Quinn Rodney

Doctor Laura Alexander

BSC 435C
March 31, 2023
Cryptobiotic soil: A Possible Mechanism for Fire Protection and Management
Introduction
Both fire ecology and the ecological effects of biological soil crusts have been investigated in
many other studies. However, many of these studies have failed to mention any fire-retardant
effects that cryptobiotic soil crusts provide for ecosystems. This paper investigates the possibility
of fire protection by cryptobiotic soil through a series of literature searches. It is expected that if
cryptobiotic soil offers fire protection to the root systems of trees, there will be a greater
diversity of native plants in such areas. However, a comprehensive study of biodiversity is
beyond the scope of this paper. Instead, this paper will explore a possible mechanism for
cryptobiotic soil fire protection and explain why a diversity increase would be expected.
This paper’s hypothesis is that the moisture trapping abilities of cryptobiotic soil crusts gives
protection to plants. If supported, the mechanism in our hypothesis would hint at a sort of
symbiosis between plants and the organisms making up the crust. This interaction can be
investigated in future studies by examining the effect such biological soil crusts have on
ecosystem biodiversity.

Methods
To investigate fire retardant effects of cryptobiotic soil and the possible mechanisms by which
these effects occur, literature searches were performed. The Northern Arizona University college
library and the Arizona Western College catalog were loaded into Google Scholar and was used
to find relevant peer reviewed literature. The key search terms included: “cryptobiotic soil” and
derivatives such as “cryptogamic” or “biological soil crusts” with “fire protection’ or “fire
suppressive effects.” Explorations of possible mechanisms included “moisture content protective
effects” “biodiversity protection from fires” and derivatives thereof. Additionally, a review of
literature regarding fire effects on trees and plants was done to provide background information
for context of harmful and protective effects.
Results and Discussion
Fourteen papers were found on the topic and read in this literature search. Only eleven papers are
referenced here with the other three papers having been determined to be irrelevant or redundant
for the topic. Five of the relevant papers were important for understanding the role of fire in
ecosystems around the world, though mainly limited to the Southwestern United States. Four
papers covered cryptobiotic soils, with two of those papers covering the effect of fire on the soil.
The final two papers investigated the effect of fires and moisture content.
Research revealed that natural wildfires are important for nutrient cycles and waste disposal in
ecosystems. Fire clears overcrowding plants and replenishes soil micro-nutrients and
Phosphorous. Low intensity and patchy burning of forests clears fuel for bigger fires and signals
some species of plants to germinate while still leaving areas for wildlife to take refuge. These
fires will also limit the growth of younger trees and keep the canopy open enough for underbrush
to receive adequate light. In Northern Arizona, suppressing such fires only encourages larger
crown fires to occur. These larger fires often kill off entire regions of forest, burning young
saplings and old trees alike. Since then, scientists have discovered these patterns of fire ecology
and managers have started to adjust their techniques. However, there are some aspects of small
brush fires left to be explored.
Additionally, research showed that crown fires kill trees in more ways than simply burning away
tissue. Tissues that remain relatively intact may be damaged by the heat of the flames and can
lead to the death of seemingly undamaged trees long after the fire has passed by, what is known
as second order fire effects (Bär et al. 2019). Fire damaged leaves and needles starve plants of
energy, damaged vascular tissue prevents nutrient flow, and damaged roots prevent nutrient and
water uptake. Root damage can even result in the tree blowing down in storms that it would not
have otherwise. The damage may be caused by burning or simply exposure to high heat. Such
effects are especially damaging to the roots of trees. These effects should theoretically be caused
by low intensity fires near the ground just as in the larger fires. However, these low ground fires
naturally occur when the soil is moist, like during or after a thunderstorm. Such storms are
usually the source of the fire in the form of lightning. However, with human disturbance, this is
becoming less common (Keeley and Syphard 2018, Ganteaume and Syphard 2019). More and
more fires are anthropogenic. Combine this effect with the long-lasting drought that the desert
southwest is experiencing, even small fires may become problematic.
Research on cryptobiotic soil showed that such biological soil crusts are found around the world
and are common in Arizona and the surrounding states. This soil is made up of many different
types of organisms, and their composition varies from region to region. Generally, cryptobiotic
soils, or cryptogamic soils, are composed of mosses, fungi, algae, and lichens. These organisms
together form a biotic crust community that reduces airborne dust and erosion, fixes Nitrogen,
and traps moisture in the soil (Eldridge and Greene 1994, Brotherson and Rushforth n.d.). Arid
environments like those in the desert southwest especially benefit from these soils due to their
moisture trapping abilities. It is the moisture trapping abilities of these soil crusts that may be
key to fire protection.
The moisture trapping properties of cryptobiotic soil can help reduce the impact of burning,
whether it is natural, artificial, or accidental. Studies have shown that soil moisture increases the
survival of microbes in soils (Dunn et al. 1985). Even if roots aren’t damaged directly, plant
epiphytes and endosymbionts can also be damaged by the heat of even low intensity fires.
Nutrients cycles such as the nitrogen cycle can be disrupted by this. Thus, the presence of
cryptobiotic soil can help shield flora in more ways than one. Burrowing fauna may also be
better protected by higher soil moisture. These creatures are important for the aeration of roots
and mixing of nutrients back into the soil. Ultimately, an ecosystem with cryptobiotic soil has the
potential to recover faster. This is the mechanism by which cryptobiotic soil helps to increase
biodiversity.

