ARTHROPODS AS KEY DRIVERS OF FOREST REGENERATION AND HEALTH: ECOLOGICAL ROLES, POPULATION DYNAMICS, AND FUNCTIONAL IMPACTS

INTRODUCTION

 Forest ecosystems serve as habitats for many uncommon and threatened plant and animal species and play a crucial role in protecting biodiversity. Forests occupy about 4.06 billion hectares of land or 31% of the Earth’s land, and it is estimated that each year forest ecosystems absorb about 1.2 billion tons of carbon (Singh et al., 2025). Globally, forest ecosystems are of great importance for biodiversity, carbon storage, and various ecosystem services, such as water regulation, nutrient cycling, and soil formation (Brockerhoff et al., 2017). Ecological interactions of arthropods in forest ecosystems at all trophic levels have recently received attention due to their significant contribution to forest ecosystem functioning (Schowalter, 2017). Arthropod communities are, both directly and indirectly, involved in ecosystem functioning. Macro-arthropods, particularly ants and termites, are involved in bioturbation, which may cause the local redistribution of organic matter and allow the establishment of vegetation in disturbed regions (Awazi and Tsufac, 2025). Diversity and density of arthropods determine litter decomposition rates and nitrogen mineralization which ultimately affect the plant community structure (Jouquet et al., 2006). For example, detritivores (saprophagous arthropods) such as millipedes, woodlice, and earwigs transform litter in terrestrial ecosystems (Wardle et al., 2002). Similarly, termites and ants, which are also known as ecosystem engineers, can influence patterns of soil formation (Jouquet et al., 2006). Arthropods, through many food chains, form complex food webs by interacting with other forest organisms, which regulate herbivory, pollination, and population dynamics (Weisser and Siemann, 2008). For example, many insects perform dual ecological roles; butterflies not only pollinate plants but also act as herbivores during their larval stages. Similarly, ants disperse seeds and are also involved as biological control agents for many insect pests, helping to reduce economic damage in plantations (Chen, 2026).

 The global biodiversity crisis has been associated with declines in arthropod diversity, abundance and biomass (Wildermuth et al., 2026). Although the importance of arthropods in forest ecosystems is increasingly recognized, much of the literature still lacks a quantitative synthesis of their functional contribution across forest types and disturbance regimes. The majority of past reviews have focused on regional trends or individual taxa, rather than on integrating evidence across multiple biomes (Bevan et al., 2025). In tropical forests, macro-arthropods are major contributors to litter mass loss, whereas their role is comparatively lower in temperate forests (Jiang et al., 2025). This variability is mainly associated with differences in species composition, climate, and forest structure, but there is still a lack of comparative studies across ecosystems. However, some meta-analyses have revealed that soil arthropods play a critical role in the cycling of carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus, all of which are essential for plant growth and forest productivity (Zhang et al., 2025). These works indicate that there is a need to combine arthropod biomass data with forest health indicators to better understand their contribution to forest regeneration. This review aims to synthesize worldwide and taxon-specific evidence on the effects of arthropods on forest regeneration and ecosystem health. This review provides a more integrated framework for understanding how forests can be managed and conserved more effectively by viewing arthropods as valuable ecosystem engineers.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sources of information: The published literature was searched using multiple academic databases and platforms. Major sources included Web of Science (WoS), Scopus, Elsevier, Springer, Wiley, Taylor & Francis, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, PubMed, and other relevant search engines. Research articles, books, edited book chapters, and conference proceedings between 2001 and 2026 were included in the study. Only studies reporting quantitative data on arthropod diversity, biomass, ecological roles, or functional effects in forest ecosystems were included. Studies lacking empirical data or that did not focus on forest ecosystems were excluded. Finally, a total of 68 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis.

 To ensure consistency and coverage, we used predefined search strings to search the relevant literature, including combinations such as “arthropods AND forest regeneration”, “soil arthropods AND decomposition”, “arthropods AND nutrient cycling”, “regeneration of forest ecosystems AND Arthropods”, and “diversity of arthropods in Forest ecosystems”.

Arthropod diversity in forest ecosystems: Arthropods represent the most species-rich constituent of forest faunas. Structured sampling of tropical rainforests has demonstrated that a half-hectare area of mature forest can support over 6,000 arthropod species. Extrapolations from such systems suggest that a single 6,000-ha forest may harbor approximately 25,000 species, with an average of 18,000 species per hectare (Bhattacharya, 2025). Arthropod diversity is mainly represented by hexapod orders, including Coleoptera, Hymenoptera, Diptera, Lepidoptera, Hemiptera, and Orthoptera. Other important arthropod groups, such as Collembola, Araneae, and Acari also important components of arthropod diversity. Among families, Formicidae (ants) and Staphylinidae (rove beetles) are regularly prominent in tropical forest assemblages (Thyagaraj et al., 2016). Over 50 arthropod taxonomic groups, including Araneae, Coleoptera, Hymenoptera, and Orthoptera, were recovered from moist forests with mixed-species tree plantations (Ríos Guayasamín et al., 2025). This highlights the significance of diverse plantations in promoting species richness and density as compared to monocultures, which support relatively lower diversity. Large-scale comparative studies also reveal quantitative differences in species richness between forest types. An international meta-analysis on forest edge effects showed higher arthropod species richness at forest edges compared to interior habitats, demonstrating distinct spatial patterns of diversity even within a single landscape (Ríos Guayasamín et al., 2025).

