Green Roof Ageing Or Isolatic Technosol's Pedogenesis?
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Green roof ageing or Isolatic Technosol’s pedogenesis? Ryad Bouzouidja, Gustave Rousseau, Violaine Galzin, Rémy Claverie, David Lacroix, Geoffroy Séré To cite this version: Ryad Bouzouidja, Gustave Rousseau, Violaine Galzin, Rémy Claverie, David Lacroix, et al.. Green roof ageing or Isolatic Technosol’s pedogenesis?. Journal of Soils and Sediments, Springer Verlag, 2018, 18 (2), pp.418-425. 10.1007/s11368-016-1513-3. hal-01520147 HAL Id: hal-01520147 https://hal.univ-lorraine.fr/hal-01520147 Submitted on 29 Aug 2017 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Manuscript Click here to download Manuscript Bouzouidja_JSS_v1 for review.docx Click here to view linked References 1 SUITMA 8 1 2 2 3 3 Green roof ageing or Isolatic Technosol’s pedogenesis? 4 5 4 6 5 Ryan Bouzouidja1,2,3 • Gustave Rousseau1,2 • Violaine Galzin1,2 • Rémy Claverie3 • David Lacroix4 • 7 1,2 8 6 Geoffroy Séré 9 7 10 1 11 8 Laboratoire Sols et Environnement, Université de Lorraine-INRA, 2 avenue de la Forêt de Haye, BP 172, 54505 12 9 Vandœuvre lès Nancy cedex, France 13 14 10 2INRA, Laboratoire Sols et Environnement, UMR 1120, TSA 40602, 2 avenue de la Forêt de Haye, BP 172, 15 11 54518 Vandœuvre-lès-Nancy Cedex, France 16 17 12 3CEREMA DTer Est, 71 Rue de la Grande Haie, 54510 Tomblaine, France 18 13 4Université de Lorraine, LEMTA UMR 7563, 2 Avenue de la Forêt de Haye TSA 60604, 54518 Vandœuvre-lès- 19 20 14 Nancy cedex, France 21 15 22 23 16 24 17 Geoffroy Séré 25 26 18 [email protected] 27 19 Tel +33 (0)3.83.59.58.95, Fax +33 (0)3.83.59.57.91) 28 29 20 30 31 21 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 1 63 64 65 22 Abstract 1 23 Purpose: Green roofs (GR) offer a way to improve several ecosystem services in cities. However, the 2 3 24 performances of GR are basically considered as steady over time whereas they are living media subject to ageing 4 25 that are rarely managed by their owners. This study transposes a pedological approach to evaluate changes in GR 5 6 26 physical structure and chemical composition over time. 7 27 Materials and methods: A full scale experimental plot with various vegetation cover was studied. An appropriate 8 9 28 sampling of a four years substrate was implemented on the basis of observation. Then physical and chemical 10 29 characterization were conducted and compared to results on the original substrate. 11 12 30 Results and discussion: The top sub-layer of the substrate contained a large amount of fine and short roots 13 31 whereas the root density was much smaller in the lower layer of the substrate. There was a drastic drop of 3% of 14 15 32 the organic carbon content between the initial substrate and the 4 years old substrate. On contrary the nitrogen 16 33 concentration has increased of 0.4% during the same period. The total porosity decreased from 0.45 cm3 cm-3 to 17 18 34 0.38 cm3 cm-3. On the whole substrate the < 2 mm particles fraction was smaller after 4 years (12.5%) than in the 19 35 initial substrate (18.2%) which was especially obvious in the upper horizon (9.5%). Additionally, the monitored 20 21 36 properties also varied significantly as a function of soil cover (sedum, moss and bare soil). Evidences of an early 22 37 pedogenesis were highlighted. 23 24 38 Conclusions: In conclusion, the study demonstrated the effects of time, climate and vegetation on physical and 25 39 chemical properties of green roofs. They are not only classified as Isolatic Technosols due to their composition 26 27 40 and implementation, they also exhibit one of the major characteristic of young Technosols: a fast and intense 28 29 41 pedogenesis. 30 42 31 32 43 Keywords Green roof • Pedogenesis • Substrate • Temporal changes 33 44 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 2 63 64 65 45 1 Introduction 1 46 Increasing use of green roofs (GR) on the top of the buildings of our cities rely on their acclaimed benefits 2 3 47 regarding local climate and storm water regulation (Mentens et al. 2006; Alexandri and Jones 2008) as well as 4 48 their contribution to urban biodiversity (MacIvor and Lundholm 2011). Such ecosystem services are 5 6 49 progressively evaluated in a variety of situations and climates through scientific studies (Carter and Jackson, 7 50 2007; Moran and Smith, 2005). However, the performances of GR are basically considered as steady over time 8 9 51 whereas they are living media subject to ageing that are rarely managed by their owners. 