A soil fauna index for assessing soil quality

Yan, Shiguang; Singh, Anita; Fu, Shenglei; Chonghui, Liao; Wang, Silong; Li, Yuanliang; Cui, Yinan; Hu, Lile

doi:10.1016/j.soilbio.2011.11.014

Cited by 85 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The abundance and diversity of soil fauna integrate soil physical, chemical and microbiological properties and reflect general ecological changes, becoming an important asset in the landscape ecology and conservation tool box (Menta et al, 2008;Yan et al, 2012;Wardle, 2002). The spatial distribution of soil microarthropods and their functional groups' abundance are influenced by human-induced disturbance related to farming activities, such as soil cultivation (Paoletti and Bressan, 1995).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Short-term recovery of soil physical, chemical, micro- and mesobiological functions in a new vineyard under organic farming

Costantini

Agnelli

Fabiani

et al. 2015

SOIL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Deep earthwork activities carried out before vineyard plantation can severely affect soil profile properties. As a result, soil features in the root environment are often much more similar to those of the underlying substratum than those of the original profile. The time needed to recover the original soil functions is ecologically relevant and may strongly affect vine phenology and grape yield, particularly under organic viticulture.The general aim of this work was to investigate soil resilience after vineyard pre-planting earthworks. In particular, an old and a new vineyard, established on the same soil type, were compared over a 5-year period for soil chemical, physical, micro-and mesobiological properties.The investigated vineyards (Vitis vinifera L., cv. Sangiovese) were located in the Chianti Classico district (central Italy), on stony and calcareous soils, and were not irrigated. The older vineyard was planted in 2000, after slope reshaping by bulldozing and back-hoe ploughing down to about 0.8-1.0 m. The new vineyard was planted in 2011, after equivalent earthwork practices carried out in the summer of 2009. Both vineyards were organically managed, and they were fertilized with compost only every autumn (1000 kg ha −1 per year). The new vineyard was cultivated by periodic tillage, while the old vineyard was managed with alternating grass-covered and tilled inter-rows.Soil samples were collected at 0-15 cm depth from fixed locations in each vineyard every spring from 2010 to 2014. The old vineyard was sampled in both tilled and grass-covered inter-rows.According to the results from physical and chemical analyses, the new vineyard, during the whole 2010-2014 period, showed lower total organic carbon, total nitrogen, carbon to nitrogen ratio and electrical conductivity, along with higher silt and total CaCO 3 contents than the old vineyard, suggesting still-evolving equilibrium conditions. The microarthropod analysis showed significantly different abundances and community structures, in relation to both vineyard and time. Rainfall appeared to have an enhancing effect on microarthropod abundance, but only in the old vineyard, where the biota was more structured than in the new one. The euedaphic forms, well adapted to soil life, were always rare. Microbiological analysis revealed a different structure of eubacterial communities between the old and the new vineyard in the whole period. However, the DGGE similarity values of these communities increased by about 2.5 % per year, suggesting that at least 3 years more are needed to compare intra-and inter-specific diversity of the two vineyards.In conclusion, the consequences of deep earthworks on soil chemical, micro-and mesobiological properties were still evident 4 years after planting, indicating that more time is necessary for the recovery of soil functions, probably longer than the time needed to reach a state of economically viable grape production.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Short-term recovery of soil physical, chemical, micro- and mesobiological functions in a new vineyard under organic farming

Costantini

Agnelli

Fabiani

et al. 2015

SOIL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, soil quality can be assessed by physical, chemical and microbiological properties of soil together with the abundance and diversity of edaphic fauna (nematodes, Acari, Collembola, Symphyla, Chilopoda, Pauropoda, enchytraeids, earthworms); furthermore, the determination of community structure adds significant information on the soil status (Cole et al, 2006;De Goede and Brussard, 2002;Duelli and Obrist, 2003;Menta et al, 2008;van Straalen, 1998;Yan et al, 2012). In a well-balanced soil, mesofauna is highly biodiversified and occupies all trophic levels within the soil food webs (Ruf et al, 2006).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Case study of microarthropod communities to assess soil quality in different managed vineyards

Gagnarli¹,

Goggioli²,

Tarchi³

et al. 2015

SOIL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Land use influences the abundance and diversity of soil arthropods. The evaluation of the impact of different management strategies on soil quality is increasingly sought, and the determination of community structures of edaphic fauna can represent an efficient tool. In the area of Langhe (Piedmont, Italy), eight vineyards characterized for physical and chemical properties (soil texture, soil pH, total organic carbon, total nitrogen, calcium carbonate) were selected. We evaluated the effect of two types of crop management, organic and integrated pest management (IPM), on abundance and biodiversity of microarthropods living at the soil surface. Soil sampling was carried out in winter 2011 and spring 2012. All specimens were counted and determined up to the order level. The biodiversity analysis was performed using ecological indexes (taxa richness, dominance, Shannon-Wiener, Buzas and Gibson's evenness, Margalef, equitability, Berger-Parker), and the biological soil quality was assessed with the BSQ-ar index.The mesofauna abundance was affected by both the type of management and sampling time. On the whole, a higher abundance was in organic vineyards (N = 1981) than in IPM ones (N = 1062). The analysis performed by ecological indexes showed quite a high level of biodiversity in this environment, particularly in May 2012. Furthermore, the BSQ-ar values registered were similar to those obtained in preserved soils.

show abstract

“…Among soil organisms, soil micro fauna has been used as indicator of soil quality; its role includes litter fragmentation, macropores formation, bioturbation. In particular, the presence and diversity of soil microarthropods has been recently used in several works Parisi et al, 2005;Yan et al, 2012). The QBS index ("Qualità Biologica del Suolo"), developed in Italy (Parisi, 2001;Parisi et al, 2005) as an index for assessing the biological quality of soil, is based on the number of microarthropod groups adapted to the soil habitat.…”

Section: Habitat For Soil Organismsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A methodological framework to assess the multiple contributions of soils to ecosystem services delivery at regional scale

Calzolari

Ungaro

Filippi³

et al. 2016

Geoderma

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A soil fauna index for assessing soil quality

Cited by 85 publications

References 31 publications

Short-term recovery of soil physical, chemical, micro- and mesobiological functions in a new vineyard under organic farming

Short-term recovery of soil physical, chemical, micro- and mesobiological functions in a new vineyard under organic farming

Case study of microarthropod communities to assess soil quality in different managed vineyards

A methodological framework to assess the multiple contributions of soils to ecosystem services delivery at regional scale

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About