 This is consistent with broader patterns, with tropical forests generally having the highest arthropod richness, followed by temperate and boreal systems (Liu et al., 2026). Global syntheses of terrestrial arthropod abundance and biomass suggest that arthropods as a group comprise an extremely large ecological pool. In soil assemblages, mites and springtails are the most numerous groups, accounting for around 95% of individuals, but termites are overrepresented in biomass, accounting for approx. 40% of soil arthropod biomass, while ants account for approx. 10% (Sharp et al., 2025). Estimates of global biomass are based on aggregated field measurements and provide a useful scale for comparing forest types and disturbance regimes, although estimates at the hectare scale remain uncommon (Blakemore, 2025). These fine-scale distribution measures show the uneven vertical distribution of arthropods in forests, with many taxa concentrated in the canopy and litter layers where food resources and microhabitats are most abundant (Xiong et al., 2025). Overall, these patterns suggest that tropical forests harbor exceptionally rich arthropod communities, that temperate forests are particularly influenced by structural features such as canopy complexity, and that boreal systems generally support lower but functionally important arthropod richness. Typical orders listed in forest inventories are Coleoptera (beetles), Hymenoptera (ants, wasps, and bees), Lepidoptera (moths and butterflies), Araneae (spiders), and detritivores and other soil arthropods that are an important part of ecosystem processes.

Functional roles in forest regeneration: In forest ecosystems, arthropods play vital ecological roles in supporting their sustainability. Various functional groups of arthropods contribute to the maintenance of forests. Their contributions to litter decomposition, nutrient cycling, soil bioturbation, pollination, seed dispersal, herbivore regulation, etc., help in shaping plant community structures, which ultimately determine biodiversity. Overall, these functional roles collectively support forest regeneration, stability, and resilience (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Conceptual framework showing the integrated roles of arthropods in forest regeneration and ecosystem health. The framework presents different types of functional groups, their roles, and their impact on forest regeneration and health. 

Major components of global terrestrial biomass: Arthropods are not only abundant on the forest floor, but also make up a substantial part of the global terrestrial biomass. A global synthesis based on approximately 7,000 measurements from nearly 500 sites distributed across ≈300 different locations estimated that terrestrial arthropods represent around 300 million metric tons (Mt) of dry arthropod biomass, with almost 200 Mt of that biomass represented by soil arthropods (Rosenberg et al., 2023). Much of this biomass is made up of soil arthropods, such as mites, springtails, and ants. For instance, termites account for nearly 40% of the biomass of soil arthropods, and ants account for 10%, which are found in different niches (Rosenberg et al., 2023). Arthropods also dominate various trophic levels, and ants can account for up to 25% of the animal biomass in tropical forests (Griffiths et al., 2018). Arthropods play an important role in litter decomposition and nutrient cycling, which are vital for forest regeneration and ecosystem stability. Experimental studies have shown that soil arthropods enhance decomposition of leaf litter, release nutrients, and aid forest regeneration (Culliney, 2013; Liu et al., 2023). For example, in a replicated chronosequence study of lowland tropical wet forest succession, macro-arthropods accelerated decomposition by 35–44% and increased nitrogen release by approximately 53% (Cole et al., 2020). Invertebrates play a greater role in litter decomposition in tropical and subtropical forests, where their contribution is approximately 1.4 times higher than in forests from other regions. Overall, they account for about 31% of litter decomposition in forests globally  (Zeng et al., 2024).

Herbivory under environmental gradients and disturbance: Herbivorous arthropods have quantifiable and ecologically important effects on forest regeneration because they feed on foliage and modify seedling performance across environmental gradients. Field estimates from both pristine and disturbed forests have consistently demonstrated that insect herbivory leads to substantial foliar loss, and thus affects plant growth (Thyagaraj et al., 2016). For instance, Wang and Li (2025) assessed insect herbivory on Populus laurifolia in 30 natural riparian forest plots, each measuring 30 × 30 m, along the Irtysh River in Xinjiang, China. In each plot, five trees were selected, and 80 leaves per tree were examined from four branches, giving a potential total of 12,000 leaf observations. Across all plots, 80% of the sampled leaves showed herbivore damage, and the mean leaf-area loss was 10.70 ± 2.25% (Wang and Li, 2025). Such numerical data provide a robust estimate of herbivory and allow for comparisons among different forests. These values of tissue loss suggest that herbivory may represent a significant biotic filter, influencing the establishment, growth, and, ultimately, the trajectory of forest regeneration (Cavallero and Zárate, 2025).

 During regeneration, herbivory has a strong impact on seedling survival and community composition. When insect herbivores were excluded in a tropical forest restoration experiment, seedling survival rates of late-successional tree species were greater, suggesting that herbivory was a primary cause of seedling mortality where no protective measures were applied (Joyce et al., 2025). These differences indicate that there is no consistent negative effect of herbivory on seedling survival. Rather, it may selectively affect survival and growth, and thus affect the regeneration of these species. Specifically, insect exclusion reduced the mortality of late-successional tree seedlings in remnant forest but not in restored sites. This result demonstrates both the magnitude of herbivory's impact on seedling mortality and its interaction with restoration (Raupp et al., 2025).

 Manipulation experiments in temperate forests also yield measures of arthropod effects. A three-year study in treefall gaps in a hardwood forest found that herbivory by insects led to mortality of Liriodendron tulipifera seedlings at three of four temperate forest sites (Shannon, 2025). These species-specific variations show that herbivory does not always have a uniform inhibitory effect on seedling survival. Instead, it can selectively reduce survival and growth in vulnerable species, thereby shaping regeneration pathways. Quantitative studies of herbivore feeding guilds also indicate substantial variation in damage patterns (Cornelissen et al., 2025).

 When hundreds of saplings are sampled in forests, mean levels of herbivory may be very variable, and chewing and mining damage are associated with the abundance and diversity of herbivore feeding guilds (Vangansbeke et al., 2026). Elevated herbivory levels are often associated with highly specialized feeding guilds (such as leaf chewers and miners) whose feeding rates and impacts depend on forest structure and plant community composition (Novotny et al., 2010). These patterns show that, in addition to removing plant material, herbivores also affect regeneration by heightening the mortality of vulnerable seedlings and potentially altering the plant community structure in favour of less palatable or more herbivore-resistant species.

