Open Journal of Soil Science, 2011, 1, 54-60

doi:10.4236/ojss.2011.12008 Published Online September 2011 (http://www.SciRP.org/journal/ojss).

Collembolan Density and Diversity in a Forest and

an Agroecosystem
D. Paul*, A. Nongmaithem, L. K. Jha
Department of Environmental StudiesNorth Eastern Hill University, Shillong, India
Email: *[email protected]

Received June 17th, 2011; revised July 22nd, 2011; accepted July 22nd, 2011

ABSTRACT:
Collembola, commonly called “springtails” are wingless soft-bodied hexapods that are usually between 1 and 3 milli-
metres in length and occur in varying habits such as, soil surface and litter, under rocks or the bark of trees. The great
majority develop in soil, feeding on fungi, bacteria, algae and decaying plant matter, and along with other soil fauna
constitute the decomposer community. The present study examines the diversity, density, and seasonal variation pat-
terns of collembolan fauna under two different land uses, as evidenced in a forest and an agroecosystem. Results indi-
cate that both densities and diversity of collembola was higher in the forest than in the agroecosystem. Seasonal fluc-
tuation exhibited an increase from spring to summer and autumn and a decrease during winter. The coorelation pat-
terns with different chemo-edaphic factors did not show any specific trend.Indices of diversity and significant correla-
tion values are discussed in light of landuse.

Keywords: Collembola, Biodiversity, Forest, Agroecosystem

1. Introduction tered (e.g. Agriculture) ecosystems.

Temperature and moisture are two of the most impor-
Soil as a habitat contains the most diverse assemblages
tant environmental factors affecting populations of soil-
of living organisms. Collembola, commonly known as
dwelling collembola [5]. Soil moisture gradient and
springtails, are small wingless soft-bodied hexapods that
changes in soil temperature were observed to play a sig-
are usually between 1 and 3 millimetres in length, gener-
nificant role in seasonal fluctuation and distribution of
ally found on or near the soil surface and in the litter,
collembola [6-10]
under rocks or the bark of trees. They are usually associ-
Any land use which affects the soil structure or alters
ated with decaying organic matter, some species even
the soil chemistry affect the soil fauna. Land use change
found inhabiting the nests of ants and termites [1]. They
are the most abundant insects found all over the world in alters the below ground physico-chemical characteristics,
a great variety of habitats, and densities as high as often leading to loss of biodiversity and concomitant
200,000 individual per square metre have been recorded depletion of soil nutrients. Collembola richness and di-
[2]. They have varied food habits, with species being versity decreased along a gradient of different land uses,
detritivores, microbivores, coprovores and saprovores. from natural forest passing through mixed use landscape
Collembola together with other soil arthropods such as and agricultural dominated landscapes [11] Different
acari constitute an important component of soil meso- agricultural practices also influences the biodiversity of
fauna in almost all terrestrial ecosystems [3], and are microarthropod communities such that greater biodiver-
indispensable in decomposition of organic matter, main- sity is observed in minimum tillage systems compared to
tenance of soil physical structure, and efficient nutrient deep tillage systems [12]. Such analysis of the effects of
cycling. Although bulk of decomposition is attributed to different land-uses on diversity and species richness and
microbial activities, soil fauna are important in condi- the distribution pattern of collembola could serve as a
tioning the litter and in stimulating microbial activities potential bioindicator of land-use changes [13]. Studies
[4]. Such activities are vital in the functioning of ecosys- on collembolan diversity may be helpful in the develop-
tems and maintenance of soil health and above ground ment of conservation strategies and monitoring of natural
productivity, both in natural (e.g. Forest) and human al- and human-impacted areas [14].

