Hi Niels,

Thanks a lot, that's not the one I was thinking of, but will look through to see what I find.

Cheers,

Phil

Hi Phil,

Kate Buckeridge measured snowpack nutrient contents, see Buckeridge & Grogan - Biogeochemistry (2010) 101:105–121 DOI 10.1007/s10533-010-9426-5

Re: potential snowfence bias. Summer shading from the fences themselves... is this for something in particular?

Hope all is well.

Cheers,

Casper

Hi Casper,

Good to hear from you and thanks for the article suggestion, I'll check it out.

I found the one I was originally thinking of:

Fahnestock J, Povirk K, Welker JJM (2000) Ecological significance of litter redistribution by wind and snow in arctic landscapes. Ecography, 23, 623–631.

They use the big fences in Toolik to analyze the litter directly after snow melt. Apparently they have quite clear and visible litter input onto the snow fence snow drift there, they are writing about several cm of litter addition compared to the controls. That's not the case in the Adventdalen fences where I'm working on (again), where there is no material visible in the snow.

We analyzed snow from there to see if there are differences in inorganic nutrient concentrations, i.e. to check if some of the artifacts that the Toolik fences see is relevant for us. Preliminary analyses show that the fences do not attract more or less nutrients, but this is very early and might change. A maybe more interesting side effect of the study so far is, that NO3 and NH4 concentrations in the snow are not too low in general and might (or might not, depending on how one wants to argue) be relevant inputs for the ecosystem. There have been a couple of studies on pure snow chemistry so far which I'm reviewing at the moment, and I hope to be able to bridge the gap between snow chemistry and ecology in this manuscript.

Anyway, thanks for the article suggestions, I hope all is fine!

Cheers,

Phil