THE POSSIBLE NUTRITIONAL/MEDICINAL VALUE OF SOME
TERMITE MOUNDS USED BY ABORIGINAL COMMUNITIES OF
NAUIYU NAMBIYU (DALY RIVER) AND ELLIOTT OF THE
NORTHERN TERRITORY,
WITH EMPHASIS ON MINERAL ELEMENTS.
A thesis submitted for the degree of
Master of Science
in the
University of Queensland
by
FRANCOISE L. FOTI
lngenieur Agronome (Nutrition and dietetique)
Universite Catholique de Louvain-la-Neuve (BELGIUM)
School of Chemistry and Earth Sciences
Northern Territory University
Darwin, NT
March 1994
DECLARATION
The work presented in this thesis is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, original,
except as acknowledged in the text, and that the material has not been submitted,
either in whole or in part, for a degree at this or any other university
FRANCOISE L. FOTI
Darwin, March 1994
To Uncle Emile,
My Three Children:
Nadia, Y asmin and Joshua
and Hubby Tony,
With Love •••
Hr" llllJJ\,i\· iJI(I Jo pooJq-JfiJ tJ i1JtJ .Ci11f.l''''iJ.JtJjJm· <JI(I 01 \'IUiJ!-JJnll
,,'fii!Jq JVI{I 311!111 iJJnJV!U!UI IJ jo f'VlJifJ!d l11(1 iJJV .ti11f.1 ... Ji1UIJ3J-? lllllti:JIJ,\
V iJJIJ .tiUf.L ... .,q OJ JIJiJUdiJ .fi1'fl \lJUt/1\qUIOJ J.li1U! 31(1 JIIU iJJIJ V!.IVI!III.Ii1 .1.,
J:l \I }I \(ll( 1 ua punoiU HIHJ/11' ).JIU.UJIIUJ
Uf: oiuar~:ld,UI IJP.ifif11( "~"l (UilJiliJUI){) UOJIV pull (nlJIIIllU(O ")) lllll(lllK I II V lei
(vii)
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
A great number of people 4ave contributed to this project. Firstly, I wish to thank my
supervisor Dr David Parry who has been a constant source of guidance, constructive
criticism and reassurance and for patiently deciphering my Frenglish drafts.
Undoubtedly his support has largely contributed to the completion of this thesis.
I am grateful for the support of the Northern Territory University through the award of
the Herbalife Company scholarship which enabled me to pursue my interest in the role
of termitaria in relation to nutrition.
I wish to thank Professor David Wigston for offering me this project and making
available the use of laboratories and technical equipment.
I am also indebted to Dr Gordon Duff, Northern Territory University for his statistical
analysis rescue during the Christmas holidays and to Dr Andy Lee, Northern Territory
University for statistical advice at the beginning of the project.
Special thanks to the Daly River (Nauyiu Nambiyu) and Elliott communities and in
particular to Patricia Marrfurra Me Taggart, Molly (Yawalminy), Mercia (Wawurr) of
the Moil people in Daly River, Eileen Farrelly (adult educator of the Majellan Centre
in Daly River), Eleanor Brooks of Melville Island and Amy Lauder, Molly Dixon and
Lucy Hughes (Lababi) of Elliott for sharing their knowledge and for their support and
trust.
I am very grateful to the Aboriginal Pharmacopoeia Committee members for initial grant
and suggesting this project to Professor David Wigston; particularly Andy Barr (the
project manager) who introduced me to the communities, late Joan Chapman for her
enthusiasm, advice and encouragement and Nick Smith for sharing information and data
on Aboriginal medicine.
(viii)
A special thank you to the CSIRO Entomology Division, Canberra and especially to
Leigh Miller for the identification of termites and for sending me useful literature; to
Dr Tony Watson for giving me the opportunity to participate with his team in a field trip
and sharing his knowledge and to Dr Michael Lenz who sent me numerous photocopies
of literature articles.
I also thank the CSIRO, Division of Wildlife and Ecology, Darwin, especially Dr Gary
Cook, Andy Chapman, Dr Martin Andrew (Associate Director Roseworthy Agricultural
College) and the librarian Annette.
Thank you to Dr Barry Noller (Department of Mines and Energy) and Naseen Peerzada
(Northern Territory University) for advice on soil extraction methods and Sue Wigston
(Northern Territory Conservation Commission) and Peter Me Far lane for their assistance
in the particle size analyses.
I am grateful for the encouragement and advice received from Dr Amanda Lee of the
Menzies School of Health Research, Dr P Scheelings (Regional Director of Australian
Government Analytical Laboratories), J Leadbeater (Senior trace element analyst) and
Dr J Brand (Sydney University).
I am also indebted to Ann Alderslade and Robert Boot from the Royal Darwin Hospital
Library.
For her fantastic photographs taken in Daly River, Gaye Pascoe has to be complemented
and gratefully thanked.
Collecting termite mound samples was a laborious process made easier by the
contribution of Ann Tobin, Jan Holland, Penne Kennedy, Nicki Hanssen, Natalie Jenkins
(who also skilfully developed the black and white photographs) and in particular by
Catherine Suringa who also provided valuable assistance in the early stages of the
laboratory work.
(ix)
A special thank you to Sue Renaud (Northern Territory University) for her friendship,
support particularly at crisis time and her practical suggestions during the late stage of
the thesis.
I wish to thank all the Myilly Point lecturers, technicians, secretaries and postgraduate
students for their professional support and friendships and in particular the late Stephen
Brand for his valuable advice on Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometry, Anna Padovan
for sharing her AAS experience, Niels Munksgaard for sharing his laboratory and his
wealth of technical knowledge, Neil Smit for numerous specially brewed cups of coffee
and for letting me use his room, Dr Keith McGuinness for statistical advice, Tony
O'Grady for offering assistance and Penne Kennedy for her computer skills and constant
support.
I am very grateful to Louise Me Kenna (Director of the Harry Giese Centre), for her
support, practical advice and encouragement, and in particular strategies for balancing
responsibilities of family and study.
I am indebted to Nicki Hanssen who supported me on many occasions throughout the
entire project from field trip to proof reading part of the thesis. Her continuing
friendship is highly valued.
Throughout the years many friends have provided practical help and support, Jennifer
Fern with moral support and baby-sitting at short notice and Phil York-Barber who also
assisted with some proof reading.
Finally, I am very grateful to my three children Nadia, Yasmin and Joshua for their
generous love, patience and understanding and to my husband Tony who put up with
so many crises and doubts, who cooked so many wonderful meals and took over the
household for the last four months of the study.
(x)
ABSTRACT
This study is the first detailed investigation of the possible nutritional/medicinal value
of termite mounds as eaten by Aboriginal people. Two communities of the Northern
Territory (Nauiyu Narnbiyu, Daly River and Elliott) were chosen for detailed
investigations on the choices, usages and modes of preparation of termitaria. The
elements studied were AI, Ca, Co, Cu, Fe, K, Mg, .Mn, Na and Zn together with the
particle size analyses.
In Daly River, the Aboriginal women did not chooseAmitermes vitiosus at all sites and
preferred the mounds of Tumulitermes pastinator and Nasutitermes triodiae with the
newly built material being the most favoured. In Elliott,Amitermes vitiosus mounds
were used exclusively. In the two communities, the use of termitaria for gastric
disorders or after eating certain foods like yams, turtle or goannas could be related to
the clay content and in particular to the kaolin; while the consumption of termite mound
material during pregnancy or lactation could be associated with their elemental content,
in particular, iron and calcium.
The results of this study showed that at all sites and for all species, the mounds selected
by the Aboriginal people had a higher percentage of clay than the adjacent top soil (0-
IOcm) and the species most favoured by the Daly River people (Nasutitermes triodiae),
had the highest mean clay content. The average clay content of soil was 12.9 ± 4.4%
and for Amitermes vitiosus, Tumulitermes pastinator and Nasutitermes triodiae mounds
was: 16.3 ± 4.6, 20.8 ± 6.2 and 22.8 ± 4.2% respectively. Differences in clay content
occurred between mounds of the same species at most sites and between the same
species at different sites for Nasutitermes triodiae and Tumulitermes pastinator. With
respect to the Aboriginal preference for newly built as opposed to older material, no
significant differences were found. The clay in the tennitaria appeared to be largely
composed of kaolin. This is significant as kaolin has long been used for the treatment
of gastric-disorders in both traditional and modern pharmacologies.
(xi)
The concentrations of elements from the water "infusion" extract from Amitermes
vitiosus mounds, which is drunk by the Aboriginal people, were minimal compared to
the human needs but, nevertheless, they could contribute to the global intakes, especially
calcium. On the other hand, the finer fraction which includes clay, preferentially
selected in the infusion, could be beneficial against gastro-intestinal disorders.
In general, the termitaria had higher concentrations of elements than the adjacent top-soil
and the differences between mounds and soils were more pronounced in the bioavailable
tests. This could be a reflection of the termite by-products (of organic origin) added to
the mounds.
In the bioavailable analyses, the differences in concentrations of elements cannot always
explain the Aboriginal preference of one species at the exclusion of another at the same
site or a particular species (Amitermes vitiosus) at one site but not at another. Between
different age materials, with the exception of the soluble iron inNasutitermes triodiae
mounds, no significant differences in concentration were observed. The 44 % increase
in soluble iron in the newly built parts of mounds in the pepsin-HCl extracts could be
of importance in relation to the Aboriginal use of termitaria during pregnancy.
Undoubtedly one of the most remarkable aspects of termitaria are their high
concentrations of elements. However, with the exception of calcium which had a high
percentage recovery (82 %) between "total" and bioavailable analyses, only a fraction
of the "total" concentrations of elements present in the termitaria was potentially
available. In relation to human needs, the daily average quantity of termite mound
consumption, estimated at 30-60 g per day, can only provide a small portion of the RDis
for Ca, Cu, Fe, Mg and Mn. Fifty grams of termitaria would provide less than 5 % of
the RDis for Ca, Cu and Mg. The relatively low concentrations of Na and K in
termitaria would not provide a significant contribution towards salt replacement in the
diet. The "total" aluminium concentrations were high (2676-7745 mg/lOOg) in the
termitaria, however, only 0.37 to 13.9 mg/lOOg were present after the in vitro
bioavailable analyses.
(xii)
The bioavailability study showed that a maximum of 0.25 mg/1 OOg of iron from termite
mounds could be bioavailable to adult males. This represents less than 0.1 % of the
11total11 iron present in the termitaria studied. As the daily average loss for men is only
I mg/day, 50 g of termitaria could possibly contribute significantly to the daily
requirements. Since the bioavailability of ifon is influenced by a number of factors,
including the diet, further study will be necessary to assess more precisely the iron
bioavailability from termitaria for Aboriginal people.
(xiii)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Acknowledgments Vll
Abstract X
Table of Contents Xlll
List of Tables xxii
List of Figures xxxii
List of Plates xxxvi
, Abbreviations xxxviii
1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Medicinal/Nutritional Usages of Termitaria 1
1.1.1 In Australia I
1.1.1.1 Modes of Preparation 5
1.1.2 In Two NT Aboriginal Communities 7
1.1.2.1 Nauiyu Nambiyu (Daly River) 7
1.1.2.2 Elliott I I
1.1.3 Other Countries 12
1.1.3.1 Usages 13
1.1.4 Possible Therapeutic Activities 14
1.1.5 Possible Complications 16
1.1.6 Geophagy and its Relation to Mineral
Deficiency 17
1.2 Nutritional Aspects of Selected Elements and
Recommended Dietary Intakes (RD!s) 20
(xiv)
Page
1.3 Some Aspect of Traditional Aboriginal Health
Concept and Background 25
1.3.1 Aboriginal Health Concept 25
1.3.2 Aboriginal Mineral Nutritional Background 25
1.4 Termitaria Biological Background 27
1.4.1 Taxonomy and General Biology of Tennites 27
1.4.1.1 Feeding Habits 32
1.4.2 Nests 33
1.4.2.1 Mound Construction 35
1.4.2.2 Age of the Termitaria 35
1.4.2.3 Termite Nest Material and Fabrics 36
1.4.2.4 Chemical Analyses 41
1.4.2.5 Agricultural Uses of Termitaria 68
1.5 Aims of this Project . 69
2 MATERIAL AND METHODS 71
2.1 Collection of Terrnitaria 71
2.1.2 Method of Collection 71
2.1.2 Site Locations 71
2.1.3 Sample Description and Summary 73
2.1.3.1 Detailed Mound Study 73
2.1.3.2 T ermitaria Sample 76
2.1.3.3 Soil Sampling 80
2.2 Sample Preparation 80
2.3 Particle-size Analysis
2.4 Acid Extractable of T erm.itaria and Soils
2.4.1 Extraction Trials
2.4.2 Acid Extraction Nitric/Perchloric acid (1 :4) Method
2.4.3 Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer Analysis Procedures
2.4.4 Quality Assurance and Quality Control for the Analyses
2.5 Infusion (Hot Water) Extractable Minerals
2.5.1 Extraction Process
2.5.2 Analysis Procedures
2.6 Bioavailability of Fe in Termitaria
2.6.1 Bioavailability Extraction Trials
2.6.2 Extraction Procedure
2.6.3 Analysis Procedures
2.6.3.1 Total Concentrations
2.6.3.2 Analysis of Fe(Il)
2.6.4 Quality Assurance and Quality Control
3 RESULTS
3.1 Site and Mound Characterisations
3 .1.1 Site Characterisations
3.1.2 Termite Species and Mound Characterisations
3.1.2.1 Nasutitermes triodiae (Froggatt)
(xv)
Page
81
81
82
82
83
85
85
85
86
87
87
88
89
89
90
90
91
91
91
91
95
(xvi)
3.2
3.1.2.2
3.1.2.3
3.1.2.4
Tumulitermes pastinator (Hill)
Amitermes vitiosus Hill
Tumulitermes hastilis (Froggatt)
Acid Extractable (Perchloric/Nitric Acids) Selected Elements from
Termite Mounds and Soils Together with Particle Size
3.2.1
3.2.2
3.2.3
3.2.4
Quality Assurance and Quality Control
Overview, General Correlation
Detailed Mound Study
3.2.3.1
3.2.3.2
3.2.3.3
Hypotheses
3.2.4.1
3.2.4.2
3.2.4.3
3.2.4.4
3.2.4.5
Amitermes vitiosus (Elliott, Site 5)
Tumulitermes pastinator (Daly River, Site 3)
Nasutitermes triodiqe (Daly River, Site 3)
Hmothesis 1: The New Material of Nasutitermes
triodiae Mounds Contains a Higher Element
Content, in Particular Iron and Calcium, and has
a Higher Clay and Silt Content than the Older
Part of the Mounds
Hypothesis 2: There is No Difference Between
Samples Taken from Different Positions of
T ermitaria for Selected Elements and
Particle Size Content
Hypothesis 3: There are No Significant Selected
Elements and Particle Size Differences Between
Mounds of Different Sizes
H.xnothesis 4: There are Differences Between
Mounds of the Same Species at the Same Site
Hypothesis 5: There are Differences in Selected
Elements and Particle Sizes Between Termitaria
of Different Species at the Same Site
Page
97
97
99
101
101
103
106
106
109
113
117
117
121
127
127
130
3.2.4.6
3.2.4.7
Hypothesis 6: There are Differences in Element
and Particle Size Content for Same Species
Mounds at Different Sites
Hypothesis 7: There are Differences in Elements
and Particle Sizes Between Different Species at
Different Sites
3.3 Hot Water ("Infusion") Extractable Selected Elements from Amitermes
vitiosus Mounds (Elliott, Site 5)
3.3.1 Comparison of Hot Water ("Infusion") Element Extracts and
Perchloric/Nitric Acid Extracts
3.3 .2 Position Effects on Selected Elements
3.4 Soluble Iron, lonisable Iron and Selected Element Concentrations of
(xvii)
Page
140
145
152
152
153
Termitaria and Soils Following Pepsin-Hydrochloric Acid Incubation 154
3.4.1 Pepsin Concentration Effects on Soluble Iron, lonisable Iron
and Selected Element content Following Pepsin-Hydrochloric
Acid Incubation 154
3.4.2 Quality Assurance 157
3.4.3 Soluble Iron, Ionisable Iron and Selected Element Composition
of Pepsin-Hydrochloric Acid (pH 1.35) Extracts and pH 7.5
Filtrates 159
3 .. 4.3.1 Soluble Iron, lonisable Iron and Selected
Elements Comparisons of Pepsin-Hydrochloric
Acid pH 1.35 Extracts, pH 7.5 Filtrates
and Perchloric/Nitric Acid Extracts 159
3.4.2.2 Age Effects on Selected Elements (Depth�O) 171
(xviii)
4
4.1
4.2
4.2.1
3.4.3.3 General Overview of the different species studied
at different sites with Relation to the Adjacent
soil (0-!0cm)
DISCUSSION
Introduction
Acid Extractable (Perchloric/Nitric Acid) Selected Element
Concentrations Together With Particle Size
Quality Control and Quality Assurance
4.2.2
4.2.3
4.2.4
4.2.5
4.2.6
4.2.7
4.2.8
Overview, General Correlation
Influence of Age of Mound Material on Selected Element
Concentrations and Particle Size
Influence of Depth in Mound on Selected Element and
Particle Size
Influence of Position in Mound on Selected Element
Concentrations and Particle Size
Influence of Mound Size on Selected Element Concentrations
and Particle Size
Comparison of Mounds of the Same Species at the Same Site
Comparison Between Different Species Mound Composition
at the Same Site
4.2.8.1
4.2.8.2
Comparison Between Tumulitermes pastinator
and Tumulitermes hastilis Mounds Composition
in Daly River Site I
Comparison Between Nasutitermes triodiae and
Tumulitermes pastinator Mounds Composition
in Daly River site 1 and Howard Springs
Page
171
175
175
175
175
177
179
181
182
184
184
185
186
186
4.2.8.3 Comparison Between Amitermes vitiosus and
Nasutitermes triodiae Mound Composition in
(xix)
Page
Daly River Site 4 187
4.2.9 Comparison Between Mound Composition of the Same
Species at Different Sites 188
4.2.9.1 Comparison Between Mound Composition of
Amitermes vitiosus at Different Sites 188
4.2.9.2 Comparison Between Mound Composition of
Tumulitermes pastinator and Nasutitermes
triodiae at Different Sites
4.2.10 General Overview: Influence of Soil Composition on
Composition of Mounds of Different Species at Different
Sites
4.3 Hot Water ("Infusion11) Extractable Selected Element Concentrations
from Amitermes vitiosus Mounds (Elliott, Site 5)
4.4 Soluble Iron, lonisable Iron and Selected Element Concentrations of
190
191
194
Termitaria and Soils Following Pepsin-Hydrochloric Acid Incubation 195
4.4 . I Quality Assurance 196
4.4.2 Selected Element Comparisons of Pepsin-HCI (pH 1.35)
Extracts, pH 7.5 Filtrates and Perchloric/Nitric Acid Extracts 197
4.4.2.1 Influence of Age of Mound Material on Selected
Element Concentrations and Particle Size,
Depth�o) 198
4.4.2.2
4.4.2.3
Comparison Between Different Species Mound
Composition at the Same Site
Comparison Between Mound Composition of the
Same Species at Different Sites
199
201
(xx)
4.4.2.4 General Overview: Comparison Between Mound
Composition of Different Species Studied at
Different Sites and their Relation to the Adjacent
Page
Soil (0-!0cm) 202
4.4.2.5
4.4.2.6
5 CONCLUSIONS
REFERENCES
APPENDICES
'Bioavailable' Composition of Different Mounds
at Different Sites in Relation to Human Needs
and Foods
Soluble Iron and lonisable Iron in Relation to the
Human Needs
I Detailed Results of Particle Size Content (%) ofAmitermes
vitiosus, Tumulitermes pastinator, Nasutitermes triodiae and
Tumulitermes hastilis Termite Mounds Sampled at Site 1-7
II Detailed Results of Selected Elemental Composition (mg/lOOg) of
Amitermes vitiosus Termite Mounds Sampled at Elliott (site 5)
Following Hot Water "Infusion"
III Detailed Results of Selected Elemental Composition (mg/IOOg) of
Amitermes vitiosus, Tumulitermes pastinator, Nasutitermes triodiae
and Tumulitermes hastilis Termite Mounds Sampled at Site 1-7,
Following Perchloric/Nitric Acid (4:1) Extraction
204
206
209
215
237
237
250
251
IV Detailed Results of Selected Elemental Composition (mg/1 OOg) of
Amitermes vitiosus, Tumu!itermes pastinator, Nasutitermes triodiae
and Tumulitermes hasti!is Termite Mounds Sampled at Site 1-6,
(xxi)
Page
Following Pepsin-HCl Extraction (pH 1.35) 265
V Detailed Results of Selected Elemental Composition (mg/1 OOg) of
Amitermes vitiosus, Tumulitermes pastinator, Nasutitermes triodiae
and Tumulitermes hastilis Termite Mounds Sampled at Site 1-6,
Following Pepsin-HCl Extraction (pH 1.35) and Neutralisation (pH 7.5) 270
VI Graphic Representations of the Soil - Mound Effects (mean ± SE) on
Element Concentrations (mg/l OOg) Following the/1.1 Vitro Test on
Tennitaria of Amitermes vitiosus, Tumulitermes pastinator,
Tumulitermes hastilis, Nasutitermes triodiae, and Soil (0-lOcm),
Sampled at Sites 1-6, following Pepsin-HCl (pH 1.35) Extractions 275
VII Graphic Representations of the Soil - Mound Effects (mean ± SE) on
Element Concentrations (mg/1 OOg) Following the In Vitro Test on
Termitaria of Amitermes vitiosus, Tumulitermes pastinator,
Tumulitermes hastilis, Nasutitermes triodiae, and Soil (0-1 Ocm),
Sampled at Sites 1-6, following Pepsin-HCI (pH 1.35) Extractions
and neutralisation (pH 7.5) 279
(xxii)
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 1.1 Summary of reported usages of termitaria 3
Table 1.2 Nutritional aspects of selected elements: adult body content,
physiological functions, deficiency symptoms, daily losses,
% absorption from food, recommended dietary intakes
(RDis) and sources 24
Table 1.3 Australian termite mound and adjacent soil physical
properties 44
Table 1.4 Means and standard deviations for a number of species of
Australian termite mounds {and corresponding soils)
chemical analySes 49
Table 1.5 Termite mound and soil chemical data I (Lee and Wood,
197lb) 51
Table 1.6 Coptotermes acinaciformis (Australian mound and soil
chemical analyses) 55
Table 1.7 Amitermes vitiosus (Australian mound and soil chemical
analyses) 56
Table 1.8 Nasutitermes triodiae {Australian mound and soil chemical
analyses) 60
Table 1.9 Tumulitermes pastinator (Australian mound and soil chemical
analyses) 61
Table 1.10 Tumulitermes hastilis (Australian mound and soil chemical
(xxiii)
Page
analyses) 62
Table 2.1 Site locations 72
Table 2.2 Physical characteristics of 3 termitaria selected for more
detail sampling: nasutitermes triodiae from Daly River
(site 3), Tumulitermes pastinator from Daly River (site 3)
and Amitermes vitiosus from Elliott (site 5)
Table 2.3 Detail mound sample summary for 3 termitaria:
nasutitermes triodiae from Daly River (site 3},
Tumulitermes pastinator from Daly River (site 3) and
Amitermes vitiosus from Elliott site 5)
Table 2.4 Soil samples collected at 0-1 Ocm depth in Daly River
(site 3) and in Elliott (site 5)
Table 2.5 Amitermes vitiosus termitaria sample summary
Table 2.6 Tumulitermes pastinator termitaria sample summary
Table 2.7 Nasutitermes triodiae termitaria sample summary
Table 2.8 Tumulitermes hastilis sample summary
Table 2.9 AAS Instrument Parameters
Table 2.10 AAS Instrument Parameters for Analysis of Hot Water
74
75
75
77
78
79
80
84
Digest 87
(xxiv)
Page
Table 2.11 Bioavailable test sample list 88
Table 2.12 ICP-AES instrument parameters (pepsin-HCI extraction)
(pH 135 and pH 7.5) 89
Table 3.1 Quality control of selected elemental composition of reference
material (BCSS-1, MESS-I and IAEA SOILS), following
perchloric/nitric acid ( 4: I) extraction (mg/IOOg) 100
Table 3.2 Quality control of selected elemental composition of internal
reference termitaria material (Av44D4, Av22E, Tp23Dl and
Nt24D4), following perchloric/nitric acid (4:1) extraction
(mg/IOOg) 102
Table 3.3 Quality control-of selected elemental composition of internal
reference soil material (OlE, 25D4 and 29H), following
perchloric/nitric acid (4:1) extraction (mg/IOOg) 104
Table 3.4 Pearson correlation (PC) matrix and probabilities (P) of
selected elements and particle sizes of 87 termite mounds
(n�I89) of all the species and sites studied (depth�!) 105
Table 3.5 Amitermes vitiosus mound detailed study (Elliott, site 5):
depth effects on selected elements (mg/IOOg) and particle
sizes (%) (mean ± standard deviation) together with ANOVA
probability of differences (P) between depths 107
Table 3.6 Amitermes vitiosus mound detailed study (Elliott, site 5):
position effects on selected elements (mg/IOOg) and particle
sizes (%) (meao ± standard deviation) together with ANOVA
probability of differences (P) between positions 109
Table 3.7
Table 3.8
Table 3.9
Table 3.10
Tumulitermes pastinator moWld detailed study: age effects
on selected elements (mg/IOOg) and particle sizes(%)
(mean ± standard deviation) together with ANOV A
probability of differences (P) between ages. (Depth=O)
Tumulitermes pastinator mound (Daly River, site 3) detailed
study: depth and position effects on selected elements
(mg/IOOg) and particle sizes(%) (mean± standard deviation)
together with ANOV A probability of differences (P) between
depths and positions (at depth=!)
Nasutitermes triodiae mound detailed study: age effects .
on selected elements (mg!IOOg) and particle sizes(%)
(mean ± standard deviation) together with ANOV A
probability of differences (P) between ages. (Depth=O)
Nasutitermes triodiae mound (Daly River site 3) detailed
study: depth and position effects on selected elements
(mg!IOOg) and particle sizes(%) (mean± standard deviation)
together with ANOV A probability of differences (P) between
depths and positions (at depth=!)
Table 3.11 Age effects on selected elements (mg/IOOg) and particle
sizes(%) (mean± standard deviation) in 5 Nasutitermes
triodioe mounds (Daly River, site 4). ANOV A probability
of differences (P) between ages. (Depth=O)
(xxv)
Page
Ill
112
115
116
119
(xxvi)
Table 3.12 Age (new, old) and position (top, ntiddle, bottom) effects
Table 3.13
Table 3.14
Table 3.15
Table 3.16
Table 3.17
on selected elements (mg/lOOg) and particle sizes(%)
(mean ± standard deviation) in 5 Nasutitermes triodiae
mounds sampled at site 4. ANOV A probability of differences
(P) between ages. (Depth=O)
Matrix of Pairwise Comparison Probabilities (P) (Tukey test)
between different positions of material (T =top, M=middle,
B=bottom) and age (o=old, n=new) for aluminium content
in Nasutitermes triodiae mounds sampled at site 4
Position effects on selected elements (mg/lOOg) and particle
sizes(%) (mean± standard deviation) in Amitermes vitiosus
mounds sampled at sites 2, 4 and 5. ANOV A probability of
differences (P) between positions
Position effects on selected elements (mg/1 OOg) and particle
sizes(%) (mean ± standard deviation) in Tumulitermes
pastinator mounds sampled at sites 1 and 6. ANOV A
probability of differences (P) between positions
Position effects on selected elements (mg/lOOg) and particle
sizes(%) (mean± standard deviation) in Nasutitermes
triodiae mounds sampled at sites 4 and 6. ANOV A
probability of differences (P) between positions
Pearson correlation (PC) and probability (P) matrix of mound
size (height + circumference) with selected elements and
particle sizes of three species at different sites
Page
120
121
122
125
126
129
Table 3.18
Table 3.19
Table 3.20
Table 3.21
Table 3.22
Table 3.23
Probability differences (ANOV A) [P] between mounds of
each species (Av, Tp, Nt and Th) per site for selected
elements and particle sizes
Selected elements (mg/lOOg) and particle sizes(%)
(mean ± standard deviation) of Tumulitermes pastinator and
Tumulitermes hastilis mounds sampled at site I .
(xxvii)
Page
130
Probability of differences (P) between the two species mounds 136
Selected elements (mg/lOOg) and particle sizes(%)
(mean ± standard deviation) of Tumulitermes pastinator and
Nasutitermes triodiae mounds sampled at site 3.
Probability of differences (P) between the two species mounds 137
Selected elements (mg/lOOg) and particle sizes(%)
(mean ± standard deviation) of Amitermes vitiosus and
Nasutitermes triodiae mounds sampled at site 4.
Probability of differences (P) between species mounds
Selected elements (mg/lOOg) and particle sizes(%)
(mean ± standard deviation) of Tumulitermes pastinator and
Nasutitermes triodiae mounds sampled at site 6.
138
Probability of differences (P) between the two species mounds 140
Selected elements (mg/lOOg) and particle sizes(%)
(mean ± standard deviation) of Amitermes vitiosus mounds
per site (2, 4 and 5) and for all sites (2+4+5) together with
the probability of differences (P) between sites 141
(xxviii)
Table 3.24 Selected elements (mg/lOOg) and particle sizes(%)
(mean ± standard deviation) of Tumu/itermes pastinator mounds
per site (1, 3 and 6) and for all sites (I+ 3+6) together with
the probability of differences (P) between sites
Table 3.25 Selected elements (mg/IOOg) and particle sizes(%)
(mean ± standard deviation) of Nasutitermes triodiae mound
samples per site (3, 4, 6 and 7) and for all sites (3+4+6+7)
Page
142
together with the probability of differences (P) between sites 144
Table 3.26 Selected elements (mg/IOOg) and particle sizes(%)
(minimum, maximum and mean ± standard deviation) of
Amitermes vitiosus, Tumulitermes pastinator and Nasutitermes
triodiae mounds sampled at sites 1 to 7, together with the
probability of differences (P: Av-Tp-Nt) between the three
species and the pairwise comparison probabilities between
species (P: Av-Tp, P: Av-Nt and P: Tp-Nt) 146
Table 3.27 Selected elements (mg/IOOg) and particle sizes(%)
(mean ± standard deviation) of soil samples (0-!0cm) collected
at all the site studied: 1 to 7
Table 3.28 Selected elements (mg/IOOg) and particle sizes(%)
(minimum, maximum and mean ± standard deviation) of
soil (0-!0cm) sampled at sites I to 7, together with the
probability (P) of differences between soils
Table 3.29 Probability of differences (P) between soil and termite mound
by location and species together with the differences (%)
between the soil and the termite mound
147
148
149
(xxix)
Page
Table 3.30 Selected element concentrations (mean± standard deviation in
mg/IDOg) following hot water ("infusion") and acid
(perchloric/nitric acid) extractions of eleven Amitermes vitiosus
mounds (Elliott, Site 5) and soils, together with the percentage
recovery between extractions !53
Table 3.31 Position effects on selected elements (mean ± standard
deviation in mg/lOOg) in eleven Amitermes vitiosus mounds
(Elliott, Site 5) following two types of extraction: hot water
("infusion") extraction and perchloric/nitric acid extraction.
ANOV A probability of differences (P) between positions !54
Table 3.32 Selected element composition (mg/lOOg) of tennitaria reference
material (Nt26D4), following O.IN HCl acid (pH 1.35)
extraction with different pepsin percentage v/w (0%, 0.1%
and 0.5%), together with the probability (P) of differences
between pepsin concentrations !55
Table 3.33 Internal quality control of selected elemental composition
(mg/IOOg) of pepsin-HCl acid (pH 1.35) extracts and pH 7.5
filtrates of terntitaria sample (Nt26D4) 158
Table 3.34 Soluble iron and ionisable iron content (mean ± standard
deviation in mg/1 OOg) of termitaria and soils, in perchloric/nitric
extracts, pepsin-hydrochloric (pH 1.35) extracts and pH 7.5
filtrates together with the percentage recovery between ionisable
iron and soluble iron in pepsin-HCl extracts and pH 7.5
filtrates. Depth= 1, n=3 unless indicated 160
(xxx)
Table 3.35 Comparison of selected element concentration (mean± standard
deviation in mg/lOOg) of termite mounds (Tumulitermes
pastinator and Tumulitermes hastilis) and soils (0-lOcm),
sampled from Daly River (site I) io: A- pepsin-HCI acid
(pH 1.35) extracts; B- pH 7.5 filtrates and C- perchloric/nitric
acid (4:1) extracts, together with the %recovery between
treatments
Table 3.36 Comparison of selected element concentration (mean± standard
deviation in mg/1 OOg) of termite mounds (Amitermes vitiosus)
and soils (0-1 Ocm), sampled from Daly River (site 2) and
Elliott (site 5) in: A- pepsio-HCI acid (pH 1.35) extracts;
B- pH 7.50 filtrates and C- perchloric/nitric acid (4:1) extracts,
together with the % recovery between treatments
Table 3.37 Comparison of selected element concentration (mean ±standard
deviation in mg/lOOg) of termite mounds (Tumulitermes
pastinator and Nasutitermes triodiae) and soils (0-lOcm),
sampled from Daly River (site 3) io: A- pepsin-HCI acid
(pH 1.35) extracts; B- pH 7.50 filtrates and C- perchloric/nitric
acid (4:1) extracts together with the% recovery between
treatments
Table 3.38 Comparison of selected element concentration (mean± standard
deviation in mg/1 DOg) of termite mounds (Nasutitermes
triodiae) and soils (0-!0cm), samples from Daly River (site 4),
depth�O (new/old material), io: A- pepsio-hydrochloric acid
(pH 1.35) extracts; B- pH 7.50 filtrates and C- perchloric/nitric
acid (4:1) extracts together with the% recovery between
treatments. Probabilities (P) of differences between ages
Page
163
164
165
(new/old) 166
Table 3.39 Comparison of selected element concentration (mean± standard
deviation in mg/1 DOg) of termite mounds (Amitermes vitiosus
and Nasutitermes triodiae) and soils (0-IOcm), samples from
Daly River (site 4), in: A- pepsin-HCl acid (pH 1.35) extracts;
B- pH 7.50 filtrates and C- perchloric/nitric acid (4:1) extracts,
together with the % recovery between treatments
Table 3.40 Comparison of selected element concentration (mean ± standard
deviation in mg/lOOg) of termite mounds (Tumulitermes
pastinator and Nasutitermes triodiae) and soils (0-IOcm),
samples from Howard Springs (site 6), in: A- pepsin-HCl
Table 3.41
Table 3.42
Table 3.43
Table 4.1
(pH 1.35) extracts; B- pH 7.50 filtrate and C- perchloric/nitric
acid (4:1) extracts, together with the % recoVery between
treatments
Selected Elements (mg!IOOg) (Minimum, Maximum and
Mean ± standard Deviation) of Amitermes vitiosus,
Tumulitermes pastinator and Nasutitermes triodiae mounds
and soils (0-!0cm) sampled at Sites I to 6, Following
Pepsin-HC! Incubation (pH 1.35)
Selected Elements Content (mg/IOOg) (Minimum, Maximum
and Mean ± Standard Deviation) of Amitermes vitiosus,
Tumulitermes pastinator and Nasutitermes triodiae mounds
and soils (0-!0cm) Sampled at Sites I to 6, in pH 7.5 Filtrates
Selected Element Differences(%) Between Soil and Termitaria
in Pepsin-HCl Acid Extracts (pH 1.35) and pH 7.5 Filtrates
Composition of Selected Australian Aboriginal Bushfoods
and Western foods in mg per lOOg Edible Portion
(xxxi)
Page
167
168
172
173
174
205
(xxxii)
Figure 1.1
Figure 1.2
Figure 1.3
Figure 1.4
Figure 1.5
Figure 1.6
Figure 1.7
Figure 1.8
Figure 1.9
LIST OF FIGURES
Location of reported usages of termitaria throughout the
Northern Territory
Classification of lsoptera
Termite families
Castes of Coptotermes acinaciformis, Rhinotermitidae:
A: winged reproductive or alate
B: worker
C: soldier
De-alate reproductive (dropped wings) revealing severed
wing butts
Queen termite with a distended abdomen (physogastric queen)
Soldier types:
A: mandibulate soldier of Heterotermes ferox,
Rhinotermitidae
Page
2
28
29
30
30
31
B: nasute soldier of Nasutitermes exitiosus, Termitidae 31
Digestive tube system in worker termites
Mound nest:
A: Mound nest of Coptotermes lacteus
B: Mound nest of Coptotermes lacteus showing
internal stnucture
32
Figure 3.1
Figure 3.2
Figure 3.3
Figure 3.4
Figure 3.5
Figure 3.6
Figure 3.7
Figure 3.8
(xxxiii)
Page
Dorsal view of nasute head: A: Nasutitermes sp and
B: Tumulitermes sp and mandibulate head: C: Amitermes sp 93
Size comparison (height + circumference in em) of Amitermes
vitiosus (Av), Tumulitermes pastinator (Tp), Nasutitermes triodiae
(Nt) and Tumulitermes hastilis (Th) mounds at different sites 95
Position effects (mean ± SE) on calcium, magnesium and zinc
(mg/1 OOg) in Amitermes vitiosus mound sampled in Elliott
(site 5) at depths I and 2
Depth effects (mean ± SE) on calcium, potassium and
manganese (mg/1 OOg) in Tumulitermes pastinator mound
sampled in Daly river (site 3)
Depth effects (mean ± SE) on silt and coarse sand (%) in
108
110
Tumulitermespastinator mound sampled in Daly River (site 3) 110
Depth effects (mean ± SE) on iron and sodium (mg/1 OOg)
together with coarse sand (%) inNasutitermes triodiae mound
sampled in Daly river (site 3)
Position effects (mean± SE) on calcium (mg/lOOg) and coarse
sand (%) in Nasutitermes triodiae mound sampled in Daly
114
River (site 3) 114
Age effects (mean ± SE) on aluminium, iron, potassium and
copper (mg/1 OOg) in Nasutitermes triodiae mounds sampled
in Daly River (site 4) 118
(xxxiv)
Figure 3.9 Age effects (mean ± SE) on aluminium and iron (mg/1 OOg),
at three positions (top, middle, bottom), inNasutitermes
triodiae mounds sampled in Daly River (site 4)
Figure 3.10 Position effects (mean ± SE) on calcium, magnesium and
manganese (mg/1 OOg) in Amitermes vitiosus mounds
sampled in Daly River (site 4)
Figure 3.11 Position effects (mean ± SE) on particle size ( (%) in
Page
118
124
Amitermes vitiosus mounds sampled in Daly River (site 4) 124
Figure 3.12 Mound effects (mean± SE) on calcium and iron (mg/IOOg)
in Nasutitermes triodiae mounds sampled in Daly River
(site 4)
Figure 3.13 Selected elements (mg/IOOg) and particle size (%) (mean± SE)
of Amitermes vitiosus (Av), Tumulitermes pastinator (Tp),
Nasutitermes triodiae (Nt) and Tumulitermes hastilis (Th):
128
A Aluminium and calcium concentrations (mg/1 OOg) 131
B Cobalt, Copper, Iron and potassium
concentrations (mg/IOOg)
C Magnesium, manganese, sodium and zinc
concentrations (mg/1 OOg)
D Clay, silt, fine sand and coarse sand content (%)
Figure 3.14 Soil-mound effects (mean± SE) on calcium, potassium and
sodium (mg/100g) in mounds of different species and soils
(0-1 Ocm) sampled at different locations
132
133
134
ISO
\
Figure 3.15 Soil-mound effects (mean ± SE) on clay and coarse sand (%)
in mounds of different species and soils (0-lOcm) sampled at
different locations
Figure 3.16 Pepsin concentration effects on aluminium, soluble iron and
ionisable iron (mean± SE in mg/lOOg) inNasutitermes
triodiae mound (Nt26D4, Daly River, Site 4) following
Pepsin-HC1 pH 1.35 extraction (n�9)
Figure 3.17 Pepsin concentration effects on aluminium, soluble iron and
ionisable iron (mean ± SE in mg/lOOg) inNasutitermes
triodiae mound (Nt26D4) in pH 7.5 filtrates (n�9)
Figure 3.18 Selected element percentage variations between
perchloric/nitric acid extracts, pepsin-HCI acid pH 1.35
extracts and pH 7. 5 filtrates of termitaria (A: Amitermes
vitiosus; B: Nasutitermes triodiae and C: soil , from Daly
River site 4)
Figure 3.19 Selected elements (calcium, potassium, magnesium and
manganese) percentage recovery in pH 7.5 filtrates of
Nasutitermes triodiae mounds, Tumulitermes pastinator
mounds and soils at site 3
(xxxv)
Page
151
156
157
162
170
(xxxvi)
Plate 1
Plate 2
Plate 3
Plate 4
Plate 5
Plate 6
Plate 7
Plate 8
LIST OF PLATES
Nathan (Culmungu) and Aaron (Kingaruo) Me Taggart
inspecting an Amitermes vitiosus mound in Daly River
Mercia (Wawurr) of the Moil people at Nauiyu Narnbiyu
(eating some Nasutitermes triodiae tennitaria) accompanied by
Molly Yawalminy and Malcolm Kurruwul
Typical Nasutitermes triodiae mounds in Daly River
Mercia (Wawurr), Molly (Yawalminy) and Patricia Marrfura
Me Taggart of Daly River showing the newly built material,
that they favoured, at the base of aNasutitermes triodiae
mound
A sample of Nasutitermes triodiae mound ready to be taken
home (Daly River)
Sample of termitaria quantity Mercia (Wawurr) and Molly
(Yawalminy) used to take 2 or 3 times a day during their
pregnancy (Daly River)
Lucy Hughes (Lababi) from Elliott, crushing someAmitermes
vitiosus mounds during the preparation of the "infusion"
In Elliott, Lucy Hughes demonstrates the poultice while Amy
Lauder is getting ready to drink the 11infusion"
Page
VI
4
6
6
8
8
10
10
Plate 9
Plate 10
Plate II
Plate 12
Plate 13
Plate 14
Plate 15
Plate 16
Typical site with Nasutitermes triodiae (right) and Amitermes
vitiosus (left) mounds in Daly River
Nasutitermes triodiae mound (3 m high), Daly River site 3
Vertical section of Nasutitermes triodiae mound at site 3,
showing compact basal portion-galleries and nursery (middle
part of the mound, ground level)
(xxxvii)
Page
92
94
94
Tumulitermes pastinator mound (70 em high), Daly River, site 3 96
Vertical section of Tumulitermes pastinatormound at site 3,
showing alveolar type of structure and the nursery (N)
Amitermes vitiosus mound (50 em high), Elliott site 5
Vertical section of Amitermes vitiosus mound in Elliott,
showing the concrete hard structure
Tumulitermes hastilis mound (55 em high), Daly River site 1
96
98
98
99
(xxxviii)
AAS:
ANOVA:
Av:
CEC:
cucum:
em:
diam:
Ext. Lab:
g:
ICP-MS:
ICP-OES:
Kg:
L:
m:
me:
mg:
mm:
run:
Nt:
OSS:
pmw:
ppm:
RDis:
SD:
SE:
Th: Tp:
XRF:
ABBREVIATIONS
atomic absorption spectrophotometer
analysis of variance
Amitermes vitiosus
cation exchange capacity
circumference
centimetre
diametre
external laboratory
gram
inductively coupled plasma - mass spectrometer
inductively coupled plasma - optical emission spectrophotometer
kilogram
litre
metre
milliequivalent
milligram
millimetre
nanometre
Nasutitermes triodiae
office of the supervising scientists
post-menopausal women
parts per million
recommended daily intakes
standard deviation
standard error
Tumulitermes hastilis
Tumulitermes pastinator
x- ray fluorescence
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1 INTRODUCTION
1
"Most nineteenth-century colonists looked with horror at the eating habits of Aborigines,
and had little insight into the depth of knowledge and experience of their hosts. "82
1.1 Medicinal/Nutritional Usages of Termitaria
This study is a part of the Aboriginal Pharmacopoeia Project which aims to study the
therapeutic use of Aboriginal plants and other natural products in Northern Australia.
1.1.1 In Australia
Like many other indigenous populations around the world, the Aboriginal communities
are using termite mounds (termitaria) for many different reasons: physical and
metaphysical. Although the spiritual and cultural aspect of the bush medicine cannot be
ignored. only its physical aspect has been addressed in this study as it can be studied by
modem scientific methods.
Termite mounds are known by many different names. Besides their local names, such
as: ''Ngete" in Ngankikurungkurr, "Bilaya" in Jingulu and "Bellar" in Mudburra1\ they
are popularly known as "ant"-bed, "ant"-hill and termite hill14• They are used
medicinally throughout the Northern Territory from Bathurst Island to the Central
Northern region14 (see Figure 1.1). Different Aboriginal communities are using
tennitaria for different purposes and in many different ways. It is used either internally
or externally. Their usage, as with other bush medicine, was more widespread prior to
European contact. As Magarruminya, a Mardarrpa (Yolngu) man said: "We had our own
medicine. We had doctors of our own ... Now young people are giving that away ... "160,
There are multiple use of termitaria; see Table 1.1 Their main applications are to treat
gastro-intestinal disorders17•44•43•82 or are related to pregnancy.14
2
...
Bathurst Island
�
Goulburn Island Warruwi
'L.:V> .. !
Pine Creek • •
Nauiyu Nambiyu
Groote Eyiandt 1 n:Umbakumba,
"1"""f'" Bulla
• ,
FIGURE 1 . 1
•
Lajamanu ..
Newcastle Waters
• . Elliott
0 •M 200 3�: km
Location of reported usages of termitaria throughout the Northern Territory
3
TABLE 1.1 Summary of reported usages of termitaria
Use Community (Figure 1.1) Reference
Diarrhoea Pine Creek, Maningrida 131 Lajamanu, Bulla, Nguiu, 43 Elliott, Newcastle Waters, 14 Nauiyu Nambiyu
Pregnancy W arruwi, Umbakumba, 14 Nauiyu Nambiyu
Abdominal or Goulburn Island 14 menstrual pains
Mineral deficiency Groote Eylandt 100
General illness Elliott 16 Bathurst Island 131
Lactation Elliott 14
Sores Bathurst Island 131
Allay hunger Nauiyu Nambiyu 14 Out-stations (Maningrida) 44
Cooking Elcho Island 16 Bathurst Island
Mosquito repellent Goulburn Island 131
Eastwell (1979)" mentioned that one bush group of 40 people consumed 2 kg of termite
mound during April 1973. Eastwell (1984)44 reported that "people who live in the out
stations still eat some ant-hill with some of their meals, or have some clay"44 and that
"teenagers are seen carrying clay in plastic bags to eat at the outdoor cinema1143•
Sometimes, in Daly River, when there is a flood that renders the termite mounds
inaccessible, the people would dive down to collect clay from a favoured place. Clay
and termite mounds seem interchangeable with preference for termitaria in some places.
Levitt (1980)100 wrote that clay processed by animals, such as on the termite mound, was
considered to be safer than other kinds. Where clay is eaten, it is used in much the
same way as termite mounds: to allay hunget2.17, to cure stomach aches, diarrhoea, to settle the stomach, to treat worm infestation or to "line the stomach before eating yams,
or fish which may be poisonous"11.
4
.. 0
2 11-0
"" .. c ~ 0
~
PLATE 2 Mercia (Wawurr) of lhe Moil people at \lauiyu -.;ambiyu (eating some Nasutitermes tnodioetennlto.ria) accompanaed by Molly (Y JWalminy) and Mnlcolm Kurruwul
5
Bateson and Lebroy (1978)17 reported that children ate clay because they liked the taste.
On Groote Eylandt, some women ate clay "particularly if they had a craving for fish as
they said it tasted like fish"100•
1.1.1.1 Modes of Preparation
There are many different ways in which the Aborigines use termite mounds. It seems
almost as if every family has its own "recipes" . The simplest way is to break off small
pieces of the outer mound, crumble it in the hand to a powder, then drop it into the
mouth (Nauiyu Nambiyu1\ Groote Eylandt100), (Plate 2). In other communities, a large
piece of mound (hand size) is ground finely and mixed with water, milk or tea, then
drunk.14•82 Sometimes, only the extracted liquid is drunk (Wave Hill, Wattie Creek)17.
Honey-ants (Melophorus sp.) or plants can be added to the mixture of tennitaria and
water16. In Elliott14, pieces of mounds are first burnt in the fire, until black, then crushed
and mixed with water. One part of the "infusion" is then drunk and the other part used
to bathe the skin or as a poultice.16 When used as a mosquito repellent, the inner part
of the mound is slowly burnt in the frre4.
In general, the mounds are consumed on the spot. In some places, such as Numbulwar,
the dry earth eaten was probably tennitaria brought from another area for the
construction of the airstrip17• On some occasions, for example, just prior to the flood
caused by the rains of the wet season in Daly River, a big lump of the mound can be
taken horne for further use.
The mound is not the only part eaten, Dulcie Levitt (1980i00 reported that the tennite
soil tunnels in logs are also used.
Since tennite mounds have been so widely used in Australia and that most soft-bodied
insects that were available in quantity were eaten190, it is surprising that there is no
mention of termites themselves being used as food. Likewise, despite the abundance of
tennitaria in the Amazon region, few records exist of Brazilian Indians eating termites110,
compared with Africa where they are a favourite dish164•
" 0 u .. .. 0.. <) ;-;-,� '-' " 0 ..::::
:::.
'-' 0 0 E .. » .. 0 0 0 "" e:.
6
PLATE 3
PLATE 4
Typical Nasutitemus triodiae mounds in Daly River.
Mercia (Wawurr). Molly (Yawalminy) and Patricia Marrfura Me Taggart of the Daly Rjver showing the newly built material, that they favoured.
at the base of a Nasutllem1es triodiae mound.
1.1.2 In Two NT Aboriginal Communities
7
The selection of the two communities (Nauiyu Nambiyu (Daly River) and Elliott) was
suggested by Andy Barr (the Aboriginal pharmacopoeia project manager) and the late
Mrs Joan Chapman (the pharmacopoeia team pharmacist) who had worked closely with
the two communities and had received the approval by the two communities for further
study.
1.1.2.1 Nauiyu Nambiyu (Daly River)
The first contact with the Nauiyu Nambiyu community took place in June 1988. A
meeting was organised with Patricia Marrfurra Me Taggart of the Moil people at Nauiyu
Narubiyu (coordinator at the MajelJan Centre), her mother Moliy (Yawalminy), her
·grand-mother Mercia (Wawurr), her two children: Nathan (Culmungu) and Aaron
(Kingaruo), and Eileen Farrelly (adult educator of the Majellan Centre).
The information concerning the use of termitaria was gathered after a few subsequent
visits and field trips (August-October-November 1988, December 1988 and 1989, August
1990 and 1991), often also including members of the extended family.
1.1.2.1.1 Choice of Termitaria
Mercia and her family use three different types of mounds. They belong to:
'Nasutitermes triodiae, Tumulitermes pastinator and Amitermes vitiosus. Where
Nasutitermes triodiae is present, Amitermes vitiosus is not taken. The red mounds may
be thought to be more effective16• Coptotermes acinaciformis mounds have also been
reported by the pharmacopoeia team as being used in Daly river. Out of al� the mounds,
they prefer the freshly built parts of Nasutitermes triodiae mounds (Plates 3 & 4).
11Women like the taste of it" (Mercia). Just seeing the freshly built parts give them
watery mouth.
8
PLATE 5
PLATE G
A sample of Nasutitermes triodiae mound ready to be taken home (Daly River).
Quantity of termitaria Mercia (Wawurr) and Molly (Yawalminy) used to
take 2 or 3 times a day during thdr pn:gnancy (Daly River)
9
If the mound is attacked by red ants they would not eat it because it would be too old.
The 11old ones (are) not too sweet" said Mercia. Sometimes, they take "a big mob
home" for further consumption (Plate 5). They throw away the grass and termites by
shaking the portion taken and let it "dry" in the sun before putting it into their bag.
When tennitaria is not available (eg: during the flood of the wet season) they dig for a
clay (sub-soil) close to the mission.
1.1.2.1.2 Usage
Mercia said that they used to eat it 11more before the mission, now they forget about it".
She used to eat a handful (20 to 30 g) (Plate 6) at least 2-3 times a day when she was
pregnant or had diarrhoea and used to give termite mound pieces even to young children
with diarrhoea. She uses the clay in much the same way. Molly ate termitaria material
for "upset stomach, vomiting and diarrhoea" or when she was pregnant to stop the
craving. Molly used to eat "bits and pieces all day long11 during pregnancy. She
reported that they also used to eat it when they were hungry, when they had stayed in
the bush for a long time, or after eating yam or meat (turtle, wallaby, goanna and
porcupine). She mentioned that men eat termite mounds too. Patricia reported eating
termite mound when she was a child.
1.1.2.1.3 Mode of Preparation and Consumption
Small pieces of the outer casing are broken off, crushed between the hands and placed
on the middle of the tongue where they are left to melt before being swallowed.
10
PLATE 7 Lucy Hughes (Lababi) from Elliott, crushing someAmitermes vltiosus mounds during the preparation of the "infusion".
PLATE 8 In Elliott, Lucy Hughes demonstrates the poultice while Amy Lauder is getting ready to drink the "infusion.
11
1.1.2.2 Elliott
The first contact with the community took place in September 1988. As for the Nauiyu
Nambiyu community the information was gathered after a few meetings and field trips
with the Aboriginal informers (Amy Lauder, Molly Dixon and Lucy Hughes (Lababi)).
A) Choice of Termitaria
Amitermes vitiosus mounds are the dominant mounds in the landscape and are used by
Aboriginal community for medicinal purposes. Their local name is: "Bilaya".
B) Usage
It is used for diarrhoea, upset stomach, during pregnancy or to bring up milk after birth
and to "make the baby strong".
C) Mode of Preparation and Consumption
The mound is first pushed to the ground and broken into big pieces with an axe. Then,
the pieces are placed in the fire. They remain there for 15 a2Q minutes before being
placed in a billycan, half-full with water. The pieces are crushed to mud with a piece
of stick (Plate 7) and left there to infuse for I 0 minutes . The "infusion" is mixed well
and drunk hot. The remaining mixture of muddy composition is rubbed on the back and
the front of the person (baby and lactating mother), (Plate 8).
12
1.1.3 Other Countries
Native populations throughout the tropical and sub-tropical regions of the world have
been using termite mounds for many different purposes. As previously discussed in
chapter 1.1, only the physical aspects of their use have been considered.
Other than being used for pottery68•86•164 or to build roads86•143•68, tennis courts86•143,
housesw3•86•42•15 and ovens103•42•15, termite mounds have been widely used in agriculture
around the world (see chapter 1.4.2.5) and in geochemical explorations137• Termite
mounds are also an important source of nutrition for many species of animals. In
Northern Ghana, the indigenous population use Trinervitermes geminatus mounds as a
source of chicken food157• Pullan (1974)147 reported the use of termite mounds for
nutrient supply, for example, elephants may excavate tennitaria200 and eat the earth, and
antelopes may use natural excavations of termite mounds as salt licks. In Guinea
(Conakry), tennite mound excavations containing large white nodules (most probably
calcium carbonate) are given to the cattle as a natural mineral supplement by the
nomadic breeders around th� country (Personal communication 1981). Those "earths"
were also fed to mineral deficient sows at the University farm of Macenta (Guinea)
(personal observation 1981 ). Monkeys have also been reported eating termite
mounds75•74•40•210•73• Red leaf monkeys (Presbytis rubicunda), in Sabah (Northern
Borneo), were observed eating Macrotermes mounds and chimpanzees were reported,
in Gabon and Tanzania, eating 10 to 20g of earth (most of them from tennite mounds),
up to twice daily74•
This phenomenon (the habit of eating earth) is more commonly known as geophagy.
It is a fonn of pica which is the craving and eating of non-natural, and inedible objects70,
It has been reported in the human population for many centuries45•187•47, It is reported
all over the world70: Saudi Arabia70, TurkeY3•114, Iran146•188•1S4,Js9, Algeria12, Nigeria, Togo,
Liberia and Ghana186•185 Zambia147 South Africa189 USA181•180'47•46•56•53 South America1 10 • • • • •
Haiti63, India86 and Philippines41• "Earth eating cross-cuts ethnic, social, and economic
lines. In the United States, geophagy is found among whites and blacks, children and
adults, and in both rural and urban populations. "187 Its prevalence varies greatly from
13
culture to culture66• It seems to be more prevalent in the black Americans47 and among
"poverty·stricken" populations where the nutrition is less than optirnum65 and in
women. 6s·46•147•66•47•45•147 For example: it occurs among 57% of women and 16% of
children of both sexes in the black population of rural Holmes County, Mississipi; the
average daily consumption is 50g187• And more particularly in women during pregnancy:
out of 42 women studied in Alabama who ate between 6-130g of clay daily, 38 were
pregnant46• In Ghana, although clay (from sub·soil or termitaria) is mostly eaten by
adult women (34 to 68%, with the highest percentage in more remote areas), it is also
consumed by 14% of the adult male population (in Eweland)'"'. In South Africa, clay
from a termite mound is very popular with rural black women; 44% of rural black
women experience geophagy during pregnancy as opposed to 4.4% in mixed-coloured
women and 2.2% in Indian women; while pica did occur among white pregnant women,
it was rare1119• Cavdar et al (1983)33 report that geophagy was a common finding among
Turkish children and women in villages.
In some small southern towns in the USA, clay can be purchased at commercial
outlets46• In African countries it can be bought in the local market where a particular
clay called eko or Calabar could be imported from a distant region (more than 1500 Km away)186• In Western countries, capsules of dirt and clay are being marketed in health
food stores. The origin of the material used is not always specified.
1.1.3.1 Usages
Cesare Bressa (early 1 800), cited in Mustacchi (1971)121 described that the slaves in
Louisiana started eating soil during their illnesses (known later on as wet beriberi or
vitamin Bl deficiency); most often they wanted to eat earth and some seemed to prefer
hard earth while others liked clay121• In India, Joseph (1978)86 reported that the material
of the termite mounds was often eaten by local tribes, presumably for their mineral salts
content. In Nigeria, they used clay in traditional medicinal preparations for intestinal
problems (stomach and dysenteric ailments) or problems associated with pregnancy186•
The reasons given by the pregnant women (USA) for eating clay are numerous: to
14
relieve nausea, prevent vomiting, relieve dizziness, relieve headaches and many reported
eating more clay when they were upset46• In the Amazon, termite mounds are prepared
as remedies for bronchitis, constipation, goitre, sores, boils, ulcers and other ailments110
1982• Termite mounds are also eaten when food is scarce1 10• The Uaica Indians chew the
soil of pulverised termitaria, saying that it is good for them, it helps strengthening and
building up the body; they like the taste and eat handfuls at a time110,
1.1.4 Possible Therapeutic Activities
The external uses of clay are perhaps more familiar; poultices containing clay are a
known remedy for boils, while mud baths are recommended for the treatment of
rheumatism and arthritis. The popular literature claims that the benefits of termite
mound and clay consumption are quite numerous. According to Dextreit (I 976)41 clay
can cure anaemia, absorb harmful substances (bacteria, poison), expel worms, relieves
digestive disorders including ulcers, enteritis, dysentery, constipation and diarrhoea and
many other ailments. Dextre�t (1976t1 claimed that clay can cure iron deficiency, not
because of a high mineral content, but because it contains catalysts that work in
infinitesimal doses to stimulate failing organs. The more clay is exposed to sun, air, and
rain, the more active it becomes41 •
The most obvious reason given by many authors for geophagy is because o f the potential
as nutrient sources, mainly during pregnancy. For example, in Zambia, pregnant women
use te�ite mounds probably as a source of calcium and sodium147• Barbier et a/
(1986Y2 suggested that malnutrition causing growth failure and zinc deficiency could be
the cause of geophagy12• Edwards et a/ (1959t6 noted that possibly clay-eaters eat clay
to compensate a diet that was poor in calcium and iron. This will be discussed in more
detail in section 1.1.6
In the treatment of stomach complaints, including diarrhoea, clay (from soil or
termitaria) may act as an adsorbent antidiarrhoeal and might help to alleviate digestive
disorders40• The mineralogical analyses of the eko clay (Nigeria) are strikingly similar
15
to the clay in the commercial pharmaceutical Kaopectate (kaolinic composition)m.
Kaolin is a powdered hydrated aluminium silicate freed from gritty particles171• It has
long been used for the treatment of gastric disorders (diarrhoea, dysentery) in both
traditional (China) and modem pharmacologies178• The clay absorbent power is quite
extraordinary, according to Dextreit (1976t1, 5g of clay are enough to completely
discolour 10 cm3 of a water solution containing 0.1% of methyl blue41•
An interesting case, demonstrating the absorbent power of the clay, was reported by
Halsted ( 1968)", in which a prisoner, in Germany (158 1), who was given 6g of mercuric
chloride followed by one tablet of clay ("terra sigillata in olde wine") and did not die.
Halsted (1968)" reported that it is quite possible the clay had acted as an ion-exchange
resin and that elements in the clay could have exchanged with mercury, making it
unavailable for absorption.
. Research with rats has shown that geophagy occurs when rats are made acutely ill
(poison) or are stressed or arthritic32• The sicker the rat, the more kaolin it eats. Kaolin
intake is also a behavioural index of motion sickness in rats179• Geophagy could be a
response to generalised stress, since this state may involve gastro-intestinal malaise32·m.
A study done in South Africa (where geophagy is more common among black pregnant
women), on the frequency and severity of nausea and vomiting during pregnancy
reported that it affected only 3 .8 and 3 .19% of the black women respectively, while it
affected 19.8 and 17.8% of white women respectively189
Davies and Baillie (1988)'to observing monkeys in North Borneo suggested that geophagy
may serve different functions at different times: it might help to absorb toxins, to alleviate digestive disorders or to supplement the mineral intake. This latter point was
disputed by Hladik (1977ar3 who stated that the amounts of minerals in the termite
mound sample were very small but for iron, and that the iron content of the leaves and
fruits eaten by the primates was enough to cover all their physiological requirements73•
16
There may also be other determinants such as psychological and social. For one thing,
home treatment (eg: preparation and administration of the clay-tennitaria in illness) may
strengthen family ties because care and attention are exchanged within the family group.
The patient is surrounded and taken care of by his own people who feel responsibility
for the family1s health174 but also 11Eating clay is psychologically comforting.
Masticating it is gratifying, salivary flow is increased, and the stomach is comfortably
julf'43• Likewise, the most common reason for eating clay given by males (Ghana) is
that it provides "pleasure11185
1.1.5 Possible Complications
The medical literature on geophagy is meagre and research reports are often conflicting
in their findings45• In Australia, it is not viewed as a serious medical problem by the
nursing staff of different Aboriginal communities ( eg: Maningrida, Angurugu }, although
it can cause constipation when used to excess69 According to Hausheld (1975t9 it is a
traditional practice more likely to be beneficial to health than dangerous to it69•
However, Bateson and Lebroy (1978}17 (Northern Territory) warned that eating clay or
termite mounds can be dangerous as it can cause a partial obstruction, or even
perforation, of the colon. Thomson (1984}'x1 reported that geophagy, especially if kaolin
is involved, may lead to a zinc deficiency. Eastwell (1984)44 reported that it could also
interfere with iron absorption.
Dirt eating was listed as a cause of death in 1850121, probably because it was consumed
by dying slaves in their attempt to compensate their malnutrition. Geophagy is also
associated with severe iron deficiency anaemia,s6•33•188'146,n4,154 in addition to zinc
deficiency33•66• A syndrome characterised by geophagy, iron deficiency anaemia, zinc
deficiency, growth retardation and hypogonadism has been observed in both sexes in
Iran146•154•159, and in Turkey33·m for several decades; this syndrome is probably due to the
poor nutritional status of the population but possibly increased by prolonged geophagy33•
Clay ingestion has also been associated with myositis (muscle weakness) and
hypokalemia (potassium deficiency) or hyperkalemia (excess potassiumY3•81• Halsted
17
(1970t6 noted that a case of tetanus linked to the ingestion of clay containing spores of
the tetanus bacillus has been reported66•
1.1.6 Geophagy and its Relation to Mineral Deficiency
The traditional medicinal uses of termite mounds, such as for gastro-enteric disorders
and during pregnancy would suggest that a number of elements may be of importance,
in particular minerals such as: calcium, iron, magnesium, potassium and sodium. The
older literature suggests that iron-deficiency lead to geophagy. Halsted (1968)65 reported
that although it is an attractive theory, the literature evidence for anaemia resulting in
geophagy is meagre187 and the results are often conflicting. Barbier et al (1986)12
suggest that although geophagy was probably a spontaneous effort to compensate for
malnutrition (growth failure, zinc deficiency), it was also probably the cause of iron
deficiency anaernia12• This idea is supported by Cavdar er al (1983}33 who suggested
that the zinc deficiency could have been present before geophagy started. Indeed, the
nutritional status of Turkish villagers was poor: based on wheat bread and wheat product
with very limited animal protein. It had little zinc content and the zinc could have been
bound by phytate (inositol hexaphosphate) and fibres"'. But they also noted that the
geophagy may cause both iron and zinc deficiency: by reducing the appetite for normal
food, by decreasing the iron absorption and by causing malabsorption of zinc and iron
due to irreversible changes in intestinal epithelial cells associated with prolonged
geophagy. This same view is also supported by Walker et a/ (1985)189 who suggested
that "In the case of geophagy, while the practice may contribute significant amounts of
calcium and trace elements, under certain conditions it may exacerbate an existing iron
deficiency anaemia. The extent to which iron deficiency causes geophagy, or geophagy
promotes iron deficiency is not wholly clear ... ".
Different experiments have produced different results. For example, Patterson and
Staszak (1977)141 reported maternal anaemia and reduction in the birth weight of the
neonatal rats born to kaolin (20%) fed rats while the results of kaolin fed rats receiving
iron supplement were normal. Edwards et a/ (1983ts reported that small levels of clay
18
conswnption (20%) may be beneficial as it enhances physical development in rats. The
haemoglobin values of baby rats from female rats receiving 20% and 35 % of clay
through their diet were not different from control values45•
Eastwell (1979)43 studying Aboriginal clay eaters found no difference in the haemoglobin
levels of ingesters as compared with controls. Edwards et a/ (1964)47 reported that
although the total iron and calcium content of the clay studied was respectively:
20.8mg/100g and 21.4mgil 00g, only 0.03mgil00g ofiron and 0.2 mgilOOg of calcium
were "available" in the in vitro tests. Likewise, Venneer (1971)185 found very little
"available" minerals (0.1 N HCl extraction) in Ghanian clay. But he commented that
"It is possible, ... that even such small amounts may contribute to the overall nutrition
if that element is deficient in the body and if other dietary inputs is inadequate"m.