Copyright © 2011 SciRes. OJSS

 Collembolan Density and Diversity in a Forest and an Agroecosystem 55

The present study is intended to analyze the diversity,

density, and seasonal variation of collembola under two
different land uses, represented by a forest and an a-
groecosystem.
2. Materials and Methods
The present investigation was carried out in a pine forest
and an agroecosystem in the vicinity of North-Eastern
Hill University, Shillong, the state capital of Meghalaya
which lies between 25˚4′ N to 26˚10′ N latitudes and
89˚48′ E to 92˚50′ E longitudes.
A seasonal sampling was carried out for each of the Figure 1. Seasonal fluctuation of pH and electrical conduc-
four seasons i.e. spring, summer, autumn and winter for tivity in forest.
one annual cycle i.e. from March 2008 to February 2009.
During each sampling occasion, triplicate samples were
collected from each of the two sampling sites i.e. forest
and agroecosystem. The soil samples were collected with
a soil core of 5 × 5 cm2 in surface area and at a depth of
0 - 10 cm. The forest soil samples also included the
overlying litter, which was absent in the agroecosystem
soil samples. The samples were tagged and sealed,
transported to the laboratory and extracted for soil fauna
for 48 hours using modified high-efficiency Tullgren
extractor. The extracted fauna were sorted, identified and
counted. Alongside, soil samples were also collected for
determining the pH, conductivity, moisture content and Figure 2. Seasonal fluctuation of pH and electrical conduc-
tivity in agroecosystem.
pore space. Soil temperature was recorded at site during
sampling.
winter and highest temperature of 23.03˚C was recorded
Measures of species diversity (Simpson’s index) and
during summer. Soil moisture content gradually de-
the correlation coefficient were analysed by using PAST-
Point pattern analysis 1.99. creases from spring peak of 47.38% to a winter low of
23.76% Soil porosity was observed to be lower during
3. Results and Discussion spring and summer and gradually increase during autumn
3.1. Physico-Chemical Factors and winter with values ranging between 67.05% and
70.39% (Figure 3).
pH of forest soil ranged between 5.57 and 6.02, indicat- Soil temperature, soil moisture and porosity of
ing that the soils are acidic in nature. The seasonal trend agroecosystem are represented in Figure 4. Lowest soil
followed is a slight increase during spring and summer temperature recorded was 14.93˚C during winter and
and then a gradual decrease during autumn and winter.
highest temperature was 23.62˚C recorded during sum-
Electrical conductivity of forest soil was observed to
mer. Moisture content increased from spring to a summer
range between 6.42 µS and 11.45 µS. The seasonal
peak of 58.03% subsequently decreasing gradually to the
variation did not show any specific trend (Figure 1). A
lowest value of 37.61% in winter. The soil porosity was
similar trend of seasonal variation of soil pH was ob-
served in the agroecosystem (Figure 2) as in forest, more or less uniform throughout the seasons with values
where it declined from autumn towards winter season. ranging between 71.86% and 74.48%.
The values ranged between 5.00 and 6.30. As for elec- Although soil temperature of forest and agroecosystem
trical conductivity the values ranged between 11.68 µS showed very little difference, the agroecosystem soil
and 36.60 µS showing a slight increase from spring revealed an overall higher range. Soil moisture content
through summer and autumn and then a slight decrease and porosity clearly showed a higher range in agroeco-
during winter. system as compared to the forest soil reflecting the ef-
Soil temperature increased from spring through sum- fects of tillage. Soil conductivity ranges were also higher
mer and gradually declined from autumn to winter. in the agroecosystem probably as a result of the use of
Lowest soil temperature of 14.7˚C was recorded during organic manure.

Copyright © 2011 SciRes. OJSS

56 Collembolan Density and Diversity in a Forest and an Agroecosystem

Figure 3. Seasonal fluctuation of soil porosity, soil temperature and soil moisture in forest.

Figure 4. Seasonal fluctuation of soil porosity, soil temperature and soil moisture in agroecosystem.

3.2. Species Composition and Diversity Table 1. Species composition of collembola in forest and
agroecosystem.
A total of ten (10) species of collembola were recorded
in the pine forest and nine (9) in agroecosystem soil as Sl. No. Collembola Forest Agroecosystem
shown in Table 1. The species composition was found to
be the same in forest and agroecosystem, except for the 1. Hypogastrura sp. + +
absence of Dicranocentroides sp. in agroecosystem soil. 2. Xenylla sp. + +
Similarity in species composition may be explained by 3. Folsomia sp. + +
the nature of the terrain of the study sites. The forest is
located on a hillock which merges into the agroecosys- 4. Seira sp. + +
tem located in the adjoining valley. It is speculated that 5. Lepidicyrtus sp. + +
the fauna are probably washed down by flowing rain 6. Cyphoderus sp. + +
water from forest soil into the agroecosystem where they
colonise. Figure 5 illustrates the diversity (Simpson’s 7. Dicranocentroides sp. + –
index) of collembolan in forest and agroecosystem. Di- 8. Callyntrura sp. 1 + +
versity of collembolan in forest exhibited a seasonal 9. Callyntrura sp. 2 + +
trend of increasing values from spring (0.40) to summer
and autumn (0.68 and 0.76 respectively) when pH, soil 10. Sphyrotheca sp. + +

