215 
Table 1 
Prudhoe Bay Standing Crop data and plot description 
Ave. Standing Crop (g m2)  % Total Standing Crop 
No. of Depth of Humus Soil Runoff 
Lichen Vascular Vascular % Soil Thaw* Layer Conductivity ** Soil Runoff Conductivity 
Tine) 
Plot*** Species Lichen Mosses Plants Lichens Mosses Plants Moisture (cm) (cm) (uzmho cm pH pH (umho cm!) 
| (0) 0.0 926.2 212.9 0.0 81.3 18.7 104 D=19.9 8.0 779 7A 7-5 374 
T=33.3 
Wl 4 3.9 314.0 254.1 0.7 54.9 44.4 80 D=22.3 5.2 362 70 66 409 
T=31.5 
Hl 10 55:3 95.3 204.9 15.6 26.8 57.6 19 D=40.8 iler/ 405 7.6 a 174 
T=51.6 
IV 11 44.1 281.7 247.1 Tad. 49.2 43.1 108 D=116 46 390 66 7.8 143 
T=21.4 
Vv (0) 0.0 1572.8 171.7 0.0 90.2 9.8 37 21.9 444 Te 7.8 373 
vi 1 (crustose) 0.0 14.9 24 43.5 1.1 2140 TH 7/833 373 
vil 14 83.1 27.5 470.0 14.3 47 81.0 26 D=33.1 1 270 7.1 7.1 222 
T=46.8 
Vill 8 54.6 461.3 251.8 7.1 60.1 32.8 52 D=156 4.3 421 7.6 7.1 222 
T=35.5 
* As of 7/13/72. D = depressions, T = tussocks 
5:1 dilution (deionized water), 18-19 hrs. later filtered through No. 120 soil sieve 
Plot | — wet meadow in old lake bottom; (T10N, R14E, Section 4) 
Plot Il — edge of ridge around old lake bed; moist meadow; (T10N, R14E, Section 4) 
Plot IIl — top of ‘Fox Ridge” W of pingo; very dry, sandy soil; elev. 15 m (T11N, R14E, Section 33) 
Plot 1V — 100 m N of drill pad F; wet meadow; low-center polygons and many tussocks present (T11N, R13E, Section 2) 
Plot V — near Prudhoe Bay docks, 75 m from coast; moist meadow, dense moss cover (T11N, R15E, Section 16) 
Plot VI — (5 x 5 m) near Prudhoe Bay docks, 39 m E of plot V; very dry, barren high-center polygons; high salinity; crustose lichen 
cover (not weighed) more than 50% (T11N, R15E, Section 16) 
Plot VII — S flank of Michele pingo, heavy vascular cover; very dry, sandy soil; elev. = 14m (T11N, R13E, Section 5) 
Plot VIII — (5 x 5m) on stream terrace 0.7 km SW of Michele pingo; well drained, grassy area (T11N, R13E, Section 5) 
U.S. Tundra Biome site 4 at Barrow, which had 
nearly identical moisture contents but highly 
divergent lichen standing crops that were 
inversely related to moss biomass. 
Several other abiotic parameters showed a 
correlation with lichen biomass, although these 
are interpreted as being secondary reflections of 
soil moisture. For example, somewhat higher 
lichen standing crops were observed on sites 
with a greater depth of thaw and on sites with a 
thinner humus layer. However, this was prob- 
ably a ramification of the fact that dry sites 
generally had greater depth to permafrost and 
also less vascular plant and bryophyte cover, the 
latter of which would be responsible for thinner 
humus layers. 
The pH and conductivity of soil and runoff 
water did not appear to have an effect on the 
differential distribution of plants, as there was 
little variation among the samples. The only 
exception to this was the high salinity of plot 
VI. On that site a sterile white crustose lichen 
covered more than 50% of the surface area, 
while mosses were completely absent, and 
vascular plants were present only as isolated 
shoots. The sparsity of plant life in plot VI is 
not surprising in view of the well-known fact 
that most terrestrial plants are intolerant of high 
salt concentrations. 
Acknowledgments 
These studies were supported by a National 
Science Foundation grant to Ohio State Univer- 
sity, and logistics at Prudhoe were provided 
through the Prudhoe Bay Environmental Sub- 
committee support at the Tundra Biome Center, 
University of Alaska. 