Although the ingestion of clay may slow down the mobility in the gastro-intestinal tract
and thus promoting absorption, its consumption may also impair the absorption of certain
other nutritive elements through chemical exchange185• Talkington et a/ (1970Y80
reported that while the ingestion of sizeable amounts of clays, just prior to iron intake,
did not appreciably reduce iron absorption; a red clay containing considerable iron
proved inefficient for correcting iron-deficiency anaemia while the admission of a
smaller quantity of ferrous sulfate did. They commented on the fact that iron absorption
in the same individual can vary appreciably, at different times, unrelated to the agent
being tested. They suggested that the degree of iron absorption reduction caused by clay
could vary widely, apparently depending upon the clay.
In their study on the effect of clays of different origins on 59FeS04 absorption, Minnie.
et a/ (1968)u4 reported that Turkish clay and soil reduced the amount of 59FeS04
absorbed from the intestinal tract while three other clays obtained in the United States
were less effective. The last clay tested was from New Mexico and it had no effect
upon iron absorption. Interestingly, a dose of MgO completely blocked radioiron
absorption in four of five subjects and reduced absorption significantly in the fifth.
Turkish clay and soil also removed iron from solution better than did the naturally acid
clays. The mechanism which most likely accounts for the observed effect is the cation
exchange capacity and the base saturation value (which correlate with the pH114). In the
19
study by Minnie et a/ (1968)1" the clay differed in effect depending upon their cation
exchange capacity (CEC). Turkish clay having a high CEC was more effective in
blocking iron absorption than were three other clays with lower CEC values. The iron
is exchanged for Ca, Mg, Mn, Na, K, and H ions with the formation of non-absorbable
iron compounds. They commented that the effect of clay and soil on iron absorption
may not be the only factor in the production of anaemia in geophagy, but it could be
contributory. Nutritional and parasitic (worms) factors may contribute to anaemia as
wel1114•
Halsted (1968)65 suggested that as geophagy leads to iron deficiency, it may also prevent
absorption of potassium and mercury and possibly zinc, as they have demonstrated a
high cation-exchange capacity for zinc by Iranian clay, in their in-vitro tests.
In the case of hypokalemia, some in-vitro tests have been conducted by Gonzalezet a! .
{1982)56 showing a moderate potassium-binding capacity of clay especially at pH 6.
They suggested that clay eaters could develop hypokalemia depending upon the type of
clay ingested, the daily dietary potassium intake, and the renal function status.
Severance et a/ (1988)162 reported that the potassium level returned to normal when the
clay ingestion was discontinued and potassium supplement was given162• Gelfandet a/
(1975)53, analysing hyperkalemia in five patients with chronic renal failure, suggested
that since river-bed clay contains as much as 100 meq of potassium in I 00 g of clay
(much of which is exchangeable at acid pH), hyperkalemia appears to be the result of
the absorption of potassium released from clay after ingestion. As in the hypokalemia
case, the hyperkalemia ceased to be a problem when the patients stopped eating clay53•
One may ask, after reading the medical literature, if the clay (and more specifically the
clay as in termitaria) is the cause of certain mineral deficiencies or is it the cure? Most
probably it will depend on the physiological state of the individual, but the composition
of the termite mounds (or clay) eaten is of prime importance. Most of the research to
date on human geophagy has concentrated on clays or earths. The mineral content of
the clays studied, as indicated by the literature review is generally very low in
comparison to the high mineral content of termite mounds.
20
1.2 Nutritional Aspects of Selected Elements and Recommended Dietary Intakes
(RDis).
The traditional medicinal uses of termite mounds, such as during pregnancy and for
gastro-enteric disorders, would suggest, as previous authors have already mentioned
(chapter 1 . 1 .4), that elements such as Ca, Cu, Fe, Mg, K, Na and Zn may be of some
importance. In order to determine the nutritional contribution of termite mounds towards
the human nutritional needs, a summary of the selected elements nutritional
characteristics is a prerequisite.
The selected elements studied in this thesis have been classified in human nutrition as:
- electrolytes (sodium, potassium),
- major minerals (calcium and magnesium),
- trace elements (cobalt, copper, iron, manganese and zinc),
- substances with no known essential nutrient function in man
(aluminium).
A summary of the selected element (calcium, cobalt, copper, iron, potassium,
magnesium, manganese, sodium and zinc) body contents, physiological functions,
Recommended Daily Intakes (RDis), sources and deficiency symptoms is given m
Table 1.2. In this study, mineral and element are used interchangeably.
The RDis have been defmed as "the levels of intake of essential nutrients considered,
in the judgement of the National Health and Medical Research Council, on the basis of
available scientific knowledge to be adequate to meet the known rmtritional needs of
practically all healthy people. "124 The human element requirement is difficult to
establish as it varies between individuals and changes according to age, environment and
physical condition. This has led to differences between various national and
international recommendations. However, these differences are, however narrowing as
more knowledge accumulates169• In Table 1.2, the Australian RDis have been chosen
21
whenever available; the American values were selected for cobalt, copper and
manganese.
The RDis should not be misinterpreted as a daily minimum or as a requirement for any
specific individual. The RDis exceed the actual nutrient requirements of practically all
healthy persons as the estimates of requirements for each age/sex category have been
increased by a generous factor to take into consideration the variations in absorption and
metabolism124• As discussed by Southgate et a! (1989Y69, the mineral nutritiona! value
of food and diets is not necessarily equal to their composition as determined by chemical
analyses. The intestinal absorption and subsequent metabolism of all the elements needs
to be considered. Only a proportion of the total ingested element is capable of being
used. The amount of element absorbed depends not only on the chemical form of the
mineral in the food but on the other ingredients in that food and of the rest of the diet
and also on physiological factors169• Certain food in the diet may enhance absorption
of a particular element and decrease another, for example: ascorbic acid and protein
from meat decrease copper absorption and increase iron absorption. The problems of
minerals are multiplied by their own interactions. For example, an excess of zinc, iron
or calcium decrease the absorption of copper (an increase of 5 to 20 mg of zinc results
in an increase of the copper need of 75%)19,
Iron deficiency is the most common nutrient deficiency disorder in the world125 and
pregnant women subgroup is one of the most at risk categories. The incidence of iron
deficiency anaemia among pregnant women varies from I 0% in adequately nourished
groups to 50% in poorly nourished groups with multiple, closely spaced pregnancy183.
The iron deficiency results from one or a combination of the following: inadequate diet,
impaired absorption, blood loss or repeated pregnancies20• The iron is absorbed in the
duodenum and upper jejunum through a complex but poorly understood process183• The
factors which determine the proportion of iron absorbed from food are complex. They
include the iron status of an individual, the iron content and the composition of a meal.
Only a small proportion of dietary iron is absorbed; normal subjects commonly absorb
5-10% of the iron of mixed diets, and iron-deficient individuals 15-20% or more of this
iron, but considerable divergence from these values can occurm. The iron absorption
22
is also markedly increased during pregnancy, being about 30% in the second trimester
and 40% in the third trimester183• The composition of a meal also determines what
proportion of its content can be absorbedm. The dietary factors enhancing the iron
absorption are : ascorbic acid, citric acid, meat, fish and alcohol while the inhibiting
factors are polyphenols (such as tannins), phosphates, bran, phytate (in cereals and
legumes) and cooked egg yolk169• All meat sources promote the absorption of iron from
other foods. Even relatively small quantities of meat and fish (50-75g) may markedly
improve the hie-availability of iron124• Concomitant doses of 200 mg of ascorbic acid
with iron salts may increase absorption by 25 to 50%119•
Adult males and post-menopausal women measured iron losses are about I mg/day
(Table 1.2). Additional iron losses associated with menstruation vary, and for 90% of
women it averaged at 1 .35 mg/day124• During the second and third trimesters of
pregnancy, 5-7 mg/day extra iron is necessary to provide for the large increase in the
blood volume of the mother and the foetal growth. In Australia, the composition of the
diet (particularly its content of vitamin C and meat protein) suggest an iron absorption
rate of 15-20%, and therefor� the minimum dietary iron intake necessary to meet the
physiological requirements of adult males and post-menopausal women is 7 mg. For
menstruating women, 12-16 mg/day are necessary.
All elements are potentially toxic in large dose. The RDis, even though known to be
excessive for at least 80% of the population, are also known to be safe for 100% of the
healthy population. Data which would permit the delineation of toxic levels of dietary
elements are meagre. The toxicity level of an element depends on the extent to which
other elements which affect their absorption and retention are present. This is
particularly true for copper. In animals, a particular level of copper intake can lead
either to copper deficiency or toxicity, depending on the relative intakes of molybdenum
and sulfur, or of zinc and iron184• Toxicity iron ingestion is the fourth most frequent
cause of poisoning of children in United States. The average toxic dose being 200 to
250 mg!Kg; an acute toxic dose may be as low as 150 mg!Kgm.
23
Aluminium has been selected not for its potential nutritive aspect but for its possible
toxicity. Aluminium has been considered to be a benign metal by many authors like
Davidson et a! (1973)39• They claimed that it is too insoluble in its natural form to be
absorb by the body and this very property gave them a use in human medicine. For
example, aluminium silicate (kaolin) is widely used as an absorbent in the treatment of
diarrhoea. In 1970, Berlyne et a/, cited in Kundu (1990)" reported that high levels of
aluminium in tap water used for renal dialysis equipment could be linked to a form of
dementia in patients who were undergoing treatment. Since then, aluminium as been
assodated with a variety of metabolic and neural dysfunctions. The extent of absorption
of aluminium from clay, however small, could be of importance. As it is believed that
a relatively small amount of aluminium enters through the mucosal lining of the mouth
and the gastro-intestinal wall. The great majority is excreted unabsorbed92. Brown
(1983), as reported by Kundu (!990)" has shown that while increased amounts of
aluminium associated with reduced pH is certainly toxic, small amount of calcium may
prevent the toxicity.
TABLE 1.2 Nutritional aspects ofselected elements: adult body content, physiological functions, deficiency symptoms, daily losses, o/o absorption from food, recommended dietary intakes (R.Dis) and sources.
Element
Cobalt
Copper
Calcium
lwn
Magnesium
Manganese
Potassium
Sodium
Zinc
Body content and primary concentration
1.1 mg Liver
80-120 mg Liver, brain, heart. kidneys 20.7 to 24.8 g per Kg of fat free body tissue1 99% of Ca deposited in bones
4-5 g1u 70% in haemoglobin, 25% in storage form (ferritin, hemosiderin) Liver, spleen, bone marrow
20-28 g165 55% in bone, 27% in musculature 12-20 mg Kidneys, pancreas, liver
J I .S to 131 g1SO Principal intracellular cation 83-97 giSO major cation in extracellular fluid
1-2.3 g in almost aU tissue, muscle 63%, bone 20o/o, blood 2%1n
Data from 601 otherwise specihed.
Physiological functions Deficiency Symptoms
Integral part of vitamin 812 Pernicious anaemia
Haemoglobin synthesis, bone Anaemia, growth retardation. mineralisation, enzyme function secondary iron deficiency
Bones and teeth, blood Osteoporosis, poor coagulation, storage and release developme'nt of teeth and of hormones, activation of bones, delayed coagulation enzymes systems Transport and utilisation of Anaemia, disturbance of bone oxygen, component of energy marrow function transfer oxidase
Cofactor in enzyme reactions Neuromuscular disturbances, behaviour disturbances, cardiac disturbance
Bones structure, reproduction, Impaired growth, skeletal activator of enzyme function abnormalities, ataxia,
convulsions, vomiting Osmotic pressure Lethargy and tetany
Osmose regulation, water balance Dehydration, nausea, anorexia, fatigue, muscular cramps
Metalloenzyme function, protein Poor growth and sexual metabolism, lipid metabolism development, impaired wound
healing
Daily losses in mglday flo absorption]
[30"/o]
12�100-150 [20%]
124Men, pmw®: I Menstruating women: I.35 pregnancy: 5·,. [15-20%]
124[50%]
101[40%]
1241200
124140 + sweat (2· 8g/L)1SO
124 Adult: 2; Pregnant: +I; Lactation:+ 1.3 [30%]
RD!s for adults in mglday
m Supplied as vitamin 812, approximately 0.003
2-3
124 Adult: 800 Pregnant: + 300 Lactation: + 400
124Men, pmw®: 7 Menstruating women: 12-16 Pregnant: + 10-20
124Men: 320, women: 270 Pregnant: + 30 Lactation: + 70 Adult: 2.5·5
119Adult: ID-22
mAdult1950-5460
124Adult: 920-2300
124Adult: 1 2 Pregnant: + 4 Lactation: + 6
@: pmw post�menopausal women #: only for second and third tnmesters of pregnancy
Sources
Liver, meal Varies on soil content on which food is grown Nuts, shellfish, dried legumes, liver Milk. cheese, nuts, green leafY vegetables, bones
Liver, meat, oysters, nu"
Grains, fiuits, vegetables, nuts
Green leafY vegetables, nuts, grain, tea Fruits and vegetables
Sodium Chloride, meat, fish, milk eggs
Meat, liver, eggs, seafood
t
25
1.3 Some Aspect of Traditional Aboriginal Health Concept and Background
1.3.1 Traditional Aboriginal Health Concept
The concept of health and illness in the traditional Aboriginal world is quite different
in philosophy and practice to western medicine. The maintenance of health is tied to
spiritual, religious and social welfare123 " ••• rather than through adequate nutrition,
exercise and the maintenance of a hygienic environment1195• Serious illness and death
may be attributed either to sorcerers or to the effect, direct or mediated, of the breach
of a religious law or social norm. The most commonly postulated cause of illness is
sorcery153• Treatment with medicine is often secondary to the spiritual healing processes.
"However, in the case of minor ailments, from which the patient would be expected to
recover in any case, such as colds, gastric troubles, wounds or skin diseases, the
treatment would probably be with medicines only"114• Usually women are the herbal
medicine authorities in the community82•174, although every adult possess a
comprehensive knowledge of bush medicines123• The two methods of healing (spiritual
and medicinal) may be used in conjunction 174•
1.3.2 Aboriginal Health Background (Mineral Nutrition)
Franklin and White (199It9 reported that it is now generally accepted that the average
pre·colonial Aborigines were generally in good nutritional health. They were vigorous
people with few but robust children (a quarter of their children had died by the end of
their fifth year). Their life span was 40 years, with injury (including warfare and
murder) being the most frequent cause of death before disease. In general they ate well
and "their environment provided ... food comprising both protein and vegetable foods
with adequate vitamins and minerals. "49 "There was no evidence of rickets or other
nutritionally·related disease in traditional Aboriginal groups"95• "Early data from
recently nomadic Aboriginals generally indicated high haemoglobin concentrations for
both men and women"95• But "the rapid shift to a sedentary life on cattle stations, . . . ,
26
had a dramatic effect on the nutritional and health status of Aboriginal people"9s. Their
transitional diet indicated that sufficient iron was still usually provided but many diets
were inadequate in calcium, vitamin A and vitamin C95• T o·day, malnutrition appears
to be a persi_stent problem for many Aborigines112• "Aborigines and Torres Strait
Islanders comprise the least healthy identifiable sub-population in Australia . . . death
rates are up to four times higher, and life expectancy is up to 21 years less"182•
"Intestinal infections and infestations remain a major cause of Aboriginal ill-health and
of hospitalisation. Dia"hoea/ diseases were responsible for more than 10% of the
deaths of Aboriginal children aged less than 5 years in the NT (1979-1983}"182• There
has been an increase in anaemia, in more recent studies, mainly due to iron deficiency95,
" ... nutrients such as zinc, vitamin C, vitamin D, iron, and vitamin A, may be major
contributing factors to poor health in Aboriginal children"95• But, in other areas, Lee
(1991)95 reported a surprisingly large ranges of both red blood cell and serum thiamine
concentrations, including some high values on remote aboriginal communities.
1.4 Termitaria Biological Background
1.4.1 Taxonomy and General Biology of Termites.
27
Termites are polymorphic eusocial insects comprising the order Isoptera. They belong
to the superclass Hexapoda and the infraclass Pterygota (Figure 1.2). They are closely
related to the order Blattodea (cockroaches)89'91• This small group of primitive insects
contains about 2300 species world-wide with some 350 species in Australia192 and about
60 species in the Top End of Australia113• The lsoptera order has five families present
in Australia (Figure 1.3) with the Termitidae (higher termites) being the largest and most
recent52• Termites are one of the predominant groups of tropical invertebrates86,85• They
are found mainly in the tropical and subtropical regions of the world54•97•9, approximately
between 45"N and 45CS96, In Australia, termites are absent from certain types of soil207
and there is a very small number of species in rainforest areas 51•
Termites are popularly known as White ants'. This name was given to them by the
English in the West Indies and later used by early naturalists (eg: Sir Joseph Banks in his journal (1768-1771) cited in Watson and Gay (1983)"1• This taxonomic
misconception is still used today and often people confuse termites {lsoptera) with ants
(Hymenoptera).
Their physical and social characteristics are among the factOrs that influence the features
of the colony. Termites are soft-bodied insects with cryptic habits. They are
hemimetabolous (have no pupa stage) and they live in family groups (colonies) with
polymorphic castes. Three major castes are recognised: reproductives, workers and
soldiers (shown in Figure 1 .4) The ratio of the castes may vary with time; it is kept in
control through pheromones, hormones and selective cannibalism176•
28
Phylum ARTHROPODA
I Sub-Phylum ANTENNATA
I Super-Class HEXAPODA
I Class INSECTA
I Sub-Class D!CONDILIA
I CERCOFILATA
I Infra-Class PTERYGOTA
I NEOPTERA
I DICTYOPTERA
Order I BLATTODEA I I ISOPTERA
FIGURE 1.2 Classification of Isoptera (redraw from Kristensen, 199 191).
29
I ORDER ISOPTERA I I
I I Primitive Recent
(no worker caste, (worker caste) pseudergates)
I I RlllNOTERMITIDAE TERMITIDAE Coptotermes Amitermes
Nasutitermes Tumu/itermes
IMASTOTERMITIDAEI I TERMOPSIDAE I KALOTERMITIDAE I -
FIGURE 1 .3 Tennite Families (redraw from Hadlington, 198764)
The primary reproductives , or kings and queens, are derived from the alates151• In all
but one species, Mastotermes darwiniensis, the fore and hind wings are similar, therefore
their name !so( same) ptera(wings). After the nuptial flight their wings are shed and only
some small scales remain (Figure 1.5). The alates are fully matured insects with
compound eyes, hard pigmented cuticle and gonads. Their function in the colony is
reproduction. In many species the queen' s abdomen becomes distended due, mainly, to
the enlargement of the ovaries. This phenomenon is known as physogastry (Figure 1 .6).
The queen can lay up to 2000-3000 eggs per day192 and can measure up to 12 cm106•
Both king and queen live for many years, often over twenty. In some species, the
colony may survive the death of their progenitors by producing supplementary
reproductives or neotenics192•
30
' I
\\\ ,\,
- .'\' :;··· . ·- _:· I ' . \ ;''' . ··/ l,i' .;,.;,_� � y
\\ - I ' !'
. .
B
2·5.m m
c
'�
FIGURE 1.4
Castes of Coptotermes acinaciformis, A, winged reproductive or alate; B, worker; C, soldier. (from Watson & Gay, 1991 192 )
'l,'-A� I mm
FIGURE 1.5
De-alate reproductive (dropped wings) revealing severed wing butts. (from Hadlington, 198764 )
31
The workers class is the most abundant. They perform all the duties except defence and
reproduction. Their development is arrested at an early stage. They are sterile and
wingless and their compound eyes and ocelli are absent or greatly reduced 127• Their
cuticle is thin and highly susceptible to desiccation.
The soldiers class is the most distinctive with their head greatly developed. There are
two physically and different types of soldiers: the mandibulates and nasutes (Figure 1 .7).
Each species has one or the other type. The mandibulates (such as Amitermes vitiosus
and Coptotermes acinaciformis) have large characteristic jaws at the front of their head,
while the nasutes (such as Nasutitermes triodiae and Tumulitermes pastinator) have their
head ending in a long rostrum or nasus which opens in the front. Through the nasus
they can eject a sticky secretion onto their enemies112• The soldier's role is solely
defence. The males and females are sterile and usually apterous and blind. '
) )
. ' . .
' ' (\
•
A
' �::
l .. i ' · · ! 1 m m
FIGURE 1.6 Queen termite with a distended abdomen (physogastric queen) (from Hadlington 198764)
FIGURE !.7 A, mandibulate soldier of Heterotermes ferox, Rhinotermitidae; B, nasute soldier of Nasutitermes exitiosus, Termitidae. (from Watson, 1991192)
32
1.4.1.1 Feeding Habits
T errnites feed almost entirely on materials rich in lignin and carbohydrate, especially
cellulose118•190, Their diet ranges from living vegetation (trees, grasses, roots), to sound
dead wood, to decaying or even rotten plant materials206•118•29•190• Some species feed on
dried animal dung48, hurnus104 or soil rich in organic matter 97•206•85•111.29• Fungi are an
important part of the diet of many termites206'97'158'116• Cannibalism is also frequent in
termites not only as a means of sanitation206 and control of the population but also as a
means of conserving and recycling nitrogen113 and other minerals126• Termites can also
fix nitrogen by gut symbionts31'161.2°3•
The digestion of cellulose is facilitated by enzymes (including cellulases) secreted by
symbiotic Protozoa in the hindgut of the lower termites or bacteria in Tennitidae93• The
habit of oral and proctodaea! feeding of one individual by another helps to spread the
symbiotic protozoa and bacteria through the cornmunity129• Cellulases are also secreted
in the midgut of termites" (Figure 1.8).
.�..,Mouth
FIGURE 1.8 Digestive tube system in worker termites. (from Park, 1989139)
The workers are the only caste to gather food. Most of them consume their food in situ,
but many species (harvesters) carry it back to the nesf2•97"192 and stack the vegetative
material in certain chambers designed as attics127 or may build mounds which serve
largely as food stores97•206• lbis enables termites to operate throughout the extensive dry
season4• The dependent castes (soldiers, young larvae, nymphs and reproductives) feed
solely from the workers.
33
1.4.2 Nests
T ennites build a great variety of nests. They may be mere networks of simple galleries
in wood or soil, or elaborate constructions below and/or above ground level85• The nests
are usually characteristic of the species and in some cases of the genus64• Harris (1961 )68
remarkS that the species in residence is not always the original builder . Some species
(inquilinists) prefer to settle in the mound of another speciesm·127•23•193. According to
Noirot (1970)127, as many as ten different termite species can be found in a few cubic
decimetres of a Cubitermes built mound.
The function of the nest is to 'homeostatically' regulate several factors (e.g., humidity,
temperature, entrance of intruders, invasion by fungi)68•176•23• It may also, as mentioned
previously, serve as a food store97; Wood 1978; Watson 1991). From the nest, termites
may construct a system of galleries and covered runways which are known to extend -
from 50-75 m in Coptotermes and Nasutitermes up to over 100 m inMastotermer2• The
network can cover as much as a hectare�' and up to two hectares for some African
termites26• Some nests may extend several meters below the surface. Yakushev, quoted
in Lee and Wood (197la)97, reported termite galleries in West Africa going to the water
table at a depth of 70 m.
About 20% of Australian termites build nests in the form of mounds192 and Braithwaite
(1990?8 indicates that a third of the Top End termite species build termitaria (termite
mounds). The mounds vary greatly in size, shape and colour according to the species
of their builders, the environment and feeding habits62,611?7·'68• They can be a spectacular
feature of many savanna landscapes85• Their colour varies from grey to reddish-brown
depending on the material used for their construction57. Termitaria include by far the
largest structures built by insects. They range from hardened pavements to the 1cathedral1
structures of Nasutitermes triodiae which can extend up to 7 m high129•192• The diameter
can vary from a few centimetres to about 60 m96• Intraspecific variation in mound
structure can occur in some species72,tSt,97•1 56•147•93• Variation may range from 'no-mound
formation' to as many as five different types of mounds. In the same area, within a few
kilometres, different types of mound construction of the same species can be seen156•
34
It is therefore not always possible to identify a termite species from the size and shape
of the mound alone147•
The structure of the mound varies greatly from species to species. Noirot127 describes
two general types of mounds: the homogeneous mounds (all the chambers are alike and
there are no differences between the peripheral and internal regions) and the
heterogeneous mounds where different regions (outer soil capping, wall and nursery)
have different functions and may be composed of different materials (Figure 1.9).
The distribution of termite mounds is mainly affected by the environment167•102• It is
highly correlated with vegetation57 and there seems to be an inverse relation between the
termitaria and the soil nutrients97•145•136•57• Their density is very variable; it ranges from
less than 5/ha5 for mounds supporting very populous colonies (more than 1 million
termites per mound) to more than I 000/ha for small mounds208•
" !
; I ��-.•. - . 1.( , -, . ,( ; . ( . ' ' ·' <',;, � .
: ; --, .._ ·�,-�:: -� . . .
A
FIGURE 1.9 Mound nest:
Hdrd and thick
·�
Mo!(' open but hard inner layer
' Subterranean tunnels-In search ol lood
8
A: mound nest of Coptotermes /acteus B: mound nest of Coptotermes /acteus showing -internal structure (from Hadlington, 198r)
35
1.4.2.1 Mound Construction
The mound is not a static structure, it is in constant evolution and transformation26•97•
Basically there are two ways of building nests: excavation and construction. Excavation
is perhaps the most primitive and simplest action176• The construction techniques are
more sophisticated and may give rise to complicated nests in the higher termites.
Noirot (1970Y27 recognises two different methods of construction: addition and
modification. In the first instance new structures are added without any modification
of the existing ones (e.g., Cubitermes jungifaber) while in the latter, the workers modify
and re-organise the pre-existing structures by reworking the inside outwards (e.g.,
Macrotermes bellicosus, Nasutitermes exitiosus).
construction methods are combined127•
Very often, excavation and
Construction usually occurs at nighf2.23 and is usually seasonal. Most of the species
construct at the beginning205 or during the rainy season60•22 and a few others when both
the rainfall and temperature are low10•
1.4.2.2 Age of the Termitaria
There is a great variation in mound longevity, although little data have been collected
on this subject9•13•102• Mound longevity is generally based on the life-span of the colony,
since an unoccupied mound will erode more rapidly102 but in some cases, larger termite
mounds may be used by a succeeding colony of the same species after the first one has
become moribund147• Since some species are polycarpic with a single colony comprising
up to eight mounds80, the growth of the mound is not always related to the size and
environment of the colony. As a general rule, the growth rate of the individual mound
declines as the mound increases in height10•
The Australian termite mounds are ephemeral structures, most of them lasting for only
a few years, although the very large mounds of Nasutitermes triodiae may last 100
years or more96• Small colonies may reach their maximum size at the age of 4 and a
I I ,
!
36
half years and die at the age of 6-7 years, while larger colonies may die after 15-16
years 97• Holt et a! (1980f8 give a life-span of someAmitermes vitiosus mounds of 25-
50 years. The oldest termite mound known is described by Watson (1967)195 in Rhodesia
and may be 700 years old.
1.4.2.3 Termite Nest Material and Fabrics
Mounds are constructed from a mixture of materials such as soil, excreta, saliva and
plant debris206•68•97 combined into different fabrics according to the proportion of each
material. The choice of material depends partly on the termite feeding habits168 the
availability of material in their habitat68,97 and the part of mound being built (nursery,
wall, outer cap). Lee and Wood (197la)" identified two major types of fabric based on
the materials from which they were composed:
(A) Fabrics dominated by orally transported soil particles :
a) cemented solely with saliva as in the African Macrotermitinae mounds67•
b) re-packed with excreta, in addition to saliva. This type of fabric can be
found largely in the outer wall of mounds of a few species such as
Tumulitermes pastinato?'.
(B) Fabrics dominated by excreta:
a) consisting of soil (i.e. from soil-feeding species) mixed with orally
transported soil particles
,b) consisting of organic matter derived from the ingestion of plant material.
Sleeman and Brewer (1 972)168 observed that grass-feeding species (e.g. Nasutitermes
triodiae, Tumulitermes pastinator) appeared to build mounds composed mainly of soil
materials with little organic matter, while wood-feeders (e.g.Coptotermes acinaciformis)
tended to build mounds containing mainly organic material.
In general the same species seem to construct particular parts of a mound with similar
types of materials97• However, the proportions of the different elements may change
considerably with location68.97•98•168•
I
37
1.4.2.3.1 Soil
As discussed previously (1.2), soil particles are often the major constituents of the nest·
systems. Exceptions are found in the nest·systems of species which have no contact
with the soil, or in certain regions of the nests of other species.
A) Mound Material Origin and Clay Mineralogy
The origin of the soil particles used for the construction of termitaria has been discussed
by many authors and the clay mineralogy in mounds and soils has been used to identify ·
the soil material from which the mound originated98• Kaolin and illite represent the
major constituents of clay in the mounds and soils studied by Lee and Wood (197Ib)98,
They range from 60-100% of the total clay content. The kaolin alone varied from 10
to > 80% with a meao of 54% (Table 1.3). Boyer (1971)26 also showed high
percentages of kaolin in African termite mounds (70-85%). Generally, the kaolin ratio
is greater in the subsoil (B horizon) than in the topsoil (A horizon)98.
Sometimes building materials are brought from great depth; Boyer (1971 )26 found that
Macrotermes subhyalinus brought building materials from depths of 12-15 m. Lee and
Wood (1971b)98 have shown that the soil used by termites for their mound construction
generally comes from sub-soil. Many authors working in various parts of Africa
204,197,194,137,109,104,6s,61.26,134,144,71, India84,166,152,s6, British Guianas' and Australia<Js,2os have come
to the same conclusions. There are few exceptions, with a few studies reporting the use
of topsoil in mound construction98·102·209·104·136•9·144• Work reported by Lee and Wood
. (1971 b )98 show that in many places the topsoil contains too little clay to meet the needs
of mound construction, while the subsoil seems to satisfy requirements98• In their study,
based on 12 species taken from 1 7 localities in the Northern Territory, they showed that
half of the mounds studied came entirely from subsoil and the minority (20%) from
topsoil. The remainder derived from a combination of the two. They also showed that
38
a particular species does not always take soil from the same horizon. In four different
sites, Coptotermes acinaciformis used the B horizon twice, the A horizon once and in
the fourth site, a mixture of the two horizons. Nasutitermes triodiae used the same B
horizon in all the sites examined. They also noted that at a same site, mounds of several
species sampled showed that the materials came from different horizons. For example,
at one site, Tumulitermes pastinator andAmitermes laurensis used soil material from the
A horizon while Nasutitermes triodiae and Drepanotermes rubriceps used B horizon
material.
B) Particle Size.
The particle size of soils can be classified into the following categories: clay <.002 mm,
silt 0.002-.02 mm, fine sand 0.02-0.2 mm, coarse sand 0.2-2.0 mm and gravel >2.00
mm2• The size of the workers seems to dictate the upper limit of the grain size that can
be transported by mandibles or ingested97•109• Comparatively large species of termites
like Drepanotermes rubriceps and Nasutitermes triodiae incorporate a small fraction ( 1-
3%) of fine gravel in their construction72•98,
The clay fraction is an important element of the mound; it is not only a binding material,
but also helps to hold moisture in the mound. Three major reviews97•109•102 have been
published on the particle size of tennite mounds and their associated soils with emphasis
on the effects of termites on soil properties. The majority of studies show an increase
in the clay content of the mounds in comparison with unmodified soils. Although a few
authors have reported a similar clay content compared to the surrounding soil1ss,t49•6 or
subsoil166•71 or even lower clay content than the subsoW8•144•98• Differences in clay
content may occur within the mound. Some researchers have reported higher clay
content in the queen's chamber and the nursery71•7.26, while others found higher values
in the surface layer and outer wall 5°. Miedema and Van Vuure (1977)109 have questioned
the validity of some particle size analyses, as they detected some erroneous results of
particle size analyses. These are probably due to substances incorporated by the termites
in their mounds which could interfere with the soil fractionation. For the same reason,
39
Lee and Wood (1971b)98 have omitted physical analyses and detennination of clay
minerals of samples with high carton content (wood feeding termites).
Certain African termites may include up to 70% clay in certain structures of their
mounds24 and most of the mound-building species studied in Australia incorporate more
than 20% of clay in their structures (Table 1.3). Although the clay content of the
mounds can be up to 20% more than in any of the soil horizons, many species appear
to have no precise requirements of particle size98• They seem to be able to construct
mounds from a wide range of available materials. For example, two mounds of
Amitermes meridionalis located 100 m apart had different physical compositions: clay:
13 and 17%; fine sand: 42 and 27-29% respectively. With the exception of the inner
part of the mounds, the particle size composition of the nests seems to be more related
to the composition of the soil than the species of termite97. This contrasts with some
African species (e.g., Apicotermes occultus Silvestri) whose tu1dergrotu1d nests always
consist of 8 1·83% of fine sand mixed with organic matter, irrespective of soil type1n.
1.4.2.3.2 Saliva
The use of saliva as a binding agent for the construction of the nest and associated
structures has been noted by many authors6s,127,97,98,26,55,m,w7,5o,J32,149,
m.n.25·147·129·96. Its use may be more important for species which do not use their excreta
as a cementing agent97·98. Little is known about its composition. The saliva sustains
larvae, ftu1ctional reproductives and soldiers of some species. Lafage and Nutting
(1978)93 observed that the salivary gland foam cells secrete lipids and perhaps
mucopolysaccharides, and the vacuole cells, a substance with glycoprotein characteristics.
Grasse and Gharagozlou (1963)59 considered the saliva to be very rich in proteins and
Cmelick (1971, 1972)34·35 suggested the presence of some free fatty acids and easily
emulsifiable phospholipids.
40
1.4.2.3.3 Excreta
Termites use of excreta as a binding agent for soil particles has been reported by many
scientists96.Js.m,to7•93•36.84,9S,209,9•102• Lafage and Nutting (1978)93 noted that probably all
termites use their excreta for construction, modifying and lining their nests and
associated structures. Lee and Wood (1971a)97 observed that excreta can also be used
to fill disused galleries or as a structural component. The quantity and composition of
the excrement varies with the feeding habits and the structure considered. The soil�
feeding termites produce excreta which contains a large proportion of soil and appears
very much like soil. Wood-feeding species, in contrast to grass-feeding species, produce
a greater quantity of excreta. In these species, it may be the major constituent of their
nest or certain parts of it. This material is generally known as carton. It is a hard, dark
brown and highly adaptable construction material. It is made up principally of organic
excreta with some mineral particles and some fragments of undigested plant tissue911•93•
It contains up to 16.5% of polyphenolic material which resembles the alkali-soluble,
acid-insoluble humic materials of soils98• Lignin is a major constituent of carton,
although it also includes som� cellulose and sometimes substances that inhibit microbial
and fungal growth". Samples of cartons have been found to contain 87-95% of organic
matter (dry weight)".
1.4.2.3.4 Plant Remains
Some species such as Coptofermes, Nasutitermes and Mastotermes, have been observed
to incorporate some undigested wood into their mounds. This appears to be
exceptional'27•97• Likewise, the inclusion of grass into predominantly earthen mounds
seems to be incidental. Harvested plant material is generally stored within the galleries
and chambers of the mound.
41
1.4.2.4 Chemical Analyses
Much work around the world has been reported on the chemical analyses of termite
mounds and their surrounding soils. The aims of many of these studies was to assess
the influence of termites on biological, ecological or pedological factors. Therefore the
analyses concentrated on plant nutrients (organic carbon, total nitrogen, pH, phosphorus,
potassium, calcium, cation exchange capacity and exchangeable cations [calcium,
magnesium, potassium and sodium]). Very few studies have included other e�ements
(aluminium's·36•1•136; iron14•27•1•136; manganese36.136; zinc197'36). In Australia, only one study
undertaken by Okello-Oloya et a/ (1985)136 reported concentrations for aluminium and
manganese. The chemical analyses of termite mounds has been reviewed by Lee and
Wood (1971a)97, Boyer (1971)" and (1973)27, Bache1ier (1977)9, Wood and Sands
(1978)"" and more recently Lobry de Bruyn and Conacher (1991)'"'. Unfortunately the
species26,27, the age of the termitaria27 and the exact location of the sample (mound or
soil) is not always stated; the number of mounds investigated by researchers is often
small, sometimes only one, and an apparently unaffected soil may have been affected
by termite nests in the past102• According to Lee (1983)96 "much of the area of northern
Australia, and to a lesser extent of southern Australia, probably owes its present soil
mantle to termite-transported material". Work on chemical analyses of Australian
termite mounds have been conducted mostly in Northern Australia. The most
comprehensive study was done by Lee and Wood (1971b)" in 1971. Another major
research program was undertaken by CSIRO in North Eastern Australia to investigate
the role of termites in the ecosystem136,13s,no,t73•172.171•
Most of the studies, in Australia and throughout the world, showed an increase in the
chemical composition (organic carbon, nitrogen and exchangeable bases: mainly calcium
and magnesium) of termite mounds compared to the adjacent soiJI4.98·n,t02• However, a
few authors such as Nye (1955)134, Lee and Wood (197la&b)'�', Kang (1978)17, Sheikh
and Kayani (1 982)'63, and Spain and Mcivor (1988)171 observed that not all termite
mound materials are richer in plant-nutrients than the surface soils distant from the
mounds. Nye (1955)134 found that the chemical composition of the mounds seems to
42
vary according to the species of termite, the age of the mound, the part of it sampled
and the type of soil. Boyer (1956)25 in Central Africa reported a gradual increase of the
total bases content from the soil, to pediment, to wall and finally to the nursery. Those
differences are also seen clearly in the work by Lee and Wood (1971 a&b)"''· In
contrast, Pomeroy (1976)'44 in Uganda found no significant differences between new and
old parts of the mound, or between inner and outer parts of the mound wall. He
attributes this to the redistribution throughout the mound by diffusion during the wet
seasons. Coventry et a! (1988)38 in Australia, working onAmitermes vitiosus, came to
the same conclusion when they reported no significant difference between sampling
positions.
The cause of the mineral accumulation in termite mounds can be attributed to three
major factors:
I) the differential selection of soil particles and the use of a richer sub-soil by
termites201
II) the incorporation of vegetation, saliva and excreta (in certain parts of the
mounds)
III) pedological changes198•
Other factors which may contribute to mineral accumulation are:
a) the higher level of microflora activity in the mound. Cellulose decomposers142
and denitrifier micro-organisms (Pomeroy 1983)145 release nutrients into the
mound by their activity
b) the higher evaporation from the soil surface of the mound201•144•145•71•27 which is
increased by the air flow through the mound26.201•202• However, Fyfe and Gay
(1938)50 reported the presence of a relatively impermeable surface layer which
impeded evaporation in Nasutitermes exitiosus mounds
c) Watson (1976)199 reported the 'umbrella effect' of termite mounds in shedding
rainfall and retarding leaching in low and medium rainfall zones. He also
showed that water was retained through the wet season in termite mounds but
was leached from adjacent soils196
43
d) Another cause was proposed by Boyer (1973)27 who suggested that the
mechanical action of termites (grinding and remoulding soil materials with
vegetation) may free certain elements.
Although it is not always possible to compare the chemical analyses data :
• different procedures give different results,
- the element analysed and the species studied vary from one investigation tO another,
- and the exact location of the sample in the mound is not always known:
a few tables of data for chemical analyses of Australian termites have been compiled for
comparison purposes (Tables 1.3 - 1 . 1 0).
Table 1.3 Australian termite mound and adjacent soil physical properties ... ... The letters: *A to *D indicate the references.
Location Termite species Type of material Gravel C. Sand F Sand Silt Clay Kaolin Illite Others & & % % % ••
Reference Position Texture (excluding gravel), in % % NT Howard Spring Coptotennes acinaciformis M. outer casing 0 2 1 4 1 5 3 1 >80 . 10-20
*A A (0·25) <I 3 1 46 6 1 6 >80 . 5-10 8(60-75) <I 34 43 3 2 1 >80 . 1·5
N.T. S.Port Darwin Amitenne.s meridiana/is upper mound galleries 0 27 42 1 1 1 3 >80 . 5-10
*A M. center 0 34 42 10 1 3 >80 . 5-10 soil beneath mound 7 40 3 9 9 1 1 >80 . 5-10
Amitermes meridiana/is upper mound galleries 0 2 1 27 1 6 27 >80 . 5-10 M. center 0 29 29 1 1 27 >80 . 5-10 soil beneath mound <I 29 30 12 26 >80 . 5·10 A l l (0·10) 5 47 43 4 5 >80 . 5·10 Al2(10·25) 1 8 47 42 3 6 >80 . 5-10 B (25-45) 70 47 4 1 3 7 >80 - 5-10
N.T. Daly River Nasutitermes triodiae M. outer galleries 0 1 8 4 1 1 2 25 65-80 20-30 1·5 *A nursery 0 9 3 7 1 9 29 65-80 20-30 <I
basal region of mound <I 1 3 46 1 2 23 65-80 20-30 1-5 AI (0-6) <I 23 54 14 9 40-50 30-40 10-20 A2(10-20) I 22 52 12 1 3 30-40 50-65 1-5 B (40-50) 35 20 45 1 4 1 8 65-80 20-30 1-5
N.T. Pine Creek Coptotermes acinaciformis M. outer casing 0 1 1 39 20 25 50-65 30-40
'A Tumulitennes hastilis Mound 0 1 1 3 3 26 26 30-40 50-65 A I (0-10) 9 1 8 56 24 5 40-50 50-65 B (20-40) 49 IO 37 24 28 40-50 40-50 1-5
N.T. Larrimah Tumulitennes hastilis Mound galleries 0 3 8 22 7 29 >80 - 10-20 *A galleries under mound 2 34 25 3 37 >80 - 10-20
Amitennes vitiosus Mound galleries 0 33 30 4 29 >80 - 10-20 Mound base I 4 1 30 3 26 >80 - 10-20
AI (0-6) [ 46 32 9 8 >80 - 10-20 B (25-30) 2 36 1 9 4 44 >80 - 10-20
N.T. Tennant Creek Drepanotermes rubriceps Mound external wall [ 14 59 3 20 50-65 30-40 2-10 'A Mound internal [ [5 60 5 20 40-50 20-30 l-5
A (0- 10) [ 1 9 65 4 9 40-50 20-30 15-30 B (20-30) <[ 1 7 63 2 16 50-65 30-40 l l-25
QLD Mareeba I Amitermes laurensis Mound 0 12 41 25 17 10-20 65-80 10-20 'A Tumulitermes pastinator Mound outer galleries 0 4 45 27 1 9 10-20 65-80 10-20
Nasutitermes triodiae Mound outer galleries <[ 12 38 20 25 10-20 50-65 20-40 Drepanotermes rubriceps Mound outer galleries 3 1 0 43 22 26 10-20 50-65 25-50
A (0-8) <[ 12 56 23 7 10-20 50-65 5-10 B (16-24) <[ 7 43 20 29 20-30 65-80 15-30
QLD Mareeba 2 Amitermes /aurensis Mound outer galleries 0 [4 44 4 34 65-80 20-30 <[ 'A core of mound 0 1 9 49 5 24 65-80 20-30 <[
Nasutitermes triodiae Mound outer gaJieries 0 18 47 6 25 65-80 20-30 l-5 basal region of mound [ 1 9 47 5 23 65-80 20-30 <[ A (0-20) 1 8 26 65 4 4 40-50 40-50 <[ B (45-60) 4 1 27 40 7 24 50-65 30-40 <[
QLD Mareeba 3 Coptotermes acinaciformis M. outer casing 0 6 1 7 2 53 65-80 - 20-30 'A G. within wood 0 5 9 45 69 65-80 - 20-30
Schedorhinotermes int.act. G. over log 0 6 10 18 64 65-80 - 20-30 Nasutitermes triodiae Mound outer galleries <[ 30 [6 15 36 50-65 10-20 20-30
A (0-10) [ 8 18 24 53 65-80 - 20-30 B (30-50) 0 5 10 15 7 1 65-80 - 20-30
QLD Atherton Nasutitermes magnus Mound outer galleries [ 15 33 22 26 40-50 40-50 5-10 'A A (0-15) 7 15 39 30 15 20-30 50-65 5-10
B (25-35) 4 l3 35 26 25 40-50 40-50 6-15 QLD Townsville Amitermes laurensis Mound outer galleries 0 7 4 [ 27 19 50-65 10-20 2()..40
'A core of mound 0 6 42 29 20 50-65 10-20 20-40 Coptotermes acinaciformis M. outer casing 0 l3 45 18 19 50-65 10-20 15-30 Nasutitermes longipennis Mound 2 1 7 46 18 1 6 50-65 10-20 20-40
cont ... .. ....
Table 1.3 (cont ..• ) Austalian termite mound and adjacent soil physical properties ... "'
Location Tennite species Type of material Gravel C. Sand F Sand Silt Clay Kaolin Illite Others & & % % % ..
Reference Position Texture (excluding gravel), in % % B (16-24) I I 7 28 23 40 65-80 5-10 15-30
QLD Warwick Nasutitermes magnus Mound outer galleries I 52 21 9 16 >80 . 10·20
'A AI (0·20) 4 54 24 I I 10 >80 . 10-20 A2 (40-60) I I 50 23 9 17 >80 . 10-20
N.S.W. Canberra Nasutitermes exitiosus outer soil cap 0 26 3 1 9 30 50-65 20-30 1 1-25
'A Coptotermes /actus outer soil cap 0 16 26 7 47 50-65 20-30 10·20 AIA2 (0-20) 29 35 47 10 9 40-50 40-50 5·10 A3 (25-45) 44 36 43 10 I I 40-50 40-50 5-10 B (55-70) 38 24 28 9 40 65-80 10-20 1·5
N.S.W. Tallangatta Coptotermes /actus outer soil cap 0 27 13 17 37 20-30 40-50
'A AI (0·12) 6 32 26 19 22 20-30 40-50 A2 (15030) 4 26 28 17 28 40-50 10-20 B (35-55) 3 24 28 15 3 1 20-30 20-30 1·5
N.S.W. Narrandera Drepanotermes rubriceps surface galleries <I 22 52 9 14 30-40 40-50 1 1 -25
'A deeper gal. 5-30cm <I 24 52 8 14 30-40 40-50 1 1 -25 soil under ga11.30-60 I 25 54 6 14 30-40 40-50 1 1-25 soil below gall.60-70 4 23 54 7 15 30-40 40-50 1 1-25 • (0·30) <I 25 52 8 14 30-40 30-40 1 1·25 • (30-60) I 26 54 6 14 30-40 30-40 12·30 • (60-90) <I 19 54 7 23 30-40 40-50 12·30
S.A. Chowilla Drepanotermes rubriceps surface galleries . 4 1 38 9 I I
'A deeper ga1.2.5-7 .Scm - 38 34 10 16 g.bottom nest7.5-15cm . 37 34 9 17 soil- (0-2.5) . 51 35 6 7
- (2.5·7.5) . 45 39 7 7
• (7.5-15) . 44 40 8 7
• (15-20) . 39 34 7 1 8
"
TABLE 1.3 (conti.) Austalian termite mound and adjacent soil physical properties Location Termite species Type of material Grace I C. Sand F Sand Silt Clay
& & % Reference Position Texture (excluding gravel}, in %
'F QLD Amitermes Jaurensis Upper mound 21
Charles Towers Middle mound 24
Lower mound 20
Mound pediment 17
In term. soil (0·1 O)cm 8
*F N.S.W. Nasutitermes exitiosus Surface layer 17.7 43.0 17.0 22.4
Canberra Outer wall 16.8 41.1 16.7 25.4
Inner wall 26.7 37.8 19.3 16.3
Nursery 60.6 23.5 10.9 5.0
Soil 22.6 50.2 18.2 9.0
Nasutitermes exitiosus Surface layer 28.1 44.8 16.0 1 1 .2 Outer wall 33.9 41.0 15.2 10.0
Inner wall 36.8 37.4 18.1 7.7
Nursery 58.4 25.7 1 1 .3 4.6
Soil 33.2 45.3 15.3 6.2
Nasutitermes exitiosus Surface layer 21.1 33.7 16.0 292
Outer wall 16.7 33.6 16.1 33.6 Inner wall 23.8 34.1 21.4 20.6
Nursery 54.3 19.8 12.3 13.6
Soil 30.5 42.5 18.3 8.6
Nasutitermes exitiosus Surface layer 18.3 29.6 14.4 37.7
Outer wall 17.6 30.5 14.9 37.1
Inner wall 27.6 28.6 19.4 24.5
Nursery 58.1 25.0 4.0 12.9
Soil 39.6 38.0 16.4 6.1 n; Montmonllmute, Venmcuhte, Chlonde, regularly mterstratihed mateHai, ra!ldomly strat1hed matenal, quartz, haemahte, goeih11e and felspar. •A: Lee & Wood 1971b91 [Method Hutton (1955)] •G: Spain etal 1982'""' [Wt% of fine earth] H: Ho1t eta/ 198071 [Wt% of fine earth] •G: Spain et al 1982''" (WI o/e of fine earth] •F: Fyfe & Gay 1938"' (Method of Prescott & Piper 1928, after ignition]
Fyfe and Gay resuhs were re<:alculated to obtain the fractions (clay, silt, fine sand and coarse sand) in %
... 00 Kaolin % Illite % Others
.. %
TABLE 1.4 l\feans and standard deviations for a number of species of Australian termite mounds (and corresponding soils) chemical analyses
The !etten • A to •p indicate the reference
•• soil : fraction in the range of0-10 em depth
Reference • pll Org. C K,O K Ca p Mg Na Fe
g/lOOg mg/lOOg mgllOOg mg/lOOg mg/lOOg mg/lOOg mg/100g mg/lOOg
Tz£e of material mem SD mean SD mem SD mem SD mean SD mean SD mem SD mem SD mean SD
*A Mound: OM<IO% (n-39) 5.6 0.7 2.8 1.6 1699 1362 183 137 79 5 1 1 6 1 7
Mound: OM>lO% (n=26) 4.2 0.7 30.8 14.5 190 127 3 1 5 !54 24 10
Mound (n=65) 5.0 1.0 14.0 16.6 186 132 173 !56 19 15
•• Soil (n=18) 5.9 0.6 1.4 1.5 2290 1605 148 142 60 56 1 1 6
*B Mound 6.2## 0.5 2.1## 1.4 1045# 1 184 10.2# 6.5 15.9# 2.2 18.1# 7.2 241# 289 1372# 138 ( #o n� 6) (##o n�l8)
* * Soil (n=6) 5.9 0.6 0.8 0.2 1103 1455 8.2 4.5 1 1 .4 4.1 1 1 .6 3.2 254 257 1 132 143
*C+*D Mound (n=5) 5.8 0.2 1.9 1.0
** Soil (n=3) 6.0 0.2 0.6 0.1
*E Mound (n=2) 6.9 0.0 1.9 15.0 7.1
** Soil (n=2) 6.8 0.1 1.1 15.0 7.1
*F Mound (n=2) !53 19 135 44 135 30 5.3 0.7 1772 629
** Soil (n=2) 83 17 10.5 0.7 33 7.8 3.2 0.1 2561 2518
Mound mean (total) 5.3 1.0 10.8 15.1 1699 1362 256 412 !59 !54 18.5 14.1 47 55 182 267 1472 323 (n max = 92)
** Soil mean (total) 6.0 0.6 1.2 1.2 2290 1605 363 780 45 52 1 1 .5 5.5 1 7 1 0 191 246 1489 1165 (n max = 31)
•A: Lee and Wood (197lb/' n= number of data set from literature values
•s: OkeUo-Oloya et al. (1985)130 #: n= 6 •c: Holt and Coventry (1981)77 + Coventry i!l al. (1988)" ##: ll"' 18
•E: Birkill (1985)10 OM: Organic matter .... *F: Barr et al. (1988)14 "'
TABLE 1.4 (conti.) Means and standard deviations for a number of species of australian termite mounds (and corresponding soils) chemical analyses "'
0
The letters • A to *E indicate the reference ** soil : fraction in the range of 0-1 0 em depth
Reference * Mn A! Ext.P Exc.Ca Exc.K Exc.Mg Exc.Na S Tot. S Sol.
mg/IOOg mg/IOOg mg/IOOg mg/lOOg mg/lOOg mg/IOOg mgltOOg mgllOO mg/100 g g
Type of material m<m SD m<m SD rn<m SD mem SD mean SD mem SD m<m SD m<m m<m
*A Mound OM:<J0%(n-39) 75 5 1 23 !5 29 !5 4.3 4.7
Mound OM:> 10% (n=26)
Mound {n=65)
Soil {n=l8) 49 5 1 !6 !6 !2 9 !.7 0.9
*B Mound 26.4# 5.2 3613# 483 3.3## 3.7 !39## 63 2!.5## 9.3 24.!## I J .4 10.1# !4.2 ( #, n� 6) (##: n=18
Soil (n=6) 24.7 4.8 3093 937 0.6 0.4 16.6 8.5 19.0 4.7 13.9 72 2.9 2.0
*C+*D Mound (n=5) !.0 0.4 !32 9! 1 1.1 4.0 53 !3.8 0.5 0.!
Soil (n=3) 0.5 0.2 40 23 6.0 !.5 28.5 !!.0 0.4 0.4
*E Mound (n=2) 0.5 0.2 28! 2! 228 12.4 280 32 9.2 3.3 20.0 !.!4
Soil (n=2) 0.3 0.2 !70 44 !51 47 !86 !3 8.0 !.6
Mound mean (total) 26.4 5.2 3613 483 2.6 3.3 !04 7! 28 39 37 47 5.0 6.6 20.0 !.!4 (n max = 90)
Soil mean (total) 24.7 4.8 3093 937 0.5 0.3 50 55 25 38 26 45 2.3 2.! 10.0 0.98 (n max = 29)
*A: Lee & Wood (197lb)"' n= number of data set from literature values *B: Okello-Oloya et al (1985) #: n= 6 *C: Holt & Coventry (1981) + Coventry el al. (1988) 11#; � 18 •n: Birkm (1985) OM: Organic matter
TABLE 1.5 Termite mound and soil chemical data I (Lee and Wood, 1971 b)98• II samples containing high level of organic matter pretreated with peroxide
Location Termite species I Type of material
NT Berrimah
NT Howard Spring
NT S.Port Darwin
NT Daly River
NT Pine Creek
Soil
Mastolermes darwiniensis Carton in wooden build. #
Amitermes sp. Galleries und. bark #
Coptotermes acinaciformis M. outer casing
Carton from mound # Microcerotermes nervosus whole mound #
soil soil: A (0�25)
soil: 0(60-75)
Amitermes meridionalis
soil
Amilermes meridionalis
upper mound galleries
M. center
beneath mound
upper mound galleries
M. center
soil beneath mound
Microcerotermes nervosus Whole mound # soil A I I (0-10)
8 (25-45)
Nasulllermes triodiae M. outer galleries
nursery # basal region of mound
soil A I (0-6)
8 (40-50)
Coptotermes acinaciformis M. outer casing
Carton from mound # Nursery from mound #
Tumu/itermes hastilis Mound
soil A I (0-10)
B (20-40)
pH
5.2
4.1
4.8
3.2
5.3
5.2
5.3
5.5
5.8
5.1
5.6
5.5
4.7
4.9
5.3
5.4
5.6
5.6
6.2
5.8
5.7
4.7
3.2
3.2
4.9
5.8
5.6
Org. C
g/100g
46.0
10.0
2.7
43.0
1 1.0
3.4
0.2
4.6
1.3
0.7
6.3
1.9
1.1
14.0
0.6
0.2
2.7
w:o
2.5
0.5
0.2
2.4
43.0
50.0
4.6
0.5
0.4
K,O
mg/IOOg
100
1 1 0
80
490
430
450
330
370
320
570
490
1730
1820
2020
2950
1870
3100
4340
3820
2800
K Ca P Exc.Ca Exc.K Exc.Mg Exc.Na
mg!IOOg mg/IOOg mg/IOOg mgfiOOg mgftoOg mgllOOg mgfiOOg
65
24
21
23
48
7
6
28
36
20
64
74
54
100
14
21
230
280
200
60
170
260
1 10
1 1 0
250
160
490
560
70
20
1 1 0
170
1 0
<10
40
10
<10
40
10
<10
140
<10
<10
70
220
70
10
10
20
170
120
80
10
<10
21
7
9
16
25
9
4
10
8
5
1 8
1 6
1 1
25
4
9
1 1
27
I I
4
8
12
1 5
1 6
1 4
7
18
20.0
10.0
2.0
24.0
8.0
0.8
24.0
10.0
0.8
0.6
0.2
4.0
150.3
60.1
4.0
2.0
14.0
52.1
2.0
6.0
3.5
1.6
0.0
4.3
12.5
1.6
13.7
22.7
2.0
0.4
0.4
39.1
62.6
54.7
5.9
2.3
10.9
17.2
7.8
3.5
41.3
2.4
3.6
9.7
3.6
0.2
14.6
4.9
0.2
0.2
0.1
38.9
83.9
34.0
3.6
9.7
25.5
37.7
9.7
17.0
2.5
1.6
0.2
5.5
1.8
0.9
9.4
2.1
0.7
0.7
0.2
0.9
2.1
1.8
0.9
0.9
0.9
1.1
1.1
2.3
cont .•.
"' �
TABLE 1.5 (conti.) Lee and Wood (l97lb) termite mound and soil chemical data
II samples containing high level of organic matter pretreated with peroxide
Location Termite species/ Type of materiaJ
Soil
pH Org. C K,O
total
K
HCI
gi!OOg mgltOOg mgllOOg
NT Larrimalt
NT Tennant Creek
QLD Mareeba I
QLD Mareeba 2
QLD Mareeba 3
Tumulitermes hastilis
Amitermes vitiosus
soil
Drepanotermes rubriceps
soil
Mound galleries
Mound galleries
Mound base
AI (0·6)
B (25-30)
Mound external wall
Mound internal
A (0-to)
B (20-30)
Tumulitermes coma/us Mudgut in dead tree # Amilermes laurensis Mound
Tumulitermes pastinator Mound outer galleries
Nursery from mound # Nasutilermes triodiae Mound outer galleries
Drepanotermes rubriceps Mound outer galleries
soil A (0-8)
B (16-24)
Amitermes laurensis Mound outer galleries
core of mound
Nasutitermes triodiae Mound outer galleries
basal region of mound
soil A (0-20)
B (45-60)
Coptotermes acinaciformis M. outer casing
Carton from mound # G. within wood
Schedorhinotermes int.act G. over log
5.3
5.6
6.2
5.9
6.0
5.6
B 6.4
6.5
4.5
5.2
B 5.2
S.l
5.2
B 65
7.1
5.5
6.1
6.0
6.6
6.8
5.7
3.1
5.3
5.8
2.4
2.2
0.8
1.1
0.3
1.4
1.1
0.5
0.2
18.0
2.9
3.7
1 1.0,
4.4
1.6
0.8
0.4
2.1
1.3
2.0
4.0
0.5
0.3
2.7
44.0
2.8
7.4
370
350
350
490
370
1340
1310
1360
1430
4580
4340
4530
4840
5720
4790
1400
1420
1380
1440
3110
1510
220
180
260
74
64
53
61
64
170
170
130
160
260
180
250
270
310
260
100
380
120
98
140
150
38
160
100
54
94
97
c. HCI
mg!IOOg
60
80
50
60
30
130
90
70
40
170
60
90
260
70
30
<10
<10
100
70
50
160
30
20
90
300
40
210
� P Exc.Ca Exc.K Exc.Mg Exc.Na
HCI
mg!IOOg mgllOOg mgiiOOg mg/IOOg
13
14
13
14
13
I I
I I
10
8
1 8
I I
I I
22
10
8
8
8
16
14
12
12
8
20
10
20
9
I l l
64.1
62.1
38.1
36.1
26.1
114.2
92.2
60.1
42.1
50.1
84.2
68.1
24.0
2.0
2.0
1 14.2
64.1
88.2
142.3
30.1
38.1
164.3
104.2
240.5
15.2
12.5
9.4
6.6
6.6
19.6
23.5
14.5
11.7
5.9
11.3
7.4
5.1
2.0
2.7
16.4
10.2
23.9
46.9
5.5
11.3
39.1
34.4
32.1
19.5
26.8
14.6
12.2
12.2
21.9
10.9
10.9
9.7
34.0
64.4
64.4
55.9
8.5
79.0
32.8
12.2
31.6
47.4
4.9
18.2
42.6
36.5
34.0
mgiiOOg
0.7
1.1
2.5
1.4
0.7
1.1
1.8
0.7
0.5
4.6
25.3
17.9
9.0
1.8
10.6
3.7
1.6
1.4
3.4
0.7
0.9
3.4
2.8
3.9
QLD Atherton
QLD Townsville
QLD Warwick
NSW Canberra
NSW Tallangatta
Nas:utitermes triodiae
soil
Nasutitermes magrws
soil
Amitermes laurensis
Coptotermes acinaciformis
Nasulilermes longipennis
soil
Nasutitermes magnus
soil
Nasutitermes exitiosus
Coptotermes factus
soil
Coptotermes factus
Mound outer galleries A (0-10) B (30-50) Mound outer galleries Nursery of mound # A (0-15) n (25-35) Mound outer galleries core of mound M. outer casing Carton from mound # Mound A (0-8) B (16-24) Mound outer galleries Nursery from mound # AI (0-20) A2 (40-60) outer soil cap Carton from wall # Nursery from mound # outer soil cap Carton outer wall # Carton inner wall # Nursery from mound # AIA2 (0-20) Al (25-45) D (55-70) outer soil cap Carton from wall # Carton inner wall # Nursery from mound #
6.1 6.4 6.2 5.5 4.9 5.5 5.4 5.9 6.5 4.5 3.2 5.1 6.2 6.1 6.1 5.0 6.2 6.6 5.2 4.0 4.1 4.5 3.9 4.3 3.8 5.8 5.5 5.2 5.0 3.8 4.5 4.2
1.5 2.1 0.6 1.5
12.0 1.3 0.5 3.0 1.5 3.5
41.0 3.5 0.9
. 0.2 1.0
17.0 0.9 0.3 2.8
29.0 41.0
2.4, 29.0 41.0 42.0
1.6 0.3 0.3 4.8
44.0 43.0 50.0
710 270 220
2250
2950 2100 1640 1530 1470
1860 2720 1200
970
1000 960
1740
1540
2200 1710 2600
ISO 110 110 240 230 220 260
90 100 110 120
99 81
120 100 190
83 88
240 230 130 390 210 320 180 15 15
340 620 330 520 450
70 90 40 40
180 20 10
140 110 90
430 120
so 10 so
410 30 10 so
110 soo
40 310 520 400
90 30 10 70
390 480 400
39 14 9
19 27 18 17 10
6 5
18 8 6 3
16 48 18 16 13 29 39 1 4 2 4 47 31 I I
5 16 20 26 21 16
114.2 160.3
94.2 38.1
18.0 16.0
1 10.2 96.2 72.1
100.2 34.1 20.0 42.1
30.1 8.0
42.1
48.1
50.1 10.0 6.0
60.1
23.9 39.1 28.5 10.9
18.4 3.9
18.4 30.1 19.2
25.4 16.8 7.4 9.8
10.6 4.3
26.6
35.2
10.9 7.4
30.1 58.7
25.5 34.0 23.1
8.5
6.1 3.6
31.6 24.3 29.2
32.8 10.9 45.0 15.8
9.7 9.7
26.8
45.0
8.5 4.9
32.8 21.9
1.8 2.3 1.8 1.4
1.1 0.9 6.9 3.9 6.2
6.4 3.2
29.9 2.3
1.8 4.1 4.1
3.9
1.1 1.6 3.9 1.6
cont •..
l!l
TABLE 1.5 (conti.) Lee and Wood (1971b) termite mound and soil chemical data u. ..
