Cited by 15Invertebrate Taxonomy and EcologySoil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsEnvironmental and biological studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.

Nutritive value and physical and chemical deterrents of forage grass litter explain feeding performances of two soil macrodetritivores

Open access
Pey, Benjamin, Trân, Cécile, Cruz, Pablo, Hedde, Mickaël, Jouany, Claire, Laplanche, Christophe, Nahmani, Johanne, Chauvet, Eric, Lecerf, Antoine·2019·Applied Soil Ecology

Abstract

Millipedes (Diplopoda) and terrestrial isopods (Isopoda) may play a significant role in soil decomposition. The present study aimed to contribute to the general understanding of feeding performances of macrodetritivores consuming grass litter by answering two questions. Q1: Are grass litter traits indicating nutritive value (i.e. chemical) and traits indicating feeding deterrents (i.e. mainly physical but not necessarily) both necessary to explain individual feeding performances of soil invertebrates consuming grass litter? Q2: Do grass physical traits indicating physical deterrents (e.g. WHC for mechanical aspects) provide more than, less than or the same amount of information about invertebrate individual performances as grass chemical traits indicating mainly chemical but also physical deterrents (e.g. lignin content directly for digestibility and indirectly for mechanical aspects)? We thus designed a laboratory experiment to assess individual feeding performances of two common macrodetritivores (Armadillidium vulgare (Latreille, 1804) and Glomeris marginata (Villiers, 1789)) in four monospecific treatments of litter from perennial forage grasses (Brachypodium pinnatum P. Beauv., Bromus erectus Huds., Festuca rubra L. and Holcus lanatus L.). A. vulgare feeding performances were correlated with nutritive values (litter N and P contents) and plant mechanical aspects (LDMC: leaf dry matter content). G. marginata performances were correlated with chemical deterrents (cellulose and lignin contents). Thus, (Q1) for grass litters, both traits indicating nutritive value (e.g. N, P) and feeding deterrents (e.g. LDMC, lignin content) are necessary to explain macroinvertebrates feeding performances. We also demonstrated the results depend on the invertebrate species considered. Also, (Q2) chemical deterrents may influence feeding performances of G. marginata the most, while physical deterrents related to mechanical aspects may influence those of A. vulgare the most. Our study shows that using grass chemical and physical traits that indicate both nutritive value and feeding deterrents can help explain feeding performances of macrodetritivores.

Overview

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 · 10.1016/j.apsoil.2018.09.006

Cites

Statistics

Verification

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.