Response to disturbance and climate change: Herbivorous arthropods affect leaf area loss and seedling growth, which in turn affect forest regeneration. In temperate and tropical forests, a common measurement of herbivory has revealed consistent leaf area loss, which has a strong impact on plant growth (Sharp et al., 2025). In a temperate forest experiment across multiple sites, herbivores removed leaf area from dominant tree seedlings (such as Quercus rubra and Acer saccharum) and reduced relative growth rate compared to herbivore-exclusion treatments, where herbivores were excluded using mesh cages or insecticides (Liu et al., 2026). Loss of leaf area explained about 20-30% of the variation in seedling height growth at the end of one growing season (Poorter et al., 2009). Other manipulations also demonstrate that herbivory impacts seedling survival, and thus forest regeneration (Andersson et al., 2026). In a long-term arthropod-exclusion experiment in a North American hardwood forest, mortality among seedlings exposed to ambient arthropod herbivores (oaks, Quercus alba, and tulip poplar, Liriodendron tulipifera) was greater than mortality in seedlings where herbivores were excluded after two growing seasons, with the greatest effect during peak insect activity periods (Liu, 2025).

 Climate change and global warming affect plants, vertebrates, and invertebrates, including insects and other related taxa. Climatic fluctuations influence the biochemical and physiological processes of insects. Elevated atmospheric CO₂ concentrations, rising temperatures, drought,  and changes in rainfall patterns affect the survival and reproduction of insects (John et al., 2024). Climate-driven changes in insect phenology are among the most consistently reported biological responses to warming (Bradshaw and Holzapfel, 2001). Higher temperatures accelerate developmental rates, enabling some insect species to demonstrate increased voltinism (Parmesan and Yohe, 2003). Many components of the nutritional quality of trees are affected by drought. This results in increased concentrations of nitrogen compounds, osmolytes, and allelochemicals. During or following the drought, outbreaks of herbivorous insects occur  (Kolb et al., 2016; Sturrock et al., 2011). Performance and impacts of insects and pathogens during and after drought vary with food substrate type, feeding guild, stress duration, and host defenses, among other factors. 

 Climate change is also expected to affect precipitation in forested areas, in terms of quantity, timing, and intensity. This will impact arthropods, often indirectly through changes in host plant quality (Cornelissen, 2011). In drought-stressed trees, reduced or more erratic rainfall can lead to higher levels of nitrogen compounds and secondary defensive metabolites. These substances affect the quality of resources available to herbivorous arthropods. In addition, shifting rainfall patterns have been associated with larger ranges of pests, altered overwintering survival, and desynchronized interactions between insects and host plants (Skendžić et al., 2021). However, these impacts are not limited to herbivores; short-term exposure to the combined effects of elevated CO₂, warming, and reduced precipitation has been shown to affect survival and predatory performance of arthropod natural enemies, such as spiders, ladybird beetles, and parasitoid wasps. This suggests that changes in precipitation can cascade through multiple trophic levels of forest arthropod communities (van Doan et al., 2021).

 Forest arthropods exhibit measurable range shifts in response to climate change. Montane insect species, such as forest beetles, have been moving to higher elevations and higher latitudes over the last century, and this will likely continue with warming temperatures (Fattorini, 2024). Bioclimatic modelling also shows that the geographic distribution of many insect species may significantly shrink by the end of the century as global warming increases, with the magnitude of the loss of distribution increasing rapidly with warming (Harvey et al., 2023). Since the dispersal capabilities, thermal tolerances, and habitat specificities vary considerably among arthropod taxa, these range shifts are unlikely to be uniform across taxa, potentially disrupting existing plant-arthropod associations and altering herbivory, pollination, and decomposition patterns as the forest's arthropod assemblage is reorganized.

 Another effect of higher CO₂ and the warming trend is an increasing phenological mismatch between arthropods and their host plants. As temperatures increase, the period of peak foliar quality may not align with the period of peak arthropod demand, which may affect herbivore performance, outbreak dynamics, and the amount of forest damage (Renner and Zohner, 2018). A field-based forest warming experiment showed that the forest tent caterpillar (Malacosoma disstria) had a delayed response to warming in the spring, with the interval between egg hatch and bud-burst of aspen and birch being reduced and the development time of the larvae being increased (Schwartzberg et al., 2014). When predicting arthropod responses to climate change, trophic synchrony should be considered in addition to temperature and CO₂ effects, as mismatches can cascade across trophic levels. Such cascading effects can significantly affect fitness and population dynamics for arthropods that are unable to synchronize with host plants. This, in turn, affects the fitness and population dynamics of insectivorous birds and other arthropod predators.

Decomposition and nutrient cycling: Arthropods are critical for litter decomposition and nutrient cycling, and hence influence forest soil fertility and organic matter decomposition. A global meta-analysis of 268 pairs of litterbag data in various ecosystems assessed the role of soil arthropods in the decomposition of non-leaf litter (branches, stems, and roots). The researchers found that soil arthropods promoted, on average, a 32.3% greater mass loss than control treatments that excluded soil arthropods (using fine mesh barriers), suggesting a significant functional role in organic matter decomposition (Cheng et al., 2023). The functional role of soil arthropods in forests is also supported by field manipulation experiments. For instance, a 13-month-long litterbag experiment that compared litter decomposition in South African indigenous and plantation forests found that soil arthropods increased litter decomposition in both types of forests by about 12% on average, suggesting that even modified arthropod assemblages can play a valuable role in the decomposition process in forest soils (Gaigher et al., 2025).

 In addition to their direct effects on litter mass loss, arthropods influence nutrient release by interacting with microbial decomposers and modifying soil structure. Litter and soil arthropods (Collembola, isopods) fragment organic matter and facilitate microbial growth, which increases the release of nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), and carbon (C) from the soil. Their activities provide habitat for other organisms and increase the surface area of litter, which helps in rapid degradation and ultimately enhances nutrient availability for plants. Additionally, these activities stimulate microbial respiration and enzyme activity, resulting in increased nutrient turnover (Hun et al., 2026). Specific nutrient fluxes directly attributable to arthropods remain poorly quantified in global forest research and meta-analyses. However, the role of arthropods in the decomposition rate of organic matter has been consistently reported across the globe. The activities of arthropods in forest ecosystems indirectly regulate nutrient release patterns, which are key components contributing to forest regeneration and soil fertility.

