Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 March 2018 | 10(3): 11432–11442

Seasonal distribution and abundance of earthworms (Annelida: Oligochaeta) in relation to the edaphic factors around Udupi Power Corporation Limited (UPCL),

Udupi District, southwestern coast of India

T.S. Harish Kumar ¹, M. Siddaraju ², C.H. Krishna Bhat ³ & K.S. Sreepada ⁴

^1,4 Department of Applied Zoology, Mangalore University, Mangalagangothri, Mangaluru, Karnataka 574199, India

² Sri Sathya Sai Loka Seva P.U. College, Alike, Dakshina Kannada, Karnataka 574235, India

³ KSHEMA, Nitte deemed to be University, Deralakatte, Mangaluru, Karnataka 575018, India

¹ harishsrys@gmail.com, ² saishreesiddu@yahoo.com, ³ chkrishnabhat1951@gmail.com, ⁴ srisuchith@gmail.com (corresponding author)

Abstract: Seasonal distribution and abundance of four species of earthworms belonging to three families—Rhinodrilidae (Pontoscolex corethrurus), Megascolecidae (Megascolex konkanensis and Metaphire houlleti) and Octochaetidae (Karmiella karnatakensis)—were studied in three habitats (residential, agricultural and forest) along with edaphic factors around Udupi Power Corporation Limited (UPCL), Karnataka, India between September 2014 and August 2016. Among the four species, P. corethrurus was collected throughout the year and was most abundant in residential habitats such as colacasia garden, coconut and banana pits. M. konkanensis was collected from coconut plantations, banana plantations and forest soil during monsoon and post-monsoon periods. M. houlleti was collected from manure heaps, coconut and banana pits of residential habitat, coconut plantations and forest soil. K. karnatakensis was collected from garden soil in residential habitat during the post-monsoon period, coconut plantations and soil mixed with forest leaf litter during monsoon and post-monsoon periods. The soil temperature differ significantly during different seasons in residential (P= 0.01) and agricultural (P=0.03) habitats whereas moisture shows highly significant difference in agricultural habitat (P=0.00037) during different seasons. P. corethrurus showed positive correlation with organic carbon during pre-monsoon and C/N ratio during monsoon in the residential habitat. It shows negative correlation with pH during the monsoon period. M. houlleti showed positive correlation with organic carbon in residential habitat during the pre-monsoon and in forest habitat during monsoon periods. M. konkanensis showed positive correlation with electrical conductivity in agricultural habitats during monsoon period. K. karnatakensis showed positive correlation with moisture during monsoon and with C/N ratio during post-monsoon period in forest habitats.

Keywords: Earthworm distribution, edaphic factors, Megascolecidae, Octochaetidae, Rhinodrilidae, Udupi Power Corporation Limited (UPCL).

doi: http://doi.org/10.11609/jott.3806.10.3.11432-11442 | ZooBank: urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:94330186-7D5D-48CF-A4A8-F3B5552E4F46

Editor: J.W. Reynolds, New Brunswick Museum, Saint John, Canada. Date of publication: 26 March 2018 (online & print)

Manuscript details: Ms # 3806 | Received 20 September 2017 | Final received 03 March 2018 | Finally accepted 10 March 2018

Citation: Kumar, T.S.H., M. Siddaraju, C.H.K. Bhat & K.S. Sreepada (2018). Seasonal distribution and abundance of earthworms (Annelida: Oligochaeta) in relation to the edaphic factors around Udupi Power Corporation Limited (UPCL), Udupi District, southwestern coast of India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 10(3): 11432–11442; http://doi.org/10.11609/jott.3806.10.3.11432-11442

Copyright: © Kumar et al. 2018. Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. JoTT allows unrestricted use of this article in any medium, reproduction and distribution by providing adequate credit to the authors and the source of publication.

Funding: SC/ST Research fellowship from Mangalore University.

Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

Author Details: Mr. T.S. Harish Kumar is a research scholar in the Department of Applied Zoology, Mangalore University working in the field of earthworm taxonomy and diversity for PhD. Dr. M. Siddaraju is a lecturer in Sri Sathya Sai Loka Seva P.U. College, and he is also a expert in the field of earthworm taxonomy. Dr. C.H. Krishna Bhat is a retired Biostatistician and currently he is working as visiting Professor at Nitte deemed to be University, Mangaluru. Dr. K.S. Sreepada is a Professor in Applied Zoology at Mangalore University.

Author Contribution: All authors have equally contributed.

Acknowledgements: The authors are grateful to Mangalore University for providing the necessary facilities to undertake this research work. We are thankful to Dr. Raghuramulu Y., Sri. N. Hariyappa, and Dr. Seetharam, H.G., Central Coffee Research Institute (CCRI), Coffee Research Station, Chikmagalur District, Karnataka, India for their support during soil analysis and Mr. Vivek Hasyagar for earthworms photography.

Introduction

India is a vast country with great diversity of plants and animals supported with tropical and sub-tropical climates. Soil faunal population is very important in many agro ecosystems; because the soil organisms promote soil fertility (Lee 1985; Werner & Dindal 1989). The major soil organisms include earthworms, centipedes, millipedes and microorganisms. Of these, earthworms are considered as one of the major soil invertebrates belonging to the phylum Annelida and class Oligochaeta. Oligochaetes are mainly divided into megadriles and microdriles. Megadriles live in both terrestrial and aquatic systems whereas microdriles prefer only aquatic systems. Globally, there are about 4,400 different species of earthworms (Reynolds & Wetzel 2017) and from India 505 species of earthworms (Julka 2014; Ahmed & Julka 2017; Narayanan et al. 2017) have been reported.

Diversity and distribution of earthworms have been studied from different parts of the world, viz., Bulgaria (Mihailova 1964; Stojanovic et al. 2012), Thrace (Mihailova 1966), Myanmar (Gates 1972; Reynolds 2009), Australia (Jamieson & Wampler 1979; Blakemore 2000; Blakemore & Paoletti 2006), Argentina (Mischis & Brigada 1985; Mischis 1992, 1993; Mischis & Righi 1999; Laura & Ines 2001), Turkey (Omodeo & Rota 1991), Australia, Japan and India (Blakemore 1994, 2004, 2006), Bangladesh (Reynolds 1994; Reynolds et al. 1995b; Das & Reynolds 2003), northern Neotropical region (Fragoso et al. 1995), Belize (Reynolds et al. 1995a), Mexico (Fragoso & Reynolds 1997), New Zealand (Springett et al. 1998), Faisalabad (Ghafoor & Qureshi 1999), Taiwan (Tsai et al. 2000, 2004), Gujranwala (Rana et al. 2002), north-west of the Iberian Peninsula (Monrey et al. 2003), central Terai region (Bisht et al. 2003), Philippines (James 2004), Taiwan (Tsai et al. 2004), Singapore (Shen & Yeo 2005), southern and eastern Uruguay (Grosso et al. 2006), Mexico (Huerta et al. 2007), North America (Reynolds & Wetzel 2008), northwestern England (Chamberlain & Butt 2008), Nicaragua (Sherlock et al. 2011), Hawaii (Reynolds 2015), Bermuda (Reynolds & Fragoso 2004), South America (Christoffersen 2008a,b, 2010; De-Assis et al. 2017), Guadeloupe Islands of West Indies (Csuzdi & Pavlicek 2009), Serbia and Bulgaria (Stojanovie et al. 2013), and Thailand (Chanbun et al. 2017).

