Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Comparative analysis of soil nematode biodiversity from five different fruit orchards in Osmaneli district, Bilecik, Türkiye Cover

Comparative analysis of soil nematode biodiversity from five different fruit orchards in Osmaneli district, Bilecik, Türkiye

By: Taylan Çakmak  
Open Access
|Mar 2024

Full Article

Introduction

Turkey is in an advantageous position in fruit growing thanks to its location and ecological characteristics. It is known that there are many species and varieties richness in the country due to the fact that it is located in the Near East and Mediterranean gene centers (Erdem and Kos, 2022). The country is the homeland of many fruit species such as that of the apple (Malus domestica L.), pear (Pyrus communis L.), quince (Cydonia oblonga L.), hazelnut (Corylus avellana L.), pistachio (Pistacia vera L.), sour cherry (Prunus cerasus L.), cherry (Prunus avium L.), plum (Prunus domestica L.), walnut (Juglans regia L.), almond (Prunus dulcis L.), chestnut (Castanea sativa L.), fig (Ficus carica L.), grape (Vitis vinifera L.) and pomegranate (Malum granatum L.), which have an important place in fruit culture. In 2020, a total of 21,853,084 tons of production were realized with an increase of approximately 6% compared to the data of 2019 (Gerçekçioğlu et al., 2009).

The Bilecik Province is located in the southeast of the Marmara Region, between the intersection points of the Marmara, Aegean, Central Anatolia, and Black Sea regions. The region has many advantages in fruit and vegetable cultivation thanks to its location, changing altitude differences in its geography and the unique ecosystem that is surrounded by the Sakarya River. The cultivation of many fruits is well-known locally, such as peach in the Osmaneli district, pomegranate cultivation in the Inhisar district and walnut and cherry cultivation in the Gölpazarı district. Furthermore, Bilecik is at the midpoint of cities such as Istanbul, Bursa, Izmit and Eskisehir, and it also provides access to the Marmara, Central Anatolia and Mediterranean Regions by road and railway, thus providing easy access to airports and ports, and therefore to the market (Niyaz and Demirbaş, 2011) (Table 1).

Table 1.

Bilecik Province fruit production area and production amount of selected fruit types in 2022.*

Fruit nameProduction (in tonnes)Total Area of Production(1000m2)Yield per tree (kg)Number of matured treesNumber of growing trees
Peach35.94820.39139911.99424.38
Cherry8.20920.90028293.224124.423
Olive2.99616.76811269.89151.83
Walnut2.15741.93518117.255130.918
Plum1.6473.6612081.59310.521
Nectarine11.7002040.01210
TOTAL71.024138.3832.322.154,944450.346

*According to (Erdem & Kos, 2022)

Nematodes (Phylum Nematoda) are one of the most diverse groups of invertebrate animals, characterized by a simple body structure with wide variety of feeding habits, life strategies, and their important role in the soil food web. It is reported that nearly 25.000 nominal species have been identified (Zhang, 2012), and it is estimated that their diversity can reach up to 1.000.000 nematode species (Hugot et al., 2001).

Many species are free-living animals, which inhabit soils and (both freshwater and marine) sediments. Their feeding spectrum is diverse, including predatory, algivory, fungivory, omnivory, saprophagy, etc. (Yeates et al., 1993). Many species have become plant and animal, even human, parasites, causing important diseases and pests (Lee, 2002).

As with any other crop grown in Türkiye, damage to the tree and/or fruit by pests and diseases, including nematodes, reduces the grower’s profit. The effects of some plant parasitic nematodes on plant growth and yield are largely the result of the disruption that these organisms cause to the normal process of plant root growth and soil exploration for both water and nutrients. Nutrient deficiencies resulting from the failure of the plant root system to explore and exploit the soil adequately can also be a major consequence of a plant parasitic nematode attack.

The objectives of this study were, (i) to determine the soil nematode fauna of fruit orchards in Osmaneli District of Bilecik Province, (ii) to characterize of nematodes as soil bioindicators and (iii) to characterize the biodiversity of nematodes in regard to their host plant.

