| |
|
|
| Registros recuperados : 5 | |
| 2. |  | MATHIEU, J.; ANTUNES, A. C.; BAROT, S.; ASATO, A. E. B.; BARTZ, M. L. C.; BROWN, G. G.; CALDERON-SANOU, I.; DECAËNS, T.; FONTE, S. J.; GANAULT, P.; GAUZENS, B.; GONGALSKY, K. B.; GUERRA, C. A.; HENGL, T.; LAVELLE, P.; MARICHAL, R.; MEHRING, H.; PEÑA-VENEGAS, C. P.; CASTRO, D.; POTAPOV, A.; THÉBAULT, E.; THUILLER, W.; WITJES, M.; ZHANG, C.; EISENHAUER, N. sOilFauna: a global synthesis effort on the drivers of soil macrofauna communities and functioning. Soil Organisms, v. 94, n. 2, p. 111?126, 2022. Workshop report.| Biblioteca(s): Embrapa Florestas. |
|    |
| 3. | | POTAPOV, A. M.; SUN, X.; BARNES, A. D.; BRIONES, M. J. I.; BROWN, G. G.; CAMERON, E. K.; CHANG, C.-H.; CORTET, J.; EISENHAUER, N.; FRANCO, A. L. C.; FUJII, S.; GEISEN, S.; GONGALSKY, K. B.; GUERRA, C.; HAIMI, J.; HANDA, I. T.; JANION-SCHEEPERS, C.; KARABAN, K.; LINDO, Z.; MATHIEU, J.; MORENO, M. L.; MURVANIDZE, M.; NIELSEN, U. N.; SCHEU, S.; SCHMIDT, O.; SCHNEIDER, C.; SEEBER, J.; TSIAFOULI, M. A.; TUMA, J.; TIUNOV, A. V.; ZAITSEV, A. S.; ASHWOOD, F.; CALLAHAM, M.; WALL, D. H. Global monitoring of soil animal communities using a common methodology. Soil Organisms, v. 94, n. 1, p. 55-68, Apr. 2022.| Biblioteca(s): Embrapa Florestas. |
| |
| 4. | | PHILLIPS, H. R. P.; BACH, E. M.; BARTZ, M. L. C.; BENNETT, J. M.; BEUGNON, R.; BRIONES, M. J. I.; BROWN, G. G.; FERLIAN, O.; GONGALSKY, K. B.; GUERRA, C. A.; KÖNIG-RIES, B.; KREBS, J. J.; ORGIAZZI, A.; RAMIREZ, K. S.; RUSSELL, D. J.; SCHWARZ, B.; WALL, D. H.; BROSE, U.; DECAËNS, T.; LAVELLE, P.; LOREAU, M.; MATHIEU, J.; MULDER, C.; VAN DER PUTTEN, W. H.; RILLIG, M. C.; THAKUR, M. P.; VRIES, F. T. de; WARDLE, D. A.; AMMER, C.; AMMER, S.; ARAI, M.; AYUKE, F. O.; BAKER, G. H.; BARETTA, D.; BARKUSKY, D.; BEAUSÉJOUR, R.; BEDANO, J. C.; BIRKHOFER, K.; BLANCHART, E.; BLOSSEY, B.; BOLGER, T.; BRADLEY, R. L.; BROSSARD, M.; BURTIS, J. C.; CAPOWIEZ, Y.; CAVAGNARO, T. R.; CHOI, A.; CLAUSE, J.; CLUZEAU, D.; COORS, A.; CROTTY, F. V.; CRUMSEY, J. M.; DÁVALOS, A.; COSÍN; DOBSON, A. M.; DOMÍNGUEZ, A.; DUHOUR, A. E.; VAN EEKEREN, N.; EMMERLING, C.; FALCO, L. B.; FERNÁNDEZ, R.; FONTE, S. J.; FRAGOSO, C.; FRANCO, A. L. C.; FUSILERO, A.; GERASKINA, A. P.; GHOLAMI, S.; GONZÁLEZ, G.; GUNDALE, M. J.; LÓPEZ, M. G.; HACKENBERGER, B. K.; HACKENBERGER, D. K.; HERNÁNDEZ, L. M.; HIRTH, J. R.; HISHI, T.; HOLDSWORTH, A. R.; HOLMSTRUP, M.; HOPFENSPERGER, K. N.; LWANGA, E. H.; HUHTA, V.; HURISSO, T. T.; IANNONE III, B. V.; IORDACHE, M.; IRMLER, U.; IVASK, M.; JESÚS, J. B.; JOHNSON-MAYNARD, J. L.; JOSCHKO, M.; KANEKO, N.; KANIANSKA, R.; KEITH, A. M.; KERNECKER, M. L.; KONÉ, A. W.; KOOCH, Y.; KUKKONEN, S. T.; LALTHANZARA, H.; LAMMEL, D. R.; LEBEDEV, I. M.; LE CADRE. E.; LINCOLN, N. K.; LÓPEZ-HERNÁNDEZ, D.; LOSS, S. R.; MARICHAL, R.; MATULA, R.; MINAMIYA, Y.; MOOS, J. H.; MORENO, G.; MORÓN-RÍOS, A.; MOTOHIRO, H.; MUYS, B.; NEIRYNCK, J.; NORGROVE, L.; NOVO, M.; NUUTINEN, V.; NUZZO, V.; RAHMAN, P. M.; PANSU, J.; PAUDEL, S.; PÉRÈS, G.; PÉREZ CAMACHO, L.; PONGE, J.