The reports on Indian oligochaetes include, Karnataka (Kale & Krishnamoorthy 1978), southern India (Julka 1983), woodlands of Karnataka (Krishnamurthy & Ramachandra 1988), Kumaun Himalayan pasture soil (Kaushal & Bisht 1994), Western Ghats (Blanchart & Julka 1997), central Himalaya (Bhadauria et al. 2000), Tamil Nadu (Gobi & Vijayalashmi 2004; Kathireswari et al. 2005, 2008), Chennai (Begum & Ismail 2004), Rajasthan (Tripathi & Bharadwaj 2004), western Himalaya (Paliwal & Julka 2005), Pondicherry (Sathianarayan & Khan 2006), northern Indian states (Dhiman & Battish 2006), Tripura (Chaudhuri et al. 2008), Uttarakhand (Joshi & Aga 2009), southern Karnataka (Kale & Karmegam 2010), Garhwal Himalaya (Joshi et al. 2010), Kashmir Valley (Ishtiya & Anisha 2011), Dakshina Kannada District of Karnataka (Siddaraju et al. 2010), Jammu, northeastern India (Rajkhowa et al. 2014), and Kerala (Narayanan et al. 2016).

Earthworms feed on organic matter and litter. They enrich soil fertility by adding nutrients to the soil through their burrowing activities and are recognized as ecological engineers due to their strong interaction with soil functioning in the ecosystem (Jones et al. 1994; Lavelle et al. 1994). Earthworm casts are highly rich in organic matter compared to the non-ingested surrounding soil. The effect of earthworms on the dynamics of soil organic matter depends on the time and space (Mora et al. 2005). Earthworms are known to increase the transfer of organic carbon and nitrogen into soil through their gut microbial activities and they facilitate the stabilization and accumulation of soil organic matter (Desjardins et al. 2003). The cycling process of C and N in agro- ecosystems depends on the cropping system and management practices (Fonte et al. 2007). The earthworm species and their interactions also affect the nitrogen mineralization (Brown et al. 1999). They also increase the soil pH and promote the microbial activity in the soil. In addition, other nutrients such as N, P, K and Ca derived from earthworm urine and mucus are also involved in soil fertility (Parmelec et al. 1998).

Understanding the soil factors which control the abundance of earthworms and their strong interaction in maintaining the soil ecosystem functioning has gained widespread attention in recent years. Several studies have shown that a number of factors control the earthworm’s density and distribution (Fonte et al. 2009). Huerta et al. (2007) have observed high earthworm abundance in soil with high organic matter in tropical rain forests. Management practices, however, alter the earthworm population density by altering the aggregation of soil organic matter (Fonte et al. 2009).

Most of the studies focussed on diversity and distribution of earthworms in natural habitats and agro ecosystems. A few studies have reported bio-indicator activities for earthworms for heavy metal pollutions in various habitats (Hook 1974; Spiegel 2002; Hobbelen et al. 2006; Suther et al. 2008). The present study records the seasonal occurrence and distribution of four species of earthworms in relation to the edaphic factors around Udupi Power Corporation Limited (UPCL), Udupi District of Karnataka, southwestern coast of India.

Study area

Udupi Power Corporation Limited (UPCL) (14.22305556⁰N & 76.21138889⁰E) is an important coal based thermal power plant, established in 2008. It is located to the north of Mangaluru, west of Belman and adjacent to the north-east of Padubidri in the village of Yellur, Udupi District, Karnataka, India and it is situated roughly 7–8 km from the coast (Arabian Sea), very close to the Shambhavi River. The study area covers the radius of about 10km around UPCL and the villages included are Bellibettu, Kaup, Kuthyaru, Mudarangadi, Nadsal, Nandikur, Padabettu, Yellur and Tenka-Yermal. The geographical coordinates in each habitat were noted using a Garmin eTrex GPS and a Google map was constructed using Google Earth (Image 1). The annual rainfall in Udupi District ranged from 3,184–3,575 mm. The elevation ranges from 5–51 m in the study area. The average soil temperature ranged between 26.5–29.2 ⁰C. Soil texture varies from fine clay to loamy. The sampling sites were broadly divided into residential, agricultural and forest habitats. In the residential habitat, the major plants include: Cocus nucifera (Coconut), Areca catechu (Areca Nut), Musa spp. (Banana), Psidium guajava (Common Guava) and Carica papaya (Papaya). In the agricultural habitat, the major crops include, Oryza sativa (Paddy), Cocus nucifera, Areca catechu, Musa spp. and in the forest habitat the tree species include: Tectona grandis (Teak), Millettia pinnata (Indian Beech), Mangifera indica (Mango), Borassus flabellifera (Palmira), Artocarpus heterophyllus (Jack Fruit), Alstonia scholaris (Saptaparna), Tamarindus indica (Tamarind) and Manikara zapota (Sapodilla).

Methods

Studies on distribution and abundance of earthworms (Pontoscolex corethrurus, Megascolex konkanensis, Metaphire houlleti and Karmiella karnatakensis) was carried out in residential, agricultural and forest habitats around Udupi Power Corporation Limited (UPCL) during pre-monsoon (February–May), monsoon (June–September) and post-monsoon (October–January) periods of September 2014 to August 2016. Sampling points were identified and soil was excavated from 30x30x30cm quadrants in each site in the selected villages. Available earthworms were collected by hand sorting method and brought to the laboratory along with soil samples in polythene bags. Specimens were washed with tap water and anesthetized in 30% ethyl alcohol, straightened and preserved in 5% formalin. Species were identified based on standard taxonomic keys of Julka (1988) and Blakemore (2006).

Soil analysis

In the earthworm sampled habitats such as residential and agricultural (in all seasons) and forest habitat (monsoon and post-monsoon seasons), edaphic factors were analysed by using standard protocols (Jackson 1973). Soil temperature was measured by using a digital thermometer (TP 101 model) at the depth of 10cm. Moisture content was determined gravimetrically on a wet weight basis by oven drying method (105^OC, 12 hours). The air dried soil sample was sieved and subjected to the following analysis. The pH (1:2.5) was detected using digital pH meter (Systronics model EQ 610). Electrical conductivity (EC) was measured using conductivity meter (Systronics model EQ 660A). Organic Carbon (OC) content was determined using Walkley-Black chromic acid wet oxidation method. Nitrogen (N) content was estimated by Micro Kjeldahl method. The available Phosphorous (P) content was measured by Bray’s method for acidic soil samples (pH<6.5) and Olsen’s method for alkaline soil samples (pH>6.5) using Near Infra-Red (NIR) spectrophotometer. The Potassium (K) was measured by Flame photometer method using neutral normal ammonium acetate as an extractant.

