Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Morphological and functional characterisation of the burrow systems of six earthworm species (Lumbricidae)
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Morphological and functional characterisation of the burrow systems of six earthworm species (Lumbricidae)
Do you wish to request the book?
Morphological and functional characterisation of the burrow systems of six earthworm species (Lumbricidae)
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Morphological and functional characterisation of the burrow systems of six earthworm species (Lumbricidae)
2015
Overview
Earthworm burrow systems are generally described based on postulated behaviours associated with the three ecological types. In this study, we used X-ray tomography to obtain 3D information on the burrowing behaviour of six very common anecic (
Aporrectodea nocturna
and
Lumbricus terrestris
) and endogeic (
Aporrectodea rosea
,
Allolobophora chlorotica
,
Aporrectodea caliginosa
,
Aporrectodea icterica
) earthworm species, introduced into repacked soil cores for 6 weeks. A simple water infiltration test, the Beerkan method, was also used to assess some functional properties of these burrow systems. Endogeic worms make larger burrow systems, which are more highly branched, less continuous and of smaller diameter, than those of anecic worms. Among the anecic species,
L. terrestris
burrow systems are shorter (9.2 vs 21.2 m) with a higher number (14.5 vs 23.5) of less branched burrows (12.2 vs 20.2 branches m
−1
), which are also wider (7.78 vs 5.16 mm) than those of
A. nocturna
. In comparison, the burrow systems made by endogeic species appeared similar to each other. However,
A. rosea
burrows were short and narrow, whereas
A. icterica
had a longer burrow system (15.7 m), more intense bioturbation intensity (refilled macropores or soil lateral compaction around them) and thus a greater number of burrows. Regarding water infiltration, anecic burrow systems were far more efficient due to open burrows linking the top and bottom of the cores. For endogeic species, we observed a linear relationship between burrow length and the water infiltration rate (
R
2
= 0.49,
p
< 0.01). Overall, the three main characteristics significantly influencing water infiltration were burrow length, burrow number and bioturbation volume. This last characteristic highlighted the effect of burrow refilling by casts.