Copyright © 2011 SciRes. OJSS

 Collembolan Density and Diversity in a Forest and an Agroecosystem 57

Figure 5. Seasonal fluctuation of diversity in forest and Figure 6. Mean total density of collembola in forest and
agroecosystem. agroecosystem.

temperature and moisture were at a higher range, and cies richness of soil collembolan communities [16].
then decreased during winter (0.62) when soil tempera- The percentage composition of collembolan species in
ture and moisture was lower. A similar trend of seasonal forest and agroecosystem is depicted in Figures 7 and 8
variation of diversity was observed in agroecosystem respectively. Cyphoderus sp. accounted for the highest
where the diversity values ranged between 0.23 recorded percent density in both forest and agroecosystem repre-
during spring and 0.74 recorded during autumn. Col- senting 21% and 30% of the total density respectively.
lembola declines in numbers through the dry season and
then increased during the wet season [15,16]. A marked
difference in diversity between forest and agroecosystem
was observed during spring and winter, whereas, the
values were more or less same during summer and au-
tumn. Overall, the forest harboured a higher diversity of
collembola as compared to the agroecosystem probably
reflecting the higher intensity of disturbance in the latter.
A similar finding was made, where, collembolan di-
versity, abundance and species richness decreased along
a gradient of soil-uses ranging from a forest with mini-
mum intervention to an agricultural site completely ex-
posed to anthropogenic disturbances passing through
managed forest and grasslands [13]. Further, in forest
ecosystems, the primary producer-decomposer systems Figure 7. Percentage composition of Collembolan species in
determine the abundances of collembola through the forest.
availability of habitat provided by the amount of litter
and organic layers in the soils [15]
3.3. Density
Figure 6 illustrates the mean total collembolan density in
forest and agroecosystem soil. Forest soil contained a
higher density of collembola (1,475 individuals·m–2) all
seasons combined, as compared to the agroecosystem
(1,289 individuals·m–2). Highest density was recorded
during summer in forest (2558 individuals·m–2) and dur-
ing autumn in agroecosystem (3,244 individuals·m–2).
The lowest records of mean total density were during
spring in forest (876 individuals·m–2) and agroecosystem
(896 individuals·m–2). Land use intensification (land dis- Figure 8. Percentage composition of Collembolan species
turbance) negatively influences the abundance and spe- inagroecosystem.

Copyright © 2011 SciRes. OJSS

58 Collembolan Density and Diversity in a Forest and an Agroecosystem

This was followed by Hypogastrura sp. (20% in forest significant positive correlation with diversity (p ≤ 0.05),
and 21% in agroecosystem) and Folsomia sp. (16% in while the other physico-chemical factors had a weak
forest and 11% in agroecosystem). Sphyrotheca sp. also positive and weak negative correlation (not significant)
constituted 11% of the total density in agroecosystem. with diversity. Collembolan density also exhibited a sig-
On the whole, Cyphoderus sp., Hypogastrura sp. and nificant positive correlation with soil temperature (p ≤
Folsomia sp. were the dominant species. 0.05) in both forest and agroecosystem. Density and po-
rosity were also positively correlated, (p ≤ 0.05) in forest.
3.4. Correlation
Density and pH in agroecosystem were negatively corre-
The seasonal assessment of correlation of collembolan lated (p ≤ 0.05).
diversity and density with the abiotic factors revealed a
4. Conclusions
random pattern of positive and negative correlation.
(Tables 2 to 5). Diversity and pH in forest showed a Diversity and density of collembola varies greatly with
weak positive correlation (not significant), while electri- changes in physical and climatic conditions of an area.
cal conductivity and soil temperature showed significant The overall diversity and density of collembola was
positive correlation with diversity (p ≤ 0.05 and p ≤ 0.01). higher in the forest as compared to the agroecosystem.
A significant negative correlation was observed between This may be indicative of the higher intensity of distur-
diversity and soil moisture and porosity (p ≤0.05). In the bance in the agroecosystem as compared to the forest by
agroecosystem, pH and soil temperature demonstrated a way of tillage and irrigation which alter the soil structure

Table 2. Correlation between diversity of Collembola and physico-chemical factors in forest.