II samples containing high level of organic matter pretreated with peroxide
Location Tennite species/ Type of material pH Org. C K,o K Ca p Exc.Ca Exc.K Exc.Mg Exc.Na
Soil total HCI HCI HCI
gllOOg mg!JOOg mg/IOOg mg!IOOg mg/IOOg mgi!OOg mgiiOOg mg!IOOg mg!IOOg
soil AI (0-12) 6.1 6.3 1940 490 230 2S 156.3 54.7 30.4 2.1
A2 (15030) S.8 !.6 1940 490 70 17 50.1 50.8 14.6 1.6
B (35-55) S.6 1.9 2020 S60 30 17 24.0 27.0 8.S 0.9
NSW Narrandera Drepanotermes rubriceps surface galleries 6.2 1.4 2240 JSO 170 21 156.3 50.8 21.9 3.0
soil • ( 0-30) 6.S 0.9 2470 320 130 17 122.2 39.1 17.0 2.8
- {30-60) S.6 0.2 2270 300 40 13 48.1 9.8 25.5 3.9
- (60-90) 7.1 0.2 2430 420 80 I I 84.2 39.1 65.7 25.3
SA Chowilla Drepanotermes rubriceps surface galleries 7.9 0.8 4SO 240 18 144.3 54.7 29.2 4.6
soil - ( 0-2.S) 6.9 0.4 320 80 13 74.1 43.0 20.7 2.S
- (2.5-7.5) 1.S 0.2 310 90 I I 62.1 32.1 20.7 3.7
• (7.5-1.5) 7.9 0.2 300 80 10 80.2 29.3 23.1 6.7
- ( 15-20) 8.0 0.2 430 90 12 74.1 26.6 43.8 48.3
- ( 25-30) 8.2 0.3 760 140 " 122.2 46.9 87.6 80.5
SA Gawler I Nasutitermes eJitiosus outer soil cap 4.3 4.0 1860 180 S2 ' 48.1 ,. 19.5 4h
Carton from wall N 3.9 15.0 116 JSO I I
Nursery from mound N 3.9 30.0 72 S20 19
soil AI (0-4) 4.9 !.S 2590 3 60 3 19.4 3.9 3.6 1.4
A2 (4-12) 4.S 0.4 2680 2 " 2 2.2 1.6 1.7 0.7
B (25-30) 4.3 o.s 1730 3 310 3 2.4 4.3 13.4 4.1
SA Gawler 2 Nasutitermes exitiosus outer soil cap 4.5 6.6 2930 530 100 16 1 12.2 16.4 45.0 7.8
Carton from wall N 4.0 26.0 238 440 24
Nursery from mound N 3.7 42.0 260 460 2S
soil AI (0-4) S.3 4.1 4380 380 170 13 146.3 12.5 23.1 S.3
A2 (6-12) 4.7 1.0 4660 400 15 13 26.1 4.7 8.S 2.1
B (25-30) s.o 0.8 3440 6SO 2S 18 42.1 12.9 38.9 S.l
TABLE 1.6 Coptotermes acinaciformis (Australian mound and soil chemical analyses)
Data from Lee and Wood (1971 b)"' II sample containing high level of organic matter, pretreated with peroxide
LOCATION TYPE OF MATERIAL pH Org. C K20 K Ca p Exc.Ca Exc.K Exc.Mg Exc.Na
POSITION total HCI HCI HCI
g!IOOg mg!IOOg mg!IOOg mg!IOOg mg!IOOg mg!IOOg mg!IOOg mg!IOOg mg!IOOg
NT Howard Spring M. outer casing 4.8 2.7 100 21 20 9 20.0 3.5 41.3 2.5
Carton from mound # 3.2 43.0 23 110 16
soil: A (0-25) 5.2 3.4 110 7 10 9 10.0 1.6 2.4 1.6
soil: 8(60-75) 5.3 0.2 80 6 10 4 2.0 0.0 3.6 0.2
NT Pine Creek M. outer casing 4.7 2.4 3100 260 20 12 14.0 10.9 25.5 0.9
Carton from mound # 32 43.0 1 10 170 15
Nursery from mound # 3.2 50.0 1 10 120 16
soil: AI (0-10) 5.8 0.5 3820 160 10 7 2.0 7.8 9.7 1.1
soil: B (20-40) 5.6 0.4 2800 490 10 18 6.0 3.5 17.0 2.3
QLD Mareeba 3 M. outer casing 5.7 2.7 220 100 90 10 164.3 39.1 42.6 3.4
Carton from mound # 3.1 44.0 54 300 20
soil: A (0-1 0) 6.4 2.1 270 110 90 14 160.3 39.1 34.0 2.3
soil: B (30-50) 6.2 0.6 220 110 40 9 94.2 28.5 23.1 1.8
QLD Townsville M. outer casing 4.5 3.5 1470 110 90 5 72.1 19.2 29.2 6.2
Carton from mound # 3.2 41.0 120 430 18
soil: A (0-8) 6.2 0.9 2720 81 50 6 34.1 16.8 10.9 3.2
soil: B (16-24) 6.1 0.2 1200 120 10 3 20.0 7.4 45.0 29.9
th "'
TABLE 1.7 Amitermes vitiosus (Australian mound and soil chemical analyses) II: mean mound value
Location Type of material pH Carbon p Ca K
g!IOOg mg/IOOg mgllOOg mg/IOOg
Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Mean S.D. ·Basalt Wall Upper mound 6.3 0.2 2.6 1.0
red earth Middle mound 6.4 0.2 2.1 1.2 15.3# 2.4# 5.2# 4.9# 200# 30#
•a Lower mound 6.6 0.4 I.S 0.6
Mound pediment 6.4 02 2.1 1 2 14.8 3.9 7.5 62 180 30
Soil (O·IO)cm 6.3 0.1 0.9 0.2 12.0 3.4 5.9 3.8 130 50
Basalt Wall Upper mound 6.4 0.2 1.8 1.0
yell. earth Middle mound 6.5 0.3 1.8 0.6 15.5# 3.8# 4.4# 1.6# 230# 40#
•a Lower mound 6.4 0.3 1.2 0.5
Mound pediment 6.4 0.1 1.4 0.5 15.1 3.3 6.1 3.8 200 20
Soil (0-IO)cm 6.3 0.2 0.9 0.2 14.2 1.5 7.7 4.2 170 20
Basalt Wall Upper mound 6.1 0.1 1.5 0.4
Grey earth Middle mound 6.4 0.2 1.3 0.3 12.5# 5.5# 6.8# 4.6# 290# 110#
•a Lower mound 6.0 0.3 1.3 0.3
Mound pediment 6.1 0.2 1.1 0.3 11.0 1.1 9.0 6.8 270 110
Soil (0-IO)crn 6.3 0.4 0.6 0.1 8.> 2.1 3.9 1.9 260 90
NT Larrimah Mound galleries 5.6 2.2 14 80 64
Lee & Wood Mound base 6.2 0.8 13 50 53
'A soil: A I (0-6) 5.9 1.1 14 60 61
soil: B (25-30) 6.0 0.3 13 30 64
Manbullo Mound 6.85 10.0
control Below mound 0-10 em 6.95 10.0
Birkill Below mound 10-30 em 6.95 10.0
'E Below mound 30-50 ern 6.90 10.0
Soil 0-10 em 6.87 10.0
Soil 10-30 em 6.85 10.0
Soil 30-50 em 6.75 10.0
Mg
mg/100g
Mean S.D.
10.2# 3.5#
1 1 .6 6.9 7.6 4.3
10.7# 4.4#
12.7 3.4
8.8 4.9
16.8# 7.2#
15.6 5.3
12.1 3.2
Na Fo mgiiOOg mgllOOg
Mean
7.0#
8.0 9.0
13.0#
39.0 13.0
23.0#
20.0 180
S.D. Moan
3.0# 1510#
4.0 1250
5.0 1210
2.0# 1440#
65.0 1290
6.0 1340
9.0# 1270#
14.0 l l 80 260 1190
S.D.
350#
330 550
110#
160
180
190#
90 200
"' a,
Manbullo
unfertilized 'E
Charters
Towers Holt
•o
Charters Towers
•o
ChartersTow.
•c
Mound
Below mound 0-10 em
Below mound 10-30 em Below mound 30-50 em
Soil 0-10 em
Soil 10-30 em
Soil 30-50 em
Mound
Below mound to 10 em Below mound to 40 em Soil 0-10 em
Soil 10-20 em
Soil 20-30 em
Soil 30-40 em Soil 40-50 em Soil 50-60 em
Soil 60-70 em
Soil 70-80 em
Mound Below mound to 10 em Below mound to 40 em Soil 0-10 em
Soil I 0-20 em
Soil 20-30 em Soil 30-40 em Soil 40-50 em
Soil 50-60 em
Soil 60-70 em
Soil 70-80 em
Mound n�to
below m. 0-40 em
Soil 0-10 em n=l8
6.90 1.91 20.0
6.62 1.17 20.0
6.47 0.64 20.0
6.52 0.32 20.0
6.72 1.09 20.0
6.60 0.61 20.0
6.80 0.39 10.0
5.9 1.13 - 1.24 - 0.63
5.8 0.65
5.8 0.34
5.8 0.29
5.1 0.28
5.1 0.21
5.8 0.17
5.8 0.13
5.8 0.13
5.6 1.28
- 0.78 - 0.56
5.9 0.65
5.1 0.34
5.6 0.29
5.6 0.28
5.5 0.21
5.5 0.17
5.6 0.13
5.1 0.13
5.9 2.23
6.2 0.58
6.2 0.55 *A: Lee & Wood ((9116)"'; •B: Okello-oloya et a/ (1985)""; °C: Holt & COventry(\982)"; •D: Coventry et a/1988"; *E: B1rktll 1985"'
"' ....
TABLE 1.7 cont.. Amitermes vitiosus (Australian mound and soil chemical analyses) #: mean mound value
Location
Basalt Wall red earth 'B
Basalt Wall yell. earth
'B
Basalt Wall Grey earth
'B
NT Larrimah 'A
Manbullo
control
'E
Type of material
Upper mound
Middle mound
Lower mound
Mound pediment
Soil (0-IO)cm
Upper mound Middle mound Lower mound
Mound pediment
Soil (0-IO)cm
Upper mound
Middle mound Lower mound
Mound pediment Soil (0-1 O)cm
Mound galleries Mound base
soil: A 1 (0-6)
soil: B (25-30)
Mound Below mound 0-10 em Below mound 10-30 em
Below mound 30-50 em Soil 0-10 em
Soil 10-30 em
Soil 30-50 em
Mn
mgl100g Mean S.D.
AI
mg!IOOg Mean S.D.
P acid-Extr.
mg!IOOg
Mean S.D.
Exch. Ca
mg!IOOg
Mean S.D.
Exch. Mg
mg/lOOg
Mean .D.
Exch. K
mg!IOOg
Mean S.D.
1.7 26.2# 7.7# 3510# 810# 2.0
2.0
0.7 156 34.1 25.5 1.5 145 25.9 22.6
1.2 156 44.5 16.8
7.9 27.0 10.9 5.4 25.8 8.6
4.3 22.3 10.9 24.5 26.5
6.0 3940 460 5.5 2110 1320
1.0 0.4 124 31.3 19.0 5.0 18.8 7.4 6.3 0.7 0.1 17 8.0 21.6 10.9 2l.l
1.9 I. 7 225 54.3 30.6 25.2# 7.1# 3960# 240# 1.9• l.3 211 67.9 29.4
24.6
33.3
6.6 4080 280 5.3 3610 180
1.9 0.8
0.6
l.3 209 54.5 18.2 0.2 150 53.5 21.3
0.2 21 5.0 15.7
18.9 4.3 3390 270 0.9 0.5 122 17.0 26.3
18.9# 4.3# 3390# 270# 1.0 0.5 141 44.1 27.4
0.9 0.4 163 55.7 23.0 19.5 2.9 3580 170 0.6 0.2 110 38.7 24.1 23.3 4.3 3390 350 0.3 0.2 8.2 2.6 22.3
0.70 0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
62.1 38.1
36.1 26.1
295 204 166
141 138
148
123
26.8 14.6 12.2 12.2
302 175
165
165
177
205
168
6.7 23.1 7.3 30.5 4.1 28.5 6.1 21.5
2.2 23.1
3.5
9.4 5.1
4.3
2.7
2.8 20.3 4.3
6.3 26.2 6.3
5.8 32.8 8.2 4.5 22.3 5.9
4.3 25.0 6.3
12.5 9.4 6.6 6.6
237
237
178
127
1!7
99
80
Exch.Na
mg!IOOg
Mean SO
0.9 0.5 • • • •
0.7 0.2 0.7 0.5
1.8 0.5 • • • •
1.6 0.2
0.5 0.1
2.3 • •
1.8 5.3
1.1
2.5 1.4
0.7
11.5
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2 9.1 9.2
1.8 •
•
1.1 6.9
S.Tot S.Sol
mg!IOOg mg/1 OOg
"' 00
0.00 Manbul\o Mound 0.38 266 258 219 6.9 20.0 1.14 unfertilized Below mound 0·1 0 em 0.17 202 200 182 6.9 10.0 0.92 'E Below mound I 0·30 em 0.10 148 170 141 6.9 10.0 0.69
Below mound 30·50 em 0.10 136 171 130 6.9 10.0 0.32 Soil 0-10 em 0.15 201 195 184 6.9 10.0 0.98 Soil 10-30 em 0.10 163 180 136 6.9 10.0 0.59 Soil 30-50 em 0.10 166 204 113 6.9 10.0 0.26
Charters Mound 0.90 56.91 70.13 8.99 Towers Below mound to I 0 em 1.30 67.53 49.11 12.12
Holt Below mound to 40 em 0.70 51.10 47.40 8.99 •o Soil 0·10 em 0.70 42.48 39.75 7.04 0.46
Soil 10-20 em 0.40 26.05 31.97 6.26 0.46 Soil 20·30 em 0.30 20.84 31.24 5.08 0.46 Soil 30·40 em 0.30 21.84 38.41 5.08 0.46 Soil 40-50 em 0.30 22.85 52.02 5.08 0.46 Soil 50-60 em 0.30 21.84 61.02 4.30 0.46 Soil 60-70 em 0.10 20.84 66.24 3.91 0.46 Soil 70-80 em 0.10 17.84 70.13 2.35 0.46
Charters Mound 0.60 42.48 62.96 5.08 Towers Below mound to I 0 em 0.90 58.12 53.48 10.17
•o Below mound to 40 em 0.60 40.88 49.84 7.04 Soil 0-10 em 0.40 16.�3 28.08 4.30 0.69 Soil 10-20 em 0.30 8.62 23.58 3.91 0.46 Soil 20-30 em 0.30 9.62 30.63 3.13 0.46 Soil 30-40 em 0.20 8.62 45.46 2.35 0.46 Soil 40-50 em 0.20 10.62 64.30 1.96 0.69 Soil 50-60 em 0.10 8.62 73.29 1.17 1.15 Soil 60-70 em 0.10 6.41 75.24 1.17 us Soil 70-80 em 0.10 4.41 79.74 1.17 1.84
Charters Tow. Mound n=IO 1.61 269.3 48.86 14.08 0.46 •c below m. 0-40 em n=40 0.62 92.18 19.45 6.65 0.69
Soil 0·10 em n=l8 0.48 61.72 17.75 6.65 0.23 "' 'D •A: Lee & Wood 1971"; *B: Okello-oloya et a/l98JD6; •t: Holt & Coventry (1982)11; *D: Coventry et all988"; *E: Birktll 19115'6
TABLE 1.8 Nasutitermes triodiae (Australian mound and soil chemical analyses) "' C>
Data from Lee and Wood (1971b)91 •BB: material entirely or predominantly derived from B horizon
Location Type of material pH Org. C K,O K Ca p Exc.Ca Exc.K Exc.Mg Exc.Na
total HCI HCI HCI
Possible source g/IOOg mg/IOOg mg/IOOg mg!IOOg mg/lOOg mg/IOOg mg!lOOg mg!lOOg mg!IOOg
NT Daly River M. outer galleries *BB 5.6 2.7 1730 230 70 1 1 4.0 39.1 38.9 0.9
nursery # 5.6 10.0 1820 280 220 27 150.3 62.6 83.9 2.1
basal region of mound 6.2 2.5 2020 200 70 1 1 60.1 54.7 34.0 1.8
AI (0-6) 5.8 0.5 2950 60 10 4 4.0 5.9 3.6 0.9
A2(10-20) 5.5 0.2 1970 84 <10 4 2.0 2.0 4.9 0.5
B (40-50) 5.7 0.2 1870 170 10 8 2.0 2.3 9.7 0.9
QLD Mareeba 1 M. outer galleries *BB 5.1 4.4 4530 310 70 10 68.1 7.4 64.4 17.9
A (0-8) 5.5 0.8 5720 100 10 8 2.0 2.0 8.5 1.8
B (16-24) 6.5 0.4 4790 380 10 8 2.0 2.7 79.0 10.6
QLD Mareeba 2 M. outer galleries *BB 6.1 2.0 1380 140 50 12 88.2 23.9 3 1.6 1.4
basal region of mound 6.0 4.0 1440 !50 160 12 142.3 46.9 47.4 3.4
A (0-20) 6.6 0.5 3110 38 30 8 30.1 5.5 4.9 0.7
B (45-60) 6.8 0.3 1510 160 20 20 38.1 11.3 18.2 0.9
QLD Mareeba 3 Mound outer galleries 6.1 1.5 710 !50 70 39 114.2 23.9 25.5 1.8
A (0-10) 6.4 2.1 270 110 90 14 160.3 39.1 34.0 2.3
B (30-50) 6.2 0.6 220 110 40 9 94.2 28.5 23.1 1.8 #: sample pretreated w11fl peroxtde (high organ1c carbon content)
TABLE 1.9
Data from
LOCATION
QLD Mareeba I
'A
Charters Tow
•o
Tumulitermes pastinator (Australian mound and soil chemical analyses)
•A Lee and Wood (1971b)"" •o Coventry et al (1988)'1
TYPE OF MATERIAL pH Carbon K20 K Ca p Exc.Ca Exc. K Exc.Mg Exc.Na
POSITION total HCI HCI
g/IOOg mg/IOOg mg/IOOg mg/IOOg mg/IOOg mg/IOOg mg/IOOg mg/IOOg mg/IOOg
Mound outer gaJieries 5.5 3.7 4340 250 90 I I 84.2 1 1.3 64.4 25.3
Nursery from mound # 5.2 1 1.0 270 260 22
soil: A (0-8) 5.5 0.8 5720 100 10 8 2.0 2.0 8.5 1.8
soil: B (16-24) 6.5 0.4 4790 380 <10 8 2.0 2.7 79.0 10.6
Mound n=9 5.6 3.6 0.94 141.48 12.90 50.32 0.69 below m. 0-20 em n=24 5.6 0.6 0.58 57.31 7.04 25.77 0.23
Soil 0-10 em n=IS 6.2 0.6 0.48 61.72 6.65 17.75 0.23
Mound Moan 5.6 3.7 4340 250 90 6.0 1 12.8 12.1 57.4 13.0 (SO) 0.1 0.1 7.1 40.5 1 . 1 10.0 17.4
Soil 0-10 em Mean 5.9 0.7 5720 100 10 4.2 31.9 4.3 13.1 1.0 (SO) 0.5 0.2 5.3 422 3.3 6.5 1 . 1
#: sample pretreared with peroxide (high organic carbon content)
"' �
"' "' TABLE 1.10 Tumulitermes hastilis ( Australian mound and soil chemical analyses) Data from •A Lee and Wood (197lb)91
LOCATION TYPE OF MATERIAL pH Carbon K20 K Ca p Exc.Ca Exc. K Exc.Mg Exc.Na
POSITION total HCI HCI
g/IOOg mg!IOOg mg!IOOg mg!IOOg mg!IOOg mg!IOOg mg/lOOg mg!IOOg mg!IOOg
NT Pine Creek Mound 4.9 4.6 4340 250 80 14 52.1 17.2 37.7 1.1 'A soil: A I (0-1 0) 5.8 0.5 3820 160 10 7 2.0 7.8 9.7 1.1
soil: B (20-40) 5.6 0.4 2800 490 <10 18 6.0 3.5 17.0 2.3
NT Larrimah Mound galleries 5.3 2.4 370 74 60 13 64.1 15.2 19.5 0.7
'A galleries under mound 6.4 0.6 370 62 40 14 40.1 9.0 12.2 1.6
soil: AI (0-6) 5.9 1.1 490 61 60 14 36.1 6.6 12.2 1.4
soil: B (25-30) 6.0 0.3 370 64 30 13 26.1 6.6 12.2 0.7
Mound M•an 5.1 3.5 2355 162 70 14 58.1 16.2 28.6 0.9
(SD) 0.3 1.6 2807 124 14 I 8.5 1.4 12.9 0.3
Soil 0-10 em Mean 5.8 0.8 1645 276 30 16 21.0 5.1 14.6 1.8 (SD) 0.2 0.5 1633 303 42 3 21.3 2.2 3.4 0.7
63
1.4.2.4.1 pH
The differences between soil and termite moilllds pH are generally small209•102•97 and seem
to have little slgnificance93• The increase of pH, mainly in Macrotermes spp. mounds,
seems to be linked to calcium carbonate accurnulation98•102, while their decreases in other
mounds may be related to the incorporation of organic-rich excreta209• The average
Australian molUlds and associated soils studied are acid in reaction: pH ranging from 4.2
• 6.9 in mounds with, lower values: 4.2 ± 0. 7 in the nursery or carton material and 5.9 -
6.8 in soils (Table 1 .4).
1.4.2.4.2 Organic Carbon
The organic content of most termite mounds is higher than the soil from which they
originated and occasionally lower than the surrounding soii97• It varies greatly not only
according to the species and the origin of the construction material (top- or sub-soil) but
also within the same mound26•97•98• In non-homogenous types of mounds, it generally
increases from the outer mound casing to the inner mound structures (carton or nursery).
For example, Coptotermes acinaciformis mounds have a mean of 2.8 ± 0.5 percent of
organic carbon in the mound outer casing and 44.2 ± 3.4 percent in the nursery and the
carton part (Table 6 (b)). In Australia, the average organic carbon values of mounds
composed largely of soils and their associated soils are respectively between 2 - 3
percent and around I percent (Table 1.4 (a)), while it reaches 50 percent in the nursery
area (Table 1.5 (a)). Okello-Oloya et al (1985)136 observed that the levels of carbon
vary within the mound and decrease from the upper to the lower levels. Organic carbon
also increases in the pediment compared with the soil.
64
1.4.2.4.3 Elements
A) Calcium
Nearly all the studies around the world showed an increase in the calcium content (total
or exchangeable) of termite mounds compared to the adjacent soils. In Africa and Asia,
nodules of calcium carbonate can be found in certain Macrotennitinae mmmds26.27•71•143•
In Australia no nodules have been found. Lee and Wood ( 197Ib)98 mention a usual
increase of calcium in tennitaria of two to five times compared to the soil from which
they originated. According to the Wood and Sands ( 1978)209 table an increase in
calcium (acid extractable) is not always followed by an increase of exchangeable
calcium, and vice versa. Some authors reported higher exchangeable calcium values
than acid extractable or total. There would appear to be some problem in their
analytical procedures. For example, in Okello-Oloya et a/ ( 1985)136, the total calcium
values range from 4.4 ± 1.6 to 21.8 ± 6.8 mg/1 OOg while the exchangeable calcium
values range from 122 ±17.7 to 227 ± 54.3 mg/IOOg (Table 1.7). The total calcium
values are abnormally low compared with the acid-extractable values reported by Lee
and Wood (197lb)" (Table 1.4). The procedure of extraction mentioned was a digestion
with hot hydrofluoric acid. While no specific details of the method are available, it is
likely that the fluorides would interfere with calcium extraction.
The increase of calcium content within mounds seems to follow the increase of organic
carbon content, although Lee and Wood (197la&b}97•98 see no precise correlation
between the two. Acid extractable calcium values in Australian mounds analysed by Lee
and Wood (197lb)" (Table 1.5) vary from <10 to 560 mg/100g with a mean of 173 ±
156 mg/lOOg in the mounds and 60 ± 56 mg/100g in the soils (0-10 em fraction or
closest to this profile ex.: 0-7.5 em) (Table 1.4). The exchangeable calcium values
follow the same kind of range (Table 1.4). The values vary greatly with the location,
species and the part of the mound analysed. For example, a Nasutitern1es triodiae
mound was found to have ISO mg/lOOg exchangeable calcium in the nursery and only
4 mg/1 OOg in the mound outer galleries (Table 1.5). Generally, Okello-Oloya et a/
( 1985)136 found in Amitermes spp. (Table 1.7) mounds that the exchangeable calcium is
65
higher in the upper and middle level part of the mound than in the lower and the
pediment section, but always higher than the surrounding soil.
B) Magnesium
Generally, the magnesium content of mounds is higher than that of the surrounding
surface soils7•14•27•26.25•21•132,14o,109•88•97•98, As for other elements, it varies with the species
responsible for the building204•163•98, or the location1s,!n,98• Most of the magnesium
reported in the literature is exchangeable magnesium. In Australia, total magnesium data
have only been reported by Okello-Oloya et a/ (1985)136 and Barr et a/. (1988)14•
Coventry et al (1988), reported an increase of exchangeable magnesium of 2.6 times in
Amitermes vitiosus mounds compared with the soil. Similar increases have been noted
for Drepanotermes and Tumuliterme�8• Lee and Wood (1�71 a&b)97�8 reported greater
increase of exchangeable magnesium for some species. For example, a Coptotermes
acinaciformis mound outer casing contained 41.3 mg/lOOg of exchangeable magnesium,
while its adjacent soil had only 2.4 mg/lOOg and a Nasutitermes triodiae mound had
83.9 mg!IOOg in its mound nursery compared with 3.6 mg/100g in the adjacent soil
(Table 1 .5). An increase of magnesium of 4-5 times has been recorded in two mounds
(traditionally used by Aboriginal people) compared to the surrounding soil14•
In Australia the average, total magnesium reported by Okello-Oloyaet al (1985)136 for
mounds of Amitermes vitiosus and Amitermes laurensis is 18 . 1 ± 7.2 mg/IOOg
(Table1 .4). This is comparatively low compared with the value they found for the
exchangeable magnesium 24.1 ± 1 1 .4 mg/100g (Table 1 .4). The reasons for this could
possibly be explained in the same way as already mentioned for calcium (sec 1.2.4.3 A).
The distribution of exchangeable magnesium in mounds and soils varies between sites
but seems to be consistently lower in the lower level of the mound136• The highest
values of magnesium were reported by Birkill ( 1985)21 in Katherine for A. vitiosus
mounds with a mean of 280 mg/1 OOg. She also reported high soil values, such as 186
mg!IOOg. The Australian average values of exchangeable magnesium in mounds are 37
66
± 47 mg/lOOg (Table 1 .4). These values are comparable to those reported for species
in other countries102•
C) Potassium
As with calcium, potassium figures in the termite mounds are generally higher than the
soil from which they originate14'98•136•38•98 but may be only slightly higher or even lower
than the topsoil figures209 and do not seem to be closely linked to organic matter (Table
1.4). As for calcium and magnesium they vary according to the species and the sample
position (see Table 1.5). There are greater differences between the total and the
exchangeable potassium than for calcium and magnesium. Okello-Oloyaet a! (1985)136
reported total potassium values ranging from 200 - 2720 mg/l OOg for mounds and 130 -
3520 mg/l OOg for adjacent soils, while the exchangeable potassium varied from 5.5 -
32.8 mg/100g to 13.3 - 25 mg/100g respectively. There are no special patterns of
exchangeable potassium associated with the different levels of mounds (upper, middle
and lower)136•
D) Sodium
As for the other elements already mentioned, sodium content seems to be higher in the
mound than in the surrounding soil, although Okello-Oloyael a/ (1985)'" showed that
at some sites the levels were much lower. Values vary greatly according to the
procedures used, the species and the location. Okello-Oloya et a/ (I 985)'" reported
total sodium values ranging from 7.0 ± 3.0 to 23.0 ± 9.0 mg/IOOg in mounds and 9.0
± 5.0 to 180 ± 260 mg/100g in the soil, compared with the exchangeable values of 0.9
± 0.5 to 2.3 ± 1.8 mg/100g in the mounds and 0.5 ± 0.1 to 5.3 ± 6.9 mg/100g in
adjacent soils (Table 1.7). Boyer (1956)" reported very high levels of sodium in the
inner part of the mound of Be!licositermes rex, probably due to the incorporation of
saliva during construction.
67
E) Phosphorus
In general mounds have a higher phosphorus content than adjacent soils (Table 1.4).
The average, dilute, acid-extractable phosphorus in termite mounds and soils studied in
Australian are respectively: 18.5 mg/IOOg and 1 1 .5 mg/IOOg. Coventry el a/ (1988)
reported values 2 to 3.7 times higher in the mounds. There are no consistent variations
between mou�d levels although the lower part of the mound seems to have a lower
content136• Lee and Wood {1971 a&b)97�8 reported that the distribution of phosphorus
in the mound is fairly uniform.
F) Iron and Aluminium
The iron and aluminium content of termite mounds has been poorly studied in Australia
and around the world. Stoops (1964)175 reported an increase of free iron inCubitermes
mounds. Boyer (1973)27 indicated values of 5.2 to 7.8 percent of Fl?:03 with an even
distribution through the mound of Bellicositermes spp. and 16 to 20 percent of Al203•
He also reported the presence of iron concretions27 and an accumulation of Fe2+ from
underground water which would eventually precipitate as ferric hydroxide. Agarval
(1978)1 reported a considerable increase in F�03 and Al203 in mounds compared with
the surrounding soil with not much difference between regions of the mounds, but he
did not differentiate between the iron and aluminium values. Cornaby and Knebs
(1975f6 reported lower aluminium values in the mounds than in the soil. The iron
values reported by Basalingappa et a/ (1978)15 in India are very similar to those of
Boyer (1973)27 in Africa, eg. 7.27- 7.91 %, with little variation within the mound. This
contrasts with Basalingappa et a/ (1978)u aluminium values which vary from 0.09% in
the mound (soil) and 14. 17% in the royal chamber. In Australia, Okello-Oloyael a/
( 1985)136 reported values for iron and aluminium respectively of 1 .4 and 3.6 % for
mounds and 1 . 1 and 3 . 1 % in the soils. This indicates a slight increase of those values
in the mound compared with the soil. The variations of iron between sites were also
very slight. This contrasts with the work of Barr et a/. (1988) in which high variations
of iron were reported between sites (Table 1 .4).
68
G) Manganese, Zinc, Cobalt and Copper
Very little has been reported on these elements. Comaby and Knebs (1975)36 in
Venezuela reported higher concentrations of manganese in the mound of Nasutitermes
sp. than in the nearby soil, while the zinc levels were lower. Okello-Oloyaet a/
(1985)136 reported manganese values of 26.4 mg/lOOg in the mound and 24.7 mg/lOOg
in the soil, while Watson ( 1970}'97 reported anomalous concentrations of zinc in termite
mounds compared with the surrounding soiL There have been no data reported on
cobalt.
1.4.2.5 Agricultural Uses of Termitaria
Termite mound use as a soil amendment has been discussed by many authors. The
results are often divergent. They depend on the properties of the crops, the soils and the
habits of different species of termitesn In deficient soils, termitaria can provide
nutrients7!). Sheppe (1968) observed that when the subsoil is richer than the topsoil, the
termitaria are used in preference to the adjacent soils by African natives to plant their
crops. In many parts of Africa and Asia, better crops such as vegetables133, sisal133•68•86,
sorghum148 maize147•103 cotton and tobacco68•86 have been obtained on termite mounds ' '
or fields where the termite mounds have been levelled. In Thailand, Pendleton (1941)143
reported that the farmers are using mounds for growing cotton, vegetables and tobacco
but that the productivity of the levelled termite mound is very irregular. In Australia,
Okello-Oloya and Spain (1986)135 have reported an increase of biomass of Digit aria
ciliris (an annual grass) and Stylosanthes hamata (a pasture legume) on termite mound
materials compared to surface soils from the same areas. The increase was correlated
to the phosphorus and nitrogen level of the mound and soil material used. Negative
results have also been reported by Nye (1955)134 and Kang (1978)", in Nigeria, where
growth of annual crops, such as maize was poorer in the soil mound or levelled mounds.
In Zaire, Meyer (1960i08 reported that when the material brought up by the termite from
the subsoil is particularly infertile, the mounds (mainly if they are abundant) may present
a serious obstacle to cultivation.
1.5 Aims of this Project
The aims of this project are to:
69
determine the elemental composition of termite mounds eaten by Aboriginal
people and more specifically, of two Aboriginal communities of the Northern
Territory, with the mineral analyses concentrating more particularly on iron,
calcium, potassium, sodium, magnesium, manganese, aluminium, copper, cobalt
and ziric.
determine the particle size fractionation of termite mound material
to assess the selected elemental variations:
I) between different age material (new and old)
2) within mounds according to the sample position: top, middle and bottom
3) between mounds of the same species (and different species) in a same
location
4) between mounds of the same species (and different species) in different
locations
determine the bio-availability (in vitro) of the selected elements studied (with
emphasis on iron bio-availability)
CHAPTER TWO
MATERIAL AND METHODS
•
2 MATERIAL AND METHODS
2.1 Collection of Termitaria
71
The method of sampling termitaria was designed as a result of consultations with
Aboriginal communities (section: 1 . 1.2.1 and 1 .1 .2.2).
2.1.2 Method of Collection
In Daly River, the surface samples (O-J em) were taken at random on the outside of the
tennite mound (on both new and old parts of the mound) using a stainless-steel knife.
The deeper samples (0-lOcm) were taken, randomly, at different height on the outside
of the motmd with a I 0 em core fixed on a cordless drill. Core samples were also taken
from the middle section of two mounds (Nasutitermes triodiae and Tumulitermes
pastinator). A minimum of 200-250g of sample was collected when possible.
In Elliott, the samples (approximately 10cm3) were cut using an axe, as used by the
Aboriginal people. All samples were stored in paper soil bags.
Ten centimetre cores of soil were collected, at each site, using a l Ocm auger. Triplicate
cores (50cm apart) were obtained for each sample site and bulked.
2.1.2 Site Locations
The samples were collected at 4 geographically different localities: Berrimah. Howard
Springs, Daly River and Elliott.
Geographical references concerning the different sites are given in Table 2.1.
;::! TABLE 2.1 Site locations
Site Termite species Location Longitude Latitude Grid reference Notes collected • (map)
Daly River (site I) Tp,l11 5070 Daly River 130" 43' 13" 44' 52LFK865803 5.2 Km on the right when coming from the Daly River mission
Daly River (site 2) Av 5070 Daly River 130" 42' 13' 45' 52LFK847785 3.4 Km on the left when coming from the Daly River mission
Daly River (site 3) Nt,Tp 5070 Daly River 130" 44' 13' 39' 52LFK883897 20.2 Km from the Police Station on the Daly River Road to Darwin
Daly River (site 4) Nt,Av,Ca 5070 Daly River 130' 49' 13" 3 1 ' 52LFL961 040 2.9 Km after Lichfield road when coming from the mission; 64.6 Km from Tipperary
Elliott (site 5) Av SE 53-5 N.waters 133' 30' 17" 35' 53KLA4055 8.4 Km on the left side of the road leading to Lake Woods and the Longreacb Waterhole
Howard Springs (site 6) Nt,Tp 5073-2 Darwin 130" 59' 12" 28' 52LGMI58207 0.5 Km after the Yarrawonga Zoo, on the left when coming from Darwin
Berrimah (site 7) Nl 5073-2 Danvin 130" 55' 12" 28' 52LGM093213 I .8Km before East Ann Settlement, on the left side of the road coming from Darwin
• Tp: Tunwlilermes pastinator Th: T111mditermes hastilis ca·: Coptotermes acinaciformis A v: Amitermes vitios11s Nt: Nasutitermes lriodiae
2.1.3 Sample Description and Summary
73
All soil and termite mound samples are numbered according to the following system:
Sample numbering system: Mound: AbcDe Soil: cDe
Ab: Termite species (Av: Amitermes vitiosus, Tp: Tumulitermes pastinator Nt:
Nasutitermes triodiae Th: Tumulitermes hastilis, Ca: Coptotermes
acinaciformis) c : Sample number
D : Indicates the geographic location (D: Daly River, E: Elliott, H: Howard Spring)
e : Site number in a specific location
An underlined sample is a collected on the outer surface of the mound (depth: 0-lcm).
An asterisk (*) at the end of a sample number indicates that the sample has been
collected on a newly built part of the mound by opposition to the "old'' material. Old
does not have a connotation of time (specific age)� it is a part of the mound material that
has been weathered. It is distinguished from the new built material by the different
texture and color.
Sample numbering example: Nt31D4* = Nasutitermes triodiae sample number 3 1 from
Daly River, site 4, collected on a new part on the outer surface of the mound (depth of
0-lcm).
2.1.3.1 Detailed Mound Study
One mound of each of the three major species used by the Aboriginal communities
(Nasutitermes triodiae, Tumulitermes pastinator andAmitermes vitiosus) was studied in
detail. The physical characteristics of the mounds are given in Table 2.2. A total of 20
samples were taken from Nasutitermes triodiae mound (Site 3), 17 from the
74
Tumulitermes pastinator mound (Site 3) and 9 from Amitermes vitiosus mound (site 5).
The different number of samples was related to the size of the mounds and the way the
Aboriginal people sample them. A detail of the 3 mound sampling is given in Table 2.3
and associated soil samples are given in Table 2.4.
TABLE 2.2 Physical characteristics of 3 termitaria selected for more detail sampling: Nasutitermes triodiae (Nt) from Daly River (site 3), Tumulitermes pastinator (Tp) from Daly River (site 3) and Amitermes vitiosus (Av) from Elliott (site 5).
Mound characteristics Termite species -
Nt Tp Av
Site number 3 3 5
Mound number I I I I
Basal circumference (em) 460 320 127
Middle height circum (em) 310 250 98
Top less lOcm circum (em) 72 130 53
Height (em) 310 70 64
Tota1 mound samples 20 17 9
Total soil samples 4 3 4
75
TABLE 2.3 Detail mound sample summary for 3 termitaria: Nasutitermes triodiae (Nt) from Daly River (site 3), Tumulitermes pastinator (Tp) from Daly River (site 3) and Amitermes vitiosus from Elliott (site 5).
Mound number/
0-lcm depth from outer casing
0-IOcm depth from outer casing
0-1 Ocm depth from middle section
site --------------------------'--_;_-
l / site 3
I / site 3
1 1 I site 5
Top Middle Bottom Top Middle Bottom Top Middle Bottom
NtOl "' Nt02
Nt04* Nt08* NtlO Ntl2 Nt05 Nt09 Ntll Ntl3
Nt03* Nt06*
Tp27',Tp28 Tp29,Tp30*
Tp31
Nt07
Tp32 Tp33 Tp34 Tp35
Tp36 Tp37
Ntl4 Ntl6 Ntl8 Ntl9 NtiS Nt17 Nt201
T38 Tp39
Tp40 Tp41 Tp42 Tp431
ns ns ns Av21 Av23 Av26 Av27 Av28 A29 Av22 Av24
Av25
•: newly built material 1: material from nursery ns: not sampled
TABLE 2.4 Soil samples collected at 0-!0cm depth in Daly River (site 3) and in Elliott (site 5).
Location
Daly River
Elliott
1-m away from any mounds
15D3, 16D3, 17D3, 18D3, 19D3
OlE, 02E
�1m away from any mounds
20D3, 21D3, 22D:l'
03E, 04E
76
2.1.3.2 Termitaria Sampling
In general three samples were taken per mound (Top, middle, bottom). If the mound
height was below !.2m, only 2 samples were taken (top and bottom). In the sample
summary tables (2.5, 2.6, 2.7, 2.8), the diameter + height gives an indication of the
relative volume of the mound. The circumference was taken at lm height for mounds
over l . m otherwise at half-height of the mound. All samples were 0-10 em depth,
unless indicated. The underlined samples were superficial samples (depth: 0-lcm). The
* indicates that the sample was taken on a newly built part.
2.1.3.2.1 Amitermes vitiosus Termitaria Sample Summary
A total of 1 0 Amitermes vitiosus mounds (5 small and 5 medium) were sampled in
Elliott, 14 mounds in Daly River: 1 0 mounds in Site 4 and 4 mounds in site 2, (Table
2.5).
2.1.3.2.2 Tumulitermes pastinator Termitaria Sample Summary
A total of 15 Tumulitermes pastinator mounds (5 large, 5 medium and 5 small) were
sampled in Daly River (site I) and 13 mounds (3 large, 5 medium and 5 small) in
Howard Springs (site 6) (Table 2.6).
2.1.3.2.3 Nasutitermes triodiae Te�mitaria Sample Summary
A total of 15 mounds (5 large, 5 medium and 5 small) were sampled in Daly River
(site4), 5 large mounds in Howard Springs (site 6}, and 5 large mounds in Berrimah (site
7) according to the availability of mounds in each location (Table 2. 7).
77
TABLE 2.5 Amitermes vitiosus termitaria sample summary
Mound Mound Height Circum Height + Sample location number/ class (em) (em) Diam (em)
Site Top Bottom
11 site 5 Sma11 23 32 33 AOl A02
21 site 5 Small 28 34 39 A03 A04
31 site 5 Small 28 50 44 AOS A06
41 site 5 Small 21 34 32 A07 AOS
51 site 5 Small 23 35 34 A09 A10
61 site 5 Medium 38 35 49 A l l A12
71 site 5 Medium 30 3 1 40 A13 Al4
81 site 5 Medium 35 45 49 A l 5 A16
91 site 5 Medium 45 70 67 A l 7 Al8
10/ site 5 Medium 30 55 48 Al9 A20
11 site 2 Small 75 87 103 A30 A32
21 site 2 Small 64 71 87 A33 A35
31 site 2 Small 57 89 85 A36 A38
41 site 2 Small 59 70 81 A39 A41
11 site 4 Medium 120 140 165 A42 A43
21 site 4 Medium 140 150 188 A44 A45
31 site 4 Medium 1 1 0 140 155 A46 A47
41 site 4 Medium 1 1 0 140 155 A48 A49
51 site 4 Medium 120 190 180 ASO ASl
61 site 4 Small 60 90 89 A 52 A53
11 site 4 Small 40 60 59 A 54 ASS
8/ site 4 Small 50 120 88 A 56 A57
91 site 4 Small 60 90 89 ASS A 59
10/ site 4 Small 60 1 1 0 95 A60 A61
78
TABLE 2.6 Tumulitermes pastinator termitaria sample summary
Mound Mound Height Circum Height + Sample location number/ class (ern) (ern) Diam (em)
Site Top Bottom
11 site 1 Large 80 340 188 TpOI T02
21 site 1 Large 90 330 195 Tp03 Tp04
31 site I Large 90 287 181 Tp05 Tp06
41 site 1 Large 100 454 245 Tp07 Tp08
51 site 1 Large 75 263 !59 Tp09 Tp!O
61 site I Medium 65 197 128 Tpl l Tp12.Tp13*
71 site 1 Medium 50 164 102 Tp14 Tp15
8/ site I Medium 54 261 137 Tp16 Tp17
91 site I Medium 60 200 124 Tp18 Tp19
10/ site I Medium 50 135 93 Tp20 Tp21
1 11 site I Small 17 60 36 Tp22 ns
12/ site 1 Small 21 58 39 Tp23 ns
13/ site 1 Small 18 61 37 Tp24 ns
14/ site 1 Small 20 75 44 Tp25 ns
15/ site I Small 10 40 23 Tp26 ns
II site 6 Medium 80 226 !52 Tp44 Tp45
21 site 6 Medium 75 203 140 Tp46 Tp47
3/ site 6 Medium 100 177 !56 Tp48 Tp49
41 site 6 Medium 75 377 195 Tp50 TpSI
51 site 6 Medium 60 206 126 Tp52 Tp53
61 site 6 Small 45 83 71 Tp54 Tp55
71 site 6 Small 28 39 40 Tp56 ns
81 site 6 Small 35 45 49 Tp57 ns
91 site 6 Small 25 42 38 Tp58 ns
I 01 site 6 Small 30 53 47 Tp59 ns
1 1/ site 6 Large I I 0 250 190 Tp60 Tp62
12/ site 6 Large 130 337 237 Tp63 Tp65
13/ site 6 Large 105 230 178 Tp66 Tp68
79
TABLE 2.7 Nasutitermes triodiae termitaria sample summary
Mound Mound Height Circum Height + Sample location number/ class (em) (em) Diam (em)
Site Top Middle Bottom
1 / site 4 Large 470 480 623 Nt21 * Nt22 Nt23
2 / site 4 Large 400 420 534 Nt24 Nt25 Nt26 Nt27,Nt30* Nt28,Nt31* Nt29,Nt32*
3 / site 4 Large 380 580 565 Nt33 Nt34 Nt35,Nt36* Nt37 Nt40* Nt38,Nt41* Nt39,Nt42*
4 / site 4 Large 370 480 523 Nt43 Nt44 Nt45 Nt46.Nt49"' Nt47Nt50* Nt48 Nt51*
5 / site 4 Large 380 670 593 Nt52 Nt53 Nt54 Nt55,Nt58* Nt56,Nt59* Nt57.Nt60*
6 / site 4 Medium 250 350 361 Nt61* Nt62 Nt63 Nt64 Nt67* Nt65,Nt68* Nt66,Nt69*
7/ site 4 Medium 190 240 266 Nt70* Nt71 Nt72
8 / site 4 Medium 240 280 329 Nt73 Nt7.4 Nt75
9 / site 4 Medium 260 460 406 Nt76 Nt77 Nt78
10 / site 4 Medium 250 500 409 Nt79 Nt80 Nt81
1 1 I site 4 Small 120 130 161 Nt82 ns Nt83
1 2 I site 4 Small 100 100 132 Nt84 ns Nt85*
13 I site 4 Small 100 180 157 Nt86 ns Nt87
14 / site 4 Small 1 10 100 142 Nt88 ns Nt89
1 5 / site 4 Sma11 120 120 158 Nt90 ns Nt91
I I site 6 Large 380 500 539 Nt92 Nt93* Nt94
2 1 site 6 Large 350 360 465 Nt95 Nt96 Nt97
3 1 site 6 Large 340 374 459 Nt98 Nt99 NtlOO
4 1 site 6 Large 370 474 521 NtlOJ Nt102 Nt103
51 site 6 Large 350 494 507 Nt104 Nt105 Ntl06
I I site 7 Large 440 580 625 ns Ntl07 ns
2 I site 7 Large 450 400 577 ns Ntl08 ns
3 I site 7 Large 470 420 604 ns Ntl09 ns
4 1 site 7 Large 550 470 700 ns NtllO ns
5 I site 7 Large 480 420 614 ns Nt1 1 1 ns
80
2.1.3.2.4 Tumulitermes hasli/is Sample Summary
One other species mounds was sampled at site 1 : Tumulitermes hasti/is. T. hastilis
mounds were widely distributed but not reported to be eaten by the aboriginal
communities of Daly River. Samples collected are shown in Table 2.8.
TABLE 2.8 Tumulitermes hastilis Sample Summary
Mound Height Circum Height + Sample location number/ (em) (em) Diam (em) Middle
site
I/ site I 90 86 78 ThO!
2/ site 1 45 52 47 Th02
31 site 1 50 44 82 Th03 4/ site 1 75 71 61 Th04
51 site I 87 64 52 Th05
2.1.3.3 Soil Sampling
A minimum of 3-4 soil samples were taken at each major site: Elliott (site 5), Howard
Springs (site 6), Berrimah (site 7) and Daly River (site I, site 2, site 3 and site 4). Each
sample was taken at a minimum distance of 1-m from any termite mound on the site and
at a depth of 0-lOcm. Another soil sample was also collected near site site 2 (50m on
the right to the Daly River mission) as it is favoured by Mercia' family during the
annual wet season flood, when the mounds are not available.
2.2 Sample Preparation
All the tennitaria and soil samples were initially crushed in plastic bags by gentle
rubbing with a piece of wood (the tennitaria often being in solid lumps). This allowed
the removal of the grass and tennites by sieving and shaking. The samples were then
81
dried, in soil paper bags, at 60° in an oven. The coarse sample was crushed using a soil
crusher (Conservation Commission Berrimah Soil laboratory) and sieved through a 2mm
sieve. A I OOg sub-sample of material was removed for physical analyses. The
remaining sample was pulverised using a ring grinder (<75 microns). A sub-sample of
the homogenous pulverised sample was taken for chemical analyses.
2.3 Particle-Size Analysis
The aim of the particle-size analysis was to subdivide the soil minerals into different
categories according to the particle diameter
clay <0.002 mm (<2 �m)
silt 0.002-0.02 rom (2-20 �m)
ftne sand 0.02-0.2 rom (20-200 �m)
coarse sand 0.2-2.0 mm (200-2000 �m)
The particle-size analysis method used was based on the Pipette and sieve method
described by Coventry and Fett (1979)37 in which sodium tripolyphosphate was replaced
by Calgon (hexametaphosphate) as dispersing agent. It was conducted at the NT Conservation Commission Berrimah soil laboratory. A chemical pretreatment of termite
mound samples rich in organic matter (>0.5%) with hydrogen peroxide was conducted
according to the method of Mcintyre and Loveday (1974)10s.
2.4 Acid Extraction of Termitaria and Soils
A number of digestion methods, using combinations of the acids HN03, HCl04 and
H2S04 were investigated. The aim was to select a method that would provide
reproducible results with high reproducible recovery rates. It was not necessary to
obtain a total extraction for this study. The elements analysed were aluminium, calcium,
cobalt, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, potassium, sodium and zinc. The
82
determination of the element concentrations was performed using a Varian SpectrAA 40
atomic absorption spectrophotometer (AAS) (see 2.4.3).
2.4.1 Extraction Trials
The trials were conducted in order to select the most appropriate:
- acid combination (eg: nitric/perchloric (9:1), nitric/sulfuric (1 :4),
nitric/perchloric (1 :4)} for the extraction
- sample size (lg, 5g, lOg, 25g),
- sample fraction (2 mm, pulverised),
- type of digestion flask (150 mL beaker on hot plate, 150 or 200 mm test tubes
in a block digester).
The results of the different trials indicated that the best method was to use a small
amount of pulverised soil (1 g) and digest with nitric (AR) and perchloric acid (70 %
aristar) (1 :4) in 1 8 by 200 nim test tubes, in a block digester.
2.4.2 Acid Extraction Nitric/Perchloric (1:4) Method
All glass-wear was washed with high purity water and detergent (decon) before being
placed in a detergent bath (2% decon) for a several hours. They were then washed three
times with high purity water, soaked overnight in 10% nitric acid, rinsed thoroughly
with high purity water (Pennutit), dried in an oven.
An homogenous pulverised sample ( 1 g) was weighed into clean 200 mL test tubes (in
triplicate). One mL nitric acid (AR) was added to the test tube. The tubes were covered
with plastic film and the mixture was allowed to stand overnight in a block digester at
room temperature. The following morning, 4 mL perchloric acid (Aristar grade) was
added to the mixture. Gradually, over a period of I hour, the temperature was increased
83
to a maximum of 180' C and maintained at 180' C for 3 hours. Triplicate blank and
2 reference samples (in duplicate) were carried out with each batch of 50 samples;
The digest was allowed to cool before bringing to volume (20mL) with high purity
water (permutit). The digest was mixed thoroughly using a vortex mixer before being
transferred into SOmL polypropylene centrifuge tubes and centrifuged for 10 minutes at
12,000 rpm in a Beckman model N' J2-21MIE centrifuge.
The centrifuged samples were filtered through Whatrnan 541 filter paper into 50 mL polyethylene bottles and stored in a fridge at 4'C prior to analysis.
2.4.3 Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer Analysis Procedures
Prior to being analysed for the vanous elements, the sample solutions (stored in
polyethylene bottles at 4•c) were allowed to reach room temperature and sonicated.
A number of elements (cobalt, copper, iron, manganese and zinc) were read directly or
diluted with high pwity water if necessary. Aluminium, calcium, magnesium, potassium
and sodium required the addition of releasing or ionisation agent to avoid chemical
interference. To avoid the necessity for separate dilutions128, lanthanum chloride (LaCI3)
(releasing agent) and caesium chloride (CsCl) (ionisation agent) were added to the
solutions. Aluminium and calcium were analysed using the nitrous oxide/acetylene
flame.
A stock solution containing 25,000 mg/L LaCI3 and 10,000 mg/L CsCI, in 2 M
hydrochloric acid, was prepared to give a final concentration of 5,000 mg!L lanthanum
and 2,000 mg/L caesium for the measurement of aluminium, calcium, magnesium,
sodium and potassium.
The blanks and the standards were prepared using the same proportions of reagents.
Perchloric acid was added to the standards to match the final acid concentration of the
84
sample solutions (10 % for copper, cobalt, iron, manganese and zinc and 1 % for the
other elements). The standards were prepared using BDH stock standard solutions (I 000
mg/L).
Prior to each set of measurements, the AAS was allowed to "warm up" for 20 min
minimwn before calibration. Three consecutive_ readings, each of 3·5 seconds
integration time, were obtained. Every I 0 samples, the instrument was recalibrated or
one standard was re-read. During the analyses, I M nitric acid followed by high purity
water were nebulised through the AAS instrument to keep the burner assembly as clean
as possible. The instrumental settings are given in Table 2.9.
TABLE 2.9 AAS instrument parameters
Elements Wavelength Slit Lamp current Background
(nm) (nm) (rnA) correction
AI 396.1 0.5 10 no
Ca 422.7 0.5 7 no
Co 240.7 0.2 7 yes
Cu 324.8 0.5 4 no
Fe 386.0 0.2 5 no
K 769.9 1.0 10 no
Mg 202.5 1.0 7 yes
Mn 279.5 0.2 5 no
Na 589.0 0.5 7 no
Zn 213.9 1.0 5 yes
Flame Standards Comment
(mg!L)
N20/C2H2 25.0 . 400 La/Cs
N20/C2H2 1.25 • 10 La/Cs
air-acetylene 0.3 13 - 5.0
air-acetylene 0.156 - 2.5
air-acetylene 25.0 - 200
air-acetylene 3.13 - 50 La/Cs
air-acetylene 1.25 - 20 La/Cs
air-acetylene 0.313 - 5.0
air-acetylene 0.625 - 5.0 La/Cs
air-acetylene 0.156 - 2.5
2.4.4 Quality Assurance and Quality Control for the Analyses
85
The quality assurance and the quality control of the results were checked by using
reference materials and external laboratory analyses. As no termite mound reference
materials are available, BCSS�l and l\1ESS-l sediment reference material were selected
together with a soil reference material IAEA Soil 5. Four termite mound and three soil
samples were sent to an external laboratory and analysed by XRF and ICP-AES or ICP
MS. The four mound samples were used as internal reference samples. The precision
of the method was established by running 3 times (3-5 replica) the reference materials
(BCSS-1, MESS-I and IAEA SoilS) and the internal samples (A?l :Amitermes vitiosus
(Daly River), A53: Amitermes vitiosus (Elliott), Nl58: Nasutitermes triodiae (Daly
River), T99: Tumulitermes pastinator (Daly River), SA65 (Elliott soil), SN198 (Daly
River soil) and SN217 (Howard Springs soil).
During the analyses, the internal reference sample A?l was run with every batch of
samples. Another internal reference sample was run matching the type of termite
samples being read.
2.5 Infusion (Hot Water) Extractable Minerals
The "water infusion" of samples was prepared according to the description of the method
used by the Aboriginal community at Elliott (see chapter 1 . 1 .2.2c). For analytical
purposes, the Elliott water (bore) was substituted by distilled water. A total of 1 3
mounds (Amitermes vitiosus) (top and bottom sections) and 2 soils were analysed.
2.5.1 Extraction Process
An approximate 250g piece of Amitermes vitiosus mound was weighed and burned in
a fire, similar to the fire made by the Aboriginals in Elliott, for 15-20 minutes (until the
outside becomes black). The hot piece of mound was removed from the fire and placed
immediately in a 2L beaker containing 500 mL of high purity water (23°C). The weight
86
of the termite piece was rechecked as soon as the hot termitaria was in the water, by
difference between the total weight and the weight of the 2L beaker and the 500mL of
water. This was necessary as some material from the termite mound piece are destroyed
by the fire. The termitaria was left to infuse in the water for 1 0 minutes. After the first
5 minutes, the total weight (water + termite material) was determined again to calculate
the remaining amount of water, as some water evaporated on contact with the hot
termitaria. The preparation was then mixed and crushed until all big lumps of termitaria
were reduced to a sandy texture. The water extract was centrifuged in 50 mL
polypropylene centrifuge tubes for 15 minutes at 10,000 rpm in a Beckman model N"
J2-21MIE centrifuge, filtered through Whatman 541 filter paper and IOOmL of the
solution obtained was poured into a polyethylene bottle containing lmL of cone. nitric
acid. The soil samples (<2 mm fraction) being very sandy could not be burned in the
fire and were poured directly into hot water (85°)C; this was the temperature reached
by the mound mixtures during infusion. The determination of the element
concentrations (aluminium, calcium, cobalt, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese,
potassium, sodium and zinc) was performed using a Varian SpectrAA 40 Atomic
Absorption Spectrophotometer (AAS).
2.5.2 Analysis Procedures
The analysis procedures were similar to those described previously in chapter 2.4.3. All
the standards were made I % in nitric acid to match the "infusion11 acidity. The AAS
instrumental settings are given in Table 2.10.
87
TABLE 2.10 AAS instrument parameters for analysis of hot water digest
Elements Wavelength Slit Lamp Background (nm) (nm) current correction
(mA)
A1 309.3 0.5 10 no Ca 422.7 0.5 10 no Co 240.7 0.2 7 yes
Cu 324.8 0.5 4 no
Fe 248.3 0.2 5 yes
K 769.9 1.0 1 0 no
Mg 202.5 1 .0 7 yes
Mn 279.5 0.2 5 no
Na 589.0 0.5 7 no
Zn 213.9 1.0 5 yes
2.6 Bioavailability of Fe in Termitaria
Flame Standards Comment (mg!L)
NP/C2H2 6.3 - 100 La/Cs
NP/C2H2 10 - 100 La/Cs
air�acetylene 0.313 - 5.0
air-acetylene 0.313 - 5.0
air-acetylene 1.56 - 12.5
air-acetylene 3.13 - 50 La/Cs
air-acetylene 1.56 - 25 La/Cs
air-acetylene 0.313 - 5.0
air-acetylene 0.313 - 5.0 La/Cs
air-acetylene 0.156 - 5.0
The bioavailable analysis ("in vitro11 analyses) method was a modification of the method
described by Narasinga Rao and Prabhavathi (1978)'22 for the determination of the
bioavailability of iron from foods with the addition of potassium fluoride to complex the
Fe(III)90 . The elements analysed were extended to the 9 other elements studied in this
project. The determination of the element concentrations was performed using a Perkin
Elmer Plasma 400 Inductively Coupled Plasma Argon Emission Spectrophotometer ICP
AES.
2.6.1 Bioavailability Extraction Trials
Different percentages of pepsin (0%, 0.1%, 0.5% and 5% w/v) were used in the
extraction procedure with samples A71 and Nl60, 3 times in triplicates. In view of the
results obtained, a 0.5 % w/v solution of pepsin was used for all extractions. The list
of sample analysed is given in Table 2 . 1 1 . The analyses were carried in triplicate on
a minimum of 3 mounds for each species and 2 soil ·samples at each site.
88
TABLE 2.1l Bioavailable test sample list
Site
Site I : Daly River
Site 2: Daly River
Site 3: Daly River
Site 4: Daly River
Site 5: Elliott
Sample number*
Tp0201, Tpl60!, Tp230!, ThO!dl, Th020!, Th030!, 050!, 0701
Av3 1D2, Av34D2, Av39D2, 0902, 1002
Tp34D3, Tp3603, Tp3803, Nt!OD3, Nt!203, Ntl403, 1703, 2203
Av4504, Av5004, Av6!D4, Nt2504, Nt2604, Nt2804, Nt3!D4,
Nt3404, Nt5604, Nt5904, Nt6504, Nt6804,Nt7204, 2304, 2604
AvO IE, Avl5E, Av22E, OlE, 02E
Site 6: Howard Springs Nt92H, Nt99H, Ntl06H, Tp45H, Tp60, Tp64, 27H, 29H
#: sample number explanation: section 2.1.3
2.6.2 Extraction Procedure
The extraction of soluble and ionisable iron was performed as follows:
Approximately 2.5g of termitaria and soil samples were incubated in a lOOmL conical
flask containing 50mL (0.5% w/v pepsin in 0.1 N HCl) at pH 1.35, at 37°C for 90
minutes in a metabolic shaker (200 rpm}. The pepsin used was from porcine stomach
mucosa (Sigma I :60,000; 2450 units/mg solid). After the incubation, the digests were
centrifuged for 1 5 minutes at 12,000 rpm in a Beckman J2-21M/E centrifuge and the
supernatant filtered through Whatman 541 filter paper into polyethylene bottles. An
aliquot of the filtrate (pH 1.35) was neutralised, in a 50mL polypropylene centrifuge
tube, with O. l N NaOH and the pH was adjusted to pH 7.5. The solution obtained was
centrifuged for 1 5 minutes at 12,000 rpm and filtered into 50 mL polyethylene bottles.
89
2.6.3 Analysis Procedures
2.6.3.1 Total Concentrations
The total soluble iron, together with the elements AI, Ca, Co, Cu, K, Mg, Mn, Na, Zn
was determined on the pH 1.35 and pH 7.5 filtrates by ICP-AES. Prior the analyses,
the appropriated wavelength for each element was selected according to the sample
mineral composition in order to minimise the possible interference and to obtain a
maximum sensitivity. For the sodium values, the interference due to iron present in each
sample was calculated and deduced from the total sodium. The instrumental settings of
the ICP-AES are given in Table 2.12. The sodium was not measured at pH 7.5, due to
use of NaOH to neutralise pH 1.35 extract.
TABLE 2.12 ICP-AES instrument parameters (Pepsin-HCI extraction) (pH 1.35 and pH 7.5)
Elements Wavelength Standards Elements Wavelength Standards
(nm) (ppm) (nm) (ppm)
AI 396.152 0.500 - 50.00 K 769.490 0.500 - 50.00
Ca 3 1 7.933 5.000 - 50.00 Mg 279.553 5.000 - 50.00
Co 228.616 0.100 - 1.000 Mn 257.610 0 .I 00 - 1 .000
Cu 324.754 0.100 - 1 .000 Na 589.592 1 .000 - 10.00
Fe 238.204 0.100 - 0.500 Zn 213.856 0.100 - 1.000
0.500 - 50.00
90
2.6.3.2 Analysis of Fe(II)
Prior to being analysed for the ionisable iron (Fe(II)), the sample solution was first
acidified with {6M) HCI, then the Fe(III) was complexed as (FeF6l by addition of
potassium fluoride (2M) to the sample solution, l 0 minutes before adding a-a'
bipyridine (0.25 % w/v) and ammonium acetate · acetic acid buffer (pH 4.5). The Fe{II)
was measured colorimetrically in pH 1.35 and pH 7.5 extracts at the absorbance of 523
run on a Perkin-Elmer 552 UV-Visible Spectrophotometer, using a lcm plastic cell, as
HF (etching acid) is present in the filtrate. The calibration curve was established using
a range of standards from 0.05 ppm iron(ll) to I 0 ppm.
2.6.4 Quality Assurance and Quality Control
The precision of the technique was established in the same way as for the
nitric/perchloric analyses. A termitaria reference sample Nl60 (< 2 nun fraction) was
chosen and subjected to the analysis 3 times in triplicates. Sample N160 was also run
with every batch of samples.
CHAPTER lliREE
RESULTS
3 RESULTS
3.1 Site and Mound Characterisations
91
Four species of termite mounds (Plates 9-16), including the three species that are used
by the Aboriginal communities of Daly River or Elliott, have been studied from 4
geographically different localities as described in section 2.1.2.
3.1.1 Site Characterisations
A typical site with Nasutitermes triodiae and Amitermes vitiosus mounds in Daly River
is shown in Plate 9. The type of vegetation is open woodland (site 4) to woodland
(Eucalyptus) in Daly River, Howard Springs and Bertimah and open grassland with
scattered trees in Elliott.
3.1.2 Termite Species and Mound Characterisations
Four termite species were collected and identified. The identification was based on the
size and physical structure of the soldier caste, the termite distribution and the type of
mound. The identifications were later confirmed by Leigh Miller from CSIRO Division
of Entomology, Canberra.
All the termites studied belong to the recent family: Termitidae (termites with worker
caste) and are grass-eating termites. Three belong to the sub-family Nasutitennitinae:
Nasutitermes triodiae (Froggatt) (Plates 10 and I I), Tumulitermes pastinator (Hill)
(Plates 12 and 13) and Tumulitermes hastilis (Froggatt) (Plate 14). They have nasute
head (Figure 3.1). Nasutitermes sp are distinctive with the soldier's head is not
constricted (Figure 3.1-A), while Tumulitermes sp have the soldier's head constricted
near its centre (Figure 3.1-B). Amitermes vitiosus Hill (Plates I S and 16) belongs to the
~
,....
>
--'
-rl
-c 3 0 :::
::l c.. .,.
~ ~ ~ ::- " " "'0 et " ~
l6
93
Amitermitinae subfamily. Amitermes sp have mandibulate heads with mandibles toothed
and sabre-shaped (Figure 3 . I -C).
The termitaria have characteristic features, although there is a degree of variation in
mound shape within species. A general representation of the size (height +
circumference) of the termitaria sampled at each site, is given in Figure 3.2. As seen
in Figure 3.2, Amitermes vitiosus and Tumulitermes hastilis have mounds that are small
and usually narrow, those of Tumulitermes pastinator are low but wide and those of
Nasutitermes triodiae are tall and large.
A. Nasutitermes sp
Nasute head
B. Tumulitermes sp
Mandibulate head
C. Amitermes sp
FIGURE 3.1 Dorsal view ofnasute head: A: Nasutitermes sp and B: Tumu/itermes sp and mandibulate head: C : Amitermes sp. (from Hadlington, 198764)
PLATE 10 Nasutitermes triodiae mound (3m height), Daly River, site 3 .
PLATE I I Vertical section of Nasutitermes triodiae mound at site 3, showing compact basal portion-galleries and nursery (middle part of the mound, ground level).
\C .a:..
1000
BOO
600 8
400
200
0
FIGURE 3.2
3.1.2.1
95
Av Nt
8 CIRCUM [l HEIGHT
z 4 5 . , 3 • 3 • • 7
SITE
Size comparison (height + circumference in em) of Amitermes vitiosus (Av), Tumulitermespastinator (Tp1 Nasutitermes triodiae (Nt) and Tumulitermes hasti/is (Th) mounds at different sites.
Nasutitermes triodiae (Froggatt)
These nasute soldiers (4.5 ± 0.25 mm) have a dark brown head extended into a thin
nasus (Figure 3.1-A) through which they can expel a sticky repellent secretion associated
with the defence against ants and other enemies. Nasutitermes triodiae occur widely in
Northern Australia. They are also known as "spinifex termites". They construct various
types of mounds that are the largest of any of the Australian species, reaching a height
of 6 metres. The mounds collected in Daly River are the "cathedral" type, (Plates 9, 10
and I I), they are only found in the Top End, north of Pine Creek. Elsewhere,
Nasutitermes triodiae builds large mushroom-shaped mounds or columnar mounds
without the Top End elaborations151•72,
In these mounds, the inner region (beside the nursery N) is solid and extremely hard.
Around this solid central core, there is a zone of open galleries and cells in which
chaffed grass (8.61 ± 0.51 mm) is stored in considerable quantities during the dry
season97• As the mound grows, the outer storage chambers are abandoned and re-packed
with soil.
PLATE 1 2 Tumulitermes pastinator mound (70cm height). Daly
River, site 3. Vertical section of Tumulitermes pastinator mound
at site 3 (Daly River), showing alveolar type of
structure and the nursery (N).
\C �
97
3.1.2.2 Tumulitermes pastinator {Hill)
Tumulitermes pastinator is a small species of variable size and colour; the soldiers
measure 3.5 to 3.75 mm long, they have a nasute head usually light to dark brown72•
The species extends across Northern Australia from Queensland to Western Australia52•
The mounds are generally low dome-shaped structures (Plate 12) about 60-80 em high and 60-90 em in diameter, but occasionally they reach a height of 1.2 m and a basal
diameter of 1 .5 m. The outer wall is made of repacked soil material and is very thin and
dense. It covers an open alveolar interior made of softer repacked soil material (Plate
13). The vast number of chambers and galleries are packed with fragments of chaffed
grass stems. The central nursery [N] (Plate 13 ground level) is made of a soil/carton
mixture97
3.1.2.3 Amitermes vitiosus Hill
Amitermes vitiosus is a variable species with a dark orange head. The soldiers measure
4-5 mm and are of the mandibulate type72 (Figure 3.1-C). It is a fairly common species
in the northern parts of Queensland and the Northern TerritorY2• It is often found in
association with other grass�feeding mound�building species, Nasutitermes triodiae
(site 4) and Tumulitermes hastilis. The mounds of this termite are remarkable for their
abundance in certain localities and for their diversity in form. Their structures are
intensely hard (concrete� hard material), with a thin, undifferentiated outer wall which
is often deeply sculptured (Plates 14 and 15). They range in colour from light gray
(site 2) to dark gray (site 4) and to deep mahogany red (site 5, Plates 14 and 15)
according to the colour of the surrounding soi1'2• The commonest form consists of a
colunmar mound up to 1.2 m high with a basal diameter up to 60 em (site 2). On sandy
soil, it builds small conical mounds (site 5). On areas subject to seasonal flooding (such
as site 4), the mounds closely resemble those of Amitermes meridionalis in being
laterally flattened and oriented more or less on a north·south axis (Plate 9).
PLATE 14 Amitermes vitiosus mound (50cm height), Elliott. PLATE IS Vertical section of Amitermes vitiosus mound in
Elliott showing the concrete hard structure.
\C 00
99
The mounds show little obvious differentiation in gross structure. The internal structure
consists of repacked soil with interconnected galleries. The gaJleries are usually lined
by very fine, black organic residues (Sites 2 and 4). In the outer part of the mound,
they are often filled with fragments of grass, leaves and organic materials, including the
bodies of dead termites 38.
3.1.2.4 Tumuliterme.� hastilis (Frogatt)
The soldiers measure 3.5-4.5 mm. The species has a wide distribution in the inland low
rainfall areas of Queensland, Northern Territory, Western Australia and South Australia.
