You are on page 1of 12

Red de Revistas Científicas de América Latina, el Caribe, España y Portugal

Sistema de Información Científica

Vieira da Cunha Neto, Felipe; Fernandes Correia, Maria Elizabeth; Almeida Pereira, Guilherme Henrique;
Pereira, Marcos Gervasio; dos Santos Leles, Paulo Sérgio
Soil fauna as an indicator of soil quality in forest stands, pasture and secondary forest
Revista Brasileira de Ciência do Solo, vol. 36, núm. 5, octubre-noviembre, 2012, pp. 1407-1417
Sociedade Brasileira de Ciência do Solo
Viçosa, Brasil

Available in:

Revista Brasileira de Ciência do Solo,
ISSN (Printed Version): 0100-0683
Sociedade Brasileira de Ciência do Solo

How to cite Complete issue More information about this article Journal's homepage
Non-Profit Academic Project, developed under the Open Acces Initiative

Brazil. 1407 DIVISÃO 2 . Maria Elizabeth Fernandes Correia(3). The soil invertebrate community was sampled using pitfall traps. UFRRJ. Graduate Course of Environmental and Forest Sciences (PPGCAF) of Universidade Federal Rural do Rio de Janeiro . BR 465.57 in areas with acacia and eucalyptus in the rainy season to 3.UFRRJ. The objective of this study was to evaluate soil quality in areas with different soil management (6) Adjunct Professor III.. Of all forest stands. Ci. Professor. pasture. Solo. Received for publication in February 2. and change index V were determined. Minas Gerais. eucalyptus. mimosa. Shannon’s index ranged from 1. respectively). Brazil. the Pielou uniformity index. CEP 23890-000 Seropédica (RJ). in Além Paraíba.19 in the eucalyptus area in the dry based on soil fauna as indicator. CEP 78000-200 Cáceres (MT). Researcher.1 . E-mail: ecorreia@cnpab. the mimosa area had the most abundant soil fauna. Index terms: edaphic community. from areas with five vegetation types (acacia. but higher in the rainy season in the pasture and secondary forest than in the forest stands. biological indicators.PROCESSOS E PROPRIEDADES DO SOLO Comissão 2. acacia and mimosa) in the dry season. in the dry and rainy seasons.3 and 31. (3) Biologist. E-mail: guilhermepereira06@gmail. both in the dry and rainy season (36 and 23 %. CNPq and FAPERJ scholarship holder. Master graduate in Environmental and Forest Sciences. Marcos Gervasio Pereira(5) & Paulo Sérgio dos Santos Leles(6) SUMMARY The interactions between soil invertebrates and environmental variations are relatively unknown in the assessment of soil quality. Silviculture Department of Forest (5) Associate Professor IV.. dos Ramires. CEP 23890-000 Seropédica (RJ).embrapa.Biologia do solo SOIL FAUNA AS AN INDICATOR OF SOIL QUALITY IN FOREST STANDS. PASTURE AND SECONDARY FOREST(1) Felipe Vieira da Cunha Neto(2). Soil Department of Agronomy Institute. respectively). PASTURE AND. The abundance of organisms and the total and average R. 2012 (2) Forest Engineer.neto@cas. E-mail: pleles@ufrrj. (1) Part of the Master's degree dissertation of the first author. km 7. Bras. UFRRJ.Embrapa Agrobiologia. Brazil. Av. Guilherme Henrique Almeida Pereira(4). The highest values of average and total richness were recorded in the secondary forest in the dry season and in the mimosa stand in the rainy season. Brazil. the abundance of organisms in the three vegetation types did not differ. soil management. SOIL FAUNA AS AN INDICATOR OF SOIL QUALITY IN FOREST STANDS.7 individuals per trap per day. The uniformity index was highest in forest stands (eucalyptus. and secondary forest). In the rainy (4) Biologist. km 7. The fauna was most abundant in the areas of secondary forest and mimosa plantations in the dry season (111. 36:1407-1417 . The change index V indicated that the percentage of extremely inhibited groups was lowest in the area with mimosa. E-mail: felipe. Instituto Federal de Educação. Distrito Industrial. BR 465. 2011 and approved in October 6. Shannon’s diversity index. E-mail: gervasio@ufrrj. Ciência e Tecnologia do Mato Grosso (IFMT). Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária .

pastagem e floresta secundária). Forests with diverse vegetation or in more various organisms. 2006. no período seco. no período chuvoso. (Moço et al. 2009). 2009). a área de mimosa foi a que proporcionou a maior abundância de fauna edáfica. 1985. 1982). and shelter and reproduction sites (Guerra system consume roots and make galleries and in this et al. utilizando a fauna edáfica como indicador. 2005). Compared to mixed soil fauna sensitivity to environmental variations can forest stands. indicadores biológicos. 1980. 2009). litter quality.. 2006. Solo. PASTAGEM E FLORESTA SECUNDÁRIA As interações entre os invertebrados edáficos e as variações ambientais. para avaliação da qualidade do solo. which immediately reduces food supply and fertility. Bras. respectivamente)... Para a amostragem da comunidade de invertebrados do solo. Thus. to soil habitat. 2005. pastures and therefore be a potential indicator of soil quality. Pela aplicação do índice de mudança V.. In addition to contributing to the the removal of the vegetation results in a simpler decomposition of organic matter and.. 2005.... 2008. including soil fauna invertebrates. way influence soil aggregation as well (Correia & Additionally.. em cinco áreas com diferentes coberturas vegetais (acácia. na estação seca.. 2002). INTRODUCTION eucalyptus stands tend to be less rich and the predatory activity reduced (Moço et al. tanto no período seco quanto no chuvoso (36 e 23 %. a área de mimosa foi a que apresentou a menor percentagem de grupos extremamente inibidos. 2007. o objetivo deste estudo foi avaliar a qualidade do solo em áreas com diferentes manejos. The al. Já na estação chuvosa. nas estações seca e chuvosa. acácia e mimosa).7 indivíduos por armadilha por dia.1408 Felipe Vieira da Cunha Neto et al. Silva et al. 2009). Ribas et al. Silva et al. the invertebrates that inhabit the soil-litter diversity.. invertebrate community (Moço et al.19 na área de eucalipto. of ecosystems. RESUMO: FAUNA EDÁFICA COMO INDICADOR DA QUALIDADE DO SOLO EM POVOAMENTOS FLORESTAIS. as riquezas média e total. Souto et al. as áreas de floresta secundária. Due to their stages of recovery (Menezes et al. O índice de uniformidade de Pielou foi maior para os povoamentos florestais (eucalipto.. One of these ecosystem processes is the recycling Modifications in the invertebrate community of the of nutrients by the soil fauna through the soil are related to variations in the environment decomposition of organic matter (Mason. o índice de uniformidade de Pielou e o índice de mudança V. monoculture areas.. Dias et al. the soil fauna is an important alterations in the properties of the invertebrate element in the process of ecosystem reestablishment community of the soil fauna reflect the development (Majer et al. respectivamente). MG.. advanced successional stages tend to have a richer These organisms vary in size and metabolism. Foram determinados a abundância da fauna. de mimosa e de acácia não diferiram. microclimate variations is reduced. mimosa. 1994).. eucalipt. 1992. Termos de indexação: comunidade edáfica. functional diversity.. 2011).3 e 31. Baretta 2000) or the indirect stimulation of microbial activity et al. Os maiores valores de riqueza média e total foram quantificados na área de floresta secundária no período seco e na área de mimosa no período chuvoso. 2008. são pouco conhecidas. thus. Entre os povoamentos florestais. and regulation of the decomposing fungal populations Azevedo et al. and soil fauna and to be more abundant in saprophagous they play numerous functional roles in the species and predators than forest stands in the initial environment (Lavelle et al. O trabalho foi realizado em Além Paraíba. 1982. Haag (Correia. Variations in the vegetation et al. as áreas de pastagem e floresta secundária superaram os povoamentos florestais. o índice de diversidade de Shannon. In general. food availability. 36:1407-1417 . 1992).. Menezes et al. 2007). extreme soil temperatures and low associated with the variety of resources and moisture. The role of the fauna composition and in soil management. the protection of the vegetation against Oliveira. and degree of degradation or recovery in this process involves the fragmentation and of the ecosystem have a great influence on the soil redistribution of vegetation debris (Correia & Oliveira. As áreas de floresta secundária e plantio de mimosa apresentaram a maior abundância da fauna no período seco (111. a 3. R. Silva et The soil-litter system is the natural habitat of al. which results in Several of the functions of the soil fauna are high insolation. manejo do solo. Ci. foram utilizadas armadilhas “pit fall”. Nesse sentido.. Lavelle et al.. O índice de Shannon variou de 1.57 nas áreas de acácia e eucalipto.. 2000). making the environment less favorable for microinhabitats of the soil-litter system (Lavelle et survival and reproduction (Guerra et al. No período chuvoso.

42" W). 1994). Mimosa artemisiana Heringer & Paula stands caught per trap per day (ind. total abundance = mean number of individuals 2. days the traps remained in the field. This method allows measuring sensitivity to the environmental conditions (McGeoch. parameter indicates the fauna abundance. richness and different soil management systems. fertilization. The term group refers to either taxonomic dry season from June to September. total nº of 3..12 ha. Thereafter. order or family) or stage of development annual temperature is 22. total nº of days = number of stand. 2005). Ci. 2009). 5. urophylla of ind.). Total abundance = Σ (total nº of ind. The samples were kept in plastic pots with alcohol (70 %) This study was conducted on the Fazenda for the preservation of the morphological structure of Cachoeirão. based on soil fauna diversity (Moço et al. Solo.3 °C (annual average (larva or adult.5 x 2. 1991). = number of individuals of the group.. spatial distribution.. per trap and with fungi from the rhizobium strain. where group abundance = mean number of individuals Saplings inoculated with arbuscular mycorrhiza fungi of each group caught per trap per day (ind. depending mountainous relief and a mean altitude of 390 m asl. 1994) using the in litter than other diversity measurements (Moço et R. Silva as indicator.. Sampling was conducted Parkin. Arthropods were identified in the largest taxonomic The annual rainfall in the region is 1. the organisms. and is therefore The fauna of the five management systems was better suited for comparisons of soil fauna community sampled with pitfall traps (Moldenke. 15 year. with a groups. on their development stage. the samples were taken to the laboratory and the captured animals washed with MATERIAL AND METHODS running water to remove the preserving agent. abundance of individuals between the groups (Moço According to the oldest farm residents.52" S and 42º 53’ 40.. and fertilization with 200 g N-P-K (04. starting date. nº of type of sapling inoculation as in the Acacia mangium traps = number of traps. (2006). SOIL FAUNA AS AN INDICATOR OF SOIL QUALITY IN FOREST STANDS. Menezes et al.. and ind. 1409 Biological indicators are species or groups of species modified model of Price & Shepard (1980). Grazing had ceased index varies with the equitability obtained from the about 40 years before. The region has a very rugged and functions in the nutrient cycling process. The average levels (class. per stand. The quality of the soil environment is related macrofauna. total richness (total number of groups found owner. Bras. The objective influences the environmental quality in the different of this study was to evaluate the soil quality in stands systems and properties of the soil fauna community in Além Paraíba. Shannon’s diversity index and the Pielou equitability index were used. Minas Gerais. the interactions between soil in September 2008 (end of dry season) and in March invertebrate and environmental conditions are little 2009 (end of the rainy season). 2009). fertilization with 100 g phosphate per seed hole. in the municipality of Além Paraíba. The data were converted The vegetation cover was classified as Seasonal into number of individuals per trap per day. The diversity obtained from Shannon’s forest stand used to be a pasture. However. the secondary et al. inter-row spacing of Aside from the abundance of the soil fauna. 36:1407-1417 .3 °C). per trap day-1). Minas Gerais (21º 56’ 53. day-1). the abundance of groups of the soil mesofauna and 1998). The traps were buried in the soil (top end even with the soil surface) and left in the field for 10 days. depending The soil quality was assessed based on soil fauna basically on the mobility of the groups (Moldenke. as proposed that reflect the impact of habitat changes due to their by Aquino et al. reported as the most stable parameter. Group abundance = Σ (nº of ind. 2. mean richness (mean number of groups caught per pasture for dairy heifers.3 °C and average annual minimum necessary because invertebrates may have different 16. nº of with the same area. In the diversity analysis. calculated by the equations: evaluated in areas with different vegetation covers. 2005. diversity was also assessed as a parameter of soil 31-04) per seed hole. Secondary forest in an initial stage of succession.. Brachiaria pasture (Brachiaria sp. inter-row spacing of 2 x 2 nº of days (2) m. as indicator. Acacia mangium Wild stands of 0./nº of traps)/ initiated in November 2004. in areas under such as density. PASTURE AND. 2009. ecological indices of 4. Stands of Eucalyptus grandis x E. as the traps can catch animals that move to its capacity to sustain biological production and to about on the soil. The invertebrate community was 1994). which made the secondary Pielou uniformity index. regardless of the trap)../nº of traps)/nº of days (1) 1. This classification is maximum 28. quality. according to the property stand). in some cases). Nine traps containing 4 % maintain or improve the environmental quality within formaldehyde. planted in November 2004. This Semideciduous Forest (Veloso et al. The Pielou index has been succession process possible. since the season known in the assessment of soil quality. the limits of a natural or managed system (Doran & were installed in each stand. 8 ha.0 m. et al. Shannon’s diversity is a function of the community stand with the most complex structure (20 tree species group richness and the relative distribution of identified in a flora survey) (Abel et al. for the preservation of the organisms. = total number of individuals of the soil fauna.290 mm.

