Experimental and Applied Acarology

, Volume 61, Issue 3, pp 299–310 | Cite as

Influence of spatio-temporal resource availability on mushroom mite diversity



Although biodiversity in nature is of fundamental importance because it improves the sustainability of ecosystems, communities of microscopic organisms are generally excluded from conservation targets for biodiversity. Here, I hypothesize that mushroom mite species richness is correlated with both spatial (i.e., mushroom size) and temporal (i.e., longevity of fruiting bodies) resource availability. I collected fruiting bodies in an old-growth forest over 4 years to collect mites and insects inhabiting the mushrooms. Mites were collected from 47 % of the fruiting bodies and approximately 60 % of the mite species were collected only once. Mite species richness was significantly correlated with the availability of long-lasting fruiting bodies. For example, bracket fungi contained more mite species than ephemeral fruiting bodies. Insect presence was also correlated with mushroom mite richness, probably as phoretic hosts and food resources for predacious mites. On the other hand, mushroom size seemed to be less important; small fruiting bodies sometimes harbored several mite species. Although mite species richness was correlated with mushroom species richness, mushroom specificity by mites was not clear except for a preference for long-lasting fruiting bodies. Therefore, I suggest that a constant supply of coarse woody debris is crucial for maintaining preferred resources for mushroom mites (e.g., bracket fungi) and their associated insects (mycophilous and possibly saproxylic insects).


Ephemeral habitat Habitat conservation Habitat heterogeneity Patchy habitat Phoresy 



Some of the sampled mushrooms were identified by Dr. T. Hattori (FFPRI). I thank Drs. M. Hasegawa and M. Sueyoshi (FFPRI) for providing technical support and collaborations. Dr. B. M. OConnor helped identify the astigmatas. This study was partly supported by a Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (B) 2010, #22310145, from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science.