Conclusion
Fires can cause major damage to arid ecosystems where recovery is difficult. Yet, many
ecosystems still rely on fire to thrive. Understanding the impact of fire on ecosystems is the first
step to ensuring that an area is being managed properly. Implementing strategies to mitigate
damage is the next step. Therefore, research into natural fire suppression in wildlands can offer
great insight into ecosystem management strategies. Though instances of cryptobiotic soil
protecting flora and fauna have yet to be researched, the mode of protection is clearly present. It
is possible that the effects of cryptobiotic soil discussed here may differ from the theoretical
foundation, thus the need for more research. However, the premise and foundation are strongly
rooted in known scientific research, and the literature covered here does support the hypothesis
proposed in this paper. The moisture trapping properties of cryptogams are well known, as are
the effects of low intensity fires, and the benefit of prescribing low intensity burns. If proven
correct, the careful introduction of cryptobiotic soil crusts into management areas can benefit the
biodiversity and richness of these areas. In a time when biodiversity losses are numerous, efforts
like these to increase biodiversity are becoming increasingly valuable.
References

Bär, A., S. T. Michaletz, and S. Mayr. 2019. Fire effects on tree physiology. New Phytologist
223:1728–1741.
Brotherson, J. D., and S. R. Rushforth. (n.d.). Influence of cryptogamic crusts on moisture
relationships of soils in Navajo National Monument, Arizona. Great Basin Naturalist 43.
Dunn, P. H., S. C. Barro, and M. Poth. 1985. Soil moisture affects survival of microorganisms in
heated chaparral soil. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 17:143–148.
Eldridge, D., and R. Greene. 1994. Microbiotic soil crusts: A review of their roles in soil and
ecological processes in the rangelands of Australia. Australian Journal of Soil Research -
AUST J SOIL RES 32.
Ganteaume, A., and A. Syphard. 2019. Ignition Sources.
Hawkes, C. V. 2004. Effects of biological soil crusts on seed germination of four endangered
herbs in a xeric Florida shrubland during drought. Plant Ecology 170:121–134.
Hilty, J. H., D. J. Eldridge, R. Rosentreter, M. C. Wicklow-Howard, and M. Pellant. 2004.
Recovery of biological soil crusts following wildfire in Idaho. Journal of Range
Management 57:89–96.
Johansen, J. R., L. L. St. Clair, B. L. Webb, and G. T. Nebeker. 1984. Recovery Patterns of
Cryptogamic Soil Crusts in Desert Rangelands Following Fire Disturbance. The
Bryologist 87:238–243.
Keeley, J. E., and A. D. Syphard. 2018. Historical patterns of wildfire ignition sources in
California ecosystems. International Journal of Wildland Fire 27:781.
O’Bryan, K. E., S. M. Prober, I. D. Lunt, and D. J. Eldridge. 2009. Frequent Fire Promotes
Diversity and Cover of Biological Soil Crusts in a Derived Temperate Grassland.
Oecologia 159:827–838.
Pausas, J. G., and J. E. Keeley. 2019. Wildfires as an ecosystem service. Frontiers in Ecology
and the Environment 17:289–295.