Cited by 2Environmental DNA in Biodiversity StudiesIsotope Analysis in EcologyInvertebrate Taxonomy and Ecology

Niche Differentiation of Three Terrestrial Isopod Species Based on DNA Metabarcoding

Open access
Wang, Jiachen, Yang, Yiwen, Zhang, Gaoji, Xu, Wei, Liu, Hongyi·2025·Ecology and Evolution

Abstract

Species coexistence is a hot topic in ecology, with niche differentiation playing a key role in reducing interspecific competition. This study investigates the dietary habits and niche differentiation of three terrestrial isopod species ( Armadillidium vulgare , Sphaeroma raffaelei , and Trachelipus semiproiectus ) using DNA metabarcoding technology. By analyzing plant food composition, we identified significant differences in dietary preferences and niche widths among the species, with niche width (B) values of 13.3987 for T. semiproiectus , 10.0396 for S. raffaelei , and 6.0363 for A. vulgare . Trachelipus semiproiectus exhibited the broadest trophic niche, consuming a diverse range of plant taxa, including Bryopsida and Polypodiopsida, while A. vulgare and S. raffaelei showed more specialized diets dominated by Sapindales and Rosales, respectively. Dietary overlap indices ( O jk ) revealed moderate overlap between T. semiproiectus and A. vulgare (0.48) and S. raffaelei (0.39), whereas A. vulgare and S. raffaelei showed the lowest overlap (0.29). The results highlight the importance of dietary specialization and resource partitioning in facilitating species coexistence. This study provides new insights into the feeding ecology of terrestrial isopods and contributes to understanding soil invertebrate community dynamics, offering a foundation for biodiversity conservation and ecosystem management.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/ece3.71682

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 47 · Cited by 2

Authors
Wang, J., Yang, Y., Zhang, G., Xu, W., & Liu, H.
Affiliations
Nanjing Forestry University (CN)
Corresponding author
Liu, Hongyi
Venue
Ecology and Evolution
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2025-06-26
Volume
15
Issue
7
Pages
e71682-e71682
ISSN
2045-7758 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4411740733
Cited by
2
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 2
FWCI
1.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Ecology and Evolution (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
National College Students Innovation and Entrepreneurship Training Program (202410298097Z)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Environmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Isotope Analysis in Ecology
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Invertebrate Taxonomy and Ecology
Keywords
niche differentiation, terrestrial isopods, Armadillidium vulgare, dietary specialization, resource partitioning, species coexistence, interspecific competition, trophic niche width, diet overlap, feeding ecology, soil invertebrates, DNA metabarcoding

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review