Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Ants show that the conservation potential of afforestation efforts in Chinese valley-type savanna is dependent upon the afforestation method

  • ORIGINAL PAPER
  • Published:
Journal of Insect Conservation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

China has the largest afforestation effort in the world, which was implemented in response to large-scale deforestation that has occurred over centuries. Although the outcomes for vegetation coverage are clear, it remains unclear if these efforts also translate into broader conservation outcomes for fauna. Here we use ant communities to assess the conservation potential of vegetation undergoing natural regeneration and subject to afforestation plantings in valley-type savanna in the Hengduan Mountains of southwest China. Species richness was almost always highest in the oldest (30 year) sites irrespective of habitat type. The two sites that were monocultures of Leucaena leucocephala had notably low species richness (1 and 6 species respectively). Plant species richness had a significant positive relationship with total ant abundance and richness. The number of exotic ant species present had a negative relationship with total species richness. Multivariate analysis of species presence/absence data found no distinction between ant communities of plantation and rehabilitating sites, except for the two Leucaena plantation sites. PCA analysis of abundance data found that the separation of the sites was dependent upon the analyses conducted. We conclude that afforestation efforts are a useful conservation tool, regardless of whether these are of regenerating purely native vegetation or the creation of novel ecosystems using non-native species. However, for plantations the conservation benefits are dependent upon the species that are planted.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Andersen AN (1990) The use of ant communities to evaluate change in Australian terrestrial ecosystems: a review and a recipe. Proc Ecol Soc Aust 16:347–357

    Google Scholar 

  • Andersen AN, Majer JD (2004) Ants show the way Down Under: invertebrates as bioindicators in land management. Front Ecol Environ 2:291–298

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andersen AN, Cook GD, Corbett LK, Douglas MM, Eager RW, Russell-Smith J, Setterfield SA, Williams RJ, Woinarski JCZ (2005) Fire frequency and biodiversity conservation in Australian tropical savannas: implications from the Kapalga fire experiment. Austral Ecol 30:155–167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson M, Gorley R, Clarke K (2008) PERMANOVA for PRIMER, user manual. Primer-E Ltd., Plymouth

    Google Scholar 

  • Armbrecht I, Perfecto I, Vandermeer J (2004) Enigmatic biodiversity correlations: ant diversity responds to diverse resources. Science 304:284–286

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Asfiya WARA, Lach L, Majer JD, Heterick B, Didham RK (2015) Intensive agroforestry practices negatively affect ant (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) diversity and composition in southeast Sulawesi, Indonesia. Asian Myrmecol 7:87–104

    Google Scholar 

  • Bestelmeyer BT, Wiens JA (2001) Ant biodiversity in semiarid landscape mosaics: the consequences of grazing vs. natural heterogeneity. Ecol Appl 11:1123–1140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blatrix R, Lebas C, Galkowski C, Wgnez P, Pimenta R, Morichon D (2016) Vegetation cover and elevation drive diversity and composition of ant communities (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in a Mediterranean ecosystem. Myrmecol News 22:119–127

    Google Scholar 

  • Brooks TM, Mittermeier RA, Mittermeier CG, Da Fonseca GA, Rylands AB, Konstant WR, Flick P, Pilgrim J, Oldfield S, Magin G (2002) Habitat loss and extinction in the hotspots of biodiversity. Conserv Biol 16:909–923

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brühl CA, Eltz T (2010) Fuelling the biodiversity crisis: species loss of ground-dwelling forest ants in oil palm plantations in Sabah, Malaysia (Borneo). Biodivers Conserv 19:519–529

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brühl CA, Eltz T, Linsenmair KE (2003) Size does matter—effects of tropical rainforest fragmentation on the leaf litter ant community in Sabah, Malaysia. Biodivers Conserv 12:1371–1389

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cabra-García J, Bermúdez-Rivas C, Osorio AM, Chacón P (2012) Cross-taxon congruence of α and β diversity among five leaf litter arthropod groups in Colombia. Biodivers Conserv 21:1493–1508

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chao A, Gotelli NJ, Hsieh TC, Sander EL, Ma KH, Colwell RK, Ellison AM (2014) Rarefaction and extrapolation with Hill numbers: a framework for sampling and estimation in species diversity studies. Ecol Monogr 84:45–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen XF (1996) An exploration on the sustainable development problem of forest resource of China. J Nat Resour 11:318–325

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke KR (1993) Non-parametric multivariate analyses of changes in community structure. Aust J Ecol 18:117–143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corley J, Sackmann P, Rusch V, Bettinelli J, Paritsis J (2006) Effects of pine silviculture on the ant assemblages (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) of the Patagonian steppe. For Ecol Manag 222:162–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Deyn GB, Raaijmakers CE, Zoomer HR, Berg MP, de Ruiter PC, Verhoef HA, Bezemer TM, van der Putten WH (2003) Soil invertebrate fauna enhances grassland succession and diversity. Nature 422:711–713

