Monthly changes of ground arthropods in artificial Caragana intermedia plantations in desert steppe

doi:10.11686/cyxb20140235

Abstract

Abstract: Taking 6, 15, 24, 36 year old artificial Caragana intermedia plantations in desert steppe as a subject, an investigation on ground arthropods from May to September was carried out using pitfall traps. The monthly changes of ground arthropod are discussed, together with their relationship to the stand age. 1) There were seventy-two groups captured and they belonged to 62 families, 13 orders and five classes. In light of the guilds, there were six functional groups: predator, phytophagous, saprophagous, coprophagous, omnivorous and parasitic animals. Carabidae, Tenebrionidae and Melolonthidae dominated the ground-arthropod community and comprised 46.71% of total individuals. 2) From May to June, such dominant groups as saprophagous animals were as abundant as phytophagous and omnivorous and parasitic animals in each shrubland. In July in 36-year-old shrubland, predator animals increased, while from August to September in each shrubland, they were the dominant groups. With increasing stand age, the food web tended to become more complicated in ground arthropod communities. 3) The peak of dominant groups in 6-year-old shrubland was in September, in 15-year-old shrubland it was in June and September, in 24-year-old shrubland it was in June, August and September, and in 36-year-old shrubland it was in June, July, August and September. With increasing stand age, the monthly distribution of dominant groups tended to be homogeneous in ground arthropod communities. 4) The maximum density in 6-year-old shrubland was in May and September, and the minimum was in August; From 15 to 24-year-old shrubland, the maximum density was in May with relatively low number of individuals in the other months; In 36-year-old shrubland, August followed May in maximum density. Stand age effects were maximum in August but minimum in May, June and July. 5) It is suggested that monthly changes of ground arthropods were strongly affected by stand age, which had direct influences on the structure and function of grassland ecosystems and related recovery processes.

CLC Number:

S812.29

LIU Ren-tao, ZHU Fan. Monthly changes of ground arthropods in artificial Caragana intermedia plantations in desert steppe[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2014, 23(2): 296-304.

