Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-5g6vh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T03:15:02.252Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Inoculative release of anecic earthworms in a California orchard

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 October 2009

Matthew R. Werner
Matthew R. Werner
Affiliation:
Soil Ecology Specialist, Center for Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems, 1156 High Street, University of California, Santa Cruz, CA 95064; werner@zzyx.ucsc.edu
Get access

Abstract

Anecic earthworms (e.g., nightcrawlers) create deep, vertical burrows and feed by dragging organic matter from the soil surface into the burrow, thereby incorporating organic matter. The incorporation of leaf litter in orchards may reduce inoculum levels of organisms that cause diseases such as apple scab. However, anecic earthworms are generally absent from agro-ecosystems in California, in part possibly because of low rainfall and seasonal drought. Anecic earthworms (Lumbricus terrestris) were introduced to an organic apple orchard in Watsonville, California, where the resident earthworm community included only the endogeic (subsurface-feeding) species Aporrectodea caliginosa and Microscolex dubius. With L. terrestris present, incorporation of apple leaf litter increased from less than 28% to 79%. Yearly patterns of activity of resident earthworm species were unimodal, corresponding to the winter season of peak rainfall and low soil temperature. Earthworm populations were similar for organic and conventional treatments until the third year, when abundance and biomass of resident species were significantly greater in the organic plots.

Keywords

Lumbricus terrestrisAporrectodea caliginosaMicroscolex dubiusorganic farminglitterapple scabVenturia inaequalis
Type
Articles
Information
American Journal of Alternative Agriculture , Volume 11 , Issue 4 , December 1996 , pp. 176 - 181
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Binet, F., and Trehen, P.. 1992. Experimental microcosm study of the role of Lumbricus terrestris (Oligochaeta: Lumbricidae) on nitrogen dynamics in cultivated soils. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 24:1501–1506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Bugg., R.L. 1994. Earthworm update. Sustainable Agriculture/Technical Reviews, U.C. Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education Program 6(3):11–13.Google Scholar
3.California Certified Organic Farmers. 1990. Certification Handbook. Santa Cruz, California.Google Scholar
4.Daly, M.J., Beresford, R.M., Spink, M., Lorosy, E.R., Springett, J., and Gray, R.. 1991. Management strategies for hastening leaf litter disappearance in organic apple orchards. Annual Report, Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries, Agroecology Program, Palmerston North, New Zealand, pp. 22–24.Google Scholar
5.Edwards, W.M., Shipitalo, M.J., Owens, L.B., and Norton, L.D.. 1989. Water and nitrate movement in earthworm burrows within long-term no-till cornfields. J. Soil and Water Conservation 44:240–243.Google Scholar
6.Fender, W.M. 1985. Earthworms of the Western United States. Part I. Lumbricidae. Megadrilogica 4:93–129.Google Scholar
7.Harris, D.C. 1979. The occurrence of Phytophthora syringae in fallen apple leaves. Annals of Applied Biology 91:309–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Hirst, J.M., and Stedman, O.J. 1962. The epidemiology of apple scab. III. The supply of ascospores. Annals of Applied Biology 50:551–567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Knollenberg, W.G., Merritt, R.W., and Lawson, D.L.. 1985. Consumption of leaf litter by Lumbricus terrestris (Oligochaeta) on a Michigan woodland flobdplain. American Midland Naturalist 113(1):1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10.Lee, K.E. 1985a. Earthworms: Their Ecology and Relationships with Soils and Land Use. Academic Press, Sydney. Australia.Google Scholar
11.Lee, K.E. 1985b. Peregrine species of earthworms. In Pagliai, A.M. Bonvicini and Omodeo, P. (eds). On Earthworms. Selected Symposia and Monographs, 2 Collani U.Z.I. Mucchi Editore, Modena, Italy, pp. 315–327.Google Scholar
12.Potter, D.A., Buxton, M.C., Redmond, C.T., Patterson, C.G., and Powell, A.J.. 1990. Toxicity of pesticides to earthworms (Oligochaeta: Lumbricidae) and effect on thatch degradation in Kentucky bluegrass turf. J. Economic Entomology 83:2362–2369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.Raw, F., 1962. Studies of earthworm populations in orchards. I. Leaf burial in orchards. Annals of Applied Biology 50:389–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Satchell, J.E. 1971. Earthworms. In Phillipson, J. (ed). Methods of Study in Quantitative Soil Ecology: Population, Production and Energy Flow. IBP Handbook No. 18. Blackwell Sci. Pub., Oxford, England, pp. 107–127.Google Scholar
15.Swezey, S.L., Rider, J., Werner, M.R., Buchanan, M., Allison, J., and Gliessman, S.R.. 1994. Granny Smith conversions to organic show early success. California Agriculture 48(6):36–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16.Werner, M.R. 1993. Earthworms in California agroecosystems. Proceedings, Sustainable Soil Management Symposium, Univ. of California, Davis, pp. 53–63.Google Scholar
17.Werner, M.R., and Dindal, D.L.. 1990. Earthworm community dynamics in conventional and low-input agroecosystems. Revue d'Ecologie et de Biologie du Sol 26:427–437.Google Scholar