Upload
vothuy
View
216
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
EDAPHOLOG monitoring system: automatic, real-time detection of soil
microarthropods
Miklós Dombos, Norbert Flórián, Zita Groó, Péter Dudás, Beáta Oláh-
Hambek, András Kosztolá[email protected]
22-26 August 2016 The XVII International Colloquium on Soil Zoology
The XVII International Colloquium on Soil Zoology
22-26 August 2016
Monitoring Soil Biological Activity by using a novel tool: EDAPHOLOG-System – system building and field testingMEDAPHON LIFE 08ENV/H/000292
The XVII International Colloquium on Soil Zoology
22-26 August 2016
80-100mm
20mm
Tests on precision and accuracy
1. Detectability and body size estimation in laboratory
2. Comparison of the Catching efficiency of EDAPHOLOGprobes, Pitfall traps and Soil extraction on a single test site.
3. Detectability in field, 100 EDAPHOLOG probes on 25 monitoring plots
22-26 August 2016The XVII International Colloquium on Soil
Zoology
• Recording Detection (1/0) and body size estimates in EDAPHOLOG
• Measuring Body sizes (mm) by using stereo microscope
• n=588
22-26 August 2016The XVII International Colloquium on Soil
Zoology
1. Laboratory tests: Detectability and body size estimation
Morphotypes Body length
(mm)
Oribatid mites 0.3 - 1.7
Other mites 0.5 - 1.8
Euedaphic Collembola (Coecobrya magyari, Folsomia
candida)
0.5 - 1.9
Haired epigeic Collembola (Orchesella cincta, O.
spectabilis)
1.0 - 5.9
Scaled epigeic Collembola (Heteromurus nitidus,
Lepidocyrtus curvicollis, L. paradoxus, Pogonognathellus
flavescens)
0.6 - 4.7
22-26 August 2016 The XVII International Colloquium on Soil Zoology
• Binomial GLM, (morphotype: χ2 = 4.507, df= 4, p = 0.342, measured size: χ2 = 9.218, df = 1, p = 0.002)
• 95.6% of the individuals
• Smallest Oribatida: 87.5% of the animals was
detected
• Detectability reached near 1at around 2 mm
body lengths in each microarthropod
morphotype
Laboratory tests results
22-26 August 2016The XVII International Colloquium on Soil
Zoology
Body length estimation
quadratic model explained less than a third of the total variance (R2 = 0.32)
2. What does EDAPHOLOG probe catch? Field study on one site
• 50x50m Alfalfa field, 30th April - 17th May 2015
• 20 EDAPHOLOG probes + 20 pitfall traps + 20 soil samples
22-26 August 2016The XVII International Colloquium on Soil
Zoology
Soil extractionPitfall trapEDAPHOLOG trap
Results on three Sampling methods
• Pitfall traps >> butmacroarthropods, as well(green)
• Euedaphic species at both trapping methods (!?)
• Relative abundances of soil-living microarthropods (dark blue) >> at soil extraction (OK)
22-26 August 2016The XVII International Colloquium on Soil
Zoology
22-26 August 2016The XVII International Colloquium on Soil
Zoology
Taxa/Species or types Morphotype
maximum
size (mm)Mean number (SD) of individuals captured by
Edapholog trap Pitfall trap Soil Extraction
Entomobryomorpha (juveniles)
epiedaphic
15 (23.4) 81.4 (47.4) 13.6 (14.5)
Heteromurus major (Moniez, 1889) 2 4 (4.9) 13.6 (10.2)
Heteromurus nitidus (Templeton, 1835) 3 8.2 (5.3) 3 (2.4) 0.3 (0.8)
Lepidocyrtus lanuginosus (Gmelin 1788) 1,2 57.9 (73.8) 133.9 (167.8) 1 (1.4)
Lepidocyrtus paradoxus Uzel 1891 3 0.6 (1) 6.5 (4.3)
Orchesella cincta (Linnaeus, 1758) 4,5 2.4 (2.4) 63.9 (21.1) 0.2 (0.4)
Proisotoma minuta (Tullberg, 1871) 1,1 1.7 (1.7) 3 (2.7) 0.3 (0.8)
Sminthurinus elegans (Fitch, 1863) 0,7 6.6 (16.8) 67.2 (46.7) 0.2 (0.5)
Sminthurus maculatus Tömösvary, 1883 2,8 0.6 (0.9) 25 (14.6)
Sminthurus viridis Linneaus, 1758 3 0.2 (0.4) 9.6 (6.8) 0.1 (0.2)
Sphaeridia pumilis (Krausbauer, 1898) 0,5 3.4 (6) 26.1 (28.5) 0.1 (0.2)
Isotomurus fucicolus (Schött, 1893)
euedaphic
2 11.9 (14.5) 162.1 (133.3) 0.8 (1.1)
Onychiuridae 1 0.5 (0.6) 0.4 (0.5) 0.6 (0.9)
Xenylla welchi Folsom 1916 0,9 0.1 (0.4) 10.4 (7.3) 0.1 (0.2)
Pitfall traps captured much more individuals than the other two methods(MANOVA, Wilk’s λ = 0.061, F10,102 = 31.16, p < 0.001).