Statistical analysis

The seasonal abundance of earthworms in relation to edaphic factors was analysed using Karl Pearson’s Correlation method. To compare the means of two different groups, independent student t-test and for comparison of more than two group’s one way ANOVA test was used. Statistical analysis was done using SPSS version 16.

Results and Discussion

The present study records, the distribution pattern and abundance of four species of earthworms belonging to three families, viz., Rhinodrilidae (P. corethrurus), Megascolecidae (M. konkanensis and M. houlleti), and Octochaetidae (K. karnatakensis) (Table 1; Figs. 1–3). Among these species P. corethrurus was observed during all the seasons in the soil of colacasia gardens, coconut and banana pits of residential habitats, paddy fields and coconut plantations. More abundance was observed during the monsoons in the residential habitats (62.0±14.85) and less abundance during the post-monsoons in agricultural habitats (3.0±2.60). The species, however, was not recorded in forest habitats in any of the seasons. M. konkanensis was recorded from coconut gardens and banana plantations in maximum numbers (51.0±10.82) during the monsoons and minimum in forest habitats (15.0±7.53) during post-monsoons. M. houlleti was recorded throughout the year except in the forest habitats during pre-monsoons. The maximum was recorded from coconut gardens, garden soil and manure heaps in the residential habitats (51.0±0.82) during the monsoon period; however, fewer numbers were recorded in agricultural habitats (1.0±1.8, 2.0±1.41, 3.0±2.19). K. karnatakensis was recorded from all the selected habitats during monsoon and post-monsoon periods except in residential habitats during the monsoon period and in all the habitats during the pre-monsoon period. The maximum number was observed in forest habitats (42.0±3.22) during the monsoon period and minimum number was observed in agricultural (3.0±2.75) and residential (3.0±2.92) habitats during monsoon and post-monsoon periods respectively.

Table 1. Seasonal distribution and abundance of earthworm species (Mean±SD) (n=6).

Seasons	Pre-monsoon			Monsoon			Post-monsoon
Habitats	Residential habitat	Agricultural habitat	Forest Habitat	Residential habitat	Agricultural habitat	Forest habitat	Residential Habitat	Agricultural habitat	Forest habitat
Species
P. corethrurus	41.0±4.93	11.0±3.16	-	62.0±14.85	45.0±10.77	-	7.0±2.62	3.0±2.60	-
M. konkanensis	-	-	-	-	51.0±10.82	-	-	-	15.0±7.53
M. houlleti	13.0±4.81	1.0±1.8	-	51.0±10.82	2.0±1.41	22.0±5.83	18.0±7.18	3.0±2.19	9.0±4.09
K. karnatakensis	-	-	-	-	3.0±2.75	42.0±3.22	3.0±2.92	13.0±5.09	13.0±6.19

1. Pontoscolex corethrurus (Fr. Muller, 1857) (Image 2)

Distribution: Bellibettu (coconut and banana pits of residential habitats); Kaup (colacasia garden); Mudarangadi (banana pits of residential habitats), Padabettu (paddy field) and Tenka-Yarmal (coconut pits of residential habitats) villages.

Recorded periods: All the seasons.

Previous records: Bangladesh (Reynolds 1994; Reynolds et al. 1995b; Das & Reynolds 2003), Mexico (Fragoso & Reynolds 1997), Taiwan (Tsai et al. 2004), Rajasthan (Tripathi & Bharadwaj 2004), Singapore (Shen & Yeo 2005), Tamil Nadu, southern India (Kathireswari et al. 2005, 2008; Blakemore 2006), Puducherry (Sathianarayan & Khan 2006), Tripura, India (Chaudari et al. 2008), Myanmar (Gates 1972; Reynolds 2009), Dakshina Kannada, southwestern coast of Karnataka (Siddaraju et al. 2010), southern Karnataka (Kale & Karmegam 2010), Nicaragua (Sherlock et al. 2011), Western Ghats of Karnataka, India (Biradar et al. 2013), Assam, northeastern India (Rajkhowa et al. 2014), and Kerala, India (Narayanan et al. 2016).

2. Megascolex konkanensis Fedarb, 1898 (Image 3).

Distribution: Adve (Banana plantation); Kuthyaru (coconut plantation); Nandikur (forest soil) and Yellur (banana plantation) villages.

Recorded periods: Monsoon and post-monsoon.

Previous records: Southern India (Stephenson 1923; Rao 1979; Oommen 1998; Blakemore 2006; Reynolds et al. 2010), Dakshina Kannada, southwestern coast of Karnataka (Siddaraju et al. 2010) and Western Ghats of Karnataka, India (Biradar et al. 2013).

3. Metaphire houlleti (Perrier, 1872) (Image 4).

Distribution: Adve (banana pits in residential habitat); Bellibettu (forest soil, manure heaps, coconut and banana pits of residential habitats) and Nadsal (coconut plantations) villages.

Recorded periods: Monsoon and post-monsoon.

Previous records: Belize (Reynolds et al. 1995a), Bangladesh (Das & Reynolds 2003), Taiwan (Shen et al. 2005), Tamil Nadu (Kathireswari et al. 2005), western Himalaya states (Paliwal & Julka 2005), Australia, Japan and India (Blakemore 1994, 2004, 2006), northern Indian states (Dhiman & Battish 2006), North America (Reynolds & Wetzel 2008), Tripura, India (Chaudari et al. 2008), Guadeloupe Islands of West Indies (Csuzdi & Pavlicek 2009), Garhwal Himalaya (Joshi et al. 2010), southern Karnataka (Kale & Karmegam 2010) and Dakshina Kannada, southwestern coast of Karnataka (Siddaraju et al. 2010).

4. Karmiella karnatakensis Julka, 1983 (Image 5)

Distribution: Bellibettu (garden soil of residential and forest habitats); Nandikur (coconut plantations) villages.

Recorded periods: Monsoon and post-monsoon.

Previous records: Tirthahalli, Kotegehara, Moodabidri, Bhagamandala, Sakleshpur of Karnataka State, India (Julka 1988).

