2008
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejsobi.2007.10.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Efficiency of two widespread non-destructive extraction methods under dry soil conditions for different ecological earthworm groups

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
40
0
1

Year Published

2010
2010
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 65 publications
(41 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
0
40
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Endogeic species were extracted in low numbers for both methods compared to hand-sorting, suggesting decreased activity or inactivity during dry seasons. These findings led Eisenhauer et al [101] to conclude that the octet method was inappropriate in estimating earthworm community structure, however these conclusions may have limited applicability to dry or seasonally dry soils.…”
Section: Electroshockmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Endogeic species were extracted in low numbers for both methods compared to hand-sorting, suggesting decreased activity or inactivity during dry seasons. These findings led Eisenhauer et al [101] to conclude that the octet method was inappropriate in estimating earthworm community structure, however these conclusions may have limited applicability to dry or seasonally dry soils.…”
Section: Electroshockmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Eisenhauer et al [101] tested the same octet design as Schmidt [100] against mustard extraction in dry conditions in a seminatural grassland in Germany. Electrical current was applied for 35 min per treatment in step-wise incremental increase of voltage from 250 to 600 V with no report of electric current or distance between probes.…”
Section: Electroshockmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This method is environmentally friendly and provides an accurate index of species composition and abundance (Gunn 1992;Lawrence and Bowers 2002;Eisenhauer et al 2008), especially for the deep-burrowing L. terrestris (Chan and Munro 2001). However, the method requires substantial time and effort because large quantities of water must often be transported long distances into remote areas.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This method is attractive as little or no damage is done to the area sampled and only fallen leaves and overgrown vegetation need be removed prior to sampling to assist earthworm detection. To date only limited work has been undertaken with this method, specifically in agricultural soils [21] possibly because equipment is expensive as an extraction unit to sample 0.2 m 2 at a time will cost (at 2009 prices) in excess of $3000. Having determined which earthworms are present in a given habitat, if desired, it is then possible to experimentally manipulate the earthworms themselves or resources, such as food, in the habitat.…”
Section: Collection Techniques (First Catch Your Earthworm)mentioning
confidence: 99%