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dejean A, Fisher BL, Corbara B, Orivel J, Leponce M (2007) Rainforest canopy ants: the implications of territoriality and predatory behavior. Funct Ecosyst Communities 1:105–120

    Google Scholar 

  • Del Toro I, Ribbons RR, Pelin SL (2012) The little things that run the world revisited: a review of ant-mediated ecosystem services and disservices (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Myrmecol News 17:133–146

    Google Scholar 

  • Doherty M (1998) The conservation value of regrowth native plant communities: a review. Report to the New South Wales Scientific Committee. CSIRO, Canberra

    Google Scholar 

  • FAO (2001) State of the world’s forests. Forestry paper no. 140. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

  • Fava F, Pulighe G, Monteiro AT (2016) Mapping changes in land cover composition and pattern for comparing Mediterranean rangeland restoration alternatives. Land Degrad Dev 27:671–681

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fayle TM, Turner EC, Snaddon JL, Chey VK, Chung AY, Eggleton P, Foster WA (2010). Oil palm expansion into rain forest greatly reduces ant biodiversity in canopy, epiphytes and leaf-litter. Basic Appl Ecol 11:337–345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Folgarait PJ (1998) Ant biodiversity and its relationship to ecosystem functioning: a review. Biodivers Conserv 7:1221–1244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerlach J, Samways M, Pryke J (2013) Terrestrial invertebrates as bioindicators: an overview of available taxonomic groups. J Insect Conserv 17:831–850

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grimbacher PS, Hughes L (2002) Response of ant communities and ant-seed interactions to bush regeneration. Ecol Manag Restor 3:188–199

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hillebrand H, Matthiessen B (2009) Biodiversity in a complex world: consolidation and progress in functional biodiversity research. Ecol Lett 12:1405–1419

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmann BD (2010) Using ants for rangeland monitoring: Global patterns in the responses of ant communities to grazing. Ecol Indic 10:105–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmann BD, Andersen AN (2003) Responses of ants to disturbance in Australia, with particular reference to functional groups. Austral Ecol 28:444–464

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmann BD, Andersen AN, Zhang X (2011) Taxonomic confusion of two tramp ant species: Iridomyrmex anceps and Ochetellus glaber are really species complexes. Curr Zool 57:662–667

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holway DA, Lach L, Suarez AV, Tsutsui ND, Case TJ (2002) The causes and consequences of ant invasions. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 33:181–233

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hou Y (2003) The framework theory on sustainable forestry development and sustainable forest management. World For Res 16:1–6

    Google Scholar 

  • James T (1997) Native Flora of Western Sydney. Urban Bushland Biodiversity Survey. Stage 1: Western Sydney. NSW Biodiversity Survey Program. NSW NPWS, Sydney

    Google Scholar 

  • Janz N, Nylin S, Wahlberg N (2006) Diversity begets diversity: host expansions and the diversification of plant-feeding insects. BMC Evol Biol 6:4

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Klimes P, Idigel C, Rimandai M, Fayle TM, Janda M, Weiblen GD, Novotny V (2012) Why are there more arboreal ant species in primary than in secondary tropical forests? J Anim Ecol 81:1103–1112

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Klimes P, Fibich P, Idigel C, Rimandai M (2015) Disentangling the diversity of arboreal ant communities in tropical forest trees. PLoS ONE 10(2):e0117853

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Komonen A, Övermark E, Hytönen J, Halme P (2015) Tree species influences diversity of ground-dwelling insects in afforested fields. For Ecol Manag 349:12–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lu Z, Hoffmann BD, Chen Y (2016) Can reforested and plantation habitats effectively conserve SW China’s ant biodiversity? Biodivers Conserv 25:753–770

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luke SH, Fayle TM, Eggleton P, Turner EC, Davies RG (2014) Functional structure of ant and termite assemblages in old growth forest, logged forest and oil palm plantation in Malaysian Borneo. Biodivers Conserv 23:2817–2832

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer AL, Pimm SL (1997) Tropical rainforests: diversity begets diversity. Curr Biol 7:R430–R432

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mezger D, Pfeiffer M (2011) Partitioning the impact of abiotic factors and spatial patterns on species richness and community structure of ground ant assemblages in four Bornean rainforests. Ecography 34:39–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller B, Sinclair EA, Menz MHM, Elliott CP, Bunn E, Commander LE, Dalziell E, David E, Davis B, Erickson TE, Golos PJ, Krauss SL, Lewandrowski W, Mayence CE, Merino-Martin L, Merritt DJ, Nevill PG, Phillips RD, Ritchie AL, Ruoss S, Stevens JC (2016) A framework for the practical science necessary to restore sustainable, resilient, and biodiverse ecosystems. Restor Ecol. doi:10.1111/rec.12475