10 52 Considering their composition - mixing of extracted and transported materials form natural origin such as 11 12 53 pozzolana or peat and man-made products such as bricks and compost that all are defined as "artefacts" (IUSS 13 54 2014) – and the way they are implemented, green roofs clearly belong to the "Technosol" Soil Reference Group 14 15 55 (IUSS 2014). Their properties are dominated by the technical origin of their parent materials. Moreover, their 16 56 main attribute is clearly defined under the qualifier "isolatic: having, above technic hard material, above a 17 18 57 geomembrane or above a continuous layer of artefacts starting ≤ 100 cm from the soil surface, soil material 19 58 containing fine earth without any contact to other soil material (e.g. soils on roofs or in pots)” (IUSS 2014). We 20 21 59 already proposed to classify them as Isolatic Technosol (Drainic, Folic, and Transportic) (Bouzouidja et al. 22 60 2016). 23 24 61 As Technosols, GR and especially their substrates are reactive media that can be submitted to an early and fast 25 62 pedogenesis that lead to an evolution of their physical and chemical properties (Séré et al. 2010; Huot et al. 26 27 63 2015; Leguédois et al. 2016). However, actual results about GR evolution are controversial subjects. Evidences 28 29 64 of the evolution with time of the chemical composition of different green roof substrates were demonstrated. 30 65 However the observations are contrasted, as some observed a decrease with time of organic matter in the 31 32 66 substrates (Emilsson et al. 2007), whereas others described an enrichment in both organic carbon and total 33 67 nitrogen contents (Schrader and Boening 2006). Concerning physical characteristics, a study on a 5-years-old 34 35 68 substrate showed that the water holding capacity has increased compared to a new one (Getter et al. 2007), 36 69 whereas Mentens et al. (2006) evidenced the lack of influence of the age of the GR on its hydraulic behaviour. 37 38 70 Very recent works focused on such a target as the highlighting of drastic evolution of GR’s physical properties. 39 71 De-Ville et al. (2015) interestingly described the fact that the upper layers of two different aged substrates have 40 41 72 an increased number of finer particles whereas the lower part exhibited few changes. This increase was 42 73 attributed, amongst other factors, to atmospheric particles deposition and weathering processes. They observed 43 44 74 that the development of roots led to a leaching of organic constituents and a consequent local enrichment in 45 75 organic matter. Finally, the authors also demonstrated a decrease of total porosity, with antagonistic results about 46 47 76 the fine and the open porosities, considering one or the other substrate. As a consequence, De-Ville et al. (2015) 48 77 estimated that such an evolution could influence green roof performances, especially as water regulation is 49 50 78 concerned. These results are absolutely consistent with another study that suggested a decrease of the hydraulic 51 79 performances of a GR due to an evolution of its physical organization (Bouzouidja et al. 2016). All of this work 52 53 80 focuses on the substrate study that has most of time heterogeneous and diverse geographical origin. 54 81 Consequently, the contradictory aspect of performance may be linked to this. 55 56 82 Thus, it appears that soil science is progressively transposing its methods to study physical and chemical 57 83 properties of such an artificial medium as GR substrate. Beyond their WRB classification, do GR behave like 58 59 84 soils? Are they submitted to a fast and intense early pedogenesis like other Technosols? The present work aims 60 61 62 3 63 64 65 85 at: i) defining relevant sampling and measurement strategies to exhibit the evolution of an aged GR substrate 1 86 over time ii) describing such transformations in terms of pedogenic processes. 2 3 87 4 88 2 Materials and methods 5 6 89 2.1 Experimental site 7 90 This work was based on an in situ experimental GR plot settled in Tomblaine (north-east of France, 48°40’N 8 9 91 6°13’E , under temperate climate ).