Land-use and land-management change: relationships with earthworm and fungi communities and soil structural properties

Annals of Occupational and Environmental Medicine

David J Spurgeon⁴  Aidan M Keith¹  Olaf Schmidt³  Dennis R Lammertsma²  Jack H Faber² 

[1] Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Library Avenue, Bailrigg, Lancaster LA1 4AP, UK

[2] Alterra, Wageningen University and Research Centre, P.O. Box 47, 6700 AA Wageningen, Netherlands

[3] UCD School of Agriculture and Food Science, University College Dublin, Dublin 4, Belfield, Ireland

[4] Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Maclean Building, Benson Lane, Crowmarsh Gifford, Wallingford, Oxon OX10 8BB, UK

关键词: Microaggregate stability;    Soil porosity;    Functional biodiversity;    Fungi;    Earthworm;    Meta analysis;   

Others  :  1084962
DOI  :  10.1186/1472-6785-13-46

 received in 2013-07-10, accepted in 2013-11-13,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

Change in land use and management can impact massively on soil ecosystems. Ecosystem engineers and other functional biodiversity in soils can be influenced directly by such change and this in turn can affect key soil functions. Here, we employ meta-analysis to provide a quantitative assessment of the effects of changes in land use and land management across a range of successional/extensification transitions (conventional arable → no or reduced tillage → grassland → wooded land) on community metrics for two functionally important soil taxa, earthworms and fungi. An analysis of the relationships between community change and soil structural properties was also included.

Results

Meta-analysis highlighted a consistent trend of increased earthworm and fungal community abundances and complexity following transitions to lower intensity and later successional land uses. The greatest changes were seen for early stage transitions, such as introduction of reduced tillage regimes and conversion to grassland from arable land. Not all changes, however, result in positive effects on the assessed community metrics. For example, whether woodland conversion positively or negatively affects community size and complexity depends on woodland type and, potentially, the changes in soil properties, such as pH, that may occur during conversion. Alterations in soil communities tended to facilitate subsequent changes in soil structure and hydrology. For example, increasing earthworm abundances and functional group composition were shown to be positively correlated with water infiltration rate (dependent on tillage regime and habitat characteristics); while positive changes in fungal biomass measures were positively associated with soil microaggregate stability.

Conclusions

These findings raise the potential to manage landscapes to increase ecosystem service provision from soil biota in relation to regulation of soil structure and water flow.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Spurgeon et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

Figure 5.

Figure 6.