Season pH Electrical Conductivity (µS) Soil Temperature (˚C) Soil Moisture (%) Soil Porosity (%)
**
Diversity 0.44 –0.19 0.57 0.15 0.04
Spring
p value 0.07 0.45 0.01 0.55 0.87
*
Diversity 0.41 0.52 *
0.25 –0.48 –0.49*
Summer
p value 0.09 0.03 0.31 0.04 0.04

Diversity 0.38 0.47* 0.14 –0.33 –0.24

Autumn
p value 0.12 0.05 0.57 0.18 0.34

Diversity 0.25 –0.13 0.06 0.15 0.12

Winter
p value 0.33 0.62 0.81 0.55 0.65

(*) correlation coefficient significant at p ≤ 0.05. (**) correlation coefficient significant at p ≤ 0.01.

Table 3. Correlation between diversity of Collembola and physico-chemical factors in agroecosystem.

Season pH Electrical Conductivity (µS) Soil Temperature (˚C) Soil Moisture (%) Soil Porosity (%)

Diversity 0.66* –0.45 0.60* 0.45 0.48

Spring
p value 0.02 0.14 0.04 0.15 0.11

Diversity –0.31 0.19 0.39 –0.23 0.18

Summer
p value 0.33 0.55 0.20 0.46 0.57

Diversity –0.08 –0.07 –0.25 0.17 –0.29

Autumn
p value 0.79 0.83 0.43 0.60 0.36

Diversity –0.10 0.20 0.25 –0.20 –0.35

Winter
p value 0.76 0.54 0.43 0.53 0.27

(*) correlation coefficient significant at p ≤ 0.05.

Copyright © 2011 SciRes. OJSS

 Collembolan Density and Diversity in a Forest and an Agroecosystem 59

Table 4. Correlation between density of Collembola and physico-chemical factors in forest.

Season pH Electrical Conductivity (µS) Soil Temperature (˚C) Soil Moisture (%) Soil Porosity (%)
Density –0.26 –0.08 0.51* 0.10 0.50*
Spring
p value 0.29 0.74 0.03 0.70 0.03
Density 0.26 0.23 0.65 0.16 0.15
Summer
p value 0.30 0.35 0.00 0.52 0.56
Density 0.39 0.82 –0.01 –0.42 –0.48*
Autumn
p value 0.10 0.00 0.97 0.08 0.05
Density –0.34 –0.34 –0.05 0.26 0.25
Winter
p value 0.16 0.16 0.84 0.30 0.31
*
( ) correlation coefficient significant at p ≤ 0.05.

Table 5. Correlation between density of Collembola and physico-chemical factors in agroecosystem.

Season pH Electrical Conductivity (µS) Soil Temperature (˚C) Soil Moisture (%) Soil Porosity (%)
Density –0.30 –0.51 0.21 –0.46 –0.05
Spring
p value 0.35 0.09 0.51 0.13 0.88
Density –0.65 0.36 –0.07 0.06 0.50
Summer
p value 0.02 0.25 0.82 0.86 0.10
Density –0.16 –0.01 0.26 –0.06 –0.28
Autumn
p value 0.63 0.98 0.41 0.85 0.38
Density 0.34 –0.53 0.63 0.15 –0.23
Winter
p value 0.27 0.08 0.03 0.65 0.47
*
( ) correlation coefficient significant at p ≤ 0.05.

