Content uploaded by Majid Moradi Faradonbeh
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Majid Moradi Faradonbeh on Oct 17, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
Persian J. Acarol., 2020, Vol. 9, No. 4, pp. 353–366.
http://dx.doi.org/10.22073/pja.v9i4.59610
Journal homepage: http://www.biotaxa.org/pja
How to cite: Amani, M., Khajehali, J., Moradi-Faradonbeh, M. & Macchioni, F. (2020) Species diversity of soil mites
(Acari: Mesostigmata) under different agricultural land use types. Persian Journal of Acarology, 9(4): 353–366.
Article
Species diversity of soil mites (Acari: Mesostigmata) under different agricultural
land use types
Mehrnaz Amani1
, Jahangir Khajehali1
, Majid Moradi-Faradonbeh2* and Fabio
Macchioni3
1. Department of Plant Protection, College of Agriculture, Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan 84156-83111, Iran;
E-mails:
mehrnazamanibeni@outlook.com, khajeali@cc.iut.ac.ir
2. Department of Entomology, College of Agricultural Sciences, Shiraz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shiraz, Iran;
E-mail: majidmoradifaradonbeh@yahoo.com
3. Department of Veterinary Science, University of Pisa, Italy; E-mail: fabio.macchioni@unipi.it
* Corresponding author
ABSTRACT
Mites are among the most important members of soil arthropod communities, because they are the most diverse in
terms of ecological niche and behavior. Due to the sensitivity of soil mites to soil disturbance, their diversity and
numbers can be used as ecological indices for assessing disturbances in ecosystems. To determine the effect of land
use type on soil mite biodiversity, abundance and biodiversity indices of soil inhabiting mesostigmatic mites were
evaluated at eight sites in Saman and Shahrekord, Iran, each site including two adjacent agricultural pieces of land: an
orchard and a crop field. The biodiversity of mites was measured by several biodiversity indices and then compared
by analysis of variance. The specimens collected belonged to 12 families, 17 genera and 24 species. The biodiversity
index values calculated in different months showed that these indices were usually higher in warm months and in
orchards than in cold months and crop fields. In the examined crop fields, the diversity index values were lower after
harvesting, probably due to soil disturbance by agricultural machinery. There was a significant difference in the
Shannon-Wiener's diversity index among different land uses. The maximum and minimum values of this index were
recorded at the vine orchard (1.48) and wheat field (0.15) in an elm/wheat site at Shahrekord, respectively. The soil
organic matter content was maximum in the vineyard (2.12%) and minimum in the wheat field (0.41%).
KEY WORDS: Abundance; biodiversity; richness; Parasitiformes; Simpson's index.
PAPER INFO.: Received: 8 June 2020, Accepted: 21 July 2020, Published: 15 October 2020
INTRODUCTION
Terrestrial communities play significant roles in the ecosystem including decomposition and
recycling of organic waste (Wardle et al. 2004). In agricultural ecosystems, these communities are
influenced by many factors including ploughing, pesticide and fertilizer application, soil compaction
during harvest, and removal of herbal biomass. The response of terrestrial communities are
represented by changes in abundance, species richness and biodiversity indices (Schulz 1991;
Vreeken-Buijs et al. 1998; Maraun et al. 2003). Less disturbed settlements may be an appropriate
354 AMANI ET AL. 2020
SPECIES DIVERSITY OF SOIL MITES UNDER DIFFERENT AGRICULTURAL LAND USE TYPES
shelter for some terrestrial species and be richer in varieties (Gulvik et al. 2008). Small arthropods
constitute an important and significant part of the soil (Walter and Proctor 1999).
Among arthropods, mites are very significant groups in terms of variety richness and abundance
and are one of the components of soil biodiversity in terms of behavior and life strategies (Wissuwa
et al. 2013). Predatory mesostigmatic mites represent a very important part of soil food webs in forest
and agricultural soils by feeding on the nematodes, collembolans, as well as insects and mite larvae
(Walter and Proctor 1999; Ruf and Beck 2005). Because of their high density, Mesostigmata are
effective predators in soil food webs and control prey populations effectively (Schneider et al. 2012).
However, they are rarely considered in studies on trophic interactions in terrestrial food webs,
probably due to their small size (Moore et al. 1988).
Natural and uncultivated ecosystems and low-input agroecosystems, such as cropping systems
in organic farming are considered to have higher biodiversity than intensively-farmed
agroecosystems (Bedano and Ruf 2007). Human disturbance has decreased the abundance and species
richness of mites (Gulvik 2007). The effects of plant species on soil food chains has been studied in
nematodes (Viketoft et al. 2009) and Collembola (Salamon et al. 2004). Many studies have been
carried out to determine the impact of agricultural practices on the soil fauna, and some have focused
on mesostigmatic mites, however, few studies have described the soil mite community of adjacent
arable fields with different plant species (Koehler and Born 1989; Kohler 1999; Gulvik 2007; Gulvik
et al. 2008.).
This study investigates the effect of land use type on the within-habitat diversity of soil
mesostigmatic mites using two diversity indices, species richness, and abundance. Adjacent
agricultural orchards and crop fields, at different sites with different combinations of plant species,
were compared to assess the possible effects of plant species and land use management on the
quantitative and qualitative structure of the mesostigmatic mite communities. In addition, in order to
determine the effect of soil organic matter content on the biodiversity of mesostigmatic mites, we
used canonical correspondence analysis (CCA) (Ter Braak 1988) as one of the most commonly used
ordination methods to investigate the relationship of environmental variables to species composition
(Lagerlöf and Andrén 1988).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Study site
The research was conducted in Shahrekord and Saman, two regions of Chaharmahal and
Bakhtiari province in southwestern Iran (Fig. 1). Eight pairs of sampling sites in Shahrekord
(32.3256° N, 50.8644° E) and Saman (32.27° N, 50.53° E) were chosen to represent various land use
types which form a gradient of management intensity: wheat field (W), barley field (B), alfalfa field
(Al), saffron field (S), almond orchard (A), elm trees (E), walnut orchard (Wa) and vineyard (V).
Table 1 presents the exact geo-location parameters of the sites using the UTM system as well as
a short history of the land use type and management. The selected plots differed in terms of soil
moisture, soil organic matter, and type of plant species (Table 1). In some study plots, 20–30-year
old trees with a developed canopy led to an increase in litter moisture and a decrease in litter
temperature due to lower soil exposure to sunlight. Due to farming operations, the crop fields usually
underwent more changes than the orchards. The material for the analysis was collected from fields
and orchards that were adjacent to each other. In this study, paired comparisons were used to eliminate
variations (Such as the effect of altitude and etc.) between experimental sites. The first comparison
was carried out between an almond orchard and wheat field in plot 1. In the same way, in the other
plots, orchards and farmlands were compared, except for plot 2 and plot 8 where instead of an orchard,
saffron and alfalfa fields were used, respectively. These two crops are perennial plants, usually with
lower management and tillage practices than the annuals crops used in this study.
2020 PERSIAN JOURNAL OF ACAROLOGY 355
SPECIES DIVERSITY OF SOIL MITES UNDER DIFFERENT AGRICULTURAL LAND USE TYPES
Figure 1. Geographic location of collection sites.
Table 1. Description of experimental plots in Saman and Shahrekord in 2014. Wheatfield (W), barley field (B), alfalfa
field (Al), saffron field (S), almond orchard (A), elm trees (E), walnut orchard (Wa), and vine orchard (V).
