Advertisement

Ecological Research

, Volume 32, Issue 4, pp 511–521 | Cite as

Relationships among site characteristics, taxonomical structure and functional trait distribution of arthropods in forest, urban and agricultural soils of Southern Italy

  • Giulia Maisto
  • Vittoria Milano
  • Lucia Santorufo
Original Article

Abstract

Urbanization and agriculture cause alterations in soil biodiversity. As arthropods quickly respond to soil changes, they have been recognized as good indicators of soil quality. This study aimed to evaluate if (1) soil physico-chemical properties act as environmental filters of the functional trait distribution of soil arthropod community; (2) the abundance of certain functional traits is linked to different land uses; (3) the taxonomical and functional approaches provide complementary information about the evaluation of biological soil quality. The study was performed at forest, agricultural and urban sites in downtown and surroundings of Naples. The soils were characterized for texture, pH, organic matter content, water content, total Cd, Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb and Zn concentrations. The forest soils showed the highest organic matter and water contents, and the lowest metal concentrations; the agricultural soils showed the lowest organic matter and water contents and high Cd and Cu concentrations, whereas the urban soils showed high Pb and Zn concentrations. The forest soils showed the highest arthropod density, taxa richness and diversity. The distribution of the functional traits in the arthropod communities of the different land uses highlighted similarity only for the preference to occupy soil and for the percentage contribution of detritivores. The abundance of arthropods living above litter and omnivores were positively correlated to Pb and Zn concentrations, whereas predators were positively correlated to Cu concentrations. The findings suggest that the arthropod identification at order level could be enough to detect differences in functional traits among forest, urban, and agricultural soils.

Keywords

Land use Arthropod diversity Microhabitat preferences Trophic classes Heavy metals 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was funded by the Dipartimento di Biologia, Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II, Italy. The authors wish to thank their colleagues of the BETSI project (FRB-CESAB) for their work on functional traits, and Miss Roberta Leandri for English revision.

Supplementary material

11284_2017_1464_MOESM1_ESM.docx (20 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 21 kb)

