The influence of vegetation and soil characteristics on active-layer thickness of permafrost soils in boreal forest.

Carbon release from thawing permafrost soils could significantly exacerbate global warming as the active-layer deepens, exposing more carbon to decay. Plant community and soil properties provide a major control on this by influencing the maximum depth of thaw each summer (active-layer thickness; ALT), but a quantitative understanding of the relative importance of plant and soil characteristics, and their interactions in determine ALTs, is currently lacking. To address this, we undertook an extensive survey of multiple vegetation and edaphic characteristics and ALTs across multiple plots in four field sites within boreal forest in the discontinuous permafrost zone (NWT, Canada). Our sites included mature black spruce, burned black spruce and paper birch, allowing us to determine vegetation and edaphic drivers that emerge as the most important and broadly applicable across these key vegetation and disturbance gradients, as well as providing insight into site-specific differences. Across sites, the most important vegetation characteristics limiting thaw (shallower ALTs) were tree leaf area index (LAI), moss layer thickness and understory LAI in that order. Thicker soil organic layers also reduced ALTs, though were less influential than moss thickness. Surface moisture (0-6 cm) promoted increased ALTs, whereas deeper soil moisture (11-16 cm) acted to modify the impact of the vegetation, in particular increasing the importance of understory or tree canopy shading in reducing thaw. These direct and indirect effects of moisture indicate that future changes in precipitation and evapotranspiration may have large influences on ALTs. Our work also suggests that forest fires cause greater ALTs by simultaneously decreasing multiple ecosystem characteristics which otherwise protect permafrost. Given that vegetation and edaphic characteristics have such clear and large influences on ALTs, our data provide a key benchmark against which to evaluate process models used to predict future impacts of climate warming on permafrost degradation and subsequent feedback to climate.

Actions speak louder than words: the case for responsible scientific activism in an era of planetary emergency.

The world's understanding of the climate and ecological crises rests on science. However, scientists' conventional methods of engagement, such as producing ever more data and findings, writing papers and giving advice to governments, have not been sufficiently effective at persuading politicians to act on the climate and ecological emergency. To date, governments' decisions (such as continuing with vast subsidies for fossil fuels) clearly show that powerful vested interests have been much more influential than the amassed scientific knowledge and advice. We argue that in the face of this inaction, scientists can have the maximum amount of influence by lending their support to social movements pressing for action, joining as active participants and considering civil disobedience. Scientists seeking to halt continued environmental destruction also need to work through our institutions. Too many scientific organizations, from national academies of science to learned societies and universities, have not taken practical action on climate; for example, many still partner with fossil fuel and other compromised interests. We therefore also outline a vision for how scientists can reform our scientific institutions to become powerful agents for change.