History Plot Location Site
Orchard aged > 7 years
Regular herbicide application (glyphosate), rotated between
wheat and barley.
A 32° 21' 8.11" N, 51° 03" 17.49" E
1
W
Orchard aged > 7 years
Saffron planted in 2009, prior use – almond orchard,
A 32° 17' 42.08" N, 51° 01" 39.51" E
2
S
Orchard aged > 8 years
Barley/wheat rotation, the last 2 years in wheat, regular
herbicide application
A 32° 20' 39.45" N, 51° 06" 43.30" E
3
W
Trees aged > 18 years, pesticides never used
Annual tillage
E 32° 20' 17.26" N, 50° 49" 33.09" E
4
W
Orchard aged > 30 years, with high organic content and
regular herbicide application.
A 32° 28' 39.11" N, 50° 54" 17.39" E
5
B
Orchard aged > 12 years, with leguminous cover crop
Fertilized with manure
Wheat planted 2012, prior use - viticulture aged > 9 years
V 32° 26' 27.40" N, 50° 52" 55.73" E
6
W
Orchard aged > 20 years
Barley/wheat rotation
Wa 32° 27' 10.68" N, 50° 53" 59.99" E
7
W
Regular pesticide application. Different pesticides and
herbicides applied as a test
No tilling for 4 years. Fertilized with liquid manure
A 32° 26' 59.60" N, 50° 55" 49.91" E
8
Al
356 AMANI ET AL. 2020
SPECIES DIVERSITY OF SOIL MITES UNDER DIFFERENT AGRICULTURAL LAND USE TYPES
Sampling
From March to October 2014, monthly sampling was conducted (25cm × 25 cm × 10 cm depth).
Four randomly selected soil samples were taken from each site/plant species (8 sites, 16 plots, 4
replications) and a total of 512 quantitative soil samples and 2838 mite species were taken.
Sample extraction and identification
The specimens were extracted from soil samples by Tullgren funnels for 3–5 days (depending
on the sample moisture) and extracted mites were transferred into 75% ethanol. Adults and immature
stages of mesostigmatic mites were counted and identified to species level with a differential
interference microscope (Leica DLMB). The mites were cleared in 80% lactic acid and mounted in
Hoyer's medium on microscope slides. The species were identified using keys constructed for
mesostigmatic mites (Lindquist et al. 2009; Bregetova 1984).
Determination of soil organic matter
Soil organic carbon was determined by the wet oxidation method (Walkley and Black 1934). For
all determinations, three replicates were used. The soil was ground and then passed through a 0.5 mm
mesh sieve and placed in a 500 mL Erlenmeyer flask. The amount of soil used in the determination
ranged from 0.1 to 0.5 g. Ten milliliters of 0.167 M potassium dichromate and 20 mL of concentrated
sulfuric acid were added to the soil. The suspension was swirled and left to stand for 30 min. and then
200 mL of distilled water, 10 mL of concentrated H3PO4, and 1 mL of 0.16 % diphenylamine were
added. The excess dichromate was measured by volumetric titration using Mohr's salt (Yeomans and
Bremner 1988).
Data analysis
A variety of diversity indices can be used in soil ecology to assess the environmental quality and
the disturbance effects on soil communities. In the present study, we used some of these indices
(Species richness, Shannon-Wiener's and Simpson's indices) based on Magurran (2003). The numbers
of individuals from each taxonomic group per soil core or per sample were determined to calculate
the Margalef's index (a number of species per sample), Shannon-Wiener's and Simpson's inverse
diversity index, using the formula based on Magurran (2003). Land use type was considered as a
fixed effect and other factors, sampling sites (their locations and associated effects of soil type, crop
management, etc.) were treated as random factors (Steel et al. 1996). For all parameters tested
(Margalef's, Shannon-Wiener's and Simpson's inverse), statistical tests were conducted using SAS
9.1 (Schlotzhauer and Littell 1987) and Fisher's protected LSD (α = 0.05). The influence of the
environmental parameters, such as the organic matter content in the soil, on the mite assemblage, was
investigated by canonical correspondence analysis (CCA) using CANOCO software (Ter Braak
1988).
RESULTS
Diversity, species richness, abundance, and organic matter content
After analyzing 512 samples, a total of 2838 mesostigmatic individuals were counted, belonging
to 12 families, 17 genera and 24 species. All taxa were identified to species level. Abundance and
diversity of mites were found to be higher in orchards than in fields. The diversity indices of soil
mites such as Shannon-Wienner's index (1.48 ± 0.01), Margallef's index (1.75 ± 0.11) and Simpson's
index (6.39 ± 0.41) were found highest in the sampled vineyard, whereas the lowest mite density was
recorded in a wheat field (site 4).
The highest estimated values of Simpson's diversity index were recorded in the vineyard in April
(10.73 ± 0.04), in the walnut orchard in May (9.3 ± 0.29), and in the wheat field site 3 in May (10 ±
0.32) (Table 3). Neoseiulus marginatus (Wainstein) and Parasitus fimetorum (Berlese) were found
2020 PERSIAN JOURNAL OF ACAROLOGY 357
SPECIES DIVERSITY OF SOIL MITES UNDER DIFFERENT AGRICULTURAL LAND USE TYPES
to constitute the dominant species, nearly 38.6% of total number of individuals observed in all sample
sites. Phytoseiid mites were found in all sampling months, but their diversity varied. Differences in
soil organic matter content among the eight pairs of sampling dates were more obvious (p < 0.0001).
Amount of soil organic matter in orchards was found higher than that of farmlands (p < 0.0001). The
species diversity and density were higher in orchards with higher organic matter than that of fields.
The maximum amount of organic matter was present in the grape vineyard (2.12%).
Sample frequencies of N. marginatus, P. fimetorum and Parasitus hyalinus (Willman) were
27.4%, 11.2% and 9.5%, respectively which were classified as dominant. Two other species i.e.
Halolaelaps sexclavatus (Berlese) and Onchodellus karawaiewi (Berlese) ranked as subdominant
with 8.5% and 6.9%, respectively.
In all the fields over time before glyphosate application, the index values were high and densities
increased. The Shannon-Wienner index of Mesostigmata was the lowest in the agroecosystem and
individual soil cores increased in the almond orchard of almond/wheat code. We found significant
differences in abundance and species richness, in terms of the Simpson's and Shannon-Wiener's
indices of Mesostigmata between the old orchards and perennial and annual fields (Table 4).
Effect of land use type on density
The analysis of the number of species, dominance and average abundance (specimen/m2) of the
species in the examined communities found in the two orchards and fields show the dynamics of the
changes over this period. Significantly, the density of Mesostigmata in the orchards was higher than
in the fields (Table 2).
The densities of the four most abundant mesostigmatic species - H. sexclavatus, O. karawaiewi,
P. fimetorum and N. marginatus were significantly higher in orchards than fields except in
alfalfa/almond, where the number of N. marginatus individuals was higher in Medicago sativa than
in Prunus amygdalus. The densities of H. sexclavatus, O. karawaiewi, P. fimeturom and N.
marginatus were higher in Vitis vinifera, Amygdalus scoparia, Ulmus carpinifolia, and M. sativa
respectively. Interestingly, 20 species occurred both in orchards and in fields. Four species, Veigaia
planicola (Berlese), Androlaelaps shealsi (Costa), Gaeolaelaps nolli (Karg) and Gaeolaelaps
queenslandicus (Womersley) were found only in orchard habitats, while Arctoseius cetratus
(Sellnick) was associated with the saffron field (Table 5).