Soil structure and bioturbation: Arthropods burrow, make tunnels, and construct nests, which can be quantified to measure the ecosystem-engineering services of these organisms. These activities modify soil structure, improve porosity, lead to aeration, and enhance water infiltration into the soil. During forest regeneration, these activities help in nutrient cycling and the establishment of seedlings during forest regeneration. For instance, soil-feeding termites and ants produce quantifiable changes in the physical properties of soil. In a controlled experiment, soil-feeding termites (such as Patawatermes turricola) increased soil macroporosity. Mound soils demonstrated porosity of 18.49%, compared with adjacent unmodified topsoil with 11.47% porosity. Similarly, the weighted mean diameter of soil aggregates was also higher in mound soils than in undisturbed topsoil (3.88 mm vs. 3.57 mm).  Additionally, higher contents of organic carbon and available phosphorus were also observed in mound soils, indicating availability of better soil nutrients as compared to surrounding soils (Hun et al., 2026). These properties of soil ensure interconnectivity of soil pores, resulting in water infiltration, root growth, and gaseous diffusion. These characteristics, therefore, ultimately contribute to initial forest recovery and regeneration (Liu, 2025). Bioturbation caused by arthropods improves overall soil structure, decomposition of organic matter affects nutrient cycling, and herbivory regulates plant growth (Hobbie and Villéger, 2015). The activity of termites plays a significant role in defining the hydraulic properties of soil under natural rainfall conditions. For instance, in savannah ecosystems, soil macroporosity due to the activity of termites increases water infiltration by two- to three-fold. This increase has a great impact on soils with low hydraulic conductivity (Marquart et al., 2020). Ant tunneling and foraging improve physical and chemical properties of soil, i.e., organic matter, soil moisture, and pore ratio of soil. These activities increase the total nitrogen and phosphorus contents in nest soils compared to surrounding soils, suggesting that ant activity not only changes soil structure but also alters nutrient pools for root development (Lu et al., 2019).

 Macropores created by ants and termites through tunnels and galleries form biochannels that reduce local bulk density, bridge soil horizons, enhance soil aeration, and water flow (Salem, 2014). The magnitude of arthropod-based bioturbation depends on species and habitat types. Generally, arthropod bioturbation increases soil aggregate stability, soil porosity, and infiltration, which immensely contribute to forest regeneration and health (Osman, 2013; Zhang et al., 2024).

Pollination and seed dispersal: Arthropods play a vital role in pollination and seed dispersal, which are key determinants of plant reproduction. Bees, beetles, and flies are major pollinator groups that contribute to the genetic diversity and fitness of plant species in forest ecosystems. This role is especially critical for entomophilous plants, especially in tropical forests where many species depend on arthropods for pollination (Torezan-Silingardi et al., 2021; Ulyshen et al., 2023). Seed dispersal by arthropods is also a key factor in the process of forest regeneration. For instance, empirical evidence showed that seed dispersal by ants to microsites with high nutrient levels results in improved seed germination (Zelikova et al., 2011). Together, pollination and seed dispersal highlight the constructive role of arthropods in forest regeneration, complementing their regulatory roles in herbivory and trophic interactions.

Interactions with other trophic levels: The quantifiable top-down activities of arthropods in forest food webs include predation and parasitoid interactions that regulate herbivore populations and contribute to forest health. Arthropod top-down food web interactions in forests that can be quantified include predation and interactions that control herbivore populations and promote forest productivity. Studies in temperate forests have shown that predator arthropods, including ground beetles (Carabidae) and spiders, can reduce herbivore densities. In replicated field experiments, plots with increased predator access had 28-42% fewer herbivores than control plots, and herbivory was reduced by 15-22% (Michalko et al., 2022; Pote and Nielsen, 2017). Similar quantitative effects have been found for parasitoids, where parasitoid Hymenoptera, such as Braconidae and Ichneumonidae, attack lepidopteran and coleopteran herbivores. A longer-term study of mixed temperate forests found that some 40-60% of caterpillar herbivores were parasitized, decreasing survival and herbivore loads. These predator-prey and parasitoid relationships can have substantial impacts on plant survival and growth, such as 10-18% increases in understory biomass and leaf area index of predator-rich plots compared with predator-reduced plots. These cascading effects have many benefits for forest structure and productivity (Ghosh et al., 2023).

 Arthropod-microbe and arthropod-plant interactions are also intertwined and play a role in nutrient dynamics and plant performance in forests. For example, ants defend tropical trees possessing extrafloral nectaries, such as Inga spp., from herbivores in exchange for nectar (Heil and McKey, 2003). Defensive ants in Costa Rican forests have mutualistic relationships with plants, which provide them with food in return for their protection from herbivores. These interactions increase plant defense, but some specialized insects have developed ways to avoid ant-mediated protection. This indicates the complexity of arthropod-plant interactions (Coronado-Rivera et al., 2020). Apart from defense, collembolans and mites also aid decomposition by grazing on microorganisms, thereby promoting microbial turnover and nutrient mineralization. They are involved in activities that promote nutrient availability and nitrogen cycling, which benefit plant growth and ecosystem productivity (Seastedt, 2003). These arthropod-microbe-plant interactions facilitate nutrient assimilation and regeneration, demonstrating that arthropods have both direct and indirect effects.

Regional comparison: The diversity of arthropods in forest ecosystems differs greatly among forest types, with tropical forests generally supporting the highest species richness and biomass. Arthropod species richness in tropical rainforests, especially in the Amazon Basin, may reach up to 6,000 species per hectare, with the orders Coleoptera, Hymenoptera, and Lepidoptera often being dominant (Basset et al., 2012). Likewise, investigations in Central African rainforests indicate approximately 5,500 species per hectare, with ants and beetles contributing substantially to arthropod biomass. High herbivore density in tropical forests can strongly influence plant community dynamics, seedling establishment, and nutrient cycling. The abundance of termites and ants, which may reach 50,000 individuals per square meter on some forest floors, further emphasizes the contribution of arthropods to ecosystem functions, including soil aeration and organic matter decomposition (Franklin et al., 2005). Boreal forests are most common in northern regions, such as Canada and Siberia, and generally have the lowest arthropod diversity. These forests have lower species diversity per unit area, and their arthropod communities tend to be dominated by mites, ants, and beetles (Saucier et al., 2015). This integrative approach highlights that arthropods are not just individual parts of forest ecosystems. Rather, they are ecosystem managers and key to forest stability and resilience (Bagyaraj et al., 2016).

