Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Jan 4;10(1):4.
doi: 10.3390/insects10010004.

Linking Termite Feeding Preferences and Soil Physical Functioning in Southern-Indian Woodlands

Sougueh Cheik  1   2 , Rashmi Ramesh Shanbhag  3 , Ajay Harit  4 , Nicolas Bottinelli  5   6 , Raman Sukumar  7 , Pascal Jouquet  8   9
Affiliations

Linking Termite Feeding Preferences and Soil Physical Functioning in Southern-Indian Woodlands

Sougueh Cheik et al. Insects. .

Abstract

Termites are undoubtedly amongst the most important soil macroinvertebrate decomposers in semi-arid environments in India. However, in this specific type of environment, the influence of termite foraging activity on soil functioning remains unexplored. Therefore, this study examines the link between the quality of litter and the functional impact of termite feeding preferences on soil properties and soil hydraulic conductivity in a deciduous forest in southern India. Different organic resources (elephant dung: "ED", elephant grass: "EG", acacia leaves: "AL" and layers of cardboard: "CB") were applied on repacked soil cores. ED appeared to be the most attractive resource to Odontotermes obesus, leading to a larger amount of soil sheeting (i.e., the soil used by termites for covering the litter they consume), more numerous and larger holes in the ground and a lower soil bulk density. As a consequence, ED increased the soil hydraulic conductivity (4-fold) compared with the control soil. Thus, this study highlights that the more O. obesus prefers a substrate, the more this species impacts soil dynamics and water infiltration in the soil. This study also shows that ED can be used as an efficient substrate for accelerating the infiltration of water in southern-Indian soils, mainly through the production of galleries that are open on the soil surface, offering new perspectives on termite management in this environment.

Keywords: Odontotermes obesus; litter quality; organic resource consumption; sheeting; soil water dynamic; termite foraging activity.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Rate of organic resource consumption by termites, in % of the initial organic resource weight loss (elephant dung (“ED”), acacia leaves (“AL”), elephant grass (“EG”) and cardboard (“CB”)), Error bars represent the standard error of the mean. Histograms with the same letter are not significantly different at p ≥ 0.05 (n = 5). N/A for non-applicable in the case of the control.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Amount of termite sheeting (g) for each treatment. Treatments are: control (“CTRL”), elephant dung (“ED”), acacia leaves (“AL”), elephant grass (“EG”) and cardboard (“CB”). Error bars represent the standard error of the mean. Histograms with the same letter are not significantly different at p ≥ 0.05 (n = 5).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Number of foraging holes observed on the soil surface. Treatments are: control (“CTRL”), elephant dung (“ED”), acacia leaves (“AL”), elephant grass (“EG”) and cardboard (“CB”). Error bars represent the standard error of the mean. Histograms with the same letter are not significantly different at p ≥ 0.05 (n = 5).
Figure 4
Figure 4
Average diameter of foraging holes (in mm). Treatments are: control (“CTRL”), elephant dung (“ED”), acacia leaves (“AL”), elephant grass (“EG”) and cardboard (“CB”). Error bars represent the standard error of the mean. Histograms with the same letter are not significantly different at p ≥ 0.05 (n = 5).
Figure 5
Figure 5
Matrix of correlations between variables. Only significant correlations (p < 0.05) are given. The scale colour indicates whether correlations between variables were positive (closer to 1, blue circles) or negative (closer to −1, red squares).
Figure 6
Figure 6
Soil bulk density (g cm−3) below the treatments (control (“CTRL”), elephant dung (“ED”), acacia leaves (“AL”), elephant grass (“EG”) and cardboard (“CB”)). Error bars represent the standard error of the mean. Histograms with the same letter are not significantly different at p ≥ 0.05 (n = 5).
Figure 7
Figure 7
Soil hydraulic conductivity (Ksat, in mm s−1) for the different treatments (control (“CTRL”), elephant dung (“ED”), acacia leaves (“AL”), elephant grass (“EG”) and cardboard (“CB”)). Error bars represent the standard error of the mean. Histograms with the same letter are not significantly different at p ≥ 0.05 (n = 5).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Lavelle P., Decaëns T., Aubert M., Barot S., Blouin M., Bureau F., Margerie P., Mora P., Rossi J.-P. Soil invertebrates and ecosystem services. Eur. J. Soil Biol. 2006;42:S3–S15. doi: 10.1016/j.ejsobi.2006.10.002. - DOI
    1. Wall D.H., Nielsen U.N., Six J. Soil biodiversity and human health. Nature. 2015 doi: 10.1038/nature15744. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Holt J.A., Lepage M. Termites and Soil Properties. In: Abe T., Bignell D.E., Higashi M., editors. Termites: Evolution, Sociality, Symbioses, Ecology. Springer; Dordrecht, The Netherlands: 2000. pp. 389–407.
    1. Jouquet P., Traoré S., Choosai C., Hartmann C., Bignell D. Influence of termites on ecosystem functioning. Ecosystem services provided by termites. Eur. J. Soil Biol. 2011;47:215–222. doi: 10.1016/j.ejsobi.2011.05.005. - DOI
    1. Bignell D.E., Eggleton P. Termites in Ecosystems. In: Abe T., Bignell D.E., Higashi M., editors. Termites: Evolution, Sociality, Symbioses, Ecology. Springer; Dordrecht, The Netherlands: 2000. pp. 363–387.