5 abA No change (NC) -0. 2006..05).9 to 80.1410 Felipe Vieira da Cunha Neto et al.05 Mimosa 31.9 bcB 39. Solo.5 ind. 2005).8 ± 5.7 abA Slight stimulation (MdS) 0.6 ± 4. composition and diversity 2 dM Fauna abundance ranged from 17.5 ± 1. 2009). Bras. per trap day-1 in the where V = change index. In contrast to the dry season. In the dry season. al. and seasons in each stand. and secondary forest) Values followed by the same small letter in was random. lowest in the acacia stand. Principal Component Analysis (PCA) The litter production in forest stands was reduced in was also carried out to evaluate possible patterns of the drier periods (Fernandes et al. Ci.05 > V > -0. 36:1407-1417 . In contrast.. 2008).5 ± 1.3 ± 4.9 abB 76. fauna was most in managed systems.67 Pasture 29. dNM = density of individuals in abundant in the secondary and mimosa forest and non-managed systems. Mimosa artemisiana (mimosa).8 to V= -1 (3) dM + dNM 111. 2000.8 cB 44. the dry and rainy seasons in Acacia mangium indicating inhibition or stimulation of (acacia). 2009.3 ± 10. The influence of columns and the same capital letter in rows are litter on fauna abundance and diversity was evaluated statistically equal by the Kruskal-Wallis test by the analysis of abundance and mean richness data (p < 0.9 ± 1. Diniz et al.5 aB R.05 < V < 0. 2004). 2005).. the soil management system (modified by pasture. pasture. Two number of individuals collected per trap per evaluations were performed: stands in each seasons day ± standard error. urophylla (eucalyptus). The following equation was used to calculate the change index: Abundance. Individuals per trap per day and mean with the Kruskal-Wallis test (p < 0. STATISTICA 7. version 4.67 Moderate inhibition (MI) -0. as the favorable environment for the biota and stimulates differences between management systems were greater biological activity (Moço et al. The reduction of litter leads Table 2. dM = density of individuals rainy season. Canoco for Windows. & Aquino.67 ind. in this season (Moço et al. The change index (V) is a good indicator of management conditions. per trap day-1 ± e Slight inhibition (MdI) -0. The sampling design in the five stands (acacia. This pattern was clearer in Statistical analysis mimosa and acacia stands. multivariate cluster analysis was conditions of the sampling site and resource performed by the Ward method with software availability (Menezes et al. The Euclidian microclimatic conditions had a lower influence on the distance was also used as a measure of dissimilarity vertical distribution of invertebrates in the soil-litter and to cluster the five stands in a dendrogram (Costa system (Correia & Oliveira.1 ± 9.7 ± 1.... 2005).33 > V > -0.33 < V < 0. abundance of soil fauna groups in response to Eucalyptus grandis x E.3 bcB 40. which were similar to the secondary forest stand in this season (Table 2).1 ± 9.05).33 Eucalyptus 19. Clustering was With regard to the seasons.05 < V < 0..8 bA Moderate stimulation (MS) 0. eucalyptus. In addition to these indexes.5 ± 9. the change system) (ACP). Calvi et al.7 ind. Soil fauna abundance ± standard error in Table 1. groups of response variable data (soil fauna in this 2011). To explain the fluctuation Several factors influenced the soil invertebrate in the population of soil fauna individuals (Mussury community.. changes in the soil fauna under the different soil management systems (Wardle & Parkinson.9 bA Extreme stimulation (ES) V> 0. The groups were with the others. Ranking according to the change index V. 2002).33 Acacia 17. 2005).5.3 ± 4. was index (V) was determined for the evaluation of the used (Ter Braak & Smilauer. in comparison system and used as a reference. rain contributes to a more done based on abundance in the rainy season.7 aA 80. decreasing the food availability for fauna case) in relation to the treatment (management (Correia & Oliveira. and secondary forest Wardle. 1995) Stand Abundance Category Index V Dry season Rainy season Extreme inhibition (EI) V< -0. 2010).7 ± 7.3 ± 10. Silva et al.67 Secondary forest 111.0 (StatSoft. as it can indicate disturbance or stability RESULTS AND DISCUSSION of the soil fauna (Correia. per trap day-1 in the dry season and from 40.. with nine repetitions. 1991). The pasture and eucalyptus The secondary forest was taken as a non-managed stands had intermediate abundance. mimosa. 2000). abundance increased in the four management systems in the rainy season. particularly season and microclimate et al. 2002). fauna ranked based on the V index (Table 1).

