Plant and Soil

, Volume 429, Issue 1–2, pp 9–18 | Cite as

What stabilizes biological soil crusts in the Negev Desert?

  • Vincent John Martin Noah Linus FeldeEmail author
  • Sonia Chamizo
  • Peter Felix-Henningsen
  • Sylvie Laureen Drahorad
Regular Article



Biological soil crusts (biocrusts) are widespread in many drylands, where plant growth is limited due to water scarcity. One of their most important functions is the stabilization of the topsoil, particularly in regions with sandy soils prone to desertification. Since the mechanisms playing a role in soil stabilization are poorly understood, this study aims to shed light on the connection between crust stability and different cementing agents.


We measured the penetration resistance and the concentrations of different cementing agents of biocrusts in the Israeli Negev Desert. Structural equation modelling was performed to examine the direct and indirect effects of the variables analyzed and identify variables that are best able to explain the observed patterns of penetration resistance.


All observed variables showed a high variability within and between sites. Structural equation modelling revealed that the main parameters explaining penetration resistance are the content of fines and the electrical conductivity, while carbonates and organic carbon only have an indirect effect.


Our results suggest that adding silt and clay to (natural or induced) biocrusts is very likely to produce stronger, more stable crusts, which will be more effective in combating desertification and improve their ability to survive trampling by livestock.


Penetration resistance Biocrust Surface stability Grazing potential Desertification Structural equation modelling Ecosystem restoration 



We thank the German Research Foundation (DFG) for funding this research in the framework of the trilateral project “Biotic and abiotic factor affecting biological soil crust formation and recovery in a semiarid dune ecosystem, Gaza and NW Negev” (Project FE 218/14-2), and the Arid Ecosystems Research Center of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Special thanks go to Simon Berkowicz for his support during fieldwork and to Günter Weber for assistance in the lab. We would also like to thank David Eldridge, as well as two anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments, which considerably improved a previous version of this manuscript.