and its chemical nature, depleting the available resources [2] S. Hopkin, “The Biology of the Collembola (Springtails):
and making the soil less habitable and conducive for the the Most Abundant Insects in the World,” 2002.
http:// www.fathom.com/feature/122603/
growth and sustenance of soil fauna. The pattern of sea-
sonal fluctuations of species diversity and density corre- [3] J. Rusek, “Biodiversity of Collembola and Their Func-
tional Role in the Ecosystem,” Biodiverisity and Conser-
sponded with changes in the physico-chemical factors as vation, Vol. 12, 1998, pp. 1207-1219.
evidenced by the statistically significant correlations doi:10.1023/A:1008887817883
between the two entities. Higher species diversity and [4] D. C. Coleman and D. A. Crossley, “Fundamentals of
density was recorded during the spring and summer Soil Ecology,” Academic Press, New York, 1996.
months when the soil temperature and soil moisture were [5] W. II Choi, D. L. Moorhead, D. A. Neher and M. II.
on the higher range than autumn and winter months. Ryoo, “A Modeling Study of Soil Temperature and Mois-
Among the collembolan species recorded, Cyphoderus sp, ture Effects on Population Dynamics of Paronychiurus
Folsomia s, and Hypogastrura sp. contributed a rela- kimi (Collembola: Onychiuridae),” Biology Fertile Soils,
tively high percentage to total density in both the study Vol. 43, No. 1, 2006, pp. 69-75.
doi:10.1007/s00374-005-0062-5
sites. Temporally, they were encountered throughout the
sampling period except for a few instances when they [6] S. K. Mitra, A. K. Hazra and A. K. Sanyal, “Ecology of
collembola at the eden gardens, Calcutta,” Ecological
were absent. This implies that, these species dominate
Bulletin (Stockholm), Vol. 25, 1977, pp. 539-544.
the total recorded population of collembola and have a
[7] H. A. Verhorf and A. J. van. Selm, “Distribution and
wide range of tolerance (occurrence) to soil physico-
Population Dynamics of Collembola in Relation to Soil
chemical perturbances. Moisture,” Holarctic Ecology, Vol. 6, 1983, pp. 378-394.
[8] P. K. Vatsauliya and J. R. B. Alfred, “Ecological Studies
REFERENCES on Jhum Fallows (Meghalaya) with Special Reference to
[1] http://www.ento.csiro.au/education/hexapods/collembola. Soil Fauna,” Records of the Zoological Survey of India
html. Ocassional Paper, No. 149, 1993.

Copyright © 2011 SciRes. OJSS

60 Collembolan Density and Diversity in a Forest and an Agroecosystem

[9] V. Huhta and S. M. Hanninen, “Effects of Temperature [13] J. P. Sousa, M. M. da Gama, C. Pinto, A. Keating, F.
and Moisture Fluctuations on an Experimental Soil Mi- Calhoa, M. Lemos, C. Castro, T. Luz, P. Leitao and S.
croarthropod Community,” Pedobiologia, Vol. 45, No. 3, Dias, “Effects of Land-Use on Collembola Diversity Pat-
2001, pp. 279-286. terns in a Mediterranean Landscape,” Pedobiologia, Vol.
doi:10.1078/0031-4056-00085 48, No. 5-6, 2004, pp. 609-622.
[10] E. Jucevica and V. Melecis, “Long-Term Effects of Cli- doi:10.1016/j.pedobi.2004.06.004
mate Warming on Forest Soil Collembola,” Acta Zo- [14] M. P. Culik and D. Z. Filho, “Diversity and Distribution
ologica Lituanica, Vol. 15, No. 2, 2005, pp. 124-126. of Collembola (Arthropoda: Hexapoda) of Brazil,” Bio-
[11] J. P. Sousa, T. Bolger, M. M. da Gama, T. Lukkari, J. F. diversity and Conservation, Vol. 12, No. 6, 2003, pp.
Ponge, C. Simon, G. Traser, A. J. Vanbergen, A. Brennan, 1119-1143. doi:10.1023/A:1023069912619
F. Dubs, E. Ivitis, A. Keating, S. Stofer and A. D. Watt, [15] D. Wiwatwitaya and H. Takeda, “Seasonal Changes in
“Changes in Collembola Richness and Diversity Along a Soil Arthropod Abundance in the Dry Evergreen Forest
Gradient of Land-Use Intensity: A Pan European Study,” of North-East Thailand, with Special Reference to Col-
Pedobiologia, Vol. 50, No. 2, 2006, pp. 147-156. lembolan Communities,” Ecology Research, Vol. 20, No.
doi:10.1016/j.pedobi.2005.10.005 1, 2005, pp. 59-70.
[12] J. Cortet, D. Ronce, N. P. Balaguer, C. Beaufreton, A. doi:10.1007/s11284-004-0013-x
Chabert, P. Viaux and J. P. C de Fonseca, “Impacts of [16] J. J. Muturi, J. P. Mbugil, J. M. Mueke, J. Lagerlof, J. K.
Different Agricultural Practices on the Biodiversity of Mungatu, G. Nyamasyo and M. Gikungu, “Collembola
Microarthropod Communities in Arable Crop Systems,” Density and Diversity Along a Gradient of Land-Use
European Journal of Soil Biology, Vol. 38, No. 3-4, 2002, Types in Embu District, Eastern Kenya,” Tropical and
pp. 239-244. doi:10.1016/S1164-5563(02)01152-4 Subtropical Agroecosystems, Vol. 11, 2009, pp. 361-369.

Copyright © 2011 SciRes. OJSS