The mimosa stand season in the three forest stands indicates the spatial had a good trophic community structure. The groups with the highest hypothesis becomes more plausible when one analyzes abundance of fauna groups in the mimosa stand were the variation of the standard error of abundance from Acari.. Acari and Collembola are microphagous. The biomass of acacia and mimosa Pseudoscorpionida was found only in the soil fauna of species has a lower C-to-N ratio and therefore the secondary forest. In the dry season. (2005) also reported provides the fauna with a better litter quality (Dias the occurrence of Pseudoscorpionida in the et al. the establishment of better invertebrate community of a preserved forest stand. Moço et al. This in the environment. 2005). with great variability of the soil invertebrate community from population control. greater biological activity in the soil under this litter. % abundance of Araneae in the secondary forest soil. This indicates in the biological activity at the surface of the soil. 2009). Seasonal variation of the standard error of of pasture were less rich than in the secondary forest. fauna richness increased in the pasture forest... Moço et The standard error of abundance represents the al. total abundance of the soil fauna in Acacia The soil fauna richness in acacia. The variation of the they act influence the nutrient cycling process standard error of abundance was lower in the pasture indirectly by controlling the populations of decomposer stand (Figure 1)... that is. 2007). Solo. 1411 to reduction in moisture and makes the fauna migrate The fauna abundance was therefore greatest in to soil layers below the surface. which had similar soil high rainfall resulted in an increase in resource fauna communities to those of the mimosa stand and supply and created microenvironments more greater abundance of Collembola suborders. urophylla those of pasture and secondary forest stands. or predators and abundance in the different management systems and regulate the populations of other invertebrate groups seasons. bacteria and fungi (Wardle & Lavelle. resulting in a decrease the mimosa stand in both seasons.. In the Poduromorpha and Symphypleona.6 %) stands. SOIL FAUNA AS AN INDICATOR OF SOIL QUALITY IN FOREST STANDS. Ci. which basically depends on the relative season is related to the creation of more favorable abundance of fauna groups and the function they fulfill environments in the different stands by rain. indicating the 10 functional redundancy of the system. e. Formicidae can be either saprophagous and variability of fauna abundance around the mean influence nutrient cycling directly. and secondary rainy season. An increase in the standard error with of the fauna (Moço et al. in the eucalyptus (9. In the (eucalyptus) stands. secondary forest fragment the biological activity in the dry season. litter system (Silva et al.. this With regard to the group composition. with a greater structural complexity. conditions and a greater resource supply stimulate but not in non-preserved. with 20 redistribution of energy among a greater number of species (Begon et al. where the variation was greater.9 %) and mimosa (6. pasture. Collembola (Entomobryomorpha) and the dry season to the rainy season.. it is possible that the seasonal reduction in activity of the fauna influences the soil quality in the the variation of abundance from the dry to the rainy mimosa stand. 36:1407-1417 . equilibrium.g. Mimosa artemisiana eucalyptus stands was intermediate in relation to (mimosa). 2005). and greater control of ecologic processes (Begon et al. This may be due to the vertical migration of some fauna pattern may be due to the type of environment. This pattern also the effect of the seasons. and mimosa stands and was greater than in the R. mainly in the rainy season. In the rainy season. functional redundancy. mainly stands (Table 3). and the dry to the rainy season. The abundance Formicidae. case of the legume stands. 0 In relation to the fauna diversity. This good fauna 15 community structure pattern is evident in the greater Standart error.. Forest groups to the surface of the soil-litter system (Silva systems evolve and tend toward a dynamic et al.. This pattern illustrates reduced saprophagous activity. acacia and mimosa. The occurrence of Pseudoscorpionida in the invertebrate community 5 of the secondary forest only suggests the potential of this group as an indicator of good soil quality. the applied to the other stands. especially of decomposers. the invertebrate groups Figure 1. Thus. 1997. 2009). This pattern was similar in the other standard error increased in the three stands. the ecological Acacia Eucalyptus Mimosa Secondary Pasture indexes also varied with season in the management Forest systems. 2005). 2005). mimosa and mangium (acacia).. eucalyptus and pasture stands.. This greater biological Thus. Eucalyptus grandis x E. Bras. 2005). of favorable to soil fauna (Moço et al. In this stage. it is pattern was greater due to the greater availability important to point out that the predator group of resources. This pattern (capoeira). Araneae is also a predator group. PASTURE AND. the occurrence of predators like Pseudoscorpionida Dry season Rainy season indicates a more controlled trophic structure.

00 0.61 0.51 0.32 3.16 0.00 0.18 1. the diversity of habitats available to the fauna.31 8..00 0.00 0.48 0.10 0.13 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.43 0.00 0. Tews in the dry season.03 0.54 27.09 Total 17.00 0.22 0.01 0.00 0. Mimosa artemisiana (mimosa).05 0.05 0.06 0.14 Isoptera 0.14 6.00 0.03 0.48 0.00 0.24 Poduromorpha 2.14 Lepidoptera larva 0. Bras.36 11.05 16.00 0.26 2.00 0.00 0.36 0.39 0.00 0.04 0.44 0.86 31.12 8.00 0.34 0.03 0.03 0.00 Orthoptera 0. Menezes et al. 1975.02 0.00 0.00 0. per trap day-1 Acari 2.06 0.08 6. particularly greater number of fauna groups (Bazzaz. In contrast.02 0.79 3.05 0.01 Thysanoptera 0.00 0.00 0. when Litter is a variable that has a great influence on compared to the secondary forest.19 0.08 0.24 0.19 Entomobryomorpha 1.04 Coleoptera larva 0.71 0.00 0.22 0.71 0.00 0. Soil fauna abundance of taxonomic groups in the dry (DS) and rainy seasons (RS) in Acacia mangium (acacia)..01 0.04 Psocoptera 0.84 3.06 0.00 Lepidoptera 0. Silva et al.10 Coleoptera 0.61 0.08 Araneae 0.96 39.54 0.00 0.98 5.50 1.03 0. 2005).04 0.00 0. Management also found in eucalyptus and pasture stands.43 43.32 0.03 0.09 0.00 0.99 0. therefore.23 0.80 0.81 29.02 0.04 0.19 1.03 0.23 0.39 1. They attributed this pattern to the et al.08 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.05 0. and secondary forest (SF) Taxonomic group Acacia Mimosa Eucalyptus Pasture Secondary forest DS RS DS RS DS RS DS RS DS RS ind. Ci.69 20.20 0.54 0.01 0.77 Isopoda 0. 2011).03 0.00 0.00 0.82 0. 2009).04 0.11 0.36 0. Eucalyptus grandis × E. a richness was lower in the manioc culture.19 1.69 14.03 Hymenoptera 0.00 Symphyla 0.11 0.10 0.29 Diptera larva 0.68 7. pasture.25 0.00 0.06 0.15 0.47 0.00 0. (2009) systems.00 0.00 0.14 Blattodea 0.07 0.49 0.03 0.59 0.91 14.23 0.28 0.45 0.00 0.60 0. 2004.00 0.50 3.55 3. 36:1407-1417 .39 Diplopoda 0.03 0.01 0.39 0.1412 Felipe Vieira da Cunha Neto et al.14 0.06 0.08 0.61 1.66 0.01 0.14 Diptera 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.05 0.36 6.00 0.00 0.02 0.21 0.73 0.00 0.04 0.28 0.00 0.13 0.70 Formicidae 5... 2011). but decreased in the eucalyptus stand uniformity of the manioc monoculture.00 0.00 0.13 secondary forest. the greater vegetation diversity resulted in investigated the effects of soil management systems a more heterogeneous litter layer (Menezes et al..00 0.64 0.00 0.20 0.00 0.04 0. Solo. 2009.00 Trichoptera 0.24 0.20 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.19 0.20 0. in forest forest species (Ribas et al.21 0.02 16.00 0.00 0.54 19.06 0.05 0.69 Auchenorryncha 0.00 0.66 2.36 111.01 0.00 0.23 0.03 0.06 0..03 0.40 0.66 0.00 0.00 0.37 80.25 1.76 0.97 32.01 0.57 Heteroptera 0.00 0.00 0.72 76.00 0.00 0.16 43.03 Neuroptera larva 0.52 4.09 0.43 1.00 0.00 0.01 0.06 Pseudoscorpionida 0.01 0.29 Hymenoptera larva 0.04 0.46 0.05 0. urophylla (eucalyptus).02 0.00 0.02 0.36 1.02 0.00 0. 2005).23 0.51 1.10 0.01 Sternorryncha 0.06 0.24 0.45 0.21 1.07 Mantodea 0.10 0. where systems with homogeneous vegetation do not attract the fauna group richness was half of that of secondary native fauna organisms as much as systems with forest (Moço et al.00 Symphypleona 0.03 0.01 0.73 29.91 39.06 0.06 0.44 0.52 44.00 0.01 0.00 0.16 0. Table 3.00 0.70 0.00 0.30 7. which reduces (Table 4).05 0.00 0.91 0.02 6.04 0.36 0.74 1.03 0. on the soil invertebrate community of a secondary Machado.00 0.15 0.39 5.06 0.03 Chilopoda 0. This allows the environment to forest and manioc monoculture and reported that sustain a greater diversity of niches and.66 40.05 0.00 Trichoptera larva 0.63 9.25 1.45 0. R.30 3.06 0.78 0.65 4.00 0..84 0.00 0.46 0.67 0.00 0.06 0.35 0. This pattern was fauna group richness (Moço et al.31 0.78 0.00 0.24 0.00 0.01 0.26 1.64 0.05 0.08 0.

