1. Ecology

Contrasting responses to aridity by different-sized decomposers cause similar decomposition rates across a precipitation gradient

  1. Viraj R Torsekar  Is a corresponding author
  2. Nevo Sagi  Is a corresponding author
  3. J Alfred Daniel
  4. Yael Hawlena
  5. Efrat Gavish-Regev
  6. Dror Hawlena
  1. Risk-Management Ecology Lab, Department of Ecology, Evolution & Behavior The Alexander Silberman Institute of Life Sciences, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel
  2. Theoretical Ecology and Evolution Lab, Centre for Ecological Sciences, Indian Institute of Science, India
  3. The National Natural History Collections, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.93656.3
Share this article
Cite this article
  1. Viraj R Torsekar
  2. Nevo Sagi
  3. J Alfred Daniel
  4. Yael Hawlena
  5. Efrat Gavish-Regev
  6. Dror Hawlena
(2024)
Contrasting responses to aridity by different-sized decomposers cause similar decomposition rates across a precipitation gradient
eLife 13:RP93656.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.93656.3
  2. Download BibTeX
  3. Download .RIS
6 figures, 2 tables and 3 additional files

Figures

Figure 1
Download asset Open asset
Hypothetical climate dependence of litter decomposition by microorganisms and mesofauna (dotted orange curve), by macrofauna (gray – dash), and by the whole decomposer community (maroon – solid).
Figure 2
Download asset Open asset
Illustration of the experimental design.

(A) Locations and landscapes of the seven experimental sites across a precipitation gradient from 22 to 526 mm mean annual precipitation (MAP). (B) A block of three litter baskets in the Sayeret Shaked site. Macro-basket in front, meso-basket on the right, and micro-basket on the left. The precipitation map courtesy of the Hebrew University GIS center.

Figure 3
Download asset Open asset
Litter removal rate (mean ± standard error [se]) from baskets with different mesh sizes across sites and seasons.

Asterisks represent significant differences between mesh sizes within site and season: *p-value <0.05, **p-value <0.01, ***p-value <0.001 (Tukey’s Honestly Significant Difference). Each bar represents 25 samples, total n = 1050. NS – Nahal Shita; MS – Meishar; AV – Avdat; SS – Sayeret Shaked; HS – Havat Shikmim; BG – Bet Guvrin; RH – Ramat Hanadiv. Negative values may represent cases in which physical cleaning and ash correction failed to correct for all dust accumulation on the litter or cases in which exogenous litter may have penetrated the baskets. Our findings were not sensitive to these negative values.

Figure 4
Download asset Open asset
Contribution of different organism size classes to litter removal (mean ± standard error [se]) across the precipitation gradient during summer, winter, and both seasons combined.

Macrofaunal contribution was calculated as the within-block difference between macro- and meso-baskets; mesofaunal contribution as the difference between meso- and micro-baskets; microbial and whole-community contributions represent litter removal rates in the micro- and macro-baskets, respectively. 25 litter baskets of each size class were used in each site during each season (total n = 1050). Curves were fitted to data using local estimation scatterplot smoothing (LOESS). Negative values may represent cases in which physical cleaning and ash correction failed to correct for all dust accumulation on the litter or cases in which exogenous litter may have penetrated the baskets. Our findings were not sensitive to these negative values.

Figure 5
Download asset Open asset
Macro-decomposer abundance, biomass, and alpha morphospecies richness across the precipitation gradient in the two experimental seasons (mean ± standard error [se]).

Values are averaged across pitfall traps and divided by the number of trapping days. Sample sizes (number of recovered traps) in winter and summer, respectively: NS - 16,16; MS - 19,17; AV - 20,16; SS - 20,20; HS - 18,17; BG - 20,13; RH - 19,12. Curves are fitted to data using local estimation scatterplot smoothing (LOESS). NS – Nahal Shita; MS – Meishar; AV – Avdat; SS – Sayeret Shaked; HS – Havat Shikmim; BG – Bet Guvrin; RH – Ramat Hanadiv.