It builds tall narrow mounds up to 1 . 5 m height and 50 em wide at ground level52 In
Daly River site I, the mounds are relatively small and narrow (see Plate 16), they do not
exceed 90 em height. The construction material is mostly soil97. The interior consists
of large numbers of small chambers stored with grass ·and pieces of unidentifiable
vegetable debris.
Plate 16 Tumulitermes hastilis mound (55cm height), Daly River. site I .
� <:> TABLE 3.1 Quality control of selected elemental composition of reference material (BCSS-1, MESS-I <:>
and 1AEA SOILS), following perchloric/nitric acid (4:1) extraction (mgl100g).
Element Reference material
BCSS-1 MESS-I IAEA SOILS
Certified HNO/HCI04 Certified HNO/HCI04 Certified HNO,IHCIO,
values n=lO N"alues n=9 values n=l l
Aluminium 6260 ± 217 4245 ± 372 5837 ± 201 3140 ± 80 8190 ± 280 4333 ± !57
Calcium 543 ± 53 412 ± 14 482 ± 46 261 ± 7 2200 *nc 1341 ± 56
Cobalt 1 . 14 ± 0.21 0.98 ± 0.05 1.08 ± 0.19 0.93 ± 0.06 1.48 ± 0.08 1.08 ± 0.04
Copper 1.85 ± 0.27 1.49 ± 0.05 2.51 ± 0.38 2.22 ± 0.09 7.71 ± 0.47 7.21 ± 0.43
Iron 3287 ± 98 3539 ± 201 3050 ± 175 2921 ± 189 nd 4472 ± 192
Potassium 1801 ± 33 1088 ± 175 1859 ± 33 775 ± 78 1860 ± ISO 855 ± 123
Magnesium 1471 ± 139 1321 ± 80 868 ± 54 697 ± 40 1500 *nc 1002 ± 61
Manganese 22.9 ± 1.5 20.4 ± 0.5 5 1 .3 ± 2.5 40.2 ± 1.4 nd 70.5 ± 1.4
Sodium 2018 ± 156 959 ± 65 1855 ± I l l 690 ± 58 1920 ± 1 1 0 93.5 ± 9.3
Zinc 1 1 .9 ± 1.2 10.1 ± 0.2 19.1 ± 1.7 17.2 ± 0.9 36.8 ± 0.8 36.0 ± 2.1
nd: not detennined • nc: not certified, OSS (Jabiru) value
101
3.2 Acid Extractable (PerchloridNitric Acids) Selected Elements from Termite
Mounds and Soil Together with Particle Sizes.
3.2.1 Quality Assurance and Quality Control
The results of the quality control and quality assurance are shown in Tables 3.1, 3.2 and
3.3. Table 3 .1 shows the results of selected elemental composition of reference material
(BCSS-1, MESS-I and IAEA SOILS) following perchloric/nitric acids (4:1) extraction.
This extraction does not result in a total concentration in all elements. However, the
efficiency for Fe is greater than 95 % for all the reference materials and the extraction
efficiencies for Co, Cu, Mg, Mn and Zn are generally greater than 80 %. The Ca
extraction efficiency varies between reference materials (54 % in MESS-I to .76 % in
BCSS-1). Na and K are poorly extracted from soils and sediments. The efficiency
being of the order of 42 to 60 % for K and 5 to 48 % for Na.
. The extraction efficiency depends on the mineralogical nature of the sample. It was
therefore important to check with reference material more closely matched to the
samples of this study. As there is no termitaria reference material available, internal
reference materials were established. Four termite mound samples: Amitermes vitiosus
(Daly River, site 4), Amitermes vitiosus (Elliott, site 5), Tumu/itermes pastinator (Daly
River, site 1), Nasutitermes triodiae (Daly River, site 4) and three soil samples: Daly
River (site 4), Elliott (site 5) and Howard Springs (site 6) were sent to a private
laboratory for comparative analyses. The termitaria samples were analysed by X-ray
fluorescence for AI, Ca. Fe, K, Mg and Zn and following a mixed acid digestion (HCI,
HCI04 and HF) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Optical Emission Spectrometry (ICP
OES) for all the selected elements but Co and by Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass
Spectrometer (ICP-MS) for Co. Soils were analysed by ICP-OES following mixed acid
digestion (HCI, HCI04 and HF)
Tables 3.2 and 3.3 show the results of the selected elemental composition of the internal
reference materials (mounds and soils) following perchloric/nitric acids ( 4: 1) extraction.
TABLE 3.2 Quality control of selected elemental composition of internal reference termitaria material (Av44D4, Av22E, Tp23Dl and Nt24D4), following perchloric/nitric acid (4:1) extraction (mg/lOOg).
Element Internal reference tennitaria material®
Av44D4 Av22E
Ext.Lab HNO/HCI04 Ext. Lab HNO/HC104 -
XRF lCPj n=55 XRF lCPt n=25
Aluminium 4567 4800 3986 ± 143 2911 3420 3614 ± 151 .
Calcium 93 109 93 ± 3 122 151 137 ± 4
Cobalt 0 #0.54 0.42 ± 0.02 - #0.43 0.31 ± 0.03
Copper - 1.10 0.91 ± 0.03 - 1.00 0.83 ± 0.03
Iron 1350 1330 1271 ± 26 1476 1580 1625 ± 87
Potassium 1 1 12 1 170 702 ± 68 158 198 161 ± 15
Magnesium 15 1 159 139 ± 5 30 92 96 ± 5
Manganese 7.80 10.3 7.34 ± 0.22 7.80 9.90 7.55 ± 0.32
Sodium - 52.1 30.0 ± 2.4 - 10.7 5.7 ± 0.3
Zinc - 0.80 0.52 ± 0.03 1 .30 1 .00 ± 0.05
@ : for internal reference termitaria material number explanations see chapter 2J.3 Abbreviations: Ext.Lab = external laboratory; XRF = X-Ray Fluorescence; ICP - Inductively Coupled PLasma t: ICP mixed acid digestion = JICI, JICIO,, fiF; II: ICPMS - Inductively Coupled Plama Speclrophotometer
Tp23Dl
Ext. Lab HNO/HC104
XRF lCPt n=32
3514 3590 3194 ± 1 1 8
21.4 34.0 26.5 ± 1.0
- #0.37 0.29 ± 0.03
- 0.80 0.58 ± 0.02
1336 1330 1354 ± 52
780 781 526 ± 45
42 78 68 ± 4
7.80 5.00 3.16 ± 0.08
- 46.0 31 .4 ± 2.5
- 0.70 0.43 ± 0.03
Nt2404
Ext. Lab HNO/HC104
XRF lCPt n=33
4869 5250 4608 ± 2 1 1
21.4 37.5 28.8 ± 1.3
- #0.39 0.29 ± 0.03
- 1.00 0.89 ± 0.03
2000 2180 2149 ± 98
913 1020 652 ± 69
54 1 14 100 ± 4
7.80 3.70 2.44 ± 0.12
- 39.0 22.1 ± 2.8
- 0.60 0.43 ± 0.04
� <:> N
103
The method shows good extraction efficiencies compared to the XRF external laboratory
results, except for Mn in the Tumulitermes pastinator and Nasutitermes triodiae mound
samples; and good recoveries compared to ICP-OES and JCP-MS, except for Na (where
percentage recovery varies from 53 to 68 % in the mounds and 43 to 63 % in the soils).
The K percentage recoveries were highest in the Elliott samples: 100 % in the mound
and 86 % in the soil, while at the other sites it was arotu1d 60 to 70 %.
The general precision of the method is indicated by the selected element standard
deviations given in Tables 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3. These values are the total of the values
obtained for all the runs, during testings and analyses. They were usually very low
(below 5 %) but K and Na were higher (± 10 %).
3.2.2 Overview, General Correlation
A global overview of termite mound selected elements and particle sizes data from
different areas and different species is presented in Table 3.4. It shows strong negative
and positive correlations between most of the variables. Out of the 91 variable
cOrrelations, 72 were significantly correlated. For example, the iron was positively
correlated to aluminium, cobalt, copper, manganese, zinc, clay and fine sand. It was
negatively correlated to potassium, magnesium, sodium, silt and coarse sand. No
significant correlation was observed between iron, calcium and silt. The calcium was
positively correlated to copper, manganese and zinc and negatively correlated to
potassium and sodium. The clay was significantly correlated to most of the variables:
positively correlated to aluminium, cobalt, copper and iron and negatively correlated to
potassium, magnesium, silt and coarse sand. No significant correlation has been found
between clay, calcium and fine sand.
While a complete study of the correlations would be interesting, it is not the focus of
the project which has concentrated on Aboriginal community use ofterrn.itaria. For this
purpose, a finer detailed investigation between: age of sample collection, sample
position, size of mound, mounds of different species and different sites has been
necessary.
� = ...
TABLE 3.3 Quality control of selected elemental composition of internal reference soil material (OlE, 25D4 and 29H), following perchloric/nitric acid (4:1) extraction (mg/IOOg).
Internal reference soil materia!®
OlE 2504 29H
Element Ext. Lab HNO/HC104 Ext. Lab HNOiHC104 Ext.Lab HNO/HC104 ICPt n=15 ICPt n=15 ICPt n=IS
Aluminium !610 1677 ± 48 2600 2216 ± 159 3340 3587 ± 76
Calcium 55.1 46.2 ± 1.4 13.5 6.8 ± 0.5 59.8 51.4 ± 1 5 Cobalt #0.32 0.21 ± 0.02 #0.33 0.20 ± 0.03 # 0.92 0.70 ± 0.02
Copper 0.70 0.55 ± 0.01 0.60 0.48 ± 0.02 1.50 1.22 ± 0.03
Iron ! 100 1167 ± 42 820 844 ± 20 7040 7648 ± 209
Potassium ! 18 101 ± 6 746 449 ± 62 50 28 ± 2
Magnesium 42 44 ± 3 56 49 ± s 3 1 35 ± 3
Manganese 7.50 5.66 ± 0.13 3.90 2.31 ± 0.09 14.9 12.1 ± 0.34
Sodium 9.80 4.25 ± 0.74 32.8 20.7 ± 3.80 7.90 4.39 ± 0.55
Zinc 0.70 0.51 ± 0.02 0.50 0.25 ± 0.02 2.60 2.60 ± 0.10
@: for C1(planation of soil reference material number n:fi:r to chapter 2.3.1 t: mixed acid digestion - HCI, HCIO,, HF; #: ICPMS
TABLE 3.4 Pearson correlation (PC) matrix and probabilities (P t) of selected elements and particle size of 87 termite mounds (n=189) of all the species and sites studied (depth=l).
Element/ Aluminium Calcium Cobalt Copper Iron Potassium Magnesium Particle size PC p PC p PC p PC p PC p PC p PC p Aluminium 1.000 ...
Calcium 0.051 N 1.000 ...
Cobalt 0.749 ••• 0.056 N 1.000 •••
Copper 0.801 ... 0.160 • 0.818 ••• 1.000 ••• Iron 0.842 ... 0.037 N 0.764 ••• 0.817 ••• 1.000 •••
Potassium -0.465 ... -0.439 ••• -0.505 ••• -0.536 ••• -0.561 ••• 1.000 •••
Magnesium -0.182 • -0.061 N -0.222 •• -0.172 • -0.163 • 0.675 ••• 1 .000 ••• Manganese 0.146 • 0.504 ••• 0.329 ... 0.322 ••• 0.371 ••• -0.242 •• 0.345 •••
Sodium -0.404 ... -0.350 ••• -0.483 ••• -0.550 ••• -0.605 •• • 0.800 ••• 0.262 •••
Zinc 0.468 ... 0.246 •• 0.5 1 1 ••• 0.670 ••• 0.661 ••• -0.454 ••• .0219 •• Clay 0.789 ... -0.004 N 0.553 ••• 0.635 ... 0.618 ••• -0.322 ••• -0.153 • Silt -0.215 .. 0.083 N -0.100 N -0.105 N -0.121 N 0.395 ••• 0.718 ••• F.sand 0.254 ... -0.000 N 0.362 ••• 0.312 ••• 0.314 ••• -0.357 ••• -0.478 ••• Coarse sand -0.667 ... -0.013 N -0.636 ••• -0.639 ••• -0.625 ••• 0.258 ••• 0.086 N
Element/ Manganese Sodium Zinc Clay Silt Fine sand Coarse sand Particle size PC p PC p PC p PC p PC p PC p PC p Manganese 1.000 ...
Sodium -0.480 ... 1.000 ••• Zinc 0.648 ... -0.722 ••• 1.000 •••
Clay -0.080 N 0.267 ••• 0.294 ••• 1.000 ••• Silt 0.489 ... 0.074 N 0.320 ••• -0.459 ••• 1.000 ••• Fine sand -0.041 N -0.080 N 0.044 N -0.044 N -0.076 N 1.000 ••• Coarse sand -0.156 • 0.141 N -0.387 ... -0.433 ••• -0.151 • -0.714 ••• l .OOO ***
f: N: P>O.O$; *: O.Ol<P<O.O:>; *": O.OOI<P<O.Ol; •u: P<O.OOI � = "'
106
3.2.3 Detailed Mound Study
One mound of each termite species selected by the Aboriginal communities of Elliott
and Daly River, was analysed in detail. The detailed study included comparisons
between:
a) the age of the outside material of the moWld (old and new) in Nasutitermes triodiae
and Tumulitermes pastinator mounds;
b) the depth of sample collect where: depth�O, represents the Q.J em fraction of the
outside mound; depth= 1 , represents the 0� 10 em fraction of the outside mound; and
depth=2, represents the 0-10 em taken from the inside central axis of the mound.
Samples were taken from depths= 1 and 2 for Amitermes vitiosus and from depths=O,
I and 2 for Tumulitermes pastinator and Nasutitermes triodiae mounds;
c) the vertical position of the sample in the mound: top, middle and bottom
The physical characteristics of the termitaria selected are given in Table 2.2 and the
detailed mound sample summary for the 3 termitaria is given in Table 2.3. The detailed
results of the analyses are given in Appendices lc, le, lg, lllc, llle, lllg.
3.2.3.1 Amitermes vitiosus (Elliott, Site 5)
The effects of depth and position on the selected elements and particle sizes of the
mound together with ANOV A probability of differences are presented in Table 3.5 and
Table 3.6 respectively.
107
TABLE 3.5 Amitennes vitiosus mound detailed study (Elliott, site 5): depth effects on selected elements (mg/lOOg) and particle sizes (o/o) (mean ± standard deviation) together with ANOV A probability of differences (P) between depths.
Element/ Depth-I Depth-2 p Particle size n""6 n=3 � Aluminium 3428 ± 128 3548 ± 191 N
Calcium 136 ± 17 127 ± 22 N
Cobalt 0.32 ± 0,03 0.35 ± O.Ql N
Copper 0.91 ± 0.03 0.92 ± 0.03 N
Iron 1644 ± 43 1666 ± 24 N
Potassium 154 ± 2.8 160 ± 3.0 N
Magnesium 92 ± 2.1 92 ± 5.5 N
Manganese 7.93 ± 0.33 7.76 ± 0.23 N
Sodium 6.19 ± 0.32 5.98 ± 0.43 N
Zinc 1.09 ± 0.10 1.10 ± 0.11 N
Clay 16.5 ± 6.5 20.8 ± 2.3 N
Silt 10.4 ± 5.0 9.7 ± 5.3 N
Fine sand 36.3 ± 6.0 33.8 ± 1.1 N
Coarse sand 38.0 ± 1.3 37.5 ± 0.9 N l: N: P>O.OS
In the mound studied, there were no statistically significant differences associated with
depth of the sample in the mound.
The ANOV A shows that there are highly significant differences in calcium, magnesium
and zinc with position (Table 3.6). The pairwise comparisons (Tukey test) indicate that
the differences are associated with increases in concentrations in the top and middle
sections of the mound (Figure 3.3).
108
160 l 1.2 -
� Bottom 0 Middle
120 1 Fj l Lc Too_l 09 0, 0 0 -' 0 80 � El � El � 06 5 \1 0 0 40 � El � El � 03
0 -'--- 0.0 I 1=1 ,
FIGURE 3.3
c. MINERAL
Mg zo MINERAL
Position effects (mean ± SE) on calcium, magnesium and zinc (mg/lOOg) in Amitermes vitiosus mound sampled in Elliott (site 5) at depths I and 2
109
TABLE 3.6 Amitermes vitiosus mound detailed study (Elliott, site 5): position effects on selected elements (mg/lOOg) and particle sizes (%) (mean ± standard deviation) together with ANOV A probability of differences (P) between positions.
Element/ Top Middle Bottom Particle size n=3 n=4 n=2
Aluminium 3529 ± 135 3521 ± 1 1 7 3271 ± 82
Calcium 133 ± 3.4 147 ± 5.5 105 ± 1 .00
Cobalt 0.34 ± 0.03 0.32 ± 0.02 0.33 ± 0.04
Copper 0.90 ± 0.02 0.93 ± 0.03 0.92 ± 0.05
Iron 1655 ± 70 1653 ± 21 1641 ± 1.0
Potassium 158 ± 3.5 153 ± 3.4 160 ± 3.9
Magnesium 94 ± 2.3 93 ± 0.8 87 ± 1.3
Manganese 7.88 ± 0.40 7.93 ± 0.32 7.74 ± 0.15
Sodium 6.36 ± 0.21 6.16 ± 0.31 5.67 ± 0.01
Zinc 1 . 15 ± 0.63 1.14 ± 0.02 0.94 ± 0.06
Clay 12.1 ± 6.1 20.6 ± 3.1 21.3 ± 0.4
Silt 15.5 ± 2.4 8.4 ± 3.2 5.6 ± 0.7
Fine sand 39.9 ± 7.0 32.5 ± 0.9 34.9 ± 0.3
Coarse sand 37.3 ± 1 . 1 38.3 ± 1.2 37.6 ± 1.4
l: N: P>O.OS; . . : O.OOJ<P<O.OI
3.2.3.2 Tumulitermes pastinator (Daly River, Site 3)
p t N ..
N
N
N
N . .
N
N ••
N
N
N
N
The effects of age on the selected elements and particle sizes of the mound together with
the ANOVA probability of differences are presented in Table 3.7. The results of the
ANOV A show that the effects of age on the proportion of the selected elements and
particle sizes were not significant for the Tumulitermes pastinator mound at site 3
(P>0.05).
110
80
60 � ... a. 0 0 � ' § 40 � 1111! Sl 0 0
20 � .I.Ellli!
1000
750 � ' IIIII
500 � 1 rn
250 � 1 rn
1 2
g
6
3
l8l Depth-2 g Depth•1 D Depth .. O
0 -'-----'- 0 -'---__u o L--.t...r;:
FIGURE 3.4
FIGURE 3.5
c.
40 ,
I 30
� z
K MINERAL
Mo
Depth effects (mean ± SE) on calcium, potassium and manganese (mg!IOOg) in Tumulitermes pastinator mound sampled in Daly river (site 3)
l ll!l Deoth•2 El Depth-1 0 Depth-0
T
� 20 a: w a_
10
0 I I '7 Sill Coarse sand PARTICLE SIZE
Depth effects (mean ± SE) on silt and coarse sand (%) in Tumulitermes pastinator mound sampled in Daly river (site 3)
111
TABLE 3. 7 Tumulitermes pastinator mound detailed study: age effects on selected elements (mg/lOOg) and particle sizes (o/o) (mean ± standard deviation) together with ANOVA probability of differences (P) between ages. (Deptb=O).
Element/ Old material New material p Particle size n=5 n=2 + Aluminium 3983 ± 498 3986 ± 161 N
Calcium 16.5 ± 1.3 24.1 ± 7.6 N
Cobalt 0.44 ± 0.04 0.45 ± 0.01 N
Copper 0.86 ± 0.08 0.85 ± 0.01 N
Iron 2942 ± 250 2912 ± 108 N
Potassium 701 ± 83 755 ± 67 N
Magnesium !55 ± 10 164 ± 24 N
Manganese 5.43 ± 0.41 5.96 ± 0.94 N
Sodium 14.9 ± 3.0 15.3 ± 1.5 N
Zinc 1 .24 ± 0.10 1 .26 ± 0.14 N
Clay 18.3 ± 1.3 19.4 ± 0.3 N
Silt 16.4 ± 1.0 16.9 ± 0.1 N
Fine sand 37.0 ± 0.3 38.4 ± 4.1 N
Coarse sand 31.5 ± 1.7 30.2 ± 5.0 N
I' N: P>O.OS
The effects of depth and position on the selected elements and particle sizes of the
Tumulitermes pastinator mound together with the ANOV A probability of differences are
presented in Table 3.8.
The ANOVA shows a highly significant difference (P<O.Ol) in calcium, potassium,
manganese, silt and coarse sand and a significant difference in clay (P<0.05) associated
with depth. The pair-wise comparison between depths indicates that the inner section
of the mound ( depth=2) contains a higher level of calcium, potassium, manganese
(Figure 3.4), higher silt aod lower coarse saod particles (Figure 3.5).
� � TABLE 3.8 Tumulitermes pastinator mound (Daly River, site 3) detailed study: depth and position effects on selected
...
elements (mg/lOOg) and particle size (%) (mean ± standard deviation) together with ANOVA probability of differences (P) between depths and positions (at deptb=l).
Element/ Depth=O Depth= 1 Depth=2 P (Depths) Top Middle Bottom P (Positions)
Particle size n=7
Aluminium 3984 ± 412
Calcium 18.7 ± 4.9
Cobalt 0.44 ± o.m Copper 0.85 ± 0.08
Iron 2934 ± 210
Potassium 717 ± 78
Magnesium 158 ± 13
Manganese 5.58 ± 0.57
Sodium 15.0 ± 2.5
Zinc 1.24 ± 0.10
Clay 18.6 ± 1.2
Silt 16.5 ± 0.9
Fine sand 37.4 ± 1.8
Coarse sand 3 1 . 1 ± 2.6
n=6
3826 ± 446
23.3 ± 3.9
0.42 ± 0.04
1.50 ± 0.55
2917 ± 198
651 ± 79
152 ± 19
5.97 ± 0.83
13.8 ± 2.1
1.54 ± 0.28
2 1 .2 ± 2.4
15.6 ± 2.2
36.9 ± 2 . 1
28.8 ± 2.9
n=4
4039 ± 269
60.2 ± q.o 0.48 ± 0.04
1.34 ± 0.46
2939 ± 186
783 ± 61
175 ± 16
10.0 ± 2.1
16.8 ± 1.4
1.66 ± 0.31
20.2 ± 1.3
18.7 ± 0.8
38.1 ± 2.4
23.7 ± 2.7
I ' N: P>O . O S ; * : O . O l<P< O . O S ; * * : 0 . 00l<P<0.01
t n=2 n=2 n=2 t N 3795 ± 233 4280 ± 382 3403 ± 145 N
•• 23.8 ± 1.2 19.8 ± 1.71 26.2 ± 5.34 N
N 0.42 ± 0.04 0.44 ± 0.06 0.39 ± 0.01 N
N 1.22 ± 0.64 1.81 ± 0.25 1.48 ± 0.82 N
N 2821 ± 204 3117 ± 175 2814 ± 55 N
• • 629 ± 51 732 ± 87 593 ± 20 N
N 165 ± 3.2 159 ± 20.8 131 ± 5.6 N
• • 6.08 ± 0.77 5.32 ± 0.40 6.50 ± 1.10 N
N 1 3 . 1 ± 3.5 15.2 ± 1.80 13.0 ± 0.57 N
N 1.46 ± 0.28 1.75 ± O.Q2 1.43 ± 0.42 N
• 21.2 ± 1.9 23.1 ± 2.7 19.4 ± 2.3 N
• • 16.1 ± 1.2 17.4 ± 1.9 13.2 ± 0.3 N
N 35.9 ± 1.0 37.5 ± 0.1 37.4 ± 4.1 N
• • 28.8 ± 1.7 26.0 ± 0.8 31.7 ± 2.5 N
113
There are no significant differences associated with position of elements or particle sizes
content at depth= ! (Table 3.8). The other depths (0 and 2) were not investigated
because of the size of the mound.
3.2.3.3 Nasutitermes triodiae (Daly River, Site 3)
The effects of age on the selected elements and particle sizes of the mound together with
the ANOVA probability of differences are presented in Table 3.9. The results of the
ANOV A show that the effects of age on the proportion of the selected elements and particles size were not significant for the Nasutitennes triodiae mound at site 3 (P > 0.05).
Table 3.10 shows that at Daly River site 3, there were significant differences for cobalt,
iron, sodium and coarse sand with depth. The pair-wise comparison between depths
indicates that there was an increase in cobalt in the inner p;rrt of the mound (depth =2),
and an increase of iron, sodium and coarse sand in the outer part (depth =0) (Fignre 3. 6).
The calcium concentration was higher at depth=2, however the increase was not
significant due to a very high standard deviation.
At depth= I , the AN OVA shows significant differences in calcium and coarse sand with
positions (Table 3 . 1 0). The calcium concentration was higher at the bottom position of
the mound and the coarse sand was lower at the top (Figure 3.7).
114
3600
� 3500 a 8 -
' ..§' 3400
0 z 0 ()
3300
3200
,, MINERAl
FIGURE 3.6
30
" 8 25
r � 20
19 23 l!':l Qgpth-2
El Deoth- 1
0 Depth•O
18 22
17 � 21 w 0 �
16 � 20
15 19
14 18 No Coarse sand
MINERAL PARTICLE StZE
Depth effects (mean ± SE) on iron and sodium (mg/lOOg) together with coarse sand (%) in Nasutitermes triodiae mound sampled in Daly river (site 3)
22
2 1
� iii � 20
1 9
� Bottom
0 Middle
El Top
1 5 .L.._----=:1..,.- 18 .1._---=L,--
FIGURE 3.7
Co
MINERAL
Coarse sand
PARTICLE SIZE
Position effects (mean ± SE) on calcium (mg/JOOg) and coarse sand (%) in Nasutitermes triodiae mound sampled in Daly River (site 3)
115
TABLE 3.9 Nasutitermes triodiae mound detailed study: age effects on selected elements (mgllOOg) and particle sizes (%) (mean ± standard deviation) together with ANOV A probability of differences (P) between ages. (Depth=O).
Element/ Old material New material p Particle size n=l n=S t Aluminium 4772 ± 158 4722 ± 303 0.776 N
Calcium 23.1 ± 3 . 1 25.1 ± 4.7 0.501 N
Cobalt 0.52 ± 0.03 0.53 ± 0.02 0.718 N
Copper 0.82 ± 0.14 0.90 ± 0.19 0.490 N
Iron 3493 ± 169 3596 ± 232 0.485 N
Potassium 940 ± 81 987 ± 72 0.389 N
Magnesium 265 ± 37 252 ± 16 0.550 N
Manganese 9.61 ± 0.89 9.79 ± 1.79 0.859 N
Sodium 18.1 ± 1.9 18.4 ± 2.3 0.836 N
Zinc 1.63 ± O.o7 1 .62 ± 0.09 0.903 N
Clay 19.8 ± 1.6 23.6 ± 7.4 0.355 N
Silt 25.5 ± 5.0 26.0 ± 7.5 0.908 N
Fine sand 33.1 ± 1.8 33.3 ± 1.9 0.900 N
Coarse sand 23.5 ± 4.2 21.5 ± 1.7 0.350 N
t: N: P>O.OS
� TABLE 3.10 Nasutitennes triodiae mound (Daly River site 3) detailed study: depth and position effects on selected
� "' minerals (mg!IOOg) and particle size (%) (mean ± standard deviation) together with AN OVA probability of differences (P) between depths and positions (at depth=!).
Element/ Depth effects Position effects
Particle size Depth=O Depth=l Depth=2 P (Depths) Top Middle Bottom P (Positions) n=9 n=6 n=5 t n=2 n=2 n=2 t
Aluminium 4744 ± 236 4488 ± 167 4480 ± 234 N 4439 ± 26 4602 ± 502 4422 ± 312 0.610 N
Calcium 24.2 ± 3.9 23.1 ± 4.7 32.2 ± 23.6 N 19.9 ± 1.3 20.5 ± 2.6 28.8 ± 2.1 0.039 .
Cobalt 0.52 ± 0.02 0.52 ± 0.04 0.57 ± O.Q2 • 0.54 ± 0.04 0.52 ± 0.06 0.50 ± 0.01 0.633 N
Copper 0.87 ± 0.16 0.97 ± 0.30 0.98 ± 0.25 N 0.93 ± 0.37 0.98 ± 0.48 1.02 ± 0.26 0.970 N
Iron 3550 ± 202 3434 ± 124 3245 ± 139 • 3352 ± 120 3563 ± 108 3387 ± 1.0 0.195 N
Potassium 967 ± 76 897 ± 65 949 ± 95.5 N 862 ± [ [ 1 948 ± 12 881 ± 18 0.481 N
Magnesium 258 ± 26 256 ± 25 260 ± 22.5 N 239 ± 14 261 ± 8.3 268 ± 44 0.585 N
Manganese 9.71 ± 1.38 9.38 ± 0.99 9.69 ± 2.47 N 8.62 ± 0.91 9.84 ± 0.92 9.68 ± 1.21 0.515 N
Sodium 18.3 ± 2.0 16.5 ± 2.0 14.6 ± 1.3 • 14.7 ± 1.4 16.2 ± 0.1 18.4 ± 2.2 0.188 N
Zinc 1.63 ± 0.08 1.68 ± 0.18 1.74 ± 0.21 N 1.60 ± 0.07 1.74 ± 0.33 1.69 ± 0.15 0.803 N
Clay 21.9 ± 5.7 19.4 ± 1.0 21.9 ± 3.6 N 19.1 ± 1.0 19.3 ± 0.8 19.8 ± 1.6 0.833 N
Silt 25.8 ± 6.1 29.4 ± 1.3 29.8 ± 3.2 N 29.4 ± 1.4 30.5 ± 1.6 28.5 ± 0.4 0.391 N
Fine sand 33.2 ± 1.8 33.6 ± 2.1 32.9 ± 2.2 N 35.2 ± 1.0 31.4 ± 2.3 34.1 ± 0.6 0.164 N
Coarse sand 22.4 ± 3.0 20.4 ± 1.5 18.7 ± 2.6 • 18.6 ± 0.6 21.5 ± 0.1 21.2 ± 0.8 0.029 .
*: N: P>O.OS; •: O.Ol <P<O.O.S
117
3.2.4 Hypotheses
A number of hypotheses have arisen from the way the Aboriginal communities selected
and sampled tennite mounds. The depth considered in this chapter is depth=! (unless
indicated), which represents the 0-10 em fraction of the outside of the mound. Depth= I
is the depth normally used by Aboriginals. The detailed analysis results of all the
samples are given in Appendices I to V.
3.2.4.1 Hypothesis 1: The New Material of Nasutitermes triodiae Mounds Contains a Higher Element Content, in Particular Iron and Calcium, and Has a Higher Clay and Silt Content than the Older Part of the Mounds.
Samples from new and old material were collected from 5 Nasutitermes triodiae mounds
(n=30), at Daly River (site 4). The results (mean ± standard deviation), per age group
of the mineral analyses (mg/1 OOg) and the particle size analyses (percent of the fine
fraction: <2mm) together with the probability of differences between old and new parts
of the mounds are given in Table 3.11 . The sample depth studied is depth=O, it
represents the 0-1 em fraction collected from the outside of the mound.
The results of the ANOV A show that the only significant differences between the ages
of samples were for aluminium, copper and iron, where the increase in the old material
was highly significant (P<O.OI) and for potassium significantly different (P<O.OS)
(Figure 3.8).
118
5000 ..,
4ooo I a, 0 ;2 3000 i ' � 5 � 2000 -i ()
10] FIGURE 3.8
5000 "")
4000 i a, 0 � 3000 1 ' � 5 S? 2000 -l 0 ()
100: 1 FIGURE 3.9
1.0 12 New marerial
n 1 0 Old rna !erial 1
DB
I
I
I � 0.6
� 04
I I B 02
[)! 0.0 AI ,, K c"
MINERAL MINERAL
Age effects (mean ± SE) on aluminium, iron, potassium and copper (mg/lOOg) in Nasutitermes triodiae mounds sampled in Daly River (site 4)
e.! New malenal Aluminium -
2000 1 Iron 0 Old material
� 1 m
l r,a
I I Top
� _L 1600
l r,a I I,!, 1200
l r,a I P1 BOO
I I I I 400
0 Middle Bottom Top Middle Bottom
POSITION POSITION
Age effects (mean ± SE) on aluminium and iron (mgllOOg), at three positions (top, middle, bottom), in Nasutitermes triodiae mounds sampled in Daly River (site 4)
119
TABLE 3.11 Age effects on selected elements (mgllOOg) and particle sizes (%) (mean ± standard deviation) in 5 Nasutitermes triodiae mounds (Daly River, site 4). ANOVA probability of differences (P) between ages. (Depth=O).
Element I Nasutitermes triodiae site 4 Particle size Old material New material p
n=IS n=JS � Aluminium 3919 ± 6 1 1 3216 ± 380 0.001 ••
Calcium 26.9 ± 10.3 29.2 ± 9.2 0.516 N
Cobalt 0.27 ± 0.06 0.24 ± 0.03 0.092 N
Copper 0.78 ± 0.12 0.67 ± O.o7 0.001 ..
Iron 1364 ± 345 1057 ± ISO 0.004 ••
Potassium 602 ± 35 563 ± 48 0.016 •
Magnesium 95 ± 24 89 ± 10 0.430 N
Manganese 2.12 ± 0.67 2.60 ± 0.70 0.063 N
Sodium 22.7 ± 4.2 21.3 ± 3.0 0.312 N
Zinc 0.46 ± 0.06 0.42 ± 0.06 0.095 N
Clay 19.9 ± 2.9 18.9 ± 3.2 0.382 N
Silt 5.3 ± J.J 5.9 ± 0.6 0.068 N
Fine sand 31.2 ± 2.9 32.9 ± 3.4 0.133 N
Coarse sand 42.0 ± 2.9 40.4 ± 2.3 0.109 N
t: N: P>0.05; •: O.Ol<P<O.OS; .. : O.OOJ<P<O.OI
The aluminium, copper, iron, and to a lesser extent potassium, mean content is
consistently higher in the old part of the mound, at each mound position (top, middle
and bottom), as shown in Figure 3.9 for aluminium and iron. The age effect
probabilities per position in the moWld (Table 3.12) were not significant (P>0.05) in all
cases and the age/position pairwise comparisons (new-old material I top-middle-bottom
section) indicated no significant differences for any of the elements or particle sizes, in
the Nasutitermes triodiae mounds (site 4), except aluminium (Table 3.13). For
aluminium, the pairs top-old versus bottom-new and middle-old versus bottom-new were
significantly different (P<0.05).
TABLE 3.12
Element/ Particle size
Aluminium
Calcium
Cobalt
Copper
Iron
Potassium
Magnesium
Manganese
Sodium
Zinc
Clay
Silt
Fine sand
Coarse sand
*= N: P>0.05
Age (new, old) and position (top, middle, bottom) effects on selected elements (mg/lOOg) and particle size (%) (mean ± standard deviation) in 5 Nasutitermes triodiae mounds sampled at site 4. AN OVA probability of differences (P) between ages. (Depth=O).
Top Middle
Old material New material p Old material New material n=5 n=5 t n=5 n=S
4044 ± 821 3400 ± 325 0.384 N 3995 ± 550 3301 ± 265
22.7 ± 6.6 31.7 ± 9.0 0.677 N 2H ± 7.6 31.5 ± 1 1 .5
0.29 ± 0.08 0.25 ± 0.04 0.892 N 0.27 ± O.o7 0.25 ± O.o3
0.79 ± 0.14 0.71 ± 0.04 0.652 N 0. 79 ± 0.09 0.67 ± 0.05
1411 ± 499 1128 ± 177 0.602 N 1406 ± 352 1080 ± 167
592 ± 53 570 ± 54 0.957 N 6 1 1 ± 23 585 ± 37
92.7 ± 25.0 93.8 ± 7.4 1 .000 N 90.4 ± 20.1 95.3 ± 9.5
1.88 ± 0.39 2.72 ± 0.72 0.410 N 2.00 ± 0.54 2.81 ± 0.77
22.1 ± 5.1 21.6 ± 3.0 1 .000 N 22.1 ± 3.7 22.5 ± 4 . 1
0.46 ± 0.06 0.43 ± O.o3 0.957 N 0.47 ± 0.05 0.43 ± 0.05
19.7 ± 4.1 18.8 ± 1.7 0.998 N 20.4 ± 3.0 18.8 ± 3.6
5.3 ± 0.9 6.4 ± 0.4 0.288 N 5.9 ± 1.4 5.5 ± 0.5
33.8 ± 3.2 33.7 ± 2.2 1 .000 N 30.0 ± 1.2 32.4 ± 4.7
39.7 ± 2.7 39.9 ± 3.4 1 .000 N 43.1 ± 3.0 40.7 ± 2.4
Bottom
p Old material New material p t n=5 n=5 t
0.307 N 3718 ± 505 2947 ± 432 0.208 N
0.894 N 32.9 ± 14.2 24.5 ± 6.3 0.737 N
0.989 N 0.26 ± 0.04 0.22 ± O.o2 0.819 N
0.344 N 0.76 ± 0.09 0.63 ± 0.09 0.192 N
0.452 N 1274 ± 173 964 ± 40 0.508 N
0.916 N 604 ± 28 535 ± 46 0.135 N
0.998 N 102 ± 30 80.0 ± 7.0 0.444 N
0.439 N 2.47 ± 0.94 2.27 ± 0.62 0.997 N
1 .000 N 23.8 ± 3.7 19.8 ± 1.5 0.590 N
0.852 N 0.43 ± 0.06 0.40 ± 0.09 0.946 N
0.970 N 19.7 ± 1.8 19.2 ± 4.5 1 .000 N
0.978 N 4.8 ± 0.7 5.9 ± 0.5 0.344 N
0.808 N 29.6 ± 2.1 32.7 ± 3.5 0.598 N
0.679 N 43.2 ± 2.0 40.5 ± 1.2 0.593 N
� ... =
TABLE 3.13
Position-Age
T·O
T·n
M·o
M·n
B-o
B·n
121
Matrix of Pairwise Comparison Probabilities (P:) (Tukey test) between different positions of material (T=top, M=middle, B=bottom) and age (o=old, n=new) for aluminium content in Nasutitermes triodiae mounds sampled at site 4.
T·o
N
N
N
N
N
•
T·n
N
N
N
N
N
M·o
N
N
N
•
M·n
N
N
N
B·o
N
N
B·n
N :: N: P>0.05; *: O.Ol<P<0.05
3.2.4.2 Hypothesis 2: There is No Difference Between Samples Taken
from Different Positions of Termitaria for
Selected Elements and Particle Size Content.
Three species of termitaria at different sites were analysed separately for position effects:
a) Amitermes vitiosus rnotmds: top and bottom positions;
b) Tumulitermes pastinator mounds: top and bottom positions;
c) Nasutilermes triodiae mounds: top, middle and bottom positions.
A) Amitermes vitiosus
The results of selected elements, particle sizes and ANOV A analyses on the position
effects in Amitermes vitiosus mounds from Daly River (sites 2 and 4) and Elliott (site
5) are given in Table 3.14.
For the Daly River site 2, there were no significant differences (P>0.05) for the ten
selected elements and for particle size composition between the top and the bottom
sections of the mounds. This contrasts with the mounds at Daly River site 4, where the
top section showed a highly significant increase in calcium, copper, magnesium,
TABLE 3.14
Element/
Particle size
Aluminium
Calcium
· Cobalt
Copper
Iron
Potassium
Magnesium
Manganese
Sodium
Zinc
Clay
Silt
Fine sand
Coarse sand
Position effects on selected elements (mgllOOg) and particle size (%)(mean ± standard deviation) in Amitermes vitiosus mounds sampled at sites 2, 4 and 5. ANOV A probability of differences (P) between positions.
Da1y River (Site 2} DaJy River (Site 4) Elliott (Site 5)
Top Bottom Probability Top Bottom Probability Top Bottom Probability n=4 n= 4 t n = lO n= 10 t n=ll n= 1 1 t
3042 ± 143 3209 ± 300 0.353 N 3903 ± 353 3750 ± !59 0.228 N 3771 ± 394 3526 ± 359 0.136 N
39.0 ± [ [ .[ 29.4 ± 7.2 0.!95 N 82.7 ± 27.8 31.8 ± 10.8 0.000 *** [ [7 ± 17 95 ± 20 0.013 .
0.57 ± 0.10 0.55 ± 0.13 0.!61 N 0.50 ± 0.23 0.34 ± O.Dl 0.047 * 0.32 ± 0.05 0.30 ± 0.05 0.372 N
0.83 ± 0.12 0.80 ± 0.17 0.384 N 0.95 ± O.ll 0.79 ± 0.09 0.002 •• 0.93 ± 0.08 0.89 ± 0.07 0.165 N
1574 ± 176 1549 ± 227 0.683 N 1480 ± 341 1359 ± 248 0.376 N 1769 ± 161 [700 ± 141 0.296 N
446 ± 35 469 ± 54 0.874 N 734 ± 82 694 ± 25 0.159 N 165 ± 12 159 ± 12 0.209 N
lOS ± 13 ll3 ± [8 0.776 N 131 ± 17 96 ± 13 0.000 ..... 96 ± 7.1 89 ± 5.9 0.013 .
8.[8 ± 2.36 6.49 ± 1.60 0.!66 N 7.23 ± 1.81 3.88 ± 0.77 0.000 ••• 7.75 ± 1.99 7.21 ± 1.89 0.512 N
12.0 ± 0.5 11.7 ± 2.0 0.998 N 32.6 ± 4.7 28.9 ± 3.4 0.060 N 6.62 ± 0.79 6.35 ± 0.63 0.386 N
0.93 ± 0.16 0.85 ± 0.08 0.277 N 0.55 ± 0.14 0.39 ± 0.05 0.006 • • [.[2 ± 0.08 1.04 ± 0.08 0.026 .
14.7 ± 2.0 16.0 ± 1.6 0.620 N 13.2 ± 4.1 [9.[ ± 3.3 0.002 •• 16.0 ± 6.0 16.7 ± 5.0 0.771 N
14.7 ± 2.2 15.4 ± 2.9 0.145 N 21.4 ± 6.[ 12.0 ± 3.1 0.000 ••• 13.9 ± 2.9 12.9 ± 4.9 0.559 N
28.7 ± 4.7 33.7 ± 3.2 0.899 N 45.1 ± 5.2 41.2 ± 3.4 0.059 N 36.2 ± 4.6 34.9 ± 2.[ 0.410 N
43.8 ± 3.6 36.8 ± 2.8 0.431 N 19.9 ± 5.9 28.6 ± 3.4 0.001 •• 37.2 ± 2.1 38.2 ± 2.0 0.261 N
:1:: N: P>0.05; *: 0.01 <P<0.05; .. : 0.001 <P<O.Ol; ***: P<O.OOI n: number or mounds
� ... ...
123
manganese, zinc and silt; a significant increase in cobalt and a highly significant
decrease in clay and coarse sand, as seen in Figures 3.10 and 3 . 1 1 .
In Elliott, there were significant (P<O.Ol) differences between position for calcium,
magnesium and zinc (Table 3.14). Here, as at Daly River site 4, the increase was in the
top position, with the calcium concentration: 1 1 7 ± 17 mg/1 OOg in the top section and
95 ± 20 mg/IOOg in the bottom section.
In general, there were no highly significant differences between the top and bottom
positions in Amitermes vitiosus mounds for aluminium, cobalt, iron, potassium, sodium
and fine sand content for the three sites studied. For the other elements, the differences
were highly significant but only at site 4.
B) Tumulitermes pastinator
The results of the analyses comparing top with bottom sections of Tumulitermes
pastinator mounds from sites 1 and 6 are given in Table 3.15. The results of the
ANOV A show that the effects of mound position (top/bottom) on the selected elements
and particle size content, were not highly significant (P<0.01) for all the termitaria
studied at the 2 locations. The only significant differences (0.01 <P<O.OS) were for
aluminium, calcium and manganese content at site 1 (Table 3.15).
124
150 ] 10
120 � 8
" 0 0 90 j I F==llil 6 � ' 0 .§ 0 60 j ""' = 4 z 0 0 3: 1 I I 2
0 c. Mg Mo
MINERAL MINERAL
FIGURE 3.10 Position effects (mean ± SE) on calcium, magnesium and manganese (mg/IOOg) in Amitennes vitiosus mounds sampled in Daly River (site 4)
50
40
� 30 w 0 a: 1i: 20
10
O I E Clay Slit Fine sand
PARTICLE SIZE
� Bottom � Top
Coarse sand
FIGURE 3.11 Position effects (mean ± SE) on particle size ( (%) in Amitermes vitiosus mounds sampled in Daly River (site 4)
125
TABLE 3.15 Position effects on selected elements (mgllOOg) and particle sizes (%) (mean ± standard deviation) in Tumulitermes pastinator mounds sampled at sites 1 and 6. ANOV A probability of differences (P) between positions.
Element/ Daly River (Site I)
Particle size Top Bottom n=l5 n=Il
Aluminium 3 1 19 ± 176 2942 ± 196
Calcium 21.4 ± 5.2 26.7 ± 7.8
Cobalt 0.29 ± 0.01 0.29 ± 0.01
Copper 0.57 ± 0.03 0.57 ± O.o3
Iron 1359 ± 101 1321 ± 77
Potassium 514 ± 23 503 ± 19
Magnesium 64.3 ± 7.4 65.7 ± 6.6
Manganese 3.16 ± 0.32 3.57 ± 0.46
Sodium 27.8 ± 2.5 26.4 ± 1.6
Zinc 0.48 ± 0.03 0.48 ± 0.03
Clay 14.8 ± 1.3 14.8 ± 1.4
Silt 8.7 ± 1.0 8.9 ± 1.3
Fine sand 43.3 ± 3.1 43.8 ± 2.0
Coarse sand 32.7 ± 3.7 32.8 ± 2.6
l: N: P>0.05; •: O.Ol<P<O.OS n: number of mounds
C) Nasutitermes triodiae
Howard Springs (Site 6)
p Top Bottom p I n=I3 n=9 I
0.024 • 6300 ± 703 6125 ± 524 0.532 N
0.048 . 52 ± 12 47 ± 10 0.373 N
0.376 N 0.92 ± 0.23 0.84 ± 0.26 0.463 N
0.691 N 1.67 ± 0.33 1.65 ± 0.39 0.881 N
0.302 N 4307 ± 658 4813 ± 971 0.160 N
0.185 N 38.1 ± 7.7 35.6 ± 6.4 0.449 N
0.628 N 48.9 ± 5.3 48.9 ± 4.8 0.975 N
0.014 "' 6.54 ± 1.89 6.61 ± 2.04 0.938 N
0.116 N 6.11 ± 0.66 6.45 ± 0.67 0.258 N
0.997 N 1.14 ± 0.16 1.16 ± 0.25 0.876 N
0.999 N 27.3 .± 3.4 25.8 ± 3.5 0.322 N
0.560 N 6.41 ± 1.0 5.9 ± 1.1 0.358 N
0.605 N 45.9 ± 4.3 46.7 ± 2.2 0.647 N
0.967 N 18.8 ± 2.3 19.8 ± 3.3 0.405 N
The results of the analyses comparing the top and bottom positions of Nasutitermes
triodiae mounds, at sites 4 and 6 are given in Table 3.16. As for Tumulitermes
pastinator, the results of the AN OVA show no highly significant differences between
mound positions for any of the elements or particle sizes. The only significant
differences (O.Ol<P<0.05) were in the site 4 samples, with a significant increase in
aluminium and copper in the top section of the mounds. No position effects were
observed in the Howard Springs mounds.
� TABLE 3.16 Position effects on selected elements (mg/lOOg) and particle size (o/o) (mean ± standard deviation) in Nasutitermes
... a-triodiae mounds sampled at sites 4 and 6. ANOV A probability of differences (P) between positions.
Element/ Daly River (Site 4) Howard Springs (site 6)
Particle size Top Middle Bottom Probability Top Middle Bottom Probability n=l5 n=IO n= l5 * n=S n=S n=S *
Aluminium 4150 ± 539 4327 ± 694 3735 ± 407 0.020 • 5774 ± 761 5723 ± 892 5716 ± 708 0.992 N
Calcium 41.4 ± 22.6 45.5 ± 26.4 38.3 ± 23.3 0.755 N 85 ± 19 82 ± 27 84 ± 28 0.981 N '
Cobalt 0.34 ± 0.04 0.35 ± 0.05 0.32 ± O.DJ 0.162 N 0.81 ± 0.25 0.78 ± 0.23 0.78 ± 0.21 0.972 N
Copper 0.85 ± 0.09 0.87 ± 0.10 0.78 ± 0.07 0.025 • 1.61 ± 0.22 1.54 ± 0.15 1.53 ± 0.15 0.729 N
Iron 1504 ± 333 1600 ± 324 1346 ± 227 0.094 N 3683 ± 406 3624 ± 770 3639 ± 1120 0.993 N
Potassium 668 ± 68 695 ± 85 632 ± 45 0.059 N 38.0 ± 3.7 38.3 ± 5.5 39.2 ± 5.4 0.926 N
Magnesium 103 ± 13 1 15 ± 21 102 ± 22 0.232 N 50.2 ± 6.7 48.8 ± 8.6 52.0 ± 8.9 0.821 N
Manganese 3.63 ± 1.17 3.99 ± 1 .29 3.52 ± 0.68 0.529 N 4.88 ± 1.38 5.08 ± 1.83 5.14 ± 2.14 0.972 N
Sodium 25.5 ± 3.1 28.6 ± 4.5 26.4 ± 3.7 0.126 N 5.73 ± 0.61 5.65 ± 0.68 6.30 ± 1.03 0.394 N
Zinc 0.47 ± 0.08 0.46 ± 0.07 0.42 ± 0.05 0.127 N 1.12 ± 0.13 1.01 ± 0.21 0.98 ± 0.12 0.360 N
Clay 22.1 ± 2.8 23.8 ± 3.9 20.8 ± 2.4 0.054 N 26.8 ± 2.5 28.4 ± 3.2 27.7 ± 3.8 0.732 N
Silt 7.8 ± 2.4 8.9 ± 4.2 7.4 ± 1.8 0.433 N 8.3 ± 1.7 7.8 ± 1.2 7.5 ± 0.7 0.629 N
Fine sand 31.7 ± 3.2 32.0 ± 4.7 34.7 ± 3.5 0.071 N 43.9 ± 3.0 44.7 ± 1.9 45.5 ± 4.2 0.730 N
Coarse sand 38.6 ± 3.4 35.1 ± 6.4 36.3 ± 4.2 0.168 N 20.8 ± 2.6 18.2 ± 3.0 18.6 ± 1.2 0.221 N
�: N: P>0.05; •: 0.01 <P<O.OS n: number of mounds
3.2.4.3 Hypothesis 3:
127
There are No Significant Selected Elements and
Particle Size Differences Between Mounds of
Different Sizes.
To test the influence of the mound size on selected elements and particle sizes, 10 to 15
Amitermes vitiosus, Tumulitermes pastinator and Nasutitermes triodiae mounds were
sampled at two locations per species. The correlation between the size of the mounds
and the selected elements and particle sizes was calculated by the Pearson Correlation
and Probability Test. Equality of variance and normality were checked by Bartlett's
Test. The results of the analyses, given in Table 3.17, indicate that 85 % of the variable
correlations are not significantly correlated. The significant 15 % of correlations are not
consistent across species and sites. For example, calcium is positively correlated to size
only in Amitermes vitiosus mounds at site 5; iron is not significantly correlated for the
three species at all sites and clay is significantly positively correlated in Nasutitermes
triodiae mounds at site 4. There is no consistency in. the way the variables are
correlated. For example in Amitermes vitiosus mounds the iron is positively correlated
(but not significantly) to size at site 4, while it is significantly negatively correlated to
size at site 5. Overall, there are no significant correlations between mound size and
selected element and particle sizes.
3.2.4.4 Hypothesis 4: There are Differences Between Mounds of the
Same Species at the Same Site.
The differences between mounds of the same species at the same site were tested by
ANOV A for Amitermes vitiosus at sites 2, 4 and 5, Tumulitermes pastinator at sites 1
and 6, Nasutitermes triodiae at sites 4, 6 and 7 and for Tumulitermes hastilis at site I .
The probability differences (P) are given in Table 3.18. The concentration data are
given in Appendices I to V. Interestingly, at two sites (Amitermes vitiosus site 4 and
Tumulitermes pastinator site 1), there were no significant differences between mounds
of the same species, except for iron at site 4 (0.01 <P<0.05), but significant and highly
significant differences for the other species on the same site (Nasutitermes triodiae at site
4 and Tumulitermes hastilis at site 1). An example of the variation between mounds is
128
120 2500
100
� 80 � ' 0 .§ 60
........ � 2000 0 0 0 � 1500 .§
0 15 0 40
� 1000 0
• 0 20
l � § s § § .1: 500
0 o ' ''''''''''''''' 1 � 3 • e o r a a w •• n ffl u � • 2 3 • a e r e e � ,, 12 13 u �
Nt MOUND SITE 4 Nt MOUND SITE 4
FIGURE 3.12 Mound effects (mean ± SE) on calcium and iron (mg/lOOg) in Nasutitermes triodiae
mounds sampled in Daly River (site 4)
129
given in Figure 3.12, for calcium and iron content in Nasutilermes triodiae mounds at
site 4. At the other sites, the differences between mounds are often highly significant
for all the selected elements.
For the particle sizes, the differences are less marked. There was only one site with
highly significant differences for silt.
TABLE 3.17 Pearson correlation (PC) and probability (P�) matrix of mound size (height + circumference) with selected elements and particle sizes of three species® at different sites.
Element/ Amitermes vitiosus Tumulitermes pastinator Nasutitermes triodiae Particle size "s"'it:::e-;4:---;S;:i::te�5;;-----;:S'=ite::-;l---;S;:it::e-;6,---�S;:i::te:-4:;----;;S'=it:::e-.:6--
Size P Size P Size P Size P Size P Size P
Size 1.000 • • • 1.000 • • • 1.000 ••• 1 .000 • • • 1.000 ••• 1 .000 • • •
0.559 *** 0.106 N Aluminium 0.249 N -0.359 N -0.046 N 0.179 N
Calcium
Cobalt
Copper
Iron
0.389 N
-0.068 N
0.341 N
0.320 N
Potassium 0.454 •
Magnesium 0.292 N
Manganese 0.421 N
Sodium 0.295 N
0.527 • •
0.154 N
0.055 N
-0.367 N
-0.3 1 8 N
0.131 N
0.146 N
-0.282 N
-0.087 N
-0.645 • • •
-0.289 N
0.224 N
-0.093 N
-0. 1 1 5 N
-0.567 • •
-0.034 N
0.149 N
0.207 N
0.313 •
0.202 N
0.132 N
0.3 1 5 N
-0.030 N
0.236 N
0.404 ** 0.092 N
0.306 N 0.165 N
0.161 N 0.192 N
0.387 * 0.092 N
Zinc 0.477 • -0.063 N
0.213 N
0.020 N
0.150 N
0.013 N
0,078 N
0.376 N
0.1 18 N
-0.094 N
0.192 N
0.547 N
-0.279 N
-0.164 N 0.294 N -0.282 N Clay -0.019 N
Silt 0.233 N
F.sand 0.031 N
Coarse sand -0.175 N
0.149 N
-0.443 •
-0.016 N
O.oJ8 N
-0.527 N
0.428 N
0.200 N
-0.154 N
-0.610 •••
0.426 •
0.321 * 0.0 1 1 N
0.086 N -0.195 N
-0.045 N -0.199 N
-0.239 N 0.101 N :t N: P>0.05; *: O.OI<P<O.OS; n: O.OOI<P<O.OI; •n: P<O.OOI
@ Amitermes viti=: Tumulitermes pastinator: Nasutllerme.s triodiae:
site 4: 10 mounds (n=20) site 5: I I mounds (n=26) site I: IS mounds (n=26) site 6: 13 mounds (11'"'25)
site 4: IS mounds (n=41) site 6: 5 mounds (n=J5)
130
TABLE 3.18 Probability differences (ANOVA) PW between mounds of each species (Av, Tp, Nt and Th) per site for selected elements and particle sizes.
Element/ Av Tp Nt Th -
Particle size Site 2 Site 4 Site 5 Site I Site 6 Site 4 Site 6 Site 7 Site I n=12 n=20 n=26 n=26 n=25 n=41 n=15 n::JO n:IO
Aluminium • N .. N .. .. .. . .. ...
Calcium N N .. N ... ... ... ... ...
Cobalt ... N .. N ... .. ... .. ..
Copper ... N .. N ... .. .. • ...
Iron .. • ... N • ... .. ... N
Potassium .. N .. N .. N .. N N
Magnesium • N N N ... .. ... .. ...
Manganese • N ... N ... ... ... ... ...
Sodium • N .. N ... • N • N
Zinc N N N N .. ... .. N ...
Clay . . N N N • .. ...
Silt .. N N N N N N
Fine sand N N N N .. .. N
Coarse sand N N ... N .. • N £ N: P>0.05; 1: O.OI<P<O.OS; ": O.OOI<P<O.Ol; n•: P<O.OOI
3.2.4.5 Hypothesis 5: There are Differences in Selected Elements and Particle Sizes Between Termitaria of Different Species at the Same Site.
The data were analysed statistically by one-way analysis of variance (ANOV A), with
selected elements and particle size distribution as the source of variance between species
mounds. An overview of the termitaria selected elements and particle sizes (mean ±
standard error), per species and per site, is presented in Figures 3.13 (A to D).
7000
6000
- 5000 8 2 4000
g 3000 ;;: 2000
1000
0
150
"' 100 8 ' 0 .§ • 50 0
Av
2 4 '
Av
2 4 '
131
Nt Th
3 6 3 4 6 7 SITE
!'!! Th
7
TABLE 3.13 A Selected elements (mg!IOOg) and particle size (%) (mean ± SE) of Amitennes vitiosus
(A v), Tumulitermes pastinator (Tp ), Nasutitermes triodiae (Nt) and Tumulitermes hastilis
(Th) at sites 1-7.
Aluminium and calcium concentrations (mgllOOg)
1.00
OEO 0 8 060 � ' rn ..s 0.40 0 0
0.20
000
2.00 l 150
0 0 0 � � 1.00 s , 0
0.50
000 I
AY In I'!! Th 5000 J Av I In ., , Nt 4000
0 8 3000 � ' � s 2000 m "-
1000
0
2 4 5 I 3 6 3 4 6 7 I 2 4 5 I 3 6 3 4 6
1000 Av I In � I Nt I Th l Av I In ' ""' Nt
1 ..+, BOO
0 0 600
- � 0 �
� � - � I "' s 400
rlil "'
200
vp 9 r�(J '''(' ¥(4 r\Q II"(I !Cf' Kie "I" ' I 0 2 4 5 I 3 6 3 4 6 7 I I 3 6 3 4 6 2 4 5
SITE SITE
TABLE 3.13 B Selected elements (mg/IOOg) and particle size(%) (mean ± SE) of Amilermes vitiosus
(A v), Tumulitermes pastinaror(Tp), Nasutitermes triodiae (Nt) and Tumulitermes hastilis
(Th) at sites 1�7. Cobalt, copper, iron and potassium concentrations (mg/IOOg)
hh I � "' N
7
I Th
7
300 .., I I� I Th I 40 Av In Nt
30 roo ] I -a 8
I -
E3 r 20 � 100 El El • = z 10 J i I iii i �li i � ;li I 0
2 4 5 I 3 6 3 4 6 . 7 I 2 4 5 I 3 6 3 4 6 7
10 , 2.00 Av In Rl Nt Th
8 1.50 -a -a 0 6 I
0 0
I 0 -
� - � -' '(» 1.00 0 s 4 5
c
� c " N 2 0.50
0 ')" "I'' "�' I "j � ·y· ,,, ,,�. "j¥ , ... .,,,. . "i' 0.00 2 4 5 I 3 6 3 4 6 7 I 2 4 5 I 3 6 3 4 6 7
SITE SITE
TABLE 3.13 C Selected elements (mg/IOOg) and particle size(%) (mean ± SE) of Amitermes vitiosus (A v), Tumulitermes pastinator(Tp), Nasutitermes triodiae (Nt) and Tumulitermes hastilis
(Th) at sites 1-7. � "' "' Magnesium, manganese, sodium and zinc concentrations (mg/100g)
so , � 20 l 10
J so , : 20 l 10
0 '
Av I rn ""'I
I I � 1 l l ; Nt J"'l I Th I
� i i iii i ��� � � ��� I
2 4 ' I 3 6 3 4 6 7 '
Av I In I� Nt I Th I
� - � = 1 � � � r?l � Yf' Yf" •1a "'{' Kf' 'j" "'J" "(' "I" ' '
2 4 ' I 3 6 3 4 6 7 I
SJT�
60 l I� rn �1 Av ---40
g 30 " � 20 u_
10
0 2 4 ' I 3 6 3
60 l Av I In I
40
g so " • c.Q 20 "
10
0 2 4 ' I 3 6 3
SITE
TABLE 3.13 D Selected elements (mg/IOOg) and particle size(%) (mean ± SE) of Amitennes vitiosus
Nt � � I !" I
4 6 7
Nt
4 ' 7
(A v), Tumulitermes pastinator(Tp), Nasurilermes triodiae (Nt) and Tumulitermes hastilis
(Th) at sites 1-7. Clay, silt, fine sand and coarse sand content (%)
-... ...
135
A) Tumulitermes pastinator versus Tumulitermes hastilis mounds at site 1 (Daly
River).
The mean (± standard deviation) of the selected elements, the particle size distribution
and the pairwise comparison probabilities between Tumulitermes pastinator and
Tumulitermes hasti/is mounds, sampled at site 1 , are given in Table 3.19.
As seen in Table 3.19, the aluminium, potassium, sodium, zinc, clay and to a lesser
extent fine sand content are highly significantly increased (P<O.Ol) in Tumulitermes
pastinator mounds, while the calcium, magnesium, manganese and coarse sand content
are higher in Tumulitermes hastilis mounds. For example, in Tumulitermes pastinator
motu1ds: aluminium is 38 % higher; calcium 4.5 fold lower and coarse sand 22 % lower.
For the other selected elements and particle sizes (cobalt, copper, iron and fine sand)
there were no significant differences detected at site 1 .
136
TABLE 3.19 Selected elements (mg/100g) and particle sizes (%) (mean ± standard deviation) of Tumulitermes pastinator and Tumulitermes hastilis mounds sampled at site 1. Probability of differences (P) between the two species mounds@.
Element/ Tumulitermes Tumulitermes p Particle size pas tina tor hastilis �
n=26 n=S
Aluminium 3044 ± 201 2209 ± 247 • •••
Calcium 23.7 ± 6.8 107 ± 66 ...
Cobalt 0.29 ± 0.01 0.30 ± 0.04 N
Copper 0.57 ± 0.03 0.57 ± 0.07 N
Iron 1343 ± 92 1249 ± 1 13 • N
Potassium 510 ± 22 403 ± 18 • ...
Magnesium 64.9 ± 6.9 76 ± 14.2 ..
Manganese 3.33 ± 0.43 5.91 ± 1 .65 ...
Sodium 27.2 ± 2.2 18 .4 ± 1 .02 • ...
Zinc 0.48 ± 0.03 0.42 ± 0.07 • ..
Clay 14.8 ± 1.3 12.3 ± 2.6 • ..
Silt 8.8 ± 1.1 9.6 ± 0.6 N
Fine sand 43.5 ± 2.7 38.9 ± 10.1 • •
Coarse sand 32.8 ± 3.2 42.0 ± 1 1 . 1 ...
@: 15 Tumulitermes pastinator mourids and Tumulilermes hastilis mounds
I ' N: P>O.OS; $; O.Ol<P<O.OS; U; O.OOI<P<O.Ol; •••: P<O.OOI .o. : mean variable content higher in Tunrulitermu pastinator mounds
B) Tumu/itermes pastinator versus Nasutitermes triodiae mounds at site 3 (Daly
River).
The mean (± standard deviation) of the selected elements, the particle size distribution
and the pairwise comparison probabilities between Tumulitermes pastinator and
Nasutitermes triodiae mounds, sampled at site 1 , are given in Table 3.20.
The probability of differences (ANOV A) between the two species' mounds indicates a
significant increase of fine sand (P<O.OS) and a highly significant increase of coarse sand
(P<O.OOl) in Tumulitermes pastinator mounds. However, although the copper content
is 1.50 ± 0.55 mg/IOOg in Tumulitermes pastinator mounds and 0.97 ± 0.30 mgl100g
137
m Nasutitermes triodiae mounds, no significant difference was indicated. In
Nasutitermes triodiae, there is a highly significant increase in aluminium, cobalt, iron,
potassium, magnesium, manganese and silt content (P<O.Ol) and a significant increase
of sodium (P<O.OS). For example, the mean magnesium and manganese content are
respectively 69 and 57 % higher in Nasutitermes triodiae.
There are no significant statistical differences detected at site 3 for calcium, copper, zinc
and clay content between the two species.
TABLE 3.20 Selected elements (mg/IOOg) and particle sizes (%) (mean ± standard deviation) of Tumulitermes pastinator and Nasutitermes triodiae mounds sampled at site 3. Probability of differences (P) between the two species mounds®.
Element/ Tumulitermes Nasutitermes p Particle size pastinator triodiae t
n=6 n=6
Aluminium 3826 ± 446 4488 ± 167 ••
Calcium 23.3 ± 3.9 23.1 ± 4.72 • N
Cobalt 0.42 ± 0.04 0.52 ± 0.04 ••
Copper 1.50 ± 0.55 0.97 ± 0.30 • N
Iron 2917 ± 198 3434 ± 124 ...
Potassium 651 ± 79 897 ± 65 •••
Magnesium 1 5 1 ± 19 256 ± 24.9 •••
Manganese 5.97 ± 0.83 9.38 ± 0.99 •••
Sodium 13.9 ± 2.1 16.5 ± 2.03 •
Zinc 1.54 ± 0.28 1.68 ± 0.18 N
Clay 21.2 ± 2.4 19.4 ± 1.0 • N
Silt 15.6 ± 2.2 29.4 ± 1.3 ...
Fine sand 36.9 ± 2.1 33.6 ± 2.1 • •
Coarse sand 28.8 ± 2.9 20.4 ± 1.5 • ...
@ : I Tumuliterm£s pastinator mound and I Nasutitermes triodiae mound
I' N: P>O.OS; *: O.Ol<P<O.OS; .. : O.OOI<P<O.Oi; •••: P<O.OOI " mean variable content higher in Tumulitermes pastinator mounds
138
TABLE 3.21 Selected elements (mg/100g) and particle sizes (%) (mean ± standard
deviation) of Amitermes vitiosus and Nasutitermes triodiae mounds
sampled at site 4. Probability of differences (P) between species
mounds®.
Element/ Amitermes Nasutitermes p Particle size vitiosus triodiae �
n�20 n=ll
Aluminium 3826 ± 278 4031 ± 578 N Calcium 57.2 ± 33.2 41.2 ± 23.4 • •
Cobalt 0.42 ± 0.18 0.33 ± 0.04 • ..