-F.; PRIETZEL, J.; RAPOPORT, I. B.; RASHID, M. I.; REBOLLO, S.; RODRÍGUEZ, M. A.; ROTH, A. M.; ROUSSEAU, G. X.; ROZEN, A.; SAYAD, E.; VAN SCHAIK, L.; SCHARENBROCH, B.; SCHIRRMANN, M.; SCHMIDT, O.; SCHRÖDER, B.; SEEBER, J.; SHASHKOV, M. P.; SINGH, J.; SMITH, S. M.; STEINWANDTER, M.; SZLAVECZ, K.; TALAVERA, J. A.; TRIGO, D.; TSUKAMOTO, J.; URIBE-LÓPEZ, S.; VALENÇA, A. W. de; VIRTO, I.; WACKETT, A. A.; WARREN, M. W.; WEBSTER, E. R.; WEHR, N. H.; WHALEN, J. K.; WIRONEN, M. B.; WOLTERS, V.; WU, P.; ZENKOVA, I. V.; ZHANG, W.; CAMERON, E. K.; EISENHAUER, N. Global data on earthworm abundance, biomass, diversity and corresponding environmental properties. Scientific Data, v. 8, n. 136, 2021. 12 p.| Biblioteca(s): Embrapa Florestas. |
| |
| 5. | | PHILLIPS, H. R. P.; GUERRA, C. A.; BARTZ, M. L. C.; BRIONES, M. J. I.; BROWN, G. G.; CROWTHER, T. W.; FERLIAN, O.; GONGALSKY, K. B.; VAN DEN HOOGEN, J.; KREBS, J.; ORGIAZZI, A.; ROUTH, D.; SCHWARZ, B.; BACH, E. M.; BENNETT, J.; BROSE, U.; DECAËNS, T.; KÖNIG-RIES, B.; LOREAU, M.; MATHIEU, J.; MULDER, C.; VAN DER PUTTEN, W. H.; RAMIREZ, K. S.; RILLIG, M. C.; RUSSELL, D.; RUTGERS, M.; THAKUR, M. P.; VRIES, F. T. de; WALL, D. H.; WARDLE, D. A.; ARAI, M.; AYUKE, F. O.; BAKER, G. H.; BEAUSÉJOUR, R.; BEDANO, J. C.; BIRKHOFER, K.; BLANCHART, E.; BLOSSEY, B.; BOLGER, T.; BRADLEY, R. L.; CALLAHAM, M. A.; CAPOWIEZ, Y.; CAULFIELD, M. E.; CHOI, A.; CROTTY, F. V.; DÁVALOS, A.; DIAZ COSIN, D. J.; DOMINGUEZ, A.; ESTEBAN DUHOUR, A.; VAN EEKEREN, N.; EMMERLING, C.; FALCO, L. B.; FERNÁNDEZ, R.; FONTE, S. J.; FRAGOSO, C.; FRANCO, A. L. C.; FUGÈRE, M.; FUSILERO, A. T.; GHOLAMI, S.; GUNDALE, M. J.; GUTIÉRREZ LÓPEZ, M.; HACKENBERGER, D. K.; HERNÁNDEZ, L. M.; HISHI, T.; HOLDSWORTH, A. R.; HOLMSTRUP, M.; HOPFENSPERGER, K. N.; HUERTA LWANGA, E.; HUHTA, V.; HURISSO, T. T.; IANNONE III, B. V.; IORDACHE, M.; JOSCHKO, M.; KANEKO, N.; KANIANSKA, R.; KEITH, A. M.; KELLY, C. A.; KERNECKER, M. L.; KLAMINDER, J.; KONÉ, A. W.; KOOCH, Y.; KUKKONEN, S. T.; LALTHANZARA, H.; LAMMEL, D. R.; LEBEDEV, I. M.; LI, Y.; JESUS LIDON, J. B.; LINCOLN, N. K.; LOSS, S. R.; MARICHAL, R.; MATULA, R.; MOOS, J. H.; MORENO, G.; MORÓN-RÍOS, A.; MUYS, B.; NEIRYNCK, J.; NORGROVE, L.; NOVO, M.; NUUTINEN, V.; NUZZO, V.; MUJEEB RAHMAN, P.; PANSU, J.; PAUDEL, S.; PÉRÈS, G.; PÉREZ-CAMACHO, L.; PIÑEIRO, R.; PONGE, J.