Figure 7.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Rutgers M, Schouten AJ, Bloem J, van Eekeren N, de Goede RGM, Akkerhuis G, van der Wal A, Mulder C, Brussaard L, Breure AM: Biological measurements in a nationwide soil monitoring network. Eur J Soil Sci 2009, 60(5):820-832.
• [2]Black HIJ, Parekh NR, Chaplow JS, Monson F, Watkins J, Creamer R, Potter ED, Poskitt JM, Rowland P, Ainsworth G, et al.: Assessing soil biodiversity across Great Britain: national trends in the occurrence of heterotrophic bacteria and invertebrates in soil. J Envir Mgmt 2003, 67(3):255-266.
• [3]Griffiths RI, Thomson BC, James P, Bell T, Bailey M, Whiteley AS: The bacterial biogeography of British soils. Environ Microbiol 2011, 13(6):1642-1654.
• [4]Blouin M, Hodson ME, Delgado EA, Baker G, Brussaard L, Butt KR, Dai J, Dendooven L, Peres G, Tondoh JE, et al.: A review of earthworm impact on soil function and ecosystem services. Eur J Soil Sci 2013, 64(2):161-182.
• [5]Lemanceau P: EcoFINDERS characterize biodiversity and the function of soils in Europe 23 partners in 10 European countries and China. Biofutur 2011, 326:56-58.
• [6]Keith AM, Boots B, Hazard C, Niechoj R, Arroyo J, Bending GD, Bolger T, Breen J, Clipson N, Doohan FM, et al.: Cross-taxa congruence, indicators and environmental gradients in soils under agricultural and extensive land management. Eur J Soil Biol 2012, 49:55-62.
• [7]Wardle DA, Walker LR, Bardgett RD: Ecosystem properties and forest decline in contrasting long-term chronosequences. Science, NY 2004, 305(5683):509-513.
• [8]Heemsbergen DA, Berg MP, Loreau M, Van Hal JR, Faber JH, Verhoef HA: Biodiversity effects on soil processes explained by interspecific functional dissimilarity. Science, NY 2005, 306(5698):1019-1020.
• [9]Emmett BA, Reynolds B, Chamberlain PM, Rowe E, Spurgeon D, Brittain SA, Frogbrook Z, Hughes S, Lawlor AJ, Poskitt J, et al.: Countryside survey: soils report from 2007. Wallingford, UK: NERC Centre for Ecology and Hydrology; 2010.
• [10]Gardi C, Montanarella L, Arrouays D, Bispo A, Lemanceau P, Jolivet C, Mulder C, Ranjard L, Römbke J, Rutgers M, Menta C: Soil biodiversity monitoring in Europe: ongoing activities and challenges. Eur J Soil Sci 2009, 60:807-819.
• [11]Spurgeon DJ, Hopkin SP: Seasonal variation in the abundance, biomass and biodiversity of earthworms in soils contaminated with metal emissions from a primary smelting works. J Appl Ecol 1999, 36(1):173-183.
• [12]Lubbers IM, van Groenigen KJ, Fonte SJ, Six J, Brussaard L, van Groenigen JW: Greenhouse-gas emissions from soils increased by earthworms. Nat Clim Change 2013, 3:187-194.
• [13]Jouquet P, Dauber J, Lagerlof J, Lavelle P, Lepage M: Soil invertebrates as ecosystem engineers: intended and accidental effects on soil and feedback loops. Appl Soil Ecol 2006, 32(2):153-164.
• [14]Lavelle P, Decaens T, Aubert M, Barot S, Blouin M, Bureau F, Margerie P, Mora P, Rossi JP: Soil invertebrates and ecosystem services. Eur J Soil Biol 2006, 42:S3-S15.
• [15]Aspiras RB, Allen ON, Harris RF, Chesters G: Aggregate stabilization by filamentous microoganisms. Soil Sci 1971, 112(4):282-284.
• [16]Wright SF, Upadhyaya A: A survey of soils for aggregate stability and glomalin, a glycoprotein produced by hyphae of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi. Plant Soil 1998, 198(1):97-107.
• [17]Alhassoun R: Studies on Factors Affecting the Infiltration Capacity of Agricultural Soils. Brunswick, Germany: Technical University and Julius Kühn-Institute; 2009.
• [18]JohnsonMaynard JL, Umiker KJ, Guy SO: Earthworm dynamics and soil physical properties in the first three years of no-till management. Soil Tillage Res 2007, 94(2):338-345.
• [19]Ouellet G, Lapen DR, Topp E, Sawada M, Edwards M: A heuristic model to predict earthworm biomass in agroecosystems based on selected management and soil properties. Appl Soil Ecol 2008, 39(1):35-45.
• [20]Drenovsky RE, Steenwerth KL, Jackson LE, Scow KM: Land use and climatic factors structure regional patterns in soil microbial communities. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 2010, 19(1):27-39.
• [21]Oehl F, Sieverding E, Ineichen K, Mader P, Boller T, Wiemken A: Impact of land use intensity on the species diversity of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi in agroecosystems of Central Europe. Appl Environ Microbiol 2003, 69(5):2816-2824.
• [22]van der Wal A, van Veen JA, Smant W, Boschker HTS, Bloem J, Kardol P, van der Putten WH, de Boer W: Fungal biomass development in a chronosequence of land abandonment. Soil Biol Biochem 2006, 38(1):51-60.
• [23]Peres G, Piron D, Bellido A, Goater C, Cluzeau D: Earthworms used as indicators of agricultural managements. Fresenius Environ Bull 2008, 17(8b):1181-1189.
• [24]Lee KE: Earthworms: Their Ecology and Relationships with Soils and Land Use. North Ryde, Australia: Academic Press; 1985.