DISCUSSION
Effect of land use type on mesostigmata assemblages
Soil biodiversity is commonly used to evaluate land use effects. How to respond to the type of
land use changes on soil communities is of great importance (Paoletti et al. 1992; Sánchez-Bayo
2011; Pascual et al. 2015; Murvanidze et al. 2019). Our results showed that a sample size of 32 was
sufficient to evaluate the effects of land use on the mesostigmatic mites assemblage in all the
examined land use types. Strong relationships between sample size and species richness showed that
sample size may be sufficient to capture rare species (Moreno and Halffter 2000). For future studies,
the sample size should be optimized by adjusting the sample size to achieve sampling efficiency
among all land use types.
As expected, in most of the samplings species diversity was significantly related to land use type
and was highest in orchards. Ettema and Wardle (2002) also showed that the abundance and diversity
of Oribatida were high in forests and low in corn fields. The indices used in this study are sensitive
to the abundance of species per sample and may be influenced by the composition of communities
(Magurran 2004). The abundance and diversity at each site may be influenced by environmental
factors (Nekola and White 1999). Environmental factors such as high soil organic matter content,
suitable soil moisture conditions throughout the year, soil temperatures and low incident radiation
due to plant cover are favorable conditions for soil mite development. High organic soil content is
358 AMANI ET AL. 2020
SPECIES DIVERSITY OF SOIL MITES UNDER DIFFERENT AGRICULTURAL LAND USE TYPES
usually beneficial for most soil animals and biodiversity is relatively strongly linked to available
energy resources and essential nutrients (Pokarzhevskii and Krivolutskii 1997). Schulz (1991)
observed that total species richness of oribatid mite increased from corn fields to forests. This is
contrary to the intermediate disturbance hypothesis (Connell and Slatyer 1977; Connell 1978)
according to which diversity is highest in areas with intermediate disturbance. Maraun et al. (2003)
showed that the diversity of Oribatida declined when disturbance increased.
Table 2. Diversity of soil mites in different sites/plots under different land uses in Saman and Shahrekord in 2014:
Margalef's index, Shannon-Wiener's index, Simpson's index, density (mean ± SE), and ANOVA (GLM, α = 0.05)
for the hypothesis of no effect of the land use type.
Site Crop Shannon-Wiener's
index
Margalef's index Simpson's
index
Density Organic matter
(Percent)
1 Almond
Wheat
0.99 ± 0.06
0.64 ± 0.01
1.07 ± 0.09
0.74 ± 0.06
4.47 ± 0.26
3.62 ± 0.25
5.9 ± 0.54
2.43 ± 0.35
1.2 ± 0.02
0.62 ± 0.00
F (1, 30)
P
2.17
0.01
15.65
0.007
3.96
0.09
25.4
0.002
301.79
< 0.0001
2 Almond
Saffron
1.01 ± 0.04
0.66 ± 0.07
1.15 ± 0.03
0.93 ± 0.09
4.05 ± 0.18
3.55 ± 0.3
7.21 ± 0.52
4.71 ± 0.5
1.25 ± 0.00
1.04 ± 0.02
F (1, 30)
P
15.69
0.007
2.05
0.2
1.32
0.2
11.33
0.01
82.79
< 0.0001
3 Almond
Wheat
1.26 ± 0.08
0.46 ± 0.07
1.35 ± 0.07
1.23 ± 0.08
5 ± 0.46
4.81 ± 0.5
6.37 ± 0.26
1.37 ± 0.32
1.92 ± 0.00
0.53 ± 0.00
F (1, 30)
P
13.01
< 0.0001
1.2
0.3
0
0.92
218.18
< 0.0001
155.2
< 0.0001
4 Elm
Wheat
1.16 ± 0.09
0.15 ± 0.04
1.57 ± 0.13
0.22 ± 0.06
3.44 ± 0.19
1.81 ± 0.23
17.15 ± 1.7
1.15 ± 0.17
1.730 ± 0.01
0.41 ± 0.00
F (1, 30)
P
336.1
< 0.0001
138.02
< 0.0001
347.11
0.0002
92.07
< 0.0001
109.4
< 0.0001
5 Almond
Barley
1.4 ± 0.05
0.19 ± 0.05
1.70 ± 0.07
0.31 ± 0.06
6.17 ± 0.33
2.4 ± 0.17
16 ± 1.63
1.84 ± 0.23
1.75 ± 0.01
0.54 ± 0.01
F (1, 30)
P
165.1
< 0.0001
347.5
< 0.0001
32.44
0.0001
116.18
< 0.0001
325.5
< 0.0001
6 Vine
Wheat
1.48 ± 0.01
0.99 ± 0.02
1.75 ± 0.11
1.21 ± 0.12
6.39 ± 0.41
6.35 ± 0.46
18.06 ± 2.06
6.37 ± 0.98
2.12 ± 0.03
0.93 ± 0.01
F (1, 30)
P
36.12
0.001
62.25
< 0.002
3.46
0.1
13.69
0.001
113.61
< 0.0001
7 Walnut
Wheat
1.1 ± 0.03
0.2 ± 0.02
1.21 ± 0.09
0.25 ± 0.03
5.2 ± 0.46
2.06 ± 0.18
8.28 ± 0.53
2.84 ± 0.76
1.51 ± 0.03
0.72 ± 0.01
F (1, 30)
P
169.66
< 0.0001
192.62
< 0.0001
33.06
0.001
27.11
0.002
362.4
< 0.0001
8 Almond
Alfaalfa
0.82 ± 0.08
0.76 ± 0.03
1.02 ± 0.11
0.83 ± 0.04
6.02 ± 0.43
2.3 ± 0.16
3.96 ± 0.3
15.53 ± 1.42
1.1 ± 0.02
1.17 ± 0.02
F (1, 30)
P
0.29
0.6
5.25
0.06
57.98
0.0008
56
< 0.0003
5.18
0.06
Our results showed that as land management intensity increased, the diversity of Mesostigmata
declined. The density of Mesostigmata varied in arable land and high densities were found in Lucerne
ley (Andrén and Largerlöf 1983). Wardle et al. (2004) found a high density of mites in former
agricultural land caused by a higher survival rate resulting from the former agricultural use. Plant
species may be effective in soil biota because they make a difference in the quantity and quality of
resources that are returned to the soil (Walter and Proctor 2004). According to Maraun et al. (2003),
the intermediate disturbance hypothesis does not apply to the ecological dynamics of soil
microarthropods. A balance between the sequence of disturbance and recolonization time, for
2020 PERSIAN JOURNAL OF ACAROLOGY 359
SPECIES DIVERSITY OF SOIL MITES UNDER DIFFERENT AGRICULTURAL LAND USE TYPES
different populations of microarthropods, is essential for the formation of societies in managed or
disturbed habitats (Siepel 1996).
Table 3. Simpson's diversity index from March to October 2014.