  1. Aoki J (1999) Pictorial keys to soil animals of Japan. Tokai University Press, TokyoGoogle Scholar
  2. Brooks TM, Mittermeier RA, Mittermeier CG, da Fonseca AB, Rylands AB, Konstant WR, Flick P, Pilgrim P, Oldfield S, Magin G, H-Taylor C (2002) Habitat loss and extinction in the hotspots of biodiversity. Conserv Biodivers 16:909–923. doi: 10.1046/j.1523-1739.2002.00530.x Google Scholar
  3. Connor EF, McCoy ED (1979) The statistics and biology of the species-area relationship. Amer Nat 113:791–833CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ehara S (1980) Illustrations of the mites and ticks of Japan. Zenkoku Noson Kyoiku Kyokai, TokyoGoogle Scholar
  5. Green JL, Holmes AJ, Westoby M, Oliver I, Briscoe D, Dangerfield M, Gillings M, Beattie AJ (2004) Spatial scaling of microbial eukaryote diversity. Nature 432:747–750. doi: 10.1038/nature03034 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Griffith GW (2012) Do we need a global strategy for microbial conservation? Trend Ecol Evol 27:1–2. doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2011.10.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gulvik MA (2007) Mites (Acari) as indicators of soil biodiversity and land use monitoring: a review. Pol J Ecol 55:415–440Google Scholar
  8. Heinlen ER, Vitt DH (2003) Patterns of rarity in mosses of the Okanogan Highlands of Washington State: an emerging coarse filter approach to rare moss conservation. Bryologist 106:34–52. doi:10.1639/0007-2745(2003)106[0034:PORIMO]2.0.CO;2Google Scholar
  9. Japan Meteorological Agency (2011) Climate statistics. Available at Japan Meteorological Agency. http://www.jma.go.jp/jma/menu/report.html (in Japanese). Accessed on 10 May 2011
  10. Jess S, Bingham JFW (2004) Biological control of sciarid and phorid pests of mushroom with predatory mites from the genus Hypoaspis (Acari: Hypoaspidae) and entomophathogenic nematode Steinernema feltiae. Bull Entomol Res 94:159–167. doi: 10.1079/BER2003286 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Jonsell M, Nordlander G (2002) Insects in polypore fungi as indicator species: a comparison between forest sites differing in amounts and continuity of dead wood. For Ecol Manag 157:101–118. doi: 10.1016/S0378-1127(00)00662-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Jonsson BG, Jonsell M (1999) Exploring potential biodiversity indicators in boreal forests. Biodiver Conserv 8:1417–1433. doi: 10.1023/A:1008900309571 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Jonsson M, Nordlander G (2006) Insect colonization of fruiting bodies of the wood-decaying fungus Formitopsis pinicola at different distances from and old-growth forest. Biodivers Conserv 15:295–309. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4020-5204-0_18 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Junninen K, Komonen A (2011) Conservation ecology of boreal polypores: a review. Biol Conserv 144:11–20. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2010.07.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kadmon R, Allouche O (2007) Integrating the effects of area, isolation, and habitat heterogeneity on species diversity: a unification of island biogeography and niche theory. Amer Nat 170:443–454. doi: 10.1086/519853 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Keitt TH, Urban DL, Milne BT (1997) Detecting critical scales in fragmented landscapes. Conserv. Ecol. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol1/iss1/art4/inline.html. Accessed 8 February 2012
  17. Klimov PV (1998) Review of mites of the genus Boletoglyphus (Acariformes, Acaridae). Entomol Rev 78:1094–1101Google Scholar
  18. Komonen A (2003) Hotspots of insect diversity in boreal forests. Conserv Biol 17:976–981. doi: 10.1046/j.1523-1739.2003.02076.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Krantz GW, Walter DE (2009) A manual of Acarology, 3rd edn. Texas Tech University Press, LubbockGoogle Scholar
  20. Lindenmayer DB, Margules CR, Botkin DB (2000) Indicators of biodiversity for ecologically sustainable forest management. Conserv Biol 14:941–950. doi: 10.1046/j.1523-1739.2000.98533.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lindquist EE (1975) Associations between mites and other arthropods in forest floor habitats. Can Entomol 107:425–437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Logue JB, Mouquet N, Peter H, Hillebrand H, the metacommunity working group (2011) Empirical approaches to metacommunities: a review and comparison with theory. Trend Ecol Evol 26:482–491. doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2011.04.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Miyamoto A, Sano M (2008) The influence of forest management on landscape structure in the cool-temperate forest region of central Japan. Landscape Urban Plan 86:248–256. doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2008.03.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Nakashizuka T, Matsumoto Y (2002) Diversity and interaction in a temperate forest community. Ecological Study 158. Springer, TokyoGoogle Scholar
  25. Noss RF (1997) The science of conservation planning: habitat conservation under the Endangered Species Act. Island Press, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  26. O’Connell T, Bolger T (1997a) Fungal fruiting bodies and the structure of fungus-micro-arthropod assemblages. Biol Environ 3:249–262Google Scholar
  27. O’Connell T, Bolger T (1997b) Stability, ephemerality and dispersal ability: microarthropod assemblages on fungal sporophores. Biol Soc Linn Soc 62:111–131. doi: 10.1111/j.1095-8312.1997.tb01617.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. OConnor BM (1984) Acarine-fungal relationships: The evolution of symbiotic associations. In: Wheeler Q, Blackwell M (eds) Fungus-insect relationships. Columbia University Press, NY, pp 354–381Google Scholar
  29. Okabe K (1999) Vectoring of Hypocrea nigricans (Hypocreales: Hypocreaceae) by three fungivorous mite species (Acari: Acaridae). Exp Appl Acarol 23:653–658. doi: 10.1023/A:1006218919274 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Okabe K, Amano H (1992) Mite species collected from field mushrooms (I): cryptostigmata. J Acarol Soc Jpn 1:127–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Okabe K, Amano H (1993) Mite species collected from field mushrooms (II): mesostigmata, Prostigmata and Astigmata. J Acarol Soc Jpn 2:19–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Pilz D, Molina R (1996) Managing forest ecosystems to conserve fungus diversity and sustain wild mushroom harvests. USDA Forest Service, PortlandGoogle Scholar
  33. Pinna S, Gévry M-F, Côtéa M, Sirois L (2010) Factors influencing fructification phenology of edible mushrooms in a boreal mixed forest of Eastern Canada. For Ecol Manag 260:294–301. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2010.04.024 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Pullin AS (2002) Conservation Biology. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Siitonen J, Penttilä R, Kotiranta H (2001) Coarse woody debris, polyporous fungi and saproxylic insects in an old-growth spruce forest in Vodlozero Natiotal Park, Russian Karelia. Ecol Bull 49:231–241Google Scholar
  36. StatSoft (2005) STATISTICA Pro 06J. StatSoft Japan, TokyoGoogle Scholar
  37. Straatsma G, Ayer F, Egli S (2001) Species richness, abundance, and phenology of fungal fruit bodies over 21 years in a Swiss forest plot. Mycol Res 105:515–523. doi: 10.1017/S0953756201004154 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sueyoshi M, Okabe K, Nakamura T (2007) Host preferences of crane flies (Diptera: Limoniidae) and their roles as phoronts of Acari (Arachnida) inhabiting fungal sporophores. Can Entomol 139:247–257. doi: 10.4039/n06-016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. van Straalen NM (1998) Evaluation of bioindicator systems derived from soil arthropod communities. Appl Soil Ecol 9:429–437. doi: 10.1016/S0929-1393(98),00101-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wertheim B, Sevenster JG, Eijs IEM, van Alphen JJM (2000) Species diversity in a mycophagous insect community: the case of spatial aggregation vs. resource partitioning. J Anim Ecol 69:331–335. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2656.2000.00396.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Wilson EO (2000) A global biodiversity map. Science 289:2279. doi: 10.1126/science.289.5488.2279 Google Scholar
  42. Worthen WB (1989) Effects of resource density on mycophagous fly dispersal and community structure. Oikos 54:145–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Yamashita S, Hijii N (2007) The role of fungal taxa and developmental stage of mushrooms in determining the composition of the mycophagous insect community in a Japanese forest. Eur J Entomol 104:225–233Google Scholar
  44. Zeische TM, Roth M (2008) Influence of environmental parameters on small-scale distribution of soil-dwelling spiders in forests: what makes the difference, tree species or microhabitat? For Ecol Manag 255:738–752. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2007.09.060 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Forestry and Forest Products Research InstituteTsukubaJapan

Personalised recommendations