Citations

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 30 · Cited by 15

Research works printed but not linked: 28

  1. Abelho, 2009, Effect of introduced exotic tree litter on consumption patterns of the introduced exotic isopod Armadillidium vulgare, Eur. J. Soil Biol., 45, 306, 10.1016/j.ejsobi.2009.04.004 · DOI
  2. Barrios, 2007, Soil biota, ecosystem services and land productivity, Ecol. Econ., 64, 269, 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.03.004 · DOI · Paper page
  3. Cornelissen, 1997, Functional leaf attributes predict litter decomposition rate in herbaceous plants, New Phytol., 135, 109, 10.1046/j.1469-8137.1997.00628.x · DOI
  4. Coulis, 2015, Functional dissimilarity across trophic levels as a driver of soil processes in a Mediterranean decomposer system exposed to two moisture levels, Oikos, 124, 1304, 10.1111/oik.01917 · DOI
  5. Coulis, 2013, Macroarthropod-microorganism interactions during the decomposition of Mediterranean shrub litter at different moisture levels, Soil Biol. Biochem., 64, 114, 10.1016/j.soilbio.2013.04.012 · DOI
  6. Cruz, 2010, Typologie fonctionnelle de graminées fourragères pérennes: une classification multitraits, Fourrages, 11
  7. David, 2014, The role of litter-feeding macroarthropods in decomposition processes: a reappraisal of common views, Soil Biol. Biochem., 76, 109, 10.1016/j.soilbio.2014.05.009 · DOI
  8. David, 1998, How to calculate leaf litter consumption by saprophagous macrofauna?, Eur. J. Soil Biol., 34, 111, 10.1016/S1164-5563(00)88647-1 · DOI
  9. David, 2010, The ecology of saprophagous macroarthropods (millipedes, woodlice) in the context of global change, Biol. Rev., 85, 881, 10.1111/j.1469-185X.2010.00138.x · DOI
  10. David, 2001, Feeding rates of the woodlouse Armadillidium vulgare on herb litters produced at two levels of atmospheric CO2, Oecologia, 127, 343, 10.1007/s004420000599 · DOI
  11. Decaëns, 2006, The values of soil animals for conservation biology, Eur. J. Soil Biol., 42, S23, 10.1016/j.ejsobi.2006.07.001 · DOI
  12. Gerlach, 2014, Feeding preferences of native terrestrial isopod species (Oniscoidea, Isopoda) for native and introduced leaf litter, Appl. Soil Ecol., 83, 95, 10.1016/j.apsoil.2014.02.006 · DOI
  13. Gerlach, 2012, Consumption of introduced oak litter by native decomposers (Glomeridae, Diplopoda), Soil Biol. Biochem., 44, 26, 10.1016/j.soilbio.2011.09.006 · DOI
  14. Ibanez, 2013, Herbivory mediated by coupling between biomechanical traits of plants and grasshoppers, Funct. Ecol., 27, 479, 10.1111/1365-2435.12058 · DOI
  15. Ihnen, 2008, Selective consumption and digestion of litter microbes by Porcellio scaber (Isopoda: Oniscidea), Pedobiologia, 51, 335, 10.1016/j.pedobi.2007.06.001 · DOI · Paper page
  16. Joly, 2015, Litter-type specific microbial responses to the transformation of leaf litter into millipede feces, Soil Biol. Biochem., 86, 17, 10.1016/j.soilbio.2015.03.014 · DOI
  17. Khaled, 2006, Using leaf traits to rank native grasses according to their nutritive value, Rangel. Ecol. Manag., 59, 648, 10.2111/05-031R2.1 · DOI
  18. Kibblewhite, 2008, Soil health in agricultural systems, Philos Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci., 363, 685, 10.1098/rstb.2007.2178 · DOI
  19. Levin, 1973, The role of trichomes in plant defense, Q. Rev. Biol., 10.1086/407484 · DOI
  20. Massey, 2006, Silica in grasses as a defence against insect herbivores: contrasting effects on folivores and a phloem feeder, J. Anim. Ecol., 75, 595, 10.1111/j.1365-2656.2006.01082.x · DOI
  21. Paris, 1963, The ecology of Armadillidium vulgare (Isopoda: Oniscoidea) in california grassland: food, enemies, and weather, Ecol. Monogr., 33, 1, 10.2307/1948475 · DOI
  22. Pontes, 2007, Seasonal productivity and nutritive value of temperate grasses found in semi-natural pastures in Europe: responses to cutting frequency and N supply, Grass Forage Sci., 62, 485, 10.1111/j.1365-2494.2007.00604.x · DOI
  23. Rouifed, 2010, The importance of biotic factors in predicting global change effects on decomposition of temperate forest leaf litter, Oecologia, 163, 247, 10.1007/s00442-009-1528-1 · DOI
  24. Rushton, 1983, Food and feeding rates of the terrestrial isopod Armadillidium vulgare (Latreille), Oecologia, 57, 415, 10.1007/BF00377189 · DOI · Paper page
  25. Wolters, 2000, Invertebrate control of soil organic matter stability, Biol. Fertil. Soils, 31, 1, 10.1007/s003740050618 · DOI
  26. Wood, 2012, Feeding rates of Balloniscus sellowii (Crustacea, Isopoda, Oniscidea): the effect of leaf litter decomposition and its relation to the phenolic and flavonoid content, Zookeys, 231–245
  27. Zimmer, 2005, Do woodlice and earthworms interact synergistically in leaf litter decomposition?, Funct. Ecol., 19, 7, 10.1111/j.0269-8463.2005.00926.x · DOI
  28. Zimmer, 2002, Species-specific patterns of litter processing by terrestrial isopods (Isopoda: Oniscidea) in high intertidal salt marshes and coastal forests, Funct. Ecol., 16, 596, 10.1046/j.1365-2435.2002.00669.x · DOI

Metadata

Authors
Pey, B., Trân, C., Cruz, P., Hedde, M., Jouany, C., Laplanche, C., Nahmani, J., Chauvet, E., & Lecerf, A.
Affiliations
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
  • Institut National Polytechnique de Toulouse (FR)
  • Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement (FR)
Corresponding author
Pey, Benjamin
Venue
Applied Soil Ecology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-01
Volume
133
Pages
81-88
ISSN
0929-1393 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2894018946
Cited by
15
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3
FWCI
1.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Applied Soil Ecology (publishedVersion)
  • Open Archive Toulouse Archive Ouverte (University of Toulouse) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
IDEX program
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Invertebrate Taxonomy and Ecology
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Environmental and biological studies
Keywords
feeding performance, grass litter, nutritional value, feeding deterrents, Armadillidium vulgare, Glomeris marginata, soil invertebrates, lignin, cellulose, leaf dry matter content, nitrogen and phosphorus content, soil decomposition, forage grasses, Brachypodium pinnatum, Bromus erectus, Festuca rubra, Holcus lanatus

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