  1. Antoninka A, Bowker MA, Reed SC, Doherty K (2016) Production of greenhouse-grown biocrust mosses and associated cyanobacteria to rehabilitate dryland soil function: cultivating biocrust mosses. Restor Ecol 24:324–335. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Austin AT, Yahdjian L, Stark JM et al (2004) Water pulses and biogeochemical cycles in arid and semiarid ecosystems. Oecologia.
  3. Belnap J, Büdel B (2016) Biological soil crusts as soil stabilizers. In: Weber B, Büdel B, Belnap J (eds) Biological soil crusts: an organizing principle in drylands. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 305–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Belnap J, Weber B, Büdel B (2016) Biological soil crusts as an organizing principle in drylands. In: Weber B, Büdel B, Belnap J (eds) Biological soil crusts: an organizing principle in drylands. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 3–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bentler PM (2006) EQS 6 structural equations program manual. Multivariate Software, Inc., EncinoGoogle Scholar
  6. Blume H-P, Beyer L, Pfisterer U, Felix-Henningsen P (2008) Soil Characteristicsand pattern of the Nizzana research site. In: Breckle S-W, Yair A, Veste M (eds) Arid dune ecosystems.The Nizzana sands in the Negev Desert. Springer, Berlin, pp 65–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bollen KA (1989) Structural equations with latent variables. Wiley, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bowker MA, Antoninka AJ (2016) Rapid ex situ culture of N-fixing soil lichens and biocrusts is enhanced by complementarity. Plant Soil 408:415–428. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brungard CW, Boettinger JL, Hipps LE (2015) Wind erosion potential of lacustrine and alluvial soils before and after disturbance in the eastern Great Basin, USA: estimating threshold friction velocity using easier-to-measure soil properties. Aeolian Res 18:185–203. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chamizo S, Rodríguez-Caballero E, Miralles-Mellado I et al (2010) Características de las costras físicas y biológicas del suelo con mayor influencia sobre la infiltración y la erosión en ecosistemas semiáridos. Pirineos 165:69–96. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chamizo S, Rodríguez-Caballero E, Cantón Y et al (2015) Penetration resistance of biological soil crusts and its dynamics after crust removal: relationships with runoff and soil detachment. Catena 126:164–172. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chamizo S, Rodríguez-Caballero E, Román JR, Cantón Y (2017) Effects of biocrust on soil erosion and organic carbon losses under natural rainfall. Catena 148:117–125. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Czarnes S, Hallett PD, Bengough AG, Young IM (2000) Root- and microbial-derived mucilages affect soil structure and water transport. Eur J Soil Sci 51:435–443. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Davies GM, Gray A (2015) Don’t let spurious accusations of pseudoreplication limit our ability to learn from natural experiments (and other messy kinds of ecological monitoring). Ecol Evol 5:5295–5304. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. Dojani S, Büdel B, Deutschewitz K, Weber B (2011) Rapid succession of biological soil crusts after experimental disturbance in the succulent Karoo, South Africa. Appl Soil Ecol 48:263–269. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Drahorad SL, Felix-Henningsen P (2012) An electronic micropenetrometer (EMP) for field measurements of biological soil crust stability. J Plant Nutr Soil Sci 175:519–520. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Drahorad SL, Felix-Henningsen P (2013) Application of an electronic micropenetrometer to assess mechanical stability of biological soil crusts. J Plant Nutr Soil Sci.
  18. Eijkelkamp Agrisearch Equipment (2009) HAND-PENETROMETER FOR TOP LAYERS, TYPE IB: Operating InstructionsGoogle Scholar
  19. Eldridge DJ, Bowker MA, Maestre FT et al (2010) Interactive effects of three ecosystem engineers on infiltration in a semi-arid Mediterranean grassland. Ecosystems 13:499–510. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Felix-Henningsen P, Rummel B, Blume H-P (2008) Soil processes and salt dynamics in dune soils. In: Breckle S-W, Yair A, Veste M (eds) Arid dune ecosystems.The Nizzana sands in the Negev Desert. Springer, Berlin, pp 225–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Freeberg TM, Lucas JR (2009) Pseudoreplication is (still) a problem. J Comp Psychol 123:450–451. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Ganor E (1991) The composition of Clay minerals transported to ISRAEL as indicators of Saharan dust emission. Atmos Environ 25:2657–2664CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Goudie AS, Middleton NJ (2001) Saharan dust storms: nature and consequences. Earth-Sci Rev 56:179–204. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Grace JB (2006) Structural equation modeling and natural systems. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Grace JB, Keeley JE (2006) A structural equation model analysis of Postfire plant diversity in California Shrublands. Ecol Appl 16:503–514.[0503:ASEMAO]2.0.CO;2 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Grace JB, Pugesek BH (1998) On the use of path analysis and related procedures for the investigation of ecological problems. Am Nat 152:151–159. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Grace JB, Allain L, Allen C (2000) Factors associated with plant species richness in a coastal tall-grass prairie. J Veg Sci 11:443–452. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hu C, Liu Y, Song L, Zhang D (2002) Effect of desert soil algae on the stabilization of fine sands. J Appl Phycol 14:281–292. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hussain SM, Smillie GW, Collins JF (1985) Laboratory studies of crust development in irish and iraqi soils. Soil Tillage Res 5:33–53. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Keck H, Felde VJMNL, Drahorad SL, Felix-Henningsen P (2016) Biological soil crusts cause subcritical water repellency in a sand dune ecosystem located along a rainfall gradient in the NW Negev desert, Israel. J Hydrol Hydromech.