Copper 0.87 ± 0.13 0.83 ± 0.09 • N Iron 1420 ± 297 1466 ± 304 N Potassium 714 ± 62 660 ± 68 • ..
Magnesium 1 14 ± 23 106 ± 19 • N
Manganese 5.56 ± 2.19 3.67 ± 1.03 • ...
Sodium 30.8 ± 4.4 26.6 ± 3.8 • ...
Zinc 0.47 ± 0.13 0.45 ± 0.07 • N Clay 16.2 ± 4.8 22.03 ± 3.1 ...
Silt _16.7 ± 6.8 7.9 ± 2.8 • ...
Fine sand 43.2 ± 4.7 32.9 ± 2.9 • ...
Coarse sand 24.3 ± 6.4 36.9 ± 4.7 •••
@: 10 A.mitermes vitioswr mounds and IS Nasulitermes triodiae mounds
!: N: P>O.OS; •: O.Oi<P<O.OS; �•: O.OOI<P<O.Oi; •n: P<O.OOI & : mean variable content higher in Amilermes vitiosus
C) Amitermes vitiosus versus Nasutitermes triodiae mounds at site 4.
139
The mean (± standard deviation) of the selected elements, the particle size distribution
and the probabilities (P) between Amitermes vitiosus and Nasutitermes triadiae mounds,
sampled at site 4, are presented in Table 3.21.
The results of the ANOV A betweenAmitermes vitiosus and Nasutitermes triodiae mound
contents, indicate highly significant differences (P<O.Ol ) for cobalt, potassium,
manganese, sodium, clay, silt, fine sand and coarse sand and a significant di�erence
(?<0.05) in calcium content. Nasutitermes triodiae mounds have a larger proportion of
clay (36 % higher) and coarse sand (52 % higher) than the Amitermes vitiosus mounds.
Amitermes vitiosus mounds have a higher calcium, cobalt, potassium, manganese (51 %),
sodium, silt (1 1 1 %) and fine sand (%) content than Nasutitermes triodiae mounds.
No significant differences were observed for aluminium, copper, iron, magnesium and
zinc content between the Amitermes vitiosus and Nasutitermes triodiae mounds studied
at site 4.
D) Tumulitermes pastinator versus Nasutitermes triodiae mounds at site 6 (Howard Springs).
The mean (± standard deviation) of the selected elements, the particle size distribution
and the pairwise comparison probabilities between Tumulitermes pastinator and
Nasutitermes triodiae mounds sampled at site 6, are given in Table 3.22.
Significant differences are observed between the two species for: aluminium (P<0.05),
calcium (P<O.OOl), iron (P<O.Ol), manganese (P<0.05) and silt (P<O.OOI). No
significant differences are observed for the other variables.
140
TABLE 3.22 Selected elements (mgllOOg) and particle sizes(%) (mean ± standard
deviation) of Tumulitermes pastinator and Nasutitermes triodiae
mounds� sampled at site 6. Probability of differences (P) between the
3.2.4.6
two species mounds.
Element/ Tumu/itermes Nasutitermes Particle size pas tina/or triodiae
n�25 0""15
Aluminium 6300 ± 658 5738 ± 733
Calcium 50.0 ± I I . 7 83.7 ± 23.2
Cobalt 0.86 ± 0.24 0.79 ± 0.21
Copper 1 .63 ± 0.35 !.56 ± 0.17
Iron 4527 ± 780 3649 ± 759
Potassium 37.3 ± 7.4 38.5 ± 4.6
Magnesium 49.3 ± 5.6 50.3 ± 7.62
Manganese 6.40 ± 1.88 5.03 ± 1.68
Sodium 6.22 ± 0.73 5.89 ± 0.79
Zinc 1 . 15 ± 0.22 1.04 ± 0.16
Clay 26.9 ± 3.5 27.6 ± 3.0
Silt 629 ± 1 .1 7.9 ± 1 2
Fine sand 45.6 ± 3.8 44.7 ± 3.0
Coarse sand 19.5 ± 2.9 19.2 ± 2.5
fl: 13 Tumulitermes pastinator mounds and S Nasuli/ermes triodiae mounds
N: P>0.05; •: O.Ol<P<0.05; n: O.OOI<P<O.OI; u•: P<O.OOI .o : mean variable content higher in Tumulitermes pastinator mounds
•
•
•
•
p t
•
...
N
N ..
N
N
• •
• N
• N
N ...
• N
• N
Hypothesis 6: There are Differences in Element and Particle
Size Content for Same Species Mounds at Different Sites.
A) Amitermes vitiosus
The mean (± standard deviation) of selected elements (mg/IOOg) and particle sizes (%)
of Amitermes vitiosus mounds at sites 2, 4, 5 and at all sites (2+4+5) are presented in
Table 3.23 together with the probability of differences (P) between the Amitermes
vitiosus termitaria samples collected at the three sites.
141
TABLE 3.23 Selected elements (mg/100g) and particle sizes (%) (mean ± standard deviation) of Amitermes vitiosus mounds per site (2, 4 and 5) and for all sites (2+4+5) together with the probability of differences (P) between sites.
Element/ Daly River Daly River Elliott Total p Particle size (Site 2) (Site 4) (Site 5) (Sites 2+4+5) j
n=12 n=20 n=26 n=58
Aluminium 3 1 15 ± 193 3826 ± 278 3634 ± 371 3593 ± 402 ...
Calcium 32.0 ± 9.9 57.2 ± 332 1 1 1 ± 23.9 76.2 ± 41.6 ...
Cobalt 0.55 ± 0.11 0.42 ± 0.18 0.31 ± 0.04 0.40 ± 0.15 ...
Copper 0.80 ± 0.14 0.87 ± 0.13 0.92 ± O.o7 0.88 ± 0.12 •
Iron 1521 ± 198 1420 ± 297 1726 ± 146 1578 ± 256 ...
Potassium 455 ± 38 714 ± 62 161 ± 12 413 ± 251 ...
Magnesium 106 ±. 14 1 14 ± 23 93 ± 7 103 ± 1 8 ...
Manganese 6.92 ± 1.99 5.56 ± 2.19 7.54 ± 1.81 6.73 ± 2.13 ..
Sodium 1 1.7 ± 1.22 30.8 ± 4.4 6.47 ± 0.68 15.9 ± 1 1.4 ...
Zinc 0.89 ± 0.14 0.47 ± 0.13 1.09 ± 0.08 0.83 ± 0.30 ...
Clay 15.4 ± 1.7 16.2 ± 4.8 16.7 ± 5.4 16.3 ± 4.6 N
Silt 14.8 ± 2.3 16.7 ± 6.8 12.9 ± 4.2 14.6 ± 52 •
Fine sand 31.8 ± 4.2 43.2 ± 4.7 352 ± 3.6 37.2 ± 6.1 ...
Coarse sand 40.1 ± 4.5 24.3 ± 6.4 37.8 ± 2.0 33.6 ± 8.2 ...
t: N: P>0.05; •: O.Ol<P<O.OS; n: O.OOI<P<O.OI; •••: P<O.OOI
The ANOVA shows that there are highly significant differences (P<O.OOl) in nearly all
the variables studied: aluminium, calcium, cobalt, iron, potassium, magnesium,
manganese, sodium, zinc, fine sand and coarse sand; significant differences (P<0.05) in
copper and silt and no significant difference (P>O.OS) in clay content (the mean clay
content remained at approximately 16 %). The aluminium, copper, iron, magnesium,
manganese and fine sand mean content, although highly significantly different, varied
within a narrow range. This contrasts with the mean contents of calcium, potassium,
sodium, zinc and coarse sand, which vary greatly between sites (Figure 3.13, A to N ).
142
B) Tumulitermes pastinator
The mean (± standard deviation) of selected elements (mg/1 OOg) and particle sizes
analyses (%) of Tumulitermes pastinator mounds at sites 1 , 3, 6 and at all sites (1+3+6)
are presented in Table 3.24, together with the probability of differences (P) between all
Tumulitermes pastinator samples collected.
The AN OVA shows that there are highly significant differences P(<O.OOl) between sites
for all the selected elements and particle sizes. Figure 3.13 (A to N) shows the wide
variation between sites. For example, the mean content varied from 3044 ± 201 to 6300
± 658 mgllOOg for aluminium, 1343 ± 92 to 4527 ± 780 mg/lOOg for iron and 27.2 ±
2.2 to 6.22 ± 0.73 mgllOOg for sodium.
TABLE 3.24 Selected elements (mg/IOOg) and particle sizes (%) (mean ± standard deviation) of Tumulitermes pastinator mounds per site (1, 3 and 6) and for all sites (1+3+6) together with the probability of differences (P) between sites.
Element/ Daly River Daly River Howard Springs Total Probability Particle (Site I) (Site 3) (Site 6) (Sites 1+3+6) P t SIZe n�26 n=6 n�5 n�57
Aluminium 3044 ± 201 3826 ± 446 6300 ± 658 4554 ± 1643 •••
Calcium 23.7 ± 6.8 23.3 ± 3.9 50.0 ± 1 1 .7 35.2 ± 15.9 ...
Cobalt 0.29 ± O.Ql 0.42 ± 0.04 0.86 ± 0.24 0.55 ± 0.32 ...
Copper 0.57 ± 0.03 1.50 ± 0.55 1.63 ± 0.35 1.13 ± 0.59 ...
Iron 1343 ± 92 2917 ± 198 4527 ± 780 2905 ± 1605 ...
Potassium 510 ± 22 651 ± 79 37.3 ± 7.4 3 1 8 ± 255 ...
Magnesium 64.9 ± 6.9 151 ± 19 49.3 ± 5.6 67.2 ± 3 1 .3 ...
Manganese 3.33 ± 0.43 5.97 ± 0.83 6.40 ± 1.88 4.96 ± 1.98 ...
Sodium 27.2 ± 2.2 13.9 ± 2.1 6.22 ± 0.73 16.6 ± 10.2 ...
Zinc 0.48 ± 0.03 1.54 ± 0.28 1 .15 ± 0.22 0.89 ± 0.42 ...
Clay 14.8 ± 1.3 21.2 ± 2.4 26.9 ± 3.5 20.8 ± 6.2 •••
Silt 8.8 ± 1.1 15.6 ± 2.2 6.29 ± 1.1 8.4 ± 3.0 ...
Fine sand 43.5 ± 2.7 36.9 ± 2.1 45.6 ± 3.8 43.7 ± 4.1 •••
C.sand 32.8 ± 3.2 28.8 ± 2.9 !9.5 ± 2.9 26.5 ± 7.1 *** l: •••: P<O.OOl
143
Most of the lowest mean values are found in the Daly River site I samples (except for
potassium, sodium and coarse sand); while the highest mean values are found in the
Howard Springs samples. Site 3 has a particularly high copper, potassium, magnesium,
manganese, zinc and silt mean content.
C) Nasutitermes triodiae
The mean (± standard deviation) of selected elements (mg/l OOg) and particle sizes (%)
of Nasutitermes triodiae mounds per site (3, 4, 6 and 7) and for all sites (3+4+6+ 7) are
presented in Table 3.25 together with the probability of differences (P) between all the
Nasutitermes triodiae samples collected.
The ANOV A shows that like the Tumulitermes pastinator mean contents, there are
highly significant differences between sample content for all the selected elements and
particle sizes. Figure 3.13 (A to N) shows the wide variation between sites. For
example, the mean content varied from: 23.1 ± 4.7 to 83.7 ± 23.2 mg/100g for calcium,
890 ± 134 to 3649 ± 759 mg/1 OOg for iron and 38.5 ± 4.6 to 897 ± 65 mgllOOg for
potassium. The variation between clay content remained small: 19.2 ± 5.9 % to 27.6
± 3.0 %
144
TABLE 3.25 Selected elements (mg/IOOg) and particle sizes (%) (mean ± standard deviation) of Nasutitermes triodiae mound samples per site (3, 4, 6 and 7) and for all sites (3+4+6+7) together with the probability of differences (P) between sites.
Element/ Daly River Daly River Howard Berrimah Total (Sites P l Particle size (Site 3) (Site 4) Springs (Site 7) 3+4+6+7)
n=6 n-41 (Site 6) n=S n=67 n=15
Aluminium 4488 ± 167 4031 ± 578 5738 ± 733 3330 ± 337 4402 ± 951 ••• Calcium 23.1 ± 4.72 41 .2 ± 23.4 83.7 ± 23.2 82.4 ± 28.2 52.2 ± 30.7 ••• Cobalt 0.52 ± 0.04 0.33 ± 0.04 0.79 ± 0.21 0.34 ± O.QJ 0.45 ± 0.22 ••• Copper 0.97 ± 0.30 0.83 ± 0.09 1.56 ± 0.17 0.89 ± 0.04 1.01 ± 0.33 ••• Iron 3434 ± 124 1466 ± 304 3649 ± 759 890 ± 134 2088 ± 1 1 17 ••• Potassium 897 ± 65 660 ± 68 38.5 ± 4.6 341 ± 19 519 ± 289 ••• Magnesium 256 ± 24.9 106 ± 19 50.3 ± 7.62 58.8 ± 5.8 103 ± 57 ••• Manganese 9.38 ± 0.99 3.67 ± 1.03 5.03 ± 1.68 3.19 ± 0.55 4.45 ± 2.03 ••• Sodium 16.5 ± 2.03 26.6 ± 3.8 5.89 ± 0.79 33.4 ± 3.7 21.6 ± 9.73 ••• Zinc 1.68 ± 0.18 0.45 ± O.Q7 1 .04 ± 0.16 0.64 ± 0.05 0.71 ± 0.41 ••• Clay 19.4 ± 1.0 22.0 ± 3.1 27.6 ± 3.0 19.2 ± 5.9 22.8 ± 4.2 ••• Silt 29.4 ± 1.3 7.9 ± 2.8 7.9 ± 1.2 10.0 ± 2.0 10.0 ± 6.6 ••• Fine sand 33.6 ± 2.1 32.9 ± 2.9 44.7 ± 3.0 45.3 ± 1.8 36.6 ± 6.4 ••• Coarse sand 2o.4 . ± 1.5 36.9 ± 4.7 19.2 ± 2.5 22.3 ± 4.6 30.4 ± 9.2 •••
t *-*: P<O.OOI
The Howard Springs site had the highest aluminium, calcium, cobalt, copper, iron, clay
and fine sand content; while the higher potassium, magnesium, manganese, sodium, zinc,
silt and coarse sand mean values were found principally at the Daly River, site 3. The
iron content is exceptionally low at the Berrimah site while the sodium content is the
highest.
3.2.4. 7 Hypothesis 7:
145
There are Differences in Elements and Particle
Sizes Between Different Species at Different
Sites.
The minimum, maximum and mean (± standard deviation) of selected elements
(mg/l OOg) and particle sizes (%) of the species of mounds (Amitermes vitiosus,
Tumulitermes pastinator and Nasutitennes triodiae) chosen by the Aboriginal
communities, sampled at sites (1 to 7), together with the probability of differences
between the three species, are given in Table 3.26.
The ANOV A between the moWldS of the three species shows that there are a highly
significant (P<O.OOI) differences for all the selected elements and particle sizes, except
for zinc, which was significantly difference (P<0.05). The Tukey pair-wise comparison,
performed after the Bartlett test for homogeneity of group variances, indicates that the
differences between Amitermes vitiosus and Tumulitermes pastinator mounds are more
important amongst all the elements and particle sizes than-between Amitermes vitiosus
and Nasutitermes triodiae mounds and between Tumulitermes pastinator and
Nasutitermes triodiae mounds (Table 3.26).
146
TABLE 3.26 Selected elements (mg!lOOg) and particle sizes (%) (minimum,
ElementJ
maximum and mean ± standard deviation) of Amitermes vitiosus, Tumulitermes pastinator and Nasutitermes triodiae mounds sampled at sites 1 to 7, together with the probability of differences (P: Av· Tp-Nt) between the three species and the pairwise comparison probabilities between species (P: Av-Tp, P: Av-Nt and P: Tp-Nt).
Av, Tp and Nt p p p p Particle size
Mean ± SD Av·Tp·Nt Av·Tp Av-Nt Tp-Nt
Min Max l l l l Aluminium 2676 7745 4192 ± 1 1 78 ••• ... ... N
Calcium 1 1 .9 !54 54.5 ± 35.2 ... • •• ... ..
Cobalt 0.20 1.21 0.47 ± 0.24 .. • N N
Copper 0.52 2.43 1.01 ± 0.40 •• • N N
Iron 782 6519 2183 ± 1248 ... ... • ...
Potassium 27.7 956 422 ± 278 ... N N ...
Magnesium 37.8 299 91.8 ± 43 ... ... N ...
Manganese 2.23 I l .S 5.34 ± 2.26 ... ... ... N
Sodium 4.61 42.5 18.2 ± 10.7 .. N .. •
Zinc 0.33 1.97 0.80 ± 0.39 • N N •
Clay 6.0 34.1 20.1 ± 5.7 ... ... ... N
Silt 3.8 3 1 .6 10.9 ± 5.8 ... ... ... N
Fine sand 22.6 55.3 39.0 ± 6.5 ... ... N ...
Coarse sand 9.4 47.2 30.2 ± 8.7 ... ... N •
Abbreviations Av• Amilerm£S viliosu.r; Tp Tumulikrmes pa.rtinator; Nt=Na.ru/1/erme.r triodiae t •: O.Ol<P<0.05; ••: O.OOI<P<O.Ol; •u: P<O.OOI
Table 3.26 also illustrates the vast differences between mound elements and particle sizes
between species and sites. For example. the minimum iron content in the mounds studied
was 782 mg/IOOg and the maximum 6519 mg/IOOg (more than 8 times higher). The
results of the probability of differences (ANOVA) between soils of different sites
indicated highly significant differences (P<O.Ol) for all the variables tested (Tables 3.27-
3.28).
The probability of differences between soil and termite mounds by location and species
is given in Table 3.29 together with the percentage differences between the soil and
mound content
TABLE 3.27 Selected elements (mg/100g) and particle size (%) (mean ± standard deviation) of soil samples (0-!0cm) collected at all the site studied: I to 7.
Element/ Daly River Particle size (Site 1)
n�
Daly River (Site 2)
n�
Daly River {Site 3)
n=S
Daly River (Site 4)
n�
Elliott (Site 5)
n�
Howard Springs {Site 6)
n�
Berrimah (Site 7)
n=3
Aluminium 1708 ± 95 2848 ± 208 3187 ± 742 2548 ± 535 2059 ± 389 4544 ± 713 1883 ± 722
Calcium 7.70 ± 3.14- 6.9 ± 3.9 9.6 ± 3.8 12.1 ± 1 1 .7 51.1 ± 12.5 56.8 ± 31.1 17.2 ± 7.2
Cobalt 0.21 ± 0.03 0.44 ± 0.03 0.45 ± 0.06 0.26 ± 0.04 0.28 ± 0.03 0.66 ± 0.25 0.26 ± 0.02
Copper 0.45 ± 0.11 0.66 ± 0.05 0.64 ± 0.1 1 0.55 ± 0.13 0.71 ± 0.06 1.28 ± 0.18 0.59 ± 0.29
Iron
Potassium
1028 ± 57
377 ± 38
1 149 ± 75
389 ± 13
Magnesium 41.4 ± 19.9 88.8 ± 7,3
2809 ± 236
694 ± 158
145 ± 49
801 ± 218 1231 ± 142 6021 ± 956 1442 ± 1543
529 ± 104 103 ± I I
59.6 ± 13.8 53.5 ± 7.4
32.0 ± 12.3 223 ± 61
37.5 ± 6.1 26.0 ± 7.4
Manganese 4.60 ± 3.17 3.08 ± 0.73 7.01 ± 1.92 2.59 ± 1 .06 7.27 ± 3.69 9.04 ± 3.69 2.04 ± 0.08
Sodium 16.8 ± 2.2 9.18 ± 0.40 12.6 ± 1.6 19.4 ± 3.4 4.11 ± 0.20 3.99 ± 0.27 13.6 ± 4.43
Zinc 0.41 ± 0.03 0.72 ± 0.07 1 .50 ± 0.56 0.31 ± 0.12 0.69 ± 0.14 1.85 ± 0.92 0.37 ± 0.16
Clay 6.5 ± 0.3
Silt 8.5 ± 1 . 1
Fine sand 43.8 ± 3.7
Coarse sand 41.0 ± 3.4
#: fl"'3
14.2 ± 1.2
1 1 .4 ± 2.1
34.4 ± 1.5
41.3 ± 2.3
13.2 ± 4.0
20.2 ± 6.4
41.0 ± 1.8
29.0 ± 9.2
13.6 ± 2.2
10.4 ± 2.8
46.3 ± 5.2
34.2 ± 7.6
13.0 ± 3.2
5.2 ± 1.2
32.2 ± 5.5
50.5 ± 4.8
18.9 ± 3.4
7.6 ± 2.0
50.9 ± 4.9
26.8 ± 2.7
10.1 ± 2.7
10.6 ± 1.4
42.2 ± 14.1
35.3 ± 7.3 � .. _,
148
The elements mean content of the soil compared to the mounds and the finer particle
sizes (clay and silt) were generally lower (but not necessary statistically) in most of the
soils studied. An example is given in Figure 3.14 for calcium, potassium and sodium.
The finer soil particle fractions were generally higher in the mound while the larger
particle size fractions (fme sand and coarse sand) were usually higher in the soil at any
given site (Table 3.29) (see Figure 3.15 for clay and coarse sand).
TABLE 3.28 Selected elements (mg/lOOg) and particle sizes (%) (minimum, maximum and mean ± standard deviation) of soil (0-lOcm) sampled at sites 1 to 7, together with the probability (P) of differences between soils.
Element/ Sites 1 to 7 p Particle size Min Max Mean ± SD l
Aluminium 1385 5508 2771 ± 1033 •••
Calcium 4.06 69.1 18.1 ± 19.2 •••#
Cobalt 0.19 0.97 0.38 ± 0.17 ...
Copper 0.37 1.51 0.69 ± 0.28 ...
Iron 505 7371 2219 ± 1777 ...
Potassium 24.0 943 385 ± 260 ...
Magnesium 20.5 201 75.7 ± 52 ...
Manganese 1.66 12.9 5.52 ± 3.29 ..
Sodium 3.75 23.6 1 1 .54 ± 5.73 ...
Zinc 0.20 7.73 1.50 ± 0.76 ..
Clay 6.21 22.05 12.9 ± 4.4 ...
Silt 4 . 1 1 27.17 1 1 .8 ± 6.5 ...
Fine sand 26.34 58.37 41.7 ± 7.6 •••
Coarse sand 20.18 54.09 35.7 ± 9.8 ...
t *: O.Ol<P<0.05; U; O.OOI<P<O.Ol ; •••: P<O.OOI
TABLE 3.29 Probability of differences (P) between soil and termite mound by location and species.
Element/ P t P t P t P t P t P t P t P t P t P t P t Particle size Site I Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 3 soil Site 4 Site 4 Site 5 Site 6 Site 6 Site 7
soil - Tp soil - Th soil - Av soil - Tp • Nt soil - Av soil - Nt soil - Av soil - Tp soil - Nt soil - Nt
Aluminium - ... . .. . N . N . .. - ... - ... - ... - ... • • . ..
Calcium N . N . .. - ... - ... . .. . N - ... N • • . ..
Cobalt - ... - ... . N . N . N • • . N . N . N . N . ..
Copper - ... . .. . N . .. . N - ... - ... - ... . N . N . N
Iron - ... . .. . .. . N - ... . .. - ... - ... .. ... N
Potassium - ... . N • • . N • • - ... . .. - ... . N . N . ..
Magnesium - ... - ... . N . N - ... - ... - ... - ... . .. . .. - ...
Manganese N . N . .. N • • . .. . N . N • .. • •
Sodium - ... . N . .. . N . .. - ... . .. - ... - ... - ... - ...
Zinc . .. . N . N N N • • • • - ... .. ... . ..
Clay - ... - ... . N - ... . .. . N - ... . N - ... - ... • •
Silt . N . N • • . N . .. • • N .. N . N N
Fine sand N N N .. ... N ... . N • • . N
Coarse sand • . N N N N .. . N ... ... .. . •
t: N: P>0.05; *: O.Oi<P<0.05; **: O.OOI<P<O.OI; ***: P<O.OOl -: indicates that the mean of the soil content is lower than the mean of the mound content (but not necessarily statistically). � Abbreviations: Tp = Tumulitermes pastinator; Th = Tumulitermes hastilis; A v = Amitermes vitiosus; Nt = Nasutitermes triodiae .... "'
150
1 50 l
8 1 oo J I 0 � ' "' E � "' 50
0
0
1 000
-Ol 0 0 � ' Ol E �
"
BOO
600
400
200
0
40
0, 30 8 �
ci, 20 s � 1 0
0
Site 1 -
Site 5
§ I I I� Site 7 Site6
Tp Th S Av S Tp Nt S Av Nt S Av S Tp Nt S Nt S -
Site 3
Site 4
Site 1 Site 2 Site 7
Tp Tb 5 Av S Tp Nt S Av Nt S Av S Tp Nt S Nt S
Site 7 Site 4 .--
Site 1
Tp Th Av S Tp Nt S Av Nt S Av S Tp Nt S Nt S
SPECIES I SOIL
FIGURE 3.14 Soil�mound effects (mean ± SE) on calcium, potassium and sodium (mg/lOOg) in mounds of different species and soils (0-lOcm) sampled at different locations.
S = Soil; Species abbreviations as indicated previously.
30
20 .. ->"'
0 10
0
60 50 � 0>
0 0 40 -' 0> 5 30 "0 c 20 "' Cf.! 0 10
0
- Site 6
Site 3 Site 4 Sit• ' I� Site 7
T
Site 1 Sitel
T al T T
J.
Ill <=! Ell I �II§
Tp Th S Av S Tp Nt S Av Nt S Av S Tp Nt S Nt S
SPECIES I SOIL
Site 5 Site 1 Site 2
Site 7
Site 6
Tp Th s A• s Tp Nt s A• Nt s A• s Tp No s No s
SPECIES I SOIL
FIGURE 3.15 Soil-mound effects (mean ± SE) on clay and coarse sand (%) in mounds of different species and soils (0-lOcm) sampled at different locations.
S = Soil; Species abbreviations as indicated previously.
151
152
3.3 Hot Water ("Infusion") Extractable Selected Elements from Amitermes
viliosus Mounds (Elliott, Site 5).
Eleven mounds (top and bottom sections), from Elliott (Site 5), were analysed for
selected elements following the method described in chapter 2 (2.5.1). The "infusion"
analyses were performed in duplicate, using two separate samples for each position. The
infusion's results for selected elements were compared to those obtained following acid
(perchloriclnitric acids) extraction (chapter 2, 2.2.4.2) performed on the same mounds
(I I mounds, top and bottom sections).
3.3.1 Comparison of Hot Water ("Infusion") Element Extracts and
Perchloric/Nitric Acid Extracts.
The concentration (mean ± standard) deviation of selected elements of Amitermes
vitiosus mounds and soils (Elliott, Site 5), extracted with hot water ("infusion") and acid
extraction (perchloric/nitric acids), together with the percentage recovery between
extractions, are presented in Table 3.30.
The results show that three of the selected elements were not detected in the "infusion"
extracts: cobalt, copper and zinc; and three other elements: aluminium, iron and
manganese had a very low percentage of recoveries: <0.3 %. The remaining four
elements: calcium, potassium, magnesium and sodium had percentage recoveries of 6.3 7
%, 6.33. %, 2.56 % and 7.31 % respectively. In the soil extracts, the recoveries were
lower for calcium, potassium and magnesium (1 .95 %, 1.84 % and 0.94 % respectively)
but higher for sodium (9 .3 % ).
153
TABLE 3.30 Selected element concentrations (mean ± standard deviation in mgllOOg) following hot water ("infusion'') and acid (perchloric/nitric acids) extractions of eleven Amitermes vitiosus mounds (Elliott, Site 5) and soils, together with the percentage recovery between extractions.
Element Mounds
"Infusion" Acid % n=44 n=22 recovery
Aluminium 0.56 ± 0.59 3664 ± 396 0.02
Calcium 6.69 ± 3.21 105 ± 21 6.37
Cobalt nd 0.30 ± 0.05 nd
Copper nd 0.91 ± 0.08 nd
Iron 0.10 ± 0. 1 1 1738 ± 156 0.01
Potassium 10.3 ± 7.83 162 ± 12 6.33
Magnesium 2.37 ± 1.55 93 ± 7.1 2.56
Manganese 0.02 ± 0.02 7.45 ± 1.96 0.23
Sodium 0.47 ± 0.54 6.49 ± 0.73 7.31
Zinc nd 1.08 ± 0.09 nd nd: not detected; detection limit (mg/JOOg): Co and Zn • 0.02;
3.3.2 Position Effects on Selected Elements
"Infusion" n=2
1.01 ± 0.24
0.92 ± 0.07
nd
nd
0.13 ± 0.01
1.78 ± 0.1 1
0.45 ± 0.03
o.oz ± 0.00
0.38 ± 0.02
nd Cu .. 0.01
Soil
Acid n=2
1847 ± 330
47 ± 1.9
0.27 ± 0.01
0.68 ± 0.09
1 154 ± 128
97 ± 12
48 ± 5.9
6.37 ± 0.66
4.03 ± 0.01
0.59 ± 0. 1 1
% recovery
0.05
1.95
nd
nd
O.oJ
1 .84
0.94
0.27
9.34
nd
The comparison between the two types of extractions with respect to position (top and
bottom), using ANOVA, is presented in Table 3.31. A significant increase in calcium
in the top section of the mounds is observed following the two types of extractions. A
highly significant increase in iron in the bottom of mounds after hot water extraction
may be attributed to the very low iron concentrations.
154
TABLE 3.31 Position effects on selected elements (mean ± standard deviation in mg/lOOg) in eleven Amitermes vitiosus mounds (Elliott, Site 5) following two types of extraction: hot water ("infusion") extraction and perchloric/nitric acids extraction. ANOV A probability of differences (P) between positions.
Mineral
Top n""22
"Infusion"
Bottom n=22
p �
Aluminium 0.39 ± 0.47 0.73 ± 0.64 N
Calcium 8.06 ± 3.42 5.33 ± 2.35 ••
Cobalt nd nd nd
Copper nd nd nd
Iron 0.05 ± O.o7 0.16 ± 0.1 1 •••
Potassium 12.2 ± 9.09 8.34 ± 5.93 N
Magnesium 2.74 ± 1.27 2.01 ± 1.75 N
Manganese 0.02 ± 0.03 0.02 ± 0.02 N
Sodium 0.62 ± 0.70 0.33 ± 0.24 N
Zinc nd nd nd
t: N: P>O.OS; *: O.Oi<P<0.05; ••: O.OOI<P<O.Ol ; •••: P<O.OOI nd: not detecll:d; detection limit (mg/IOOg): Co and Zn:0.02; Cu: 0.01
Perchloric/nitric extraction
Top n=11
Bottom n=l l
3829 ± 392 3526 ± 359
1 16 ± 17 95 ± 20
0.31 ± 0.05 0.30 ± 0.05
0.94 ± 0.08 0.89 ± O.o7
1 775 ± 160 1701 ± 141
167 ± 12 159 ± 12
97 ± 6.1 89 ± 6.1
7.77 ± 2.01 7.21 ± 1.89
6.67 ± 0.80 6.35 ± 0.63
1 . 12 ± 0.08 1.04 ± 0.08
p � N
•
N
N
N
N •
N
N •
3.4 Soluble Iron, Ionisable Iron and Selected Element Concentrations of
Termitaria and Soils Following Pepsin-Hydrochloric Acid Incubation.
The soluble iron, ionisable iron together with the elements AI, Ca, Co, Cu, K, Mg, Mn,
Na and Zn analyses were performed in triplicate on selected mound and soil samples
(Table 2.1 1) at each site (I to 6) according to the method described in chapter 2.6.2.
3.4.1 Pepsin Concentration Effects on Soluble Iron, Ionisable Iron and Selected
Element content following Pepsin-HCI Acid Incubation.
The results of variation of pepsin concentration (0-0.5 %) in the pepsin-HCl incubation,
on soluble iron, ionisable iron and selected element concentrations (mg/l OOg), together
with the probability of differences between pepsin concentration, are given in Table
3.32.
•
TABLE 3.32 Selected element composition (mg/IOOg) of termitaria reference material® (Nt26D4), following O.IN HCI acid (pH 1.35) extraction with different pepsin percentage v/w (0%, 0.1 o/o and O.So/o), together with the probability P(t) of differences between pepsin concentrations.
Element Pepsin-HCI pH 1.35 extract
0% 0.1% 0.5% P(t)
Aluminium 20.3 ± 0.9 19.8 ± 0.9 19.7 ± 0.9 N
Calcium 33.6 ± 1.0 33.7 ± 0.7 33.7 ± 0.4 N
Cobalt 0.01 ± 0.01 0.01 ± 0.00 O.ot ± 0.00 N
Copper 0.08 ± 0.01 0.09 ± 0.02 0.08 ± 0.01 N
Iron 1 1 .5 ± 0.2 1 1.3 ± 0.3 1 1.2 ± 0.3 N
Potassium 65.8 ± 3.1 65.5 ± 2.9 64.4 ± 1.9 N
Magnesium 44.4 ± 1.4 44.0 ± 0.7 43.6 ± 1.3 N
Manganese 2.39 ± 0.10 2.35 ± 0.09 2.32 ± 0.08 N
Sodium 7.65 ± 0.41 7.43 ± 0.28 7.34 ± 0.24 N
Zinc 0.08 ± O.ot 0.09 ± 0.02 0.08 ± 0.02 N
Iron(II) 8.12 ± 0.27 8.00 ± 0.32 8.04 ± 0.33 N
@: for tennitana material number explanations see chapter 2.1.3. t: N: P>0.05; •: 0.01 <P<0.05 nd: not detected; cobalt and zinc detection limit: 0.02 mgfl OOg.
0%
2.05 ± 0.53
28.7 ± 1.2
nd
0.03 ± 0.00
126 ± 0.27
63.3 ± 1.8
38.2 ± 1.2
1 .89 ± 0.07
0.02 ± 0.02
0.34 ± 0.15
pH 7.5 filtrate
0.1% 0.5%
2.49 ± 0.58 2.90 ± 0.61
28.1 ± 1.6 27.8 ± 1.3
nd nd
0.03 ± O.ot 0.03 ± 0.00
1.49 ± 0.37 1.69 ± 0.37
62.7 ± 2.3 62.4 ± 2.0
37.2 ± 2.2 35.8 ± 2.1
1.82 ± 0.10 1.77 ± 0.12
0.02 ± 0.01 nd
0.38 ± 0.12 0.67 ± 0.92
P())
•
N
N
•
N
•
N
N
� "' "'
156
25.0
� 200 � ' _§ 15.0
f--ctl 1 0 0
2 w _j w 5.0
Pepsjn-HCI Extract fpH 1.35)
0.0 _c_ __ _ 0.0 0. 1
% PEPSIN
§ Aluminium
ISl Soluble iron
� lonisable iron
0.5
FIGURE 3.16 · Pepsin concentration effects on aluminium, soluble iron and ionisable iron (mean ± SE in mg/lOOg) in Nasutitermes triodiae mound (Nt26D4, Daly River, Site 4) following Pepsin-HCI pH 1.35 extraction (n=9).
3.0 pH 7.5 Filtrate
� 2 0 � ' L � Aluminium I � ISl Soluble iron
!:11 lonisable iron 5 f--z w 1.0 2 w _j w
0.0 0.0 0.1 0.5
% PEPSIN
FIGURE 3.17 Pepsin concentration effects on aluminium, soluble iron and ionisable iron (mean ± SE in mg/IOOg) in Nasutitermes triodiae mound (Nt2604) in pH 7.5 filtrates (n=9).
I
I ,
157
The pepsin concentration does not significantly (P>0.05) affect the amount of soluble
iron, ionisable iron and selected elements present in pepsin-HCl acid (pH 1.35) extracts
(see Table 3.32 and Figure 3.!6). In pH 7.5 filtrates. there is a significant
(0.01 <P<0.05) increase in alwninium and soluble iron for the 0.5 % pepsin concentration
(see Figure 3.17) and a significant decrease in magnesium for the same pepsin
concentration. Although the ionisable iron concentration mean is higher in the pH 7.5
filtrate from the 0.5 % pepsin-HCl extract, there is no significant difference. Likewise,
no significant difference has been observed in the other selected elements. In view of
the results obtained (significantly higher soluble iron concentration and higher ionisable
iron mean) a 0.5 % w/v solution of pepsin was used for all incubations as in the in vitro
test for predicting the bioavailability of iron in foods122•
3.4.2 Quality Assurance
The results of the quality assurance are shown in Table 3.33. The internal reference
sample (Nt26D4) was run in duplicate with every batch of samples. The precision of
the method is indicated by the selected element standard deviations (n=40) for the internal reference sample mean contents. From the means of the pepsin-HCl extracts,
the standard deviations are below 5 % for AI, Ca, Fe, K, Mg, Mn, Na, Fe(II). The mean
concentrations of Co, Cu and Zn are very low, 0.02 to 0.07 mg/IOOg and their standard
deviations were 50 %, 14 % and 40 % respectively. The standard deviations from the
mean concentration of selected elements (including soluble iron and ionisable iron) of
pH 7.5 filtrates are much higher.
158
TABLE 3.33 Internal quality control of selected elemental composition (mgllOOg) of pepsin-HCI acid (pH 1.35) extracts and pH 7.5 filtrates of termitaria sample (Nt26D4).
Element Internal reference material: Nt26D4® n=40
Pepsin-HCI
Aluminium 20.6 ± 0.8
Calcium 34.3 ± 1.6
Cobalt 0.02 ± 0.01
Copper O.D7 ± 0.01
Iron 1 1.3 ± 0.5
Potassium 64.1 ± 1.4
Magnesium 46.2 ± 1.3
Manganese 2.39 ± 0.06
Sodiom 7.42 ± 0.31
Zinc 0.05 ± 0.02
Fe(ll) 9.1 7 ± 0.41
pH 7.5 filtrate
2.36 ± 1.12
31 .0 ± 1.8
<0.02
0.03 ± 0.01
1.01 ± 0.35
61 . 1 ± 4.4
42.4 ± 2.6
1.77 ± 0.28
<0.02
0.30 ± 0.1 1 @:lor explanatiOn of temutana reference matenill number reler to chapter :t.J.I
159
3.4.3 Soluble Iron, lonisable Iron and Selected Element Composition of Pepsin
HCI Acid (pH 1.35) Extracts and pH 7.5 Filtrates.
The concentration mean (± standard deviation) of selected elements of Amitermes
viliosus, Tumulitermes pastinator, Tumulitermes hastilis and Nasutitermes triodiae
mounds and soils at different sites (I to 6), in 0.5 % (w/v) pepsin - O.IN HCI acid
(pH 1.35) extracts and pH 7.50 filtrates are given in Tables 3.34 to 3.40, together with
the concentration mean (± standard deviation) of selected elements following
perchloric/nitric acid (4:1) extraction and the percentage recoveries between treatments.
Due to the inherent large degree of variability associated with the exchangeable method
used (O.lN HCl) and the small number of replicates, comparative data between different
species at the same site and same species at different sites have not been statistically
presented, as nearly all comparisons showed no significant differences. Instead,
graphical comparisons are given in Appendices Vl and VII.
3.4.3.1 Soluble Iron, Ionisable Iron and Selected Element Comparisons of
Pepsin-HCI Acid pH 1.35 Extracts, pH 7.5 Filtrates and
Perchloric/Nitric Acid Extracts.
A) Soluble Iron and Ionisable Iron
The concentration mean (± standard deviation) ofperchloric/nitric extractable iron, total
soluble and ionisable iron following pepsin-HCI acid incubation, together with the
percentage of ionisable iron in soluble iron are given in Table 3.34.
As seen in Table 3.34, very little of the iron present in the perchloric/nitric extracts is
released following pepsin-HCl (pH 1.35) incubation. The percentage of soluble iron in
the pepsin-HCl (pH 1 .35) extracts compared to the perchloric/nitric iron varied in
mounds from 0.17 % in Tumu/itermes pastinator at site 6 to 1 1 % in Amitermes vitiosus
at site 4 and in soils from 0.10 % at site 6 to 3.2 % at site 4.
TABLE 3.34 Soluble iron and ionisablc iron content (mean± standard deviation in mg/lOOg) oftermitaria and soils, in perchloric/nitric extracts, pepsin-hydrochloric (pH 1.35) extracts and pH 7.5 filtrates together with the percentage recovery between
Site
Site 1
Site 2
Site 3
Site 4
Site 5
Site 6
ionisablc iron and soluble iron in pepsin-HCI extracts and pH 7.5 filtrates. Depth= I, n=3 unless indicated
Sample Perchloric/nitric Pepsin-HCI (pH 1.35) pH 7.50 filtrate
Iron Soluble iron lron(Il) % Soluble Iron Iron(Il )
Tumulitermes pastinator 1362 ± 150 13.2 ± 3.4 7.42 ± 2.65 56 0.13 ± 0.09 nd
Tumulitermes hastilis 1321 ± 76 18.8 ± 3.9 16.5 ± 3.6 88 2.07 ± 0.71 0.54 ± O.Q2
Soil n=2 1014 ± 80 6.54 ± J .:i9 2.1 I ± 0.18 32 nd nd
Amitermes vitiosus 1497 ± 251 I 13 ± 45 62.5 ± 22.9 55 0.90 ± 0.66 nd
Soil n=2 1 192 ± I I 25.6 ± 13.1 4.19 ± 1 . 19 16 nd nd
Tumulitermes paslinator 2815 ± 162 18.0 ± 10.0 12.9 ± 6.65 72 nd nd
Nasutitermes triodiae 3380 ± 1 1 0 17.0 ± 5.0 14.1 ± 3.8 83 0.36 ± 0.38 0.14 ± 0.17
Soil n=2 2594 ± 350 23.3 ± 13.2 6.10 ± 1.57 26 nd nd Amitermes vitiosus 1368 ± 267 157 ± 77 74.7 ± 80.6 48 4.48 ± 4.17 0.47 ± 0.43 Nasutitermes triodiae 1539 ± 222 15.6 ± 4.8 12.2 ± 4.4 78 5.21 ± 5.13 0.58 ± 0.28 Nt depth=O (old) 1645 ± 184 15.7 ± 4.0 12.4 ± 3.8 79 0.44 ± 0.42 0.26 ± 0.23 Nt deptlv:=O (new) 1 163 ± 73 28.1 ± 3.7 19.5 ± 3.8 69 2.24 ± 1.96 0.48 ± 0. 1 1 Soil n=2 779 ± 1 1 0 24.6 ± 12.6 6.48 ± 1.63 26 nd nd Amilermes vitiosus 1831 ± 279 18.2 ± 2.5 13.1 ± 2.4 72 0.66 ± 0.74 0.21 ± 0.20 Soil n=2 1 1 53 ± 128 5.33 ± 0.54 0.84 ± 0. I I 16 nd nd Tunwlitermes pastinator 5195 ± 561 8.68 ± 1.43 6.22 ± 2.96 72 O.QJ ± 0.05 nd Nasutitermes triodiae 4044 ± 1086 14.9 ± 1.5 13.7 ± 1.4 92 0.34 ± 0.43 0.08 ± 0.14 Soil n=2 6243 ± 1596 6.25 ± 1.29 3.86 ± 0.47 62 nd nd
Abbreviations: nd: not detected; detection limit in mg/IOOg: ' 0.06; iron(ll) 0.20 ; Nt:Nasutitermes triodiae I fOil
%
26
39
I I I I
59 21
32
24
� "' Q
161
The highest ionisable iron contents in pepsin-HCI extracts were found in mounds where
the concentrations ranged from 6.22 mg/1 DOg in Tumulitermes pastinator mounds at site
6 to 74.7 mg/lOOg in Amitermes vitiosus mounds at site 4; while in the soil samples the
ionisable iron ranged from 0.84 mg/JOOg at site 5 to 6.48 mgiiOOg at site 4. In either
case (soluble and ionisable iron) the highest content was found in Amitermes vitiosus
mounds at sites 2 and 4.
As the pH increased from 1.35 in the pepsin-HCl extracts to 7.5 in the filtrates, both the
ionisable and soluble iron decreased. However, the decrease in the ionisable iron was
of a greater magnitude. The ionisable iron contents were very low, ranging in the
mounds, from 0.08 to 0.58 mg/lOOg. Even in Amitermes vitiosus mounds at site 4,
where previously both soluble and ionisable iron were the highest, in pH 7.5 filtrates,
the level was comparable to the other species' mound levels. In soils, at all sites, no
soluble iron nor ionisable iron was detected in pH 7.5 filtrates (for example, soil at site
4: see Table 3.34 and Figure 3.18).
162
1 00
80
f-z 60 w 0 8i 40 Q_
20
perchlortc/njtdc
I f'SW Rr,. 0 Alt"'e �• "' "' • A
1 00
Extraction Procedures: Pepsjn-HCJ
pH 1.35 pH 7 5 filtrate
PerchloricJnjtric Pepsin-HC! pH 1 35
pH 7.5 filtrate 80
f-z 60 w 0 8i 40 Q_
B
20
Q AI CaFe KMg
1 00 .
AI CaFe KMg /\I CaFe KMg
� Aluminium
• Calcium
0 Iron
bl Potassium
113 Magnesium i
Perchlortctnjtric Pepsjn-HCI pH 1.35
pH 7.5 filtrate 80
f-z 60 w 0 8i 40 Q_
20 � Q AJ Ca Fe KMg u � 1.
AI CaFe KMg AI CaFe KMg
C ELEMENT
FIGURE 3.18 Selected element percentage variations between perchloric/nitric acid extracts, pepsinHCI acid pH 1.35 extracts and pH 7.5 filtrates oftennitaria (A: Amitermes vitiosus; B:
Nasutitermes triodiae and soil (C), from Daly River site 4.
TABLE 3o35 Comparison of selected element concentration (mean ± standard deviation in mg/100g) of termite mounds (Tumulitermes pastinator and Tumulitermes hastilis) and soils (0-10cm), sampled from Daly River (site 1) in: A- pepsin-HCI acid (pH 1.35) extracts; 8- pH 7.5 filtrates and C- perchloric/nitric acid (4:1) extracts, together with the % recovery between treatments.
Species Method/ Element ± standard deviation mgllOOg
% recovery Aluminium Calcium Cobalt Copper Iron Potassium Magnesium Manganese Sodium Zinc Iron II
Tp (n 3) A-pH US 29.7 ± .S.9 17.7 ± 5.3 nd 0.04 ± 0.01 13.2 ± 3.4 I 1.0 ± 2.2 8.60 ± 1.28 1.20 ± 0.03 1.84 ± 1.69 0.03 ± 0.04 7.42 ± 2.65
B-pH 7.50 0.71 ± 0.16 16.0 ± 4.7 nd 0.01 ± 0.00 0.13 ± 0.09
% (B/A) 2.4 94 - 13 0.97
C- Total 2959 ± 248 21.5 ± 5.1 0.29 ± 0.01 0.56 ± 0.02 1362 ± 150
% (NC) 1.0 80 - 7.4 1.0
% (B/C) 0.02 74 - 0.96 0.01
IO . .S ± 2.1
95
490 ± 24
2.2
2.1
7.84 ± 1.23 0.79 ± 0.05
91 66
63.1 ± 5.1 3.27 ± 0.12
1 4 37
12 24
0 nd nd
26.8 ± 3.8 0.46 ± 0.03
6.9 7.6
Th (n=3) A-pH 1.35 33.5 ± 3.0 60.5 ± 27.6 0.02 ± 0.02 0.06 ± 0.02 18.8 ± 3.9 16.7 ± 7.7 22.7 ± 9.7 2.97 ± 1.40 1.22 ± 0.62 0.10 ± 0.05 16.5 ± 3.6
B·pH 7.50
% (B/A)
c. Total
% (NC)
% (B/C)
2.88 ± 0.62 53.1 ± 24.0 nd 0.02 ± 0.01
8.6 88 nd 29
2364 ± 180 68.8 ± 30.6 0.32 ± 0.04 0.58 ± 0.10
1.4 88 7.0 9.8
0.12 77 - 2.9
2.07 ± 0.71 16.2 ± 8.39 20.3 ± 9.3 2.04 ± 1.01 -I I 97 90 69 0
1321 ± 76 407 ± 21 68.6 ± 10.0 5.16 ± 1.36 18.9 ± 1.0
1.4 4.1 33 " 6.5
0.16 3.9 30 40
Soil (n=2) A-pH 1.35 32.1 ± 8.2 4.11 ± 1.88 nd 0.01 ± 0.00 6.54 ± 1.29 2.29 ± 0.09 0.52 ± 0.24 0.37 ± 0.14 0.56 ± 0.01
B-pl-1 7.50
% (B/A)
C· Total
% (NC)
% (B/C)
0.62 ± 0.15 4.17 ± 1.89
2.0 102
nd nd
- -
1665 ± 67 8.83 ± 2.63 0.20 ± 0.00 0.38 ± 0.01
1.9 47 - 2.7
0.04 48 - -
nd
-1014 ± 80
0.65
-
Abbreviations: Tp = Tumulitermes pastinator; Th = Tumulitermes hastilis; nd = not detected Detection limit (mg!IOOg): Co and Zn = 0.02; Cu = 0.01; Fe = 0.06; Fe(II) = 0.20
nd 0.67 ± 0.16 0.16 ± 0.05 -- l30 42
348 ± 26 31.2 ± 0.5 3.36 ± 0.24 15.9 ± 2.0
0.66 1.7 I I 3.5
0 2.2 4.6
nd
-0.44 ± 0.08
23
0.54 ± 0.02
3.3
0.06 ± 0.06 2.11 ± 0.18
nd nd
0.40 ± 0.01
1 5
� "' ...
TABLE 3.37 Comparison of selected element concentration (mean ± standard deviation in mg/100g)) of termite mounds (Tumulitermes pastinator and Nasutitermes triodine) and soils (Q-10cm), sampled from Daly River (site 3) in: A- pepsin-HCI add (pH 1.35) extracts; 8- pH 7.50 filtrates and C- perchloric/nitric acid (4:1) extracts together with the % recovery between treatments.
Species Method/ Element ± standard deviation mgllOOg
%recovery Aluminium Calcium Cobalt Copper Iron Potassium Magnesium Manganese Sodium Zinc Iron II
Tp (n 3) A-pH 1.35 29.6 ± 6.8 19.8 ± 5.0 0.04 ± 0.00 0.94 ± 0.52 18.0 ± 10.0 17.4 ± 3.1 29.0 ± 6.4 2.39 ± 0.46 1.78 ± 0.58 0.66 ± 0.23 12.9 ± 6.65
B-pH 7.50 0.99 ± 0.51 19.3 ± 5.1 nd 0.15 ± 0.06 nd 17.9 ± 2.8 27.0 ± 5.9 1.78 ± 0.53 0 nd nd
% (B/A) 3.3 97 16 103 93 74
C- Total 3715 ± 263 21.9 ± 3.0 0.39 ± 0.01 1.40 ± 0.43 2815 ± 162 624 ± 41 145 ± 17 5.43 ± 0.36 12.4 ± 1.7 1.51 ± 0.33
%(A/C) 0.80 91 10 67 0.64 2.8 20 44 14 44
% (B/C) 0.03 88 - II - 2.9 19 33
Nt (n=3) A-pH 1.35 28.5 ± 2.4 22.5 ± 6.4 0.02 ± 0.01 0.20 ± 0.11 17.0 ± 5.0 24.7 ± 0.4 56.8 ± 27.3 2.44 ± 0.95 3.49 ± 2.47 0.16 ± O.G7 14.1 ± 3.8
B-pH 7.50 0.67 ± 0.12 21.2 ± 5.6 0.01 ± 0.02 0.05 ± 0.05 0.36 ± 0.38 16.7 ± 5.6 52.5 ± 28.7 1.75 ± 1.02 nd 0.14 ± 0.17
% (B/A) 2.4 94 56 24 2.1 67 93 12 - 1.0
C- Total 4544 ± 113 23.9 ± :5.86 0.51 ± 0.05 0.71 ± O.ll 3380 ±Ito 864 ± 78 268 ± 27 9.23 ± 1.27 16.4 ± 3.2 1.5:5 ± 0.04
%(A/C) 0.63 95 3.9 28 0.5 2.9 21 26 21 10
% (B/C) 0.01 89 2.2 6.9 0.01 1.9 20 19
Soil (n=2) A-pH 1.35 31.2 ± 5.7 7.93 ± 1.94 0.02 ± 0.03 0.08 ± 0.04 23.3 ± 13.2 7.32 ± 2.88 13.8 ± 7.3 0.85 ± O.ll 1.47 ± 0.42 0,07 ± 0.10 6.10 ± 1.57
B-pH 7.50 0.27 ± 0.02 6.71 ± 1.62 nd nd nd 6.33 ± 3.04 11.7±6.3 0.52 ± 0.16 - nd nd
% (B/A) 0.88 85 - - 81 85 61
C- Total 3801 ± 146 12.0 ± 1.3 0.48 ± 0.05 0.51 ± 0.02 2594 ± 350 853 ± 128 179 ± 30 6.18 ± 0.63 14.2 ± 0.4 1.36 ± 0.38
%(NC) 0.82 66 3.7 15 0.90 0.86 1.1 14 10 5.1
% (B/C) 0.01 56 - 0.74 6.5 8.4
Abbreviations: Tp = Tumulitermes pastinator; Nt = Nasutitermes triodiae; nd = not detected ~
'"' Detection limit (mgllOOg): Co and Zn = 0.02; Cu = 0.01; Fe= 0.06; Fe(ll) = 0.20 "'
-"' TABLE 3.38 Comparison of selected element concentration (mean ± standard deviation in mg/100g) of termite mounds (Nasutitermes triodiae) Q\
and soils (D-10cm), samples from Daly River (site 4), depth"" 0 (new/old material), in: A- pepsin-hydrochloric acid (pH 1.35) extracts; 8- pH 7.50 filtrates and C- perchloric/nitric acid (4:1) extracts together with the% recovery between treatments. Probabilities (P) of differences between ages (new/old).
Species/ Method/ Elementl ± standard deviation mg/IOOg
P()) % recovery Aluminium Calcium Cobalt Copper lro" Potassium Magnesium Manganese Sodium Zinc Iron II
Nt (old) A-pH 1.35 21.1 ± 4.0 25.8 ± 8.5 0.02 ± 0.02 0.07 ± 0.01 15.7 ± 4.0 38.1 ± 12.0 25.8 ± 10.0 1.72 ± 0.78 2.97 ± 0.57 0.08 ± 0.01 12.4 ± 3.8
n=J B-pH 7.50
% (8/A)
C- Total
%(A/C)
% (8/C)
1.18 ± 0.75
5.6
22.4 ± 7.3
87
4393 ± 105 25.9 ± 7.7
0.5 99
0.03 86
"' 0.02 ± 0.01 0.44 ± 0.42
34 2.8
0.31 ± 0.05 0.85 ± 0.03 1645 ± 184
6.1 8.4
2.4
0.95
O.QJ
38.0 ± 11.5
100
623 ± 17
6.1
6.1
22.2 ± 9.0
86
101 ± 17
25
22
0.91 ± 0.32
53
2.11 ± 0.60
81
43
24.2 ± 3.3
12
0.03 ± 0.02 0.26 ± 0.23
33 2.1
0.49 ± 0.04
16
5.2
Nt (new) A-pH 1.35 18.4 ± 3.1 25.3 ± 9.0 0.04 ± 0.01 0.10 ± 0.02 28.1 ± 3.7 38.8 ± 15.7 28.0 ± 3.0 2.31 ± 0.89 4.21 ± 1.18 0.10 ± 0.04 19.5 ± 3.8
n=3 B-pH 7.50 1.70 ± 1.50
%(8/A) 9.2
C- Total
%(A/C)
% (8/C)
PU) A- pepsin-HCI
P(t) 8- pH 7.50 filtrates
PU) C- perchloriclnitric
3382 ± 85
0.54
0.05
N
N ...
21.9 ± 7.5
87
26.6 ± 8.4
95
82
N
N
N
"' "' 0.27 ± 0.04
14
N
N
0.04 ± 0.01 2.24 ± 1.96 39.2 ± 16.5
40 8.1
0.69 ± 0.04 t 163 ± 73
14 2.4
5.6
N
N .. 0.19
• N
•
101
579 ± 45
6.7
6.8
N
N
N
25.1 ± 2.6
90
91.0 ± 6.5
31
28
N
N
N
1.46 ± 0.59
63
2.58 ± 0.64
90
57
N
N
N
Abbreviations: Nt = Nasutitermes triodiae; nd = not detected; P = probability of differences between material ages (new/old) Detection limit (mg/lOOg): Co and Zn = 0.02; Cu = 0.01; Fe(ll) = 0.20 P(t): N: P>0.05; *: 0.01< P<O.OS; u: O.OOI<P<O.Ol; ***: P<O.OOI
21.5 ± 5.4
20
N
N
0.02 ± 0.02 0.48 ± 0.11
15 25
0.43 ± 0.04
24
3.7
N
N
N
N (0.083)
N (0.202)
TABLE 3.39 Comparison of selected element concentration (mean ± standard deviation in mg/100g) of termite mounds {Amitennes vitiosus and Nasutitermes triodiae) and soils ({).10cm), samples from Daly River (site 4), in: A· pepsin-HCI acid (pH 1.35) extracts; 8- pH 7.50 filtrates and C- perchloric/nitric acid (4:1) extracts, together with the% recovery between treatments.
Species Method/ Element ± standard deviation mg/1 OOg
%recovery Aluminium Calcium Cobalt Copper !roo Potassium Magnesium Manganese Sodium Zinc Iron II
Av (n-3) A-pH 1.35 49.5 ± 26.1 52.9 ± 59.3 O.o9 ± O.o7 0.15 ± 0.08 157 ± 77 16.5 ± 12.3 33.4 ± 27.1 3.85 ± 3.92 4.17 ± 1.28 0.11 ± 0.12 74.7 ± 80.6
B-pH 7.50 1.31 ± 0.94 38.9 ± 42.0 0.01 ± 0.02 0.04 ± O.oJ 4.48 ± 4.17 15.5 ± 11.8 28.3 ± 22.3 1.50 ± 1.47 od 0.47 ± 0.43
% (BIA) 2.7 74 " 27 2.9 93 84 39 0.63
C- Total 3954 ± 514 58.4 ± 64.6 0.41 ± 0.10 0.84 ± 0.17 1368 ± 267 754 ± 138 Ill ± 45 5.19 ± 3.44 34.0 ± 8.4 0.46 ± 0.15
%(A/C) 1.3 91 22 18 II 2.2 30 74 12 25
% (B/C) 0.03 67 3.3 4.7 0.33 2.1 26 29
Nt (n="4) A-pH 1.35 19.6 ± 3.5 36.2 ± 7.5 0.02 ± 0.01 0.09 ± 0.02 15.6 ± 4.8 54.9 ± 7.9 46.7 ± 16.4 2.45 ± 0.57 9.33 ± 5.10 0.07 ± 0.02 12.2 ± 4.4
B-pi I 7.50 6.05 ± 5.31 33.2 ± 7.5 0.01 ± 0.01 0.05 ± 0.02 5.21 ± 5.13 54.1 ± 8.1 43.2 ± 15.2 1.97 ± 0.45 . 0.01 ± 0.02 0.58 ± 0.28
% (B/A) 31 92 77 58 33 99 93 81 . 12 4.8
C- Total 4109 ± 573 38.5 ± 7.4 0.33 ± 0.02 0.85 ± 0.05 1539 ± 222 687 ± 44 114 ± 19 3.66 ± 0.52 31.6 ± 3.9 0.42 ± O.o4
%(A/C) 0.48 94 5.0 10 1.0 8.0 41 67 30 16
% (B/C) 0.15 86 3.9 6.0 0.34 7.9 38 54 2.0
Soil (n=2) A-pH 1.35 37.0 ± 14.7 2.58 ± 0.08 0.02 ± 0.00 0.07 ± 0.04 24.6 ± 12.6 5.85 ± 1.86 3.83 ± 0.86 0.14 ± 0.01 1.47 ± 0.16 0.04 ± 0.01 6.48 ± 1.63
B-pH 7.50 od 2.09 ± 0.26 od od od 5.73 ± 1.79 3.01 ± 0.78 0.03 ± 0.01 . od od
% (B/A) 81 98 79 22
C- Total 2657 ± 779 6.07 ± 0.63 0.25 ± 0.04 0.58 ± 0.18 779 ± 110 551 ± 144 57.4 ± 13.9 2.30 ± 0.08 20.3 ± 4.7 0.32 ± 0.14
%(A/C) 1.4 42 7.3 12 3.2 1.06 6.7 6.2 7.3 II
% (8/C) 0.01 34 . 1.6 5.2 1.4
Abbrev~atlons: A' Amitermes vmosus; Nt Nasu/ltermes tridwe; od not detected Detection limit (mg/100g): Co and Zn = 0.02; Cu = 0.01; Fe= 0.06; Fe(ll) = 0.20 ~
"' ....
TABlE 3.40 Comparison of selected element concentration (mean ±standard deviation in mg/100g) of termite mounds (Tumulitermes pastinator ~ and Nasutitermes triodiae) and soils (D-10cm), samples from Howard Springs (site 6), in: A- pepsin-HCI (pH 1.35) extracts;: 8- pH 7.50 QO
filtrate and C- perchloric/nitric acid (4:1) extracts, together with the% recovery between treatments.
Species Method/ Element ± standard deviation mg/IOOg
%recovery Aluminium Calcium Cobalt Copper Iron Potassium Magnesium Manganese Sodium Zinc Iron II
Tp (n-3) A-pH 1.35 44.2 ± 10.2 36.5 ± 20.4 0.02 ± 0.03 0.14 ± 0.08 8.68 ± 1.43 5.02 ± 2.27 11.6 ± 5.5 1.50 ± 1.08 0.91 ± 0.38 O.o? ± 0.04 6.22 ± 2.96
B-pH 7.50 0.96 ± 0.37 35.1 ± 19.7 "' 0.03 ± 0.02 O.o3 ± 0.05 4.24 ± 2.62 11.3 ± 5.7 1.03 ± 0.71 - "' "' % (B/A) 2.2 96 - 19 0.35 84 98 68 C- Total 6557 ± 1029 40.8 ± 19.1 0.80 ± 0.26 1.76 ± 0.59 51~5 ± 561 40.8 ± 11.7 48.5 ± 7.5 5.54 ± 1.90 6.20 ± 1.38 1.12 ± 0.30
%(NC) 0.67 89 2.7 8.0 0.17 12 24 27 15 6.2
% (B/C) 0.01 86 1.5 0.01 10 23 19
Nt (n"'3) A-pll 1.35 48.4 ± 4.3 74.6 ± 20.0 0.03 ± 0.05 0.14 ± 0.02 14.9 ± 1.5 12.4 ± 3.5 19.4 ± 5.4 2.08 ± 1.15 1.58 ± 0.51 0.22 ± 0.04 13.7 ± 1.4
B-pH 7.50 1.53 ± 0.72 69.7 ± 16.7 0.01 ± 0.01 0.05 ± 0.01 0.34 ± 0.43 12.1 ± 3.5 17.8 ± 4.5 1.36 ± 0.73 "' 0.08 ± 0.14
% (B/A) 3.2 94 20 33 2.3 98 92 65 0.57
C- Total 5579 ± 692 83.5 ± 21.0 0.73 ± 0.20 1.48 ± 0.12 4044 ± 1086 37.1 ± 3.6 48.9 ± 8.4 5.03 ± 2.46 5.30 ± 0.54 1.01 ± 0.11
%(NC) 0.87 89 3.8 9.3 0.37 33 40 42 30 22
% (B/C) O.Q3 84 0.8 3.1 0.01 33 37 27
Soil (n=2) A-pH 1.35 57.8 ± 16.2 37.6 ± 8.6 0.03 ± 0.04 0.10 ± 0.01 6.25 ± 1.29 3.46 ± 2.21 6.75 ± 1.42 1.67 ± 0.71 1.15 ± O.Q9 1.20 ± 1.01 3.86 ± 0.47
B-pH 7.50 0.91 ± 0.01 33.5 ± 8.0 0.01 ± 0.02 "' "' 2.48 ± 1.07 5.46 ± 1.12 1.00 ± 0.52 "' "' % (8/A) 1.6 89 45 72 81 60
C- Total 4097 ± 436 45.5 ± 11.4 0.60 ± 0.23 1.26 ± 0.06 6243 ± 1596 37.9 ± 17.5 33.9 ± 3.9 8.50 ± 4.25 3.94 ± 0.23 1.87 ± 1.16
%(NC) 1.4 83 5.0 7.6 0.10 9.1 20 20 29 64
% (B/C) 0.02 74 2.2 - - 6.5 16 12
Abbreviations: Tp = Tumulitermer partinator; Nt = Narutitermer triodiae; nd = not detected Detection limit (mg/IOOg): Co and Zn = 0.02; Cu = 0.01; Fe= 0.06; Fe(II) = 0.20
169
B) Selected Elements
As Tables 3.35 to 3.40 show, very little of the predominant elements (aluminiwn and
iron) present in the mounds and soil, at all sites, were released with pepsin-HCI acid at
pH 1.35. The percentage of recoveries of aluminium in the pepsin-HCI acid extracts
compared to the perchloric/nitric acid extracts were very low, less than 2 % for all
species, at all sites. The highest recoveries in the pepsin-HCl extracts of mounds,
compared to the perchloric/nitric acid extracts, were for calcium (greater than 78 % for
all species, at all sites).
The recoveries varied with respect to the origin of the sample. Generally, the percentage
recoveries with pepsin-HCl extracts for calcium, potassium, magnesium, manganese and
sodium were lower in the soil. This trend was not observed between mounds and soils
sampled in Elliott, where the percentage recoveries were similar for calcium, potassium,
magnesiwn and sodiwn (Table 3.36).
When the pH was increased from 1.35 to 7.5, the amount of aluminium, cobalt, copper,
soluble iron, ionisable iron and zinc decreased dramatically for all species, at all sites.
The cobalt, copper and zinc contents in the pH 7.5 filtrates were close to the detection
limit or not detected at all. Very little of the calcium, potassium and magnesium were
lost after neutralisation to pH 7.5, the percentage recoveries of these elements remained
between 80-100% for all species and at all sites (Table 3.35 to 3.40). The manganese
recoveries in the pH 7.5 filtrates compared to pepsin-HCl extracts were more variable
with an average of 65 % for all species termitaria and 49 % for all soils. Here again
as in the pepsin-HCl extracts, the percentage recoveries for calcium, potassium,
magnesium and manganese were generally lower in the soil than in the mounds, as
shown in Figure 3.19 for Nasutitermes triodiae, Tumulitermes pastinator and soil from
site 3.