Material and Methods

This study was established in Duzce University’s Faculty of Agriculture, Department of Agricultural Biotechnology, Nematology Laboratory, from April 2022 to March 2023.

Sampling

Samples were collected at the Osmaneli district, Bilecik, Turkey, in April 2022 during a field survey. The sampling was done regarding fruit tree orchards soil habitats and along six different eco-habitats, namely: cherry, nectarine, olive, plum, walnut and peach trees. (Fig. 1; Table 2).

Figure 1:

Sampling sites, fruit tree orchards: cherry (a), nectarine (b), olive (c), plum (d), walnut (e), peach (f) trees.

Table 2.

GPS Coordinates of the sampling sites; the location and host plant association.

NoLatitudeLongitudePlant/Variety/Local NameHost PlantLocation
140.41432529.847138Nectarine (Venus®)Prunus nectaria L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
240.41432529.847138Nectarine (Venus®)Prunus nectaria L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
340.41432529.847138Nectarine (Venus®)Prunus nectaria L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
440.41432529.847138Nectarine (Venus®)Prunus nectaria L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
540.41432529.847138Nectarine (Venus®)Prunus nectaria L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
640.41432529.847138Nectarine (Venus®)Prunus nectaria L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
740.41432529.847138Nectarine (Venus®)Prunus nectaria L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
840.41432529.847138Nectarine (Venus®)Prunus nectaria L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
940.41432529.847138Nectarine (Venus®)Prunus nectaria L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
1040.41432529.847138Nectarine (Venus®)Prunus nectaria L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
1140.41432529.847138Cherry (Karabodur)Prunus avium L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
1240.41432529.847138Cherry (Karabodur)Prunus avium L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
1340.41432529.847138Cherry (Karabodur)Prunus avium L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
1440.41432529.847138Cherry (Karabodur)Prunus avium L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
1540.41432529.847138Cherry (Karabodur)Prunus avium L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
1640.41432529.847138Cherry (Karabodur)Prunus avium L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
1740.41432529.847138Cherry (Karabodur)Prunus avium L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
1840.41432529.847138Cherry (Karabodur)Prunus avium L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
1940.41432529.847138Cherry (Karabodur)Prunus avium L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
2040.41432529.847138Cherry (Karabodur)Prunus avium L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
2140.41600129.862371Plum (Karapapaz)Prunus Domestica L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
2240.41600129.862371Plum (Karapapaz)Prunus Domestica L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
2340.41600129.862371Plum (Karapapaz)Prunus Domestica L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
2440.41600129.862371Plum (Karapapaz)Prunus Domestica L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
2540.41600129.862371Plum (Karapapaz)Prunus Domestica L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
2640.41600129.862371Plum (Karapapaz)Prunus Domestica L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
2740.41600129.862371Plum (Karapapaz)Prunus Domestica L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
2840.41600129.862371Plum (Karapapaz)Prunus Domestica L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
2940.41600129.862371Plum (Karapapaz)Prunus Domestica L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
3040.41600129.862371Plum (Karapapaz)Prunus domestica L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
3140.41437529.869060Olive (Trilye)Olea europaea L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
3240.41437529.869060Olive (Trilye)Olea europaea L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
3340.41437529.869060Olive (Trilye)Olea europaea L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
3440.41437529.869060Olive (Trilye)Olea europaea L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
3540.41437529.869060Olive (Trilye)Olea europaea L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
3640.41437529.869060Olive (Trilye)Olea europaea L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
3740.41437529.869060Olive (Trilye)Olea europaea L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
3840.41437529.869060Olive (Trilye)Olea europaea L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
3940.41437529.869060Olive (Trilye)Olea europaea L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
4040.41437529.869060Olive (Trilye)Olea europaea L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
4140.40349429.862752Peach (Cresthaven®)Prunus persica L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
4240.40349429.862752Peach (Cresthaven®)Prunus persica L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
4340.40349429.862752Peach (Cresthaven®)Prunus persica L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
4440.40349429.862752Peach (Cresthaven®)Prunus persica L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
4540.40349429.862752Peach (Cresthaven®)Prunus persica L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
4640.40349429.862752Peach (Cresthaven®)Prunus persica L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
4740.40349429.862752Peach (Cresthaven®)Prunus persica L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
4840.40349429.862752Peach (Cresthaven®)Prunus persica L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
4940.40349429.862752Peach (Cresthaven®)Prunus persica L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
5040.40349429.862752Peach (Cresthaven®)Prunus persica L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
5140.40208829.867829Walnut (Chandler®)Juglans regia L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
5240.40208829.867829Walnut (Chandler®)Juglans regia L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
5340.40208829.867829Walnut (Chandler®)Juglans regia L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
5440.40208829.867829Walnut (Chandler®)Juglans regia L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
5540.40208829.867829Walnut (Chandler®)Juglans regia L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
5640.40208829.867829Walnut (Chandler®)Juglans regia L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
5740.40208829.867829Walnut (Chandler®)Juglans regia L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
5840.40208829.867829Walnut (Chandler®)Juglans regia L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
5940.40208829.867829Walnut (Chandler®)Juglans regia L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik
6040.40208829.867829Walnut (Chandler®)Juglans regia L.Bereket B. Osmaneli/Bilecik