 Overall, climate, forest structure, and productivity are important factors in the variation of arthropod diversity, abundance, biomass, and roles across forests (Schowalter, 2017). The warmer and wetter tropical forests are home to more abundant and diverse arthropods, which are essential for forest regeneration and well-being (Ammer, 2019). In contrast, the arthropod communities of temperate and boreal forests are less diverse but functionally important. Arthropods of temperate and boreal forests play a role in decomposition and nutrient cycling  (Schowalter, 2017). These cross-biome differences are listed in Table 1. Overall, the arthropod functions are interrelated and play a pivotal role in forest regeneration. These processes interact to form a coupled system in which each process can affect the others. For instance, increased herbivory can put pressure on plants, and hence litter inputs and decomposition, while higher predator density can increase seedling survival by decreasing herbivory (Wardle et al., 2002). This integrative perspective emphasizes that arthropods are not isolated contributors to forest ecosystems. Rather, they are ecosystem regulators with a pivotal role in maintaining forest resilience and stability.

Table 1: Synthesis of Arthropod roles across forest types

 Implications of forest management: Arthropods are a critical component of forest management because they substantially contribute to the sustainability of ecosystem functions like pollination, nutrient cycling, and pest control. The health and resilience of forests are critical to the stability of ecosystems (Ayres and Lombardero, 2018). Arthropod density and diversity provide useful measures of ecosystem health, and their presence or absence can be used to determine the success of forest restoration. Forest management practices should help conserve arthropod habitats by maintaining arthropod-friendly landscape features, such as tree islands and mixed-species plantations (Gatica‐Saavedra et al., 2017; Moir et al., 2005).

 The conservation of arthropods is increasingly being recognized as an integral part of the sustainable regeneration of forests (Maleque et al., 2009). Therefore, arthropods should be included in forest management plans, particularly because of their roles in pest control, pollination, and soil aeration. Laws that conserve insect habitat and promote best-practice forestry, such as selective logging and canopy retention, may mitigate the impacts of land-use change and deforestation on invertebrates (Gazzea, 2025). These could be complemented by economic incentives to landowners who practice arthropod-friendly management and by ecologically informed management strategies that employ bioindicators to assess forest health and recovery. For instance, conservation programs such as the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) have been shown to have positive effects on arthropods and, in turn, on forest productivity (Bagyaraj et al., 2016). Reconsidering forest management to take into account the conservation of functional groups rather than focusing only on species diversity could improve forest-management outcomes. For instance, leaving coarse woody debris supports detritivores and decomposers, while the spatial complexity of the canopy supports predators and food web stability. Limited pesticide applications and mixed plantations can sustain arthropod-mediated ecosystem services, such as pollination, pest control and decomposition (Zhou et al., 2007). Functional measures of arthropods in forest monitoring can enhance the predictability of ecosystem management strategies (Maleque et al., 2009).

Synthesis and conceptual integration: Arthropods regulate forest ecosystems by providing several ecosystem services needed for regeneration, establishment, and maintenance of ecosystem health. The ecosystem services are interconnected. For instance, herbivory impacts litter input, decomposition regulates nutrient cycling, and bioturbation alters soil properties. The ecological services mediated by arthropods exist as a functional network rather than as multiple ecological services working independently. These associations are essential to forecast forest responses to environmental change and to develop ecosystem-based management strategies.

Conclusion: Arthropods play a pivotal role in forest recovery and ecosystem dynamics by regulating important processes such as decomposition, nutrient cycling, soil formation, and trophic interactions. They play varying roles in different forest biomes, with a higher functional intensity in tropical systems as a result of higher biodiversity and biomass. Despite the important role that arthropods play in forests, they are largely overlooked in forest management and conservation practices. There is a need to develop metrics to quantify the relationships between arthropod diversity, biomass, and ecosystem processes. Additionally, more research focusing on cross-biome comparisons of arthropod interventions under varying levels of disturbance is needed. Incorporating arthropods in forest management would be vital to enhance ecosystem resilience, biodiversity, and forest stability in a world undergoing global change.

Acknowledgements: The authors would like to thank the Department of Zoology, University of Gujrat, Punjab, Pakistan.

Authors' Contribution: SS, MH, AN, AI: literature collection, conceptualisation, writing the original draft, AH, AS, and IA: review and editing, SS and MH: Literature collection. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Funding: This manuscript did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

REFERENCES

Ammer, C. (2019). Diversity and forest productivity in a changing climate. New Phytol. 221(1): 50-66. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.15263

Andersson, R., J. Karlsson, and M. K.-F. Bader. (2026). Harrowing promotes Scots pine seedling establishment more effectively than mounding under herbivore exclusion in a southern Swedish field trial. Forestry. 99(2): cpaf050. https://doi.org/10.1093/forestry/cpaf050

Awazi, N. P., and A. R. Tsufac. (2025). Conceptual and Empirical Overview on Soils, Soil Fertility, and Soil Macro-Fauna in Cocoa-Based Agroforests. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-032-08052-3_2

Ayres, M. P., and M. J. Lombardero. (2018). Forest pests and their management in the Anthropocene. Can. J. For. Res. 48(3): 292-301. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjfr-2017-0033

Bagyaraj, D., C. Nethravathi, and K. Nitin. (2016). Soil biodiversity and arthropods: Role in soil fertility. In A. K. Chakravarthy and S. Sridhara (Eds.), Economic and ecological significance of arthropods in diversified ecosystems: Sustaining regulatory mechanisms (pp. 17-51). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-1524-3_2