October September August July June May April March Crop Site
5.2 ± 0.053.9 ± 0.08 4.3 ± 0.08 3.5 ± 0.21 5.1 ± 0.05 5.6 ± 0.11 5.6 ± 0.53 1.13 ± 0.02 Almond
Wheat
F (1,6)
P
1
2.6 ± 0.00
2.9
5 ± 0.1
3.4
3.02 ± 0.00
3.27
0.99 ± 0.08
6.15
3.03 ± 0.00
5.2
4.8 ± 0.26
2.02
4.30 ± 0.15
0.33
NA
NA
0.1 0.1 0.1 0.06 0.0007 0.2 0.59 NA
4.4 ± 0.094.3 ± 0.11 3.7 ± 0.08 3.7 ± 0.28 5.3 ± 0.15 4.3 ± 0.24 1.7 ± 0.13 3.2 ± 0.2 Almond
Saffron
2
0.5 ± 0.002.5 ± 0.05 2.66 ± 0.08 2.7 ± 0.04 4.9 ± 0.18 6.05 ± 0.295.7 ± 0.15 1.2 ± 0.05
15.2 12.9 3.34 0.37 0.11 0.86 17.9 6.5 F (1,6)
P 0.01 0.01 0.09 0.57 0.74 0.38 0.01 0.04
4.6 ± 0.1 4.9± 0.12 8.78 ± 0.29 6.07 ± 0.09 6.4 ± 0.3 5.9 ± 0.13 2.18 ±0.12 2.47 ± 0.01 Almond
Wheat
3
5 ± 0.13 5 ± 0.14 3.02 ± 0.00 3.02 ± 0.00 3.2 ± 0.21 10 ± 0.32 3.3 ± 0.13 0.99 ± 0.00
0.14 0.03 3.07 9.74 3.1 12.5 1.18 1.95 F (1,6)
P 0.7 0.8 0.1 0.05 0.1 0.02 0.35 0.02
16.2 ± 0.232.9 ± 0.01 3.81 ± 0.08 3.1 ± 0.11 5.38 ± 0.14 3.61 ± 0.133.03 ± 0.00 4.3 ± 0.00 Elm
Wheat
4 NA 0 0.99 ± 0.00 0.99 ± 0.00 3.02 ± 0.00 3.02 ± 0.003.03 ± 0.00 NA NA 811.2 18.7 15.3 15 0.83 0 NA F (1,6)
P NA 0.0001 0.02 0.01 0.008 0.4 0 NA
4.17 ± 0.027.01 ± 0.11 9.2 ± 0.25 6.24 ± 0.09 6.72 ± 0.07 5.58 ± 0.167.5 ± 00 2.28 ± 0.12 Almond
Barley
5 NA NA 0.99 ± 0.00 NA 1.58 ± 0.18 3.07 ± 0.072.3 ± 0.3 3.32 ± 0.11 NA NA 11.04 NA 37.4 12.9 1.62 0.95 F (1,6)
P NA NA 0.04 NA 0.01 0.01 0.3 0.4
5 ± 0.08 7.8 ± 0.11 7.81 ± 0.13 6.5 ± 0.08 6.2 ± 0.18 5.6 ± 0.17 10.73 ±
0.04
2.43 ± 0.21 Vine
Wheat
6
4 ± 0.05 6.4 ± 0.13 6.15 ± 0.1 6.8 ± 0.18 4.5 ± 0.2 8.8 ± 0.17 0.99 ± 0.00 NA
0.6 1.7 3.07 0.1 1.6 5.3 365.8 NA F (1,6)
P 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.7 0.2 0.05 0.002 NA
2.09 ± 0.020.38 ± 0.01 4.25 ± 0.09 3.62 ± 0.09 8.03 ± 0.26 9.3 ± 0.29 6.4 ± 0.11 3.7 ± 0.36 Walnut
7
NA NA 0.99 ± 0.00 0.99 ± 0.00 2.2 ± 0.13 1.86 ± 0.083.5 ± 0.08 NA Wheat NA NA 20.74 34.5 18.7 19.5 12.3 NA F
(
1,6
)
NA NA 0.01 0.004 0.005 0.006 0.02 NA P NA 2.3 ± 0.05 7.01 ± 0.16 5.5 ± 0.19 5.98 ± 0.12 7.34 ± 0.386.25 ± 0.00 3.38 ± 0.31 Almond
Alfaalfa
8
1.98 5.6 ± 0.12 1.24 ± 0.11 1.8 ± 0.05 2.25 ± 0.05 2.06 ± 0.093.74 ± 0.25 1.79 ± 0.17 NA 45.59 27.8 20.3 41.4 9.7 0.85 1.51 F (1,6)
P NA 0.001 0.001 0.004 0.001 0.02 0.4 0.2
NA = not applicable (Species richness = 0)
The main characteristic of farming systems is repeated disturbances and the rapid growth cycle
under conditions of tillage and fertilization which help organisms with short generation time and rapid
dispersal (Cambardella and Elliott 1994). In 1994, Sgardelis and Usher (1994) concluded that a sharp
decline is common in the species richness of oribatids mite in arable fields.
In our study, the diversity and abundance of Mesostigmata were related to land use type.
Mesostigmata can temporarily exploit restricted habitats and one important life strategy of their
species is the recolonization in different sources of soil (Siepel and Maaskamp 1994; Walter and
Lindquist 1995). Some families of Mesostigmata have a short life cycle, for example, Ascidae from
1.5 to 2 weeks, and Laelapidae from 3 to 4 weeks (Hartenstein 1962; Binns 1975).
The diversity and abundance of Mesostigmata decrease in agroecosystems but in ruderal sites
and undisturbed landscapes, they can be very high (Koehler 1991; Schulz 1991 ). The effect of land
use type was significant for the community composition of Mesostigmata. All species of
360 AMANI ET AL. 2020
SPECIES DIVERSITY OF SOIL MITES UNDER DIFFERENT AGRICULTURAL LAND USE TYPES
Meosostigmata with different life history tactics were filtered from soil communities by attentions of
land management which was confirmed with the effect of land use type (Aoki 1979; Siepel 1994,
1996; Maraun and Scheu 2000). Some families of Mesostigmata such as Veigaiidae and
Parholaspidae are k-selected given that their development is slow and their dispersal is low, while
some of them such as Ascidae, Laelapidae and Phytoseiidae are r-selected. In this study, k-selected
species were associated with orchards, and r-selected species were associated with fields (Petrova
1977; Athias-Binche 1989; Ruf 1998; Koehler 1999). Our results showed that the diversity and
abundance of mesostigmatic populations correlated with land use type and response to land
management.
Table 4. Richness diversity index from March to October 2014.