in related to the characteristic conditions of the dry comparison to the dry season. and secondary forest Richness Richness Stand U H’ U H’ Mean Total Mean Total Dry season Rainy season Acacia 14.09 14. the uniform than those of the pasture and the secondary better environmental conditions and the creation of forest. However. Acari became of fauna groups to the surface of the soil-litter system four times more abundant than in the rainy season.. This may be greater homogeneity of the soil-litter system. and over adjacent ecosystems. Bras. grandis stands by Schumacher (1992). 2005). to be lower than in forest systems (Moço et al. especially due to vertical migration rainy season. acacia and eucalyptus forests. the increase in the pasture 12-fold in the mimosa stand (Table 3).5 aA 24 0. the soil season.9 abB 23 0.. This led to lower fauna richness in the pasture fauna communities of the forest stands were more stand during the dry season.69 3.4 bA 22 0.45 Secondary Forest 17. The important groups of the deposition of deciduous material and nutrients was system can be replaced by others from the community greatest at the end of spring and summer. the diversity index pasture habitat was limited by the capacity of the takes into account the community equitability. the functional redundancy. 16 times in the acacia stand. in the with the same functional role (Begon et al. Thus. nor is litter formed. As a result.70 3.6 abA 22 0. led to a lower equitability of the soil fauna community in forest stands.. An old E. and the Pielou uniformity index (U) in dry and rainy season in Acacia mangium (acacia). 2002. This R. (Silva et al. The soil fauna community richness in management fauna group richness decreased in the eucalyptus systems which have grasses as main vegetation tends stand in the rainy season. while in areas disturbances. Begon et al. Pasture has no invertebrate communities in forest stands was greater understory. Besides the vertical migration.46 17.51 2.0 aA 24 0. Shannon’s diversity index (H’). there is a greater possibility that the community the season of greatest litter production in eucalyptus will respond differently to environmental stands coincides with the rainy season.4 abA 23 0. compared to the other systems. the diversity index of soil which is covered with brachiaria. In the rainy season. This is the case of the pasture.52 2. 2005).57 Pasture 13. greater diversity observed in the rainy season 2011). 1413 Table 4.57 Mimosa 15. 36:1407-1417 . Group richness. 2009). In the eucalyptus stand. as in the managed even than of secondary forest. which was probably associated with litter production. SOIL FAUNA AS AN INDICATOR OF SOIL QUALITY IN FOREST STANDS. Seasonal variation of the diversity index was also Menezes et al. In the dry season. heterogeneous habitat.99 18.. given system to attract or support a larger number of fauna by the Pielou uniformity index.44 Values followed by the same small letter in columns and the same capital letter in rows are statistically equal by the Kruskal- Wallis test (p < 0. Solo.0 bB 19 0.0 aA 25 0. urophylla (eucalyptus). the groups. which is less favorable to the fauna. Mimosa artemisiana (mimosa). pasture. This pattern shows that Thus.05). 2005). the uniformity more favorable microenvironments resulted in an of the forest stands decreased due to the variation in increase in the soil fauna richness of the pasture stand the abundance of some groups from the dry to the (Moço et al.97 Eucalyptus 14. which results in management systems in the dry season.66 2. resulting in greater environment with native species. This increase fauna richness can also be related to migration from in the frequency of some groups in the rainy season adjacent environments.41 1. Diniz et al.. In the dry season. Thus. 2005. Variations in the fauna community diversity affect In the evaluation of litter production in 7 .53 2. The abundance of Entomobryomorpha increased the fauna organisms can move horizontally between significantly. 2006.. warmest and wettest periods. litter production is greatest in stability (Correia. it is probable that the heterogeneity of the In contrast to group richness. saligna stands by Poggiani (1985) and in 7. PASTURE AND.. Litter input in eucalyptus stands tends to be indicates an increase in stability in the forest stand less varied in the rainy season. 2009).35 1.19 12.9 abA 22 0. Ci..35 1.10-year.9 aA 28 0. when the soil fauna consequence is that pasture tends to form a less diversity in the forest stands decreased (Table 4).54 2. observed. there was a decrease in the eucalyptus stand.. increase in diversity is related to an increase in year-old E. The opposite was mimosa. the management systems and the soil quality. One observed in the rainy season. which resulted in lower community In contrast to the fauna group richness of the other diversity. in the rainy season. Eucalyptus grandis x E. systems.. The drier periods (Fernandes et al.18 17.