Samples were collected from 60 sampling sites (10 samples from each fruit type). For each location, one soil sample was collected from a 15 × 15 cm plot. A total number of 60 soil samples were put into ziplock sampling bags, stored in portable cooler during transportation and brought to the nematology laboratory of Duzce University for the extraction process.

Extraction

A modified Baermann’s (1917) funnel technique using 12 cm diameter petri dishes was used during the extraction of nematodes. After separating rocks, 100 g of fresh soil was evaluated from each sampling site. Plastic trays lined with paper towels were used for extraction and incubated for 48 hours in the nematology laboratory. Extracted nematodes were collected after 48 hours. Nematode suspensions were heated up to 60 °C for killing before fixation. A formalin solution of 4% was used for fixation and preservation of nematodes until preparing permanent glass slides. Extractions were labeled with the relevant sample number, transferred to plastic tubes, and stored at Düzce University Nematology Laboratory. The rest of the soil samples were also stored in the soil laboratory for having a backup requirement in case of future studies.

Recovery of entomopathogenic nematodes

A 100 g soil sample from each sampling site was placed into a glass container each with three last instar larvae of the wax Moth Galleria mellonella (L.) and covered with a lid. (Bedding and Akhurst, 1975; Kaya and Stock, 1997). The samples were then stored at room temperature. After 10 days, dead larvae were collected and transferred to White traps to collect the emerging IJs (Kaya and Stock, 1997).

Preparation of Nematodes for Light Microscope

After picking up procedure, preserved nematodes were rinsed with purified water to remove the debris. A staining block of 1.25 cm deep which contained 96% ethanol with the extracted nematodes was placed in an incubator at 40 °C, and a few drops of glycerol: formalin (4 %) (1:99) were added and left at room temperature overnight. The next morning, a few drops of a solution of five parts glycerol and 95 parts of 96 % ethanol were added, and two-thirds of its cavity was covered with a glass square. A few drops of the glycerol: ethanol (5:95) solution were added every two hours for the gradual transition of the glycerin. At the end of the day, two drops of glycerol: ethanol (50:50) were added to the staining block. The next day, individual nematodes were covered with glycerol and permanent glass slides were prepared (Yoder et al., 2006).

Nematode Identification and analysis of ecological parameters

Nematodes were identified manually by using an Olympus CH microscope (Olympus Optical, Tokyo, Japan). Classification of nematodes were determined by a taxonomical key (De Ley and Blaxter, 2005). and additional taxonomical data from Hodda et al. (2006) and Andrássy (2002; 2005; 2009) were included. Nematodes were identified mostly down to the genus level. Coloniser-persister classification of nematode life cycle properties (1–5) were obtained in agreement to Bongers (1990; 1999). The nematode feeding types classification was established according to Yeates et al. (1993) and Du Preez et al. (2022). The structure index and enrichment index were calculated according to Ferris et al. (2001) and Ferris and Bongers (2009) in order to obtain the maturity degree of the nematode community composition in the ecosystem. The Nematode Indicator Joint Analysis calculation system (Sieriebriennikov et al., 2014) was used to analyze food web structure, feeding type diagnostics and MI family indices.