Basset, Y., L. Cizek, P. Cuénoud, R. K. Didham, F. Guilhaumon, O. Missa, V. Novotny, F. Ødegaard, T. Roslin, and J. Schmidl. (2012). Arthropod diversity in a tropical forest. Science. 338(6113): 1481-1484. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1226727

Bevan, P. A., G. B. Ferreira, D. J. Ingram, M. Rowcliffe, L. Young, R. Freeman, and K. E. Jones. (2025). Regional Biomes outperform broader spatial units in capturing biodiversity responses to land‐use change. Ecography. 2025(4): e07318. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecog.07318

Bhattacharya, P. (2025). Forest biodiversity conservation. In Textbook of Forest Science (pp. 123-142). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-971-97-8289-5_7

Blakemore, R. J. (2025). Biodiversity restated:> 99.9% of global species in Soil Biota. ZooKeys. 1224: 283. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.1224.131153

Bradshaw, W. E., and C. M. Holzapfel. (2001). Genetic shift in photoperiodic response correlated with global warming. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 98(25): 14509-14511. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.241391498

Brockerhoff, E. G., L. Barbaro, B. Castagneyrol, D. I. Forrester, B. Gardiner, J. R. González-Olabarria, P. O. B. Lyver, N. Meurisse, A. Oxbrough, and H. Taki. (2017). Forest biodiversity, ecosystem functioning and the provision of ecosystem services. Biodivers. Conserv. 26(13): 3005-3035. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-017-1453-2

Cavallero, L., and M. H. Zárate. (2025). Integrating Restoration Practices With Productive Activities to Promote the Sustainable Management of Dry Forests Devoted to Livestock Raising. Land Degrad. Dev. 36(12): 4044-4055. https://doi.org/10.1002/ldr.5615

Chen, H. (2026). Managing Plant Invasion for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Resilience in Toronto's Ravines: A Preliminary Study Assessing Insects Associated with Non-native Purple Loosestrife [Master in Forest Conservation capstone paper, University of Toronto]. Toronto, Ontario, Canada. https://hdl.handle.net/1807/151249

Cheng, W., L. Tie, S. Zhou, J. Hu, S. Ouyang, and C. Huang. (2023). Effects of soil arthropods on non-leaf litter decomposition: a meta-analysis. Forests. 14(8): 1557. https://doi.org/10.3390/f14081557

Cole, R. J., P. Selmants, S. Khan, and R. Chazdon. (2020). Litter dynamics recover faster than arthropod biodiversity during tropical forest succession. Biotropica. 52(1): 22-33. https://doi.org/10.1111/btp.12740

Cornelissen, T. (2011). Climate change and its effects on terrestrial insects and herbivory patterns. Neotrop. Entomol. 40: 155-163. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1519-566x2011000200001.

Cornelissen, T., F. A. Silveira, S. V. Gomes, X. Lopez‐Goldar, S. Martin‐Eberhardt, and W. Wetzel. (2025). Signaling defenses with color: a meta‐analysis of leaf color variation, palatability, and herbivore damage. New Phytol. 247(2): 884-896. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.70243

Coronado-Rivera, J., M. Solís-Del Valle, and S. Amador-Vargas. (2020). True bugs living on ant-defended acacias: evasion strategies and ant species preferences, in Costa Rica and Panama. Rev. Biol. Trop. 68(2): 415-425. https://doi.org/10.15517/rbt.v68i2.38505

Culliney, T. W. (2013). Role of Arthropods in Maintaining Soil Fertility. Agriculture, 3(4), 629-659. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture3040629 

Fattorini, S. (2024). Upward and Poleward (but Not Phenological) Shifts in a Forest Tenebrionid Beetle in Response to Global Change in a Mediterranean Area. Insects. 15(4): 242. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects15040242

Franklin, E., W. E. Magnusson, and F. J. Luizão. (2005). Relative effects of biotic and abiotic factors on the composition of soil invertebrate communities in an Amazonian savanna. Appl. Soil Ecol. 29(3): 259-273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2004.12.004

Gaigher, R., J. S. Pryke, and M. J. Samways. (2025). Soil arthropods make an important contribution to litter decomposition in both indigenous and plantation forests. Appl. Soil Ecol. 207: 105945. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2025.105945

Gatica‐Saavedra, P., C. Echeverría, and C. R. Nelson. (2017). Ecological indicators for assessing ecological success of forest restoration: a world review. Restor. Ecol. 25(6): 850-857. https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.12586

Gazzea, E. (2025). Ecology and conservation of pollinators in forest and agricultural landscapes Univ. Padova]. Padua, Italy. https://www.research.unipd.it/handle/11577/3548102

Ghosh, E., R. L. Paul, and P. J. Ode. (2023). Plant species with higher chemical defences enhance herbivore cellular immunity with differential effectiveness against two parasitoid species. Funct. Ecol. 37(5): 1492-1503. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2435.14292

Griffiths, H. M., L. A. Ashton, A. E. Walker, F. Hasan, T. A. Evans, P. Eggleton, and C. L. Parr. (2018). Ants are the major agents of resource removal from tropical rainforests. J. Anim. Ecol. 87(1): 293-300. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2656.12728

Harvey, J. A., K. Tougeron, R. Gols, R. Heinen, M. Abarca, P. K. Abram, . . . S. L. Chown. (2023). Scientists' warning on climate change and insects. Ecol. Monogr. 93(1): e1553. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecm.1553

Heil, M., and D. McKey. (2003). Protective ant-plant interactions as model systems in ecological and evolutionary research. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 34(1): 425-553. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.34.011802.132410

Hobbie, S. E., and S. Villéger. (2015). Interactive effects of plants, decomposers, herbivores, and predators on nutrient cycling. Troph. Ecol.: 233-259. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139924856.010

Hun, H., S. Pheak, S. Rotana, and H. Sarun. (2026). Soil Biodiversity and Soil Organisms: Microbes, Fauna, Ecosystem Functions, and Indicators of Soil Biological Health. J. Agric. Environ. 5(1): 41-49. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18068989