season may be due to a greater litter production in the variation of the V index between extreme and this season. Eucalyptus grandis x E. with a similar abundance and richness demonstrated that this index is a good indicator of as in the secondary forest and lower than of the fauna management conditions. greater stability of the soil fauna in forest stands of recovery.. one can infer that greater density of the soil fauna groups in the first year of resilience is mainly related to organic matter evaluation. authors. pasture. fallow.6 % of the reference of an unmanaged system total variability). and thus. while the *EI . 3 shows that the vectors of these two stands are R. only the eucalyptus stand did not have a due to the better conditions and resources available greater number of groups with moderate inhibition. there is a greater amount of OM recycling and energy flow in the systems. they found that 50 % or more of the fauna secondary forest. the clustering of the fauna community (Table 5). the variation of the stimulation/inhibition patterns of the soil fauna V index between extreme and moderate inhibition was community. In contrast to the dry season.. In a 1-year-old fallow area. 2005. nutrient transfer to the soil. (2004) mimosa stand. Solo. as well as greater richness. richness. In this system. The mimosa stand had the greatest fauna community. Inhibition was lower in the rainy season.Moderate inhibition (given as eucalyptus and acacia stands had lower values. Figure number of groups and percentage of groups per category).. It is possible V Index that this factor reduces the heterogeneity structure The fauna community of the four stands had a V and composition of the litter layer. a seasonal increase in extreme variation and a greater food supply (Moço et al. litter-forming material in eucalyptus stands (Fernandes et al. 2011). as it expresses the groups between the systems in the rainy season. In crop and pasture clustered at a distance greater than 15 % from the stands. The systems with the values closest to low in relation to the other systems. 36:1407-1417 . In the 5-year-old the other management systems. was at an intermediate distance from the systems. in the rainy in the other systems was lower in the rainy season season. In the dry season. when a greater number of groups became moderately Cluster analysis inhibited in the pasture and in the mimosa stand In general. the soil fauna increases either the resistance or the regeneration community inhibition was lower. to the fauna. inhibition was lower in the corresponded to the abundance. urophylla (eucalyptus) Axis 1 explained 18. Diniz et al. Bras. 2009). Correia et al.. Table 5. In the evaluation those of the extremely inhibited groups were those of the inhibition or stimulation of the soil fauna using nearest to each other. 2009. the secondary forest and mimosa stands had greater total group Pasture 48 (12) 52 (13) 27 (7) 73 (19) abundance. the greater inhibition of dry and rainy seasons. Similarly as index of extreme or moderate inhibition in both the observed for group richness. as a while axis 2 explained 28. The stands with different ages. In this system. fallow areas. According to the capacity of the systems to environmental disturbances. Acacia 40 (10) 60 (15) 39 (10) 61 (16) The PCA results are consistent with the fauna Eucalyptus 40 (10) 60 (15) 50 (13) 50 (13) richness and abundance data of the systems in the Mimosa 36 (9) 64 (16) 23 (6) 77 (20) seasons evaluated. A greater number of groups were associated with the secondary forest. especially the acacia and eucalyptus stands. with lower temperature and moisture In this system. the inhibition/stimulation pattern was with a diversity similar to that of the secondary forest similar to that found in forests after 15 and 30 years and low fauna inhibition. and over 30 % further away from groups were extremely inhibited. in the management systems and secondary forest In the dry season. and pasture compared to secondary forest. The pasture stand. 2006. decomposition. The eucalyptus and acacia the V index in crop. Change index (V) of Acacia mangium Principal Component Analysis (PCA) (acacia).1414 Felipe Vieira da Cunha Neto et al. compared Manage. season.Extreme inhibition. Silva et al. **MI . In the rainy season. and rain forest stands were about 5 % nearer to each other. system EI* MI** EI* MI** to the other stands. but was more similar to the eucalyptus and acacia stands (Figure 2).2 % of the data variability. In general. inhibition the soil fauna in the eucalyptus stand during the rainy was not extreme in the pasture only. diversity and pasture area only. These two stands had a smaller Dry season Rainy season number of groups. The pasture stand had a mean % (nº of groups) value (Figure 3). was disturbance or stability level.4 % (totaling 46. inhibition was observed from the dry to the rainy Menezes et al. Ci. this reduction in inhibition in younger fallow As the soil fauna is formed by a decomposer system areas was due to the recovery of the richness and the and other organisms.. Mimosa artemisiana (mimosa). moderate inhibition was low in relation to the other The difference between these two types of inhibition systems.

Hy Chil of good soil quality. Pse 4. Pse = Pseudoscorpionida. Neuroptera larvae. em comparação com povoamento de Hymenoptera. Ent = Entomobryomorpha. Coleoptera.0 Ent Rainy season 2. Dendrogram of dissimilarities of abundances and taxonomic groups of soil fauna in Acacia CONCLUSIONS mangium (acacia). The differences in soil fauna were greater among -1. Thy = Seropédica. pasture and secondary forest in the rainy season. L. Thysanoptera. Symphypleona 40 were more strongly represented in the secondary forest. L. Hy = ABEL. L. the trophic structure of the soil fauna community in the mimosa stand was good. The formation of more favorable environments For Het in the rainy season reduced the variation of abundance Isopt L. The variation in the soil fauna properties Dipt between the dry and the rainy seasons indicates that Pso Col seasonal variation has a great influence on this Dry season community. In: JORNADA DE INCIAÇÃO Poduromorpha. Mimosa Pasture Acacia Secondary Forest Eucalyptus Figure 2.. Isopt = Isoptera. Ci. Bras. CUNHA NETO. which is therefore more Figure 3. Symphyla.S.Dipt = L. with a great population control. Blat = Blattodea. 1415 120 opposite to those of the secondary forest and mimosa stands.0 stands in the rainy season. 36:1407-1417 . Likewise. Auchenorryncha. Isop = Isopoda. Dipteran. Aporte de serapilheira de Acacia L. Ar = Araneae. and reduced saprophagia.5 2. Symp = DO RIO DE JANEIRO.A. Neuroptera..G. Poduromorpha. PASSOS.6 % particularly of decomposer organisms.0 6. áreas degradadas. Auch = Auchenorryncha. Mimosa artemisiana (mimosa). urophylla (eucalyptus). Principal Component Analysis (PCA) for the indicated for the assessment of soil quality.Lep L. Ster = Sternorryncha. E.Col = L. For = Formicidae. Compared to the other systems. BELLUMATH. Symp Ac 3. and Psocoptera. Ster which suggests the potential of this group as indicator L. Dip = LITERATURE CITED Diplopoda.N Dip and increased the diversity of the soil fauna Pasture Mimosa Ort community. Anais..V. mainly in the 0 eucalyptus stand (Figure 3). Eucalyptus Pod improved the soil quality by increasing increasing the Auch resistance to environmental disturbances and the Isop regeneration capacity of the system. Sym Ar Hy 5. R. The greater stability of the soil fauna in the forest Acacia Secondary Forest system in the dry season improved the soil quality. Lepidoptera. 1.Col Blat L. Variables F1 + F2: 46. F. abundance of soil fauna groups in the stands studied in the dry and rainy seasons.. 2.M. & Hymenoptera. L.H. Dipt = Diptera. the rainy season had a greater 100 number of groups than the dry season.Dipt invertebrate community of the secondary forest. 19. V. Col = Coleoptera. indicating that the number of groups and individuals and the fauna Euclidean Distance community abundance in the rainy season were (Dlink/Dmax)*100 80 greater. Isoptera and Formicidae were better 20 represented in the mimosa stand and Isopoda in the acacia stand..L. Pseudoscorpionida were found only in the Thy L. 2009. Chil = Chilopoda. Ort = Orthoptera. Eucalyptus grandis x E. Ac = Acari. C. Pso = CIENTÍFICA DA UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL RURAL Psocoptera.. Seropédica. 1990. Orthoptera..N = L. PASTURE AND. SOIL FAUNA AS AN INDICATOR OF SOIL QUALITY IN FOREST STANDS.Hy = L. Solo. Pseudoscorpionida. Pod = eucalipto e mata nativa. Sym = Symphypleona. -2. Het = Heteroptera. Universidade Federal Rural do Rio de Janeiro.Lep mangium e Mimosa artemisiana para recuperação de = L. Diptera. 60 In terms of fauna composition. CD-ROM.