-F.; RASHID, M. I.; REBOLLO, S.; RODEIRO-IGLESIAS, J.; RODRÍGUEZ, M. Á.; ROTH, A. M.; ROUSSEAU, G. X.; ROZEN, A.; SAYAD, E.; VAN SCHAIK, L.; SCHARENBROCH, B. C.; SCHIRRMANN, M.; SCHMIDT, O.; SCHRÖDER, B.; SEEBER, J.; SHASHKOV, M. P.; SINGH, J.; SMITH, S. M.; STEINWANDTER, M.; TALAVERA, J. A.; TRIGO, D.; TSUKAMOTO, J.; VALENÇA, A. W. de; VANEK, S. J.; VIRTO, I.; WACKETT, A. A.; WARREN, M. W.; WEHR, N. H.; WHALEN, J. K.; WIRONEN, M. B.; WOLTERS, V.; ZENKOVA, I. V.; ZHANG, W.; CAMERON, E. K.; EISENHAUER, N. Global distribution of earthworm diversity. Science, v. 366, n. 6464, p. 480-485, Oct. 2019.| Biblioteca(s): Embrapa Florestas. |
|  |
| Registros recuperados : 5 | |
|
|
|
 | Acesso ao texto completo restrito à biblioteca da Embrapa Florestas. Para informações adicionais entre em contato com cnpf.biblioteca@embrapa.br. |
Registro Completo
|
Biblioteca(s): |
Embrapa Florestas. |
|
Data corrente: |
03/10/2008 |
|
Data da última atualização: |
03/10/2008 |
|
Autoria: |
GONGALSKY, K. B. |
|
Título: |
Detecting boundaries of soil animal communities at a topographic boundary. |
|
Ano de publicação: |
2008 |
|
Fonte/Imprenta: |
In: INTERNATIONAL COLLOQUIUM ON SOIL ZOOLOGY, 15; INTERNATIONAL COLLOQUIUM ON APTERYGOTA, 12., 2008, Curitiba. Biodiversity, conservation and sustainabele management of soil animal: abstracts. Colombo: Embrapa Florestas. Editors: George Gardner Brown; Klaus Dieter Sautter; Renato Marques; Amarildo Pasini. 1 CD-ROM. |
|
Idioma: |
Inglês |
|
Conteúdo: |
Relationships between above- and belowground communities determine to a great extend the
functioning of ecosystems. To unravel these relationships, it is vital to know whether the boundaries
of plant and animal communities coincide. The boundaries occur when open and forested
ecosystems adjust. Do such boundaries occur at the boundary between two forested
ecosystems? The borders between soil animal communities at the border of plant communities
should occur on the topographic border (for example, slope and foot of a hill).
The relationship between plant and soil animal communities was studied by geostatistical analysis
in a piedmont forest close to Novorossiysk (Southern Russia). The analysis did not reveal
coincidence between the boundaries of plant and soil animal communities on the bend of the
hill. Vegetation on the slope of a hill was an oak-ash-hornbeam forest, while the vegetation on
the foot of the hill was a maple-ash-hornbeam forest. Two plots were studied each including
both slope and foot habitats. On every plot samples collected formed a grid of 10x5 units with a
5 m distance between them. Soil macroinvertebrates were hand-sorted from the samples, and
several soil parameters (soil, pebble, and litter mass, soil moisture) were measured.