170
100 D Nt
80 j ~ I bl Tp >- Ill! Soil a: w 60 > 0 () w 40 a:
"' 20
0 Calcium PotaSSIUm Magnesium Manganese
ELEMENT
FIGURE 3.19 Selected elements (calcium, potassium, magnesium and manganese) percentage recovery in pH 7.5 filtrates of Nasutitermes triodiae (Nt) mounds, Tumulitermes pastinaror (Tp) mounds and soils·at site 3.
171
Figure 3.18 shows an example of the change in the percentage distribution of aluminium,
calcium, iron, potassium and magnesium in perchloric/nitric extracts, pepsin-HCl extracts
and pH 7.5 filtrates. At all sites and for all species, the aluminium and iron were the
dominant elements in the perchloric/nitric extracts. In the pH 7.5 filtrates, the 3
dominant elements were calcium, potassium and magnesium. Their relative percentages
varied according to the type of samples. For example, in the pH 7.5 filtrates, at site 4
calcium is the dominant element in Amitermes vitiosus mounds while potassium is the
dominant element in Nasutitermes triodiae mounds and soils.
3.4.3.2 Age Effects on Selected Elements (Depth=O).
As shown in Table 3.38, the results of the AN OVA between ages of mound material
(old and new), indicate a significant increase (0.01 <P<0.05) in the new material for
soluble iron in the pepsin-HCl (pH 1.35) extract and a significant decrease for iron
following the perchloric/nitric acid extraction. A smali ionisable iron increase (P=0.083)
in the new material was detected in the pepsin-HCI extract. Although highly significant
decreases were observed in new material for aluminium and copper in the
perchloric/nitric extracts, no other differences were observed in the pepsin-HCl extracts
and pH 7.5 filtrates.
3.4.3.3 General Oveniew of Different Species Studied at Different Sites with
Relation to the Adjacent Soil (0-lOcm).
The minimum, maximum and mean ± standard deviation of selected element contents
(mg/1 OOg) of the species of mounds. chosen by the Aboriginal communities, and the
adjacent soils (0-lOcm) sampled at sites I to 6, in pepsin-HCl extracts and pH 7.5
filtrates are given in Tables 3.41 and 3.42 respectively.
172
TABLE 3.41 Selected elements (mg/100g) (minimum, maximum and mean ± standard deviation) of Amitermes vitiosus, Tumulitermes pastinator and Nasutitermes triodiae mounds and soils (O~lOcm) sampled at sites 1 to 6, following pepsin-HCl incubation (pH 1.35).
Element Av, Tp and Nt (n=28) Sites 1 to 6 (n==12)
Min Max Mean ± SD Min Max Mean ± SD
Aluminium 15.3 79.2 35.6 ± 15.6 9.50 69.3 36.5 ± 17.3
Calcium ll.S 128 44.4 ± 36.7 1.74 50.4 17.4 ± 19.3
Cobalt nd 0.17 0.04 ± 0.04 nd 0.06 0.02 ± 0.02
Copper O.o3 1.45 0.22 ± 0.30 0.01 0.12 0.07 ± 0.04
Soluble iron 7.33 245 40.7 ± 56.7 4.95 34.8 15.3 ± 11.8
Potassium 3.44 62.3 20.3 ± 16.1 1.90 10.4 5.47 ± 3.05
Magnesium 5.25 88.2 27.7 ± 20.4 0.35 18.9 6.45 ± 5.60
Manganese 0.50 8.38 2.65 ± 1.69 0.13 2.26 0.94 ± 0.76
Sodium 0.51 16.9 3.25 ± 3.35 0.26 1.77 1.05 ± 0.44
Zinc nd 0.82 0.17 ± 0.20 nd 1.91 0.23 ± 0.55
Ionisable iron 4.30 167 23.7 ± 33.4 0.76 7.63 3.93 ± 2.24
Abbreviations: Av= Amitermes vitiosus; Tp= Tumulitermes pastinator; Nt= Nasutitermes triodiae nd= not detected; detection limit (mgflOOg): Co and Zn c 0.02
The selected element content differences (%) between the soil and the termite mounds
at a given site in pepsin-HCI extracts and pH 7.5 filtrates are given in Table 3.43. In
pepsin-HCI extracts, the element mean contents of the soil compared to the mounds were
generally lower in most of the soils studied, with the exception of aluminium where they
were higher in some cases. In pH 7.5 filtrates, the element mean contents of the soil
compared to the mounds, when detected, were always lower.
173
TABLE 3.42 Selected element content (mgllOOg) (minimum, maximum and mean ± standard deviation) ofAmitermes vitiosus, Tumulitermes pastinator and Nasutitermes triodiae mounds and soils (0-lOcm) sampled at sites 1 to 6, in pH 7.5 filtrates.
Element Av. Tp and Nt (n-28) Sites 1 to 6 (n-12)
Min Max Mean ± SD Min Max Mean ± SD
Aluminium 0.37 13.9 1.72 ± 2.57 nd 0.92 0.48 ± 0.35
Calcium 10.8 119 39.9 ± 32.0 1.54 45.7 15.7 ± 17.6
Cobalt nd 0.05 nd nd 0.03 nd
Copper nd 0.21 0.05 ± 0.05 nd 0.01 nd
Soluble iron nd 12.6 1.48 ± 2.91 nd nd nd
Potassium 2.04 63.1 18.8 ± 16.1 nd 9.50 4.69 ± 3.51
Magnesium 4.59 85.7 25.4 ± 19.0 0.475 16.1 5.47 ± 4.91
Manganese 0.36 4.01 1.64 ± 0.91 0.03 1.68 0.57 ± 0.57
Sodium nd
Zinc nd 0.03 nd nd nd nd
Ionisable iron nd 1.00 0.18 ± 0.28 nd nd nd
Abbreviations Av=- Amitermes vitiosus; Tp= Tumulitermes pastinatar; Nt=Nasutitennes triodwe
nd= not detected; detection limit (mgiiOOg): Co and Zn = 0.02; Cu - 0.01; Fe = 0.06; Fe(! I) .. 0.20
CHAPTER FOUR
DISCUSSION
~
::::!.
c:: ~
(Pho
to:
Gay
e Pa
s~o
e)
-------------------------------------
175
4 DISCUSSION
4.1 Introduction
Although substantial chemical and physical analyses have been reported98•77
•136 in
Australia. the literature relating to the Aboriginal nutritional/medicinal uses of mounds
is negligible. As indicated in section 1.2.4.3-F only one study136 mentioned iron values
in mounds and this for two Amitermes species in Queensland. Therefore, as described
in section 1.5, the first part of the analyses (nitric/perchloric acid extraction) was to
determine the selected elemental composition of termite mounds eaten by the Aboriginal
communities and the variation between and within mounds together with particle size
analyses. The selection of elements was determined on the basis of the Aboriginal use
of termite mounds (sections 1.1.1 and 1.1.2). The second part of this study, the hot
water "infusion" analyses, reflects the way the Aborigines (Elliott) prepare their
termitaria for nutritional/medicinal purposes. In ·view of the possible
nutritional/medicinal value ascribed to termite mounds by Aboriginal people, the "bio
availability" of elements was determined, with an emphasis on iron bio-availability.
4.2 Acid Extractable (Perchloric/Nitric Acid) Selected Element Concentrations
Together with Particle Size
4.2.1 Quality Control and Quality Assurance
For the purpose of studying the selected elemental composition of termite mounds and
the variation within mounds and between mounds, a method that would give good
p~ecision, so as to allow valid statistical analyses, was selected. As it was not necessary
for the purpose of this study to select a method that would give a total extraction, the
major focus being the human nutrition, a perchloric/nitric acid (4:1) extraction was
selected. Perchloric/ nitric acid mixture is very effective at destroying organic matter
but, as expected, cannot break down certain soil minerals, silicates in particular, so the
total element concentration of certain elements, for example, AI, K, Na. cannot be
176
obtained. In order to determine the quality of our method, the selected element
percentage recovery versus known reference material and internal termitaria reference
material were performed.
The recoveries for the internal reference tennitaria material compared to external
laboratory results show that the perchloriclnitric acid method gives comparable results
to XRF, except for manganese in Tumulitermes pastinator and Nasutitermes triodiae
mounds. The low percentage recovery in this case could be explained by the fact that
the XRF detection limit for manganese as MnO was 0.01 % which translates to a
detection limit in samples of 7.8 mg/IOOg. Being at the detection limit, it is possible
that in the case of Tumulitermes pastinator and Nasutitermes triodiae, the results have
been over-estimated. This hypothesis is supported by the fact that the ICP results for
Tumulitermes pastinator and Nasutitermes triodiae of the external laboratory are much
closer to our results (63 and 66 % respectively). It was expected that the external
laboratory results with XRF and JCP (acid digestion mixture including HF) would be
higher than those from perchloric/nitric extraction. The XRF calcium and magnesium
results (Table 3.2) are much lower than the ICP results and the perchloric!nitric results
(mainly for Tumulitermes pastinator and Nasutitermes triodiae). Here again the values
were close to the XRF calcium and magnesium detection limit which were 0.01 % CaO
or 7.2 mg of calcium per 100 g and 0.05% MgO or 30 mg of magnesium per 100 g.
It is possible that in this case the XRF values have been underestimated. The high K
percentage recovery in Elliott (1 00 % in Amitermes vitiosus mound and 86 % in soil)
would indicate that the potassium is in a different form and is more readily extracted in
Amitermes vitiosus mound and soil in Elliott than in Amitermes vitiosus mounds in Daly
River (Av44D4, Table 3.2). For iron, there is good agreement for all mounds and soil
material between the XRF, ICP (mixed acid digest) and perchloric/ nitric extraction.
This was also observed with the reference material BCSS-1 and MESS-I.
The quality assurance, monitoring the instrumental, procedural and time variations shows
the precision of the method to be very high. This is indicated by the low standard
deviations (usually below 5 %, but forK and Na 10 %) from the selected element mean
following perchloric/nitric extractions (Table 3.2).
177
4.2.2 Overview, General Correlation
As ind.icated in section 3.2.2, a complete study of the correlations between all variables
studied may have been interesting but it was not the focus of this project. In relation
to the Aboriginal uses of termitaria, the general correlation between clay and other
variables is of particular significance. As indicated previously (section 3.2.2), the clay
is positively correlated to aluminium, cobalt, copper and iron and negatively correlated
to potassium, magnesium, silt and coarse sand.
The positive correlation between clay and aluminium, copper and uon could be
explained by the fact that:
the structure of the clay itself is commonly a combination of Al-OH octahedra
(gibbsite sheet) and Si-0 tetrahedra (silica sheet)';
copper exists in soil mainly as the divalent Cu2+ which is adsorbed by clay minerals
or is associated with organic matter•;
iron{III} oxides and oxy-hydroxides of iron are the most abundant non-clay minerals
found in the clay fractions of soils130• They occur as coatings of aggregates or as
separate constituents of the clay fraction94; recent evidence shows that small amounts
of iron {2 %) may replace aluminium in the kaolin structure130•
The negative correlation between potassium and clay may indicate that the type of clay
of the termite mound could mainly be kaolinic as reported by Barber (1984)1'. Soils
whose clays are primarily kaolinic do not fix potassium. This may be reinforced by the
negative correlation between clay and magnesium, as magnesium is not a constituent of
kaolinic soil clays but of soil clays such as montmorillonite, vermiculite, chlorite and
illiteu. The coarse sand and silt are also negatively correlated to clay. This is to be
expected as their percentage compositions are interrelated, with the total particle fraction
(clay + silt + fine sand + coarse sand) being 100 percent. Another factcr is that
although generally the clay particles have developed from weathering of sand and silt
particles, most clay particles differ mineralogically from sand and silt. The
mineralogical composition of sand and silt may be similar11 • This hypothesis (the
mineralogical difference between clay and the sand and silt) is reinforced by the fact that
178
in contrast to the clay, the silt and the coarse sand are positively correlated to potassium
and magnesium (see Table 3.4).
The previously reported soil and mound studies in Northern Australia (section 1.2.3.1)
support the hypothesis that kaolin could be a major part of the clay fraction of the
termitaria and soil in Ibis study. As reported by Norrish and Pickering (1983)130, in
Northern Territory, kaolin is the dominant mineral in clays followed by illite130• The
results of tbe mineralogical analyses conducted by Lee & Wood (!971b)" (Table 1.3),
indicated a high percentage of kaolin type of clay in the termitaria and soils studied in
the Northern Territory frOm Howard Springs to Tennant Creek. The kaolin constituted
more that 80 % of the clay in Howard Springs and Larrimah; in Daly River 65-85 %
kaolin was found inNasutitermes triodiae mound clay. As discussed in section 1.2.3.1,
the kaolin ratio in the subsoil (B horizon) was generally greater than in the topsoil and
tbe clay of half of tbe mounds studied by Lee & Wood (!97lb)" came entirely from
subsoil. This was always the case for Nasutitermes triodiae mounds studied at 3
geographically different locations98• For example, in Daly River the high kaolin
composition of the clay inNasutitermes triodiae mounds came from the B horizon (65-
80 % kaolin); tbe A horizon had only 30-50 % kaolin".
In relation to the Aboriginal use of termite mounds the presence of kaolin type clay
could be of major importance. Kaolin has long been used for the treatment of gastric
disorders in both traditional and modem pharmacologym (section 1.1.4). It has also
been used in the treatment of chronic ulcerative colitis to absorb bacteria and toxins in
the colon and is usually given as a mixture (20: I) with pectin in a sweetened suspension
for the treatment of abnormal intestinal fermentation178• This could be related to the
Aboriginal use of termitaria for upset stomach, diarrhoea, stomach aches and after eating
certain food (section 1.1.2.1).
Another important aspect of the possible high concentration of kaolin in the clay fraction
in the mounds studied is in relation to the low cation-exchange capacity of kaolin clay.
Hence, the reduced possibility of nutritional complications of iron absorption. The
cation-exchange capacity (CEC) is a measure of tbe total of tbe negative charges of tbe
179
clay. Kaolin belongs to the 1:1 type of clay (each sheet has one silica tetrahedral layer
and one alumina octahedral layer). The 1:1 clays have little if any isomorphous
substitution and, hence, low negative chargeu. The cation-exchange capacity of kaolin
and montmorillonite ranges from 1 to 15 and 80 to 150 me/100g11, respectively.
Minnich et a! (1968)114 reported the possible complication of clay ingestion due to iron
absorption from the intestinal tract by Turkish clay and soil which could be a factor
leading to iron deficiency114• They showed that the Turkish clay (20-25 %
montmorillonite and 65-70% sepiolite) had a high CEC and was more effective in
blocking iron absorption than other clay with lower CEC. In their experiments, clay
from New Mexico (99-100% kaolin) had no effects upon iron absorption. In Australia,
although Eastwell (1984)" reported that clay eating could interfere with iron absorption
(section 1.1.6), his study (1979)43 showed no differences in haemoglobin level between
Aboriginal clay eaters and control. The high content of kaolin in the mounds of this
study would support Hausheld's (1975}69 theory that clay c~ating is a traditional practice
more likely to be beneficial to health than dangerous to it (section 1.1.5).
4.2.3 Influence of Age of Mound Material ou Selected Element Concentrations
and Particle Size
In Daly River, the Aboriginal women indicated that they preferred the more recently
built parts of the mounds, they like the taste of it as the old parts are 'not too sweet'
(section 1.1.2.1.1). The reports of possible elemental differences between ages of
termite mound material in the literature are very scarce. Pomeroy (1976Y44 in Uganda
found no significant differences between new and old parts of MacroterlJleS mounds,
even though there was evidence that the old parts had been built several years
previously. His chemical analyses concentrated on organic matter, nitrogen, calcium,
phosphorus, potassium and total exchangeable cations. He reported that the increased
organic matter (from saliva and excretory material) in the mound (compared to the soil}
seems to be chemically stable, as the organic matter content in parts which are several
years old is very similar to that in newly built parts of the mound144• The carbon
180
(organic matter) is positively correlated with the sum of exchangeable cations and acid
extractable phosphorus136, and hence if the organic matter content within the fresh and
old part of the mound remain constant, the sum of cations and acid-extractable
phosphorus may remain similar.
The age effects analyses showed no significant differences in selected element
concentration and particle size for Tumulitermes pastinator and Nasutitermes triodiae
mounds in Daly River site 3 but highly significant differences in aluminium, copper and
iron in Nasutitermes triodiae mounds in Daly River site 4 (Tables 3.7 to 3.9). The
absence of significant differences in selected element concentration and particle size in
site 3 could have been due to the small number of samples and the high standard
deviation from the means, in particular from the calcium mean. The calcium means tend
to be higher in the newly built parts, 32 and 8 % higher inTumulitermes pastinator and
Nasutitermes triodiae mounds respectively. In site 4, although highly significant, the
differences were not major. They were within the standard deviation of the element
mean and were not observed when the statistical analyses were perfonned by positions
(Table 3.12), again probably·because of the lower number of samples. At each position
(top, middle, bottom) in the mound, the general trend was similar with higher
aluminium, copper, iron and potassium in the old parts of the mounds. An increase in
clay could have explained the aluminium, copper and iron increases as they are
positively correlated (section 4.2.2), but there were no significant differences in clay
between ages although the clay means tend to be higher (5 %) in the old part of
Nasutitermes triodiae mounds in Site 4 (Tables 3.11 and 3.12).
It has been reported (section 1.2.1) that the mound is not a static structure, that the
termites continually rebuilt or extend the mound, taking material from the inside of the
mound to the outside. These constant alterations could explain the lack of differences
in elemental composition between new and old parts, with the exception of aluminium,
copper and iron, which each have highly significant lower concentration in the new
material. The reasons why the Aborigines prefer the new parts of the mounds cannot
be related to increases in the major elements or changes in particle size distribution of
new material. It may be simply that the freshly built parts are easier to collect.
181
4.2.4 Influence of Depth in Mound on Selected Element and Particle Size
In accordance with the ways the Aborigines collect the termitaria, a complete study of
the depth effects was not considered necessary, as they collect mainly from the first I 0
em from the outside of the mound. The depth effects was only addressed in the detailed
mound study to have a more complete picture of the mounds studied.
A gradual increase of organic matter and total cations content from outer wall to nursery
area of mounds has been frequently reported, around the world and in Australia, for
many different species27•134
•97
• The extent of the increase (in particular in exchangeable
calcium and magnesium) is closely related to the quantity of organic material
incorporated into the mound and to the type of mound construction. Nevertheless, the
increase in organic matter and total cations have not been observed for all species.
Pomeroy (1976)144, in Uganda, found no difference between the inner and outer parts of
the mound wall of Macrotermes mounds and Okello-Olqya et a! (1985)136 found no
differences in total phosphorus, calcium, JX)tassium, magnesium, sodium and iron in
Amitermes vitiosus and Amitermes /aurensis mounds in Queensland.
The results of the ANOV A for depth effects showed no significant differences m
Amitermes vitiosus mounds (Table 3.5). The results are in agreement with those of
Okello-Oloya eta/ (1985)136• This could be explained by the fact thatAmitermes
vitiosus mounds are homogeneous (section 1.2), whereas in Tumulitermes pastinator
mounds, the inner part of the mound contained significantly higher levels of calcium,
potassium, manganese, clay and silt and lower coarse sand than the outer parts (Table
3.8). The magnesium mean, at depth=2 (0-10 em fraction taken from the inside central
axis of the mound), although not significantly different was 10% higher than at depth=O
(0-1 em fraction of the outside mound) and 13 % higher than at depth= I (0-10 em
fraction of the outside mound). These results are in agreement with the literature values
(Table 1.5). Lee and Wood (197ib)" also noted an increase in clay in the material of
the nursery of Nasutitermes triodiae (Table 1.3). In Nasutitermes triodiae mounds, there
appears to be an increase of calcium at depth=2 (Table 3.10), however the 28% increase
compared to depth= I was not significant because of the high standard deviation from
the calcium mean at depth=2. The high variation of calcium is due to the heterogeneity
182
of the mound composition at that depth. The samples were taken at different levels
within the same depth, one was taken in the nursery (Nt20D3 see Appendix C 1 a and
Clb). The nursery sample had a higher content of calcium (73.6 ± 0.5 mg/lOOg),
magnesium (297.8 ± 2.5 mg/lOOg), manganese (13.5 ± 0.2 mg/lOOg), zinc (2.1 ± 0.01
mg/lOOg), clay (28.1 %) and a lower coarse sand content (15.4 %) than in the other
samples at the same depth. The higher concentration of elements and clay content found
in the nursery is consistent with the data from the literature (see Table 1.3). At
depth=2, the cobalt showed a significant increase but the concentrations were so low that
it is not considered important. The iron decrease at depth=2 was not major although
significantly different, the differences are within the standard deviation of the elements.
The sodium decrease at depth=2 contrasts with the finding of Boyer (1956)" who
reported very high levels of sodium in the inner part of the mound of an African termite
(section 1.2.4.3) and Lee and Wood (1971b)98 findings inNasutitermes triodiae mound
in Daly River where the sodium level was double in the nursery area compared to the
outer galleries (see Table 1.5).
Overall, there are no differences associated with depth in Amitermes vitiosus mounds,
whereas for Tumulitermes pastinator and Nasutitermes triodiae, there are differences
between depths but the differences are principally associated with the different structures
within the mound rather than the depth itself. For example, different structures can be
located within the same depth: nursery and mound galleries can be found in the inner
core of the mound (depth=2).
4.2.5 Influence of Position in Mound on Selected Element Concentrations and Particle Size
In selecting the termitaria sample, the Aborigines did not indicate a preference for any
one position in the mound; however, as part of the overall study, it was decided to
determine whether concentration did in fact vary at different positions in the mound.
The data on variation of element concentration and particle size with mound position are
also very scarce. Okello-Oloya eta/ (1985)136 showed different patterns of variation of
183
selected exchangeable elements and organic carbon between sites according to the
positions in the mound; with the exchangeable calcium levels being higher in the upper
and middle levels of Amitermes Jaurensis mounds. Unlike Okello-Oloyaet a! (1985)136,
Nye (1955)134 reported that the casing of an African termite mound varied little in
composition (organic carbon, pH and exchangeable cations) from the top to the base and
Coventry et a/ (1988)3a found no systematic variation within sampling position in
Amitermes vitiosus, Tumulitermes pastinator and Drepanotermes perniger mounds. In
Daly River, Lee and Wood (1971b)98 found no increase in HCl extractable calcium,
potassium and phosphorus but increase in exchangeable calcium and potassium in the
basal region of Nasutitermes triodiae mound.
Generally in Amitermes vitiosus mounds, ·there seems to be a trend towards higher
concentration of elements in the upper section of the mound (Table 3.6 and 3.14) but
the differences are seldom consistently significant; only calcium, magnesium and zinc
were significantly increased in the top section of mounds_ at two sites: Daly River site
4 and Elliott site 5 (Table 3.14). Highly significant differences were only observed at
Daly River site 4; but those Amitermes vitiosus mounds were not eaten by the
Aborigines. In Tumulitermes pastinator (Tables 3.8 and 3.15) andNasutitermes triodiae
(Tables 3.10 and 3.16) mounds no highly significant differences have been found at all
sites. In contrast to Amitermes vitiosus mounds, calcium tends to accumulate in the
lower section of the mound of Tumulitermes pastinator (Table 3.8) andNasutitermes
triodiae (Table 3.10), but this was not observed at all sites.
No highly significant differences in concentration of selected elements and particle size
composition have been observed according to the position in mounds eaten by the
Aboriginal communities of Elliott and Daly River. Although highly significant
differences were found for Amitermes vitiosus mounds at site 4, these mounds are not
selected for consumption.
184
4.2.6 Influence of Mound Size on Selected Element Concentrations and
Particle Size
The mound size is assumed to be an index of the colony size {although Watson & Perry
(1981)193 have observed that it is not always the case), and larger mounds are assumed
to be older. This is supported by observations of Coventry et a! (1988)38 of a
Tumulitermes pastinator mound which increased in basal diameter from 0.6 to 1.4 m
over a 5 year period and by the fact that very largeNasutitermes triodiae mounds may
be 100 years old. For the purpose of the current study, to compare mounds of different
sizes, it was not necessary to know exactly their volume or age. But as the shape of the
mounds is so variable it was important to take into consideration the fact that some
mounds are tall and narrow and others small and wide. For that reason, the size was
estimated by the sum of the height and the circumference (Figure 3.2). Overall no
significant correlations were found between the size and the selected elements and the
particle size (Table 3.17). This may be linked to the fact that only minor differences
have been observed between old and new materials (section 4.2.3), and very few
differences have been observ~d between positions (section 4.2.5). The termite activities
(constantly re-organising and renewing their habitat) and perhaps as presumed by
Pomeroy (1976)'44 the redistribution of elements throughout the mound by diffusion
during the wet seasons could contribute to the homogeneity of the concentration of
elements and particle size distribution within a mound.
4.2.7 Comparison of Mounds of the same species at the same site
Differences in concentration of elements and particle size between mounds of the same
species at the same site have been poorly documented. In a study by Lee and Wood
(197Ib)518, only one mound per species was taken at each site, with the exception of one
site (Darwin South Port), where twoAmitermes meridiana/is were sampled. In that site,
major composition differences were observed for most of the selected elements. For
example between the two mounds, the potassium varied from 28 to 64 mg/1 OOg, the
phosphorus from 10 to 18 mg/IOOg and the exchangeable magnesium from 9.7 to 14.6
185
mg/lOOg. Important variations also occurred in the particle size, the clay percentage
varied from 13 to 27 %and the fme sand from 42 to 27%. Okello-Oloya eta/ (1985)136
although studying 5 mounds per site, did not discuss mound variation. The high
standard deviations obtained from the means of their mounds for selected element
concentrations could give an indication of the possible variation between mounds
(although other factors could have been involved). The standard deviations from the
means of calcium, phosphorus and magnesium were 68, 44 and 43 % respectively for
Amitermes vitiosus mounds on a site in Queensland. These findings are consistent with
the results of this study indicating at nearly all sites highly significant differences for the
majority of the selected element concentrations for Amitermes vitiosus (Table 3.18). In
Daly River, the Aboriginals seem to select some mounds in preference to others of the
same species at the same site. The reasons could have been based on the differences in
concentration of selected elements between mounds, but it is also equally likely that their
choice could be based on other considerations. For example, in Daly River site 1, they
were not collecting from mounds of Tumulitermes pastinat~r that were attacked by ants
(lridomyrmex sp). However, in our study, 5 of the I5 mounds sampled at site I were
attacked by Jridomyrmex sp but no significant differences were found between mounds
in that particular site.
4.2.8 Comparison Between Different Species Mound Composition at the
Same Site
Although there is an enormous amount of data reporting physico-chemical differences
between species at the same site98•102
, the information is oflimited use in understanding
preferential use by Aboriginals of a particular species over another at the same site. For
example, selection of Tumulitermes pastinator and exclusion of Tumulitermes hastilis
mounds at Daly River site I and selection of Nasutitermes triodiae mounds and
exclusion of Amitermes vitiosus at Daly River site 4. As seen in section I.2.4, those
species are rarely reported and analysed together on the same site.
186
4.2.8.1 Comparison Between Tumulitermes pastinator and Tumulitermes
hastilis Mounds Composition in Daly River Site 1.
There were highly significant differences for the majority of elements studied (Table
3.19). Aluminium, potassium, sodium, zinc and clay were highly significantly increased
and fine sand significantly higher in Tumu/itermes pastinator mounds. Potassium,
sodium, and clay could play an important role in the diarrhoea treatment. As discussed
by Gracey (1991)", the danger from diarrhoea is dehydration which could be caused by
the loss of body fluids and body salts in the diarrhoea fluid. Potassium and sodium
could act as replacement salts and the clay, as reported in section 4.2.2, could have
positive effects alleviating the symptoms of diarrhoea. The highly significant increase
in these particular element concentrations in Tumulitermes pastinator mounds could
contribute to the reason why this particular species mounds are chosen over those of
Tumulitermes hasti/is, by the Aboriginal community of Daly River.
4.2.8.2 Comparison Between Nasutitermes triodiae and Tumulltermes
pastinator MoUnds Composition in Daly River Site 3 and Howard
Springs Site 6.
Although the Daly River Aborigines collected termitaria samples from the two species,
they preferred the Nasutitermes triodiae mounds. At Daly River site 3, there are highly
significant increases in Nasutitermes triodiae, in aluminium. cobalt, iron, potassium,
magnesium, manganese, silt and coarse sand and significant increases in sodium and fine
sand (Table 3.20). Compared to Tumulitermes pastinator mound composition, all the
selected element concentrations mentioned were significantly higher in Nasutitermes
triodiae together with the finer soil fraction (clay + silt) which was 48.8 % in
Nasutitermes triodiae versus 36.8 % in Tumulitermes pastinator. The Daly River
Aboriginal preference for Nasutitermes triodiae mounds could possibly be related to the
higher concentration of the elements or to the increase in the finer texture which could
perhaps make the termitaria more palatable.
187
At site 6 (Howard Springs), the differences between the two species mounds were not
as obvious as in site 3 (Table 3.22). Only calcium and silt were highly significantly
higher in Nasutitermes triodiae than in Tumulitermes pastinator. Compared with site 3
(Table 3.20), the iron concentration in Tumulitermes pastinator was significantly
increased (from 2917 ± 198 to 4527 mg/lOOg) and was, in this site, higher than in
Nasutitermes triodiae mounds, although still within the standard deviation of the means.
There was highly significant increase in silt in Nasutitermes triodiae mounds but unlike
site 3, the finer soil particle (clay+ silt) in the two species mounds have a very similar
ratio: 33.19 and 35.5% in Tumulitermes pastinator and Nasutitermes triodiae mounds
respectively. The major highly significant difference between the two species was with
calcium, where an increase of 67 % in Nasutitermes triodiae mounds was found. The
differences between the two species vary from site to site. These differences can also
be found in the values reported by Lee & Wood ( 1971 b )98 for a few selected elements
in Nasutitermes triodiae and Tumulitermes pastinator mounds in Queensland (Table 1.5).
The values observed were higher in Nasutitermes triodia~ mounds in organic matter,
potassium, clay and coarse sand and the concentrations were superior in Tumulitermes
pastinator in calcium, exchangeables (calcium, potassium, sodium), silt and fine sand98•
In summary, highly significant differences were observed between the two species but
no consistant pattern was noted.
4.2.8.3 Comparison Between Amitermes vitiosus and Nasutitermes triodiae
Mound Composition in Daly River Site 4.
At site 4, the Aboriginals choose Nasutitermes triodiae mounds over Amitermes vitiosus
mounds. Out of the ten selected elements, five were significantly different between the
two species mounds and the increase was always in Amitermes vitiosus mounds. The
only highly significant increases observed in Nasutitermes triodiae mounds were in
particle size fractions where clay and coarse sand were higher in Nasutitermes triodiae
mounds, however, the percentage of the fine fraction (clay+ silt) was similar in both
species (32.9 and 29.9% in Nasutitermes triodiae and Amitermes vitiosus respectively).
188
Only an increase in clay content (22 % in Nasutitermes triodiae versus 16 % in
Amitermes vitiosus) could be related to the Aboriginal preference. Possibly other
considerations could be of importance, sush as the physical aspect of the mound. For
example, the colour of the mounds: dark grey in Amitermes vitiosus and red-ochre in
Nasutitermes triodiae (see Plate 11 & 12) and the solidity of the mounds: concrete like
in Amitermes vitiosus mounds, requiring a stone to chip a part off in contrast to the new
parts of Nasutitermes triodiae mounds which can be easily collected by hand.
4.2.9 Comparison Between Mound Composition of the Same Species at
Different Sites
Highly significant differences between selected elements and particle size have been
observed between sites for each of the three species (Amitermes vitiosus, Tumulitermes
pastinator and Nasutitermes triodiae). For the same species, differences between sites
have been reported in many studies and in particular in Australia for Nasutitermes
triodiae (Table 1.8), Tumulitf.}rmes pastinator (Table 1.9), Tumulitermes hastilis (Table
1.10), Coptotermes acinaciformis (Table 1.6) and Amitermes vitiosus (Table 1.7).
4.2.9.1 Comparison Between Mound Composition of Amitermes vitiosus at
Different Sites
All the selected elements, silt, fine sand and coarse sand were highly significantly
different between the three sites studied (Daly River site 2 and 4 and Elliott). The clay
mean content remained at approximately 16 % at all 3 sites (Table 3.23). In
Queensland, Holt eta/ (1980)78 reported clay mean values of27.5 and 24.4% at 2 sites
and Lee & Wood (197lb)98 in Larrimah (NT) reported a clay mean value of 29 %
(Table 1.3). As different methods of soil fractionation have been used (this study used
the pipette and sieve method described by Coventry and Fett (1979)37 whereas Lee &
Wood (197lb)98 used the method of Hutton (1955) while Holt eta/ (1980)78 did not
189
specify the method (but probably used the sieve and pipette method), it is difficult to
compare the results with each other.
The variations, although highly significant, are not as broad for all the elements studied
(Figure 3.13 and Table 3.23). Aluminium, copper, iron, maguesium, manganese and silt
means varied within a narrow range. Important variations were observed for calcium,
potassium, sodium, zinc and coarse sand, for example, calcium content of 32 ± 9.9
mg/IOOg, 57.2 ± 33.2 mg/!OOg and Ill ± 23.9 mg/IOOg in Daly River site 2, site 4 and
Howard Springs respectively. Okello-Oloya et a/ (1985)136 reported also wide
differences for a number of total elements (Table 1.7). As their method used hot
hydrofluoric acid for extraction it is not possible to compare their results with the results
of this study as a less vigorous type of extraction has been used in this study. A
comparison may be made for iron as a percentage recovery close to I 00 % was
constantly found in this study (section 4.2.1); Okello-Oloya eta/ (1985)136 reported mean
values of 1270 ± 190, 1440 ± 110 and 1510 ± 350 mg/lO_Qg at three sites which are in
agreement with results of this study: 1420 ± 297, !52! ± 198 and 1726 ± 146 mg/IOOg
at sites 2, 4 and 5 respectively.
Differences in selected mineral and particle size composition of Amitermes vitiosus
between sites could possibly indicate reasons of selection/exclusion of a particular site.
For example, Amitermes vitiosus mounds were selected in Daly River site 2 (although
not the first preference) and Elliott site 5 but not in Daly River site 4. However, in
Elliott, no conspicuous mounds of other species could be found around site 5 that could
be have been used instead of Amitermes vitiosus. Between site 4 and site 2, the
observed differences (Table 3.23) would suggest the mounds of site 4 with higher
calcium, potassium, sodium and lower coarse sand content would be more beneficial
than those at site 2. However, there are obviously other factors than the chemical and
particle size content which could influence the choice. For example, site 2 was very
close to the community (4 km away) and in site 4 Nasutitermes triodiae were present
and favoured.
190
4.2.9.2 Comparison Between Mound Composition ofTumulitermes pastinator
and Nasutitermes triodiae at Different Sites
Unlike Amitermes vitiosus, Tumulitermes pastinator and Nasutitermes triodiae have
never been shown to be rejected by the Aboriginals, although highly significant
differences have been observed between both species for all the selected elements and
particle size. The differences between sites in selected element concentrations and
particle sizes for both species were wider than for Amitermes vitiosus (Tables 3.23 to
3.25). For example, the mean iron concentration varied inNasutitermes triodiae from
1343 ± 92 to 2917 ± 198 mg/IOOg in Daly River to 4527 mg/!OOg in Howard Springs.
Between sites, the most obvious difference was for potassium, in both Nasutitermes
triodiae and Tumulitermes pastinator (see Figure 3.13). The differences could have been
due to the difficulty encountered with potassium extraction (low percentage recovery,
section 4.2.1) but the percentage recoveries found forNasutitermes triodiae mound (site
4) and soils (site 4 and 6) compared to the ICP (mixed acid digest with HF) values of
the external laboratory were of the same order (Table 3.2): 64, 60 and 56 %
respectively. The potassium-mean values in Daly River site 4 forNasutitermes triodiae
mounds was 660 ± 68 while in Howard Springs (site 6) it was only 38.5 ± 4.6 mg/IOOg
(Table 3.25).
In Australia, only one set of particle size analyses and two records of chemical analyses
have been reported for Tumu/itermes pastinator (Table 1.3). As the methods used are
so different it is difficult to compare those values with those found in Daly River and
Howard Springs in this present study. As the exchangeable cation method of extraction
is less rigorous than the perchloric/nitric acid extraction, the higher calcium values found
in Queensland (Table 1.9) would indicate a higher calcium content in those mounds.
The clay value (19 %) found in a Queensland mound (Table 1.3) fits within the range
of the values found in Daly River site I (14.8 ± 1.3 %) and Howard Springs (26.9 ± 3.5
%) (Table 3.24), while more variations have been observed between coarse sand values:
4 % in Queensland mounds, but averaging 20.8 ± 0.8 for the three sites (1,3,6) in this
study. The values found in the literature (Table 1.3) must be used with caution as the
method of particle fractionation indicated is different (section 4.2. 9.1).
191
In Australia, values of chemical and physical composition of Nasutitermes triodiae
mounds have been reported by Lee & Wood (1971b)98 (Tables 1.3 and 1.8). They
studied four Nasutitermes triodiae mounds and although their analytical methods are
very different to those used in this study, it is possible to observe wide variations
between sites for a number of elements: organic carbon. potassium, calcium, phosphorus
and exchangeable cations (calcium, potassium, magnesium and sodium). For example
the exchangeable potassium varied from 7.4 to 39.1 mg/lOOg and the exchangeable
sodium from 0.9 to 17.9 mg/IOOg (Table 1.8) at different sites. Major differences were
also observed between particle sizes (Table 1.3). For example, the clay varied from 25
to 36% and the coarse sand from 12 to 30 %. In this study, the clay of Nasutitermes
triodiae mounds varied from 19.4 ± 1.0 to 27.6 ± 3.0% and the coarse sand from 19.2
± 2.5 to 36.9 ± 4.7 %(Table 3.25).
The highly significant differences between particle size found in this study for Amitermes
vitiosus, Tumulitermes pastinator and Nasutitermes triodiae are consistent with the
results of Lee & Wood (1971 b )98 who concluded that there is no evidence that any
individual species had precise requirements of particle sizes for its structures. This is
also supported by the results of Fyfe & Gay (1938)50 for Nasutitermes exitiosus (Hill)
mounds (Table 1.3) in which the clay percentage varied from 11.2 to 37.7 %. This is
in contrast to a number of African tennites such as Apicotermes spp., which use
carefully selected combination of particle sizes in their structures97,
4.2.10 General Overview: Influence of Soil Composition on Composition of Mounds
of Different Species at Different Sites
Nye (1955)134 reported that the chemical composition of tennite mounds seems to vary
according to many factors, amongst them the species of tennite and the site. As seen
in Table 3.26, the selected element concentration and particle size differences between
Amitermes vitiosus, Tumu/itermes pastinator and Nasutitermes triodiae mounds from
different sites are very broad. For example, the minimum ·potassium content in the
mounds studied was 27.7 mg/IOOg and the maximum 956 mg/IOOg. These results are
192
similar to those found by Lee & Wood (197lb)". They reported that the potassium
(from HCl extract) content varied from 21 mg/lOOg in Coptotermes acinaciformis mound
outer casing to 620 mg/lOOg in Coptotermes /actus outer wall (Table 1.5). The
importance of the element concentration and particle size variation between mounds of
the same species or different species could partially be explained by the differences
between the soil (0-10 em) element and particle size contents at the different sites
(Tables 3.26 to 3.28 and Figure 3.14). In Howard Springs, the minimum mean
potassium concentrations amongst the soils studied was 32.0 ± 12.3 mg/1 OOg in Howard
Springs (Table 3.2), amongst Nasutitermes triodiae mounds 38.5 ± 4.6 mg/1 OOg (Table
3.25) and Tumulitermes pastinator mounds 37.3 ± 7.4 mgllOOg (Table 3.24). The same
relationship was found for the maximum mean potassium concentrations, amongst all the
sites studied, the potassium content was the highest in the soil, in Nasutitermes triodiae
mounds and Tumulitermes pastinator mounds at site 3 (Daly River): 694 ± 158, 897 ±
67 and 651 ± 79 mg/lOOg respectively. The same relationship between soil and mounds
was found for the other selected elements (Tables 3.26 and 3.28).
The selected mean element cgncentrations and the fmer soil particle size (clay and silt)
were generally higher (but not always statistically) in the termite mounds studied than
in their adjacent (0-10 em) soils (Table 3.29 and Figures 3.14 and 3.15). At all the sites
studied, the termite mounds had a higher clay content than their surrounding soils
(Figure 3.15 and Table 3.29); the increases were always sigoificantly or highly
significantly different in Tumulitermes pastinator and Nasutitermes triodiae mounds but
no significant differences were found between Amitermes vitiosus mounds and their
adjacent (0-10 em) soil. The majority of studies have shown an increase in clay content
in mounds in comparison with unmodified soils (section 1.2.3.1-B). In Australia, with
the exception of one site where the clay content of the (0-1 0 em) soil horizon was
exceptionally high (53 %), the clay content was always higher in the mounds of the
three species (Amitermes vitiosus, Tumulitermes pastinator and Nasutitermes triodiae)
than in the adjacent (0-10 em) soils (Table 1.3). Lee & Wood (197lb)98 and Holt eta/
(1980)71 reported that the level of clay content in the mounds resembles the content of
deeper horizons which could have levels even higher than in the mounds (Table 1.3).
This finding is important in relation to the medicinal use of termite mounds as the
193
Aborigines prefer termite mounds instead of surface soil. It is easier to take a piece of
termite mound than to have to dig to the subsoil to obtain the same amount of clay,
particularly during the dry season when the soil becomes rock hard. However, during
the wet season, when the termite mound sites are flooded and inaccessible, the Daly
River Aborigines dig the flooded soil close to the mission to collect some subsoil which
has a clay content higher than the monnds (30.2 ± 0.7 %clay, hydrometer method).
According to Nye (1955)134 no general agreement about the differences between the
chemical composition of the mounds and the surrounding soil has been found~ Most
studies throughout the world and in Australia showed an increase in the chemical
composition (organic carbon, nitrogen and exchangeable bases (calcium, magnesium))
of the termite mounds compared to the adjacent soils77•98
•102
• The many factors
responsible for the increase in element concentrations in the mounds have been discussed
in section 1.2.4. However according to a munber of authors (section I .2.4) not all
mounds have a higher element content than their surrounding soils.
The results of this study together with literature show that although the termite mound
composition reflects the composition of the adjacent soil (0~ lOcm), the selected element
content in the monnds was generally higher than in the surronnding top soil (Table
3.29). Nine soil~species pairs out of eleven were significantly higher in aluminium, iron,
magnesium and sodium, eight soil~species pairs were significantly higher in calcium and
seven pairs were significantly higher in potassium and zinc. The increase of element
concentrations in mounds has been attributed to a number of factors (section 1.2.4) such
as the use of richer sub-soil by termites and the incorporation of vegetation, saliva and
excreta (in parts of mounds). The increase could further support the fact that the
Aborigines prefer taking soil from termitaria in preference to the adjacent soil (0~ lOcm).
There are of course other possible reasons for selecting tennitaria, such as, the belief that
soil processed by animals is considered to be safer than that which is not processed100,
194
4.3 Hot Water (''Infusion") Extractable Selected Element Concentrations from
Amitermes vitiosus Mounds (Elliot~ Site 5)
The purpose of the hot water "infusion" extraction was to obtain a measure of the
concentration of selected element present in the "termite mound tea" drunk by the
Aboriginals of Elliott. Potassium, calcium and magnesium were the three principal
elements extracted following hot water "infusion" from mounds with: 10.3 ± 7.83, 6.69
± 3.21 and 2.37 ± 1.55 mg/lOOg respectively (Table 3.30). These concentrations
represent a very small fraction of the nitric/perchloric acid extract: 6.33, 6.37 and 2.56
%. The extraction of these elements was even lower from adjacent (0-10 em) soil
material: 1.84, 1.95 and 0.94 % for potassium, calcium and magnesium respectively.
This higher concentration could indicate that the selected elemental increase in termitaria
"Infusion" extract (Table 3.29) may be of a more available nature as it may come, at
least partially, from tennite by-products (for example, saliva and excreta) which are
more bioavailable. Potassium was the dominant element in the "infusion", and as
mentioned in section 4.2.1, it could be in a different form (more soluble) in Elliott
mounds and soils than at any other sites. The influence of the sample position in the
mound on the selected element concentrations was comparable to the one observed in
the nitric/perchloric extract analyses in regards to the calcium (section 4.2.5 and Table
3.31). A higher calcium concentration was observed in the top section of mounds. A
highly significant increase in iron in the bottom of mounds, after hot water extraction,
may not be very relevant as the iron concentrations were very low.
In comparison to the human recommended dietary intakes (see Table 1.2), the
concentration of selected elements extracted are minimal (Table 3.30) but, nevertheless,
could contribute to the global intakes. For example, if all the calcium present in the
"infusion" was available to the human body, 1.5 to 2.2 litres of "infusion" would be
necessary to cover the daily calcium losses. But in nonnal food, the percentage
absorption of calcium is around 20 %125; therefore, at least five times more 11infusion"
may be needed.
195
Amongst other usages, the "infusion" is given for gastro-intestinal disorders, such as,
diarrhoea. It could help to restore body fluid and a fraction of body salts lost with
diarrhoea fluids and thus prevent dehydration. On the other hand, as the finer fraction
of the soil (clay and silt) is preferentially selected in the infusion, with the heavier
fractions, fine sand and coarse sand, sinking more easily to the bottom and therefore not
drunk, it may possibly be a more selective and pleasant way of eating clay. The heavier
fraction is recycled as poultice and the combination of both ("infusion" and poultice) are
used to bring up milk after birth. In a hot and harsh environment, smearing the poultice
on the chest and back provides a cooling effect due to evaporation and may benefit the
nursing mother, but also, drinking and relaxing while being surrounded by the attention
of family members, could help in releasing oxytocin, (hormone from the pituitary gland
which causes contraction of the muscle fiber of the milk glands, forcing the milk into
larger ducts), therefore promoting the "let-down" reflex. This reflex may be inhibited
if the nursing mother is worried or physically uncomfortable183• The poultice could have
other beneficial aspects as mentioned in the popular literature, to cite a few: clay
poultices placed on the lower abdomen for several days before menstruation prevent
pain; clay increases circulation and flow of oxygen to the skin all over the body; and
miraculous cures have occurred in patients, in a Swiss phthisiology centre, who had their
entire thorax coated with clay41• Unfortunately, no scientific explanations have been
offered for these observations.
4.4 Soluble Iron, lonisable Iron and Selected Element Concentrations of
Termitaria and Soils Following Pepsin-Hydrochloric Acid Incubation
As discussed in section 1.2, the total amount of element present in the diet is not
necessarily available to the hwnan body. For example, only 5-20% of dietary iron is
absorbed from the diet; and in general, cereal based food products have low iron
availability with absorption of 1-7 %for rice, com and whole wheat flour125• Most
study in Australia has focused on the effects resulting from termite activities in soils
and on the exchangeable or 'available' elements in relation to biological, ecological and
pedological significance of termite modified material. As the primary objective of the
196
analyses of this study was focusing on human nutrition, and no standard bioavailable
methods were established for all the selected elements, a method which would predict
the bio-availability of iron from food was selected. This method, suggested by
Narasinga Rao & Prabhavathi (1978), simulates the digestive conditions in the stomach
(pepsin-HCl, pH !.35) and the intestine (pH 7.5)122• As most elements are mainly
absorbed in the intestine 183, the method was extended to the other elements selected in
this study; this would reflect the potential nutritional value of termitaria more closely as
it would give a more realistic idea of the selected element content present at the
absorption site.
4.4.1 Quality Assurance
The Fe(II}-bipyridine spectrophotometric analysis had a severe interference due to the
high concentration of ferric iron, Fe(III), present in termitaria, it was not possible to
obtain a reliable measure of bioavailable iron, Fe(JI), as the absorbance of the Fe(JI)
a,a.'-bipyridine complex was observed increasing with time. This type of reaction has
previously been described by Lee eta/ (1948) with Fe(II)-1,10-Phenanthroline complex.
They found that the absorbance of the Fe(ll) complex increased with time because the
Fe(Ill) complex is slowly reduced to the Fe(II) complex. They attributed this reduction
to the higher stability constant of the Fe(!!) complex than the Fe(lll) complex". A
similar type of reaction will occur for the Fe(III) and the Fe(II)-u,u' -bipyridine
complexes with time. By complexing the Fe(lll) as [FeF6]3" with potassium fluoride
prior to the addition of the a,a'-bipyridine reagent, it was possible to obtain a reliable
and constant measure of Fe(II), as no increase of the Fe(II) complex was observed.
The effect of pepsin concentration on the selected element concentration was
investigated. A significant increase of aluminium and soluble iron in the pH 7.5 filtrates
for a 0.5 % w/v solution of pepsin, was observed but it was not followed by a
significant increase of the ionisable iron (pH 7.5) (Table 3.32), nor other differences at
all concentrations tested. Therefore, as suggested by Narasinga Rao & Prabhavathi
197
(1978) a 0.5 % w/v solution of pepsin was used in addition to HCl for all the
extractions.
An internal termite mound reference material was used to monitor possible variations of
the selected element composition during analyses. The results showed that the precision
of the method was very high for the selected elements of the pepsin-HCI extracts (Table
3.33) considering the low concentration of certain elements: cobalt, copper and zinc.
The standard deviation from the mean concentration of selected elements (including
soluble iron and ionisable iron) of pH 7.5 filtrates were much higher for a number of
elements: aluminium, copper, iron, manganese and iron (II). It could be due to the
relatively low concentration of those particular elements and to co-precipitation during
neutralisation to pH 7.5.
4.4.2 Selected Element Comparisons ofPepsin-HCl (pH 1.35) Extracts, pH
7.5 Filtrates and Perchloric/Nitric ExtraCts.
A summary of the selected element concentrations of different termitaria and soils in
pepsin-HCl (pH 1.35) extracts, pH 7.5 filtrates and perchloric/nitric acid extracts is given
in Tables 3.35 to 3.40, together with the percentage recovery between treatments. The
graphical comparisons between mounds of different species at the same site and between
sites are given in Appendices Fl-F2.
High element concentrations in perchloric/nitric acid extracts does not necessarily reflect
their bio-availability. A method that simulates the human digestion (pepsin-HCl pH 1.35
followed by neutralisation to pH 7.5) is more likely to represent the quantity really being
extracted in the human stomach and the quantity available for absorption in the intestine.
Pepsin-HCl extractions are far less rigorous than perchloric/nitric extractions and could
result in variations in the ratios of concentrations of element extracted by the two
different methods between different species of termite mounds -at different sites. Some
elements may be in a "more extractable" form in one species than in another or in one
site than in another (see 4.2.1).
198
4.4.2.1 Influence of Age of Mound Material on Selected Element
Concentrations and Particle Size (Depth=O)
As indicated in section 3.4.2.2, the only significant difference between ages of
Nasutitermes triodiae mound materials at site 4, was in soluble iron in pepsin-HCl
extracts (Table 3.38). Although highly siguificant differences had been observed in
aluminium and copper in perchloric/nitric extracts, no differences were observed in
pepsin-HCl extracts and pH 7.5 filtrates. The constant mound modifications by termites
(rebuilding and extending part of the mound, bringing material from inside to the
outside), could explain the lack of differences in concentration of elements between new
and old parts of termitaria.
While in the perchloric/nitric extracts there was a significant decrease in iron in the new
materials, the opposite was observed for soluble iron in the pepsin-HCI extracts where
a significant increase of soluble iron was found in the new material (Table 3.38). No
significant differences in soluble iron and ionisable iron were observed in pH 7.5
filtrates, although their mean~ were higher in the new materials. In the old material the
soluble iron mean was 0.44 ± 0.42 mg/lOOg while in the new material it was 2.24 ± 1.96 mg/IOOg. The lack of significant differences in soluble iron and ionisable iron in
pH 7.5 filtrates was mainly due to the high standard deviations from the means. In
respect to the preference of Aboriginals for the new parts of the mounds over the old
parts, the soluble iron increase in pepsin-HCl extracts in the new parts of termitaria
could be of importance, as it could be related to the Aboriginal usage during pregnancy
where the iron needs are markedly increased (see section 4.4.3). No other increases in
major elements were detected in pepsin-HCI extracts and pH 7.5 filtrates.
4.4.2.2
199
Comparison Between Different Species Mound Composition at the
Same Site
A) Comparison Between Tumulitermes pastinator and Tumulitermes hasti/is
Mounds Composition in Daly River Site 1.
With the exception of aluminium and sodium mean contents in pepsin-HCI extracts,
which were of the same order in both Tumulitermes pastinator and Tumulitermes hastilis
mounds, the mean concentrations of elements were higher in Tumulitermes hastilis than
in Tumu/itermes pastinator mounds (Table 3.35 and Appendix FI). In particular, the
calcium mean was three times higher in pepsin-HCI extracts and pH 7.5 filtrates; the
soluble iron was 16 times higher in Tumulitermes hastilis mounds (0.13 versus 2.07
mg/1 OOg) and the ionisable iron was not detected in the pH 7.5 filtrates of Tumulitermes
pastinator mounds but had a relatively high concentration of 0.54 mg/1 OOg in
Tumulitermes hastilis mounds. The potassiwn which was highly significantly higher in
Tumulitermes pastinator mounds in perchloric/nitric extracts, was 1.5 times higher in
Tumulitermes hastilis mounds in pepsin-HCI extracts and pH 7.5 filtrates.
The concentrations of selected elements in pepsin-HCl extracts and pH 7.5 filtrates
would not appear to be the reasons why the Aboriginals prefer Tumulitermes pastinator
mounds over Tumulitermes hastilis mounds at site I, as the concentrations of elements
were generally higher in the extracts from Tumulitermes hastilis mounds.
B) Comparison Between Nasutitermes triodiae and Tumulitermes pastinator
Mounds Composition in Daly River Site 3 and Howard Springs Site 6.
In the perchloric/nitric extracts (Table 3.20) significant and highly significant increases
were found in Nasutitermes triodiae mounds at site 3 in all but three of the selected
elements (calciwn, copper and zinc). However, only two elements (magnesiwn and
sodiwn) remained higher in pepsin-HCl extracts (magnesiwn and sodiwn) and three in
pH 7.5 filtrates (magnesiwn, soluble iron and ionisable iron) than in Tumulitermes
200
pastinator mounds (Tables 3.37 and Appendix F2). No soluble iron or ionisable iron
was detected in pH 7.5 filtrates of Tumulitermes pastinator mounds and only a small
amount was detected in Nasutitermes triodiae mounds (0.36 ± 0.38 and 0.14 ± 0.17
mg/lOOg respectively). In pepsin-HCl extracts, higher concentrations of copper and zinc
were present in Tumulitermes pastinator mounds and in pH 7.5 filtrates aluminium and
copper contents were higher than in Nasutitermes triodiae mounds. The other selected
element concentrations were of the same order in both species.
The small amount of soluble and ionisable iron found in pH 7.5 filtrates from
Nasutitermes triodiae mounds and the increase in magnesium and sodium could possibly
be related to the Aboriginals preference for Nasutitermes triodiae mounds in favour of
Tumulitermes pastinator mounds for nutritional! medicinal purpose.
In Howard Springs site 6, when comparing Nasutitermes triodiae and Tumulitermes
pastinator selected element composition in perchloric/nitric extracts, it was found that
only calcium was highly significantly higher in Nasutitermes triodiae mounds and
aluminium, iron and manganese were significantly higher in Tumulitermes pastinator
mounds (Table 3.22, Appendix F6). This contrasts with the concentrations of calcium,
soluble iron, ionisable iron, potassium, magnesium and sodium in pepsin-HCI extracts
and calcium. soluble iron, ionisable iron, potassium and magnesium in pH 7.5 filtrates
being higher in Nasutitermes triodiae than in Tumulitermes pastinator mounds (Table
3.40). At site 6, low concentrations of soluble iron (0.03 ± 0.05 mg/lOOg) and no
detectable ionisable iron in pH 7.5 filtrates was found in. Tumulitermes pastinator
mounds.
While no general pattern was found for the concentrations of selected elements between
the two species at the two sites in perchloric/nitric extracts, in the bioavailable extracts,
when differences occurred in element concentrations between the two species, the
majority of increases were found in Nasutitermes triodiae mounds.
201
C) Comparison Between Amitermes vitiosus and Nasutitermes triodiae Mound
Composition in Daly River Site 4.
In the perchloric!nitric extracts the Amitermes vitiosus mounds results indicated higher
element contents (calcium, cobalt, potassium, manganese and sodium: see Table 3.21)
than in Nasutitermes triodiae mounds. In the pepsin-HCI extracts, Amitermes vitiosus
mounds had higher concentrations of aluminium, calcium, cobalt, copper, soluble iron
(1 0 times), ionisable iron (6 times) than the Nasutitermes triodiae mounds while
potassium and sodium were higher in Nasutitermes triodiae mounds (Table 3.39 and
Appendix F4). This contrasts with the concentration of elements between the two
species in pH 7.5 filtrates where out of ten selected elements, seven were found in
similar concentration in both species and three (aluminium, potassium and magnesium)
were higher in Nasutitermes triodiae mounds (Table 3.39).
The Aboriginal preference for Nasutitermes triodiae mounds over Amitermes vitiosus
mounds may possibly be related to the higher potassium and magnesium content in a
potentially bioavailable fonn in Nasutitermes triodiae mounds, to the higher clay content
(section 4.2.8.3) and to the fact that it is physically easier to sample Nasutitermes
triodiae mounds than Amitermes vitiosus mounds.
4.4.2.3 Comparison Between Mound Composition of the Same Species at
Different Sites
A) Comparison Between Mound Composition ofAmitermes vitiosus at Different
Sites
In perchloric/nitric extracts all the selected element concentrations were significantly
different between sites with narrow ranges of variation in aluminium, copper, iron,
magnesium and manganese and larger variations for calcium, potassium, sodium and zinc
(Table 3.29 and section 4.2.9.1). In pepsin-HCI extracts (Tables 3.36 and 3.39;
Appendix F7), a narrow range of variation was observed for aluminium, potassium,
sodium and wide variations were observed for soluble iron (at site 5: 18.2 ± 2.5
202
mg/IOOg and at site 2: !57± 77 mg/IOOg), ionisable iron, calcium (at site 5: 119 ± 15
mg/IOOg and at site 2: 24.2 ± 8.7 mg/IOOg), and magnesium in pH 7.5 filtrates.
In relation to the Aboriginal use (selection of Amitermes vitiosus mounds at Daly River
site 2 and rejection of Amitermes vitiosus mounds at site 4), the differences in selected
element composition do not indicate reasons for selection at one site over another, as the
rejected site (site 4) had higher soluble iron, ionisable iron, calcium and magnesium
concentrations than mounds at site 2.
B) Comparison Between Mound Composition of Tumulitermes pastinator and
Nasutitermes triodiae at Different Sites
In Tumulitermes pastinator (Tables 3.35, 3.37 and 3.40; Appendix F8) and Nasutitermes
triodiae mounds (Tables 3.37, 3.39 and 3.40; Appendix F9), important variations in
selected elements between sites were observed. For example in Tumulitermes pastinator
the soluble iron varied in p~psin-HCI extracts from 8.68 ± 1.43 mg/lOOg in site 6 to
18.0 ± 10.0 mg/IOOg in site 3 (Tables 3.37 and 3.40). In both species, a high content
in perchloric/ nitric extracts was not necessarily followed by a high content in
bioavailable extracts. For example, in the perchloric/nitric extract iron content was
higher in Nasutitermes triodiae at site 6 than at site 4 by a factor of 2.6 and the soluble
iron content was similar in pepsin-HCl extracts and markedly different in pH 7.5 filtrates
where it was 15 times higher in site 4.
4.4.2.4 General Overview: Comparison Between Mound Composition of
Different Species Studied at Different Sites and their Relation to the
Adjacent Soil (0-lOcm)
As in perchloric/nitric extracts (section 4.2.10.2), the majority of selected element
content in the mounds compared to the surrounding soil was higher in pepsin-HCl
extracts and pH 7.5 filtrates (Table 3.43; Appendices Fl-F6). While the differences
between the soil and the termite mound rarely exceeded 150 % in the perchloric/nitric
203
extracts (Table 3.29), it frequently exceeded 200 % in the pepsin-HCl extracts and pH
7.5 filtrates (Table 3.43). In pH 7.5 filtrates, soluble iron was never detected in the
soils but was present in most mounds (Table 3.34). The selected element increases
observed in the mounds (section 4.2.1 0.2, Figure 3.19) have been attributed to different
factors (section 1.2.4) and amongst them the termite use of richer sub-soil material97, and
the incorporation of saliva, excreta and vegetation in the mound by termite activities.
The increased differences between mounds and soils in pepsin-HCI extracts and pH 7.5
filtrates could reflect the higher bio-availability of elements derived from plants and
termite by-products.
Although it is difficult to compare the results of this study with those in the literature
as the methods used are so different (section 1.2.4.3), similar trends have been observed.
For example, Lee and Wood (197lb)98 reported, at Daly River, a higher total potassium
concentration (XRF) in the soil with 2950 mg/lOOg compared to 1730 mgi!OOg in a
Nasutitermes triodiae mound; and the opposite was found following exchangeable
extraction: 5.9 and 39.1 mg/lOOg in soil and mound respectively (Table 1.5). In tltis
study at Daly River site 4 the concentration of potassium in perchloric/nitric extracts was
551 ± 144 mg/IOOg in the soil and 687 ± 44 mg/1 OOg in Nasutitermes triodiae mounds,
which represented a 20 % increase. In the pepsin-HCI extracts, the potassium
concentration was 5.85 mg/lOOg remained in soil and 54.9 mg/lOOg in mounds (or 9
times more in the mounds). In Okello-Oloya et al (1985)136, the same trend was
observed between soil and mounds for sodium but not for potassium where the soil
mound ratio for different analyses (HF and BaCliNH4Cl) remained constant (Table 1.7).
In Davies and Baillie (1988)40 study in Sabah, Northern Borneo, they found that
although aluminium was higher in Macrotermes sp. mounds than soil (515 and 447 ppm
respectively) following digestion in hydrochloric acid after pre-ignition at 800°C. \Vhile
with potassium chloride extraction the levels were much higher in soil than mounds:
33.0 and 3.9 me/lOOg respectively. Similar observations have not been made in this
study, the aluminium in perchloric/nitric extracts was generally higher in mounds than
in soils (Table 3.29); in pepsin-HCl extracts it was higher in the mounds at certain sites
204
and lower in other sites and in pH 7.5 filtrates, when detected, it was higher in mounds
(Table 3.43).
A general increase in 'bioavailable' element concentration in tennitaria compared to the
soils and no soluble iron or ionisable iron being detected in pH 7.5 filtrates from soil
(Tables 3.41 and 3.42) could be contributing factors in explaining the Aboriginal
preference for mounds over soils.
4.4.2.5 'Bioavailable' Composition of Different Mounds at Different Sites in
Relation to Human Needs and Foods.
Vermeer ( 1971) 185 reported very low concentrations of "available" minerals in 0.1 N HCl
extract of a popular Ghanian clay, with calcium, potassium and magnesium values of 12,
16.5 and 3.1 rog/lOOg respectively. Their calcium and magnesium values are close to
those found in this study in soils (Table 3.41) and the potassium value is closer to the
mound value found in this work. In Alabama, Edwards et al (1964)47, analysing some
clay eaten by pregnant women of the rural communities found that 0. 03 mg/1 OOg of iron
and 0.20 mgi!OOg of calcium were available (0.1 N HCl). The quantity of clay
consumed varied from 6 to 130 g per day in Alabama. This is comparable to the
quantity eaten by the Aboriginals in the Northern Territory (section 1.1.2.1.2).
The daily average quantity of termite mound consumption can only provide a small
portion of the RD!s for adults (Table 1.2). For example, if 50 g of termitaria is eaten
(Table 3.41), 9 % of calcium, 7 % of copper and 6 % of magnesium RDis could be
covered. As mentioned in section 1.2 the RDis exceed the actual daily nutrient
requirements to take into consideration the variations in absorption and metabolism. The
daily losses are much smaller, for example, to cover the daily calcium loss in an adult
male, 100-150 mg of calcium are necessary (section 1.2). If all the calcium present in
the pepsin·HCl extracts was available (Table 3.41), one would need to eat 250-350 g of
termitaria daily. To satisfy potassium, sodium and zinc needs, much greater quantities
would be needed.
205
Table 4.1 shows the relationship between termitaria, Aboriginal bushfoods and other
common food is given in Table 4.1. However, one must be very cautious in trying to
compare termite mounds with other Aboriginal bushfoods, not only are the methods of
extraction very different (dry ashing or nitric/sulfuric acid extracts138} but also the
organic composition of food compared to mineral/organic composition of termitaria
render the bushfood more available to humans.
TABLE 4.1 Composition of selected Australian Aboriginal bushfoods30 and Western foods18 in mg per lOOg edible portion.
Bush food Ca Cu Fe K Mg Na Zn
Dioscorea bulbifer 182 0.9 2.8 346 224 287 1.1 (Long yam, raw)
Ipomea graminea 4 0.6 3.0 293 41 31 1.1 (cooked)
Portulaca oleracea 112 0.9 13.0 100 73 20 3.0 (as damper}
Trichosurus 25 0.7 10.3 495 25 147 4.2 arnhemensis (possum, cooked flesh)
Western food Ca Fe K Na
Whole wheat flour 27.6 3.81 312 3.2
Whole milk 120 0.08 160 so Lentils (Boiled) 10.5 2.2 217 9.4
Almonds 247 4.23 856 5.8
Compared to the termitaria minimum, maximum and mean values in pepsin. HCl extracts
(Table 3.41), the calcium, copper and magnesium values in bushfoods are of the same
order, the sodium and potassium are always higher in bushfood and the soluble iron and
ionisable iron are higher in termitaria.
As termitaria are numerous and easily collected, they could act as a supplement for the
elements calcium, copper, magnesium, manganese and iron and complement bushfoods.
206
4.4.2.6 Soluble Iron and lonisable Iron in relation to the human needs
As seen in Table 3.34 and Figure 3.18. only a minute fraction (if any) of the iron
present in perchloric/nitric extract is present in the pH 7.5 filtrates and no significant
differences have been observed between new and old material of termitaria in pH 7.5
filtrates (Table 3.38). In the soil samples. no soluble iron was detected in pH 7.5
filtrates and this was the case for all the sites studied (Table 3.34). This would indicate
that the increased iron found (section 4.2.10.2) in the mounds compared to the soil,
could be of a more bioavailable nature. The iron increase in the mound could originate
from:
a richer sub~soil;
the increased clay, as seen in section 4.2.2, which in the mound is positively
correlated to the clay content;
the organic-rich excreta incorporated in the mound with the excreta coming from
the digestion of plant material.