.R. research following bauxite mining in Western Australia. 1992. Bras. Análise multivariada de atributos HAAG. 2000. Solo.G. 8p. L. In: WEAVER. BRENNAN K. R. solo em cultivos sob manejo orgânico e sob plantio direto. E.. Londrina. BLANCHART...O. p.E.. J. K. 2005.. TOWNSEND. A. 16:163-175. J..L. EPU/Universidade de São Paulo.A.Temas de biologia... RODRIGUES. 2005. ANGLE. In: LAL.M.C. Atributos indicadores da dinâmica sucessional CORREIA. C.B. AZEVEDO. p. Populações da macrofauna do solo em and the restoration of a forest ecosystem: 30 years of agricultura itinerante na Região da Mata Atlântica. 46p. Wiley gerais e metodológicos. M. F. (SSSA Publishing.W. CORREIA. BEZDICEK. KIKUTI. & FRANCO. M. Fauna de solo: Aspectos management of tropical soil fertility. Biol.G.L..L. Seropédica. Part 2.F. C. Ci. Defining and assessing soil S. R. AGUIAR-MENEZES.E. 1994. In: DORAN. 32:2683-2691. A.. S. Pinheiral..F.. v. floresta secundária. P. Agrobiologia.. MARTIN. 1994. p. G. 2007. Campinas. Pesq. 65:19-26. LOPEZ-HERNANDEZ. Defining soil quality for analysis: microbiological and biochemical properties. Invertebrates FRANCO.M. 5). Seropédica. & HARPER. 2009. A. & SCHUBART. 485-488.R. CALVI. RIZZO. áreas de floresta em Santa Maria de Jetibá-ES. 33p. 738p. M & CARDOSO. I. 2004. F. 2005. 2010. P. Soil Science Society of America..S. VALERA. & SWIFT. between soil macrofauna and tropical soil fertility. EMBRAPA-Agrobiologia. Embrapa Universidade Federal Rural do Rio de Janeiro.R. quality.A. V. & LAVELLE. PEREIRA.M. 2002. 59:37-45. Ci. I. CORRÊA NETO. J.M.M... PEREIRA.. R.R. 73:181-201.M. Special Publication.. C.) na FLONA Mário Xavier.. PEREIRA. W. N. SOUTO. 1985. & SANCHEZ. A.A. FERNANDES. 63p...R..P. 56.R. 144p. R. J.18. P.E. Seropédica.H.62-75. & LOSS. 1994. Soil Science Society Madison.F. T. Bras..B. D. D. 112).. B. Ci. Alterações na comunidade da fauna edáfica em função da queima em GUERRA.C.D. M..F. RJ.L.. 1975. Rev. & WOLLUM.L. R.K. In: SEMINÁRIO SOBRE AGRICULTURA Restor.. (Documentos. The selection. A. 12:7-13. sobre a macrofauna do solo em pastagem de Brachiaria brizantha cv. M.G. MAGALHÃES..V. Fundação Cargill.. preliminar sobre os efeitos da aplicação do herbicida RJ.157-185. 2008. J. 18). R. & QUEIROZ.M.E.F.. ANJOS. & MAJER. DONALD. BEGON. P.. Blackwell Soil Science Society of America.. The biological CORREIA.1416 Felipe Vieira da Cunha Neto et al. R.. L. R. 2006. of America Proceedings. 2011.F. A. C.. MOÇO. GAMA-RODRIGUES. Composição da fauna edáfica em duas ESCHENBRENNER. V. 2006..F. São Paulo. Myths and science of soils of the tropics. E. (Book Series. The impact of soil fauna on the properties of soils in the Humid Tropics. R. P. Solo. GAMA- 2007. M.L. The relationship of Acta Agron.G. D. D.C.L.. Número Especial. 11. M. & CORREIA. BEZDICEK.. & STEWART. Ci. Macrofauna edáfica em estádios In: SIMPÓSIO DE ESTATÍSTICA APLICADA A sucessionais de floresta estacional e pastagem mista em EXPERIMENTAÇÃO AGRONÔMICA. FRAGOSO.. Methods of soil D. SMITH. (Circular Técnica. 37:38-44. CHIARANDA.G.L. CAMPELLO. sabiá (Mimosa caesalpiniaefolia Benth) e andiroba (Carapa guianenses Aubl. J. M. CORREIA. M. Ciclagem de nutrientes em florestas tropicais.L.E. Arthropods. RODRIGUES. COSTA. 15:104-115. 36:1407-1417 . Paraquat e aração convencional na fauna edáfica do solo na região de Manaus . H. J. decíduo e nutrientes para o solo em plantio de eucalipto e 2005. from individuals to ecosystems. 29:555-564. H. M. L.. Pinheiral (RJ).F. A.F. L. DUARTE. Washington. & BRUSAARD.3-21 p. Aporte e decomposição de armadilhas de queda (“pit fall-traps”).T. PEREIRA. D. BARETTA.M. Seropédica. 2011. RODRIGUES. M. MIGRATÓRIA NA REGIÃO SERRANA DO RIO DE JANEIRO. & MOIR. COUTO. RJ. PEREIRA. eds. Comparação de técnicas MENEZES. S. DORAN. sustainable environmental.. Flor. A. SPAIN. In: WOOMER. Caracterização da fauna edáfica em diferentes coberturas vegetais na DINIZ. Decomposição . Pesq. T. Marandu. (Dissertação de Mestrado).. Plant species diversity in old-field successional LAVELLE. p.AM. 33:1647-1656.E.R. V. New York. MACHADO. & AQUINO. estabilidade dos ecossistemas.. Rio de Janeiro.E.C.E.. 2008. E. P. 156). BAZZAZ. A. BUENO.. MACHADO. Bras. Resumos. eds..E..A.137-169. plantio de Embrapa Agrobiologia. Agropec. DANGERFIELD.P. C. Aporte de material região Norte Fluminense.F. serapilheira em áreas de floresta secundária. Brasil...P. Solo. Trop. Ecol.B.A. multivariadas no estudo da macrofauna invertebrada do BATISTA. Ecology. Bras. Avaliação floresta secundária na Flona Mário Xavier.G.. AQUINO. D. terrestrial insects as bioindicators. A. PASHANASI. M. C. L. Ci. BOTTOMLEY.M.. Seropédica. B. R. McGEOCH. E. Agrobiologia..T.F.J. Recomendações para coleta de artrópodes terrestres por CRUZ.C. MOLDENKE.J. Solo. 28:09-17. CORREIA. SCHERMACK.P. RUEDA. REIS. & PARKIN. L.F. & OLIVEIRA. Efeito de leguminosas arbóreas 1998. (Documentos. Seropédica. A. & OLIVEIRA.517-539. M. Acta Amaz. K. M..F. microbiológicos e químicos do solo em florestas com CHÁVEZ. Flor. M. M. Vida. Bras. Malden. ESPÍNDULA JÚNIOR. BARETTA. M... D. E. Madison. P. A.C. MASON. S.... Relações entre a diversidade da fauna de em fragmento de Mata Atlântica na região do Médio Vale solo e o processo de decomposição e seus reflexos sobre a do Paraíba do Sul.. 103p. COLEMAN. & MACHADO.W..G.. GIÁCOMO. eds. & Aracauria angustifólia. M. Londrina. J.. Ci. TABATABAI. J..M. A.. MARTIN. 1980. Embrapa & Sons. A.S. 29). testing and application of DIAS. Ecology eds.W. 1982. & ecosystems in southern Illinois. M.

