
doi: 10.32942/x2w07b
Why does a single square meter of forest soil harbour thousands of animal species? Fifty years after J.M. Anderson raised this question, soil ecology still struggles with a fragmented view of coexistence. Researchers often study taxonomy, functional traits, and phylogeny in isolation. Each approach adds insight but leaves gaps in the picture of soil biodiversity. In this paper, I therefore propose a Community-Trait-Phylogenetic Ecology framework. It links evolutionary and ecological views and explains how soil animal communities form and persist. The framework combines three research fields: - Biogeography – describes species composition across local, regional, and global scales. - Functional traits – divided into α‑niche traits (resource use) and β‑niche traits (environmental tolerance). These traits show whether resource partitioning or filtering by environment drives community assembly. - Phylogeny – shapes trait expression and defines the historical pool of species. Evidence from springtails (Collembola) and oribatid mites shows the value of this framework. Global data synthesis reveals a mismatch between density and diversity, which challenges traditional predictions. Trait analyses show that environmental filtering occurs at global scales. At regional and local scales, cryptic species that diverged millions of years ago coexist through distinct habitat preferences. In addition, ancient and recent lineages appear together across elevations. Morphological and physiological traits usually follow phylogenetic constraints. In contrast, trophic traits show high flexibility, which allows closely related species to coexist. This integrative view shifts soil animal ecology from describing patterns to explaining mechanisms. It also supports predictions of community responses to climate change and land‑use change. Finally, it guides conservation strategies that protect trait, functional, and evolutionary diversity along with species richness.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