In contrast to results of Edwards et al (1964t7 results for "available iron" in clay, in
which they indicated that only 0.03 mg/IOOg was available, the results of this study
show markedly higher soluble iron in pH 7.5 filtrates (up to 5.21 mg/IOOg in
Nasutitermes triodiae mound samples at Daly River site 4), (see Table 3.34). However,
what Edwards eta/ (1964t7 called available iron was the quantity of iron at gastric juice
pH (1.35) not at the duodenum pH 7.5. The iron absorption occurs in the duodenum
and upper jejunum where the pH is around 7.51n and therefore a more accurate estimate
of "available iron" would be obtained from the soluble iron present in a pH 7.5 filtrate
as indicated by Narasinga Rao & Prabhavathi (1978)122• If Edwards eta/ (1964)47 were
to have measured the iron at pH 7.5 (by neutralising their pH 1.35 extract), most
probably, no iron would have been detected. As observed (and expected) in this study
as the pH was raised from 1.35 to 7.5 the concentration of iron decreased markedly
(Table 3.34).
207
Narasinga Rao & Prabhavathi (1978)122 calculated the amount ofbioavailable iron using
a "prediction" equation considering the percent ionisable iron at pH 7.5: Y = 0.4827 +
0.4707X, where Y is the percent iron absorption in adult males and X is the percent
ionisable iron at pH 7.5. For example, using data from their research, if the total iron
in rice is 1.8 mg/lOOg, and the percent ionisable iron in pH 7.5 filtrate is 15.0 %, the
percent iron absorption in an adult male is calculated as (0.4827 + 0.4707 x 15) which
equals 7.5 %and the quantity assimilated would be (1.8 x 7.5/100) = 0.135 mg/lOOg;
and a similar calculation for lentils indicates that the quantity of iron assimilated would
be 0.62 mg/1 OOg. As the daily loss of iron for males is 1 mg/day (Table 1.2), these
results would indicate that 740 g of rice or 160 g of lentil would be required to meet the
daily iron needs of adult males.
The Narasinga Rao & Prabhavathi (1978}122 method can be used to ascertain the
bioavailability of elements from edible food which have an in vivo absorption of 1.36
to 3.8 %. Outside that range, the relationship between the in vivo and in vitro methods
needs to be determined. Iron absorption from termitaria does not lie in this range. If
the in vivo iron absorption in termite mound was 1.36 %, this would result for
Tumulitermes pastinator mound sampled at site 1, in 18.5 ± 2.0 mg/lOOg available iron,
or by applying the Narasinga Rao & Prabhavathi (1978)122 "prediction" equation, 38.3
% ionisable iron at pH 7.5; but in this study no ionisable iron was detected in the pH
7.5 filtrates. The termitaria studied had a very high 'total' iron content: 1321-5195
mg/lOOg (Table 3.34) and very low percent of ionisable iron at pH 7.5 (for example,
0.038% for Nasutitermes triodiae mound samples at site 4). If the "prediction" equation
were to be used, it would result in a percent of iron absorbed of 0.4827 + 0.4707 x
0.038 = 0.5 % or 1539 mg/lOOg x 0.5 = 770 mg/lOOg available iron. This clearly
shows that the "prediction" equation is not applicable in this case and the relationship
between the in vivo and in vitro methods still needs to be determined for termitaria.
The quantity of iron available from termite mound might be estimated from the
concentration of ionisable iron present at pH 7.5. For example, it was shown previously
that 0.27 mg/IOOg of ionisable iron from rice gives 0.135 mg/1 OOg of available iron and
1.24 mgllOOg in lentil gave 0.62 mg/IOOg; this indicated that 50% of the ionisable iron
208
was bioavailable. As the form of iron in termitaria is not known, it is difficult to apply
that estimate to clay, although our analyses indicated that the ionisable iron form may
be derived from plant material excreted by the termite and therefore could be similar to
that of other cereal products. On this basis, up to 0.25 mg/1 OOg of iron from termite
mound could be bioavailable to an adult male. This may seem negligible considering
that the Daly River Aborigines eat only around 30-60 g of tennitaria per day. But the
human average daily loss ranges from only 1 mg/day for men and post-menopausal
women to 5-7 mg/day in women during pregnancy. A further consideration is that the
iron bioavailability increases with a number of factors (section 1.2) such as:
-ascorbic acid which is present in many bushfoods30: Terminaliaferdinandiana (Kakadu
plum), Phyllanthus emb/ica (Indian gooseberry) and Dioscorea bulbifera (cheeky yam);
- the iron status of an individual and
- in women during the second and third trimesters of pregnancy.
It is possible, therefore, that even such small amounts could contribute to the overall iron
need of an individual, especially if they are iron deficient and if other dietary input is
inadequate. This may especially be the case with pregnant women, which is when the
termitaria is mostly consumed in Daly River.
CHAPTER FIVE
CONCLUSIONS
209
5 CONCLUSIONS
This study is the first detailed investigation of the possible nutritionaVmedicinal value
of termite mounds consumed by the Aboriginal people. The most common reasons
given by the Northern Territory Aboriginals for termitaria consumption are to treat
gastro-enteric disorders (including diarrhoea) and during pregnancy. This suggests that
a number of elements may be of importance, in particular clay and minerals such as
calcium, iron, magnesium, potassium and sodium. The clay and in particular the kaolin
fraction, may act as an absorbent anti-diarrhoeal and may help to alleviate digestive
disorders. The high concentration of elements in the mounds could provide a potential
nutrient source, mainly during pregnancy when the needs for elements such as iron are
increased.
In respect to the clay content, this study found that at all sites and for all species, the
mounds selected by the Aboriginals had a higher percentage of clay content than the
adjacent top soil (0-10 em). The differences were more pronounced for Tumulitermes
pastinator and Nasutitermes triodiae than for Amitermes vitiosus mounds. The average
clay content of soil was 12.9 ± 4.4 % and for Amitermes vitiosus, Tumulitermes
pastinator and Nasutitermes triodiae mounds was: 16.3 ± 4.6, 20.8 ± 6.2 and 22.8 ±
4.2 % respectively. Interestingly, the species most favoured by the Daly River
Aboriginals (Nasutitermes triodiae), had the highest mean clay content. Differences
occurred between mounds of the same species at most sites and between the same
species at different sites for Nasutitermes triodiae and Tumulitermes pastinator.
However, clay concentration remained at approximately 16% forAmitermes vitiosus at
all sites. In relation to the Aboriginals preference for a particular species at the
exclusion of another at a same site an~ of new material versus old, the study found an
increase in clay content in the selected mound species but no difference was found
between inaterial of different ages.
In the Northern Territory, the dominant mineral in clays is kaolin followed by illites13u.
Mineralogical analyses of termitaria in the Northern Territory have indicated a high
percentage of kaolin type clay with, for example, 65-85 % kaolin in the clay fraction of
210
Nasutitermes triodiae mound in Daly River''. Lee and Wood (197la)" indicated that
the kaolin ratio was higher in subsoil than topsoil. As half of the mounds they studied
and in particular Nasutitennes triodiae mounds came from subsoil, it is not surprising
that the kaolin ratio was higher in mounds than topsoil. The fact that the kaolin appears
to be a major part of the clay fraction of the termitaria studied is supported in this study
by the fact that the clay had a negative correlation with potassium and magnesium 11•
The importance of kaolin in termitaria can be inferred from the fact that it has long been
used for the treatment of gastric-disorders in both traditional and modem
pharmacologies178 (it is the active ingredient in the anti-diarrhoeal medication
kaopectate186). Because of the low cation exchange capacity (less than 10 me/lOOg),
kaolin does not usually interfere with the absorption of iron186•
Undoubtedly, one of the most remarkable aspects of termite mounds is their high
concentrations of elements and in particular calcium, iron, magnesium and potassium.
Unfortunately, only a small proportion of the total element present in termitaria is
capable of being used. For most elements, the bioavailability varies and depends on the
element itself, on the nature of the whole diet and on factors inherent to the individual19•
In this study an in vitro method was chosen to simulate the digestive process of the
stomach (pepsin-HCl digestion, pH 1.35) and that of the small intestine (neutralisation
of the pepsin-HCl extracts to pH 7.5 by NaOH). Generally, the percentage recovery of
calcium between perchloric/nitric extractions and pepsin-HCl extractions from mounds
chosen by Aboriginals was very high (82 %), but for all the other elements it was much
lower with less than 5 % for potassium and less than 2 % for iron. A number of
elements (aluminium, cobalt, copper, iron, zinc) were precipitated during neutralisation
to pH 7. 5. Less than 0.1 % of the iron present in perchloric/nitric extracts is found after
the pepsin-HCl extraction acid neutralisation. Calcium recovery remained high even
after neutralisation (73 %).
Although the termite mound selected element composition reflects primarily the
composition of the adjacent soil (0-lOcm), the selected element content in the
perchloric/nitric extracts was generally higher in the mounds than in the surrounding top
~ --~ -------------
211
soil. The differences between termitaria and soil was even more important in pepsin
HCl extracts and pH 7.5 filtrates. This could reflect the higher bioavailability of termite
byproducts added to the mounds. Overall, in per~hloric/nitric extracts, highly significant
differences in the majority of selected elements were observed between mounds at nearly
all sites but no significant correlations were found between the size of the mounds and
the selected elements concentrations and no highly significant differences in selected
element concentrations were found according to the position in mounds eaten by the
Aboriginal communities of Elliott and Daly River.
The differences in selected element concentrations, in the pepsin-HCI extracts and pH
7.5 filtrates, cannot always explain the Aboriginal preference of a species at the
exclusion of another at the same site or a particular species (Amitermes vitiosus) at one
site (site 2) but not at another (site 4). In relation to the Aboriginal way of sampling
termitaria, that is, preference for new material, no significant differences were observed
between age of mound material; the only exception. being the soluble iron in
Nasutitermes triodiae mounds, which was increased by 44 % in the new parts in the
pepsin-HCl extracts. This contrasted with the perchloric/nitric extract concentrations,
where the iron content was 23 % higher in the old parts. In relation to the Aboriginal
use of termitaria during pregnancy, the increase in soluble iron concentration in the part
of the mound they favoured (new material) could be of importance.
The concentrations of elements from the water "infusion" extract from Amitermes
vitiosus mounds (Elliott, site 5) were minimal compared to the human needs but,
nevertheless, they could contribute to the global intakes, especially calcium. On the other
hand, the finer fraction which includes clay, preferentially selected in the infusion could
be beneficial against gastro-intestinal disorders. The hot "tea" could also provide some
kind of relaxation to the nursing mother and therefore promote the "let-down reflex".
In relation to the human needs, the daily average quantity of termite mound consumption
can only provide a small portion of the RDis for adults. For example, if 50 g of
termitaria were eaten, less than 5 % of the RDis for calcium, copper and magnesium
could be obtained. As the RDis exceed the actual daily nutrient requirements it is
212
possible that a higher fraction of the needs could be covered. It was estimated that up
to 0.25 mg/lOOg of iron from termite mound could be bioavailable to an adult male, as
the daily average loss for men is only 1 mg/day, 30-60 g of termitaria could contribute
to the daily requirements.
There are four factors that have been identified in this study which could contribute to
an explanation as to the Aboriginal preference for termitaria over soils:
a general increase in concentration of selected elements in perchloric/nitric
extracts
an increase in clay content which appeared to be largely composed of kaolin
a higher concentration of 'bioavailable' elements
soluble iron and ionisable iron were present in most mounds whereas not
detected in soils.
There are of course other possible reasons for selecting termitaria in preference to the
adjacent soil (0-1 Ocm), such as,
the belief that soil prOcessed by animals is considered to be safer than that which
is not processed 100;
the inclusion of termite secretions in mounds could also be beneficial: for
example, saliva is used as building material. Unfortunately, little is known of
the saliva composition93 but it sustains larvae, functional reproductives and
soldiers of some species;
the presence of organic constituents: for example, Pomeroy (1983) reported that
denitrifier micro-organisms release nutrients into the mound by their activity;
many fungi are associated with termites, for example, fungi have been found on
the head, abdomen and legs of Nasutitermes sp. m, when the bodies of termites
become contaminated with fungal spores, these spores are often deposited in the
mound158• In Africa, Sands (1970)158 reported that some fungi associated with
termites have been found to possess medicinal properties.
The termitaria eating habit seems therefore to satisfy a number of functions and the
results of the bioavailable analyses indicated that the low concentrations of elements
present could contribute to the RDis, especially if the individual is deficient and if other
213
dietary input is inadequate. But it is also important to remember that there are
deleterious effects in that eating termitaria could be a substitute for food which would
provide more nutrients and cases of partial obstruction of the colon due to excess eating
of termitaria have been reported17•
Since the bioavailability of elements is influenced by a number of factors, a more
complete understanding of the processes will be required involving detailed analyses of
the diet of the Aboriginals, the form of iron present in the termitaria and a study of the
digestive physiology. Tuckerman and Turco (1983)183 indicated that iron(III) is
dissolved in the stomach acid, bound by gastro-ferrin and then reduced to ionisable iron.
The ionisable iron is then absorbed by an active transport mechanism in the duodenum
and upper jejunum and by passive diffusion in the more distal portions of the digestive
tract. As significant concentrations of iron are present in the termitaria (between 7.33
to 245 mg/IOOg of soluble iron in pepsin-HCl extracts) it may be important to determine
how much is bound to gastro-ferrin and reduced to ionisable iron, if this is in fact a
mechanism for iron absorption, as this could provide a significant contribution towards
iron intake.
And finally, as Edwards (1964}47 observed, it would be of interest to explore the possible
presence of reducing substances in clay which may facilitate the absorption of iron from
clay and in this context from termitaria.
REFERENCES
215
REFERENCES
1. AGARVAL, V.B. (1978). Some characteristics of tennitaria soil of Odontotermes
microdentatus Roonwal and Sensanna, in relation to their surroundings. In: Soil biology
and ecology in India, Proceedings of the first all India symposium held at UAS
Bangalore, 22-26 September 1976, (eds.) C.A. Edwards & G.K. Veeresh, UAS technical
series no.22, pp. 199-202. Hebbal, Bangalore.
2. ALLEN, S.E., GRIMSHAW, H.M, PARKINSON, J.A. & QUARMBY, C. (1974).
Chemical analysis of ecological materials. (ed.) S.E. Allen. John Wiley & Sons, New
York.
3. ALLOWAY, B.J. (1990). Soil processes and the behaviour of metals. In: Heavy metals
in soils, (ed.) B.J. Alloway, pp. 7-28. Blackie & Son Ltd, Glasgow.
4. ANDERSEN, A.N. & JACKELYN, P. (1993). Ter"!ites of the Top End. CSIRO,
Australia.
5. ANDERSEN, A.N. & LONSDALE, W.M. (1990). Herbivory by insects in Australian
tropical savannas: a review. Journal of Biogeography, 17: 433-444.
6. ANDERSON, J.M. & WOOD, T.G. (1984). Mound composition and soil modification
by two soil-feeding tennites (Tennitinae, Tennitidae) in a riparian Nigerian forest.
Pedobiologia, 26: 77-82.
7. ARSHAD, M.A. (1981}. Physical and chemical properties of tennite mounds of two
species of macrotermes (Isoptera, Tennitidae) and the surrounding soils of the semi arid
savanna of Kenya. Soil Science, 132: 161-174.
8. AVIOLI, L.V. (1980). Major minerals: (a) Calcium and phosphorus. In: Modern
nutrition in health and disease, sixth edition, ( eds.) R.S. Goodhart & M.E. Shils, pp.
294-309. Lea & Febiger, Philadelphia.
216
9. BACHELlER, G. (1977). Mise au point sur !'action des termites dans les soils. Bulletin
de /'Association Fram;aise pour /'Etude du Soil, 1: 3-12.
10. BANERJEE, B. (1975). Growth of mounds and foraging territories in Odontotermes
redemanni (Wasmann) (lsoptera: Tennitidae). Insectes Sociaux, Paris, 22: 207-212.
11. BARBER, A. (1984). Soil nutrient bioavai/ability. John Wiley & Sons, United States
of America.
12. BARBIER. M.L., de LA ROCQUE, F., FERRE, P., MEN GUY, C. & FOURNET, J.P.
(1986). Malnutrition, retard staturo-ponderal, carence en zinc. anemie et g6ophagie.
Annales de Pediatrie, Paris, 33: 51-54.
13. BARONI URBANI, C., JOSENS,G. & PEAKIN, G.J. (1978). Empirical data and
demographic parameters. In: Production ecology of ants and termites, (ed.) Brian M.V,
pp. 5 - 44. Cambridge University Press, Camb~dge.
14. BARR, A., CHAPMAN, I., SMITH, N., & BEVERIDGE, M. (1988). Traditional bush
medicines: an Aboriginal pharmacopoeia. Greenhouse Publications, Richmond, Victoria.
15. BASALINGAPPA, S., MAHALE, V.B., KULKARNI, V.H. & BIRADAR, N.S. (1978).
Chemical components of the mound soil and that of royal chamber of the termite
Odontotermes assmuthi Holmgren (Termitidae: Isoptera). In: Soil biology and ecology
in India, Proceedings of the first all India symposium held at VAS Bangalore, 22-26
September 1976, (eds.) C.A. Edwards & G.K. Veeresh, UAS technical series No.22, pp.
203-206. Hebbal, Bangalore.
16. BATCHELOR COLLEGE. (1984). Bush foods of our communities. Educational media
unit Batchelor college, Bachelor. pp. 1-50.
17. BATESON, E.M. & LEBROY, T. (1978). Clay eating by Aboriginals of the Northern
Territory. The Medical Journal of Australia, Special supplement on Aboriginal health:
10, 1: 1-3.
217
18. BECK, M.E. (1977). Nutrition and dietetics for nurses. Livingstone nursing texts, fifth
edition, pp. 214-222. Churchill Livingstone, Edinburgh, New York.
19. BENDER. A.E. (1989). Nutritional significance of bioavailability. In: Nutrient
availability: chemical and biological aspects, (eds.) D. Southgate, I. Johnson & G.R.
Fenwick, special publication No.72, pp. 3-9. Institute of Food Research, Norwich.
20. BEUTLER, E. (1980). Major minerals, (c): Iron. In: Modern nutrition in health and
disease, (eds.) R.S. Goodhart & M.E. Shils, Sixth edition, pp. 324-354. Lea & Febiger,
Philadelphia.
21. BIRKILL, A. (1985). Termite ecology in a tropical savanna grazed by cattle. Honours
thesis, University of South Australia. Flinders.
22. BODOT, P. (1967). Cycles saisonniers d'activite collective des termites des savanes de
basse COte-d'Ivoire. lnsectes Sociaux, Paris, 14: 359-3~8.
23. BOUILLON, A. (1970). Termites of the Ethiopian region. In: Biology of termites, (eds.)
K. Krishna & F.M. Weesner, Vo1.2, pp. 200-280. Academic Press, New York.
24. BOYER. P. (1948). Surles materiaux composant Ia termitiere gCante de Bellicositermes
rex. Comptes Rendus Hebdomadaire des Seances de I 'Academie des Sciences, Paris,
227: 488-490.
25. BOYER, P. (1956). Etude pCdologique de Ia repartition et du dosage des bases totales
dans les materiaux de Ia termitii:re de Bellicositermes natalensis (Hav. ). Comptes Rend us
Hebdomadaire des seances de I'Academie des Sciences, Paris, 242: 801-803.
26. BOYER. P. (1971). Les diffCrents aspects de !'action des termites sur les sols tropicaux.
In: La vie dans les sols, aspects nouveaux. Etudes experimentales, (ed.) P. Pesson, pp.
279-334. Gauthier Villars, Paris.
27. BOYER, P. (1973). Action de certain termites constructeurs sur l'evolution des sols
tropicaux. Annates des &iences Naturelles, Zoologie, Paris, 15: 329-498.
218
28. BRAITHWAITE, R.W. (1990). More than a home for white ants. Australian Natural
History, 23: 306-313.
29. BRAITIIWAITE, R.W., MILLER, L. & WOOD, J.T. (1988). The structure oftennite
communities of the Austalian tropics. Australian Journal of Ecology, 13: 375-391.
30. BRAND, J.C., RAE, C., McDONNELL, J., LEE, A., CHERJKOFF, V & TRUSWELL,
A.S. (1983). The nutritional composition of Australian Aboriginal bushfoods. Food
Technology in Australia, 35: 293-298.
31. BREZNAK, J.A., BRJLL, W.J., MERTINS, J.W. & COPPEL, H.C. (1973). Nitrogen
fixation in termites. Nature, London, 244: 577-580.
32. BURCHFIELD, S.R., ELICH, M.S. & WOODS, S.C. (1977). Geophagia in response
to stress and arthritis. Physiology & Behavior! 19: 265-267.
33. CAVDAR, A.O., ARCASOY, A., CIN, S., BABACAN, E. & GOZDASOGLU, S.
(1983). Geophagia in Turkey: iron and zinc deficiency, iron and zinc absorption studies
and response to treatment with zinc in geophagia cases. Progress in Clinical and
Biological Research. 129: 71-97.
34. CMELIK, S.H.W. (1971). Composition of the lipids from the guts of termite queens.
Journal of Insect Physiology, 17: 1349-1358.
35. 'CMELIK, S.H.W. (1972). Some properties of the neutral lipids from the workers of the
termite Macrotermesjalciger. Insect Biochemistry, 2: 361-366.
36. CORNABY, B.W. & KNEBS, J.E. (1975). Propiedades qutm1cas de los suelos
ferruginosos de nidos de termites ('1comejen") y de las areas adyacentes, en Venezuela.
Turrialba, 25: 202-207.
37. COVENTRY, R.J. & FElT, D.E.R (1979). A pipette and sieve method of particle-size
analysis and some observations on its efficiency. Division of Soils, CSIRO, Australia,
Report No. 38: 1-26.
219
38. COVENTRY, R.J., HOLT, J.A. & SINCLAIR,,D.F. (1988). Nutrient cycling by mound
building termites in low-fertility soils of semi-arid tropical Australia. Australian Journal
of Soil Research, 26: 375-390.
39. DAVIDSON, S., PASSMORE, R. & BROCK, J.F. (1973). Human nutrition ond
dietetics. Fifth edition. Churchill Livingston, Edinburgh & London.
40. DAVIES, A. G. & BAILLIE, !.C. (1988). Soil-eating by red leaf monkeys (Presbytis
rubicanda) in Sabah, Northern Borneo. Biotropica, 20; 252-258.
41. DEXTEIT, R. (1976). L 'argile qui guerit, memento de medecine naturelle. (ed.) R.
Dextreit. Vivre en hannonie, Paris.
42. DRUMMOND, H. (1886). On the termite as the tropical analogue of the Earth-Worm.
Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 13: 137-146.
43. EASTWELL, H.D. (1979). A pica epidemic: a price for sedentarism among Australian
ex-hunters-gatherers. Psychiatry, 42: 264-273.
44. EASTWELL, H.D. (1984). Pica: eating non-food. Aboriginal Health Workers, 8: 23-24.
45. EDWARDS, A.A., MATHURA, C.B & EDWARDS, C.H. (1983). Effects ofmatemal
geophagia on infant and juvenil rats. Journal of the Medical Association, 75: 895-902.
46. EDWARDS, C.H., McDONALD, S., MITCHELL, J.R., JONES, L., MASON, L.,
KEMP, A.M., LAING, D. & TRIGG, L. (1959). Clay- and Cornstarch- eating women.
Journal of the American Dietetics Association, 35: 81 0~815.
47. EDWARDS, C.H., McDONALD, S., MITCHELL, J.R., JONES, L., MASON, L., &
TRIGG, L. (1964). Effects of clay and cornstarch intake on women and their infants.
Journal of the American Dietetics Association, 44: 109-115.
48. FERRAR, P. & WATSON, J.A.L. (1970). Termites (lsoptera) associated with dung in
Australia Journal of the Australia Entomological Society, 9: 100-102.
220
49. FRANKLIN, M.A. & WIDTE, I. (1991). The history and politics of Aboriginal health.
In: The health of Aboriginal Australia, (eds.) J. Reid & P. Trompf, pp. 1-36.
50. FYFE, R.V. & GAY, F.J. (1938). The humidity of the atmosphere and the moisture
conditions within mounds of Eutermes exitiosus Hill. CSIRO, Melbourne, Pamphlet No.
82: 1-82.
51. GAY, F.J. (1970). Isoptera (termites). In: The insects of Australia, (ed.) F.G.
Waterhouse, pp. 275-293. CSIRO, University Press, Melbourne.
52. GAY, F.J. & CALABY, J.H. (1970). Termites from the Australian region. In: Biology
of termites, (eds.) K. Krishna & F.M. Weesner, Vol.2, pp. 393-448. Academic Press,
New York.
53. GELFAND, M.C., ZARATE, A. & KNEPS!llELD, J.H. (1975). Geophagia. Journal af
the American Medical Association. 234: 738-740.
54. GHILAROV, M.S. (1962). Termites of the USSR, their distribution and importance. In:
Termites in the humid tropics, Proceedings New Delhi Symposium, pp. 131-135.
UNESCO, Paris.
55. GILLMAN, L.R., JEFFERIES, M.K. & RICHARDS, G.N. (1972). Non-soil constituents
of termite (Coptotermes acinaciformis) mounds. Australian Journal of Biological
Sciences, 25: 1005-1013.
56. GONZALEZ, J.J., OWENS, W., UNGARO, P.C., WERK, E.E. & WENTZ, P.W.
(1982). Clay ingestion: a rare cause of hypokalemia. Annals of Internal Medicine, 97:
65-66.
57. GOODLAND, R. (1965). On termitaria in a savanna ecosystem. Canadian Journal of
Zoalagy, 43: 641-650.
58. GRACEY, M. (1991). Treatment of children with diarrhoea and dehydration. Health
Worker Journal, 15: 9.
221
59. GRASSE, P.P. & GHARAGOZLOU, I. (1963). L'ergastoplasme et Ia genese des
proteines dans le tissu adipeux royal du tennite A cou jaune. Comptes Rendus
Hebdomadaires des seances de l'Acadimie des Sciences, Paris, 257: 3346-3548.
60. GRASSE, P .P. & JOL Y, P. (1941 ). La teneur en matieres organiques de quelques terres
de tennitieres. Bulletin de Ia Societe Zoo/ogique de France, 66: 57-62.
61. GRASSE, P.P. & NOIROT, C. (1948). La "climatisation" de Ia tennitil~re par ses
habitants et Ia transport de l'eau. Acadimie des Sciences, Paris, 227: 868-871.
62. GRIFFITH, G.A. (1938). A note on tennite hills. East African Agricultural Journal, 4:
70-71.
63. GUTMAN, L. (1979). La geophagie: cause ou consequence d'une carence martiale? La
Nouvelle Presse Medicale, 8: 1431.
64. HADLINGTON, P. (1987). Australian termites and other common timber pests. New ' South Wales University Press, Kensington, N.S.W.
65. HALSTED, J.A. (I 968). Geophagia in man: its nature and nutritional effects. The
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 21: 1384-1393.
66. HALSTED, J.A. (1970). Geophagia. American Family Physician, 1: 83.
67. HARRIS, W.V. (1956). Tennite mound building. Insectes Sociaux, Paris. 3: 261-265.
68. HARRIS, W.V. (1961). Termites: their recognition and control. (ed.) Longmans, Green
and Co, London.
69. HAUSHELD, R.G. (1975). Report of afield visit to the Northern Territory. Department
of Health, Canberra.
222
70. HAW ASS, N.E., ALNOZHA, M.M. & KOLAWOLE, T. (1987). Adult geophagia
report of three cases with review of the literature. Tropical and Geographical Medicine,
25: 191-195.
71. HESSE, P.R. (1955). A chemical and physical study of the soils of termite mounds in
East Africa. Journal of Ecology. 43: 449-461.
72. HILL, G.F. (1942). Termites (lsoptera)from the Australian region. CSIRO, Melbourne.
73. HLADIK, C.M. (1977a). A comparative study of the feeding strategies of two sympatric
species of leaf monkeys: Presbytis senex and Presbytis entellus. In: Primate ecology,
(ed.) T.H. Clutton-Brock, pp. 324-353. Academic Press, London, New York.
74. HLADIK, C.M. (1977b). Chimpanzees of Gabon and chimpanzees of Gamba: some
comparative data on the diet. In: Primate ecology, (ed.) T.H. Clutton-Brock, pp. 481-
501. Academic Press, London, New York.
75. HLADIK, C.M. & GUEGUEN, L. (1974. Geophagie et nutrition minerale chez les
primates sauvages. Comptes Rendus Hebdomadaires des Seances de I'Acadimie des
Sciences, Paris, 279: 1393-1396.
76. HOGAN, M., VEIVERS, P.C., SLAYTOR, M. and CZOLIJ, R.T. (1988). The site of
cellulose breakdown in higher tennites (Nasutitermes walkeri and Nasutitermes
exitiosus). Journal of Insect Physiology, 34 :891-899.
77. HOLT, J.A. & COVENTRY, R.J. (1982). The effects of mound-building tennites on
some chemical properties of soils in Northeastern Australia. In: Proceedings of the 3rd
Australasian Conference on Grassland Invertebrate Ecology, Adelaide, 30 Nov-4 Dec,
(ed.) K.E. Lee, pp. 313-319. S.A. Govt. Printer, Adelaide.
78. HOLT, l.A., COVENTRY, R.l. & SINCLAIR, D.F. (1980). Some aspects of the
biology and pedological significance of mound-building tennites in a red and yellow
earth landscape near Charters Towers, North Queensland. Australian Journal of Soil
Resources, 18: 97-109.
223
79. HOLT, J.A. & COVENTRY, R.J. (1990). Nutrient cycling in Australian savanas.
Journal of Biogeography. 17: 427-432.
80. HOLT, J.A. & BASEY, J.F. (1985). Polycalic colonies of some mound building termites
(lsoptera: Tennitidae) in Northeastern Australia. Jnsectes Sociaux, Paris, 32: 61-69.
81. HUSSEY, H.H. (1975). Geophagia-induced hyperkalemia. The Journal oft he American
Medical Association, 173: 746.
82. ISAACS, J. (1987). Bush food. (ed.) C. Creagh. Weldons, Sydney.
83. JACKL YN, P.M. (1990). Orientation in meridional mounds of Amitermes meridiana/is
(Froggatt) and Amitermes laurensis (Mjoherg). Ph.D. thesis, University of Sydney.
84. JOACIDM, A.W.R. & KANDIAH, S. (1940). Studies on Ceylon soils. XIV. A
comparison of soils from termite mounds and adjacent land. Tropical Agriculturist
Magazine Ceylon. 95: 333-338.
85. JOSENS, G. (1983). The soil fauna of tropical savannas. III. The tennites. In: Tropical
savannas, (ed.) F. Bourlh!re, pp. 505-524. Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company,
Amsterdam, Netherlands.
86. JOSEPH, (1978). Tennites and soils. In: Soil biology and ecology in India, Proceedings
of the first all India symposium held at UAS Bangalore, 22-26 September 1976, (eds.)
C.A. Edwards & G.K. Veeresh, UAS technical series no.22, pp. 186-191. Hebbal,
Bangalore.
87. KANG, (1978). Effect of some biological factors on soil variability in the tropics. III.
Effect of Macrotermes mounds. Plant and Soil, 50: 241-251.
88. KA YANI, S.A. & SHEIKH, K.H. (1974). Physical and chemical characteristics of the
soils of the mounds of Odontotermes obesus and their adjacent areas. In: Proceedings
of the Pakistan Science conference, 25: 29.
224
89. KRISHNA, K. & WEESNER, F.M. (1969). Biology of termites, vols. I & 2. Academic
Press, New York.
90. KRISHNAMURTI, G.S.R. & HUANG, P.M. (1990). Spectrophotometric determination
of Fe(II) with 2,4,6-tri(2'-pyridyl}-1,3,5-triazine in the presence of large quantities of
Fe(Ill) and complexing ions. Talanta, 37: 745-748.
91. KRISTENSEN, N .P. {1991 ). Phylogeny of extant hexapods. In: The Insects of Australia,
{ed.) Nauman, pp. 125-140. CSIRO, Division of Entomology, Melbourne University.
92. KUMAR KUNDU, A. (1990). Multinuclear NMR studies of aluminium cations in
aqueous media. Ph.D. thesis, School of Chemistry, University of Leeds.
93. LAPAGE, J.P. & NUTTING, W.L. (1978). Nutrient dynamics of tennites. In:
Production ecology of ants and termites, (ed.) Brian M.V, pp. 165-232. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge.
94. LANDON, J.R. (198.4}. Booker tropical soil manual. (ed.) J.R. Landon. Booker
Agriculture International Limited, London.
95. LEE, A. (1992). Survival tucker: Aboriginal dietary intake and a successful community
based nutrition intervention project. Ph.D. thesis, University of Sydney.
96. LEE, K.E. (1983). Soil animals and pedological processes. In: Soils: an Australian
viewpoint, CSIRO, Melbourne, pp. 629-644. Academic Press, London.
97. LEE, K.E. & WOOD, T.G. (l971a). Termites and Soils. Academic press, London.
98. LEE, K.E. and WOOD, T.G. (197lb). Physical and chemical effects on soils of some
Australian tennites, and their pedological significance. Pedobiologia, 11: 376-409.
99. LEE, T.S., KOLTHOFF, I.M. & LEUSSING, D.L. (1948). Reaction of ferrous and
ferric iron with 1,10-phenanthroline. I. Dissociation constants of ferrous and ferric
phenanthroline. Journal of the American Chemical Society, 37: 78-80.
225
100. LEVITT, D. (1981). Plants and people: Aboriginal uses of plants on Groote Eylandt.
Australian institute of Aboriginal studies, Canberra.
101. LI T.K. & VALLEE B.L. (1980). Trace elements, (b): The biochemical and nutritional
roles of other trace elements. In: Modem nutrition in health and disease, sixth edition,
(eds.) R.S. Goodhart & M.E. Shils, pp. 408-444. Lea & Febiger, Philadelphia.
102. LOBRY de BRUYN, L.A & CONACHER, A.J. (1990). The role oftennites and ants
in soil modification: a review. Australian Journal of Soil Research, 28: 55-93.
103. MALAISSE, F. (197.8). High Tennitaria. In: Biogeography and Ecology of Southern
Africa, (ed.) M.J.A. Werger, Monographiae Biologicae31: 1281-1300. Dr. W. Junk, The
Hague.
104. MALDAGUE, M.E. (1959). Analyses de so!s et mat6riaux de termitif:res du Congo
Beige. Insects Sociaux, 6: 343-359.
105. MciNTYRE, D.S. & LOVEDAY, J. (1974). Particle-size analysis. In: Methods for
analysis of irrigated soils, (ed.) J. Loveday, Technical Communication No.54, pp. 88-99.
CSIRO, Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux.
106. McKEOWN, K.C. (1942). Australian Insects. An introductory handbook. Royal
zoological society of New South Wales, Sydney, pp.63-69.
107. MERMUT, A.R, ARSHAD, M.A. & ARNAUD, R.J. (1984). Micropedological study
of tennite mounds of three species of Macrotermes in Kenya. Soil Science Society of
America Journal, 48: 613-620.
108. MEYER, J.A. (1960). Resultats agronomiques d'un essai de nivellement des tennitieres
realise dans Ia cuvette centrale Congolaise. Bulletin Agricole du Congo Beige, 51: 1024-
1059.
226
I 09. MIEDEMA, R. & VAN VUURE, W. (1977). The morphological,physical and chemical
properties of two mounds of macrotermes be/licosus (Smeathman) compared with
surrounding soils in Sierra Leone. Journal of Soil Science, 28: 112·124.
110. MILL, A.E. (1982). Amazon termite myths: legends and folklore of the Indians and
Caboclos. Antenna, 6: 215-217.
111. MILLER, L.R. (1984). Jnvasitermes, a new genus of soldierless termites from Northern
Australia (lsoptera: Tennitidae). Journal of Australian Entomology Society. 23: 33-37.
112. MILLER. L.R. (1986). The phylogeny of the Nasutitermitinae (lsoptera: Tennitidae).
Sociobiology, 11: 203-214.
113. MILLER, L.R. (1990). Division of Entomology, CSIRO, Personal communication.
114. MINNIC, V., OKUOGLU, Y., TARCON, Y., ARCASOY,A., CIN, S., YORUKOGLU,
0., RENDA, F. & DE:MIRAG, B. (1968). Pica in Turkey. II. Effect of clay upon iron
absorption. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 21: 78-86.
liS. MITCHELL, D., LAYCOCK, B.S. & STEPHENS, W.F. (1977). Motion sickness
induced pica in the rat. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 30: 147-150.
116. MOlllNDRA, P. & MUKERJI, K.G. (1982). Fungal ecology of termite mounds. Revue
d'Ecologie et de Biologie du Sol, 19: 351-361.
117. MONTGOMERY, R.F. & ASKEW, G.P. (1983). Soils of tropical savannas. In: Tropical
savannas, (ed.) F. Bourliere, pp. 73-75. Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company,
Amsterdam.
118. MOORE, B.P, (1969). Biochemical studies in termites. In: Biology of termites, (eds.) K.
Krishna & F.M. Weesner, Vol.l, pp. 407-432. Academic Press, New York.
227
119. MUELLER, H.R. (1989). Importance of nutrient availability in relation to trends of food
production and consumption. In: Nutrient availability: chemical and biological aspects,
(eds.) D. Southgate, I. Johnson & G.R. Fenwick, special publication No.72, pp. 13-25.
Institute of Food Research, Norwich.
120. MULLER, R.J. & PIPP, T.L. (1983). The role of trace elements in intravenous nutrition.
In: Human nutrition, (eds.) M.M. Tuckerman & S.J. Turco, pp. 235-244. Lea & Febiger,
Philadelphia.
121. MUSTACCID, P. (1971). Cesare Bressa (1785-1836) on dirt eating in Louisana. Jama,
218: 229-232.
122. NARASINGA RAO, B.S. & PRABHAVATHI, T. (1978). An in vitro method for
predicting the bioavailability of iron from foods. The American Journal of Clinical
Nutrition, 31: 169-175.
123. NATHAN, P. & JAPANANGKA, D.L. (1983). Health business. Heinemann Educational
Australia, Victoria.
124. NATIONAL HEALTH AND MEDICAL RESEARCH COUNCIL. (1991).
Recommended dietary intakes for use in Australia. Australian Government Publishing
Service, Canberra.
125. NATIONAL HEALTH AND MEDICAL RESEARCH COUNCIL. (1992). Dietary
guidelines for Australians. Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra.
126. NIELSEN, M.G. & JOSENS, G. (1978). Production by ants and termites. In: Production
ecology of ants and termites, (ed.) Brian M.V, pp. 45-53. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge.
127. NOIROT, C.H. (1970). The nests of termites. In: Biology of termites, (eds.) K. Krishna
& F.M. Weesner, Vo1.2, pp. 73-125. Academic Press. New York.
228
128. NOLLER, B.N. & BLOOM, H. (1978). Methods of analysis for major and minor
elements in foods. In: Food Technology in Australia, 30: 11-23.
129. NORRIS, K.R (1967). General biology. In: The insects of Australia, (ed.) F.G.
Waterhouse, pp. 110-136. CSIRO, University Press, Melbourne.
130. NORRISH, K. & PICKERING, l.G. (1983). Clay minerals. In: Soils: an Australian
viewpoint, CSIRO, Melbourne, pp. 629-644. Academic Press, London.
131. NORTHERN TERRITORY HEALTH DEPARTMENT. (1981 ). Traditional Aboriginal
medicines project. Newsletter No.3, pp. 1-9. N.T. Health, Darwin.
132. NUTTING, W.L., HAVERTY, M.I. & LAFAGE, J.P. (1987). Physical and chemical
alteration of soil by two subterranean termite species in Sonoran desert grassland.
Journal of Arid Environments, 12: 233-239.
133. NYAMAPFENE, K.W. (1986). The use of termite mounds in Zimbabwe peasant
agriculture. Tropical-Agriculture (Trinidad), 63: 191-194.
134. NYE, P.H. (1955). Some soil-forming processes in the humid tropics. Journal of Soil
Science, 6: 73-83.
135. OKELLO-OLOYA, T. & SPAIN, A.V. (1986). Comparative growth of two pasture
plants from northeastern Australia on mound materials of grass and litter-feeding
termites (Isoptera: Termitidae) and on their associated surface soils. Revue D'Ecologie
et de Biologie du sol. 23: 381-392.
136. OKELLO-OLOYA, T., SPAIN, A.V. & JOHN, R.D. (1985). Selected chemical
characteristics of the mounds of two species of Amitermes (lsoptera, Termitinae) and
their adjacent surface soils from Northeastern Australia. Revue d'Ecologie et de Biologie
dusol, 22:291-311.
137. d'OREY. F.L.C. (1975). Contribution of termite mounds to locating hidden copper
deposits. Transactions of the Institution of Mining and Metallurgy, 84: 150-151.
229
138. OSBORNE, D.R & VOOGT, P. (1978). The analysis of nutrients in foods. Academic
Press, London.
139. PARK, A. (1989). Termites. Australian Geographic, 13: 34-51.
140. PATHAK, A.N. & LEHRI, L.K. (1959). Studies on tennite nests. 1. Chemical, physical
and biological characteristics of a Tennitarium in relation to its surroundings. Journal
of the Indian Society of Soil Science, 7: 87-90.
141. PATTERSON, E.C. & STASZAK, D.J. (1977). Effects of geophagia (kaolin ingestion)
on the maternal blood and embryonic development in the pregnant rat. Journal of
Nutrition, 107: 2020-2025.
142. PAUL, J., SARKAR, A. & VARMA, A. (1985). Cellulose digesting bacteria from live
termite mound soils. Current Science, 54: 1098-1101.
143. PENDLETON, R.L. (1941}. Some results of termite activity in Thailand soils. Thai
Science Bulletin, 3: 29-53.
144. POMEROY, D.E. (1976). Some effects of mound-building termites on soils in Uganda.
Journal of Soil Science, 27: 377-394.
145. POMEROY, D.E. (1983). Some effects of mound-building termites on the soils of a
semi-arid area of Kenya. Journal of Soil Science, 34: 555-570.
146. PRASAD, A.S., HALSTED, J.A. & NADIMI, M. (1983). Syndrome of iron deficiency
anemia, hepatosplenomegaly, hypogonadism, dwarfism and geophagia. The American
Journal of Medicine, 31: 532-546.
147. PULLAN, R.A. (1974). Biogeographical studies and agricultural development m
Zambia. Geography, 59: 309-321.
148. RAJAGOPAL, D. (1983). Effect of termite mound soil on plant growth. Tropical Pest
Management, 29: 194-195.
230
149. RAJAGOPAL,D., SATHYANARAYANA, T. & VEERESH,G.K. (1982). Physica1and
chemical properties of tennite mound and surrounding soils of Kamataka. Journal of
Soil Biology and Ecology, 2: 18-31.
150. RANDALL, H.T. (1980). Water, electrolytes and acid-base balance. In: Modern
nutrition in health and disease, sixth edition, (eds.) R.S. Goodhart & M.E. Shils, Sixth
edition, pp.355-394. Lea & Febiger, Philadelphia.
151. RATCLIFF, F.N., GAY, F.J. & GREA YES, T. (1952). Australian termites. Thebialagy,
recognition and economic importance of the common species. CSIRO, Melbourne.
152. REDDY, M.V. 1983). Some physico-chemical properties of carton material of the
structural-wood destroying Coptotermes kishori (Roonwall & Chhotani) in relation to the
underlying soils. Comparative Physiology and Ecology, 8: 345-348.
153. REID, J. (1983). Sorcerers and healing spirits: continuity and change in an Aboriginal
medical system. Australian National University Press, Canberra.
154. RONAGHY, H.A. & HALSTED, J.A. (1975). Zinc deficiency occuring in females.
Report of two cases. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 28: 831 ~836.
155. ROONWAL, M.L. (1975). Field and other observations on the Harvester termite,
Anacanthotennes macrocephalus (Desneux) (Hodotermitidae), from the Indian desert.
Journal of Applied Entomology, 78: 424-440.
156. ROONWAL, M.L. (1977). Field data on intraspecific variability in mound construction
and nesting habits in termites and its ecological relationships. Indian National Science
Academy, 43: 159-174.
157. SANDS, W.A. (1965). Termite distribution in man~modified habitats in West Africa,
with special reference to species segregation in the genus Trinervitermes (lsoptera,
Termitidae, Nasutitennitinae). Journal Animal Ecology, 34; 557~561.
231
158. SANDS, W.A. (1969). The association of termites and fungus. In: Biology of termites,
(eds.) K. Krishna & F.M. Weesner, Vol.l, pp. 495-524. Academic Press, New York.
159. SAYAR, S.N., SARLAffi, R. & NAFICY, M. (1975). Studies on c1inica~
haematological aspects and pathological changes of gastric mucosa in geophagia. Acta
Medical Iran, 18: 137-147.
160. SCARLETT, N., WlllTE, N. & REID, J. (1982). "Bush medicines": Thephannacopoeia
of the Yo1ngu of Amhem Land. In: Body, land and spirit, (ed.) J. Reid, pp. 154-192.
University of Queensland Press, St Lucia.
161. SCHAEFER, D.A & WHITFORD, W.G. (1981). Nutrient cycling by the subterranean
termite Gnathamitermes tuhiformans in a Chihuahuan desert ecosystem. Oecologia, 48:
277-283.
162. SEVERANCE, H.W., HOLT, T. PATRONE, N.A. & CHAPMAN, L. (1988). Profound
muscle weakness and hypokalemia due to clay ingestion. South Medical Journal, 81:
272-274.
163. SHEIKH, K.H. & KAY ANI, S.A. (1982). Termite-affected soils in Pakistan. Soil
Biology & Biochemistry, 14: 359-364.
164. SHEPPE, W. (1968). African tennites. Pacific Discovery, 21: 2-15.
165. SlllLS, M.E. (1980). Major minerals, (b): Magnesium. In: Modern nutrition in health
and disease, sixth edition, (eds.) R.S. Goodhart & M.E. Shils, pp.310-323. Lea &
Febiger, Philadelphia.
166. SINGH, S.B., NATH, S., DUTTA, C.B.S. & BANERJEE, S.K. (1987). Changes in
attributes of forest soil brought about by tennites. Indian Forester, 113: 375-378.
167. SINGH, U.R. ( 1982). Population structure and mound architecture of the tennites of a
tropical deciduous forest of Varanasi, India. International Journal of Ecology and
Enviromental Sciences, 8: 147-157.
232
168. SLEEMAN, J.R. & BREWER. R. (1972). Micro-structures of some Australian termite
nests. Pedobiologia, 12: 347-373.
169. SOUTHGATE, D.A.T. (1989). Conceptual issues concerning the assessment of nutrient
bioavailability. In: Nutrient availability: chemical and biological aspects, (eds.) D.
Southgate, I. Johnson & G.R. Fenwick, special publication No.72, pp. 10-12. Institute
of Food Research, Norwich.
170. SPAIN, A.V., JOHN, R.D. & OKELLO-OLOYA, T. (1983). Some pedological effects
of selected termite species at three locations in north-eastern Australia. In: New trends
in soil biology, (eds.) P. Lebrun, H.M. Andre, A. De Medts, C. Gregoire-Wibo & G.
Wauthy, pp. 143-149. Dieu-Brichart, Ottignies-Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium.
171. SPAIN, A.V. & MciVOR. J.G. (1988). The nature of herbaceous vegetation associated
with Tennitaria in north-eastern Australia. Jo.urnal of Ecology, 76: 181~191.
172. SPAIN, A.V., OKELLO-OLOYA, T. & BROWN, A.l. (1983). Abundances, above
ground masses and basal areas of tennite mounds at six locations in tropical north
eastern Australia. Revue d'Ecologie et de Biologie du sol, 20: 547-566.
173. SPAIN, A.V., SINCLAJR, D.F. & DIGGLE, P.J. (1986). Spatial distributions of the
mounds of harvester and forager tennites (Isoptera: Tennitidae) at four locations in
tropical north-eastern Australia. Acta Oecologica, 7: 353-352.
174. STEFANSKA, A. & BARR, A. (1981). Cures from the bush. Hemisphere, 25 No.6:
368-373.
175. STOOPS, G. (1964). Application of some pedological methods to the analysis oftennite
mounds. In: Etudes sur les termites ajricains, (ed.) A. Bouillon, pp. 379-398. Masson
et Cie, Paris.
176. STUART, A.M. (1969). Social behavior and communication. In: Biology of termites,
(eds.) K. Krishna & F.M. Weesner, Vol. I, pp. 193-233. Academic Press, New York.
233
177. STUMPER, R. (1923). Sur Ia composition chimique des nids de L'Apicotermes occultus
Silv. Comptes Rendus Hebdomadaire des Seances de l'Academie des Sciences, Paris,
177:409-411.
178. SWINY ARD, E.A. (1965). Demulcents, emollients protectives and absorbents. In: The
pharmacological basis of therapeutics, (eds.) L.S. Goodman & A. Gillman, pp. 976~989.
Macmillan, New York).
179. TAKEDA, N., MORITA, M., KUBO, T., YAMATODAN1, A., WATANABE, T.,
W ADA, H. & MATSUNAGA, T. (1986). Histaminergic mechanism of motion sickness.
Neurochemical and neurophannacological studies in rats. Acta Otolaryngol (Stockh},
101: 416-421.
180. TALKINGTON, K.M., GANT, N.F., SCOTT, D.E. & PRITCHARD, J.A. (1970).
Effects of ingestion of starch and some clays on iron absorption. The American Journal
of Obstetrics and gynecology, 108: 262-267.
181. TIIOMSON, N. (1984). The role of zinc in Aboriginal nutrition. Aboriginal Health
Project Information Bulletin, No.5, pp.I0-14.
182. THOMSON, N. (1991). A review of Aboriginal health status. In: The health of
Aboriginal Australia, (eds.) J. Reid & P. Trompf, pp. 37-79.
183. TUCKERMAN, M.M. & TURCO, S.J. (1983). Human nutrition. Lea & Febiger,
Philadelphia.
184. UNDERWOOD, E.J. (1977). Trace elements in human and animal nutrition. Academic
Press, New York, London.
185. VERMEER, D.E. (1971). Geophagy among the Ewe of Ghana. Ethnology, 9: 56-72.
186. VERMEER, D.E. & FERRELL, R.E. (1985). Nigerian geophagical clay: a traditional
antidiarrheal phannaceutical. Science, 227: 634-636.
234
187. VERMEER. D.E. & FRATE D.A. (1979). Geophgia in rural Mississipi: environmental
and cultural contexts and nutritional implications. The American Journal of Clinical
Nutrition, 10: 2129-2135.
188. VESSAL, K., RONAG!N H.A. & ZARABI, M. (1975). Radiological changes in pica.
The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 28: 1095-1098.
189. WALKER, A.R., WALKER, B.F., JONES, J., et al (1985). Nausea and vomiting and
dietary cravings and aversions during pregnancy in South African women. British
Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 92: 484-489.
190. WATERHOUSE, D.P. (1991). Insects and humans in Australia. In: The insects of
Australia, CSIRO, Division of Entomology, pp. 221-225. University Press, Melbourne.
191. WATSON, J.A.L. & GAY, F.J. (1983). Taxonomy and applied entomology of
Australian tennites: a small order in perspective. In: Australian systematic entomology:
a bicentenary perspective, (eds.) E. Highley & R.W. Taylor, pp. 34-49. CSIRO,
Canberra.
192. WATSON J.A.L. & GAY, F .J. (1991). Isoptera (termites). In: The insects of Australia,
CSIRO, Division of Entomology, pp. 330·347. University Press, Melbourne.
193. WATSON, J.A.L. & PERRY, D.H. (1981). The Australian Harvester termites of the
genus Drepanotermes (Isoptera: Termitinae). Australian Journal of Zoology,
Supplementary series No.78, pp. 9-10, & 130.
194. WATSON, J.P. (1962). The soil below a termite mound. Journal of Soil Science, 13:
46-51.
195. WATSON, J.P. (1967). A termite mound in an iron age burial ground in Rhodesia.
Journal of Ecology, 55: 663-669.
196. WATSON, J.P. (1969). Water movement in two termite mounds in Rhodesia. Journal
of Ecology, 57: 441-451.
235
197. WATSON, J.P. (1970). Contribution of termites to development of zinc anomaly in
Kalahari sand. Transect ions of the Institution of Mineralogy and Metallurgy, (series, B.)
79: 53-59.
198. WATSON, J.P. (1974). Calcium carbonate in termite mounds. Nature, 247: 74.
199. WATSON, J.P. (1976). The compositionofmoundsofthe tennite Macrotermesjalciger
(GersUicker) on soil derived from granite in three rainfall zones of Rhodesia. Journal of
Soil Science, 27: 495-503.
200. WEIR, J.S. (1972a). Spatial distribution of elephants in an African National Park in
relation to environmental sodium. Oikos, 23: 1-12.
201. WEIR, J .S. (1972b ). Mechanisms of mineral accumulation in Macrotermes mounds in
Africa. Abstracts 14th International Congress Entomology, p. 196. Australian
Entomology Society.
202. WEIR, J.S. (1973). Air flow, evaporation and mineral accumulation in mounds of
Macrotermes subhyalinus (Ram bur). Journal of Animal Ecology, 42: 509-520.
203. WlllTFORD, W.G., FRECKMAN, D.W., PARKER,L.W., et a/. (1983). The
contributions of soil fauna to. nutrient cycles in desert systems. In: New trends in soil
biology, (eds.) P. Lebrun, H.M. Andre, A. De Medts, C. Gregoire-Wibo & G. Wauthy,
pp. 49-59. Dieu-Brichart. Ottignies-Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium.
204. WILD, H. (1975). Termites and the serpentines of the great dyke of Rhodesia.
Transactions of the Rhodesia Scientific Association, 57: pp. 1-11. Rhodesia Scientific
Association, Rhodesia.
205. WILLIAMS, M. (1968). Tennites and soil development near Brocks Creek, Northern
Territory. The Australian Journal of Science, 31: 153-154.
206. WOOD, T.G. (1978). Food and feeding habits of termites. In: Production ecology of
ants and termites, (ed.) Brian M.V, pp. 55-80. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
236
207. WOOD, T.G. (1988). Termites and the soil environment. Biology and Fertility of Soils,
6: 228-236.
208. WOOD, T.G. & LEE, K.E. (1971). Abundance of mounds and competition among
colonies of some Australian tennite species. Pedobio/ogia, 11: 341-366.
209. WOOD, T.G. & SANDS, W.A. (1978). The role of termites in ecosystems. In
Production ecology of ants and termites, (ed.) Brian M.V, pp. 245-292. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge.
210. WRANGHAM, R.W. (1977). Feeding behaviour of chimpazees in Gombe National Park,
Tanzania. In: Primate ecology, (ed.) T.H. Clutton-Brock, pp. 504-538. Academic Press,
London, New York.
APPENDICES
237
APPENDIX Ia: Particle size of Daly River, site 2, termite mound samples (0-lOcm on the outside of the mound).
Species: Amitermes l'itiorus.
Sample Mound Location Particle size (%of dry weight~
Number@ Number Cia~ Silt Fine sand Coarse sand
Av30D2 I top 17.6 17.7 26.3 41.0
Av31D2 I middle 17.8 17.3 31.2 34.8
Av32D2 I bottom 18.2 19.4 32.4 33.1
Av33D2 2 top 13.1 14.6 35.7 40.4
Av34D2 2 middle 14.3 12.4 37.1 39.9
Av35D2 2 bottom 15.0 12.3 38.4 37.7
Av36D2 3 top 13.7 12.5 26.8 47.2
Av37D2 3 middle 14.9 13.7 29.1 45.3
Av38D2 3 bottom 14.7 15.2 32.3 39.9
Av39D2 4 top 14.2 14.0 25.8 46.5
Av40D2 4 middle 15.6 13.8 34.3 39.0
Av41D2 4 bottom 16.1 14.7 31.6 36.6
@ : Sample number explanation: A• Amirermes vitioJW
3041 Sample number
D2 Daly River, site 2
238
APPENDIX lb: Particle size of Daly River, site 4, termite mound samples (0-lOcm on the outside of the mound).
Species: Amitermes vitiosus.
Sample Mound Location Particle size ~%of dry weight)
Number@ Number Clay Silt Fine sand Coarse sand
Av42D4 I top 8.7 18.2 55.3 17.2 Av43D4 1 bottom !9.2 11.5 42.6 25.6 Av44D4 2 top 13.7 25.8 4&9 15.1 Av45D4 2 bottom 16.5 11.5 43.7 29.6 Av46D4 3 top 11.7 31.3 47.0 9.4 Av47D4 3 bottom !8.9 14.5 36.5 309 Av48D4 4 top 15.2 25.0 41.5 17.1 Av49D4 4 bottom 23.5 12.0 40.7 27.6 Av50D4 5 top 14.6 25.1 46.4 !5.7 Av51D4 5 bottom 18.4 10.1 34.7 36.3 Av52D4 6 top 16.9 22.1 40.8 23.0 Av53D4 6 bottom 21.4 12.0 39.4 27.7 Av54D4 7 top 8.7. 19.8 48.3 22.9 Av55D4 7 bottom 21.5 9.3 44.4 24.0 Av56D4 8 top 21.4 8.4 38.3 27.5 Av57D4 8 bottom 11.7 19.2 44.8 28.4 Av58D4 9 top &6 20.0 44.9 25.8 Av59D4 9 bottom 21.8 8.0 42.3 26.5 Av60D4 10 top 12.4 18.6 39.7 25.5 Av61D4 10 bottom 18.5 11.9 42.7 29.4
@ : Samplenumbere~tplanation: A> : Amiterrrn:s vidosus
2743 : Sample number
04 : Daly River, site 4
239
APPENDIX Ic: Particle size of Elliott (site 5) tennite mound samples (0-lOcm o the outside of the mound unless indicated). Species:
Amitermes vitiosus.
Sample Mound Location Particle size (% of dry weiB_ht~ Number@ Number- Clal: Silt Fine sand Coarse sand
A vOlE I top 24.5 10.6 33.5 35.3
Av02E I bottom 14.9 15.0 33.5 36.5
Av03E 2 top 15.1 13.2 34.0 41.7
Av04E 2 bottom 17.7 10.7 32.2 42.2
Av05E 3 top 13.7 16.0 34.9 37.4
Av06E 3 bottom 9.1 18.7 35.3 39.3
Av07E 4 top 21.8 12.3 32.0 36.2
AvOBE 4 bottom 27.0 4.7 31.8 36.4
Av09E 5 top 6.7 20.1 42.7 36.0
AvlOE 5 bottom 11.7 19.5 35.0 37.8
A vUE 6 top 18.5 11.7 34.4 36.9
Av12E 6 bottom 19.9 11.0 33.8 38.7
Av13E 7 top 12.0 13.2 36.4 41.2
Av14E 7 bottom 14.3 13.6 37.1 40.7
AvlSE 8 top 19.2 16Jl 33.4 35.9 Av16E 8 bottom 17.4 14.5 35.1 35.8
Avl7E 9 top 19.6 11.4 34.1 35.9
AvlSE 9 bottom 18.3 11.7 36.2 36.5
Av19E 10 top 22.5 11.0 32.3 36.4
Av20E 10 bottom 12.2 17.2 39.1 37.3
Av21E 11 top 12.2 17.7 39.1 36.9
Av22E II top 6.0 13.0 47.2 36.5
Av23E II middle 16.0 13.0 31.6 39.3
Av24E 11 middle 22.1 5.5 31.8 39.4
Av25E 11 middle 21.6 7.9 33.4 37.2 Av26E 11 bottom 21.0 5.0 34.7 38.5
Av27E# 11 top 18.3 15.7 33.3 38.5
Av28E# 11 middle 22.6 7.2 33.1 37.4
Av29E# 11 bottom 21.6 6.1 35.1 36.6
@ : Sample number explanation: Av Amitermes vitiosus
01-29 Sample number
E Elliott (site 5)
- : For mound size refer to Table 2.5
• : Sample taken from the middle section or the mound (0-1 Ocm ) •
240
APPENDIX Id: Particle size of Daly River, site 1, termite mound samples (0-lOcm on the outside of the mound).
Species: Tumulitermes pastinator.
Sample Mound Location Particle size {% of dry weiS:ht}
Number@ Number Ctar Silt Fine sand Coarse sand
TpOIDI I top 15.6 8.7 43.4 34.5
Tp02Dl I bottom 13.3 8.7 46.1 33.8
Tp03Dl 2 top 16.7 6.1 38.9 37.7
Tp04Dl 2 bottom 15.0 7.0 38.6 38.9
Tp05DI 3 top 15.1 8.1 39.9 34.6
Tp06DI 3 bottom 16.3 9.8 43.9 28.2
Tp07Dl 4 top 16.4 9.0 428 30.3
Tp08Dl 4 bottom 15.8 9.2 43.4 31.! Tp09Dl 5 top 15.6 7.9 39.9 35.7
Tp10Dl 5 bottom 13.7 9.4 44.0 33.4
TpllDI 6 top 14.0 9.8 44.1 34.8 Tp12Dl 6 bottom 17.5 9.1 43.9 31.8 Tpl3Dl" 6 bottom 14-5 &I 45.9 33.1 Tpi4Dl 7 top 15.6 9.7 424 34.2 Tpi5DI 7 bottom 15.7 9.0 44.7 32.5
Tpi6Dl 8 top 16.2 8.1 38.9 38.4 Tpi7DI 8 bottom 14.4 &3 44.8 33.3 Tpi8Dl 9 top 15.9 9.3 43.8 31.1 Tpi9DI 9 bottom 14.0 7.8 42.7 33.6 Tp20DI 10 top 14.4 7.7 41.1 36.1 Tp21DI 10 bottom 13.1 120 44.0 31.1 Tp22Dl 11 top 12.6 8.9 45.1 31.8 Tp23Dl 12 bottom 14.2 9.1 46.1 28.6 Tp24DI 13 top 13.3 9.7 49.3 27.3 Tpl5DI 14 top 12.6 9.6 47.1 28.7 Tp26Dl 15 top 14.3 8.2 46.2 27.4
@ : Sample number explanation: Tp Tumu.litemaes pa.stinaror
01-26 : Sample number
Dl : Daly River, site 1
• : Newly built mound material
APPENDIX le: Particle size of Daly River, site 3, termite mound samples (O.lOcm on the outside of the mound unless indicated) from one mound of Tumulitermes pastinator.
' Sample Mound Location Particle size {%of d!lweight}
Number@ Number c1ax Silt Fine sand Coarse sand
TJ227D3• 1 top 19.2 16.9 35.5 33.8
TE28D3 1 top 20.1 17.9 37.0 29.7
TE29D3 1 top 18.1 15.9 37.0 33.3
TJ230D3• I top 19.6 16.9 41.3 26.6
TE31D3 I top 19.1 15.7 36.5 29.9
TE32D3 I middle 17.0 16.9 37.3 32.9
TE33D3 1 bottom 17.3 15.5 37.2 31.7
Tp34D3 1 top 22.5 16.9 36.6 27.6
Tp35D3 1 top 19.8 15.3 35.2 30.0
Tp36D3 1 middle 25.0 16.1 37.6 25.4
Tp37D3 1 middle 21.3 18.7 37.5 26.6
Tp38D3 1 bottom 21.0 13.0 34.5 33.5
Tp39D3 I bottom 17.8 13.4 40.3 29.9
Tp40D3# 1 top 20.7 19.1 35.0 27.1
Tp41D3# 1 middle 21.2 19.1 37.4 22.6
Tp42D3# 1 bottom 20.7 19.0 39.7 20.7
Tp43D3## 1 bottom 18.4 17.5 40.4 24.6
@ : Sample number explanation: Tp Tumuliterma pastinator
27-43 Sample number
03 Daly River, site 3
Underlined: Sample collected on the outside of the mound (0-lem)
• : Newly built mound material
# : Sample taken from the middle section of the mound (0-lOcm.)
## : Material from the nursery
241
242
APPENDIX If: Particle size of Howard Springs (site 6) termite mound samples (()..10cm on the outside of the mound).
Species: Tumulitermes pastinator.
Sample Mound Location Particle size {%of d!l weighQ
Number@ Number Ctar Silt Fine sand Coarse sand
Tp44H 1 top 26.4 6.2 44.5 19.7
Tp45H 1 bottom 23.9 6.4 47.7 20.5
Tp46H 2 top 30.3 5.6 41.9 20.3
Tp47H 2 bottom 29.8 5.5 45.7 16.7
Tp48H 3 top 29.5 6.2 47.1 15.4
Tp49H 3 bottom 27.9 5.0 48.1 16.9
Tp50H 4 top 28.7 6.8 43.7 17.8
Tp51H 4 bottom 23.9 7.6 46.8 19.8
Tp52H 5 top 23.1 6.5 47.4 221
Tp53H 5 bottom 19.7 5.6 48.6 25.3
Tp54H 6 top 28.1 6.6 47.5 17.7
Tp55H 6 bottom 26.2 5.1 49.6 17.3
Tp56H 7 top 23.3 6.1 51.4 16.9
Tp57H 8 top 25.4 5.5 51.0 17.6
Tp58H 9 top 23.4 7.1 49.7 18.9
Tp59H 10 top 25.4 8.0 50.1 17.0
Tp60H 11 top 34.1 8.4 38.3 16.9
Tp61H 11 middle 30.4 7.0 40.7 17.6
Tp62H 11 bottom 31.4 6.7 44.2 16.4
Tp63H 12 top 25.8 5.4 45.8 226
Tp64H 12 middle 23.6 4.1 42.9 26.3
Tp6.5H 12 bottom 24.4 4.4 47.1 21.7
Tp66H 13 top 31.4 4.9 39.0 21.6
Tp67H 13 middle 31.3 6.4 38.8 20.3
Tp68H 13 bottom 24.9 7.6 42.4 23.7
@ : Samplenumberexplanation: Tp Tumu/ilamt:J pasrinator
44-68 Sample number
H Howard Springs (site 6)
243
APPENDIX lg: Particle size of Daly River, site 3, termite mound samples (0-lOcm on the outside of the mound unless indicated) from
one mound of N asutitermes triodiae.
Sample Mound Location Particle size ~%of dry weight}
Number@ Number Cia~ Silt Fine sand Coarse sand
Nt01D3* 1 top 36.5 12.6 32.7 23.9
Nt02D3 1 top 19.6 29.8 32.4 23.7
Nt03D3* 1 top 18.3 31.0 31.6 20.7
Nt04D3* 1 middle 22.6 28.6 31.4 21.4
Nt05D3 1 middle 18.1 23.8 33.3 20.3
Nt06D3* 1 middle 19.1 28.6 35.8 22.1
Nt07D3 1 middle 22.0 29.1 31.2 20.7
Nt08D3* 1 bottom 21.7 29.2 34.8 19.4
Nt09D3 1 bottom 19.7 19.2 35.4 29.5
Nt10D3 1 top 19.8 284 35.9 19.0
Nt11D3 1 top 18.4 30.4 34.5 18.2
Nt12D3 1 middle 18.7 29.4 33.0 21.4
Nt13D3 1 middle 19.8 .31.6 29.8 21.5
Nt14D3 1 bottom 21.0 28.2 33.7 21.8
Nt15D3 1 bottom 18.7 28.8 34.6 20.7
Nt16D3# 1 top 21.6 29.6 29.5 21.3
Nt17D3# 1 top 19.3 30.0 34.8 20.6
Nt18D3# 1 middle 21.2 31.8 35.0 16.6
Nt19D3# 1 bottom 19.5 32.9 32.7 19.7
Nt20D3## 1 bottom 28.1 24.7 32.7 15.4
@ : Sample number explanation: N< Nasutitermes nWditu
01-20 Sample number
D3 Daly River, site 3
Underlined Sample collected on the outside of the mound (0-lcm)
• Newly built mound material
• Sample taken from the middle section of the mound (0-lOcm)
•• Sample taken from the middle section of the mound (0-lOc:m.) in the nursery
244
APPENDIX Ih: Particle size of Daly River, site 4, termite mound samples (0-lOcm on the outside of the mound unless indicated)
Species: N asutitermes triodiae.
