Arrival in Kilpisjärvi

This morning we flew from Helsinki up to the northern town of Kittilä, then drove three and a half hours to Kilpisjärvi.

As the airplane was landing, we got our first views of beautiful Arctic Finland.

The town of Kittalä has a pretty small little airport, and from there we crammed ourselves and all of our luggage into a bus. It was a tight squeeze for 3.5 hours! We had a very quick stop for lunch of reindeer sandwiches, but otherwise we were squeezed in like this:

We arrived at the research station around 6 pm, where we were met by the director Antero, and the very kind and wonderful cook who kept dinner warm for us. We were very hungry, and it was a wonderful welcome!

It's overcast and chilly here. It was about 6°C when we pulled into the station. That's about 42°F, which is a far cry from the 110°F Phoenix weather we are coming from! Antero promises warmer weather next week, and asks if we brought our bathing suits. (Hahaha!)

After dinner we settled into our rooms, and walked around a little bit. Here is some scenery that we get to enjoy during our stay here:

"Järvi" in Finnish means lake. So Kilpisjärvi is Kilpis Lake. Here it is!

Tiff, Richard, Guillermo, Manny, and Gina check out the lake with Saana "mountain" in the background. The little blue flag in the middle flies at the main station buildings.

Tomorrow, we resume the students' coursework. No rest for them! But, for now, it's bed time after a long day of traveling.

A Day in Helsinki

All of the students made it into Helsinki yesterday, and after a shower, a good night's sleep, and some coffee, we were ready for a day of learning in Helsinki!

Our day started at the University of Helsinki's Viiki Campus, which is where their environmental and sustainability programs are located. Here we are at the entrance to the Biocenter (or Biokeskus, in Finnish) for Helsingin Yliopisto (Finnish for Helsinki University), bright eyed and bushy tailed despite our jetlag!

Left-to-right: Diego, Guillermo, Stephanie, Kylie, Manny, Ezra, Gina, Richard, Tiff, Brooke, Christina, Andrew, and me

We started the morning hearing from the Senior Economic Officer with the U.S. Embassy in Helsinki about Arctic issues. Finland is now the chairing country of the Arctic Council, which is made up of all eight nations that fall within the Arctic and indigenous groups native to the Arctic to promote cooperation in important issues like environment, climate, economics, and people. We were particularly interested to hear about the work of the Council and their goal of promoting decisions based on science, and to think about how science can better be communicated to politicians and the public. (And it was cool to hear about careers with the Embassy!) We were so interested, that we continued talking about what we heard after Jay, our visiting officer, had to leave!

Then, we got to tour the Biocenter facilities and learn about some of the cool science being done by ecologists at the University. We learned about everything from viruses (and some very creative origami viruses!), to microfossil moss leaves used to understand past climate change from before humans were around, to how growing plants respond to changes in their climate. I think the favorite part for everyone was the greenhouses and experimental fields outside, because we love our sunshine and foliage! (We lucked out and had some beautiful weather today.)

And that was all before lunch! After lunch we took the city bus to the Finnish Museum of Natural History (or, Luonnontieteellinen Keskusmuseo). Students were assigned to tour the museum, and identify their favorite exhibits that do a good job using artistic elements to communicate complex scientific concepts. I think my favorite was a hallway where it showed animals and plants that live in mountains, going from high elevation at the beginning of the hallway down to low elevation as you walk though. The left side showed that gradient in the Rocky Mountains in the U.S., and on the right it showed the gradient in the Alps in Europe. I thought it was cool, because it showed you that, no matter where you are, things change in a similar way as you go from high to low on a mountain. While the species might be different between Europe and the U.S., they are often related, and they have a similar niche. (Unfortunately, it's hard to take a photo of both sides of a hallway... so I can't show you.)

We ended the evening with a group dinner, and a quick visit to a sound space art exhibit. (That's an art installation where you enter a room and listen to the sounds being projected, with carefully chosen frequencies and rhythms.) Here we are at dinner, still awake despite the jetlag!

Now we are back at our hotel. Tomorrow morning we get up early and head back to the airport, because we fly north to Kilpis! We are excited to get north of the Arctic Circle and begin our research projects!

Onward... to the other side of the planet!

I mostly post about our research on the polar soils of the southern hemisphere in Antarctica. However, I have just begun a journey to the opposite side of the planet, this time heading north above the Arctic Circle. Our group from Arizona State University will be spending the next couple of weeks at Kilpisjärvi Biological Station in northern Finland. 

Kilpisjärvi is in the northwestern tip of Finland, near the point where Finland, Norway, and Sweden meet. At 69°N, it is north of the Arctic Circle, so at this time of year we'll be enjoying 24 hours of daylight and some chilly temperatures that give us a much-needed break from June in Phoenix, AZ! You can learn more about Kilpisjärvi on their website here.