& SHEPARD. E. A. J. 2008. R.1111/j. TEWS. Wageningen. Plant Research International. Rio de Janeiro. In: CADISCH... F.M.. Springer-Verlag. Ants as diversity: The importance of keystone structures. Ci. Impacts of disturbance on detritus food webs Fauna Edáfica em áreas de agricultura tradicional no in agro-ecosystems of contrasting tillage and weed entorno do Parque Estadual da Serra do Mar em Ubatuba management practices. SOLAR. 229p. SCHUMACHER... 32:645-650. & LIMA.F.C.C. C. GRIMM.R. M.R... 2004.A. M.>.1-9. Universidade de São Paulo. J. R.E. S. PRICE. Piracicaba.A. Driven by nature: Plant litter quality edáfica em solo sob caatinga no semi-árido da Paraíba. p. BROSE.R. sob diferentes sistemas de produção em Latossolo da Região do Cerrado. SOUTO. Muell.. Statistica (data analysis software system). Ciclagem de nutrientes em ecossistemas de Piracicaba. MIRANDA.. 1992. 26:105-182. VALENTIM. AQUINO. 2011. Res. WICHMANN. WARDLE. 36:1407-1417 . Agrotec. C. Sampling methods in soybean entomology. D. & JELTSCH. SCHMIDT.G. M. Escola Superior de Agricultura STATSOFT. New York. Ci..P..B. 2002. MS. Analyses of co-occurrence 2006. & ALVES. version 7.x) VELOSO. Animal species diversity driven by habitat heterogeneity/ R. J. Luiz de Queiroz. eds.A. (doi: 10. Eucalyptus grandis Hill ex Maiden e Eucalyptus Dourados. PEREIRA. A.Q. F. 1997. GOMES. C. D. M.107-124.C. H...V. J. H. R. Implicações silviculturais. Mycol. (SP).. indicators of the success of rehabilitation efforts in deposits Biogeogr. Piracicaba.A.R. WARDLE.statsoft. U. (Tese de Doutorado). D. & SILVA. Agropec. Macrofauna invertebrada do solo Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística-IBGE. & SMILAUER. Solo. SCHAWGER. P. SANTOS. P. 52:107-116.F. BATISTA.. of gold mining tailings. WARDLE. TIELBÖRGER. 2008. PASTURE AND. 1991..2011. CAMPOS. & LAVELLE.. M.V.C. 95:504-507. & PARKINSON. eds. & HERZOG. & SCALON FILHO.F. and decomposition. A.. POGGIANI. R. Bras. J.R. Solo.M. D. M.J..F. Version 4.A.00831. Ci... SOUTO.. Inc. D. Escola Superior de Agricultura Luiz de Queiroz. Bras.M. G. Classificação da vegetação brasileira.M. Ecol.. K.5. 1995. in a fungal community. Restor. 104p.P..E. Fundação Instituto GUIMARÃES. R. 31:79-92. adaptada a um SILVA. F.. 1417 MUSSURY. R. Agr. M. K. C. Pesq. In: KOGAN.F. 1980. Ecol... 41:697-704. 1985.. Canoco for Windows.M. CORREIA. Sampling ground predators in TER BRAAK. 123p. torelliana F. SILVA. Flutuação populacional da do microclima em talhões de Eucalyptus camaldulensis fauna edáfica em fragmentos de mata na região de Dehnh.H. 32:151-160. F. M. A. J.L.532-543. 1991. Aspectos da ciclagem de nutrientes e M.1526-100X.A. CAB International. plant litter quality and decomposition. Ci. MERCANTE.M.F. (Tese de Mestrado).C.. Bras. Adv. Res.P.L. plantações de Eucalyptus e Pinus. Cambridge. 2009. RANGEL-FILHO. Available at: <http://www.S. R. soybean fields. SOIL FAUNA AS AN INDICATOR OF SOIL QUALITY IN FOREST STANDS. & SCHOEREDER. RIBAS.. 2004. P. Linkages between soil biota. & sistema universal. Comunidade microbiana e fauna & GILLER. U.R. p. SCALON.