Cited by 1Climate change and permafrostPolar Research and EcologyRemote Sensing in Agriculture

Finding northernmost baselines: high variability of above-ground biomass on Eurasian polar desert islands

Open access
Zemlianskii, V, Ermokhina, K, Rietze, N, Heim, R, Assmann, J, Rüthi, J, Loginova, N, Schaepman-Strub, G·2025·Environmental Research: Ecology

Abstract

As the Arctic rapidly warms, a major change in its vegetation and biomass is expected. Understanding the current state of Arctic plant biomass is crucial due to its role in the surface energy budget and ecosystem carbon storage yet challenging due to logistical and methodological limitations. Arctic polar deserts are one of the most vulnerable terrestrial biomes on Earth, highly sensitive to climate change, and likely also the most understudied. During the 2021 Arctic Century expedition, we performed vegetation surveys and collected aboveground plant and lichen biomass samples at 8 sites on the Severnaya Zemlya archipelago, Franz Josef Land, Vize, and Uedineniya Islands, filling an important spatial gap in biomass measurements in the Arctic. For these study sites, we explored three different methods for estimating plant and lichen biomass: using (1) in-situ species richness, (2) in-situ cover, and (3) remotely sensed normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) and plant cover. We found no relationship between total in-situ species richness and in-situ biomass, but in-situ lichen species richness significantly predicted lichen biomass. Remotely sensed NDVI had a limited explanatory power for in-situ biomass. However, drone-derived plant cover predicted in-situ biomass measurements well and could thus be used to effectively estimate landscape-level biomass of Arctic polar deserts. Our findings reveal that biomass varies widely among the sites, with an almost complete absence of biomass on Graham-Bell and Komsomolets islands, intermediate levels on October Revolution Inland and Pioneer islands, and maximum biomass found on Vize Island, although the results for this site are highly uncertain. Our findings could be used as a baseline to document future biomass changes in polar deserts. We propose our cover-based approach as an alternative to NDVI-based estimates of polar desert plant and lichen biomass and discuss its uncertainties and limitations.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1088/2752-664x/adf447

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Trends in the Canadian Arctic Archipelago are somewhat mixed, which may be partly due to different observational periods among sensors and observational challenges posed by the very short growing season, persistent cloudiness, and high interannual variability in snowmelt and surface water in High Arctic environments.

    “Trends in the Canadian Arctic Archipelago are somewhat mixed, which may be partly due to different observational periods among sensors, as well as observational challenges posed by the very short growing season, persistent cloudiness, and high interannual variability in snowmelt and surface water in High Arctic environments (Zemlianskii et al. 2025).”

    From NOAA Arctic Report Card 2025: Tundra Greenness (2025) · cites this paper as Zemlianskii et al. 2025

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zemlianskii, V, Ermokhina, K., Rietze, N., Heim, R., Assmann, J., Rüthi, J., Loginova, N., & Schaepman-Strub, G.
Affiliations
  • University of Zurich (CH)
  • Russian Academy of Sciences (RU)
  • Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research (CH)
Corresponding author
  • Zemlianskii, V
  • Ermokhina, K
  • Rietze, N
  • Heim, R
  • Assmann, J
  • Rüthi, J
  • Loginova, N
Venue
Environmental Research: Ecology
Published
2025-08-13
Volume
4
Issue
3
Pages
035006
ISSN
2752-664X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4412714511
Cited by
1
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 1
FWCI
0.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Environmental Research Ecology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • DORA WSL (Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich)
Funders
  • Swiss Government Excellence Scholarship (2019.0075)
  • WSL internal grant (5231.00900.002.01)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Climate change and permafrost
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Polar Research and Ecology
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Remote Sensing in Agriculture
Keywords
aboveground biomass, lichen biomass, plant biomass, biomass estimation methods, species richness, NDVI, Arctic vegetation, Severnaya Zemlya Archipelago, Franz Josef Land, Arctic warming

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review