In this way we may make a valuable step in our attempts to optimize the multiple soil functions in agricultural landscapes, and hence the multifaceted role of soils to deliver a bundle of ecosystem services for farmers and citizens, and support land management and policy toward a more sustainable society.