Results

The total number of identified nematodes reached up to 2418 individuals (number of female: 1036; male: 154; and juvenile: 1228) belonging to 54 species, 54 genera, 33 families and 11 orders (Table 3). Besides, the total nematode abundance showed variability among samples with an average number of nematodes per 100 gr of soil that were 2 to 145 individuals from the sampling sites (Table 2).

Table 3.

Abundance of nematode genera found on 5 different fruit orchards at Osmaneli, Bilecik, Türkiye

Genus NameFamily NameWalnutPlumCherryOliveNectarinePeachC-p classP-p classFeeding type
Achromadora Cobb, 1913Chromadoridae99000030Predators
Acrobeloides Cobb, 1924Cephalobidae215431001020Bacterivores
Alaimus de Man, 1880Alaimidae40000040Bacterivores
Amplimerlinius Siddiqi, 1976Dolichodoridae00004203Herbivores - ectoparasites
Anatonchus Cobb, 1916Anatonchidae00002240Predators
Aphelenchoides Fischer, 1894Aphelenchoididae0425220020Fungivores
Aphelenchus Bastian, 1865Aphelenchidae194010038020Fungivores
Aporcelaimellus Heyns, 1965Aporcelaimidae1060002050Predators
Aporcelaimus Thorne & Swanger, 1936Dorylaimidae121000050Predators
Basiria Siddiqi, 1959Tylenchidae42002002Herbivores - epidermal/root hair feeders
Belondira Thorne, 1939Belondiridae162000205Herbivores - ectoparasites
Belonolaimus Steiner, 1949Hoplolaimidae80000003Herbivores - ectoparasites
Cephalobus Bastian, 1865Cephalobidae00020020Bacterivores
Cervidellus Thorne, 1937Cephalobidae04006020Bacterivores
Chiloplacus Thorne, 1937Cephalobidae11914846920Bacterivores
Clarkus Jairajpuri, 1970Mononchidae0002303040Predators
Criconema Hofmänner & Menzel, 1914Criconematidae04000003Herbivores - ectoparasites
Diplogaster Bigot, 1886Diplogastridae180000030Fungivores
Diphtherophora de Man, 1880Diphtherophoridae06052010Bacterivores
Ecumenicus Thorne, 1974Qudsianematidae000001040Omnivores
Eucephalobus Steiner, 1936Cephalobidae154641265020Bacterivores
Eudorylaimus Andrássy, 1959Dorylaimidae000201240Predators
Eumonhystera Andrássy, 1981Monhysteridae001330020Bacterivores
Filenchus Andrassy, 1954Tylenchidae00108020Fungivores
Funaria Linde, 1938Leptonchidae240000040Fungivores
Geomonhystera Andrássy, 1981Monhysteridae0390013020Bacterivores
Helicotylenchus Steiner, 1945Hoplolaimidae29234106403Herbivores - semi-endoparasites
Heterodera Schmidt, 1871Heteroderidae80000003Herbivores - sedentary parasites
Hoplolaimus von Daday, 1905Hoplolaimidae00001003Herbivores - semi-endoparasites
Labronema Thorne, 1939Dorylaimidae00100040Predators
Malenchus Andrassy, 1968Tylenchidae1261485202Herbivores - epidermal/root hair feeders
Microdorylaimus Andrássy, 1986Qudsianematidae70000040Omnivores
Monhystera Bastian, 1865Monhysteridae140006020Bacterivores
Mononchus Bastian, 1865Mononchidae170000340Predators
Mylonchulus Cobb, 1916Mylonchulidae003130040Predators
Nagelus Thorne & Malek, 1968Telotylenchidae014000103Herbivores - ectoparasites
Nygolaimus Cobb, 1913Nygolaimidae00000250Predators
Panagrolaimus Fuchs, 1930Panagrolaimidae282300371110Bacterivores
Paratylenchus Filipjev, 1936Criconematidae2390077802Herbivores - ectoparasites
Plectus Bastian, 1865Plectidae246002020Bacterivores
Pratylenchus Filipjev, 1936Hoplolaimidae28501011403Herbivores - migratory endoparasites
Prionchulus (Cobb, 1916) Wu & Hoeppli, 1929Mononchidae02060040Predators
Prismatolaimus Micoletzky, 1922Prismatolaimidae012000030Bacterivores
Rhabditis Dujardin, 1845Rhabditidae1610004210Bacterivores
Rotylenchus Filipjev, 1934Hoplolaimidae00008003Herbivores - semi-endoparasites
Steinernema Travassos, 1927Steinernematidae027103870010Bacterivores
Telotylenchus Siddiqi, 1960Tylenchidae00002003Herbivores - ectoparasites
Teratocephalus De Man, 1876Teratocephalidae00001030Bacterivores
Tobrilus De Man, 1879Tobrilidae01000030Predators
Tripylella Brzeski & Winiszewska-Slipinska, 1993Tripylidae90000030Predators
Tylenchorhynchus Cobb, 1913Belonolaimidae6715119503Herbivores - ectoparasites
Tylenchus Bastian, 1865Tylenchidae002123302Herbivores - epidermal/root hair feeders
Tylocephalus Crossman, 1933Plectidae04000020Bacterivores
Xiphinema Cobb, 1913Longidoridae035669005Herbivores - ectoparasites