October September August July June May April March Crop Site
0.8 ± 0.02
1.27 ± 0.0
6
1.29
1.3 ± 0.03 1.12 ± 0.030.95 ± 0.08 1.28 ± 0.01 1.2 ± 0.07 1.35 ± 0.02 0 Almond
Wheat
F (1,6)
P
1
1.09 ± 0.00
3.96
0
252.3
0
91.16
0.91 ± 0.00
151.74
1.18 ± 0.02
0.02
1.17 ± 0.01
7.68
0
0
0.2 0.09 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 0.89 0.03 0
1.2 ± 0.041.23 ± 0.04 1.28 ± 0.0
0
1.08 ± 0.07 1.46 ± 0.03 1.12 ± 0.05 0.69 ± 0.01 1.033 ± 0.02 Almond
Saffron
2
0.7 ± 0.010.68 ± 0.01 0.8 ± 0.02 0.37 ± 0.03 1.28 ± 0.03 1.49 ± 0.1 1.71 ± 0.04 0.24 ± 0.03
1.37 5.93 56.16 23.17 2.41
0.1
1.78 112.49 151.79 F (1,6)P
0.2 0.05 0.0003 0.0003 0.2 < 0.0001 < 0.0001
1.3 ± 0.031.36 ± 0.09 1.87 ± 0.031.59 ± 0.03 1.69 ± 0.08 1.73 ± 0.05 0.74 ± 0.01 1.41 ± 0.08 Almond
Wheat
3
0 1.23 ± 0.07 0.57 ± 0.0
4
0.57 ± 0.05 1.49 ± 0.04 0.92 ± 0.00 0.58 ± 0.03 0
1.2 3.25 107.86 60.1 0.63 45.64 5.12 390.75 F (1,6)
P 0.5 0.1 < 0.0001 0.0002 0.4 0.0005 0.06 < 0.0001
0.82 ± 0.0
2
1.95 ± 0.03 2.04 ± 0.031.75 ± 0.04 2.54 ± 0.03 1.97 ± 0.05 1.25 ± 0.06 0 Elm
Wheat
4
0 0 0 0 0.91 ± 0.00 0.91 ± 0.00 0.22 ± 0.01 0
13.91 307.33 271.2 652.7 388.3 75.49 91.71 0 F (1,6)
P 0.009 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < .0001 < 0.0001 0
1.24 ± 0.0
4
2.05 ± 0.02 2.27 ± 0.0
4
1.78 ± 0.1 3.32 ± 0.02 1.96 ± 0.09 1.28 ± 0.08 1.26 ± 0.03 Almond
Barly
5
0 0 0 0 0 0.85 ± 0.06 0.8 ± 0.03 0.57 ± 0.02
222.3 158.8 758.8 121.5 199.3 16.20 7.06 64.63 F (1,6)
P < 0.0001 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 0.006 0.03 0.0002
1.43 ± 0.0
6
1.71 ± 0.04 2.1 ± 0.07 2.1 ± 0.05 2.43 ± 0.03 1.67 ± 0.07 1.86 ± 0.04 0.34 ± 0.03 Vine
Wheat
6
1.41 ± 0.0
7
2.01 ± 0.01 1.56 ± 0.0
4
1.5 ± 0.05 1.19 ± 0.06 219 ± 0.07 0 0
0 7.99 5.3 5.6 2.98 2.9 719.5 317.7 F (1,6)
P 0.9 0.03 0.05 0.05 0.13 0.13 < 0.0001 < 0.0001
0.53 ± 0.010.85 ± 0.05 1.24 ± 0.0
2
1.14 ± 0.04 1.88 ± 0.04 1.91 ± 0.06 1.2 ± 0.08 0.66 ± 0.02 Walnut
Wheat
7
0 0 0 0 1.26 ± 0.09 0.55 ± 0.06 0.32 ± 0.1 0
295.6 631.1 161.32 373.88 5.25 51.54 8.99 115.7 F (1,6)
P < 0.0001 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 0.06 0.0004 0.02 < 0.0001
0 0.83 ± 0.02 1.5 ± 0.04 1.32 ± 0.06 1.46 ± 0.01 1.66 ± 0.03 0 0.53 ± 0.01 Almond
Alfaalfa
8
0.76 ± 0.0
2
1.31 ± 0.06 0.83 ± 0.0
5
0.37 ± 0.04 1.01 ± 0.06 0.87 ± 0.06 1.21 ± 0.05 0.37 ± 0.05
109.69 14.79 17.08 12.56 9.7 19.59 233.6 6.9 F (1,6)
P < .0001 0.008 0.006 0.01 0.02 0.004 < 0.0001 0.03
Effect of environmental parameters on Mesostigmata assemblage
CCA showed that environmental parameters significantly impact the social structure of
Mesostigmata (Fig. 2). The most significant effect has been linked to organic carbon as well as
Collembola communities were influenced by soil organic matter (Salamon et al. 2011). Koehler and
Born (1989) found that among several parameters, such as soil moisture and pH, organic carbon is
more correlated with mite assemblages. Andrén and Lagerlöf (1983) reported a relationship between
soil organic matter and Gamasina in agricultural systems. High levels of organic matter promote the
growth of bacteria and fungi, and attract predators such as collembola, nematode, and oribatida, and
thus influence higher trophic levels such as mites. Soil organic matter is a direct food resource of
Collembola (Scheu and Falca 2000) and Mesostigmata feed on collembolans (Karg 1993). Some
2020 PERSIAN JOURNAL OF ACAROLOGY 361
SPECIES DIVERSITY OF SOIL MITES UNDER DIFFERENT AGRICULTURAL LAND USE TYPES
species of the Ascidae family feed on collembola and nematodes and juvenile oribatida (Karg 1993).
Feeding habits show a relationship between Mesostigmata and Collembola, Nematoda and Oribatida.
Figure 2. Ordination bi-plot of the canonical correspondence analysis (CCA) for Mesostigmata. Environmental variable
organic matter (OM). For abbreviations of mite species see Table 5.
Table 5. Number of individuals of Mesostigmata species in different land use types in Saman and Shahrekord region (S
= Saman, Sh = Shahrekord). For other abbreviations see Table 1.
Species S S S S Sh Sh Sh Sh
A B W V W J A Al A W A S A W W U
Ameroseius plumosus
(Oudemans)
- - 19 - - - - - - - 29 34 - - 3 -
Antennoseius bacatus
(Athias-Henriot)
- - - - - - 54 - 5 11 - - 18 79 - -
Arctoseius cetratus
(Sellnick)
- - - - - - - - - - - 4 - - - -
Alliphis halleri (G. &
R. Canestrini)
18 - 2 -
-
10 6 6 - - - - - 34 - - -
Halolaelaps
sexclavatus (Berlese)
2 - 120 18 18 211 - - - 29 4 6 7 22 2
Euandrolaelaps
karawaiewi (Berlese)
1 - 20
-
- - - - - - - - 3 - - - -
Gymnolaelaps
obscuroides (Costa) 21 - 26 7 - - 8 5 - - 5 - - - 22 -
Gaeolaelaps
queenslandicus
(Womersley)
- - - - - - - - - - - 6 - - 23 -
Gaeolaelaps asperatus
(Costa) - - 3 - - - - - 39 - - - 7 - - -
Gaeolaelaps aculeifer
(Canestrini) 19 2 - - - - - - 2 - - 6 - - - -
Gaeolaelaps kargi
(Costa) - - 8 - 8 2 11 9 - - - - 9 5 8 -
Gaeolaelaps nolli
(Karg) - - 8 - - - - - - - - - - - 9 -
Onchodells karawaiewi
(Berlese) 63 13 31 28 418 5 - - - - - - - 25 9
Parasitus fimetorum
(Berlese) 24 9 102 41 49 46 - - 3 16 35 17 14 - 112 2
Parasitus hyalinus
(Willmann) - - - - - - - - 3 17 - - - - 96 -
Neoseiulus marginatus
(Wainstein) 126 10 102 41 - - 242 28 34 9 32 83 8 36 22 6
362 AMANI ET AL. 2020
SPECIES DIVERSITY OF SOIL MITES UNDER DIFFERENT AGRICULTURAL LAND USE TYPES
Table 5. Continued.