Figure 6
Download asset Open asset
Differences in macro-decomposer assemblage across sites and seasons.

(A, B) Graphical representation of the first two axes of a principal coordinate analysis on the macro-decomposer assemblage data. Colors represent experimental sites in A and seasons in B. Arrows represent taxonomic group scores fitted onto the principal coordinates analysis (PCoA) ordination. (C) Distribution of abundance, biomass, and morphospecies richness among macro-decomposer taxonomic groups in each site across the aridity gradient. NS – Nahal Shita; MS – Meishar; AV – Avdat; SS – Sayeret Shaked; HS – Havat Shikmim; BG – Bet Guvrin; RH – Ramat Hanadiv. Color codes (left to right in panel C): gray – Zygentoma, burgundy – termites, olive green – millipedes, turquoise – woodlice, pink – snails and slugs, purple – earthworms, dark green – crickets, pale yellow – bristletails, red – beetles, pale blue – ants.

Tables

Table 1
Properties of the seven experimental sites.
SiteAbb.CoordinatesMAT* [°C]MAP* [mm]AIU* (MAP/PET)ClimateWinter experimentSummer experiment
Ramat HanadivRH32°33′22.4″N 34°56′26.6″E20.25260.518Dry sub-humid Mediterranean3.12.2020–27.6.202127.6–27.10.2021
Bet GuvrinBG31°35′54.7″N 34°54′14.2″E20.94030.370Semiarid2.12.2020–13.6.202113.6–21.10.2021
Havat ShikmimHS31°30′49.7″N 34°41′18.8″E19.83670.364Semiarid2.12.2020–13.6.202113.6–21.10.2021
Sayeret ShakedSS31°16′05.7″N 34°39′12.9″E20.01480.145Arid26.11.2020–23.5.202123.5–21.10.2021
AvdatAV30°47′02.3″N 34°46′13.3″E18.7840.089Arid26.11.2020–23.5.202123.5–21.10.2021
MeisharMS30°27′04.2″N 34°56′03.0″E20.8330.029Hyper-arid10.12.2020–12.7.202112.7–8.11.2021
Nahal ShitaNS30°08′29.4″N 35°07′36.6″E22.3220.017Hyper-arid10.12.2020–12.7.202112.7–8.11.2021
  1. *

    Climatic data extracted from http://www.meteo-tech.co.il/hanadiv_new/hanadiv_en.asp (RH), courtesy of Shaily Dor-Haim (SS), and extracted from https://ims.gov.il/en (all other sites).

Table 2
Results of a full-factorial analysis of variance in litter removal rate across mesh sizes, experimental sites, and seasons.
DfSum SqMean SqF valuePr(>F)
Site60.0020920.000349171.946<0.001
Season10.0006790.000679334.94<0.001
Mesh size20.0002670.00013365.77<0.001
Site:season60.001120.00018792.044<0.001
Site:mesh size120.0003923.27E−0516.11<0.001
Season:mesh size21.77E−058.9E−064.3680.0129
Site:season:mesh size120.0001291.08E−055.306<0.001
Residuals10080.0020440.000002

Additional files

Supplementary file 1

Results of post hoc pairwise comparisons between macro-decomposer assemblages across experimental sites.

https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/93656/elife-93656-supp1-v1.docx
Supplementary file 2

Dissimilarity matrix between macro-decomposer assemblages of the different site–season combinations.

https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/93656/elife-93656-supp2-v1.docx
MDAR checklist
https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/93656/elife-93656-mdarchecklist1-v1.pdf

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Viraj R Torsekar
  2. Nevo Sagi
  3. J Alfred Daniel
  4. Yael Hawlena
  5. Efrat Gavish-Regev
  6. Dror Hawlena
(2024)
Contrasting responses to aridity by different-sized decomposers cause similar decomposition rates across a precipitation gradient
eLife 13:RP93656.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.93656.3