Introduction to the special issue—zoogeomorphology and ecosystem engineering

Self Cite

Although climate has been shown to have a considerable influence on alpine forest dynamics, many fine‐scale processes contribute to observable forest patterns. Disturbances created by burrowing mammals may provide conifer seedlings with refuge in previously inhospitable environments and may result in conifer invasion that is not directly associated with climate change. In Olympic National Park, Washington, USA, Olympic marmot (Marmota olympus) populations have declined. Abandoned marmot burrows, which may provide ideal sites for conifer establishment, now dot the alpine landscape. Similarly, in Glacier National Park, Montana, USA, pocket gophers (Thomomys talpoides) have disturbed large areas of alpine meadows at treeline. Field and laboratory analysis of gopher eskers and spoil mounds of abandoned marmot burrows illustrated that such sites are less compacted than soils in adjacent, undisturbed locations. Additionally, disturbed soils contained higher amounts of phosphorus and lower amounts of potassium and organic matter. Soils disturbed by gophers were cooler at the surface and warmer at depth than undisturbed soils, whereas marmot‐disturbed soils were warmer at the surface and cooler at depth. Experimental seed germination of subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa) was higher on mammal‐disturbed soils, and this was statistically significant for marmot‐disturbed soils. These findings suggest that fossorial mammal disturbances have the potential to affect conifer germination and establishment. Furthermore, this research initiates the dialogue for future research on the distinct morphological and behavioral influences of different fossorial mammals as zoogeomorphic agents and ecosystem engineers. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bioturbation by gophers and marmots and its effects on conifer germination

Whitesides

Butler

2016

Self Cite

“…The session and special issue contribute to a highly active area of research at the interface between geomorphology and ecology (e.g. Darby, ; Wheaton et al ., ; Butler and Sawyer, ; Rice et al ., ). Rice et al .…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

“…The session and special issue contribute to a highly active area of research at the interface between geomorphology and ecology (e.g. Darby, 2010;Wheaton et al, 2011;Butler and Sawyer, 2012;Rice et al, 2012b). Rice et al (2012b), for example, present a special issue of Earth Surface Processes and Landforms (ESPL) focusing on disturbance regimes at this interface and note a substantial increase in papers on biogeomorphology published by the journal in the six years previous.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Dynamic riverine landscapes: the role of ecosystem engineers

Harvey

Bertoldi

2015

An important and highly active research agenda has developed at the interface of fluvial geomorphology and ecology that addresses the capacity for vegetation and animals to act as ecosystem engineers within fluvial systems. This paper briefly introduces this research domain and describes the 15 papers that contribute to the special issue on 'Dynamic riverine landscapes: the role of ecosystem engineers'. The papers illustrate the breadth of research activity at this interface, investigating the influence of a range of ecosystem engineering organisms through a combination of field study, laboratory experiments, numerical simulation and analysis of remotely sensed data. Together, the papers address a series of key themes: conceptual frameworks for feedbacks between aquatic biota, hydraulics, sediment dynamics and nutrient dynamics and their quantification through experimental and field research; the potential contribution of ecosystem engineering species to assist river recovery and restoration; and the contribution of riparian vegetation to bank stability and morphodynamics across a range of spatio-temporal scales.

“…These include ecogeomorphology (Wheaton et al, 2011), zoogeomorphology (Butler and Sawyer, 2012), vegetation and disturbance regimes (Stoffel et al, 2013), biopedturbation (Whitesides and Butler, 2015) and fluvial ecosystem engineering (Harvey and Bertoldi, 2015). These include ecogeomorphology (Wheaton et al, 2011), zoogeomorphology (Butler and Sawyer, 2012), vegetation and disturbance regimes (Stoffel et al, 2013), biopedturbation (Whitesides and Butler, 2015) and fluvial ecosystem engineering (Harvey and Bertoldi, 2015).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Biogeomorphology: diverse, integrative and useful

Coombes

2016

Biogeomorphology is an umbrella term given to a highly‐active research area within geomorphology that focusses on the many and varied interactions and feedbacks between organisms and the physical Earth. In the last 25 years this interest has developed and diversified to include the direct and indirect influences of microorganisms, plants, animals and humans on earth surface processes and landform dynamics, and the roles of geomorphology in ecological functioning, resilience and evolution. This Commentary introduces a virtual special issue of 16 research papers and three ‘State of Science’ pieces, illustrating the diversity of the field, its continued theoretical and conceptual progression, and the applied relevance of biogeomorphological science in tackling environmental problems. Collectively, these papers demonstrate the merits of – and opportunities for – biogeomorphology as an inherently integrative science in understanding and managing the complexity of living landscapes. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.