Species S S S S Sh Sh Sh Sh
A B W V W J A Al A W A S A W W U
Paraseiulus talbii
(Athias-Henriot)
54 12 2 - - - - - - - - 15 45 2 - -
Neoseiulus bicaudus
(Wainstein)
- - - - 31 3 - - - - - - - - 8 -
Multidentorhodacarus
denticulates (Berlese)
6 - 2 1 - - - - - - - - 7 - 5 -
Uroobovella marginata
(Koch)
- - 5 - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Veigaia planicola
(Berlese) - - 21 - 11 -13 - - - - 5 - - 27 -
Gymnolaelaps
myrmecophilus
(Berlese)
8 - 12 6 - - - - - - - - 17 - - -
Macrocheles glaber
(Müller) - - - - - - 43 - - - 21 - - - - -
Androlaelaps shealsi
(Costa) 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - 14 -
In conclusion, the results of the current study clearly show that the Mesostigmata communities
were unstructured, and with their short generation cycles, many Mesostigmata species seem to exist
on temporal scales that are too short to be affected by human land use practices. It may, therefore, be
difficult to relate their local species richness to landscape factors. On the other hand, the diversity of
Mesostigmata at both the site and soil core-levels correlated with the land use type, suggesting that
mesostigmatic mites respond to land management at a variety of scales. For Mesostigmata, the life
history traits of individual species can be used to predict the effect of land management on species
assemblages.
REFERENCES
Andrén, O. & Lagerlöf, J. (1983) Soil fauna (microarthropods, enchytraeids, nematodes) in Swedish
agricultural cropping systems. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, 33: 33–52.
Aoki, J. (1979) Differences in sensitivities of oribatid families to environmental change by human
impacts. Revue d'Ecologie et de Biologie du Sol, 16: 415–422.
Athias-Binche, F. (1989) General ecological principles which are illustrated by population studies of
uropodid mites. Advances in Ecological Research, 19: 303–344.
Bedano, J.C. & Ruf, A. (2007) Soil predatory mite communities (Acari: Gamasina) in Agroeco-
systems of Central Argentina. Applied Soil Ecology, 36: 22–31.
Binns, E. (1975) Notes on the biology of Arctseius cetratus (Sellnick) (Mesostigmata: Ascidae).
Acarologia, 16: 577–582.
Bregetova, N.G. (1984) A key to the soil-inhabiting mites Mesostigmata. Nauka, Leningrad, 718 pp.
Cambardella, C. & Elliott, E. (1994) Carbon and nitrogen dynamics of soil organic matter fractions
from cultivated grassland soils. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 58: 123–130.
Connell, J.H. (1978) Diversity in tropical rain forests and coral reefs. Science, 199: 1302–1310.
Connell, J.H. & Slatyer, R.O. (1977) Mechanisms of succession in natural communities and their role
in community stability and organization. The American Naturalist, 111: 1119–1144.
Ettema, C.H. & Wardle, D.A. (2002) Spatial soil ecology. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 17: 177–
183.
Gulvik, M.E. (2007) Mites (Acari) as indicators of soil biodiversity and land use monitoring: a review.
Polish Journal of Ecology, 55: 415–440.
2020 PERSIAN JOURNAL OF ACAROLOGY 363
SPECIES DIVERSITY OF SOIL MITES UNDER DIFFERENT AGRICULTURAL LAND USE TYPES
Gulvik, M.E., Jerzy-Błoszyk, I.A., Bajaczyk, R. & Piwczyński, D. (2008) Abundance and diversity
of soil microarthropod communities related to different land use regime in a traditional farm in
Western Norway. Polish Journal of Ecology, 56: 273–288.
Hartenstein, R. (1962) Life history studies of Pergamasus crassipes and Amblygamasus
septentrionalis (Acarina: Parasitidae). Annals of the Entomological Society of America, 55: 196–
202.
Karg, W. (1993) Acari (Acarina), milben Parasitiformes (Anactinochaeta), Cohors Gamasina Leach,
Raubmilben: mit 4 Tabellen Fischer, Spektrum Akademischer Verlag, 523 pp.
Koehler, H. (1991) A five year study on the secondary succession of Gamasina on a ruderal site: the
influence of recultivation. Modern Acarology, Academia, Prague and SPB Academic Publishing
BV, The Hague, 1: 373–383.
Koehler, H. (1999) Predatory mites (Gamasina, Mesostigmata). Agriculture, Ecosystems &
Environment, 74: 395–410.
Koehler, H. & Born, H. (1989) The influence of vegetation structure on the development of soil
mesofauna. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 27: 253–269.
Lagerlof, J. & Andrén, O. (1988) Abundance and activity of soil mites (Acari) in four cropping
systems. Pedobiologia, 32: 129–145.
Lindquist, E.E., Krantz, G.W. & Walter, D.E. (2009) Order Mesostigmata. In: Krantz, G.W. &
Walter, D.E. (Eds.), A manual of acarology, 3rd Edition, Texas Tech University Press, Lubbock,
Texas, USA, pp. 124–232.
Magurran, A. (2003) Measuring Biological Diversity. Oxford Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, UK,
264 pp.
Maraun, M., Salamon, J.A., Schneider, K., Schaefer, M. & Scheu, S. (2003) Oribatid mite and
collembolan diversity, density and community structure in a moder beech forest (Fagus
sylvatica): Effects of mechanical perturbations. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 35: 1387–1394.
Maraun, M. & Scheu, S. (2000) The structure of oribatid mite communities (Acari, Oribatida):
patterns, mechanisms and implications for future research. Ecography, 23: 374–382.
Moore, J.C., Walter, D.E. & Hunt, H.W. (1988) Arthropod regulation of micro-and mesobiota in
below-ground detrital food webs. Annual Review of Entomology, 33: 419–435.
Moreno, C.E. & Halffter, G. (2000) Assessing the completeness of bat biodiversity inventories using
species accumulation curves. Journal of Applied Ecology, 37: 149–158.
Murvanidze, M., Mumladze, L. & Todria, N. (2019) A contribution to the knowledge of oribatid and
mesostigmatic mites (Acari) with new records in Georgia. Persian Journal of Acarology, 8(4):
309–325.
Nekola, J.C. & White, P.S. (1999) The distance decay of similarity in biogeography and ecology.
Journal of Biogeography, 26: 867–878.
Pascual, U., Termansen, M., Hedlund, K., Brussaard, L., Faber, J.H., Foudi, S., Lemanceau, P. &
Jorgensen, S.L. (2015) On the value of soil biodiversity and ecosystem services. Ecosystem
Services, 15: 11–18
Paoletti, M.G., Pimentel, D., Stinner, B. & Stinner, D. (1992) Agroecosystem biodiversity: matching
production and conservation biology. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 40: 3–23.
Petrova, A. (1977) Family Parholaspidae Evans, 1956. In:. Ghilyarov, M.S. & Bregetova, N.G.
(Eds,), Key to the soil-inhabiting mites. Mesostigmata. Nauka, Leningrad, pp. 315–346.
Pokarzhevskii, A. & Krivolutskii, D. (1997) Problems of estimating and maintaining biodiversity of
soil biota in natural and agroecosystems: A case study of chernozem soil. Agriculture,
Ecosystems & Environment, 62: 127–133.
Ruf, A. (1998) A maturity index for predatory soil mites (Mesostigmata: Gamasina) as an indicator
of environmental impacts of pollution on forest soils. Applied Soil Ecology, 9: 447–452.
364 AMANI ET AL. 2020
SPECIES DIVERSITY OF SOIL MITES UNDER DIFFERENT AGRICULTURAL LAND USE TYPES
Ruf, A. & Beck, L. (2005) The use of predatory soil mites in ecological soil classification and
assessment concepts, with perspectives for oribatid mites. Ecotoxicology and Environmental
Safety, 62: 290–299.