References

  1. Alberti M (2010) Maintaining ecological integrity and sustaining ecosystem function in urban areas. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2:178–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allen SE (1989) Chemical analysis of ecological materials, vol 324, 2nd edn. Blackwell Scientific Publications, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  3. Andrés P, Mateos E (2006) Soil mesofaunal responses to post-mining restoration treatments. Appl Soil Ecol 33:67–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Auclerc A, Ponge JF, Barot S, Dubs F (2009) Experimental assessment of habitat preference and dispersal ability of soil springtails. Soil Biol Biochem 41:1596–1604CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Auclerc A, Nahmani J, Aran D, Baldy V, Callot H, Gers C, Iorio E, Lapied E, Lassauce A, Pasquet A, Spelda J, Rossi J-P, Guérold F (2012) Changes in soil macroinvertebrate communities following liming of acidified forested catchments in the Vosges Mountains (North-eastern France). Ecol Eng 42:260–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Behan-Pelletier VM (2003) Acari and Collembola biodiversity in Canadian agricultural soils. Can J Soil Sci 83:279–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Borror DJ, Triplehorn CA, Johnson NF (1989) An introduction to the study of insects, 6th edn. Saunder College Publishing, Fort WorthGoogle Scholar
  8. Brussaard L, Behan-Pelletier VM, Bignell DE, Brown VK, Didden W, Folgarait P, Fragoso C, Freckman DW, Gupta VVSR, Hattori T, Hawksworth DL, Klopatek C, Lavelle P, Malloch DW, Rusek J, Soderstrom B, Tiedje JM, Virginia RA (1997) Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning in soil. Ambio 26:563–570Google Scholar
  9. Burges N, Raw F (1967) Soil biology. Academic Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  10. Chevene F, Doléadec S, Chessel D (1994) A fuzzy coding approach for the analysis of long-term ecological data. Freshw Biol 31:295–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cortet J, Rone D, Poinsot-Balaguer N, Beaufreton C, Chabert A, Viaux P, Cancela da Fonseca JP (2002) Impacts of different agricultural practices on the biodiversity of microarthropod communities in arable crop systems. Eur J Soil Biol 33:365–372Google Scholar
  12. Davis AP, Burns M (1999) Evaluation of lead concentration in runoff from painted structure. Water Res 33:2949–2958CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Davis AP, Shokouhian M, Ni S (2001) Loading 349 estimates of lead, copper, cadmium, and zinc in urban runoff from specific sources. Chemosphere 44:997–1009CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. De Nicola F, Maisto G, Alfani A (2003) Assessment of nutritional status and trace element contamination of holm oak woodlands through analyses of leaves and surrounding soils. Sci Total Environ 311:191–203CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Dindal DL (1990) Soil biology guide. Wiley, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  16. Eeva T, Sorvari J, Koivunen V (2004) Effects of heavy metal pollution on red wood ant (Formica s. str.) populations. Environ Pollut 132:533–539CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Eitminaviciute I (2006) Microarthropod communities in anthropogenic urban soils. Structure of microarthropod complexes in soils of roadside lawns. Entomol Rev 86:128–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Espinosa AJF, Rodríquez MT, Barragán de la Rosa FJ, Sánchez JCJ (2001) Size distribution of metals in urban aerosols in Seville (Spain). Atmos Environ 35:2595–2601CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fiera C (2009) Biodiversity of Collembola in urban soils and their use as bioindicators for pollution. Pesqui Agropecu Bras 44:868–873CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gardi C, Tomaselli M, Parisi V, Petraglia A, Santini C (2002) Soil quality indicators and biodiversity in northern Italian permanent grasslands. Eur J Soil Biol 38:103–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Garnier E, Cortez J, Billès G, Navas ML, Roumet C, Debussche M, Laurent G, Blanchard A, Aubry D, Bellmann A, Neill C, Toussaint JP (2004) Plant functional markers capture ecosystem properties during secondary succession. Ecology 85:2630–2637CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gillet S, Ponge JP (2003) Changes in species assemblages and diets of Collembola along a gradient of metal pollution. Appl Soil Ecol 22:127–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Goddard MA, Dougill AJ, Benton TG (2009) Scaling up from gardens: biodiversity conservation in urban environments. Trends Ecol Evol 25:90–98CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Gongalsky KB, Filimonova ZV, Zaitsev AS (2010) Relationship between soil invertebrate abundance and soil heavy metal contents in the environs of the Kosogorsky metallurgical plant, Tula Oblast. Russ J Ecol 41:67–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Haaland C, van den Bosch CK (2015) Challenges and strategies for urban green-space planning in cities undergoing densification: a review. Urban For Urban Green 14:760–771CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hamza MA, Anderson WK (2005) Soil compaction in cropping systems. A review of the nature, causes and possible solutions. Soil Till Res 82:121–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Haynes RJ (2000) Labile organic matter as an indicator of organic matter quality in arable and pastoral soils in New Zealand. Soil Biol Biochem 32:211–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. He ZL, Yang XE, Stoffella PJ (2005) Trace elements in agroecosystems and impacts on the environment. J Trace Elem Med Biol 19:125–140CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Hedde M, van Oort F, Lamy I (2012) Functional traits of soil invertebrates as indicators for exposure to soil disturbance. Environ Pollut 164:59–65CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Kotze J, Venn S, Niemelä J, Spence J (2011) Effects of urbanization on the ecology of evolution of arthropods. In: Niemelä J, Breuste J, Elmqvist T, Guntenspergen G, James PP, McIntyre N (eds) Urban ecology—patterns, 398 processes, and applications. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 159–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lavelle P, Spain AV (2001) Soil ecology. Kluwer Academic Publishers, DordrechtCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lavelle P, Decaëns T, Aubert M, Barot S, Blouin M, Bureau F, Margarie P, Mora P, Rossi J-P (2006) Soil invertebrates and ecosystem services. Eur J Soil Biol 42:S3–S15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lgs D. 99/92 (1992) Attuazione della direttiva 86/278/CEE concernente la protezione dell’ambiente, in particolare del suolo, nell’utilizzazione dei fanghi di depurazione in agricolturaGoogle Scholar
