Termite mound density and distribution patterns across three land‐use types in the Vhembe District of the Limpopo Province, South Africa

Abstract

This study investigated the effect of land-use on density and distribution patterns of termite mounds. A total area of 12 ha was investigated using four 1 ha plots from each of three land-use types (mango orchards, maize fields and communal rangelands). A total of 297 mounds from four termite species were recorded. Plotted GIS coordinates for each mound in ArcMap showed a random distribution pattern in all land-use types. The mean number of mounds per hectare was significantly higher (p < 0.001) in communal rangelands (52.5 ± 1.21), than in maize fields (14.75 ± 3.15) and mango orchards (7.5 ± 0.87), and dominated by small-sized mounds of Trinervitermes sp. Few mounds of Odontotermes sp. were found. Mounds of the edible termites, Macrotermes natalensis and M. falciger, were found in all land-use types, with the highest density for both species being in maize fields. Although the mound height for both species was similar, mound circumference for M. falciger was significantly larger (p < 0.001) which may limit land available for agricultural use. Density of mounds was influenced by land-use which may lead to changes in termite ecosystem functioning and availability of termites as a free source of protein. Résumé Cette étude s'est penchée sur l'impact de l'utilisation des terres sur la densité et la répartition générale des termitières. Une zone d'une superficie totale de 12 ha a été étudiée en utilisant quatre parcelles d'une superficie de 1 ha pour chacun des trois types d'utilisation des terres (vergers de manguiers, champ de maïs et pâturages communautaires). Au total, 297 termitières abritant quatre espèces de termites ont été comptabilisées. Les coordonnées SIG de chaque termitière relevées sur ArcMap ont démontré une répartition générale aléatoire pour tous les types d'utilisation des terres. La quantité moyenne de termitières par hectare était considérablement plus élevée (p < 0.001) sur les pâturages communautaires (52.5 ± 1.21) que dans les champs de maïs (14.75 ± 3.15) et les vergers de manguiers (7.5 ± 0.87), et dominée par les termitières de petite taille de l'espèce Trinervitermes. La présence de quelques termitières de l'espèce Odontotermes a également été constatée. La présence de termitières abritant des termites comestibles, les Macrotermes natalensis et M. falciger, | 675 NETSHIFHEFHE ET al. Mervyn Mansell, Schalk Schoeman and Lutendo Mugwedi for technical guidance. We would like to thank the field assistants: Ndamulelo Netshifhefhe, Mulatedzi Netshifhefhe and Nnditsheni Nthungeni for helping with data collection. Melba Makhubela is thanked for assisting in measuring the mounds. Mattheus Human of the Gauteng Department of Agriculture and Rural Development and Richard

Spatial distribution patterns and structure of epigeal nests of soldierless termites in livestock systems in the northwestern Colombian Amazon

“…(2015) and Netshifhefhe et al (2020), who also reported a similar distribution pattern, potentially indicating interspeci c competition as a driving factor. Besides, our results align with other studies that have examined spatial distribution of epigean nests, such as those conducted by Cunha (2011) and Bruschini (2006), both of which also found a random distribution pattern.…”

“…However, magnitude of these impacts is largely dependent on spatial distribution and termite mound structure, which in turn are in uenced by environmental characteristics such as altitude, temperature, precipitation, availability of food and nesting resources, intra-and inter-speci c relationships, degree of environmental disturbance (Eggleton et al 2002), termite species, landscapes, land use, and colony size and age (Netshifhefhe et al 2020).…”

Resource availability and heterogeneity shape the self‐organisation of regular spatial patterning

“…Together, these two findings could help to explain the variation in nest regularity across disparate ecosystems and insect species (Getzin et al, 2019; Levings & Traniello, 1981; Netshifhefhe et al, 2020) and suggest that the most regular patterns should emerge in species and systems where substrates are homogeneous over extensive areas and nests are large relative to foraging territories. This finding has implications for debates over the mechanistic bases of spotted, gapped and mounded vegetation patterns (Cramer & Midgley, 2015; Gabet et al, 2014; Getzin et al, 2015; Getzin et al, 2019; Juergens, 2015; Tarnita et al, 2017; Zangerlé et al, 2016).…”