Comparative responses of termite functional and taxonomic diversity to land‐use change

Abstract

1. While it is clear that land‐use change significantly impacts the taxonomic dimension of soil biodiversity, how the functional dimension responds to land‐use change is less well understood. 2. This study examined how the transformation of primary forests into rubber tree monocultures impacts individual termite species and how this change is reflected in termite taxonomic and functional α‐diversity (within site) and β‐diversity (among sites). 3. Overall, individual species responded strongly to land‐use change, whereby only 11 of the 27 species found were able to tolerate both habitats. These differences caused a 27% reduction in termite taxonomic richness and reduced taxonomic β‐diversity in rubber plantations compared with primary forests. The study also revealed that the forest conversion led to a shift in some termite species with smaller body size, shorter legs and smaller mandibular traits. Primary forests exhibited higher functional richness and functional β‐diversity of termite species, indicating that functional traits of termite species in rubber plantations are more evenly distributed. 4. The present study suggests that forest conversion does not merely decrease taxonomic diversity of termites, but also exerts functional trait filtering within some termite species. The results affirm the need for biodiversity assessments that combine taxonomic and functional indicators when monitoring the impact of land‐use change.

Understanding global and regional patterns of termite diversity and regional functional traits

“… 28 In addition, termite morphological traits (such as leg length and mandible length) may also be affected by predation pressure and physical structure of the habitat floor since these traits are related to foraging behavior and defense. 29 …”

“…To generate a dataset of termite species richness across the globe, we aggregated data on termite species distributions and inventories of species richness. We combined inventory data based on datasets from Li et al., 30 , 31 Liu et al., 29 Cerezer et al., 16 termite database records ( https://www.termitediversity.org/ ) and GBIF records ( https://doi.org/10.15468/dl.yd4edv ) which included over 148151 additional records, almost entirely collated since 2000. After removing any duplicate records (same species at same latitude and longitude) this provided a total dataset of 2503 inventories, with a reasonable coverage across most termite-occupied parts of the planet.…”

Land use effects on termite assemblages in Kenya

“…Additive diversity partitioning of species richness and Simpson diversity showed that α component contributed 98.3% and 99.1% of the total diversity, respectively; an indication that most species were similar within fields in the two Counties. The low beta diversity within each county may be an indication of lack of significant differences in microhabitats which resulted in homogenization of the termite communities ( Liu et al., 2019 ).…”

From forest to forestry: Reassembly of spider communities after native forest replacement by pine monocultures

“…Several studies targeting arthropods have shown a reduction of species richness (including local extinction) due to the replacement of natural ecosystems by intensively productive systems (Birkhofer et al, 2017; Rigal et al, 2018). However, functional diversity patterns are not clear: in some cases, trait richness decreases because of the habitat filtering process imposed by anthropogenic disturbance (Laliberte et al, 2010; Liu et al, 2019). In other cases, functional richness remains similar or increases, but the underlying mechanisms acting on the community assemblage are not well defined (Mayfield et al, 2005; Mouillot et al, 2013).…”