Global change biologyAre soils in urban ecosystems compacted? A citywide analysis
Abstract
Soil compaction adversely influences most terrestrial ecosystem services on which humans depend. This global problem, affecting over 68 million ha of agricultural land alone, is a major driver of soil erosion, increases flood frequency and reduces groundwater recharge. Agricultural soil compaction has been intensively studied, but there are no systematic studies investigating the extent of compaction in urban ecosystems, despite the repercussions for ecosystem function. Urban areas are the fastest growing land-use type globally, and are often assumed to have highly compacted soils with compromised functionality. Here, we use bulk density (BD) measurements, taken to 14 cm depth at a citywide scale, to compare the extent of surface soil compaction between different urban greenspace classes and agricultural soils. Urban soils had a wider BD range than agricultural soils, but were significantly less compacted, with 12 per cent lower mean BD to 7 cm depth. Urban soil BD was lowest under trees and shrubs and highest under herbaceous vegetation (e.g. lawns). BD values were similar to many semi-natural habitats, particularly those underlying woody vegetation. These results establish that, across a typical UK city, urban soils were in better physical condition than agricultural soils and can contribute to ecosystem service provision.
References
- 1
- 2
Antrop M. . 2000Changing patterns in the urbanised countryside of Western Europe. Landscape Ecol. 15, 257–270.doi:10.1023/A:1008151109252 (doi:10.1023/A:1008151109252). Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar - 3
Bolund P.& Hunhammar S. . 1999Ecosystem services in urban areas. Ecol. Econ. 29, 293–301.doi:10.1016/S0921-8009(99)00013-0 (doi:10.1016/S0921-8009(99)00013-0). Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar - 4RCEP.2006The Urban Environment.26th Report. Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution, London, UK. Google Scholar
- 5
Dominati E., Patterson M.& Mackay A. . 2010A framework for classifying and quantifying the natural capital and ecosystem services of soils. Ecol. Econ. 69, 1858–1868.doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.05.002 (doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.05.002). Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar - 6
Soane B. D.& van Ouwerkerk C. . 1995Implications of soil compaction in crop production for the quality of the environment. Soil Tillage Res. 35, 5–22.doi:10.1016/0167-1987(95)00475-8 (doi:10.1016/0167-1987(95)00475-8). Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar - 7
Lorenz K.& Lal R. . 2009Biochemical C and N cycles in urban soils. Environ. Int. 35, 1–8.doi:10.1016/j.envint.2008.05.006 (doi:10.1016/j.envint.2008.05.006). Crossref, PubMed, ISI, Google Scholar - 8
Jim C. Y. . 1998Urban soil characteristics and limitations for landscape planting in Hong Kong. Landscape Urban Plan. 40, 235–249.doi:10.1016/S0169-2046(97)00117-5 (doi:10.1016/S0169-2046(97)00117-5). Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar - 9
Jim C. Y. . 1998Physical and chemical properties of a Hong Kong roadside soil in relation to tree growth. Urban Ecosyst. 2, 171–181.doi:10.1023/A:1009585700191 (doi:10.1023/A:1009585700191). Crossref, Google Scholar - 10
Banaitis M. R., Langley-Turnbaugh S. J.& Aboueissa A. . 2007Variations of soil organic carbon in three urban parks: a Maine case study. Int. J. Appl. Environ. Sci. 2, 119–128. Google Scholar - 11
Lehmann A.& Stahr K. . 2007Nature and significance of anthropogenic urban soils. J. Soils Sediments 7, 247–260.doi:10.1065/jss2007.06.235 (doi:10.1065/jss2007.06.235). Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar - 12
Smetak K. M., Johnson-Maynard J. L.& Lloyd J. E. . 2007Earthworm population density and diversity in different-aged urban systems. Appl. Soil Ecol. 37, 161–168.doi:10.1016/j.apsoil.2007.06.004 (doi:10.1016/j.apsoil.2007.06.004). Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar - 13
Pitt R., Chen S., Clark S. E., Swenson J.& Ong C. K. . 2008Compaction's impacts on urban storm-water infiltration. J. Irrigation Drainage Eng. 134, 652–658.doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9437(2008)134:5(652) (doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9437(2008)134:5(652)). Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar - 14
Pickett S. T. A.& Cadenasso M. L. . 2009Altered resources, disturbance, and heterogeneity: a framework for comparing urban and non-urban soils. Urban Ecosyst. 12, 23–44.doi:10.1007/s11252-008-0047-x (doi:10.1007/s11252-008-0047-x). Crossref, Google Scholar - 15
Scalenghe R.& Marsan F. A. . 2009The anthropogenic sealing of soil in urban areas. Landscape Urban Plan. 90, 1–10.doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2008.10.011 (doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2008.10.011). Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar - 16
Bibby P. . 2009Land-use change in Britain. Land Use Policy 26, S2–S13.doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2009.09.019 (doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2009.09.019). Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar - 17
Murray K. J.& Sheill D. . 2003A new geographic information framework for Great Britain. Photogramm. Eng. Remote Sens. 69, 1175–1182. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar - 18
Hamza M. A.& Anderson W. K. . 2005Soil compaction in cropping systems. A review of the nature causes and possible solutions. Soil Tillage Res. 82, 121–145.doi:10.1016/j.still.2004.08.009 (doi:10.1016/j.still.2004.08.009). Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar - 19
Carey P. D., 2008Countryside survey: UK results from 2007. (CEH project number: CO3259).Penicuik, UK: NERC/Centre for Ecology & Hydrology. Google Scholar - 20
Robbins P.& Birkinholtz T. . 2003Turfgrass revolution: measuring the expansion of the American lawn. Land Use Policy 20, 181–194.doi:10.1016/S0264-8377(03)00006-1 (doi:10.1016/S0264-8377(03)00006-1). Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar - 21
Nowak D. J.& Crane D. E. . 2002Carbon storage and sequestration by urban trees in the USA. Environ. Pollut. 116, 381–389.doi:10.1016/S0269-7491(01)00214-7 (doi:10.1016/S0269-7491(01)00214-7). Crossref, PubMed, ISI, Google Scholar - 22
Akbari H. . 2002Shade trees reduce building energy use and CO2 emissions from power plants. Environ. Pollut. 116, S119–S126.doi:10.1016/S0269-7491(01)00264-0 (doi:10.1016/S0269-7491(01)00264-0). Crossref, PubMed, ISI, Google Scholar
