Co-occurrence pattern of ground beetle (Coleoptera, Carabidae) assemblages along pollution gradient in scotch pine forest
Over the last 30 years there has been a great deal of interest in investigating patterns of species co-occurrence across space and time, which may be shaped by interspecific competition for shared resources. A good model of co-occurrence mechanisms is developed among predatory animals along a pollution gradient, where shared resources become more limited in more contaminated areas and the energy budget for detoxification is much higher. Community disassembly by heavy metal pollution may occur when the presence of toxic elements shifts patterns of species co-occurrence from structured to random. On the other hand, limited resources on a pollution gradient should lead to higher competition between dominant species. Disassembly may entail the loss of existing co-evolved interactions among species, which has ramifications for community dynamics and the quality of the functioning of polluted ecosystems. We expect an assemblage dominated by competitive species interactions to exhibit a significant segregation of taxa, whereas one dominated by mutualistic or syntrophic interactions would exhibit an aggregation of taxa. Responses of Carabidae co-occurrence patterns and changes in body size measures to heavy metal concentrations were investigated in a zinc contamination gradient in a Scots pine forest in the vicinity of Olkusz (southern Poland), at 12 study sites. The zinc concentration in the humus layer varied between 108 mg kg−1 dw to 6150 mg kg−1 dw. We used the C-score index, between all possible species pairs in a matrix. The ground beetle assemblages from the reference sites showed a significant segregation pattern. Community disassembly occurred only among assemblages in heavily polluted sites. The average value of skewness and kurtosis were significantly higher in the highly contaminated sites, indicating the greater proportion of small-bodied species in contaminated areas. The Gini coefficient was highest in the low contaminated sites, indicating the body-size inequality of carabid assemblages was greatest in the uncontaminated areas. Our data suggest that increased pollution contributes to the extinction of sensitive forest specialists with large body size and higher competitive abilities, leading to replacement by less sensitive generalists, with smaller body size and that the co-occurrence of species on heavily polluted sites is a result of unstable interactions between species in communities.
KeywordsBody size Carabidae Contamination C-score Heavy metals
low contaminated localities
high contaminated localities
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
This study was supported by DS-3337/KEKiOP.
- Aleksandrowicz, O.R. 2004. Biegaczowate (Carabidae). In: Bogdanowicz, W., E. Chudzińska, I. Pilipiuk, and E. Skibińska (eds.), Fauna Polski – charakterystyka i wykaz gatunków. Muzeum i Instytut Zoologii PAN. Warszawa. I: 28–42 [In Polish].Google Scholar
- Bayley, M., E. Baatrup, U. Heimbach and P. Bjerregaard. 1995. Elevated Cooper Levels during larval development cause altered locomotor behavior in the adult carabid beetle Pterostichus cupreus L. (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Ecotoxicol. Environ.Safety 32:166–170.Google Scholar
- Bednarska, A.J., I. Portka, P.E. Kramarz and R. Laskowski. 2009. Combined effect of environmental pollutants (nickel, chlorpyrifos) and temperature on the ground beetle, Pterostichus oblongopunctatus (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 28:864–872.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Brandl R. and W. Topp. 1985. Size structure of Pterostichus spp. (Carabidae): aspects of competition. Oikos 44:234–238.Google Scholar
- Butovsky, R.O. 2011. Heavy metals in carabids (Coleoptera, Carabidae). In: Kotze DJ, Assmann T, Noordijk J, Turin H, Vermeulen R (eds.), Carabid beetles as bioindicators: biogeographical, ecological and environmental studies. ZooKeys 100:215–222.Google Scholar
- Cody, M. L. and J. M. Diamond (eds). 1975. Ecology and Evolution of Communities. Harvard University Press, Cambridge., New York.Google Scholar
- Diamond, J. M. 1975. Assembly of species communities. In: M. L. Cody and J. M. Diamond (eds), Ecology and Evolution of Communities. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, USA, pp. 342–444.Google Scholar
- Gallagher, F., I. Pechmann, J.E. Bogden, J. Grabosky and P. Weis. 2008. Soil metal concentartions and productivity of Betula populifolia (gray birch) as measured by field spectometry and incremental annula growth in an abandoned urban Brownfield in New Jersey. Environ. Pollut. 156:699–706.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Hammer, Ø., D.A.T Harper and P.D. Ryan. 2001. Past: Paleontological Statistics Software Package for Education and Data Analysis. Palaeontologia Electronica 4:9.Google Scholar
- Holmstrup, M., A.M. Bindesbøl, G.J. Oostingh, A. Duschl, V. Scheil, H.R. Köhler, S. Loureiro, A.M. Soares, A.L. Ferreira, C. Kienle, A. Gerhardt, R. Laskowski, P. Kramarz, M. Bayley, C. Svendsen and D.J. Spurgeon. 2010. Interactions between effects of environmental chemicals and natural stressors: a review. Sci. Total Environ. 408(18):3746–62.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Hurka, K. 1996. Carabidae of the Czech and Slowak Republics. Kabourek, Zlin.Google Scholar
- Skalski, T, D. Stone, P. Kramarz and R. Laskowski. 2010. Ground beetle community responses to heavy metal contamination. Baltic J. Coleopterol. 10(1):1 – 12.Google Scholar
- Skalski, T, K. Gargasz and R. Laskowski. 2011. Does of mixed diffuse pollution degrease ground beetle diversity? Baltic J. Coleopterol. 11(1):1–15.Google Scholar
- Skalski, T, R. Kędzior, D. Kolbe and S. Knutelski. 2015a. Ground beetles as indicators of heavy metal pollution in forests. Sylwan 159:905–911.Google Scholar
- Skalski, T., R. Kędzior, D. Kolbe and S. Knutelski. 2015b. Different responses of epigeic beetles to heavy metal contamination depending on functional traits at the family level. Baltic J. Coleopterol. 15(2):81–90.Google Scholar
- StatSoft. 2012. STATISTICA (data analysis software system), version 12.0. http://www.statsoft.com.
- Szafer, W. and K. Zarzycki. 1972. Szata roślinna Polski. Tom II, PWN, Warszawa.Google Scholar
- Szyszko, J. 1983. Methods of macrofauna investigations. In: Szujecki A, Szyszko J, Mazur S, Perliński S (eds). The Process of Forest Soil Macrofauna Formation after Afforestation of Farmland. Warsaw Agricultural University Press, Warsaw. pp. 10–16.Google Scholar
- Ulrich, W., K. Komosiński and M. Zalewski. 2008. Body size and biomass distributions of carrion visiting beetles: do cities host smaller species? Ecol. Res. 23:241–248.Google Scholar
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.