4.6 Article

Response of nematodes to agricultural input levels in various reclaimed and unreclaimed habitats

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SOIL BIOLOGY
Volume 60, Issue -, Pages 120-129

Publisher

ELSEVIER FRANCE-EDITIONS SCIENTIFIQUES MEDICALES ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejsobi.2013.12.001

Keywords

Nematodes; Ecological indices; Fertilizer input gradient; Greenhouse; Soil reclamation

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [30970536]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

An analysis of nematode communities was conducted in two groups of habitats at the Quzhou Experimental Station of China Agricultural University. Saline-alkali land (SA) and wild woodland (WW) represented unreclaimed habitats (URE) without any agricultural input. Reclaimed habitats (RE) comprised artificial woodland (AW), orchard (OR), farmland (FA) and a greenhouse (GH), which represented increasing agricultural input level. Generally, the means of the ecological indices between unreclaimed and reclaimed habitats suggested that the reclamation of saline alkali land increased nematode diversity. In the farmland and orchard, mid-levels of fertilizer input increased nematode diversity (Shannon index (H') and diversity of trophic groups (TD), respectively), whereas high levels of fertilizer input decreased nematode diversity (H') in the greenhouse. The pattern result of maturity index (MI) and maturity index for nematodes with cp2-5 (MI25) indicated that high input in the greenhouse with a high relative abundance of enrichment opportunists increased the difference of disturbance between unreclaimed and reclaimed habitats. Canonical correspondence analysis (CCA) results corresponded to the beta(T) index, which suggested that subsequent human activities (from low to high input) exerted greater influences on nematode communities than did soil reclamation (from no input to low input). (C) 2013 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available