Earthworm Watch: Insights into urban earthworm communities in the UK using citizen science

IF 3.7 2区 农林科学 Q1 ECOLOGY
Victoria J. Burton , Alan G. Jones , Lucy D. Robinson , Paul Eggleton , Andy Purvis
{"title":"Earthworm Watch: Insights into urban earthworm communities in the UK using citizen science","authors":"Victoria J. Burton ,&nbsp;Alan G. Jones ,&nbsp;Lucy D. Robinson ,&nbsp;Paul Eggleton ,&nbsp;Andy Purvis","doi":"10.1016/j.ejsobi.2024.103622","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The distribution of earthworm ecological groups in urban areas is not well-known, despite their crucial role in delivering soil ecosystem services such as nutrient cycling and water drainage. Citizen science engages public audiences in the scientific research process and is an excellent tool for collecting biodiversity data in urban areas, where most of the UK population resides. However, a disadvantage is that differing levels of skill and engagement among participants can create statistical challenges. The Earthworm Watch citizen science project used 668 matched-pair surveys to estimate how the abundance and ecological diversity of earthworms respond to land management practices, and soil properties in UK urban habitats. A total of 5170 earthworms were counted during the project with a mean of 8 earthworms per soil pit - equivalent to a density of 198 earthworms per m<sup>2</sup>. Soil moisture and texture were the largest drivers of total earthworm abundance, with habitat borderline statistically insignificant. Endogeic earthworms were found in 71 % of soil pits, epigeic in 62 % and anecic in 33 %. Fertiliser use also had a significant effect on total abundance, but only when organic fertiliser was used. Earthworm ecological groups demonstrated varied responses to habitat, with endogeic earthworms consistently the most abundant group, showing slight preferences for grasslands and vegetable beds. Anecic earthworms had the lowest abundance across all habitats but were more prevalent in grasslands and vegetable beds. Epigeic earthworms were most abundant beneath shrubs and hedges. These findings align with expected patterns of earthworm ecology, underscoring the potential of well-designed citizen science projects to yield valuable insights into urban earthworms and soil health.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":12057,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Soil Biology","volume":"121 ","pages":"Article 103622"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1164556324000281/pdfft?md5=65e3b7dde70e42b73585f0b006fa1d8a&pid=1-s2.0-S1164556324000281-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Soil Biology","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1164556324000281","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The distribution of earthworm ecological groups in urban areas is not well-known, despite their crucial role in delivering soil ecosystem services such as nutrient cycling and water drainage. Citizen science engages public audiences in the scientific research process and is an excellent tool for collecting biodiversity data in urban areas, where most of the UK population resides. However, a disadvantage is that differing levels of skill and engagement among participants can create statistical challenges. The Earthworm Watch citizen science project used 668 matched-pair surveys to estimate how the abundance and ecological diversity of earthworms respond to land management practices, and soil properties in UK urban habitats. A total of 5170 earthworms were counted during the project with a mean of 8 earthworms per soil pit - equivalent to a density of 198 earthworms per m2. Soil moisture and texture were the largest drivers of total earthworm abundance, with habitat borderline statistically insignificant. Endogeic earthworms were found in 71 % of soil pits, epigeic in 62 % and anecic in 33 %. Fertiliser use also had a significant effect on total abundance, but only when organic fertiliser was used. Earthworm ecological groups demonstrated varied responses to habitat, with endogeic earthworms consistently the most abundant group, showing slight preferences for grasslands and vegetable beds. Anecic earthworms had the lowest abundance across all habitats but were more prevalent in grasslands and vegetable beds. Epigeic earthworms were most abundant beneath shrubs and hedges. These findings align with expected patterns of earthworm ecology, underscoring the potential of well-designed citizen science projects to yield valuable insights into urban earthworms and soil health.

蚯蚓观察:利用公民科学洞察英国城市蚯蚓群落
尽管蚯蚓在提供养分循环和排水等土壤生态系统服务方面发挥着至关重要的作用,但蚯蚓生态群在城市地区的分布却鲜为人知。公民科学让公众参与到科学研究过程中,是在英国大部分人口居住的城市地区收集生物多样性数据的绝佳工具。但其缺点是,参与者的技能和参与程度不同,会给统计工作带来挑战。蚯蚓观察公民科学项目使用了 668 项配对调查来估算蚯蚓的数量和生态多样性如何对英国城市栖息地的土地管理方法和土壤特性做出反应。项目期间共计数了 5170 条蚯蚓,平均每个土坑有 8 条蚯蚓,相当于每平方米有 198 条蚯蚓。土壤湿度和质地是蚯蚓总数量的最大驱动因素,而栖息地在统计上并不重要。71%的土坑中发现了内生蚯蚓,62%的土坑中发现了外生蚯蚓,33%的土坑中发现了内生蚯蚓。肥料的使用对蚯蚓的总数量也有显著影响,但只有在使用有机肥料时才会出现这种情况。蚯蚓生态群组对栖息地的反应各不相同,内生蚯蚓一直是数量最多的群组,对草地和菜地略有偏好。无尾蚯蚓在所有生境中数量最少,但在草地和菜畦中数量较多。灌木和树篱下的蚯蚓数量最多。这些发现与蚯蚓生态学的预期模式一致,强调了精心设计的公民科学项目在洞察城市蚯蚓和土壤健康方面的潜力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
European Journal of Soil Biology
European Journal of Soil Biology 环境科学-生态学
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
51
审稿时长
27 days
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Soil Biology covers all aspects of soil biology which deal with microbial and faunal ecology and activity in soils, as well as natural ecosystems or biomes connected to ecological interests: biodiversity, biological conservation, adaptation, impact of global changes on soil biodiversity and ecosystem functioning and effects and fate of pollutants as influenced by soil organisms. Different levels in ecosystem structure are taken into account: individuals, populations, communities and ecosystems themselves. At each level, different disciplinary approaches are welcomed: molecular biology, genetics, ecophysiology, ecology, biogeography and landscape ecology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信