TOTAL ABUNDANCE3657291756004071422418
Maturity Index Analysis

According to the maturity index analysis (Fig. 2; 3), mean values showed the highest maturity level at peach trees (MI value: 3,52), followed by; walnut trees (MI value: 2.49), cherry trees (MI value: 2.15), nectarine trees (MI value: 1.86), plum trees (MI value: 1.57) and olive trees (MI value: 1.42). According to the maturity index 2–5 analysis, mean values showed the highest maturity level at peach trees (MI value: 3,84), followed by; olive trees (MI value: 3.16), walnut trees (MI value: 2.96), plum trees (MI value: 2.19), cherry trees (MI value: 2.15) and nectarine trees (MI value: 2.03). According to the Sigma Maturity Index analysis, mean values showed slightly different values: highest maturity level was detected at peach trees (Sigma MI value: 3.35), followed by; cherry trees (Sigma MI value: 3.29), walnut trees (Sigma MI value: 2.62), nectarine trees (Sigma MI value: 2.08), plum trees (Sigma MI value: 1.84) and olive trees (Sigma MI value: 1.76). The plant parasitic nematode index analysis showed the highest PPI mean values at cherry trees (PPI value: 3.79), followed by; olive trees (PPI value: 3.02), plum trees (PPI value: 2.95), walnut trees (PPI value: 2.93), peach trees (PPI value: 2.71) and nectarine trees (PPI value: 2.43). The enrichment index analysis (EI), results showed the highest enrichment level at olive trees (EI value: 97.67), followed by; plum trees (EI value: 84.18), peach trees (EI value: 73.24), walnut trees (EI value: 71.97), nectarine trees (EI value: 53) and cherry trees (EI value: 24.24). According to the structure index analysis (SI), results showed the highest structure level at peach trees (SI value: 95.26), followed by; olive trees (SI value: 85.56), walnut trees (SI value: 78.78), plum trees (SI value: 31.99), cherry trees (SI value: 24.24) and nectarine trees (SI value: 6.74).

Figure 2:

Comparative maturity index analysis of nematode c-p classification from five fruit orchards in Osmaneli, Bilecik, Türkiye.

Figure 3:

Free-living nematode c-p classification from five fruit orchards in Osmaneli, Bilecik, Türkiye.

Food web analysis of soil properties provides a useful tool for predicting soil quality by enrichment and structure type parameters. Results showed that the two of the fruit orchards, nectarine and plum, nematode assemblage were yielded into a high enrichment class, which means disturbed, N. enriched, with low C:N value, high bacterial activity and conductive soil. Three of the fruit trees’ (Olive, walnut and peach) nematode assemblage were placed into maturing, N-enriched, with low C:N value, high bacterial activity, and regulated class. Nematode assemblage of the cherry tree orchard occurred at degraded, depleted, with high C:N value, more fungal activity and a conductive soil type (Fig. 4).