Edaphic factors

As shown in the Table 2 the edaphic factors such as soil temperature (T), pH, moisture content (MC), electrical conductivity (EC), organic carbon (OC), nitrogen (N), carbon and nitrogen ratio (C/N), phosphorous (P) and potassium (K) show the variation range during the study period in selected habitats. The range of parameters during pre-monsoon in the residential habitat include, T (27.0–30.2 ⁰C); pH (5.98–7.63); MC (20.19–41.19 %); EC (0.15– 0.49mS cm^-1); OC (2.87–6.60 %); N (0.14–0.38 %); C/N ratio (9.23–25.38%); P (99.0–513.0 kg/ha) and K (92.51–609.28 kg/ha). In agricultural habitat, T (28.2–30.2 ⁰C); pH (5.53–6.51); MC (24.11–27.97 %); EC (0.19–0.36mS cm^-1); OC (4.8–5.7 %); N (0.40 to 0.44%); C/N ratio (10.90 to 14.25 %); P (13.0 to 149.0 kg/ha) and K (76.6–204.73 kg/ha). During monsoon, in residential habitat, T (24.0–28.0 ⁰C); pH (4.32–7.52); MC (34.26–64.83%); EC (0.21–0.90mS cm^-1); OC (2.7–6.32 %); N (0.21–0.48 %); C/N ratio (10.36–27.63 %); P (37.0–480.0 %) and K (50.70–635.60 %). In agricultural habitat, T (24.5–27.6 ⁰C); pH (5.17–7.37); MC (35.73–51.04 %); EC (0.12–0.38mS cm^-1); OC (2.0–7.02 %); N (0.17–0.48 %); C/N ratio (7.4–20.17 %); P (11.0–175.0 kg/ha) and K (22.1–348.54 kg/ha) and in forest habitat, T (24.0–27.6 ⁰C); pH (4.85–7.62); MC (24.33–60.17 %); EC (0.12–0.68mS cm^-1); OC (3.68–7.11 %); N (0.21–0.49 %); C/N ratio (10.65–50.78 %); P (8.0–499.0 kg/ha) and K (38.75–798.78 kg/ha). During post-monsoon, in residential habitat, T (26.0–28.0 ⁰C); pH (6.21–6.75); MC (20.19–41.19 %); EC (0.15–0.49mS cm^-1); OC (2.87–6.60 %); N (0.14–0.38 %); C/N ratio (9.23–25.38 %); P (99.0–513.0 kg/ha) and K (92.51–609.28 kg/ha). In agricultural habitat, T (26.5–28.5 ⁰C); pH (4.94–7.86); MC (30.14–35.21 %); EC (0.12–0.36mS cm^-1); OC (4.28–5.91 %); N (0.27–0.30 %); C/N ratio (14.26–20.37 %); P (13.0–94.0 kg/ha) and K (94.64–251.88 kg/ha) and in forest habitat, T (27.0–28.0 ⁰C); pH (5.90–5.95); MC (33.86–34.70 %); EC (0.12–0.22mS cm^-1); OC (4.97–5.31 %); N (0.12–0.15 %); C/N ratio(35.40–41.41 %); P (9.0–26.0 kg/ha) and K (85.05–187.82 kg/ha). The soil temperature showed significant difference in residential (P=0.01) and in agricultural (P=0.03) habitats in all the seasons. Whereas, moisture content (P= 0.00037) is found to be highly significant in all the seasons. In forest habitats, no significant difference was found between any of the edaphic factors during monsoon and post-monsoon periods. The other parameters such as pH, electrical conductivity, organic carbon, nitrogen, C/N ratio, available phosphorous and potassium also showed no significant difference during different seasons in the study area.

Table 2. Soil characteristics of different habitats in three seasons (Mean±SD) (n=6).

Habitats	Seasons	Temperature (^0C)	pH	MC (%)	EC (mS cm^-1)	OC (%)	N (%)	C/N	P (kg/ha)	K (kg/ha)
Residential habitat	Pre-monsoon	28.6±1.58	6.93±0.63	28.06±8.59	0.27±0.11	4.33±1.29	0.27±0.09	17.46±6.63	213.0±155	292.16±213
	Monsoon	26.5±1.07	6.61±1.13	45.79±11.1	0.39±0.20	4.72±1.32	0.29±0.08	16.64±6.09	145.0±129	184±189
	Post-monsoon	27.4±0.89	6.98±0.61	35.53±7.32	0.23±0.09	4.43±1.42	0.35±0.06	12.87±4.39	94.0±92	300.91±253
	P value	0.01*	0.43	0.06	0.17	0.82	0.32	0.40	0.32	0.45
Agricultural habitat	Pre-monsoon	29.2±1.41	6.02±0.69	26.04±2.72	0.27±0.12	5.25±0.63	0.42±0.02	12.57±2.36	81.0±96.16	140.36±91
	Monsoon	26.4±1.19	5.99±0.67	42.95±5.06	0.24±0.09	4.11±1.83	0.27±0.10	15.13±3.83	83.0±54.81	159.9±93
	Post-monsoon	27.4±1.07	6.10±1.24	33.32±2.32	0.24±0.13	4.79±0.75	028±0.01	16.68±2.60	52.0±33.71	193.78±69
	P value	0.03*	0.97	0.00037**	0.94	0.58	0.14	0.419	0.65	0.73
Forest habitat	Pre-monsoon	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
	Monsoon	26.6±1.23	5.79±0.86	43.48±10.99	0.25±0.19	5.33±1.23	0.32±0.11	19.97±13.8	145.0±195	190.0± 270.06
	Post-monsoon	27.5±0.70	5.92±0.03	34.28±0.59	0.17±0.07	5.14±0.24	0.13±0.02	38.40±4.24	18.0±12.02	136.43±73
	P value	0.41	0.84	0.29	0.57	0.83	0.07	0.11	0.41	0.79

**P<0.05 (indicates statistically high significant difference), *P<0.01 (indicates statistically significant difference).

Correlation between the seasonal abundance of earthworm species with edaphic factors

The correlation analysis of abundance of different species of earthworms in relation to edaphic factors in different seasons has revealed that, during pre-monsoon, the abundance of P. corethrurus (r= 0.882; P=0.02) and M. houlleti (r=0.814; P=0.049) were positively correlated with organic carbon and are statistically significant in the residential habitats. During monsoons, P. corethrurus showed positive correlation with C/N ratio (r=0.732; P=0.01) and is statistically significant, whereas it shows negative correlation with pH (r=-0.755; P=0.007) and is statistically highly significant in the residential habitats. M. konkanensis showed positive correlation with electrical conductivity (r=0.925; P=0.00034) and is statistically highly significant in the agricultural habitat. In the forest habitat, K. karnatakensis showed statistically highly significant negative correlation with temperature (r=-0.803; P=0.029) and positive correlation with moisture content (r=0.770, P=0.043). Whereas, M. houlleti showed positive correlation with organic carbon (r=0.882; P=0.009) and is highly significant. During post-monsoons, K. karnatakensis showed positive correlation with C/N ratio (r=0.879; P=0.049) and is statistically significant in the residential habitats.