Salamon, J.A., Schaefer, M., Alphei, J., Schmid, B. & Scheu, S. (2004) Effects of plant diversity on
Collembola in an experimental grassland ecosystem. Oikos, 106: 51–60.
Salamon, J.A., Wissuwa, J., Moder, K. & Frank, T. (2011) Effects of Medicago sativa, Taraxacum
officinale and Bromus sterilis on the density and diversity of Collembola in grassy arable fallows
of different ages. Pedobiologia, 54: 63–70.
Sánchez-Bayo, F. (2011) Impacts of agricultural pesticides on terrestrial ecosystems. In: Sánchez-
Bayo, F., van den Brink, P.J. & Mann, R.M. (Eds.), Ecological impacts of toxic chemicals.
Bentham Science Publishers Ltd, USA, pp. 63–87.
Scheu, S. & Falca, M. (2000) The soil food web of two beech forests (Fagus sylvatica) of contrasting
humus type: Stable isotope analysis of a macro-and a mesofauna-dominated community.
Oecologia, 123: 285–296.
Schlotzhauer, S.D. & Littell, R.C. (1987) SAS system for elementary statistical analysis. SAS
Institute. Inc., SAS Campus Dr., Cary, NC.
Schneider, F.D., Scheu, S. & Brose, U. (2012) Body mass constraints on feeding rates determine the
consequences of predator loss. Ecology Letters, 15: 436–443.
Schulz, E. (1991) Die Milbenfauna (Acari: Mesostigmata und Cryptostigmata) in Lebensräumen auf
Kalkgestein: Populationsökologie, Sukzession und Beziehungen zum Lebensraum. Berichte des
Forschungszentrums Waldökosysteme, Göttingen, 250 pp.
Sgardelis, S. & Usher, M. (1994) Responses of soil Cryptostigmata across the boundary between a
farm woodland and an arable field. Pedobiologia, 38: 36–49.
Siepel, H. (1994) Life-history tactics of soil microarthropods. Biology and Fertility of soils, 18: 263–
278.
Siepel, H. (1996) The importance of unpredictable and short-term environmental extremes for
biodiversity in oribatid mites. Biodiversity Letters, 26–34.
Siepel, H. & Maaskamp, F. (1994) Mites of different feeding guilds affect decomposition of organic
matter. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 26: 1389–1394.
Steel, R., Torrie, J. & Dickey, D. (1996) Principles and procedures of statistics A biometrical
approach. 3rd Ed. McGraw Hill Book Company Inc., New York, USA, 672 pp.
Ter Braak, C.J. (1988) CANOCO-a FORTRAN program for canonical community ordination by
[partial][detrended][canonical] correspondence analysis, principal components analysis and
redundancy analysis (version 2.1) Report LWA-88-02, Agricultural Mathematics Group,
Wageningen, 95 pp. Vreeken-Buijs, M., Hassink, J. & Brussaard, L. (1998) Relationships of soil
microarthropod biomass with organic matter and pore size distribution in soils under different
land use. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 30: 97–106.
Viketoft, M., Bengtsson, J., Sohlenius, B., Berg, M.P., Petchey, O., Palmborg, C. & Huss-Danell, K.
(2009) Long-term effects of plant diversity and composition on soil nematode communities in
model grasslands. Ecology, 90(1): 90–99.
Walter, D.E. & Lindquist, E.E. (1995) The distributions of parthenogenetic ascid mites (Acari:
Parasitiformes) do not support the biotic uncertainty hypothesis. Experimental & Applied
Acarology, 19: 423–442.
Walter, D.E. & Proctor, H. (1999) Mites: Ecology, evolution and behavior. CABI, Oxon, UK,352
pp.
