4.6 Review

Geophysical subsurface imaging for ecological applications

期刊

NEW PHYTOLOGIST
卷 201, 期 4, 页码 1170-1175

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/nph.12619

关键词

critical zone; ecohydrology; electrical resistivity imaging; geophysical imaging; ground-penetrating radar; plant-soil interactions; soil-water; subsurface imaging

资金

  1. Directorate For Geosciences [1138881] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ecologists, ecohydrologists, and biogeochemists need detailed insights into belowground properties and processes, including changes in water, salts, and other elements that can influence ecosystem productivity and functioning. Relying on traditional sampling and observation techniques for such insights can be costly, time consuming, and infeasible, especially if the spatial scales involved are large. Geophysical imaging provides an alternative or complement to traditional methods to gather subsurface variables across time and space. In this paper, we review aspects of geophysical imaging, particularly electrical and electromagnetic imaging, that may benefit ecologists seeking clearer understanding of the shallow subsurface. Using electrical resistivity imaging, for example, we have been able to successfully show the effect of land-use conversions to agriculture on salt mobilization and leaching across kilometer-long transects and to depths of tens of meters. Recent advances in ground-penetrating radar and other geophysical imaging methods currently provide opportunities for subsurface imaging with sufficient detail to locate small (>= 5 cm diameter) animal burrows and plant roots, observe soil-water and vegetation spatial correlations in small watersheds, estuaries, and marshes, and quantify changes in groundwater storage at local to regional scales using geophysical data from ground-and space-based platforms. Ecologists should benefit from adopting these minimally invasive, scalable imaging technologies to explore the subsurface and advance our collective research.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据