Diversity, distribution and abundance of earthworm species

Diversity, distribution and abundance of soil organisms are influenced by many soil factors. Understanding the factors which control the earthworm’s diversity and population density is a vital process to maintain the soil ecosystem. Earthworms are important soil dwelling organisms and are found in a wide range of soil representing 60–80 % of the total soil biomass and they prefer soil which is rich in organic matter. Diversity is affected due to the loss of their native habitats (Lavelle et al. 1994; Bhadauria et al. 2000). Various studies have reported earlier the distribution of earthworms in relation to habitats (Fonte et al. 2009). In the earlier reports, P. corethrurus was recorded from habitats such as manure heaps, garden soil, cultivated land, coconut and rubber plantations (Julka 2008); nursery stock of Assam (Rajkhowa et al. 2014), human disturbed forests of Kerala state (Narayanan et al. 2016), moist soil and cow dung slurry pits of Dakshina Kannada, Karnataka (Siddaraju et al. 2010). In the present study P. corethrurus was found to be more widely spread and was the dominant earthworm species in the study area. The highest population density was observed during the monsoons followed by post-monsoon period and the same observation was made by Blanchart & Julka (1997) and Joshi & Aga (2009). This aneciec earthworm M. konkanensis an endemic species was reported earlier from forest leaf litter in different parts of South India (Oommen 1998; Kathireswari et al. 2005). Siddaraju et al. (2010) recorded this species from banana and cashew plantations in Dakshina Kannada district of Karnataka. Siddaraju et al. (2010) have recorded the same species from manure heaps, coconut, rubber and cocoa plantations in Dakshina Kannada, Karnataka. The present study also records the co-existence of P. corethrurus and M. houlleti in banana and coconut pits of residential habitats. Julka (1988) has reported K. karnatakensis from Bhagamandala, Kotegehara, Moodabidri, Sakleshpur and Tirthahalli in Karnataka.

Earthworm abundance in relation to edaphic factors

The species density was observed where there was the highest litter degradation in the study area. It indicates that moisture content and food availability in the habitats influence the distribution of earthworms. It has been observed that, the species abundance in residential habitats throughout the year is probably due to ideal soil moisture and rich organic matters as it was reported earlier by Ghosh (1993). Soil temperature gradually increases from monsoon to pre-monsoon periods and there is not much variation in temperature between habitats. Soil pH (5.79 to 6.93) did not show much difference between the habitats in different seasons. Iordachf & Borza (2010) opined that earthworm abundance decreased with increasing soil pH. In the present study, P. corethrurus shows negative correlation with pH (r=-0.755; P=0.007) in the residential habitats during the monsoon period. M. konkanensis showed the positive correlation with electrical conductivity (r=0.925; P= 0.00034) in the agricultural habitats during the monsoon period. Whereas, K. karnatakensis showed negative correlation with temperature (r=-0.803; P=0.029) and positive correlation with moisture (r=0.770; P=0.043) in the forest habitats. Organic carbon is very essential for the normal growth and development of earthworms, which is obtained from litter, grit and micro-organisms present in the soil. All the soil had high levels of organic carbon (>2.5%) in the selected habitats during different seasons. Wherever there is high moisture content and decaying organic matter available easily to the worms, the rate of decomposition activity is recorded to be more as it was observed in the study area (Edwards & Bohlen 1996; Joshi & Aga 2009). Hendrix et al. (1992) reported that earthworm population density is positively correlated with organic carbon. In the present study also a similar result was observed in the residential habitats with P. corethrurus (r=0.882; P=0.02) and with M. houlleti (r=0.814; P=0.049) during the pre-monsoon and in forest habitats (r=0.882; P=0.009) during the monsoon period with M. houlleti (Joshi et al. 2010). Nitrogen content in the soil is due to the accumulation and decomposition of leaf litter and debris of the plants. Banana plants add more nitrogen to the soil after death and decay by decomposition processes. Nitrogen showed no significant relationship with the distribution of the species. Only P. corethrurus (r=0.732; P=0.01) and K. karnatakensis (r=0.879; P=0.049) showed a positive correlation with C/N ratio in the residential habitats during monsoon and post-monsoon periods respectively. In all the soils, the available phosphorous content was high (52.75 to 213 kg/ha) in all the seasons, except in forest habitats (17.5 kg/ha) during the post monsoon period. The available potassium content was medium (136.43 to 193.73 kg/ha) in all the soil samples, whereas in residential habitats it shows high during pre-monsoon (292.16 kg/ha) and post monsoon (300.91 kg/ha) periods. In the present study, that the species didn’t show the relation with P and K. Phosphorous content in the soil may be due to the addition of fertilizers in higher doses and also from litter (Singh et al. 2016). Potassium content in the soil might be attributed to release of more K from organic residue and application of K containing fertilizers.

Many reports have shown that industrial discharge deposits on surrounding areas enters the food chain. These discharges mainly contain toxic substances such as organic and inorganic deposits as well as toxic metals and affects the health of mankind as well as the quality of the soil and its productivity (Chhonka et al. 2000; Ho et al. 2012). Most earthworm species are very sensitive to the alteration in the soil nutrients; though some species may survive in altered environments (Suther et al. 2008). The present study clearly indicates that there is a species specific relation with the nutrient availability in the soil. Bio indicator activities of the earthworm species are being studied to know the impact of industrial discharge on earthworm species in the study area.

References

Ahmed, S. & J.M. Julka (2017). First record of exotic earthworm, Amynthas hupiensis (Michaelsen, 1895) (Oligochaeta: Megascolecidae), from India. Megadrilogica 22(7): 151–154.

Begum, R. & S.A. Ismail (2004). Illustration of earthworms occurring in and around Chennai, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 19(3): 1394–1400; http://dx.doi.org/10.11609/JoTT.ZPJ.19.3.1394-400

Bhadauria, T., P.S. Ramakrishnan & K.N. Srivastava (2000). Diversity and distribution of endemic and exotic earthworms in natural and regenerating ecosystems in the central Himalayas, India. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 32: 2045–2054.

Biradar, M.D., B. Suresh, M. Siddaraju, K. Sreepada, R. S. Giraddi, R. Paliwal & P.B. Gai (2013). Genetic diversity of earthworms from Western Ghats of Karnataka (India) using RAPD based molecular markers. Biochemical and Cellular Archives 13(2): 237–242.

Bisht, R., H. Pandey, D. Bharti & B.R. Kaushal (2003). Population dynamics of earthworms (Oligochaeta) in cultivated soils of Central Himalayan tarai region. Tropical Ecology 44(2): 229–234.

Blakemore, R.J. (1994). Earthworms of South-East Queensland and their agro-economic potential in brig low soils. PhD Dissertation, University of Queensland, 605pp.

Blakemore, R.J. (2000). Native earthworms (Oligochaeta) from southeastern Australia, with the description of fifteen new species. Records of the Australian Museum 52(2): 187–222.

Blakemore, R.J. (2004). Checklist of Japanese earthworms updated from Easton (1981), pp. 155–162. In: Moreno, A.G. & S. Borges (eds.). “Avances en Taxonomia de Lombrices de tierra / Advances in Earthworm Taxonomy (Annelida: Oligochaeta)”. Editorial Complutense, Universidad Complutense, Madrid, Spain, 415pp.

Blakemore, R.J. (2006). Cosmopolitan Earthworms - An Eco-taxonomic Guide to the Peregrine Species of The World. Verm Ecology, Yokohama, Japan, 650pp.

Blakemore, R.J. & M. Paoletti (2006). Australian earthworms as a natural agroecological resource. Annals of Arid Zone 45(3&4): 1–22.

Blanchart, E. & J.M. Julka (1997). Influence of forest distribution on earthworm (Oligochaeta) communities in the Western Ghats (south India). Soil Biology and Biochemistry 29: 303–306.

