Wetlands Ecology and Management

, Volume 27, Issue 1, pp 149–156 | Cite as

Assessing the effects of mesh enclosures on invertebrates and litter breakdown in a floodplain forest of the Southeastern USA

  • Bryana M. BushEmail author
  • Michael D. Ulyshen
  • Conor G. Fair
  • Darold P. Batzer
Original Paper


The litter bag method has been used to study litter breakdown for over 50 years but remains a criticized technique. One major criticism is the effect of mesh enclosures, specifically the use of two or more mesh sizes to evaluate the role of arthropods, on litter breakdown. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a new basket-style mesh enclosure in mitigating microclimatic mesh effects while still excluding invertebrates. We evaluated five basket treatments constructed from 300-µm mesh: no basket, closed basket, closed basket with bottom slits, open basket, and open basket with bottom slits, which held invasive Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense) litter on the Oconee-River floodplain, GA, USA. After 134 days, we found that temperature and humidity did not vary among treatments but that litter breakdown rates (k) and invertebrate composition were different among treatments. Litter breakdown was faster in the no basket treatment (the most open treatment) than in closed baskets without slits (the most closed treatment). Microinvertebrates were not effectively excluded from baskets but most macroinvertebrates were excluded from baskets (open and closed) without slits, except for some small predators. Unexpectedly, we found some evidence that using litter bags of two different mesh sizes may have a secondary trophic effect on litter breakdown, further complicating how best to evaluate the impact of arthropods on litter breakdown.


Litter breakdown Mesh Invertebrate Microclimate Floodplain Chinese privet 



The authors thank the USDA Forest Service and the University of Georgia for the use of forest and university lands, and Scott Horn, William Bush, and Yared Aklilu for field and laboratory help. This project was funded by the USDA Forest Service, Southern Research Station.


This project was funded by the USDA Forest Service, Southern Research Station. No specific grant was used.


  1. Benfield EF (2007) Decomposition of leaf material. In: Hauer FR, Lamberti GA (eds) Methods in stream ecology, 2nd edn. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 711–720CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bocock KL, Gilbert OJW (1957) The disappearance of leaf litter under different woodland conditions. Plant Soil 9:179–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bokhorst S, Wardle DA (2013) Microclimate within litter bags of different mesh size: implications for the ‘arthropod effect’ on litter decomposition. Soil Biol Biochem 58:147–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bradford MA, Tordoff GM, Eggers T, Jones TH, Newington JE (2002) Microbiota, fauna, and mesh size interactions in litter decomposition. Oikos 99:317–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Coleman DC, Crossley DA Jr, Hendrix PF (2004) Chapter 9: Laboratory and field exercises in soil ecology. In: Coleman DC, Crossley DA, Hendrix PF (eds) Fundamentals of soil ecology, 2nd edn. Academic Press, Burlington, pp 299–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Couteaux M, Bottner P, Berg B (1995) Litter decomposition, climate and litter quality. Trends Ecol Evol 10:63–66CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Crossley DA, Hoglund MP (1962) A litter-bag method for the study of microarthropods inhabiting leaf litter. Ecology 43:571–573CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hanula JL, Horn S, Taylor JW (2009) Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense) removal and its effect on native plant communities of riparian forests. Invasive Plant Sci Manag 2:292–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kampichler C, Bruckner A (2009) The role of microarthropods in terrestrial decomposition: a meta-analysis of 40 years of litterbag studies. Biol Rev 84:375–389CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Lobe JW (2012) Effects of the removal of the invasive shrub, Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense), on soil properties and earthworm communities. Thesis, University of GeorgiaGoogle Scholar
  11. Mitchell JD, Lockaby BG, Brantley EF (2011) Influence of Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense) on decomposition and nutrient availability in riparian forests. Invasive Plant Sci Manag 4:437–447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Pinheiro J, Bates D, DebRoy S, Sarkar D, R Core Team (2017) nlme: Linear and nonlinear mixed effects models. R package version 3.1-131.
  13. Prescott CE (2005) Do rates of litter decomposition tell us anything we really need to know? For Ecol Manag 220:66–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. R Core Team (2017) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.
  15. Stoklosa AM, Ulyshen MD, Fan Z, Varner M, Seibold S, Müller J (2016) Effects of mesh bag enclosure and termites on fine woody debris decomposition in a subtropical forest. Basic Appl Ecol 17:463–470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ulyshen MD (2014) Interacting effects of insects and flooding on wood decomposition. PLoS ONE 9:e101867CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. Ulyshen MD, Müller J, Seibold S (2016) Bark coverage and insects influence wood decomposition: direct and indirect effects. Appl Soil Ecol 105:25–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bryana M. Bush
    • 1
    Email author
  • Michael D. Ulyshen
    • 2
  • Conor G. Fair
    • 1
  • Darold P. Batzer
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of EntomologyUniversity of GeorgiaAthensUSA
  2. 2.USDA Forest Service, Southern Research StationAthensUSA

Personalised recommendations