22-26 August 2016The XVII International Colloquium on Soil
Zoology
Mesostigmata 2 29.3 (17.6) 47.4 (28.3) 36.1 (21.6)
Astigmata 2 0.9 (1.3) 1.7 (2.3) 1.4 (1.9)
Prostigmata 2 0.4 (0.8) 2.6 (1.8) 0.1 (0.3)
Oribatida 2 2.9 (3.4) 2.6 (2.5) 29.8 (15.8)
Diptera larvae 2 4.8 (5.1) 1.3 (1.3) 1.9 (5.6)
2 5.7 (5.6) 1.2 (1.1) 0.8 (1.2)
Taxa/Species or typesMorphoty
pes
maximum
size (mm)
Mean number (SD) of individuals
captured by
Edapholog
trapPitfall trap
Soil
Extraction
Diplura 2 1.3 (1.6) 0.3 (0.6) 0.7 (1)
Pauropoda 2 1.3 (1.5) 0.2 (0.4)
Protura 2 0.3 (1.1) 0.1 (0.3)
Symphyla 2 0.2 (0.4) 0.1 (0.2) 0.2 (0.4)
• The number of soil-living microarthropods was relatively high at both trapping methods, which is unusual, and probably only reflects the actual habitat.
• Euedaphic Apterygotes: Diplura, Pauropoda, Protura and Symphyla were caught more efficiently by EDAPHOLOG than by pitfall traps
• The relative abundances of soil-living microarthropods were the highest at soil extraction.
22-26 August 2016The XVII International Colloquium on Soil
Zoology
Araneae 5 mm< 3 0.2 (0.5) 8.6 (4.3)
Chilopoda 3 0.2 (0.4) 0.2 (0.4) 0.3 (0.5)
Coleopteranot Carabidae or
Staphylinidae3 1.3 (1.2) 15.6 (8.5)
Coleoptera Carabidae 3 1.3 (1.5) 12.5 (7.9) 0.6 (1.4)
Hemiptera not Cicada 3 0.5 (0.8) 11.7 (6.5) 0.1 (0.2)
Hymenoptera Formicidae 3 2.9 (3.4) 65.2 (145.9) 1.5 (2.3)
Isopoda 4 0.1 (0.3) 1.3 (1.3)
Mollusca 3 0.4 (0.9) 1.4 (1.3)
Coleoptera Staphylinidae 4 13.4 (8.6) 93.5 (55.6) 0.1 (0.3)
Coleoptera larvae 4 2.7 (1.9) 21.6 (14.7) 6.3 (5.1)
Diplopoda 5 mm> 4 0.1 (0.2) 0.3 (1)
Diplopoda 5 mm< 4 0.3 (0.6) 0.9 (1)
Thysanoptera 4 0.9 (1.1) 0.6 (0.9)
Hymenoptera not Formicidae 5 0.8 (1.1) 8.5 (5.7) 0.2 (0.5)
Orthoptera 5 0.2 (0.7) 0.3 (1.3)
Taxa/Species or typesMorphotype
s
maximum
size (mm)Mean number (SD) of individuals captured by
Edapholog trap Pitfall trap Soil Extraction
Species accumulation curves
22-26 August 2016The XVII International Colloquium on Soil
Zoology
Red: EDAPHOLOG Gray: Pitfall trapsBlue: Soil extraction
--- Mean number of species··· 95% confidence intervalsSoftware used: EstimateS
3. Detectability on 25 field plots
22-26 August 2016The XVII International Colloquium on Soil
Zoology
• 100 EDAPHOLOG probes on 25 field plots (4 EDAPHOLOG per plot)• 7 soil types: Ramann brown forest soils, Brown forest soils with clay illuviation,
Chernozems, Meadow soils, Alluvial soils, Sandy soils, Solonetz• 8 habitat types: Oak-, Gallery forest, Seminatural-, mesic- and saline grasslands, Shrubland,
Orchards, arable land• 3 months: September - November in 2013
• Out of 100 Probes:
• 7 lost their radio connection
• 4 got soaked
• 5 got flooded by mud
• 84 probes were analysed
22-26 August 2016The XVII International Colloquium on Soil
Zoology
TaxaTotal number
of individuals
Epigeic Collembola
(Entomobryidae, Symphypleona) 370
Euedaphic Collembola
(Poduromorpha) 18
Acari 471
859 (73.7%)
Staphilinidae 128
Isopoda 120
Carabidae 14
Diptera larva 12
Araneae 17
Chilopoda 4
Formicidae 4
299 (26.3%)
• ≈3/4 of the arthropod: Collembola or
Acari.
• Some other arthropods with smaller
body size (mostly rove beetles
(Coleoptera, Staphylinidae) and
isopods (Isopoda, Oniscidea) were
also caught.
Results of the field study
Precision and accuracy in field study
22-26 August 2016The XVII International Colloquium on Soil
Zoology
• slope = 1.02 ± 0.07, p = 0.828
• intercept = -0.32 ± 0.16, p = 0.065
22-26 August 2016The XVII International Colloquium on Soil
Zoology
Temporal dynamics on one plot
Spearman correlation, rs = 0.871, p < 0.001
22-26 August 2016The XVII International Colloquium on Soil
Zoology
• Soil temperature and moisture sensors are already linked
• Mathematical modelling
EDAPHOLOG 2.0
• Shorter tube• Camera to
measure body size
INSECTLIFE (2014-2018) www.zoolog.hu„Innovative Real-time Monitoring and Pest control for Insects”
Thank You for Your Attention!
22-26 August 2016The XVII International Colloquium on Soil
Zoology
[email protected] www.zoolog.hu