Figure 4:

Food web analysis (Enrichment/Structure indices) from five fruit orchards in Osmaneli, Bilecik, Türkiye.

Feeding type composition of nematode assemblage according to tree types

According to results obtained by feeding types of cherry trees’ nematode assemblage, plant parasitic nematodes were found to be 69.1 %, followed by bacterivorous nematodes (19.4 %), fungivorous nematodes (9.1 %) and predator nematodes (2.3 %); nectarine trees: Bacterivorous nematodes (44.2 %), plant parasitic nematodes (38.6 %), fungivorous nematodes (16.7 %) and predator nematodes (0.5 %); olive trees: Bacterivorous nematodes (70.7 %), plant parasitic nematodes (20.9 %), predator nematodes (7.2 %) and fungivorous nematodes (7.2 %); peach trees: Predator nematodes (47.3 %), bacterivorous nematodes (24.7 %), plant parasitic nematodes (21.2 %) and omnivorous nematodes (6.8 %); plum trees: Bacterivorous nematodes (65.6 %), plant parasitic nematodes (19.8 %), fungivorous nematodes (12.1 %) and predator nematodes (2.6 %); walnut trees: Bacterivorous nematodes (41.4 %), plant parasitic nematodes (29.3 %), predator nematodes (15.6 %), fungivorous nematodes (11.8 %) and omnivorous nematodes (1.9 %) (Fig. 5).

Figure 5:

Feeding types and their relative abundance of nematodes at different fruit tree orchards.

According to results obtained by the classification of plant parasitic nematode feeding type differences, nematode assemblage in cherry tree orchards were: Ectoparasites (58.7 %), semi-endoparasites (28.1 %) and epidermal/root hair feeders (13.2 %); nectarine trees: Ectoparasites (70.7 %), epidermal/root hair feeders (19.1 %), semi-endoparasites (9.6 %) and migratory endoparasites (0.6 %); olive trees: Migratory endoparasites (79.5 %), semi-endoparasites (7.9 %), epidermal/root hair feeders (7.1 %), ectoparasites (5.5 %); peach trees: Ectoparasites (58.1 %), epidermal/root hair feeders (16.1 %), migratory endoparasites (12.9 %) and semi-endoparasites (12.9 %); plum trees: Semi-endoparasites (63.9 %), ectoparasites (27.1 %), epidermal/root hair feeders (5.6 %) and migratory endoparasites (3.5 %); walnut trees: Ectoparasites (49.5 %), migratory endoparasites (26.2 %), epidermal/root hair feeders (15 %), sedentary endoparasites (7.5 %) and semi-endoparasites (1.9 %) (Fig. 6).

Figure 6:

Distribution (%) of feeding types within the plant-parasitic nematodes from Osmaneli, Bilecik, Türkiye.

According to results obtained by the classification of plant parasitic nematode cp class differences, nematode assemblage in cherry tree orchards were PP5 (46.3 %), PP3 (40.5 %), and PP2 (13.2 %); nectarine trees: PP2 (68.2 %), PP3 (26.1 %) and PP5 (5.7 %); olive trees: PP3 (88.2 %), PP2 (7.1 %) and PP5 (4.7 %); peach trees: PP3 (51.6 %), PP2 (41.9 %) and PP5 (6.5 %); plum trees: PP3 (84.7 %), PP2 (11.8 %) and PP5 (3.5 %); walnut trees: PP3 (48.6 %), PP2 (36.4 %) and PP5 (15 %) (Fig. 7).

Figure 7:

Plant parasitic nematode c-p classification from five fruit orchards in Osmaneli, Bilecik, Türkiye.