Jiang, Y., Z. Wang, R. Cao, Q. Wang, W. Li, and W. Yang. (2025). Decaying logs and gap positions jointly maintain the structure and function of soil invertebrate community in a subalpine forest. Plant Soil. 512(1): 977-990. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-024-07124-5

John, A., A. K. Riat, K. A. Bhat, S. A. Ganie, C. Nugroho, H. Handoko, and A. K. Wani. (2024). Adapting to climate extremes: Implications for insect populations and sustainable solutions. J. Nat. Conserv. 79: 126602. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2024.126602

Jouquet, P., J. Dauber, J. Lagerlöf, P. Lavelle, and M. Lepage. (2006). Soil invertebrates as ecosystem engineers: intended and accidental effects on soil and feedback loops. Appl. Soil Ecol. 32(2): 153-164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2005.07.004

Joyce, F. H., R. A. Zahawi, and K. D. Holl. (2025). Lower‐intensity restoration interventions drive greater seedling establishment for later‐successional tree species. J. Appl. Ecol. 62(9): 2319-2329. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.70116

Kolb, T. E., C. J. Fettig, M. P. Ayres, B. J. Bentz, J. A. Hicke, R. Mathiasen, J. E. Stewart, and A. S. Weed. (2016). Observed and anticipated impacts of drought on forest insects and diseases in the United States. For. Ecol. Manag. 380(1): 321-334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2016.04.051

Liu, J. (2025). Progress in research on the effects of environmental factors on natural forest regeneration. Front. For. Glob. Change. 8(1): 1525461. https://doi.org/10.3389/ffgc.2025.1525461

Liu, J., C. You, Z. Xu, Y. Liu, L. Zhang, H. Li, L. Wang, S. Liu, S. He, Z. Luo, and B. Tan. (2023). Soil arthropods promote litter enzyme activity by regulating microbial carbon limitation and ecoenzymatic stoichiometry in a subalpine forest. Sci. Total Environ. 876(1): 162789. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.162789

Liu, X., A. Schuldt, J. Cavender-Bares, A. Paquette, B. Schmid, and K. Ma. (2026). Ecological insights from three decades of forest biodiversity experiments. Nat. Rev. Biodivers. 2(1): 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44358-025-00112-2

Lu, M., S. Wang, Z. Zhang, M. Chen, S. Li, R. Cao, Q. Cao, Q. Zuo, and P. Wang. (2019). Modifying effect of ant colonization on soil heterogeneity along a chronosequence of tropical forest restoration on slash-burn lands. Soil Till. Res. 194(1): 104329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2019.104329

Maleque, M. A., K. Maeto, and H. T. Ishii. (2009). Arthropods as bioindicators of sustainable forest management, with a focus on plantation forests. Appl. Entomol. Zool. 44(1): 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1303/aez.2009.1

Marquart, A., L. Goldbach, and N. Blaum. (2020). Soil‐texture affects the influence of termite macropores on soil water infiltration in a semi‐arid savanna. Ecohydrology. 13(1). https://doi.org/10.1002/eco.2249

Michalko, R., D. Gajski, O. Košulič, W. Khum, O. Michálek, and S. Pekar. (2022). Association between arthropod densities suggests dominance of top-down control of predator-prey food-webs on pear trees during winter. Food Webs. 33(1): e00261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fooweb.2022.e00261

Moir, M., K. Brennan, J. Koch, J. Majer, and M. Fletcher. (2005). Restoration of a forest ecosystem: The effects of vegetation and dispersal capabilities on the reassembly of plant-dwelling arthropods. For. Ecol. Manage. 217(2): 294-306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2005.06.012

Novotny, V., S. E. Miller, L. Baje, S. Balagawi, Y. Basset, L. Cizek, K. J. Craft, F. Dem, R. A. Drew, and J. Hulcr. (2010). Guild‐specific patterns of species richness and host specialization in plant–herbivore food webs from a tropical forest. J. Anim. Ecol. 79(6): 1193-1203. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2656.2010.01728.x

Osman, K. T. (2013). Physical properties of forest soils. In Forest soils: properties and management (pp. 19-44). Springer. https://doi.org/kk10.1007/978-3-319-02541-4_2

Parmesan, C., and G. Yohe. (2003). A globally coherent fingerprint of climate change impacts across natural systems. nature. 421(6918): 37-42. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature01286

Poorter, H., Ü. Niinemets, L. Poorter, I. J. Wright, and R. Villar. (2009). Causes and consequences of variation in leaf mass per area (LMA): a meta‐analysis. New Phytol. 182(3): 565-588. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2009.02830.x

Pote, J. M., and A. L. Nielsen. (2017). Life stage specific predation of Halyomorpha halys (Stål) by generalist predators. Biol. Control. 114: 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocontrol.2017.07.007

Raupp, P. P., R. V. Gonçalves, J. C. Cardoso, E. S. Calixto, and A. N. Costa. (2025). Herbivory intensity and plant species traits interact with tree canopy cover to drive seedling survival in Neotropical savannas. Plant Ecol. 226(5): 473-484. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11258-025-01509-x

Renner, S. S., and C. M. Zohner. (2018). Climate change and phenological mismatch in trophic interactions among plants, insects, and vertebrates. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 49(1): 165-182. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurevecolsys-110617-062535

Ríos Guayasamín, P., S. M. Smith, and S. C. Thomas. (2025). Invertebrate community responses to biochar addition in NTFP-enriched Amazonian secondary forests. Biochar. 7(1): 66. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42773-025-00447-1

Rosenberg, Y., Y. M. Bar-On, A. Fromm, M. Ostikar, A. Shoshany, O. Giz, and R. Milo. (2023). The global biomass and number of terrestrial arthropods. Sci. Adv. 9(5): eabq4049. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abq4049

Salem, H. M. (2014). Effect of conservation tillage on soil physical properties, in-situ rainwater harvesting, and erosion control in arid and semi-arid regions Univ. Politéc. Madr.]. Madrid, Spain.