Our team this year is interdisciplinary. We are two professors and 11 students. Half of us are scientists, and the other half are artists. The students on the project will be working in scientist+artist teams to conduct independent research projects in Arctic ecology, as well as communicate that research to the public through a creative work. So often science and art are thought of as entirely different fields, when in fact they share the same core set of skills: observation, interpretation, creativity, and communication. The stereotype of a scientist is someone analytical and boring, with no creativity or inspiration. But scientists can't design exciting new research without being creative! They need to be able to observe their surroundings from different viewpoints and think outside the box, just like an artist is trained to do. Artists also need to be analytical and take risks like scientists do, and shouldn't be deterred from getting involved and understanding science. So we hope that the students will leave the program as better scientists and better artists as a result of practicing both fields through their research projects. Plus, we'll introduce a cohort of students to the Arctic who have never been here before and convey what they learn to the public, through hands-on research experiences. Already they are coming up with some pretty cool ideas of what they'd like to work on!

Our trip begins in Helsinki, Finland. The two professors (Richard and I) arrived in Helsinki today. Tomorrow, the students join us. We'll spend a couple of days here meeting with the US Embassy, scientists and artists from the University of Helsinki, and visiting museums before flying up north to Kilpisjärvi on Saturday. Stay tuned!

Results of our "Stoichiometry Experiment"

It's been quite a while since I've posted about our Stoichiometry Experiment. I explained a bit about that experiment in this post and this post. In this long-term experiment, we wanted to find out how soils in the McMurdo Dry Valleys will change when future climate warming creates a lot of ice melt. Along with that melted water will come a larger amount of important nutrients necessary for life: carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus. What will the soil microbes and invertebrates do with these extra nutrients? Will the entire area of the Dry Valleys respond the same way, or does it depend on where you are in the Dry Valleys? Our goal in this experiment was to find out which of these nutrient elements might stimulate the soil organisms. Also, because different parts of the Dry Valleys might already have more nitrogen or more phosphorus in the soil than other places, we wanted to find out whether the stimulating nutrient changed from one location to another.

We did this experiment at two different places in the Dry Valleys: near Lake Fryxell and near Lake Bonney. Since the environment in both basins is so harsh for plant life, there's not a lot of carbon naturally in the soil. So, we hypothesized that both sites would be "carbon limited", meaning that if we add carbon to the soil, the soil organisms would be very excited to have the new food source and become a lot more active! Lake Fryxell and Bonney we think are both carbon limited, but we hypothesized that they would differ in whether nitrogen or phosphorus would stimulate the soil organisms. Lake Fryxell has a lot more phosphorus in the soil than Bonney, so we hypothesized that adding nitrogen would stimulate the soil biology more, because they already would have the phosphorus they need. Since Lake Bonney has more nitrogen than phosphorus, we hypothesized that adding phosphorus would stimulate the biology more, because they had the nitrogen they needed.

In the map at the upper right, the "B" marks Lake Bonney and "F" marks Lake Fryxell. The picture from Lake Fryxell shows how we added the nutrient treatments, using watering cans to sprinkle the salts dissolved in water over the plots. The cone helps prevent the wind from blowing away the water as we're pouring.

We started the experiment 10 years ago, during the 2006-2007 field season. Every year since then, we add water and nutrients to the soil. We added carbon (using a sugar called mannitol), nitrogen (using a salt, ammonium nitrate), phosphorus (using a different salt, sodium phosphate). They were added by dissolving those nutrients in water, and adding the solution to the soil. We also added carbon+nitrogen together, and carbon+phosphorus together. To make sure we weren't measuring just the effect of adding water, we had a control treatment where we only added water with nothing dissolved in it. So that gave us 7 different treatments: just carbon (C), just nitrogen (N), just phosphorus (P), carbon+nitrogen (CN), carbon+phosphorus (CP), water only (W), and a control where we didn't add anything at all (U... for "unamended"). Every year, we added these nutrients and water, and sampled the soil to see how the biology were responding. We measured respiration from the soil by measuring carbon dioxide coming out of the soil. I told you how we measured respiration on the soils back in this post. We extracted all of the nematodes, tardigrades, and rotifers living in the soil, and we measured nutrients in the soil, too.

Measuring respiration at the Lake Bonney experimental plots.

So what did we find? For 3 years, we didn't see any change in the soil at all. The biology didn't respond to the added water or nutrients. But, then, after 3 years, we started to see a difference! Soil respiration was greater in the plots where we added carbon+nitrogen. That means that the soil microbes were limited by both carbon and nitrogen, and having more of those allowed them to be more active. It just took a few years for them to be able to adjust to use the extra resources! It's also interesting, because Bonney Basin was also stimulated by carbon+nitrogen, even though it already had plenty of nitrogen (or so we thought!). We also noticed that the total number of invertebrates and total amount of microbes in the soil didn't change. Only their activity changes. It's similar to the way that having a lot of candy makes you more active and respire more, even though there's still only one of you.

h then leaves the soil. The graph on the left is for the Lake Fryxell soils, and on the right is Lake Bonney. You can see that all of the nutrient treatments are overlapping until year 3. Then, after year 3, the CN (carbon+nitrogen) treatment is higher than the others, meaning carbon and nitrogen together stimulated respiration. It's especially true in Lake Fryxell soils, but also Lake Bonney, where it was a smaller increase.