References

[1] 赵哈林, 苏永中, 张华, 等. 科尔沁沙地灌木对土壤性质和地下植被的多重影响[J]. 中国沙漠, 2007, 27(3): 385-390.
[2] 苏永中, 赵哈林, 张铜会. 几种灌木、半灌木对沙地土壤肥力影响机制的研究[J]. 应用生态学报, 2002, 13(7): 802-806.
[3] 殷秀琴, 宋博, 董炜华, 等. 中国土壤动物生态地理研究综述[J].地理学报, 2010, 65(1): 91-102.
[4] Fu S L, Zou X M, Coleman D. High lights and perspectives of soil biology and ecology research in China[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2009, 41(5): 868-876.
[5] 刘继亮, 李锋瑞, 刘七军, 等. 黑河中游干旱荒漠地面节肢动物群落季节变异规律[J]. 草业学报, 2010, 19(5): 161-169.
[6] 曹成有, 蒋德明, 阿拉木萨, 等. 小叶锦鸡儿人工固沙区植被恢复生态过程的研究[J]. 应用生态学报, 2000,11(3): 349-354.
[7] 曹成有, 蒋德明, 全贵静, 等. 科尔沁沙地小叶锦鸡儿人工固沙区土壤理化性质的变化[J]. 水土保持学报, 2004, 18(6): 108-112.
[8] Su Y Z, Zhao H L. Soil properties and plant species in an age sequence of Caragana microphylla plantations in the Horqin Sandy Land, north China[J]. Ecological Engineering, 2003, 20: 223-235.
[9] 张飞, 陈云明, 王耀凤, 等. 黄土丘陵半干旱区柠条林对土壤物理性质及有机质的影响[J]. 水土保持研究, 2010, 17(3): 105-109.
[10] 韩天丰, 程积民, 万惠娥. 人工柠条灌丛林下草地植物群落特征研究[J]. 草地学报, 2009, 17(2): 245-249.
[11] 郭忠升. 黄土高原半干旱区水土保持植被恢复限度——以人工柠条林为例[J]. 中国水土保持科学, 2009, 7(4): 49-54.
[12] 刘任涛, 杨新国, 宋乃平, 等. 荒漠草原区固沙人工柠条林生长过程中土壤性质演变规律[J]. 水土保持学报, 2012, 26(4): 108-112.
[13] 刘任涛, 柴永青, 徐坤, 等. 荒漠草原区柠条人工固沙林生长过程中地表植被-土壤的变化[J]. 应用生态学报, 2012, 23(11): 2955-2960.
[14] 刘任涛, 柴永青, 徐坤, 等. 荒漠草原区柠条固沙人工林地表草本植被季节变化特征[J]. 生态学报, 2014, 34(2): 500-508.
[15] 刘任涛, 李学斌, 辛明, 等. 半干旱沙地草场地面节肢动物群落对封育措施的响应[J]. 草业学报, 2012, 21(1): 66-74.
[16] 尹文英. 中国土壤动物图鉴[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2000.
[17] 郑乐怡, 归鸿. 昆虫分类[M]. 南京: 南京师范大学出版社, 1999.
[18] 王新谱, 杨贵军. 贺兰山昆虫[M]. 银川: 宁夏人民出版社, 2010.
[19] 任国栋, 于有志. 中国荒漠半荒漠步甲昆虫[M]. 保定: 河北大学出版社, 1999.
[20] 刘任涛, 赵哈林, 赵学勇. 放牧干扰后自然恢复沙质草地大型土壤动物功能群变化特征[J]. 生态环境学报, 2011, 20(12): 1794-1798.
[21] 刘任涛, 李学斌, 辛明, 等. 荒漠草原地面节肢动物功能群对草地封育的响应[J]. 应用生态学报, 2011, 22(8): 2153-2159.
[22] Shachak M, Gosz J R, Pickett S T A, et al. Biodivcrsity in Drylands: Toward a Unified Framework (Long-Term Ecological Research Network Series)[M]. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005.
[23] 陈曦. 宁夏灵武生态恢复区地表甲虫多样性及其边缘效应的研究[D]. 银川: 宁夏大学, 2010.
[24] Baker G H. Recognising and responding to the influences of agriculture and other land-use on soil fauna[J]. Applied Soil Ecology, 1998, 9: 303-310.
[25] 刘新民. 科尔沁沙地不同生境条件下大型土壤动物群落多样性特征研究[J]. 内蒙古师范大学学报(自然科学汉文版), 2008, 37(1): 98-103.
[26] John Sowell. Desert Ecology[M]. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 2001.
[27] 张淑花, 张武, 张雪萍. 黑龙江省西部沙地土壤动物生态分布研究[J]. 哈尔滨师范大学(自然科学学报), 2004, 20(2): 92-95.
[28] Callaham M A, Richter D D, Coleman D C. Long-term land-use effects on soil invertebrate communities in Southern Piedmontsoils, USA[J]. European Journal of Soil Biology, 2006, 42(S): 150-156.
[29] Frouz J, Arshad A, Frouzova J. Horizontal and vertical distribution of soil macroarthropods along a spatio-temporal moisture gradient in subtropical Central Florida[J]. Environmental Entomology, 2004, 33(5): 1282-1295.
[30] 刘任涛, 赵哈林. 沙质草地土壤动物研究进展及建议[J]. 中国沙漠, 2009, 29(4): 656-662.
[31] 肖红艳, 刘红, 李波, 等. 放牧干扰对亚高山草甸土壤动物群落影响的研究[J]. 草业学报, 2012, 21(2): 26-33.
[32] 林恭华, 赵芳, 陈桂琛, 等. 青海湖北岸不同土地利用方式对大型土壤动物群落的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2012, 21(2): 180-186.