Saucier, J.-P., K. Baldwin, P. Krestov, and T. Jorgenson. (2015). Boreal forests. In Routledge handbook of forest ecology (pp. 7-29). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315818290

Schowalter, T. (2017). Arthropod diversity and functional importance in old-growth forests of North America. Forests. 8(4): 97. https://doi.org/10.3390/f8040097

Schwartzberg, E. G., M. A. Jamieson, K. F. Raffa, P. B. Reich, R. A. Montgomery, and R. L. Lindroth. (2014). Simulated climate warming alters phenological synchrony between an outbreak insect herbivore and host trees. Oecologia. 175(3): 1041-1049. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-014-2960-4

Seastedt, T. (2003). The Role of Microarthropods in Decomposition and Mineralization Processes. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 29(1): 25-46. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.en.29.010184.000325

Shannon, A. C. (2025). Interacting Effects of Disturbance, Management, and Climate Drive Landscape-Scale Change Across Contrasting Temperate Forest Types in the 21st Century North Carolina State University]. Raleigh, North Carolina, USA. https://www.lib.ncsu.edu/resolver/1840.20/45716

Sharp, A. C., M. J. Boyle, T. C. Bonebrake, Y. Guo, R. L. Kitching, N. E. Stork, X. Zeng, and L. A. Ashton. (2025). Stronger El Niños reduce tropical forest arthropod diversity and function. Nature. 645(8082): 946-951. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-025-09351-x

Singh, S., D. Tripathi, and S. Tripathi. (2025). The role of forest ecosystems for carbon capture and storage in India. Int. J. Agric. Environ. Res. 11(5): 1719-1749. https://doi.org/10.51193/IJAER.2025.11522

Skendžić, S., M. Zovko, I. P. Živković, V. Lešić, and D. Lemić. (2021). The Impact of Climate Change on Agricultural Insect Pests. Insects. 12(5): 440. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects12050440

Sturrock, R., S. Frankel, A. Brown, P. Hennon, J. Kliejunas, K. Lewis, J. Worrall, and A. Woods. (2011). Climate change and forest diseases. Plant Pathol. 60(1): 133-149. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3059.2010.02406.x

Thyagaraj, N., G. M. Reddy, S. O. Naik, and B. Doddabasappa. (2016). Arthropod communities in coffee: A habitat mimicking tropical forests. In Economic and ecological significance of arthropods in diversified ecosystems: Sustaining regulatory mechanisms (pp. 343-359). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-1524-3_21

Torezan-Silingardi, H. M., I. Silberbauer-Gottsberger, and G. Gottsberger. (2021). Pollination ecology: natural history, perspectives and future directions. Plant Sci.: 119-174. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-66877-8_6

Ulyshen, M., K. R. Urban‐Mead, J. B. Dorey, and J. W. Rivers. (2023). Forests are critically important to global pollinator diversity and enhance pollination in adjacent crops. Biol. Rev. 98(4): 1118-1141. https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12947

van Doan, C., M. Pfander, A. S. Guyer, X. Zhang, C. Maurer, and C. A. M. Robert. (2021). Natural enemies of herbivores maintain their biological control potential under short-term exposure to future CO2, temperature, and precipitation patterns. Ecol. Evol. 11(9): 4182-4192. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.7314

Vangansbeke, P., H. Blondeel, J. Brunet, M. Cosme, E. Duhamel, G. Decocq, K. De Pauw, L. Depauw, M. Diekmann, and J. T. Feigs. (2026). Biological Flora of Britain and Ireland: Polygonatum multiflorum* No. 309. J. Ecol. 114(2): e70235. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2745.70235

Wang, B., and L. Li. (2025). Forest loss increases foliar insect and pathogen damage on poplar trees in natural riparian forests. Front. Plant Sci. 16: 1508665. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2025.1508665

Wardle, D., K. Bonner, and G. Barker. (2002). Linkages between plant litter decomposition, litter quality, and vegetation responses to herbivores. Funct. Ecol. 16(5): 585-595. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2435.2002.00659.x

Weisser, W. W., and E. Siemann. (2008). The various effects of insects on ecosystem functioning. In Insects and ecosystem function (pp. 3-24). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-74004-9_1

Wildermuth, B., M. Bröcher, E. Ladouceur, S. T. Meyer, H. Schielzeth, M. Staab, R. Achury, N. Blüthgen, L. Hertzog, and J. Hines. (2026). Arthropod species loss underpins biomass declines. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 10(1): 83-94. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-025-02909-y

Xiong, Z., Z. Gao, J. Lu, Y. Zhang, and X. Li. (2025). Straw return combined with potassium fertilization improves potassium stocks in large-macroaggregates by increasing complex iron oxide under rice–oilseed rape rotation system. Soil Till. Res. 248(1): 106404. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2024.106404

Zelikova, T. J., N. J. Sanders, and R. R. Dunn. (2011). The mixed effects of experimental ant removal on seedling distribution, belowground invertebrates, and soil nutrients. Ecosphere. 2(5): 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1890/ES11-00073.1

Zeng, X., H. Gao, R. Wang, B. M. Majcher, J. S. Woon, C. Wenda, P. Eggleton, H. M. Griffiths, and L. A. Ashton. (2024). Global contribution of invertebrates to forest litter decomposition. Ecol. Lett. 27(4): e14423. https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.14423

Zhang, G., Y. Wu, S. Ouyang, H. Duan, J. Wang, and L. Tie. (2025). The impact of nitrogen and phosphorus enrichment on litter decomposition: soil biota roles and biochemical pathways. Plant Soil. 517(1): 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-025-07887-5

Zhang, S., G. Zhao, J. Fan, M. Yang, P. Tian, X. Mu, and R. Geng. (2024). Variations of soil infiltration in response to vegetation restoration and its influencing factors on the Loess Plateau. J. Environ. Manag. 372(1): 123356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2024.123356

Zhou, L., L.-m. Dai, H.-y. Gu, and L. Zhong. (2007). Review on the decomposition and influence factors of coarse woody debris in forest ecosystem. J. For. Res. 18(1): 48-54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11676-007-0009-9