Brown, G.G., B. Pashanasi, C. Villenave, J.C. Patro’n, B.K. Senapati, S. Giri, I. Barois, P. Lavelle, E. Blanchart, R.J. Blakemore, A.V. Spain & J. Boyer (1999). Effects of earthworms on plant production in the tropics, pp. 87–147. In: Lavelle, P., L. Hendrix & P. Hendrix (eds.). Earthworm Management in Tropical Agroecosystems. CABI Publishing, Oxon, UK, 300pp.

Chamberlain, E.J. & K.R. Butt (2008). Distribution of earthworms and influence of soil properties across a successional sand ecosystem in NW England. European Journal of Soil Biology 44: 554–558.

Chanabun, R., K. Inkavilay & S. Panha (2017). New species of semi-aquatic freshwater earthworm genus Glyphidrilus Horst, 1889 from Thailand and Laos (Oligochaeta, Almidae). Zoo Keys 672: 1–34.

Chaudhuri, P.S., S. Nath & R. Paliwal (2008). Earthworm population of rubber plantations (Havea brasiliensis) in Tripura, India. Tropical Ecology 49(2): 225–234.

Chhonkar, P.K., S.P. Datta, H.C. Joshi & H. Pathak (2000). Impact of industrial effluents on soil health and agriculture-Indian experience: Part I - Distillery and paper mill effluents. Journal of Scientific and Industrial Research 59: 350–361.

Christoffersen, M.L. (2008a). A catalogue of the Ocnerodrilidae (Annelida, Oligochaeta) from South America. Italian Journal of Zoology 75(1): 97–107; https://doi.org/10.1080/11250000701695250

Christoffersen, M.L. (2008b). Species catalogue and phylogenetic relations of criodriloids and basal glossoscolecoids (Annelida: Clitellata: Lumbricina) from South America. Tropical Zoology 21: 209–226.

Christoffersen, M.L. (2010). Continental biodiversity of South American oligochaetes: The importance of inventories. Acta Zoológica Mexicana (n.s.), Número Especial 2: 35–46.

Csuzdi, C.S. & T. Pavlicek (2009). New records of earthworms from Guadeloupe with description of a new species (Oligochaeta: Glossoscolecidae, Acanthodrillidae, Megascolecidae and Eudrilidae). Opscula Zoologica Budapest 40(1): 9–15.

Das, B.C. & J.W. Reynolds (2003). A checklist and distribution of the fresh water and terrestrial annelida (Oligochaeta, Hirudinea and Polychaeta) of Bangladesh. Megadrilogica 9(10): 61–70.

De Assis, J.E., J.R.B. Souza, M.L.M. Vieira, J.V.N. De Souza, G.G. Rodrigues & M.L. Christoffersen (2017). A catalogue of the Eudrilidae and Megascolecidae (Clitellata: Lumbricina) from South America, with two new records of exotic species from Brazil. Turkish Journal of Zoology 41: 599–614.

Desjardins, T., F. Charpentier, B. Pashanasi, A. Pando-Bahuon, P. Levelle & A. Mariotti (2003). Effects of earthworm inoculation on soil organic matter dynamics of a cultivated utisol. Pedobiologia 47(5–6): 835–841.

Dhiman, N. & S.K. Battish (2006). Earthworms from northern Indian states with Ocnerodrilus occidentalis, Eisen, 1878, as a new report from Punjab. Zoo’s Print Journal 21(1): 2135–2137; http://doi.org/10.11609/JoTT.ZPJ.1203.2135-7

Edwards, C.A. & P.J. Bohlen (1996). Biology and Ecology of Earthworm. Chapman and Hall, London, 426pp.

Fonte, S.J., A.Y.Y. Kong, C. van Kessel, P.F. Hendrix & J. Six (2007). Influence of earthworm activity on aggregate-associated carbon and nitrogen dynamics differs with agro ecosystem management. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 39(5): 1014–1022.

Fonte, S.J., T. Winsome & J. Six (2009). Earthworm populations in relation to soil organic matter dynamics and management in California Tomato cropping systems. Applied Soil Ecology 41: 206–214.

Fragoso, C. & J.W. Reynolds (1997). On some earthworms from central and southeastern Mexican mountains, including two new species of the genus Dichogaster (Dichogastrini). Megadrilogica 7(2): 9–20.

Fragoso, C., S. James & S. Borges (1995). Native earthworms of the north neotropical region: Current status and controversies, pp. 67–115. In: Hendrix, P. (ed.). Earthworm Ecology and Biogeography in North America. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, Florida, 256pp.

Gates, G.E. (1972). Burmese earthworms. An introduction to the systematics and biology of megadriles oligochaetes with reference to south-east Asia. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 62(7): 1–326.

Ghafoor, A. & J.L. Qureshi (1999). Five new records of earthworms from Faisalabad. Pakistan International Journal Agricultural Science 135: 74–75.

Ghosh, A.H. (1993). Earthworm Resources and Vermiculture. Zoological Survey of India. Calcutta, 128pp.

Gobi, M. & G.S. Vijayalashmi (2004). Occurrence of the earthworm Glyphidrillus annandalei in Gadana River, Kalakkada- Mundanthurai Tiger reserve, Tamil Nadu. Zoo’s Print Journal 19(4): 1443; http://doi.org/10.11609/JoTT.ZPJ.1115.1443

Grosso, E., G. Jorge & G.G. Brown (2006). Exotic and native earthworms in various land use systems of central, southern and eastern Uruguay. Caribbean of Science 42(3): 294–300.

Hendrix, P.F., B.R. Mueller, R.R. Bruce, G.W. Langdale & R.W. Parmelee (1992). Abundance and distribution of earthworms in relation to landscape factors on the Georgia Piedmont, U.S.A. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 24: 1357-1361; http://doi.org/10.1016/0038-0717(92)90118-H

Ho, Y.C., K.Y. Show, X.X. Guo, I. Norli, F.M.A. Abbas & N. Morad (2012). Industrial waste- Industrial discharge and their effect to the environment. In: Prof. Kuan-Yeow Show (ed.). In: Tech, Available from: http://www.intechopen.com/books/industrial-waste/industrial-emissions-and-their effect-on-the-environment.

Hobblen, P.H.F., J.E. Koolhaas & C.A.M.V. Gestel (2006). Bioaccumulation of heavy metals in the earthworms Lumbricus rubellus and Aporrectodea caliginosa in relation to the total and available metal concentrations in field soils. Environmental Pollution 144: 639–646.

Hook, R.I. (1974). Cadmium, Lead and Zinc distributions between earthworms and soils: Potential for biological accumulation. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 2: 509–512.

Huerta, E., J. Rodriguez-Olan, I. Evia-Castillo, E. Montejo-Meneses, M. de la Cruz-Mondragón, R. Garcia-Hernandez & S. Uribe (2007). Earthworms and soil properties in Tabasco, Mexico. European Journal of Soil Biology 43: 190–195; http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejsobi.2007.08.024

Iordache, M. & I. Borza (2010). Relation between the chemical indices of soil and earthworm abundance under chemical fertilization. Plant Soil Environment 56: 401–407.