Discussion
Faunistics

The Bilecik Province, located in the Marmara Region of Turkey, is a region where agricultural production is intense. In this sense, when we look at the structure of the fruit trees in the region, it is possible to say that stone fruits are generally grown. However, fruits such as olives and walnuts are widely grown in the region. In the specific Osmaneli district of the Bilecik province, no holistic study on soil nematode diversity was found in this region in the literature research. However, this climate zone, which is fed with rich water resources with its proximity to the Sakarya river, is a region rich in terms of highly fertile soil structure and therefore biodiversity. Among the studies, records from Turkey were presented in the study of plant parasitic nematode fauna in olive trees in the Mediterranean climate zone (Ali et al., 2014). When the studies on soil nematode fauna from the Marmara Region ( Öztürk, 2023) were examined, it was determined that there were similar taxa. Likewise, a large-scale survey study was conducted mainly on entomopathogenic nematodes (Güneş and Gozel, 2011) from orchards in the Marmara Region.

The rising interest of learning about nematode community behavior in the soil food web is allowing us to monitor their role in the ecosystem. In Türkiye, the discovery of soil nematodes and especially the diversity of free-living nematodes are still receiving very little interest from the scientific community. The aim of this study is to determine soil nematode fauna in the five different fruit orchards in Bilecik Province, Marmara Region with a holistic approach and to identify vermiform terrestrial nematodes up to the genus level. To date, Anatonchus Cobb, 1916, Diphtherophora de Man, 1880, Funaria Linde, 1938, Telotylenchus Siddiqi, 1960 and Tripylella Brzeski and Winiszewska-Slipinska, 1993 were not reported in any scientific report from Turkiye and apparently, this study is the first report of these genera regarding Turkiye’s nematofauna. Our contribution therefore is not only significantly expanding on what is known about nematode species in Türkiye, but also indicates available knowledge of the geographic records in the Marmara Region of Türkiye.

Nematodes as biological indicators provide valuable information about soil health. The study is conducted in five different fruit orchards habitats namely that of cherry, nectarine, olive, peach, plum and walnut. On the other hand, fruit tree orchards and their ecosystem are rarely discovered in terms of terrestrial nematofauna in Türkiye. Unfortunately, there is no study to our knowledge, related to free-living nematode biodiversity in the Marmara region. Regarding the total diversity, this study indicates a valuable contribution on the importance of faunistic studies of terrestrial nematode species.

Species distribution and nematode abundance

The distribution of species in the fruit trees’ rhizosphere was investigated with an integrative approach to the species relative abundance and occurrence patterns. In fact, it is a difficult task to interpret the results of the distribution of soil nematodes. However, here we applied an interpretation scheme that consists of three frequency classes (low, medium, and high frequency) in terms of distribution patterns of nematodes in five different fruit types. According to these results, nematode genera that occurred in a high frequency at all fruit tree orchards are listed as follows: Acrobeloides, Chiloplacus, Eucephalobus, Helicotylenchus, Malenchus, Panagrolaimus, Pratylenchus and Tylenchorhynchus. These are cosmopolite nematode species and are distributed all over the world. Nematode genera that are occurring in a medium frequency at all fruit tree orchards are listed as follows: Aphelenchoides, Aphelenchus, Aporcelaimellus, Paratylenchus, Tylenchus, and Xiphinema. Finally, nematode genera that are occurring in a low frequency are listed as follows: Alaimus, Amplimerlinus, Anatonchus, Aporcelaimus, Basiria, Belondira, Belonolaimus, Cephalobus, Cervidellus, Chromadorea, Clarcus, Criconema, Diplogaster, Dipterophera, Ecumenicus, Eudorylaimus, Eumonhystera, Filenchus, Funaria, Geomonhystera, Heterodera, Hoplolaimus, Labronema, Microdorylaimus, Monhystera, Mononchus, Mylonchulus, Nagelus, Nygolaimus, Plectus, Prionchulus, Prismatolaimus, Rhabditis, Rotylenchus, Telotylenchus, Teratocephalobus, Tobrilus, Tripylella, Tylocephalus and Steinernema. Here, we need to place particular focus on the entomopathogenic nematode Steinernema spp., which occurred only in Plum and Olive orchards. Entomopathogenic nematodes are obligate parasites on insects in the soil and have a high potential to suppress many important pests, especially on fruit orchards, with the ability to survive for a long time under suitable conditions (Bedding et al., 1983; Kaya, 1985; Bedding, 1990).

The nematode community

Comparing the nematode trophic groups within five fruit tree types showed a similar pattern. However, there are small differences that can be seen as a result of fruit tree characteristics. Apparently, bacterivorous nematodes were found to be the most common group in all the samples except in cherry trees. Plant parasitic nematodes were the most abundant trophic group in cherry orchards (69.1 %). Fungivorous nematodes have reached the highest percentage at nectarine orchards (16.7 %). On the other hand, in olive tree orchards, bacterivorous nematodes have reached up to 70.7 % of the total nematode community. Predator nematodes were found the most in plum tree orchards (47.3 %) as well as omnivore nematodes (6.8 %).

Additionally, the most diverse group in terms of species richness was within the order Dorylaimida. Omnivore nematodes as a persistent group in terms of soil monitoring, were found only in peach (6.8 %) and walnut (1.9 %) tree orchards with low percentages. The persistence of this group stems from their biology which also refers to an occurrence in mature and fertile soils and having a long-life cycle. The total percentage of omnivorous and predator nematodes has reached 54.1 % of peach tree orchards which shows clues of soil maturity and an undisturbed ecosystem in these areas. Walnut tree nematode assemblage was the most equalized composition in terms of feeding types. On the other hand, the abundance of bacterivorous, fungivorous, and plant parasitic nematodes had little variation between the sampling sites. This shows clues about the disturbance and agricultural practices’ pressure on the nematode community structure.

The balance of an ecosystem can be approached by the composition of nematodes in the soil. According to the colonizer-persister (cp) structure of the nematodes in these five fruit orchards, it is possible to say the nematodes associated with peach and walnut trees here showed the most stable environments in terms of soil nematode community structure. Schnürer et al. (1986) and Yeates (2007) mentioned that the most important factors affecting the nematode community are the environmental effects of regional and seasonal changes such as soil organic matter, texture, structure, chemical differences and moisture along with environmental disturbances caused by humans. Some studies that are conducted in agricultural ecosystems show a tendency of several patterns with respect to the seasonal fluctuations in the population dynamics of nematodes which have a short life cycle. Some authors noted significant annual density fluctuations (Fisher, 1968; Palomares-Rius et al., 2015), whereas another found no such distinct changes in nematode abundance (Strayer, 1985). Overall, the ecological indices and impact of environmental changes in terms of the nematode community allowed us to read the consistency of the fruit orchards in the surrounding soils of the Osmaneli district, in the Bilecik province, Marmara region, Türkiye. It is recommended to regularly monitor the nematode community and the soil properties for further explanation of this matter. Plant parasitic nematode suppression is a key element to plant protection. Here, once again we have seen the difference between a stable and disturbed soil nematode biodiversity, which may drastically affect the concept of intensive agricultural practices where soil disturbance is occurring and limit the balance of the diversity of soil microorganisms.

This last statement definitely discloses, once again, the critical position of terrestrial nematodes in the soil food web. The range of high tolerance may occur at different climatic conditions such as highly polluted habitats to mature soils which create habitats for tolerant species and sensitive species. Nematodes have low mobility and rapid responses to disturbance and enrichment changes. Life-cycle properties of nematodes ranging from 6 days to over 2 years provide wide opportunities, perspectives, and practical tools to scientists not only for understanding environmental changes but also conservation of soil biodiversity.

Finally, our study of the fauna of terrestrial nematodes at five fruit orchards of the Bilecik Province might give a beneficial contribution on the monitoring of terrestrial nematode fauna of Türkiye and show how nematodes can be useful for soil monitoring as a rising interest.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/jofnem-2024-0001 | Journal eISSN: 2640-396X | Journal ISSN: 0022-300X
Language: English
Submitted on: Jan 6, 2024
|
Published on: Mar 14, 2024
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year

© 2024 Taylan Çakmak, published by Society of Nematologists, Inc.
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.