Seasonal fluctuation of oribatid mite communities in forest microhabitats

Abstract

Oribatid mites are abundant and diverse decomposers in almost all terrestrial microhabitats, especially in temperate forests. Although their functional importance in the decomposition system in these forests has been investigated, spatio-temporal patterns of oribatid mite communities inhabiting different microhabitats have largely been neglected. Therefore, we (i) investigated seasonal fluctuation (monthly over one year) in oribatid-mite community structure and specificity to three microhabitats (moss, dead wood and litter) and (ii) analyzed the influence of air temperature and overall air humidity on seasonal community changes. In total, 57,398 adult oribatid mite individuals were collected. Total abundance, species richness and diversity differed among microhabitats. Seasonal changes were most pronounced in moss and least in litter. While overall air humidity had no influence on species distribution and community changes, air temperature positively influenced species richness and diversity, again most pronounced in moss. The calculated environmental temperature occurrence niche showed that 35% of adult oribatid mite species occurred at higher air temperatures. Furthermore, interaction/bipartite networks were more generalized—i.e., species were more equally distributed among moss, dead wood and litter—when ambient air temperatures were higher. This pattern is probably due to the dispersal ability of adult oribatid mites, i.e., species enter a dispersal mode only at higher air temperatures.

Species‐level predation network uncovers high prey specificity in a Neotropical army ant community

“…H 2 ˈ and dˈ values are normalized relative to minimum and maximum possible values and, as a result, range from 0 (lowest interaction specificity) to 1 (highest interaction specificity; Blüthgen et al, ). H 2 ˈ and dˈ values were tested against null models based on 10,000 randomized networks, which had the same total number of interactions and the same marginal totals as the original network (Patefield algorithm; see Blüthgen et al, ; Patefield, ; Wehner, Heethoff, & Brückner, ). We tested the robustness of H 2 ˈ calculations against our sampling intensity based on random subsets of the networks.…”

“…For this, H 2 ˈ values of each army ant species pair were compared to 10,000 random networks (Blüthgen et al, ). Hence, pairwise H 2 ˈ comparisons tested whether a network, consisting of two army ant species and all their prey, differed from random networks allowing to test for prey differentiation between army ant species pairs (see also Wehner et al, ). All network analyses were analysed in r using the “ bipartite ” package (Dormann, Gruber, & Fründ, ; version 2.08).…”

DNA barcodes expose unexpected diversity in Canadian mites

“…However, the general patterns were supported even when estimates were corrected for potentially undocumented but shared species (βCS). Several factors, such as soil type, ground cover, disturbance, and moisture regimes have been linked to local variability in soil mite assemblages (Gao, He, Zhang, Liu, & Wu, 2014;Gulvik, 2007;Lindo & Winchester, 2009;Meehan et al, 2018), along with seasonal and temporal dynamics (Lindo & Winchester, 2008;Wehner, Heethoff, & Brückner, 2018). Incorporating these variables along with finer-scale sampling may improve the fit of models (Clark, 2009).…”

Morpho-ecological structure of oribatid mite (Acariformes, Oribatida) communities in the forest litter of recultivated areas

“…An important role among the animal population in transformation of dead plant material belongs to ecosystem engineers -animal environment-creators Grimaldi et al, 2016, which contribute to soil structure formation at the most important stage -biochemical process of humification, as the result of their pedoturbation and trophic activity, which ultimately leads to transformation of forest ecosystems on recultivated plots. First of all, such representatives of mezofauna -typical saprophages as earth worms should be mentioned (Eisenhauer, 2010;Jouquet et al, 2014;Kitz et al, 2015;Cunha et al, 2016;Amossé et al, 2015), millipedes (Gudym, 2016;Pokhylenko et al, 2019), woodlice (Zimmer & Topp, 1998;Toth et al, 2016), and particularly important representatives of microfauna -oribatid mites (Smrž & Norton, 2004;Gormsen et al, 2006;Wehner et al, 2018). Their activity is connected mainly with provision of such important ecosystem services as increase of soil formation and nutrient turnover.…”