• [25]van Capelle C, Schrader S, Brunotte J: Tillage-induced changes in the functional diversity of soil biota - a review witha focus on German data. Eur J Soil Biol 2012, 50:165-181.
• [26]Brussaard L, de Ruiter PC, Brown GG: Soil biodiversity for agricultural sustainability. Agric Ecosyst Environ 2007, 121(3):233-244.
• [27]Bach EM, Baer SG, Meyer CK, Six J: Soil texture affects soil microbial and structural recovery during grassland restoration. Soil Biol Biochem 2010, 42(12):2182-2191.
• [28]Kennedy PG, Hortal S, Bergemann SE, Bruns TD: Competitive interactions among three ectomycorrhizal fungi and their relation to host plant performance. J Ecol 2007, 95:1338-1345.
• [29]Muys B, Lust N, Granval P: Effects of grassland afforestation with different tree species on earthworm communities, litter decomposition and nutrient status. Soil Biol Biochem 1992, 24:1459-1466.
• [30]Reich PB, Oleksyn J, Modrzynski J, Mrozinski P, Hobbie SE, Eissenstat DM, Chorover J, Chadwick OA, Hale CM, Tjoelker MG: Linking litter calcium, earthworms and soil properties: a common garden test with 14 tree species. Ecol Lett 2005, 8:811-818.
• [31]Hobbie SE, Reich PB, Oleksyn J, Ogdahl M, Zytkowiak R, Hale C, Karolewski P: Tree species effects on decomposition and forest floor dynamics in a common garden. Ecology 2006, 87:2288-2297.
• [32]Garcia MG, Marino F, Mato S: Effect of the diet on growth and reproduction of Eisenia andrei (Oligochaeta, Lumbricidae) reared in individual cultures. Pedobiologia 1999, 43(3):267-275.
• [33]Spurgeon DJ, Hopkin SP: Effects of variations of the organic-matter content and pH of soils on the availability and toxicity of zinc to the earthworm Eisenia fetida. Pedobiologia 1996, 40(1):80-96.
• [34]Augusto L, Ranger J, Binkley D, Rothe A: Impact of several common tree species of European temperate forests on soil fertility. Ann For Sci 2002, 59(3):233-253.
• [35]Rao CS, Sharma GD, Shukla AK: Distribution of ectomycorrhizal fungi in pure stands of different age groups of Pinus kesiya. Can J Microbiol 1997, 43(1):85-91.
• [36]Weiler M: An infiltration model based on flow variability in macropores: development, sensitivity analysis and applications. J Hydrol 2005, 310(1–4):294-315.
• [37]Nuutinen V, Pitkanen J, Kuusela E, Widbom T, Lohilahti H: Spatial variation of an earthworm community related to soil properties and yield in a grass-clover field. Appl Soil Ecol 1998, 8(1–3):85-94.
• [38]Ernst G, Felten D, Vohland M, Emmerling C: Impact of ecologically different earthworm species on soil water characteristics. Eur J Soil Biol 2009, 45(3):207-213.
• [39]Francis GS, Fraser PM: The effects of three earthworm species on soil macroporosity and hydraulic conductivity. Appl Soil Ecol 1998, 10(1–2):11-19.
• [40]Bottinelli N, Henry-des-Tureaux T, Hallaire V, Mathieu J, Benard Y, Tran TD, Jouquet P: Earthworms accelerate soil porosity turnover under watering conditions. Geoderma 2010, 156(1–2):43-47.
• [41]Bardgett RD, Anderson JM, Behan-Pelletier V, Brussaard L, Coleman DC, Ettema C, Moldenke A, Schimel JP, Wall DH: The influence of soil biodiversity on hydrological pathways and the transfer of materials between terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. Ecosystems 2001, 4(5):421-429.
• [42]Wright SF, Starr JL, Paltineanu IC: Changes in aggregate stability and concentration of glomalin during tillage management transition. Soil Sci Soc Am J 1999, 63(6):1825-1829.
• [43]Curaqueo G, Acevedo E, Cornejo P, Seguel A, Rubio R, Borie F: Tillage effect on soil organic matter, mycorrhizal hyphae and aggregates in a mediterranean agroecosystem. J Plant Nutr Soil Sci 2010, 10(1):12-21.
• [44]Giller PS: The diversity of soil communities, the ‘poor man’s tropical rainforest’. Biodivers Conserv 1996, 5(2):135-168.
• [45]Fitter AH, Gilligan CA, Hollingworth K, Kleczkowski A, Twyman RM, Pitchford JW, Programme NSB: Biodiversity and ecosystem function in soil. Funct Ecol 2005, 19(3):369-377.
• [46]Treseder KK: A meta-analysis of mycorrhizal responses to nitrogen, phosphorus, and atmospheric CO2 in field studies. New Phytol 2004, 164(2):347-355.
• [47]Millenium Ecosystem Assessment: Ecosystems and Human Well-Being Synthesis. Washington, DC: Island Press; 2005.
• [48]Collaboration for Environmental Evidence: Guidelines for Systematic Review and Evidence Synthesis in Environmental Management. Environmental Evidence; 2013. [vol. Version 4.2] http://www.environmentalevidence.org/Authors.htm/Guidelines webcite 4.2.pdf
• [49]Pullin AS, Stewart GB: Guidelines for systematic review in conservation and environmental management. Conserv Biol 2006, 20(6):1647-1656.
• [50]Soane BD, Ball BC, Arvidsson J, Basch G, Moreno F, Roger-Estrade J: No-till in northern, western and south-western Europe: a review of problems and opportunities for crop production and the environment. Soil Tillage Res 2012, 118:66-87.
• [51]R Development Core Team: R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2012.