    Google Scholar 

  • Novotny V, Drozd P, Miller SE, Kulfan M, Janda M, Basset Y, Weiblen GD (2006) Why are there so many species of herbivorous insects in tropical rainforests? Science 313:1115–1118

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Palladini JD, Jones MG, Sanders NJ, Jules ES (2007) The recovery of ant communities in regenerating temperate conifer forests. For Ecol Manag 242:619–624

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parr CL, Eggleton P, Davies AB, Evans TA, Hodsworth S (2016) Suppression of savanna ants alters invertebrate composition and influences key ecosystem processes. Ecology 97:1611–1617

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pascov CM, Nevill PG, Elliott CP, Majer JD, Anthony JM, Krauss SL (2015) The critical role of ants in the extensive dispersal of Acacia seeds revealed by genetic parentage assignment. Oecologia 179:1123–1134

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pywell RF, Meek WR, Loxton RG, Nowakowski M, Carvell C, Woodcock BA (2011) Ecological restoration on farmland can drive beneficial functional responses in plant and invertebrate communities. Agric Ecosyst Environ 140:62–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • R Development Core Team (2010) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna

    Google Scholar 

  • Ribas CR, Schoereder JH, Pic M, Soares SM (2003) Tree heterogeneity, resource availability, and larger scale processes regulating arboreal ant species richness. Austral Ecol 28:305–314

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt FA, Ribas CR, Schoereder JH (2013) How predictable is the response of ant assemblages to natural forest recovery? Implications for their use as bioindicators. Ecol Indic 24:158–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silveira JM, Barlow J, Andrade RB, Louzada J, Mestre LA, Lacau S, Zanetti R, Numata I, Cochrane MA (2013) The responses of leaf litter ant communities to wildfires in the Brazilian Amazon: a multi-region assessment. Biodivers Conserv 22:513–529

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stephens SS, Wagner MR (2006) Using ground foraging ant (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) functional groups as bioindicators of forest health in northern Arizona Ponderosa pine forests. Environ Entomol 53:937–949

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tang GY, Li K (2013) Tree species controls on soil carbon sequestration and carbon stability following 20 years of afforestation in a valley-type savanna. For Ecol Manag 291:13–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wetterer JK (2005) Worldwide distribution and potential spread of the long-legged ant, Anoplolepis gracilipes (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Sociobiology 45:77–97

    Google Scholar 

  • Wodika BR, Klopf RP, Baer SG (2014) Colonization and recovery of invertebrate ecosystem engineers during prairie restoration. Restor Ecol 22:456–464

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu J, Wang CL (1995) The ants of China. China Forestry Press, Beijing [in Chinese]

    Google Scholar 

  • Xiwen L, Walker D (1986) The plant geography of Yunnan Province, southwest China. J Biogeogr 13:367–397

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu ZH (2002) A study on the biodiversity of Formicidae ants of Xishuangbanna nature reserve. Yunnan Science and Technology Press, Kunming [in Chinese]

    Google Scholar 

  • Yeeles P, Lach L, Hobbs RJ, van Wees M, Didham RK (2017) Woody plant richness does not influence invertebrate community reassembly trajectories in a tree diversity experiment. Ecology 98:500–511

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang Y, Song C (2006) Impacts of afforestation, deforestation, and reforestation on forest cover in China from 1949 to 2003. J For 104:383–387

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang K, Dearing JA, Tong SL, Hughes TP (2016) China’s degraded environment enters a new normal. Trends Ecol Evol 35:175–177

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We wish to thank Professor XU Zhenghui for help identifying the specimens. Gabi Arcoverde, Tom Bishop and two anonymous reviewers improved the draft manuscript. This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (31160131), and the Fund (IP200904) by the Key Research Foundation of the Southwest Forestry University.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Forestry, Southwest Forestry University, Bailongsi, Kunming, 650224, Yunnan, China

    Qiao Li

  2. Tropical Ecosystems Research Centre, CSIRO, PMB 44, Winnellie, NT, 0822, Australia

    B. D. Hoffmann

  3. Research Institute of Insect Resources, CAF, Kunming, 650224, China

    Zhi-xing Lu & You-qing Chen

Authors
  1. Qiao Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. B. D. Hoffmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Zhi-xing Lu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. You-qing Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Qiao Li.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Li, Q., Hoffmann, B.D., Lu, Zx. et al. Ants show that the conservation potential of afforestation efforts in Chinese valley-type savanna is dependent upon the afforestation method. J Insect Conserv 21, 621–631 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10841-017-0005-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10841-017-0005-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation