БҚМУ жаршысы - Вестник ЗКГУ ЗКГУ. Вестник, 1-2019 | Page 360

БҚМУ Хабаршы №1-2019ж. Fraxinus excelsior, Crataegus monogyna, Cornus sanguinea* Fraxinus excelsior [26] [20] [27] Alliphis siculus (31.9), Veigaia nemorensis (11.9), Gamasellodes bicolor (11.1) Trichouropoda ovalis (16.2), Prozercon kochi (14.7) Pinus sylvestris Paragamasus runciger (30.8), Trachytes aegrota (16.8), Zercon triangularis (10.3) Betula verrucosa Zercon triangularis (36.6), Rhodacarus coronatus (16.8), Paragamasus runciger (14.3), Trachytes aegrota (11.2) Populus cinerea, Alliphis siculus (36.7), Paragamasus runciger Crataegus monogyna* (26.6) Tilia cordata [125yo] Rhodacarus coronatus (59.0) *small area afforestation surrounded with tillage Succession of mite communities and bioindication. The knowledge on long-term floristic transformation resulting from succession is relative lybetter known than that of animal communities. The comprehensive analysis of faunal succession on the basis of both vertebrate and invertebrate communities with theoretical background and description of five types of succession (i.e. creative, stabilizing, rise-and-fall, regressive and restorative) was conducted by Trojan et al. [28]. With regard to mite communities, in Tilio-Carpinetum it was found that change of the abundance and percentage in Oribatida and Mesostigmata was restorative, however, in case of the latter group two increases and two falls were recorded (Table 5) [27]. Within oribatid mite communities Oppiidae, Tectocepheidae, Achipteriidae and Mycobatidae predominated in most of studied stands, however the latter family reached high dominance only in 80 years old stand. Interestingly, Oppidaemore intensely inhabited higher soil strata in younger stands while in older stands preferred more deeper strata. On the other hand, Tectocepheidae and Achipteriidae in younger stands preferred the litter while in older stands were more abundant in the first topsoil level (0-5 cm depth). Tectocepheidae represented creative model of succession (abundance and dominance) while in Achipteriidae it was regressive. In Gamasida communities Rhodacaridae predominated in all stands (see also Table 4) but families typical in forest stands (Parasitidae, Veigaiidae, Zerconidae) were also relatively abundant. Three latter families intensively penetrated the whole studied soil profile, mainly inhabiting the first topsoil level (with exception of the youngest stand where the litter was the most intensively inhabited by these families). In Rhodacaridae it was evident that this family prefer the two topsoil levels (0-5 cm and 5-10 cm depth) while in litter it was less abundant. It is worthy to mention that in case of Parasitidae, Veigaiidae and Zerconidae the abundance was negatively correlated with depth while in case of Rhodacaridae it was the opposite. The Zerconidae represented restorative type of succession changes (shaped by restorative changes of Zercon triangularis) while in Veigaiidaeit was regressive. In the latter family the regressive trend was not found in the most abundant Veigaia nemorensis which proves that the model of succession on the family level is shaped by the set of species (apart from V. nemorensis) of this family found in Tilio- Carpinetum (e.g. Veigaia cerva, Veigaia exigua, Veigaia decurtata,Veigaia sibirica). 359