  31. Kidron GJ, Vonshak A (2012) The use of microbiotic crusts as biomarkers for ponding, subsurface flow and soil moisture content and duration. Geoderma 181–182:56–64. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kidron GJ, Vonshak A, Dor I et al (2010) Properties and spatial distribution of microbiotic crusts in the Negev Desert, Israel. Catena 82:92–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lan S, Zhang Q, Wu L et al (2014) Artificially accelerating the reversal of desertification: cyanobacterial inoculation facilitates the succession of vegetation communities. Environ Sci Technol 48:307–315. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Littmann T, Berkowicz SM (2008) The regional climatic setting. In: Breckle S-W, Yair A, Veste M (eds) Arid dune ecosystems.The Nizzana sands in the Negev Desert. Springer, Berlin, pp 49–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Littmann T, Schultz A (2008) Atmospheric input of nutrient elements and dust into the sand dune field of the north-western Negev. In: Breckle S-W, Yair A, Veste M (eds) Arid dune ecosystems.The Nizzana sands in the Negev Desert. Springer, Berlin, pp 271–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Mager DM (2010) Carbohydrates in cyanobacterial soil crusts as a source of carbon in the southwest Kalahari, Botswana. Soil Biol Biochem 42:313–318. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Maleki M, Ebrahimi S, Asadzadeh F, Emami Tabrizi M (2016) Performance of microbial-induced carbonate precipitation on wind erosion control of sandy soil. Int J Environ Sci Technol 13:937–944. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. McKenna Neuman C, Maxwell CD, Boulton JW (1996) Wind transport of sand surfaces crusted with photoautotrophic microorganisms. Catena 27:229–247. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Munroe R (2009) Correlation. In:
  40. Neave M, Rayburg S (2007) A field investigation into the effects of progressive rainfall-induced soil seal and crust development on runoff and erosion rates: the impact of surface cover. Geomorphology 87:378–390. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Niederbudde E-A, Stanjek H, Emmerich K (2012) Tonminerale Methodik. In: Blume H-P (ed) Handbuch der Bodenkunde. Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, pp 1–38Google Scholar
  42. Rodríguez-Caballero E, Cantón Y, Chamizo S et al (2013) Soil loss and runoff in semiarid ecosystems: a complex interaction between biological soil crusts, micro-topography, and hydrological drivers. Ecosystems 16:529–546. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Roskin J, Blumberg DG, Porat N et al (2011) Do dune sands redden with age? The case of the northwestern Negev dunefield, Israel. Aeolian Res.
  44. Rozenstein O, Zaady E, Katra I et al (2014) The effect of sand grain size on the development of cyanobacterial biocrusts. Aeolian Res 15:217–226. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sancho LG, Belnap J, Colesie C, et al (2016) Carbon budgets of biological soil crusts at micro-, Meso-, and global scales. In: Weber B, Büdel B, Belnap J (eds) Biological soil crusts: an organizing principle in drylands. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 287–304Google Scholar
  46. Sandler A (2013) Clay distribution over the landscape of Israel: from the hyper-arid to the Mediterranean climate regimes. Catena 110:119–132. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Thomas AD, Dougill AJ (2007) Spatial and temporal distribution of cyanobacterial soil crusts in the Kalahari: implications for soil surface properties. Geomorphology 85:17–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Tisdall JM, Oades JM (1982) Organic matter and water-stable aggregates in soils. J Soil Sci 33:141–163. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Totsche KU, Amelung W, Gerzabek MH et al (2017) Microaggregates in soils. J Plant Nutr Soil Sci.
  50. Van Ancker JAMD, Jungerius PD, Mur LR (1985) The role of algae in the stabilization of coastal dune blowouts. Earth Surf Process Landf 10:189–192. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Xiao B, Zhao Y, Wang Q, Li C (2015) Development of artificial moss-dominated biological soil crusts and their effects on runoff and soil water content in a semi-arid environment. J Arid Environ 117:75–83. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Yair A, Almog R, Veste M (2011) Differential hydrological response of biological topsoil crusts along a rainfall gradient in a sandy arid area: northern Negev desert, Israel. Catena 87:326–333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Zaady E, Katra I, Barkai D, et al (2016) The Coupling Effects Of Using Coal Fly-Ash And Bio-Inoculant For Rehabilitation Of Disturbed Biocrusts In Active Sand Dunes: Using coal fly-ash and bio-inoculant for of disturbed sand biocrusts. Land Degrad Dev n/a-n/a. doi:

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vincent John Martin Noah Linus Felde
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Sonia Chamizo
    • 3
  • Peter Felix-Henningsen
    • 1
  • Sylvie Laureen Drahorad
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Soil Science and Soil Conservation, Research Centre for BioSystems, Land Use and NutritionUniversity of GiessenGiessenGermany
  2. 2.Department of Soil Science, Faculty of Organic Agricultural SciencesUniversity of KasselWitzenhausenGermany
  3. 3.Department of Agrifood Production and Environmental Sciences (DISPAA)University of FlorenceFlorenceItaly

Personalised recommendations