黄河下游农业景观中不同生境类型地表节肢动物优势类群

生物多样性是连接景观异质性与生态系统服务的桥梁。在区域尺度上,以指示类群代替地表节肢动物类群,可以有效的开展生物多样性的保护工作。但是,在黄河下游农业景观中,关于地表节肢动物指示类群的研究报道较少。以黄河下游农业景观中4种生境类型(农田、林地、树篱和沟渠)为研究样地,且在农田生境中划分不同尺度(尺度1,3.6 hm2、尺度2,14 hm2和尺度3,28 hm2),通过调查不同生境中地表节肢动物分布及其多样性,结合地表节肢动物优势类群的辨识,分析了优势类群和地表节肢动物多样性的相关性,确定了研究区内地表节肢动物多样性的指示类群。结果发现:研究区内地表节肢动物优势类群为膜翅目、鞘翅目和蜘蛛目。树篱和林地生境的地表节肢动物多样性指示类群是膜翅目,农田生境中地表节肢动物多样性指示类群是鞘翅目,沟渠生境中地表节肢动物多样性指示类群是蜘蛛目。农田生境中优势类群间无相关性(P0.05);林地、沟渠和树篱生境中鞘翅目与蜘蛛目之间存在显著正相关(P0.01);林地和沟渠生境中,鞘翅目与膜翅目之间存在正相关(P0.05)。在农田生境中优势类群之间的相关性存在尺度依赖性,随着空间尺度的增大,相关性有一定的增强。在尺度2和尺度3上膜翅目和鞘翅目均存在正相关(P0.05),并且随着尺度增加而呈上升趋势。研究表明,黄河下游农业景观中不同生境类型地表节肢动物多样性的指示类群差别较大,其中树篱和林地生境具有较高的相似性,而农田生境地表节肢动物优势类群相关性存在尺度依赖性。在黄河下游农业景观中,以优势类群多样性代替地表节肢动物类群的多样性,可以在条件不足、时间紧迫的情况下更加有效的开展生物多样性的保护工作。

Research of the dominant group of ground arthropods in the agro-landscape along the lower reaches of the Yellow River

The protection of biodiversity is important for ecosystem service, but in most regions, biodiversity shows a trend of decline, and the reasons are not fully explained by available data, therefore many researchers have focused on the protection of the biodiversity. Arthropods are important components of terrestrial ecosystems, so both domestic and foreign researchers have been carrying out extensive research on the arthropods. Different semi-natural habitats are important for biodiversity protection because of the formation of heterogeneity in agricultural landscape. Arthropods are hotspot in the indicator species research, accounting for 15% of the total indicator species. Due to that the biodiversity indicator can reflect biodiversity of the region and monitor the change of biodiversity, those indicators can be studied instead of whole community to understand the biodiversity when condition or time is limited. By comparing the dominant groups of ground arthropods across different habitats (hedgerow, woodland, farmland or ditch) and farmland spatial scales (3.6 hm², 14 hm² and 28 hm²), we tried to find the biodiversity indicator in the study area, and then we used the indicator groups instead of ground arthropods community to conduct biodiversity research. The data from the first scale was taken as the average abundance of the ground arthropods in farmland A and farmland B; the data from the second scales was taken as the abundance of the ground arthropods in farmland A and farmland B; the data from the third scales was taken as the sum abundance of the ground arthropods in farmland A and farmland B. Data was done with ln transformation and statistical analysis was conducted with SPSS. Pearson analysis in R was applied (if the assumption of normality was violated, we used Spearman rank correlation instead of Pearson) to analyze the correlations between dominant groups and ground arthropod community with coefficient of 95% confidence interval to compare different habitats and different scales. The results showed that the ground arthropod dominant groups in the study area were Hymenoptera, Coleoptera and Araneae. For both hedgerow habitat and woodland habitat, the indicator group was Hymenoptera, Coleoptera was for farmland habitat, and Araneae was for ditch habitat. The three dominant groups had no correlation between each other (P > 0.05) in farmland habitat. Coleoptera and Araneae had a significant positive correlation in woodland habitat, ditch habitat and hedgerow habitat (P < 0.01). In woodland habitat and ditch habitat, Coleoptera and Hymenoptera also had a positive correlation (P < 0.05). Hymenoptera and Coleoptera existed a positive correlation on the second scale and the third scale in farmland habitat (P < 0.05), and the correlation presented a tendency of increasing with the increase scale. The study has shown that the biodiversity indicator groups have a great difference among different habitats, but the hedgerow habitat and woodland habitat have high similarity, while in farmland habitat the dominant group correlation showed scale-dependent. Land use intensity has a significant effect on the ground arthropod community structure, the more human disturbance, the weaker correlation between the ground arthropods. Increasing semi-natural habitats in the agricultural landscape would contribute to the number of predatory arthropod, and improve the abundance of predatory arthropod conducive to protect biodiversity in agricultural landscape and the controlling of biological in the terrestrial ecosystem. Suggestion for further research in the study area is that we can make use of correlation between the species to build a food chain for the biodiversity protection and ecosystem service.