Soil animal communities of the plots were dominated by woodlice, diplopods, and insect larvae
reaching an abundance of 680-990 individuals m-2 throughout the plots. Morphospecies richness
per sample and overall animal abundance in the bend were the highest in both plots, whilst
these parameters on the slope were the lowest. Variograms and maps of spatial distribution
indicated that the boundary between soil animal communities was situated further up on the
slope than the vegetation boundary, and it was not parallel to the bend of the hill. The size of
animal communities? aggregations was smaller than the size of plots sampled, what probably
explained the lack of coincidence between the boundaries. There was a significant correlation
between distribution of litter mass and parameters of soil animal communities, which was
modulated by depth of soil layer and soil moisture. Soil parameters were more important for
explaining boundaries between soil animal communities than plant communities in the forest
considered. MenosRelationships between above- and belowground communities determine to a great extend the
functioning of ecosystems. To unravel these relationships, it is vital to know whether the boundaries
of plant and animal communities coincide. The boundaries occur when open and forested
ecosystems adjust. Do such boundaries occur at the boundary between two forested
ecosystems? The borders between soil animal communities at the border of plant communities
should occur on the topographic border (for example, slope and foot of a hill).
The relationship between plant and soil animal communities was studied by geostatistical analysis
in a piedmont forest close to Novorossiysk (Southern Russia). The analysis did not reveal
coincidence between the boundaries of plant and soil animal communities on the bend of the
hill. Vegetation on the slope of a hill was an oak-ash-hornbeam forest, while the vegetation on
the foot of the hill was a maple-ash-hornbeam forest. Two plots were studied each including
both slope and foot habitats. On every plot samples collected formed a grid of 10x5 units with a
5 m distance between them. Soil macroinvertebrates were hand-sorted from the samples, and
several soil parameters (soil, pebble, and litter mass, soil moisture) were measured.
Soil animal communities of the plots were dominated by woodlice, diplopods, and insect larvae
reaching an abundance of 680-990 individuals m-2 throughout the plots. Morphospecies richness
per sample and overall animal abundance in... Mostrar Tudo |
|
Categoria do assunto: |
-- |
|
Marc: |
LEADER 02912naa a2200121 a 4500
001 1315015
005 2008-10-03
008 2008 bl uuuu u00u1 u #d
100 1 $aGONGALSKY, K. B.
245 $aDetecting boundaries of soil animal communities at a topographic boundary.
260 $c2008
520 $aRelationships between above- and belowground communities determine to a great extend the functioning of ecosystems. To unravel these relationships, it is vital to know whether the boundaries of plant and animal communities coincide. The boundaries occur when open and forested ecosystems adjust. Do such boundaries occur at the boundary between two forested ecosystems? The borders between soil animal communities at the border of plant communities should occur on the topographic border (for example, slope and foot of a hill). The relationship between plant and soil animal communities was studied by geostatistical analysis in a piedmont forest close to Novorossiysk (Southern Russia). The analysis did not reveal coincidence between the boundaries of plant and soil animal communities on the bend of the hill. Vegetation on the slope of a hill was an oak-ash-hornbeam forest, while the vegetation on the foot of the hill was a maple-ash-hornbeam forest. Two plots were studied each including both slope and foot habitats. On every plot samples collected formed a grid of 10x5 units with a 5 m distance between them. Soil macroinvertebrates were hand-sorted from the samples, and several soil parameters (soil, pebble, and litter mass, soil moisture) were measured. Soil animal communities of the plots were dominated by woodlice, diplopods, and insect larvae reaching an abundance of 680-990 individuals m-2 throughout the plots. Morphospecies richness per sample and overall animal abundance in the bend were the highest in both plots, whilst these parameters on the slope were the lowest. Variograms and maps of spatial distribution indicated that the boundary between soil animal communities was situated further up on the slope than the vegetation boundary, and it was not parallel to the bend of the hill. The size of animal communities? aggregations was smaller than the size of plots sampled, what probably explained the lack of coincidence between the boundaries. There was a significant correlation between distribution of litter mass and parameters of soil animal communities, which was modulated by depth of soil layer and soil moisture. Soil parameters were more important for explaining boundaries between soil animal communities than plant communities in the forest considered.
773 $tIn: INTERNATIONAL COLLOQUIUM ON SOIL ZOOLOGY, 15; INTERNATIONAL COLLOQUIUM ON APTERYGOTA, 12., 2008, Curitiba. Biodiversity, conservation and sustainabele management of soil animal: abstracts. Colombo: Embrapa Florestas. Editors: George Gardner Brown; Klaus Dieter Sautter; Renato Marques; Amarildo Pasini. 1 CD-ROM.
Download
Esconder MarcMostrar Marc Completo |
|
Registro original: |
Embrapa Florestas (CNPF) |
|
|
Biblioteca |
ID |
Origem |
Tipo/Formato |
Classificação |
Cutter |
Registro |
Volume |
Status |
Fechar
|
| Nenhum registro encontrado para a expressão de busca informada. |
|
|