  34. Lgs D. 152/2006 (2006) Supplemento Ordinario n. 96 Gazzetta Ufficiale n. 88 del 14 aprile 2006Google Scholar
  35. Maisto G, Alfani A, Baldantoni D, De Marco A, Virzo De Santo A (2004) Trace metals in the soil and in Q. ilex L. leaves at anthropic and remote sites of the Campania Region of Italy. Geoderma 122:269–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Maisto G, De Nicola F, Iovieno P, Prati MV, Alfani A (2006) PAHs and trace elements in volcanic urban and natural soils. Geoderma 136:20–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Maisto G, Santorufo L, Milano V, Arena C (2016) Relationships between Quercus ilex L. litter characteristics and soil microarthropod community in an urban environment at different climatic conditions. Appl Soil Ecol 99:98–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Makkonen M, Berg MP, van Hal JR, Callaghan TV, Press MC, Aerts R (2011) Traits explain the responses of a sub-arctic Collembola community to climate manipulation. Soil Biol Biochem 43:377–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Matson PA, Parton WJ, Power AG, Swift MJ (1997) Agricultural intensification and ecosystem properties. Science 277:504CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. McIntyre NE, Rango J, Fagan WF, Faeth SH (2001) Ground arthropod community structure in a heterogeneous urban environment. Landsc Urban Plan 52:257–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. McLauchlan K (2006) The nature and longevity of 424 agricultural impacts on soil carbon and nutrients: a review. Ecosystems 9:1364–1382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Nahmani J, Lavelle P, Rossi JP (2006) Does changing the taxonomical resolution alter the value of soil macroinvertebrates as bioindicators of metal pollution? Soil Biol Biochem 38:385–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Parisi V, Menta C, Gardi C, Jacomini C, Mozzanica E (2005) Microarthropod communities as a tool to assess soil quality and biodiversity: a new approach in Italy. Agric Ecosyst Environ 105:323–333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Pielou EC (1969) An introduction to mathematical ecology. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  45. Postma-Blaauw MA, de Goede RGM, Bloem J, Faber JH, Brussaard L (2012) Agricultural intensification and de-intensification differentially affect taxonomic diversity of predatory mites, earthworms, enchytraeids, nematodes 450 and bacteria. Appl Soil Ecol 57:39–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Pouyat RV, Yesilonis ID, Dombos M, Szlavecz K, Setälä H, Cilliers S, Hormung E, Kotze K, Yarwood S (2015) A global comparison of surface soil characteristics across five cities: a test of the urban ecosystem convergence hypothesis. Soil Sci 180:136–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Salminen J, Van Gestel CAM, Oksanen J (2001) Pollution-induced community tolerance and functional redundancy in a decomposer food web in metal-stressed soil. Environ Toxicol Chem 20:2287–2295CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Salmon S, Ponge JF (2012) Species traits and habitats in springtail communities. A regional scale study. Pedobiologia 55:295–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Santorufo L, Cortet J, Arena C, Goundon R, Rakoto A, Morel JL, Maisto G (2014) An assessment of the influence of the urban environment on collembolan communities in soils using taxonomy- and trait-based approaches. Appl Soil Ecol 78:48–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Santorufo L, Cortet J, Nahmani J, Pernin C, Salmon S, Pernot A, Morel JL, Maisto G (2015) Responses of functional and taxonomic collembolan community structure to site management in Mediterranean urban and surrounding areas. Eur J Soil Biol 70:46–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Sattler T, Duelli P, Obrist MK, Arlettaz R, Moretti M (2010) Response of arthropod species richness and functional groups to urban habitat structure and management. Landsc Ecol 25:941–954CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Shannon CE (1948) A mathematical theory of communication. Bell Syst Tech J 27:379–423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Stevenson FJ (1982) Humus chemistry: genesis, composition, reactions. Wiley, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  54. Sutton PM, Athanasouils M, Flessel P, Guirguis G, Haan M, Schlag R, Goldman LR (1995) Lead levels in the household environment of children in three high-risk communities in California. Environ Res 68:45–57CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Turbé A, De Toni A, Benito P, Lavelle P, Ruiz N, Van der Putten WH, Labouze E, Mudgal S (2010) Soil biodiversity: functions, threats and tools for policy makers. Report for European Commission (DG Environment). Bio Intelligence Service, IRD, NIOOGoogle Scholar
  56. US-EPA (1996) Method 3050. Acid digestion of sediments, sludges and soils. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  57. Vandewalle M, De Bello F, Berg MP, Bolger T, Dolédec S, Dubs F, Feld CK, Harrington R, Harrison PA, Lavorel S, Martins da Silva P, Moretti M, Niemela J, Santos P, Sattler T, Sousa JP, Sykes MT, Vanbergen AJ, Woodcock BA (2010) Functional traits as indicators of biodiversity response to land use changes across ecosystems and organisms. Biodivers Conser 19:2921–2947CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Wallwork JA (1970) Ecology of soil animals. McGraw-Hill, LondonGoogle Scholar
  59. Wardle DA (1995) Impacts of disturbance on detritus food webs in agro-ecosystems of contrasting tillage and weed management practices. Adv Ecol Res 26:105–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Yeates GW, Bardgett RD, Cook R, Hobbs PJ, Bowling PJ, Potter JF (1997) Faunal and microbial diversity in three Welsh grassland soils under conventional and organic management regimes. J Appl Ecol 34:453–470CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Ecological Society of Japan 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Giulia Maisto
    • 1
  • Vittoria Milano
    • 1
    • 2
  • Lucia Santorufo
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Dipartimento di BiologiaUniversità degli Studi di Napoli Federico IINaplesItaly
  2. 2.UMR CEFE 5175, Université de Montpellier, EPHE, Université Paul-Valéry MontpellierMontpellier CedexFrance
  3. 3.Groupe ISALaboratoire Genie Civile et GeoenvironnementLilleFrance

Personalised recommendations