Ishtiya, A.N. & B.K. Anish (2011). Earthworm communities of Kashmir Valley, India. Tropical Ecology 52(1): 151–162.

Jackson, M.L. (1973). Soil Chemical Analysis. Prentice Hall of India. New Delhi, 521pp.

James, S.W. (2004). New species of Amynthas, Pheretima and Pleionogaster (Clitellata: Megascolecidae) of the Mt. Kitanglad range, Mindanao Island, Philippines. The Raffles Bulletin of Zoology 52(2): 289–313.

Jamieson, B.G.M. & J.E. Wampler (1979). Bioluminescent Australian earthworms II. Taxonomy and preliminary report of bioluminescence in the genera in the genera Spenceriella, Fletcherodrilus and Pontodrilus (Megascolecidae: Oligochaeta). Australian Journal of Zoology 27: 637–639.

Jones, C.G., L.H. Lawton & M. Shachak (1994). Organisms as ecosystem engineers. Oikos 69: 373–386.

Joshi, N. & S. Aga (2009). Diversity and distribution of earthworms in a subtropical forest ecosystem in Uttarakhand, India. The Natural History Chulalongkorn University 9(1): 21–25.

Joshi, N., M. Dabral & R.K. Maikhuri (2010). Density, biomass and species richness of earthworms in agro-ecosystems of Garhwal Himalaya, India. Tropical Natural History 10(2): 171–179.

Julka, J.M. (1983). A new genus and species of earthworm (Oligochaetidae: Oligochaeta) from south India. Geobios 2: 48–50.

Julka, J.M. (1988). The Fauna of India and The Adjacent Countries: Megascolecidae (Earthworms) - Haplotaxida: Lumbricina: Megascolecidea: Octochaetidae. Zoological Survey of India, Calcutta, 400pp.

Julka, J.M. (2008). Know Your Earthworms. Foundation for Life Sciences and Business Management, Solan, 51pp.

Julka, J.M. (2014). Diversity and distribution of exotic earthworms (Annelida, Oligochaeta) in India a review, pp. 73–83. In: Chaudhuri, P. & S.M. Singh (eds.). Biology and Ecology of Tropical Earthworms. Discovery Publishing House, New Delhi.

Kale, R.D. & N. Karmegam (2010). The role of earthworms in tropics with emphasis on Indian ecosystems. Applied and Environmental Soil Science 2010: 1–16; http://doi.org/10.1155/2010/414356

Kale, R.D. & R.V. Krishnamoorthy (1978). Distribution and abundance of earthworms in Bangalore. Proceedings of the Indian Academy of Sciences-Section B, Animal Sciences 87(3): 23–25.

Kathireswari, P., J.M. Julka & J. Ramasamy (2008). Biodiversity and earthworm species of Coimbatore forest division, the Western Ghats, Tamil Nadu, India. Megadrilogica 12(8): 120–124.

Kathireswari, P., J.M. Julka & J.W. Reynolds (2005). Checklist of oligochaeta of Tamil Nadu, India. Megadrilogica 10(8): 57–68.

Kaushal, B.R. & S.P.S. Bishat (1994). Population dynamics of the earthworm Amynthas alexandri (Annelida: Megascolecidae) in Kumaun Himalayan pasture soil. Biology and Fertility of Soils 17: 9–13.

Krishnamurthy, R.V. & S. Ramachandra (1988). Population structure of earthworms in woodlands of Karnataka. Proceedings of the Indian Academy of Science (Animal Science) 97(4): 355–365.

Laura, C.A. & I.C. Ines (2001). The distribution and ecology of littoral oligochaeta and aphanophoneura (Annelida) of the natural and historical reserve of Isla Martin Garcia, Rio de la Planta River, and Argentina. Hydrobiologia 463: 207–216.

Lavelle, P., M. Dangerfield, C. Fragoso, V. Eschenbrenner, D. Lopez-Hernandez, B. Pashanasi & L. Brussaard (1994). The relationship between soil macrofauna and tropical soil fertility, pp. 137–169. In: Swift, M.J. & P.L. Woomer (eds.). The Biological Management of Tropical Soil Fertility. John Wiley-Sayce, New York, 252pp.

Lee, K.E. (1985). Earthworms: Their Ecology and Relationships with Soils and Land Use. Academic Press, New York, 411pp.

Mihailova, P. (1964). Five species Lumbricidae (Oligochaeta) new to the fauna of Bulgaria. Annuaire de Universite de Sofia 58: 169–171.

Mihailova, P. (1966). Lumbricidae (Oligochaeta) earthworms in Thrace. Fauna of Thrace 3: 181–200.

Mischis, C.C. (1992). The first record of the species Amynthas diffringens (Baird, 1869) (Oligochaeta: Megascolecidae) in the province of Cordoba (Argentina). Megadrilogica 4: 143–144.

Mischis, C.C. (1993). A contribution to the knowledge of megascolecid fauna (Annelida, Oligochaeta) from the Province of Córdoba, Argentina. Megadrilogica 5: 9–12.

Mischis, C.C. & A.M. Brigada (1985). The earthworms (Annelida,Oligochaeta) from the Province of San Luis (Argentina). Part I. Megadrilogica 4(5): 133–134.

Mischis, C.C. & G. Righi (1999). Contribution to knowledge of the oligochaete fauna (Annelida, Oligochaeta) from Argentina. Gayana 63: 11–13.

Monroy, F., M. Aira, J. Dominguez & F. Morino (2003). Distribution of earthworms in the north-west of the Iberian Peninsula. European Journal of Soil Biology 39(1): 13–18.

Mora, P., E. Miambi, J.J. Jimenez, T. Decaens & C. Rouland (2005). Functional complement of biogenic structures produced by earthworms, termites and ants in the neotropical savannas. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 36(6): 1043–1048; http:// doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2004.10 019

Narayanan, S.P., S. Sathrumithra, G. Christopher, A.P. Thomas & J.M. Julka (2016). Current distribution of the invasive earthworm Pontoscolex corethrurus (Muller, 1857) after a century of its first report from Kerala state, India. Opscula Zoologica Budapest 47(1): 101–107; http://doi.org/10.18348/opzool.2016.1.101

Narayanan, S.P., S. Sathrumithra, G. Christopher, & J.M. Julka (2017). New species and new records of earthworms of the genus Drawida from Kerala part of the Western Ghats biodiversity hotspot, India (Oligochaeta, Moniligastridae). ZooKeys 691: 1–18.

Omodeo P. & Е. Rota (1991). Earthworms of Turkey II. Bolletino di Zoologia 58: 171–181.

Oommen, S.K. (1998). Studies on bioprocess of organic soild wastes applying vermitech and the efficacy of vermicompost and vermiwash in soil fertility. PhD Dissertation. Mahatma Gandhi University, 110pp.

Paliwal, R. & J.M. Julka (2005). Checklist of earthworms of Western Himalaya, India. Zoo’s Print Journal 20(9): 1972–1976.