Walkley, A. & Black, I.A. (1934) An examination of the Degtjareff method for determining soil
organic matter, and a proposed modification of the chromic acid titration method. Soil Science,
37: 29–38.
2020 PERSIAN JOURNAL OF ACAROLOGY 365
SPECIES DIVERSITY OF SOIL MITES UNDER DIFFERENT AGRICULTURAL LAND USE TYPES
Wardle, D.A., Bardgett, R.D., Klironomos, J.N., Setälä, H., van Der Putten, W.H. & Wall, D.H.
(2004) Ecological linkages between aboveground and belowground biota. Science, 304: 1629–
1633.
Wissuwa, J., Salamon, J.A. & Frank, T. (2013) Oribatida (Acari) in grassy arable fallows are more
affected by soil properties than habitat age and plant species. European Journal of Soil Biology,
59: 8–14.
Yeomans, J.C. & Bremner, J.M. (1988) A rapid and precise method for routine determination of
organic carbon in soil. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 19: 1467–1476.
COPYRIGHT
Amani et al. Persian Journal of Acarology is under a free license. This open-access article is distributed under
the terms of the Creative Commons-BY-NC-ND which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and
reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
366 AMANI ET AL. 2020
SPECIES DIVERSITY OF SOIL MITES UNDER DIFFERENT AGRICULTURAL LAND USE TYPES
ﻪﻧﻮﮔ عﻮﻨﺗاي ﻪﻨﻛﺎﻫي ﺰﻛﺎﺧي )Acari: Mesostigmataﻣز رد (ﻴﻦﺎﻫي زروﺎﺸﻛي ﺮﺑرﺎﻛ ﺎﺑي
توﺎﻔﺘﻣ
ﻲﻧﺎﻣا زﺎﻧﺮﻬﻣ
1
ﻲﻠﻋ ﻪﺟاﻮﺧ ﺮﻴﮕﻧﺎﻬﺟ ،
1
ﻪﺒﻧداﺮﻓ يداﺮﻣ ﺪﻴﺠﻣ ،
2*
و ﻲﻧﻮﻴﭽﻜﻣ ﻮﻴﺑﺎﻓ
3
1 .ﮔ هوﺮﮔﻴﻜـــﺷﺰﭙﻫﺎﻲ، ﺪﻜـــﺸﻧادة زروﺎـــﺸﻛي، ﺘﻌﻨـــﺻ هﺎﮕـــﺸﻧادﻲ نﺎﻬﻔـــﺻا، اﻳ؛ناﺮ ارﻳﻪﻣﺎﻧﺎﺎﻫ :
mehrnazamanibeni@outlook.com
،
khajeali@cc.iut.ac.ir
2 .ـــﺳﺎﻨﺷ هﺮـــﺸﺣ هوﺮـــﮔﻲ، ﺪﻜـــﺸﻧادة زروﺎـــﺸﻛ مﻮـــﻠﻋي، ﻣﻼـــﺳا دازآ هﺎﮕـــﺸﻧادﻲ ـــﺷ ﺪـــﺣاوﻴزاﺮ ،زاﺮﻴـــﺷناﺮـــﻳا ،ار ؛ﻳﻪـــﻣﺎﻧﺎ :
majidmoradifaradonbeh@yahoo.com
3ﺪﻜﺸﻧاد .ة ﺎﺴﻴﭘ هﺎﮕﺸﻧاد ،ﻲﻜﺷﺰﭙﻣاد، ﺎﻴﻟﺎﺘﻳاار ؛ﻳﻪﻣﺎﻧﺎ :
fabio.macchioni@unipi.it
*
لﻮﺌﺴﻣ ةﺪﻨﺴﻳﻮﻧ
هﺪﻴﻜﭼ
ﻪﻨﻛﺮﺘﻬﺑ ﺎﻫﻳﻦ ﺎﻤﻧﻳﺪﻨة ﺎﭘﺪﻨﺑﻳنﺎ ﺰﻛﺎﺧيﻧاز ،ﺪﻳاﺮ ژﻮﻟﻮﻛا ﺮﻈﻧ زاﻳﻚ ﺎﻫرﺎﺘﻓر وي ﺤﻣﻴﻄﻲ عﻮﻨﺘﻣﺮﺗﻳﻦاﺣ ﻪﺑ ﻪﺟﻮﺗ ﺎﺑ .ﺪﻧﺳﺎﺴﻴﺖ ﻪﻨﻛﺎﻫي ﮕﺘﻔﺷآ ﻪﺑ كﺎﺧﻲ
عﻮﻨﺗ زا ،كﺎﺧ ﻣ ﺎﻬﻧآ داﺪﻌﺗ وﻲﺺﺧﺎﺷ ناﻮﻨﻋ ﻪﺑ ناﻮﺗﺎﻫي ژﻮﻟﻮﻛاﻳﻚ اﺮﺑي زراﻳﺑﺎﻲ ﮕﺘﻔﺷآﻲ ﺳﻮﻛا ردﻴﻢﺘﺴ.دﺮﻛ هدﺎﻔﺘﺳا ﺎﻫ اﺮﺑي ﻌﺗﻴﻴﻦ ﺗﺛﺄﻴﺮ عﻮﻧ
ﺮﺑرﺎﻛي ﻣزﻴﻦ ز عﻮﻨﺗ ﺮﺑﻳﺘﺴﻲ ﻪﻨﻛﺎﻫي ﺰﻛﺎﺧيﺺﺧﺎﺷ ،ﺎﻫي ﻧاواﺮﻓﻲ ز عﻮﻨﺗ وﻳﺘﺴﻲ ﻣﻴنﺎﺘﺳاﻴﺎﻤﮕﻳنﺎ ﺰﻛﺎﺧي ﺖﺸﻫ ردهﺎﮕﺘﺴﻳا دنﺎﺘﺳﺮﻬﺷ رﺎﻫي
ا رﻮﺸﻛ رد دﺮﻛﺮﻬﺷ و نﺎﻣﺎﺳﻳناﺮ ﺳرﺮﺑ درﻮﻣﻲ ﺮﻫ .ﺖﻓﺮﮔ راﺮﻗهﺎﮕﺘﺴﻳا ﻌﻄﻗ ود ﻞﻣﺎﺷﺔ زروﺎﺸﻛي غﺎﺑ وراﺰﺘﺸﻛ ردرﺎﻨﻛ ﻮﺑ ﻢﻫا درﻮﻣ ﻪﻛ دزرﻳﺑﺎﻲ
ز عﻮﻨﺗ .ﺪﻨﺘﻓﺮﮔ راﺮﻗﻳﺘﺴﻲ ﻪﻨﻛﺎﻫي ﺰﻛﺎﺧي ﺎﺑ ﮔ هزاﺪﻧا ﺺﺧﺎﺷ ﺪﻨﭼﻴﺮي ﺰﺠﺗ ﺎﺑ ﺲﭙﺳ و ﺪﺷﻳﻪ ﻠﺤﺗ وﻴﻞ راوﻳﺲﻧﺎ ﺎﻘﻣﻳﻪﺴ ﻤﻧ .ﺪﺷﻪﻧﻮﺎﻫي ﻊﻤﺟروآي
ﻪﺑ ﻖﻠﻌﺘﻣ هﺪﺷ12 هداﻮﻧﺎﺧ ،17 و ﺲﻨﺟ24 دﺎﻘﻣ .دﻮﺑ ﻪﻧﻮﮔﻳﺮ ز عﻮﻨﺗ ﺺﺧﺎﺷﻳﺘﺴﻲ هﺎﻣ رد هﺪﺷ ﻪﺒﺳﺎﺤﻣﺎﻫي ﻛ داد نﺎﺸﻧ ﻒﻠﺘﺨﻣا ﻪﻳﻦ ﺺﺧﺎﺷ ﺎﻫ ﻪﺑ
رﻮﻃهﺎﻣ رد لﻮﻤﻌﻣﺎﻫي غﺎﺑ و مﺮﮔﺎﻫ ﺑﻴﺮﺘﺸ هﺎﻣ زاﺎﻫي و دﺮﺳﺎﻫراﺰﺘﺸﻛ .ﺖﺳا رديﺎﻫراﺰﺘﺸﻛ ﺳرﺮﺑ درﻮﻣﻲﻘﻣ ،راﺪ ﺺﺧﺎﺷﺎﻫي ،ﺖﺷادﺮﺑ زا ﺲﭘ عﻮﻨﺗ
ﻪﺑلﺎﻤﺘﺣا ﻟد ﻪﺑﻴﻞ ﺛﺎﺗﻴﺮ ﺷﺎﻣﻴﻦيﺎﻫ زروﺎﺸﻛي كﺎﺧ ردﺎﻫراﺰﺘﺸﻛ ﻨﻌﻣ توﺎﻔﺗ .دﻮﺑ ﺮﺘﻤﻛﻲرادي نﻮﻧﺎﺷ ﺺﺧﺎﺷ رد-وﻳﺮﻨ رددرﻮﻣ ﻪﻨﻛ عﻮﻨﺗﺎﻫي
ﺧﺰﻛﺎي ﻣز ردﻴﻦﺎﻫﻲﻳ ﺮﺑرﺎﻛ ﺎﺑي ﺑ .ﺖﺷاد دﻮﺟو توﺎﻔﺘﻣﻴﺮﺘﺸﻳﻦ ﺮﺘﻤﻛ وﻳﻦ دﺎﻘﻣﻳﺮ اﻳﻦ ﺗﺮﺗ ﻪﺑ ﺺﺧﺎﺷﻴﺐ ) رﻮﮕﻧا غﺎﺑ رد48/1 (و يﺎﻫراﺰﺘﺸﻛ مﺪﻨﮔ
)15/0 رد و ( راﺰﺘﺸﻛ مﺪﻨﮔرﺎﻨﻛ اﻮﺘﺤﻣ .ﺪﺷ ﺖﺒﺛ دﺮﻛﺮﻬﺷ رد نورﺎﻧ نﺎﺘﺧردي دﺎﻣة ﻟآﻲ نﺎﺘﺴﻛﺎﺗ رد كﺎﺧﻪﻨﻴﺸﻴﺑ )12/2 (ﺪﺻرد ﺮﺘﻤﻛ وﻳﻦ ﻣﻴناﺰ نآ
ردراﺰﺘﺸﻛ ) مﺪﻨﮔ41/0.دﻮﺑ (
:يﺪﻴﻠﻛ نﺎﮔژاو ﻲﻧاواﺮﻓ؛ ﻲﺘﺴﻳز عﻮﻨﺗ؛ ﺎﻨﻏ؛ Parasitiformes؛ ﺳ ﺺﺧﺎﺷﻴنﻮﺴﭙﻤ.
:ﻪﻟﺎﻘﻣ تﺎﻋﻼﻃا رﺎﺗﻳﺦ ردﻳﺖﻓﺎ :19/3/1399 ،رﺎﺗﻳﺦ ﺬﭘﻳشﺮ :31/4/1399 :پﺎﭼ ﺦﻳرﺎﺗ ،24/7/1399