The increased activity with the nutrient additions means that future warming in the Dry Valleys that melts ice will have an impact on the soil organisms living there. But we also found that the stimulated activity was fairly short-lived, only lasting a few weeks, so it would take sustained pulses of water and nutrients to make a big impact on the soil organisms. A sustained pulse from melting ice is a likely scenario for the future of the Dry Valleys, so our experiment might tell us about the consequences of climate change for these soil organisms.


The results of this study are published in: Ball, B.A., B.J. Adams, J.E. Barrett, D.H. Wall, R.A. Virginia. 2018. Soil biological responses to C, N and P fertilization in a polar desert of Antarctica. Soil Biology & Biochemistry 122: 7-18. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2018.03.025

What biome is Antarctica?

I was asked a good question by somebody through the "Ask A Biologist" website:
"What is the biome of Antarctica? Some say it is a Tundra Biome and some say it is a Desert or Ice Biome. What is the right answer?"
It's a great question, so I thought I'd put my answer here, too! (It's also on the Ask A Biologist website.)

The important thing to remember about Antarctica is that it's a big continent. It's larger than the United States, which has many different biomes! Most of Antarctica is a desert, yes. Of course, it is a very different type of desert than most people think about, because most people think of deserts as being hot places with a lot of cacti, and that's not what Antarctica looks like! So, I think a lot of people call Antarctica a tundra because they don't know that a desert could be very cold. Scientists that work in Antarctica mostly refer to the majority of the continent as being cold desert or polar desert. The difference between cold and polar desert is very technical, mainly dealing with mineral salt chemistry. Some say that the coastal soils around the bulk of the continent are polar deserts while the rest of the continent (not near the ocean) is cold desert. Some people, though, use the terms interchangeably.

McMurdo Dry Valleys: a polar desert

However, some locations in and around Antarctica have a slightly milder climate, which we call the "maritime" climate region. This includes the islands along the Antarctic Peninsula (which is the part that reaches up towards South America on the Western side of the continent), as well as the sub-Antarctic islands. Because it's less harsh, there are more plants (mostly moss and algae, but also some grass). The soils therefore have more organic matter (aka rotting dead plant stuff), making these locations more like a tundra ecosystem. However, there are no woody plants in Antarctica, and only two species of vascular plants (a grass and a pearlwort), so it is not as diverse or complex as the Arctic tundra.

King George Island: a tundra-like ecosystem on the Peninsula

So, yes, some areas of Antarctica are considered tundra (or at least tundra-like), but it's not the entire outside of the continent. Most Antarctic scientists would consider the tundra ecosystems to just be the "maritime climate" region of the Antarctic Peninsula in West Antarctica and the sub-Antarctic islands, and the rest of West and East Antarctica as polar or cold desert. And, of course, much of the desert areas are covered by ice, with less than 2% of the continent being ice-free. In my opinion, organisms still live in these regions (like bacteria), so it's still an ecosystem. Whether it's called an "ice biome" or desert probably isn't official. The ice covered regions still meet the criteria for being a desert, because while there is water, it is frozen and unavailable to biology! Precipitation is low and moisture easily lost to the atmosphere. But obviously ice is a very different habitat from soil, so it could make sense to differentiate between the two.

There's a lot of ice in Antarctica!

Reunited with our samples

Remember all of those boxes that we packed our frozen samples in while we were at the warehouse in Punta Arenas? They have just arrived here in Arizona.

The boxes are still frozen inside, thanks to the ice packs we put in. Once they get delivered to the lab, we unpack them quickly and load the samples into the -20°C freezer. It's pretty full!
 

Now that our samples are here, we can start processing them to gather the data we need to test our hypotheses!

Back in Punta Arenas

We are pack in Punta Arenas, Chile now. We docked about 8:00 this morning. Now that we're back in Chile, the work is not over! Today Uffe, Dave, and I spent much of our time in the warehouse packing samples for shipment home.

The samples have to stay at -20°C during the whole trip back to the U.S. We pack them in special insulated boxes with a lot of "blue ice", which are special ice packs that stay very cold. Here, Uffe and Dave are helping our lab tech Cindy pack a box of soil samples. You can see all of the blue ice that is on top. The blue ice is already -20°C, so Dave has to wear gloves to handle it.

Once the samples are packed in the boxes with the blue ice, we add a lot of labels to the outside. There are labels with the destination address, of course, but also our collection permits, information about the samples, and safety information. Plus, there are stickers telling the cargo handlers that the samples need to stay frozen and handled with care. Here, Dave is about halfway through adding labels:

We have a total of five of these boxes with our soils that need to stay frozen. We also have several more boxes that are not frozen, as well as all of our cargo. It's all packed up and ready to head back to the U.S.!

From here, our group is splitting up. Uffe is going back to Australia soon, Connor and Kelli are going back to the U.S. soon. Dave and I are staying in Chile for about another week. I will get home shortly before all of my samples do!

It has been a GREAT research trip. We got a lot done, more than we thought we would, and we worked with a lot of great people. Tonight, we all went out and celebrated a successful cruise. We ate dinner at a restaurant in Punta Arenas, which was a very welcome change compared to the food we've been eating on the ship! Unfortunately, I forgot to take a group photo...