Parmelec, R.W., P.J. Bohlen & J.M. Blair (1998). Earthworms and nutrient cycling processes: Integrating across the ecological hierarchy, pp. 179–211. In: Edwards, C. (ed.). Earthworm Ecology. St. Lucie Press, Boca Raton, Fla, USA, 456pp.

Rajkhowa, D.J., P.N. Bhattacharyya, A.K. Sarma & K. Mahanta (2014). Diversity and distribution of earthworms in different soil habitats of Assam, north-east India, an Indo-Burma biodiversity hotspot. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, India Section B: Biological Sciences 85(2): 389–396.

Rana, S.A., S. Bano & M.J.I. Siddiqui (2002). Species structure of earthworms in various crop field of Gujranwala District. International Journal of Agriculture and Biology 4(3): 350–354.

Rao, B.R.C. (1979). Studies on the biological and ecological aspects of certain Indian earthworms. Karnataka. Mysore University, PhD Dissertation, 242pp.

Reynolds, J.W. (1994). The earthworms of Bangladesh (Oligochaeta: Megascolecidae, Moniligastridae and Octochaetidae). Megadrilogica 5(4): 34–44.

Reynolds, J.W. (2009). Species distribution maps for Gates’ Burmese earthworms and current nomenclature usage. Megadrilogica 13(6): 53–84.

Reynolds, J.W. (2015). A checklist by counties of earthworms (Oligochaeta: Glossoscolecidae, Lumbricidae, Megascolecidae, Ocnerodrilidae and Octochaetidae) in Hawaii, USA. Megadrilogica 19(7): 115–122.

Reynolds, J.W. & C. Fragoso (2004). The earthworms (Oligochaeta: Acanthodrlidae, Eudrilidae, Glossoscolecidae, Lumbricidae, Megascolecidae and Ocnerodrilidae) of Bermuda. Megadrilogica 10(4): 17–26.

Reynolds, J.W. & M.J. Wetzel (2008). Terrestrial oligochaeta (Annelida: Clitellata) in North America, including Mexicana, Puerto Rico, Hawaii and Bermuda. Megadrilogica 12(12): 157–208.

Reynolds, J.W. & M.J. Wetzel (2017). Nomenclatura Oligochaetologica - A catalogue of names, descriptions and type specimens. Editio Secunda. URL: http://www.inhs.illinois.edu/people/mjwetzel/nomenoligo.

Reynolds, J.W., C. Fragoso & C.A.Guerra (1995a). New earthworm records from Belize (Ologochaeta: Acanthodrilidae, Eudrilidae, Glossoscolecidae, Megascolecidae, Ocnerodrilidae and Octochaetidae). Megadrilogica 6(7): 63–70.

Reynolds, J.W., J.M. Julka & M.N. Khan (1995b). Additional earthworm records from Bangladesh (Oligochaeta: Glossoscolecidae, Megascolecidae, Moniligastridae, Ocnerodrilidae and Octochaetidae). Megadrilogica 6(6): 51–64.

Reynolds, J.W., J. Manazhy, A. Manazhy & V. Nair (2010). The great global earthworm race goes to south India. Megadrilogica 13(11): 161–172.

Sathianarayan, A. & A.B. Khan (2006). Diversity, distribution and abundance of earthworms in Pondicherry region. Tropical Ecology 47(1): 139–144.

Shen, H.P. & D.C. Yeo (2005). Terrestrial earthworms from Singapore. The Raffles Bulletin of Zoology 53(1): 13–33.

Shen, H.P., S.C. Tsai & C. Tsai (2005). Occurrence of the earthworms Pontodrilus litoralis (Grube, 1985), Metaphire houlleti (Perrier, 1872) and Eiseniella tetraedra (Savgny, 1826) from Taiwan. Taiwan 50(1): 11–21.

Sherlock, E., S. Lee, S. Mcphee, M. Steer, J.M. Maes & C. Csuzdi (2011). First earthworm collections from Nicaragua with description of two new species (Oligochaeta). Zootaxa 2732: 49–58.

Siddaraju, M., K.S. Sreepada & J.W. Reynolds (2010). Checklist of earthworms (Annelida: Oligochaeta) from Dakshina Kannada, Karnataka south-west coast of India. Megadrilogica 14(5): 65–75..

Singh, R., R.S. Singh, H.S. Purohit, T.P. Verma & R.S. Garhwal (2016). Productivity and suitability evaluation of orange (Citrus reticulata) growing soils of hot and semi-arid region of Rajasthan (AESR 5.2). Journal of the Indian Society of Soil Sciences 64(1): 46–57.

Spiegel, H. (2002). Trace element accumulation in selected bio indicators exposed to emission along the industrial facilities of Danube Lowland. Turkish Journal of Chemistry 26: 815–823.

Springett, J.A., R.A.J. Gray, D.J. Barker, M.G. Lambert, A.D. Mackay & V.J. Thomas (1998). Population density and distribution of the New Zealand indigenous earthworm Octochaetus multiporus (Megascolecidae: Oligochaeta) in hill pastures. Journal of Ecology 22(1): 87–93.

Stephenson, J. (1923). Oligochaeta fauna of British India including Ceylon and Burma. Taylor and Francis, London, 518pp.

Stojanovic, M., R. Tsekova & T. Milutinovic (2012). Earthworms (Oligochaeta: Lumbricidae) of Bulgaria: diversity and biogeographical review. Acta Zoologica Bulgarica 4: 7–15.

Stojanovic, M., R. Tsekova, S. Pesic, J. Milanovic & T. Milutinovic (2013). Diversity and a bio-geographical review of the earthworms (Oligochaeta: Lumbricidae) of the Balkan Mountains (Stara Planina Moutains) in Serbia and Bulgaria. Turkish Journal of Zoology 37: 635–642.

Suthar, S., S. Singh & S. Dhawan (2008). Earthworms as bio indicator of metals (Zn, Fe, Mn, Cu, Pb, and Cd) in soils: Is metal bioaccumulation affected by their ecological category? Ecological Engineering 32: 99–107; http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2007.10.003

Tripathi, G. & P. Bharadwaj (2004). Earthworm diversity and habitat preferences in arid regions of Rajasthan. Zoo’s Print Journal 19(7): 1515–1519; http://doi.org/10.11609/JoTT.ZPJ.1074.1515-9

Tsai, C.F., H.P. Shen & S.C. Tsai (2000). Native and exotic species of terrestrial earthworm (Oligochaeta) in Taiwan with reference to north-east Asia. Zoological Studies 39(4): 285–294.

Tsai, C.F., H.P. Shen & S.C. Tsai (2004). Endemicity and altitudinal stratification in distribution of megascolecidae earthworms in the centro-western Taiwan. Endemic species 6(2): 1–18.

Werner, M.R. & D.L. Dindal (1989). Earthworm community dynamics in conventional and low input agro-ecosystems. Revue D’ Ecologieet de Biologie du Soil 26: 427–437.