Sample Mound Location Particle size {% of dry weight2
Number@ Number aa~ Silt Fine sand Coarse sand
Nt21D4' I top 22.9 13.2 35.0 34.0
Nt22D4 I middle 24.2 10.3 36.0 31.5
Nt23D4 I bottom 19.7 8.6 36.3 35.8
Nt24D4 2 top 24.8 5.3 30.4 36.9
Nt25D4 2 middle 25.5 7.6 30.1 36.2
Nt26D4 2 bottom 24.2 7.6 34.6 30.9
Nt27D4 2 top 19.0 5.7 31.5 42.6
Nt28D4 2 middle 21.7 8.0 28.0 44.4
Nt29D4 2 bottom 18.0 4.8 29.1 45.8 Nt30D4"' 2 top 21.2 6.8 34.8 35.9 Nt31D4,.. 2 middle 19.6 5.2 34.2 39.1 Nt32D4* 2 bottom 16.1 5.5 36.8 40.1
Nt33D4 3 top 19.5 8.6 31.5 38.5
Nt34D4 3 middle 22.1 6.7 32.3 37.4
Nt35D4 3 bottom 17.3 7.8 36.7 36.7
Nt36D4* 3 bottom 17.8 7.1 39.3 34.6
Nt37D4 3 top 22.3 6.5 36.4 37.3 Nt38D4 3 middle 23.4 5.7 30.2 42.7 Nt39D4 3 bottom 19.5 5.7 31.6 40.9 Nt40D4* 3 top 18.3 6.3 36.4 36.8 Nt41D4* 3 middle 15.7 5.2 38.3 38.3 Nt42D4* 3 bottom 17.3 5.7 33.0 41.3
Nt43D4 4 top 22.3 6.8 29.4 41.4 Nt44D4 4 middle 21.4 5.8 30.8 40.3
Nt45D4 4 bottom 20.9 6.2 33.6 38.1 Nt46D4 4 top ,18.2 5.2 33.7 40.4
Nt47D4 4 middle 16.6 5.2 30.4 46.7 Nt48D4 4 bottom 19.0 5.0 31.6 42.0 Nt49D4* 4 top 18.0 6.8 34.4 43.5 Nt50D4* 4 middle 15.1 6.2 32.3 43.6 Nt51D4* 4 bottom 16.0 6.7 34.5 41.6
Nt52D4 5 top 26.6 7.7 28.3 36.8 continued ...
245
APPENDIX Ih: continued ...
Sample Mound Location Particle size ~%of drywei~hQ
Number@ Number Cia~ Silt Fine sand Coarse sand
Nt53D4 5 middle 31.1 7.1 28.7 33.1
Nt54D4 5 bottom 22.6 7.0 30.7 37.6
Nt55D4 5 top 24.7 5.2 29.9 36.4
Nt56D4 5 middle 22.6 4.2 30.9 38.5
Nt57D4 5 bottom 22.7 3.8 26.7 42.5
Nt58D4* 5 top 19.7 5.7 31.0 40.8
Nt59D4* 5 middle 19.9 5.8 32.1 39.7
Nt60D4* 5 bottom 19.9 5.6 32.0 41.1
Nt61D4* 6 top 22.8 6.1 30.8 40.7
Nt62D4 6 middle 19.6 7.0 31.0 41.0
Nt63D4 6 bottom 22.8 3.8 29.4 41.2
Nt64D4 6 top 14.0 4.0 37.7 41.6
Nt65D4 6 middle 18.0 6.2 30.6 43.1
Nt66D4 6 bottom 19.6 4.8 28.9 44.6
Nt67D4* 6 top 16.8 6.5 32.0 42.3
Nt68D4* 6 middle 23.9 5.1 25.3 42.7
Nt69D4* 6 bottom 26.8 5.8 27.2 38.7
Nt70D4* 7 top 25.4 4.2 25.3 44.3
Nt71D4 7 middle 27.1 4.8 22.6 44.9
Nt72D4 7 bottom 20.6 6.0 27.3 43.9
Nt73D4 8 top 22.4 7.6 31.3 38.7
Nt74D4 8 middle 17.7 19.8 402 22.3
Nt75D4 8 bottom 22.3 6.7 33.0 37.6
Nt76D4 9 top 19.5 6.5 36.1 40.0
Nt77D4 9 middle 23.8 9.0 33.8 34.4
Nt78D4 9 bottom 21.6 10.0 34.3 35.4
Nt79D4 10 top 22.6 11.6 33.1 35.6
Nt80D4 10 middle 25.5 10.4 34.8 30.4
Nt81D4 10 bottom 25.5 11.7 37.0 25.5
Nt82D4 11 top 25.6 8.4 32.7 34.2
Nt83D4 11 bottom 21.2 7.7 32.1 39.7
Nt84D4 12 top 17.3 6.3 29.7 45.1
Nt85D4* 12 bottom 16.8 8.9 36.7 38.0
continued ...
246
APPENDIX lh: continued ...
Sample Mound Location Particle size (% of d!X weight)
Number@ Number ctar Silt Fine sand Coarse sand
Nt86D4 13 top 19.1 6.3 34.0 39.1
Nt87D4 13 bottom 21.1 6.1 39.4 33.8
Nt88D4 14 top 22.2 8.8 30.5 38.6
Nt89D4 14 bottom 18.6 6.3 36.0 37.7
Nt90D4 15 top 18.8 10.8 37.7 34.8
Nt91D4 15 bottom 20.2 6.9 37.9 34.7
@ : Sample number expla Nt NtmJtiterme:r triodl~
• Newly built mound material
21-91 : Sample number
04 Daly River, site 4
Underlined: Sample collected on the outside of the mound (0-lc:m)
247
APPENDIX li: Particle size of Howard Springs (site 6) and Berrimab (site 7) tennite mounds samples (0-lOcm on the outside of the mound).
Species: N asutitermes triodiae.
Sample Mound Location Particle size {%of dryweishq
Number@ Number aa! Silt Fine sand Coarse sand Nt92H I top 23.8 11.0 41.0 25.3
Nt93H* I middle 24.0 7.4 47.3 224
Nt94H I bottom 22.5 6.8 51.8 19.2
Nt95H 2 top 25.4 6.5 48.9 20.8
Nt96H 2 middle 27.0 9.1 45.4 20.2
Nt97H 2 bottom 25.7 8.6 46.8 19.4
Nt98H 3 top 27.5 8.9 43.4 19.8
Nt99H 3 middle 29.0 8.6 45.1 17.2
Nt!OOH 3 bottom 27.6 7.8 44.8 18.6
Nt!OIH 4 top 26.9 7.9 43.6 19.9
Nti02H 4 middle 29.4 7.7 43.2 15.4
Ntl03H 4 bottom 31.6 7.4 43.6 16.5 Nt104H 5 top 30.4 7.3 42.4 18.4
Ntl05H 5 middle 32.7 5.9 42.6 16.1 . Nt106H 5 bottom 30.9 6.9 40.4 19.3 Nt107B I middle 29.1 7.2 44.8 16.1 Nt108B 2 middle 14.9 8.7 44.8 26.2 Ntl09B 3 middle 20.1 11.8 45.9 19.8 Nt110B 4 middle 16.5 10.5 48.0 22.2 Nt111B 5 middle 15.4 11.9 43.2 27.1
@ : Sample number explanation: Nt Nasutitermes trioditu:
92-111 Sample number
H Howard Springs (site 6)
B Berrimah (site 7)
• : Newly built mound material
248
APPENDIX Ij: Particle size of termite mound samples (0-lOcm on the outside at the middle height of the mound) at Daly River, site 1:
Tumulitermes hastilis
Sample Mound Particle size ~%of dry weis_ht~
Number@ Number Oay Silt Fine sand Coarse sand
ThOIDI I 8.7 10.2 51.0 29.6
Th02Dl 2 15.2 10.0 46.9 32.3
Th03Dl 3 14.5 9.2 38.3 42.7
Th04Dl 4 11.1 9.2 32.2 49.8
Th05Dl 5 12.3 8.7 26.5 55.6
@ : Sample number explanation: Th ' TJ~mulitermes hastilis
01-05 : Sample number
Dl Daly River, site 1
249
APPENDIX Ik: Particle size of soil samples (0-lOcm depth) collected at different sites: Elliott (site 5), Daly River (1-4), Howard Springs (site 6) and Berrlmah (site 7).
Soil Termite Particle size (%of d~ weiB,ht~ Number sEecies@ Clal Silt Fine sand Coarse sand
OlE Av 10.28 5.10 34.61 51.17
02E - 12.03 4.55 29.36 54.09
03E - 12.01 6.85 38.61 43.55
04E - 17.65 4.11 26.34 53.26
05D1 Tp,Th 6.66 9.25 42.18 43.36
06DI - 6.21 9.49 47.32 36.21
07D1 • 6.24 7.11 46.18 40.93
08DI • 6.67 8.03 39.39 43.53
09D2 Av 13.33 13.44 35.02 39.61
10D2 • 15.59 11.44 35.41 40.40
1102 • 13.64 9.24 32.65 43.98
15D3 Tp 10.93 22.06 40.14 30.53
16D3 • 8.19 10.58 39.05 44.45
17D3 Nt 17.44 27.17 40.33 21.58
18D3 • 15.91 26.24 41.29 20.18
19D3 • 17.39 25.75 40.15 20.33
20D3 Tp 7.23 12.08 41.67 40.23
2!D3 Nt 14.1 19.30 44.87 25.02
22D3 Nt,Tp 14.76 18.23 40.09 29.30
23D4 Nt,Av,Ca 14.24 10.34 47.21 32.15
24D4 • 16.35 14.41 47.33 26.21
25D4 • 1241 8.13 39.15 44.51
26D4 • 11.42 8.64 51.65 33.75
27H Nt,Tp 20.59 7.09 46.34 30.73
28H • 22.05 10.52 47.31 24.47
29H • 14.3 6.12 56.12 26.35
30H • 18.93 6.70 54.08 25.72
31B Nt 8.77 11.56 35.83 39.08
32B • 8.3 11.19 58.37 26.83
33B • 13.26 8.90 32.49 39.87
@: Termite species studied at these soil sites
See list of abbreviations p.(xxxii).
Appendix II: Selected elemental composition of termite mounds sampled at Elliott (site 5) following hot water Minfusion~ extraction.
Sample
Number@ A -'liE Av02E A-'l3E A-'l4E A-'l5E Av06E Av07E A-'l8E A,OOE Av10E Av11E Av12E Av13E Av14E Av15E Av16E Av17E Av18E Av19E Av20E Av22E Av26E Av62E Av63E
#OlE (n~l) 02E (n~l)
AI 0.15 .± 0.01 1.34 .± 0.06 0.21 .± 0.20 0.17 .± 0.12 0.07 .± 0.01 1.03 .± 1.45 0.86 .± 0.72 0.53 .± 0.10 0.72 .± 0.11 0.70 .± 0.05 0.56 .± 0.44 0.45 .± 0.43 0.15 .± 0.03 1.22 .± 0.28 0.08 .± 0.11 1.58 .± 1.21 0.97 .± 1.29 0.51 .± 0.24 0.29 .± 0.26 0.29 .± 0.27 0.09 .± 0.13 0.18 .± 0.18 0.20 .± 0.10 0.34 + 0.41
1.18
0.84
Ca
7.26 .± 1.76 2.65 .± 0.45 4.68 .±. 2.51 5.57 .± 0.99 7.72 .±. 2.20 3.99 .±. 1.70 7.83 .±. 0.42 7.51 .±. 2.50 6.09 .±. 2.33 4.60 ± 0.73 8.38 .±. 3.34 1.75 .±. 0.96 6.60 ± 1.62 8.85 .± 1.37
13.52 .±. 7.40 7.10 .± 1.58
13.18 .± 0.20 3.86 .±. 0.83 7.02 .± 2.53 5.34 .± 0.07 4.94 .± 1.16 7.08 .± 1.58
10.73 .± 1.56 9.63 + 2.26
0.97 0.87
Co nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd
Species: Amiter17U!s vitiosus.
Element + sd (n=3) mg1100g
Cu nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd
Fe K 0.03 .± 0.00 22.01 .± 5.49 0.28 .± 0.00 11.49 ± 2.19 0.03 .±. 0.02 0.03 .±. 0.05
nd 0.23 .± 0.17 0.07 .±.'0.10 0.11 .±. 0.03 0.06 .± 0.09 0.23 .±. 0.05 0.09 .±. 0.09 0.12 .± 0.17 0.02 .±. 0.03 0.17 .±. 0.06 0.02 .±. 0.03 0.24 .±. 0.13 0.13 .± 0.19
10.94 .±. 8.78 12.25 .± 4.72 7.01 .±. 5.35 2.15 .± 1.07
14.17 .±. 15.57 3.31 .±. 0.03
13.19 .± 15.51 5.04 .±. 0.05
27.02 .± 3.31 9.11 .±. 6.29 8.16 .±. 1.14 5.06 .±. 3.96 5.05 .± 1.39 3.45 .± 0.39 3.19 .±. 1.10
0.11 .±. 0.01 13.07 .±. 3.61 0.05 .±. 0.07 3.92 .± 1.25 0.13 .±. 0.19 8.64 .±. 5.28 0.03 .±. 0.04 14.39 .±. 2.13 0.04 .± 0.06 16.77 .±. 10.97 0.03 .± 0.04 5.30 .±. 3.73 0.06 + 0.08 4.79 + 2.98
0.12 0.13
1.71 1.85
Mg 3.09 .± 1.00 1.57 .± 0.02 2.23 .±. 1.52 4.58 .± 1.58 3.62 ± 1.47 0. 72 .± 0.46 1.23 .± 0.06 1.39 .±. 0.70 2.45 .±. 1.13 0.65 .± 0.03 3.48 .±. 0.35 1.29 .± 1.09 3.51 .± 0.81 4.06 .±. 4.21 4.21 .±. 2.74 1.16 .±. 0.10 1.92 .±. 0.59 1.95 .±. 0.19 1.70 .±. 1.18 2.17 .± 1.37 1.93 .± 0.48 1.84 .± 0.28 2.06 ± 0.81 2.34 + 1.27
0.47 0.43
Mn nd nd nd nd nd
0.02 .± 0.00 0.01 .± 0.02 0.03 .±. 0.01 0.04 .± 0.05 0.05 .±. o.oo
nd nd nd
0.02 .±. 0.02 0.04 .±. 0.05 0.04 .± 0.03 0.05 .± 0.02
nd 0.04 ± 0.02 0.01 .± 0.01
nd 0.01 .± 0.01 0.07 .± 0.09 0.03 + 0.01
0.02 0.02
@; for explanation of mound sample number refer to APPENDIX Ie.
Detection limit (mg/100g): Co and Zn = 0.02; Cu and Mn = 0.01; Fe = 0.06.
#; for explanation of soil sample number refer to APPENDIX Ik.
Na
1.22 .± 0.95 0.30 .± 0.09 0.20 .±. 0.16 0.27 .± 0.21 0.52 .±. 0.57 017 .± 0.13 1.32 .± 1.51 0.53 .±. 0.32 0.63 .± 0.72 0.18 ± 0.04 1.40 .± 1.11 0.15 .± 0.03 0.29 ± 0.22 0.44 .± 0.32 0.64 .±. 0.50 0.29 .± 0.25 0.13 .± 0.03 0.19 .± 0.03 0.11 .± 0.03 0.27 .±. 0.10 0.22 .± 0.05 0.78 .±. 0.35 0.16 .± 0.04 0.32 + 0.36
0.39 0.36
Zn nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd
~ <:>
Appendix Ilia: Selected elemental composition of termite mounds sampled at Daly River, site 2, following perchloric/nitric acid (4:1) extraction. Species: Amilermes vitiosus.
Sample Element + sd {n=3} mll/100g Number@ AI Ca Co Cu Fe K M~ Mn Na Zn Av30D2 3246 .± 91 46.0 .± 0.2 0.70 .± 0.01 0.98 .± 0.02 1773 .± 20 481.2 .± 8.0 126.6 .± 2.6 9.5 .± 0.1 12.6 .± 1.3 1.14 .± 0.05 Av31D2 3205 .± 54 39.8 .± 0.1 0.69 .± 0.01 0.98 .± 0.01 1757 .±4 478.2 .± 31.5 129.2 .± 5.1 8.3 .± 0.0 12.9 .± 1.2 1.15 .± 0.01 Av32D2 3654 .± 100 39.4 .± 0.5 0.73 .± 0.01 1.02 .± 0.01 1856 .± 14 537.9 .± 12.4 138.6 .± 0.7 8.2 .± 0.0 14.5 .± 0.7 0.82 .± 0.71 Av33D2 3034 .±. 94 27.4 .± 0.4 0.48 .±. 0.01 0.69 .±. 0.01 1382 .±. 24 470.4 .±. 443 98.1 .±. 2.1 5.1 .±. 0.1 11.9 .±.OS 0.79 .±. 0.01 Av34D2 3034 .±. 57 21.0 .±. 0.3 0.43 .±. 0.01 0.61 .± 0.01 1255 .± 12 468.7 .± 10.3 90.1 .± 1.4 4.1 .± 0.1 10.8 .± 0.5 0.72 .± 0.02 Av35D2 3091 .±. 47 22.4 .± 1.0 0.42 .±. 0.01 0.60 .± 0.01 1309 .±. 5 486.2 .±. 24.4 95.8 .±. 1.7 4.4 .± 0.1 11.5 .± 0.6 0.74 .± 0.01 Av36D2 2927 .±. 43 50.7 .±. 0.7 0.58 .± 0.00 0.86 .± 0.01 1661 .± 17 410.2 .±. 18.0 107.8 .±. 2.4 10.5 .±. 0.0 12.0 .±. 0.4 1.01 .±. 0.11 Av37D2 3029 .±. 33 28.7 .± 0.2 0.50 .± 0.02 0.74 .± 0.01 1379 .±. 6 426.3 .± 14.9 97.9 .± 1.9 6.6 .±. 0.1 11.3 .±. 0.5 0.83 .±. 0.01 Av38D2 2999 .±. 97 28.6 .± 0.0 0.51 .±. 0.01 0.78 .± 0.01 1514 .± 5 421.4 .±. 27.6 107.2 .±. 2.1 6.8 .±. 0.2 10.8 .± 1.0 0.90 .± 0.03 Av39D2 2%1 .± 77 31.9 .± 0.5 0.53 .±. 0.01 0. 78 .±. 0.01 1478 .± 16 421.4 .± 19.9 98.0 .±. 1.9 7.6 .±. 0.1 11.5 .±. 1.1 0.83 .± 0.00 Av4002 3106 .±. 153 20.7 .±. 0.3 0.49 .±. 0.03 0.74 .±. 0.01 1370 .±. 15 428.8 .± 39.1 98.5 .±. 4.5 5.5 .± 0.1 10.5 .± 0.6 0.82 .±. 0.02 Av41D2 3094 + 53 27.1 + 0.1 0.53 + 0.01 0.81 + 0.01 1517 + 3 429.3 + 23.5 111.6 + 2.3 6.6 + 0.1 10.0 + 0.5 0.92 + 0.01
@;for explanation of sample number refer to APPENDIX Ia.
~ ~
Appendix lllb: Selected elemental composition of termite mounds sampled at Daly River, site 4, following perthlorlc/nitric acid ( 4:1) extraction.
Species: Amitermes vitiosus.
Sample Element + sd (n-3) mg1100g Number@ A1 Ca Co Cu Fe K Mg Mn Na Zn Av42D4 4170 .± 133 97 .± 1.2 0.44 .± 0.01 1.00 .± 0.01 1651 .± 29 782 .± 36 138 .± 2.3 8.6 .± 0.1 33.9 .± 0.8 0.68 .± 0.03 Av43D4 3792 .± 233 36 ± 0.8 0.36 .± 0.02 0.84 .± 0.07 1312 .± 44 702 .± 34 91 .± 4.5 4.5 .± 0.1 27.3 .± 2.3 0.43 .± 0.04 Av44D4 4027 .± 107 92 .± 1.4 0.42 .± 0.01 0.92 .± 0.04 1246 .± 16 680 .± 7 140 .± 1.0 7.3 .± 0.3 28.7 .± 0.5 0.56 ± 0.02 Av45D4 3634 .± 113 24 .± 0.7 0.32 .± 0.01 0.76 .± 0.03 1075 .± 25 649 .± 21 82 .± 4.6 3.3 .± 0.1 25.6 .± 0.8 0.35 .± 0.04 Av46D4 4291 .± 195 102 .± 26 0.47 .± a02 1.20 .± 0.04 2507 .± 84 821 .± 11 152 .± 5.7 9.5 .± 0.2 37.8 .± 3.0 a81 .± 0.04 Av4704 3780 .± 117 35 .± 0.4 0.36 .± 0.02 0.92 .± 0.01 1848 .± 24 682 .± 30 103 .± 1.5 4.7 .± 0.1 26.9 .± 1.5 0.51 .± 0.04 Av48D4 3479 .± 81 100 .± 1.2 0.42 .± 0.01 1.02 .± 0.01 1818 .± 18 728 .± 21 138 .± 2.2 9.1 .± 0.1 34.4 .± 1.3 0.66 .± 0.05 Av49D4 3691 .± 120 48 .± 0.6 0.39 .± 0.01 0.93 .± 0.04 1574 .± 17 732 .± 23 122 .± 2.0 5.3 .± 0.0 28.3 .± 1.4 0.41 .± 0.03 Av50D4 4547 .± 126 133 .± 2.1 0.51 .± 0.01 1.03 .± 0.01 1470 .± 29 911 .± 22 163 .± 1.9 9.2 .± 0.2 42.4 .± 0.6 0.63 .± 0.03 Av5104 3539 .± 34 22 ± 0.5 0.32 .± 0.01 0.66 .± 0.01 1021 .± 5 722 .± 14 84 .± 0.5 3.6 .± 0.0 30.0 .± 0.6 0.40 .± 0.02 Av52D4 3776 .± 55 62 .± 1.0 1.14 .± 0.03 0.88 .± 0.03 1095 .± 10 629 .± 7 119 .± 1.1 5.1 .± 0.1 30.4 .± 1.8 0.48 .± 0.04 Av53D4 3890 .± 181 34 .± 0.2 0.35 .± 0.01 0.74 .± 0.02 1369 .± 3 666 ± 10 100 .± 2.6 4.0 .± 0.0 29.6 .± 0.7 0.38 .± 0.02 Av54D4 3854 .± 52 41 .± 0.9 0.34 .± 0.01 0.85 .± 0.02 1420 .± 31 697 .± 32 112 .± 0.6 4.3 .± 0.1 27.6 ± 1.3 0.41 .± 0.01 Av5504 3788 .±. 230 21 .± 1.2 0.28 .± 0.01 0.75 .± 0.02 1302 .± 27 689 .± 64 92 .± 4.6 2.9 .± 0.1 23.1 .± 1.0 0.36 .± 0.02 Av56D4 3599 .± 88 83 .± 0.3 0.37 .± 0.01 0.86 .± 0.02 1318 .± 18 698 .± 17 126 .± 2.6 6.2 .± 0.0 28.8 .± 1.8 0.40 .± 0.01 Av57D4 4092 .± 56 49 ± 0.7 0.32 .± 0.01 0.78 .± 0.01 1249 ± 31 708 .± 60 111 .± 5.2 4.1 .±. 0.1 33.1 .± 0.2 0.38 .± 0.03 Av58D4 3788 .± 68 52 .± 1.5 0.45 .± 0.02 0.89 .± 0.01 1336 .± 25 694 .± 8 113 .± 3.4 6.4 .± 0.1 33.0 .± 1.1 0.44 .± 0.02 Av59D4 3608 .± 189 31 .± 0.4 0.32 .± 0.01 0.75 ± 0.02 1283 .± 34 690 .± 45 92 .± 6.2 3.4 .± 0.1 31.5 .± 0.3 0.33 .± 0.01 Av60D4 3495 .± 110 64 .± 0.3 0.41 .± 0.00 0.86 .± 0.02 1209 .± 17 701 .± 30 115 .± 5.2 6.8 .± 0.1 29.2 .± 2.6 0.40 .± 0.01 Av6104 3683 + 134 18 + 0.0 0.39 + 0.01 0.74 + 0.02 1064 + 14 702 + 65 88 + 3.8 3.1 + 0.1 34.0 + 0.5 0.40 + 0.01
@: for explanation or ~.ample number refer to APPENDIX lb.
... i!l
Appendix lllc: Selected elemental composition or termite mounds sampled at Elliott (siteS) rollowing perchlodc/nitric acid (4:1) extraction.
Species: Amitermes t>itiosus.
Sample Element + sd (n=3) mg/100g
Number@ AI Ca Co Cu Fe K Mg Mn Na Zn Av01E 4115 .± 117 136.1 .± 1.3 0.36 .± 0.01 0.97 .± 0.00 1790 .± 17 183.1 .± 2.3 99.1 .± 1.0 9.1 .± 0.0 6.6 .± 0.0 1.17 .± 0.09 Av02E 4131 .± 42 132.9 .± 1.3 0.30 .± 0.01 0.96 .± 0.02 1176 .± 9 183.8 .± 0.9 99.7 .± 0.4 8.6 .± 0.1 7.1 .± 0.2 1.12 .± 0.04 Av03E 3557 .± 51 117.9 .± 0.9 0.24 .± 0.01 0.81 .± 0.04 1645 .± 7 154.2 .± 1.9 89.0 .± 0.9 6.0 .± 0.1 6.1 .± 0.1 1.01 .± 0.07 Av04E 3218 .± 69 103.7 .± 0.5 0.27 .± 0.03 0.81 .± 0.03 1588 .± 9 141.8 .± 3.8 81.3 .± 1.0 5.7 .± 0.1 6.0 .± 0.3 1.03 .± 0.03 Av05E 3773 .± 199 87.8 .± 1.0 0.25 .± 0.03 0.91 .± 0.01 1783 .± 9 156.8 .± 1.1 92.3 .± 0.7 4.7 .± 0.1 6.8 .± 0.1 1.02 .± 0.01 Av06E 3585 .t 48 77.5 .± 0.9 0.26 .±. 0.05 0.87 .± 0.01 1726 .± 9 149.3 .± 0.6 89.2 .± 1.2 4.5 .± 0.1 6.6 .± 0.2 0.96 .± 0.02 Av07E 3575 .± 67 104.0 .± 1.5 0.29 .± 0.01 0.91 .±. 0.02 _1832 .t 2 160.9 .±. 5.3 99.1 .± 0.5 6.7 .± 0.2 6.8 .±. 0.3 1.10 .± 0.07 Av08E 3662 .± 8 82.4 .±. 0.8 0.29 .±. 0.02 0.93 .± 0.01 1866 .± 5 168.2 .± 3.9 97.0 .± 0.6 6.5 .± 0.0 6.4 .± 0.1 1.10 .± 0.01 Av09E 3972 .± 20 93.4 .± 0.7 0.40 .± 0.01 1.05 .± 0.01 1909 .± 9 175.3 .± 1.4 99.5 .± 0.1 11.5 .± 0.1 6.3 .± 0.2 1.20 .± 0.00 Av10E 3610 .± 198 76.4 .± 1.4 0.37 .± 0.01 0.95 .± 0.02 1769 .± 8 161.3 .± 2.5 87.1 .± 23 10.2 .± 0.2 5.7 .± 0.0 1.13 .± 0.03 AvllE 3792 .±. 52 119.3 .± 0.5 0.31 .± 0.01 0.96 .± 0.01 1896 .± 18 163.3 .± 0.8 96.3 .± 0.7 8.7 .± 0.1 7.7 .± 0.5 1.23 .± 0.19 Av12E 3805 .± 74 95.5 .± 0.6 0.31 .± 0.03 0.92 .± 0.00 1878 .± 6 164.2 .± 3.7 94.0 .± 0.6 7.7 .± 0.1 7.5 .± 0.3 1.11 .± 0.02 Av13E 3543 .± 11 114.4 .± 1.1 0.27 .± 0.02 0.81 .± 0.01 1611 .± 5 153.1 .± 6.0 91.8 .± 0.4 5.8 .± 0.1 6.3 .± 0.1 0.99 .± 0.04 Av14E 2954 .± 93 91.9 .± 0.7 0.20 .± 0.02 0.74 .± 0.02 1477 .± 6 142.7 .± 25 80.2 .± 1.0 5.7 .± 0.2 5.7 .± 0.6 0.92 .± 0.03 Av15E 4770 .± 118 109.9 .± 1.5 0.31 .± 0.00 1.03 .± 0.01 2127 .± 14 186.6 .± 2.6 113.5 .± 0.4 5.9 .± 0.0 8.4 .± 0.3 1.17 .±. 0.03 Av16E 3942 .± 187 72.8 .± 1.2 0.27 .± 0.03 0.89 .± 0.01 1846 .± 15 166.6 .± 7.4 91.3 .± 2.1 4.8 .± 0.1 7.0 .± 0.1 1.04 .± 0.03 Av17E 3334 .± 53 139.4 .± 2.4 0.34 .± 0.00 0.95 .± 0.01 1589 .± 31 164.8 .± 2.8 91.8 .± 0.7 10.1 .± 0.2 5.5 .± 0.3 1.14 .± 0.02 Av18E 3173 + 80 126.1 + 2.1 0.33 + 0.02 0.89 + 0.01 1504 + 15 154.2 + 1.5 87.3 + 1.5 8.9 + 0.1 6.0 + 0.3 1.06 + 0.04 - -- - ------Av19E 3913 .± 88 105.9 .± 1.4 0.35 .± 0.02 1.01 .± 0.00 1765 .± 8 170.9 .± 1.0 96.0 .± 1.7 &5 .± 0.0 6.2 .± 0.2 1.15 .± 0.01 Av20E 3494 .± 109 86.0 .± 1.9 0.35 .± 0.01 0.93 .± 0.01 1635 .± 34 155.7 .± 3.2 82.7 .± 1.3 9.0 .± 0.1 6.3 .± 0.2 1.08 .± 0.02 Av21E 3425 .± 8 135.4 .± 1.0 0.36 .± 0.01 0.91 .± 0.01 1702 .± 22 155.2 .± 1.2 91.8 .± 0.1 8.3 .± 0.2 6.5 .± 0.4 1.12 .± 0.05 Av22E 3479 .± 129 135.4 .± 4.6 0.30 .± 0.00 0.88 .± 0.02 1575 .± 39 155.9 .± 5.8 93.0 .± 2.9 7.8 .± 0.3 6.1 .± 0.2 1.15 .± 0.06 Av23E 3396 .± 106 154.6 .± 4.1 0.29 .± 0.00 0.94 .± 0.03 1628 .± 15 152.8 .± 2.1 92.2 .± 3.3 8.0 .± 0.1 6.3 .± 0.4 1.11 .± 0.01 Av24E 3607 .± 11 142.3 .± 1.2 0.31 .± 0.01 0.97 .± 0.06 1672 .± 47 148.9 .± 9.2 93.5 .± 0.6 7.5 .± 0.1 6.5 .± 0.1 1.16 .± 0.02 Av25E 3448 + 24 143.9 + 0.4 0.34 + 0.02 0.90 + 0.01 1643 + 32 155.1 + 2.8 93.1 + 1.1 8.3 + 0.1 6.0 + 0.1 1.12 + 0.01 - -- - ------Av26E 3213 .± 69 104.1 .± 0.5 0.31 .± 0.02 0.89 .± 0.01 1642 .± 21 156.8 .± 3.3 87.8 .± 1.9 _7.6 .± 0.1 5.7 .± 0.2 0.90 .± 0.04 Av27E# 3682 .± 28 129.4 .± 1.2 0.35 .± 0.02 0.91 .± 0.02 1688 .± 20 161.5 .± 4.8 96.4 .± 1.0 7.5 .± 0.2 6.5 .± 0.4 1.18 .± 0.05 Av28E# 3634 + 81 147.9 + 2.2 0.34 + 0.01 0.91 + 0.01 1668 + 6 156.8 + 2.3 94.0 + 1.5 7.9 + 0.0 5.8 + 0.2 1.15 + 0.02 - -- - ------Av29E# 3329 + 88 105.0 + 3.8 0.36 + 0.02 0.96 + 0.02 1641 + 34 162.3 + 4.7 86.0 + 2.6 7.8 + 0.2 5.7 + 0.1 0.98 + 0.03
@: for explanation of sample number refer to APPENDIX Ic
.... 11!
Appendix Hid: Selected elemental composition of termite mounds sampled at Daly River, site 1, following perchloric/nitric acid (4:1) extraction.
Species: Tumulitermes pastinator.
Sample Element + sd (n=3) mg/100g Number@ AI Ca Co Cu Fe K Mg Mn Na Zn Tp01D1 3306 .± 200 31.3 .± 0.9 0.28 .± 0.01 0.60 .± 0.01 1597 .± 40 549 .±50 85.9 .± 4.4 4.0 .± 0.2 33.4 .± 0.4 0.46 .± 0.02 Tp02D1 2676 .±. 108 23.0 .±. 0.3 0.28 .±. 0.00 0.53 .± 0.01 1248 .±. 16 476 .±. 6 58.3 .±. 2.2 3.4 .± 0.1 24.6 .±. 1.7 0.46 .± 0.02 Tp03D1 2885 .± 73 25.6 .± 0.3 0.29 .± 0.00 0.55 .± 0.01 1228 .± 29 526 .± 24 64.9 .± 0.9 3.1 .±. 0.0 24.0 .±. 1.6 0.49 .± 0.03 Tp04D1 2882 .± 59 25.7 .±. 0.4 0.28 .± 0.01 0.54 .±. 0.01 1201 .± 3 500 .±. 13 64.3 .±. 0.9 3.3 .±. 0.0 24.4 .± 1.1 0.53 .±. 0.03 Tp05D1 3257 .± 130 15.2 .±. 0. 7 0.29 .± 0.00 0.55 .± 0.02 1331 .± 51 490 .± 25 65.3 .± 22 28 .± 0.0 29.3 .± 1.3 0.53 .± 0.02 Tp06D1 3257 .± 83 20.3 .± 0.2 0.28 .± 0.01 0.56 .±. 0.02 1345 .± 20 530 .± 27 67.3 .± 0.6 3.3 .± 0.0 28.7 .± 0.8 0.49 .± 0.02 Tp07D1 3408 .± 84 23.9 .±. 0.3 0.31 .± 0.01 0.63 .±. 0.02 1389 .± 19 557 .± 16 69.8 .±. 2.0 3.1 .±. 0.0 30.2 .± 1.6 0.50 .± 0.03 Tp08D1 3069 .± 70 26.1 .± 0.2 0.28 .±. 0.02 0.58 .±. 0.01 1313 .±. 8 504 .± 14 67.8 .±. 0.5 3.1 .± 0.0 26.8 .± 1.5 0.47 .± 0.02 Tp09D1 2891 .± 12 22.3 .± 0.2 0.28 .± 0.01 0.55 .±. 0.01 1260 .± 11 502 .± 12 61.1 .± 0.1 2.9 .±. 0.1 26.1 .± 0.8 0.46 .±. 0.01 Tp10D1 2849 .± 38 26.8 .±. 0.3 0.27 .±. 0.01 0.56 .± 0.02 1245 .±. 12 497 .± 21 64.5 .± 1.1 3.3 .± 0.0 26.2 ·± 0.6 0.49 .±. 0.05 Tp11D1 2911 .± 103 22.2 .± 0.2 0.27 .± 0.01 0.55 .± 0.00 1337 .± 11 502 .±. 27 61.9 .± 1.3 3.1 .±. 0.1 27.3 .± 2.4 0.48 .± 0.01 Tpl2D1 3270 .±. 69 48.8 .± 0.5 0.32 .± 0.01 0.62 .±. 0.01 1476 .± 9 511 .± 27 83.2 .±. 1.6 4.6 .±. 0.0 27.6 .±. 1.1 0.51 .± 0.01 Tp13D1* 2676 .± 125 26.1 .±. 0.2 0.27 .±. 0.01 0.57 .± 0.01 1329 .± 24 4% .± 4 64.9 .± 1.9 3.5 .± 0.0 25.8 .± 23 0.45 .± 0.02 Tp14D1 3353 .± 11 22.2 .± 0.3 0.29 .± 0.02 0.65 .± 0.01 1422 .± 9 528 .±. 8 68.9 .±. 0.6 3.0 .±. 0.0 28.8 .± 0.2 0.45 .± 0.02 Tp15D1 2949 .±. 146 25.1 .±. 0.9 0.28 .±. 0.01 0.59 .±. 0.03 1373 .± 26 518 .± 22 66.5 .± 2.1 3.2 .± 0.1 27.1 .± 3.2 0.45 .± 0.02 Tp16D1 3066 .± 104 15.2 .±. 0.1 0.31 .± 0.02 0.58 .± 0.00 1533 .± 12 476 .± 23 61.7 .± 21 3.3 .± 0.0 24.5 .± 3.4 0.49 .± 0.01 Tp17D1 2880 .± 10 25.7 .± 0.6 0.28 .± 0.01 0.55 .± 0.01 1398 .± 36 536 .± 23 64.2 .± 0.8 4.1 .±. 0.0 25.4 .± 1.5 0.50 .± 0.02 Tp18D1 3063 .± 123 24.4 .±. 0.2 0.30 .± 0.00 0.56 .±. 0.01 1365 .± 29 507 .± 16 65.2 .± 0.6 3.7 .± 0.1 25.4 .±. 2.0 0.56 .± 0.04 Tp19D1 2892 .± 20 19.3 .±. 0.1 0.30 .± 0.02 0.52 .± 0.01 1311 .± 7 486 .± 37 60.8 .± 0.4 3.8 .± 0.0 25.0 .± 0.2 0.50 .± 0.02 Tp20D1 2875 .± 140 26.7 .± 0.2 0.28 .± 0.01 0.58 .± 0.01 1284 .± 22 492 .± 38 57.3 .± 1.7 3.1 .± 0.1 27.3 .± 4.6 0.48 .± 0.02 Tp21D1 2958 ± 64 27.2 .± 0.3 0.29 ± 0.00 0.59 .±. 0.01 1287 .± 8 481 ± 10 60.3 .± 0.8 3.6 ± 0.0 29.0 ± 2.9 0.48 .± 0.03 Tp22D1 3142 .± 52 17.1 .±. 1.2 0.29 ± 0.02 0.55 ± 0.01 1380 .± 9 520 .± 18 57.8 .± 1.0 3.2 .± 0.1 27.7 .± 1.0 0.50 .± 0.01 Tp23D1 3137 ± 78 26.3 .± 0.4 0.29 .±. 0.02 0.57 .± 0.01 1306 .± 20 517 .±. 27 69.4 .± 1.9 3.1 .± 0.1 31.2 .± 1.7 0.42 ± 0.03 Tp24D1 3063 .± 52 16.4 .± 0.1 0.29 .± 0.02 0.54 .± 0.00 1376 .± 11 505 .± 24 57.8 .±. 0.9 3.1 .±. 0.1 27.9 .± 0.9 0.49 .± 0.01 Tp25D1 3165 .±. 100 13.0 .± 0.0 0.28 .± 0.01 0.52 ± 0.01 1249 .± 4 504 .± 15 58.9 .± 2.0 2.9 .± 0.1 27.3 .±. 3.0 0.46 .± 0.02 Tp26D1 3254 .± 11!__19.7 + 0.3 0.~.01 0.57 + 0.01 1327 + to 544 __..±.___] 58.2 + 1.3 2.8__.±. 0.1 27.0 .±. 3.0 0.49 .± 0.01
@:for explanation of aample number refer to APPENDIX Id.
"' :c
Appendix llle: Selected elemental composition of tennite mounds sampled at Daly River, site 3, following perchloric/nitrlc acid (4:1) extraction.
Species: Tumuliternres pastinalor.
Sample Element ± sd (n=3) mg/100g Number@ AI Ca Co Cu Fe K Mg Mn Na Zn Tp27D3• 3873 .±. 102 18.7 .±. 0.2 0.44 .±. 0.01 0.76 ± 0.02 2835 .±. 20 708 .± 37 148.1 .± 4.7 5.3 .± 0.1 14.2 .± 1.1 1.16 .± 0.02 Tp28D3 4414 .± 292 16.7 .± 0.4 0.46 .± 0.01 0.81 .±. 0.02 3253 .± 46 746 .± 1 156.7 .± 7.6 5.3 .±. 0.1 15.4 .± 0.2 1.13 .± 0.04 Tp29D3 3790 .±. 147 17.8 .±. 0.3 0.43 .± 0.02 0.96 .± 0.04 2859 .± 19 712 .±. 33 148.1 .±. 4.4 5.2 .± 0.1_ 14.5 .± 1.5 1.25 .± 0.04 Tp30D3• 4100 .± 146 29.5 .± 1.2 0.46 .± 0.00 0.94 .± 0.01 2988 ± 68 803 .± 32 181.4 .±. 6.2 6.6 .±. 0.2 16.4 .± 1.1 1.35 .± 0.03 Tp31D3 4607 .±. 51 15.5 ± 0.2 0.50 .±. 0.04 0.87 .± 0.02 3159 .± 4 811 .± 20 171.1 .± 2.4 5.9 .± 0.1 19.8 .± 0.6 1.27 .± 0.03 Tp32D3 3596 .± 55 14.9 .± 0.4 0.42 .±. 0.01 0.76 .± 0.01 2744 .± 32 619 .± 8 146.1 .± 0.4 4.9 .±. 0.1 12.7 .± 0.4 1.15 .± 0.04 Tp33D3 3506 .± 165 17.7 .± 0.2 0.39 .± 0.01 0.87 .± 0.01 2696 .±. 28 617 .± 43 152.8 .± 6.0 5.8 .±. 0.1 12.1 .±. 1.2 1.37 .±. 0.04 Tp34D3 3630 .± 183 24.6 .± 0.4 0.39 .± 0.02 1.67 ± 0.05 2677 .± 37 593 .± 40 162.4 .± 6.8 5.5 .± 0.1 10.6 .±. 1.5 1.66 .±. 0.05 Tp35D3 3959 .± 263 22.9 .± 0.4 0.45 .± 0.02 0.76 .± 0.04 2965 .± 75 664 .t 3 166.7 .± 10.1 6.6 .± 0.2 15.6 .±. 1.1 1.26 .±. 0.02 Tp36D3 4010 .± 157 18.6 .± 0.3 0.40 .± 0.01 1.64 .± 0.02 2993 .± 87, 670 .±. 23 144.6 .± 4.9 5.0 .± 0.1 13.9 .± 0.3 1.73 .±. 0.01 Tp37D3 4550 .± 2 21.0 .± 0.4 0.48 .± 0.03 1.99 .± 0.08 3242 .± 68 794 .± 22 174.0 .± 0.7 5.6 .± 0.1 16.5 .± 0.6 1.76 .± 0.04 Tp38D3 3506 .± 196 22.4 .± 0.7 0.39 .± 0.01 0.90 .± 0.01 2775 .± 6 607 ± 40 127.6 .± 4.0 5.7 .± 0.0 '12.7 .± 1.4 1.13 .± 0.03 Tp39D3 3301 .±. 160 30.0 .± 1.8 0.39 .± 0.02 2.06 .± 0.13 2852 .±. 104 579 .± 63 135.6 .± 7.0 7.3 .± 0.2 13.5 .±. 1.1 1.72 .± 0.07 Tp40D3# 3775 .± 35 45.4 .± 0.6 0.49 .±. 0.01 1.45 .±. 0.04 3023 .± 35 805 .± 27 160.9 .± 1.2 8.4 .±. 0.0 17.2 ± 0.5 1.68 .± 0.01 Tp41D3# 4403 .± 73 56.0 .±. 3.7 0.47 .± 0.01 1.84 .± 0.02 3040 .±. 18 855 .±. 56 186.1 .± 2.3 10.2 .± 0.0 18.4 .± 0.7 1.94 .± 0.05 Tp42D3# 4058 .± 55 84.6 .± 0.2 0.52 .± 0.02 1.36 .± 0.05 3031 .± 43 759 .± 31 192.7 .±. 2.0 12.8 .± 0.1 16.3 .± 1.1 1.81 .± 0.01 Tp43D3## 3919 .± 169 53.9 ,± 0.5 0.43 .± 0.03 0.73 .± 0.01 2660 .± 31 714 + 30 161.6 + 6.5 8.6 + 0.2 15.0 .± 1.1 1.22 .± 0.01
@: for explanation of sample number refer to APPENDIX I e.
.... i::
Appendix III£: Selected elemental composition of termite mounds sampled at Howard Springs (site 6) following perchloric/nitric acid (4:1) extraction. Species: Tumulitermes pastinator.
Sample Element + sd (n=3) mg/100g Number@ AI Ca Co Cu Fe K
Tp44H 6230 ± 29 33.4 ± 0.9 1.08 ± 0.02 2.43 ± 0.01 4894 ± 75 53.4 ± 0.4 Tp45H 5982 ± 49 27.2 .± 0.8 1.07 ± 0.02 2.40 .± 0.03 5800 ± 35 50.8 ± 1.1 Tp46H 7088 .± 14 37.8 ± 0.3 1.20 .±. 0.01 2.02 .±. 0.02 4882 .±. 29 39.1 .± 1.3 Tp47H 6873 .± 55 38.6 .± 0.1 1.17 .± 0.00 1.97 .± 0.01 4128 .± 13 37.5 .± 0.7 Tp48H 6284 .±. 31 55.8 ± 0.7 1.10 ± 0.01 1.91 .±. 0.08 3746 ± 25 36.1 .±. 0.6 Tp49H 6062 .±. 29 48.3 ± 0.4 1.09 .±. 0.01 1.81 .±. 0.01 3713 ± 28 34.7 .±. 0.5 Tp50H 5989 .±. 47 70.1 .±. 0.6 0.73 .± 0.01 1.53 .±. 0.01 4303 .±. 22 34.4 .± 1.9
"Tp51H 5717 .±. 90 62.4 .± 1.0 0.70 .± 0.02 1.46 .± 0.04 4795 .± 85 34.6 ± 0.5
Mg Mn 47.5 ± 0.8
"45.9 .±. 0.4 55.4 .± 1.4 56.2 ± 0.5 50.3 .± 1.1 51.2 .± 1.1 44.9 .±. 1.9 47.0 + 0.6
6.4 .±. 0.0 7.7 .±. 0.1 5.3 .± 0.0 4.9 .±. 0.0 5.5 .± 0.1 5.5 .±. 0.1 5.9 .± 0.1 6.9 .±. 0.2
Tp52H 5684 .±. 63 48.2 .±. 0.5 0.78 .±. 0.02 1.46 .±. 0.01 5399 ± 57 27.7 .±. 0.5 42.7 .±. 0.1 8.7 .±. 0.1 Tp53H 5228 .± 51 54.1 .± 0.5 0.71 .± 0.01 1.38 .± 0.01 6519 .± 119 27.7 .± 0.6 41.7 .± 0.1 10.9 .± 0.1 Tp54H 6639 .±. 137 52.3 .±. 1.2 1.11 .± 0.03 1.84 .± 0.02 4581 .±. 48 37.1 .± 0.7 50.2 .±. 0.3 6.2 .± 0.0 Tp55H 6335 .±. 160 47.0 .± 0.5 1.07 .± 0.03 1.78 .± 0.02 4887 .± 61 35.0 .± 1.0 50.8 .± 1.5 6.9 .±. 0.2 Tp56H 5654 .±. 74 46.7 ± 0.6 1.21 .±. 0.01 1.85 .±. 0.01 2895 .±. 34 48.4 .±. 0.8 50.5 .±. 1.7 6.7 .± 0.0 Tp57H 5644 .±. 123 73.2 .±. 2.4 1.02 .±. 0.03 1.60 .±. 0.01 3934 .±. 45 38.9 .± 0.7 47.0 .±. 0.8 7.2 ± 0.1 Tp58H 5773 .±. 70 51.1 .±. 1.8 1.01 .± 0.01 1.49 .± 0.01 4306 .± 12 29.3 .± 1.3 46.5 .±. 1.1 11.0 .±. 0.0
Na 6.3 .±. 0.3 6.9 .± 0.2 6.7 .±. 0.4
Zn 1.38 .±. 0.01 1.36 .± 0.03 1.31 .± 0.04
6.5 .± 0.3 1.24 .± 0.02 6.8 .± 0.1 6.6 .± 0.2 6.1 .±. 0.3 6.9 .±. 0.0 5.6 .± 0.2 5.6 .± 0.1 6.2 .± 0.6 6.6 .± 0.4 6.2 .±. 0.0 5.6 .±. 0.4 6.3 .± 0.3
1.37 .±. 0.03 1.62 ± 0.17 1.10 .± 0.01 1.05 .± 0.04 1.00 .± 0.02 1.02 .± 0.03 1.16 .±. 0.03 1.14 .±. 0.04 1.16 ± 0.01 0.98 .± 0.01 1.07 ± 0.03
Tp59H 5889 .±. 148 48.8 .±. 0.2 0.82 .± 0.01 1.40 .± 0.04 3740 .± 40 31.7 .±. 1.6 45.2 .±. 1.0 8.1 .± 0.0 5.0 .±. 0.3 1.04 .±. 0.02 Tp60H 7745 .±. 122 627 ± 1.5 0.76 .±. 0.01 1.65 .±. 0.03 4694 .±. 64 43.6 .±. 1.1 55.7 .±. 1.1 4.8 .± 0.1 7.1 .±. 0.1 Tp61H 7297 .± 152 62.5 .±. 1.4 0.74 .±. 0.00 1.65 .±. 0.02 4107 .±. 64 39.0 .±. 0.5 53.1 .±. 1.4 4.8 ± 0.1 7.1 .± 0.3 Tp62H 6708 .± 144 56.5 .± 0.4 0.73 .±. 0.02 1.58 .±. 0.01 3758 .±. 86 35.3 .±. 2.3 48.9 .± 1.1 4.9 .± 0.2 7.1 .± 0.4 Tp63H 5907 .± 61 38.0 .± 0.1 0.54 .±. 0.02 1.20 .±. 0.01 3906 .±. 113 30.6 .± 0.5 41.3 .±. 0.5 3.6 .± 0.1 4.9 .± 0.2 Tp64H 5944 .± 42 32.5 .±. 0.2 0.56 .±. 0.01 1.23 .± 0.01 5092 .± 73 28.0 .±. 0.5 40.8 .± 0.8 4.1 .±. 0.0 4.6 .±. 0.2 Tp65H 5658 .± 60 40.9 ± 0.5 0.57 .±. 0.02 1.21 .±. 0.01 4151 .±. 34 30.5 .± 0.4 41.8 .± 0.7 4.2 .± 0.0 5.1 .± 0.1 Tp66H 7383 .±. 141 53.5 .±. 0.4 0.58 .± 0.01 1.33 .± 0.03 4719 .± 91 44.5 .± 1.7 59.2 .±. 1.0 5.5 ± 0.0 6.5 .± 0.2 Tp67H 7228 .± 328 57.7 .± 2.7 0.54 .± 0.02 1.25 .± 0.05 4660 .± 177 49.5 .± 2.7 61.2 .±. 3.3 6.7 .± 1.0 6.4 .± 0.5
=±= ~±~
~±=±= =±= =±= 1.19 .± 0.03 1.60 .± 0.38
~Tp68H 6707 .± 81 48.8 + 0.4 0.46 + 0.03 1.24 + 0.01 5676 + 33 34.7 ± 0.4 54.6 + 0.4 6.6 .±. 0.1 6.6 + 0.1 1.03 .± 0.02 @: for explanation o£ sample number refer to APPENDIX If.
• : n""2
'
.... u. "'
Appendix Illb: Selected elemental composition of termite mounds sampled at Daly River, site 3, following perchloric/nitric acid (4:1) extraction.
Sample Number@ Nt01D3• Nt02D3 Nt03D3• Nt04D3• Nt05D3 Nt06D3• Nt07D3
Species: Nasutitermes triodiae.
Element + sd (n=3) mgllOOg AI Ca Co Cu Fe
5139 .± 163 26.6 .± 0.2 0.52 .± 0.02 0.72 .± 0.03 3995 .± 125 4891 .± 86 20.1 .± 0.0 0.52 .± 0.02 0.73 .± 0.01 3633 .± 109 4514 .± 231 30.5 .± 0.4 0.54 .± 0.03 1.09 .± 0.06 3405 .± 31 4919 .±. 166 24.3 .± 0.2 0.54 4878 .:!: 22 23.0 4638 .± 211 17.7
.± 0.2
.± 0.3 4550 .± 292 22.0 .± 0.1
0.50 0.53 0.55
.± 0.00 0.77 .± 0.03 3566 .± 22
.± 0.01 1.03 .± 0.01 3629 .± 50
.± 0.00 1.12 .± 0.04 3461 .± 89
.:!: 0.01 0. 78 .:!: 0.02 3287 .:!: 135
K Mg 1039 .± 27 268.8 .± 3.7 937 .± 8 244.2 .± 2.9 1039 .:!: 19 247.7 .:!: 7.3 1023 .± 41 271.5 .± 3.8 1052 .± 50 246.0 .± 2.5 966 .± 52 237.6 .± 7.0 914 .± 39 246.6 .± 7.7
Nt08D3• 4400 .± 106 26.0 .± 0.3 0.50 .± 0.02 0.82 .± 0.02 3551 .± 90 870 .± 19 238.5 .± 4.1 Nt09D3 4770 .± 183 27.3 .± 1.2 0.51 .± 0.01 0.74 .± 0.03 3422 .± 189 859 .± 48 321.0 .± 12.6 Nt10D3 4421 .± 37 19.0 .± 0.2 0.57 .± 0.01 0.66 .± 0.00 3267 .± 103 783 .± 52 248.6 .± 2.1 Nt11D3 4458 .± 79 20.8 .± 0.3 0.51 .± 0.01 1.19 .± 0.06 3436 .± 114 941 .± 11 229.2 .± 3.7 Nt12D3 4567 .± 241 22.4 .± 0.1 0.49 .± 0.02 0.64 .± 0.01 3487 .± 34 939 .± 59 255.5 .± 6.3
Mn Na Zn 10.0 .± 0.0 19.9 .± 0.6 1.52 .± 0.06 8.5 .± 0.1 17.9 .± 0.2 1.54 .± 0.08 8.3 .± 0.3 21.0 .± 1.6 1.54 .± 0.12 12.8 .± 0.3 18.5 .± 1.1 1.68 .± 0.03 9.4 .± 0.2 18.7 .± 0.2 1.68 .± 0.06 8.7 .± 0.1 18.0 .± 1.3 1.74 .± 0.05 9.9 .± 0.1 15.7 .± 1.5 1.61 .± 0.05 9.2 .± 0.1 14.8 .± 0.9 1.63 .± 0.07 10.6 .± 0.3 20.2 .± 0.8 1.69 .± 0.05 8.0 .±. 0.2 13.7 .± 0.3 1.55 .± 0.02 9.3 .± 0.1 15.7 .± 0.8 1.65 .± 0.05 9.2 .± 0.0 16.2 .±. 1.6 1.51 .± 0.06
Nt13D3 4637 .± 95 18.7 .± 0.1 0.57 .± 0.01 1.32 .± 0.06 3639 .± 69 956 .± 49 267.3 .± 1.3 10.5 .± 0.2 16.3 .± 0.3 1.97 .± 1.59 .± 1.80 .± 1.69 .±
0.07 0.02 0.08 0.06
Nt14D3 4643 .± 48 30.2 .± 0.2 0.49 .± 0.01 0.83 .± 0.02 3386 .± 88 868 .± 55 298.8 .± 1.7 10.5 .± 0.1 20.0 .± 0.3 Nt15D3 4202 .± 166 27.3 .± 0.1 0.51 .± 0.02 1.20 .± 0.09 3387 .± :tS 893 .± 29 237.1 .± 3.1 8.8 .± 0.1 16.9 .± 1.0 Nt16D3# 4700 .± 48 17.6 .± 0.1 0.57 .± 0.01 1.17 .± 0.09 3352 .± 26 1075 .± 55 241.3 .± 1.6 7.8 .± 0.2 Nt17D3# 4422 .± 225 19.7 .± 0.3 0.54 .± 0.00 0.68 .± 0.01 3333 .± 56 912 .± 34 244.7 .± 6.2 7.6 .± 0.1 Nt18D3# 4588 .± 165 20.6 .± 0.4 0.59 .± 0.00 1.13 .± 0.02 3284 .± 96 947 .± 24 256.3 .± 4.6 8.8 .± 0.2
16.4 .± 0.5 13.7 .± 0.9 14.4 .:!: 0.9
1.58 .±. 0.05 1.73 .± 0.06
Nt19D3# 4102 .± 287 29.2 .± 0.6 0.56 .± 0.02 0.74 .± 0.02 3008 .± 137 817 .± 39 261.6 .± 8.5 10.9 .± 0.5 13.2 .± 0.9 1.62 .±. 0.05 Nt20D3## 4590 + 63 73.6 + 0.5 0.59 + 0.01 1.18 + 0.01 3248 + 103 991 + 56 297.8 + 2.5 13.5 + 0.2 15.3 + 0.2 2.10 + 0.01
@; for explanation of sample number refer to APPENDIX Ig.
... ..,. ....
Appendix lllh: Selected elemental composition of termite mounds sampled at Daly River, site 4, following pen:hloric/nitric acid (4:1) extraction.
Sample Number@ Nt21D4* Nt22D4 Nt23D4 Nt24D4
• Nt25D4 " Nt26D4
Nt27D4 Nt28D4 Nt29D4 Nt30D4* Nt31D4* Nt32D4* Nt33D4 Nt34D4 Nt35D4
" Nt36D4* Nt37D4 Nt38D4 Nt39D4 Nt40D4*
" Nt41D4* Nt42D4* Nt43D4 Nt44D4 Nt45D4
AI Ca 4817 .± 136 33.0 .± 0.8 0.37 4870 .± 139 3592 .± 19
40.0 .± 0.2 30.3 .± 0.5
4610 .± 222 28.3 + 0. 4
0.37 0.31 1131 0.35 0.34 0.25
4496 .± 6 4531 .± 119 4008 .± 77 4330 .± 78
49.5 .± 0.2 34.7 32.6
.± 0.7
.± 0.3 25.2 .± 0.6 0.26
Co + 0.02 .± 0.01
Species: Nasutitermes triodiae.
Element + sd (n=3) mg/1()0g
0.81 0.84
Cu Fe K .± 0.02 1374 .± 25 819 .± 17 .± 0.01 1408 .± 4 ~66 836
.± 0.00 0.75 .± 0.01 .± 0.03 .± 0.00 .± 0.04 .± 0.01 .± 0.01
1350 .± 17 593 .± 17 .± 0.03 .± 0.01 .± 0.01 .± 0.00 .± 0.01
0.92 0.87 0.87 0.75 0.81
2165 .± 50 620 .± 24 1714' .± 1700 .±
22 663 .± 35 0 707 .± 28
.± 5 1271 .± 8 614 1621 .±
3580 .± 72 52.8 .± 0.2 0.26 .± 0.01 0.75 .± 0.01 1264 .± 20 582 37 44.8 .± 0.7 0.27 .± 0.01 0.76 .± 0.00 1279 .± 10 585
.± 0.2 0.27 .± 0.01 0.72 .± 0.01 1241 .± 5 554 3708 .± 3478 .± 22
68 43
35.3
11 608 .± 9 .± 14 .± 8 .± 3 .t 17 2939 .±
4008 .± 4111 .± 3479 .±
29.6 .± 0.4 0.22 .± 0.01 0.60 .± 0.01 60.7 .± 0.7 0.30 .± 0.01 0.87 .± 0.02
25 33.7 .± 0.3 0.30 .± 0.00 0.87 .± 0.01 77 37.4 .± 0.9 .± 0.02
3676 .± 110 24.1 .± 0.2 0.28 0.30 .± 0.01
0.78 0.78
.± 0.03
.± 0.02
961 1226
.± 7 ~ 4
1240 .± 12 1063 .± 12 1182 .t13
505 656 .± 28 738 .± 21 672 699
3188 .± 53 3432 .± 125 3381 .± 63
18.7 .± 0.3 16.7 .± 0.3
0.23 0.23 0.24
.± 0.00 0.69 .± 0.00 947 .± 6 515
.t 15
.± 38
.± 21
.± 41
.± 30
.± 11
.± 2
.± 32
.± 22
22.2 2867 .± 37 33.5
+ 0.4 .± 0.4
.t 0.02
.± 0.01 0.22 .± 0.01
2850 .± 10 28.7 .t 0.1 0.22 .± 0.02 3286 .± 16 25.8 .± 0.4 0.24 .± 0.01 3816 .± 135 49.9 .± 1.6 0.28 .± 0.02 3728 .± 20 41.4 .± 1.1 0.30 .± 0.02 3986 .± 23 36.7 .± 0.8 0.30 .± 0.02
0.74 .± O.o! 0.75 .± 0.01 0.68 0.59 0.71 0.76 0.69
.± 0.01
.± 0.00
.± 0.01
.± 0.05
.± 0.01
1044 .± 23 578 1238 .± 2 567
488 924 .± 7 .t 4 567
987 .± 7 590 1393 .±
799
48 675 580 -t 26 1184 .± 36
0.73 .± 0.01 1355 .± 11 651 .± 19
'
Mg Mn Na .t 1.7 3.2 .± 0.1 28.3 93.7
103.8 79.0
.± 1.5 3.7 .t 0.1 30.7 .± 0.5 .± 1.8 .t 1.7
0.41 0.41 0.39 .± 1.0 3.8
26 102.4 .± 5.8 .± 0.0 .± 0.0
22.4 23.3 .± 22 0.47 37.5 .t 0.8 0.39
Zn .± 0.01 .± 0.01 .± 0.01 .t 0.03 .± 0.04 134.6 .± 0.5
111.8 .± 4.1 4.4 .± 0.1 3.5 .± 0.1 29.8
21.8 .t 1.6 .± 1.1
0.47 .± 0.01 .± 1.7 2.3 .± 0.0 .± 0.9 1.9 .± 0.0 21.5 .± 1.8
0.46 0.53
.± 1.8 3.4 .± 0.1 22.9 .± 1.8 0.45
.± 0.4 3.8 .t 0.0 21.5
.± 0.1 3.0 .± 0.0 17.4
.± 1.1 2.8 4.7 .± 0.9
.± 0.7
.± 0.2 0.46 0.44
.t 1.5 0.38
.± 0.6 0.43
.± 0.04
.± 0.08
.± 0.03
.± 0.01
.± 0.03
.± 0.04
.± 0.01
85.5 82.2 %.2 103.0 85.8 87.1 118.7 89.7 .± 0.4 3.5
3.2
.± 0.0
.± 0.0
.± 0.0
.± 0.0
20.8 26.5 30.0 29.8 28.6
.t 0.1
.± 1.2
.± 1.0
.t 1.2
0.44 .± 0.03 130.1 .t 27
86.4 3.5 .t 0.1 67.2 67.6 72.4 85.0 93.5
.± 1.3
.± 1.1 1.5 .± 0.0 15.8
0.39 0.39 0.38
.± 2.4 1.4
.± 2.4 1.6 .t 0.0 .± 0.0
.t 0.8 2.5 .t 0.0
.± 0.4 2.4 .± 0.0 81.4 .± 0.6 2.2 .± 0.0 100.6 91.7
.± 3.4
.± 1.2 4.4 .± 0.3 3.3 .± 0.1
18.1 .± 1.9 0.40 20.3 .± 2.0 0.38 17.8 23.2
.± 0.5 0.42
.± 0.1 21.1 .± 0.2 26.4 22.4
96.5 .t 0.8 3.5 .± 0.0 27.6
.± 0.4
.t 0.9
.t 0.5
0.37 0.42 0.51 0.43 0.45
.±~
.±M1
.±=
.±~
.±~
.±=
.±=
.±=
.±~
.±~
.±M1 continued •. ,
~
APPENDIX Illh: continued
Sample Number@ Nt46D4 Nt47D4 Nt48D4 Nt49D4* Nt50D4* Nt51D4* Nt52D4 Nt53D4 Nt54D4 Nt55D4 Nt56D4 Nt57D4 Nt58D4* Nt59D4* Nt60D4* Nt61D4* Nt62D4 Nt63D4 Nt64D4 Nt65D4 Nt66D4 Nt67D4* Nt68D4* Nt69D4* Nt70D4* Nt71D4
~ Nt72D4
AI Ca 3305 .±. 126 3366 .± 30 3804 ± 48
20.3 .±. 0.5 31.0 33.4
3339 .±. 64 33.0 3511 ± 24 49.1
26.3 23.5
+ 0.5 .± 1.2 + 0.5 .±. 0.7 .±. 0.2 .± 0.4
0.21 0.20 0.23 0.21 0.23 0.19 0.39
Element + sd (n=3) mg/100g Co Cu Fe K + 0.01 .± 0.01
0.65 .±. 0.02 1176 .± 23 563 .± 39 0.66 .± 0.00 1052 .±. 2 608 .±. 24
.±. 0.01 0.73 .±. 0.00 1262 .± 6 623 .±. 15 .± 0.00 1075 .± 9
± 4 1109 603 .± 22 619 .± 6 581 .± 33 689 .± 47
3075 .± 14 5300 .± 43 5925 ± 113 4331 .± 25 4645 .± 33 4334 .± 89 4547 .± 100 3537 .±. 65
21.8 .± 0.1 0.43
+ 0.00 .± 0.01 .± 0.00 .± 0.02 .± 0.01 .± 0.00 .± 0.01
0.66 0.71 0.61 0.90 1.02 0.78 0.90
.± 0.00
.± 0.01
.± 0.01
.± 0.01
.± 0.01
966 .± 9 1538 .± 6 2128 .± 1518 .±
34 722 .± 23 3 596 .± 47
.± 22 ± 5
22
27.6 25.8 34.0 39.2
.± 0.3
.± 0.3
.± 0.6
.± 0.5 26.4 .± 0.1
0.36 0.32 0.31 0.32 0.26
.± 0.00 1407 .± 10 621 .± 0.01 0.88 .± 0.01 1473 .± 16 618 .± 0.00 .±. 0.01
0.91 .± 0.04 1544 .±. 17 0.73 .±. 0.02 1018 ± 5
633 .±. 546 .± 19
3317 .±. 66 25.8 .±. 0.1 0.25 .±. 0.00 0.69 .±. 0.01 1095 .±. 7 552 .± 9 3224 .± 58 27.2 .±. 0.3 0.25 .± 0.00 0.72 .±. 0.00 1007 .± 4 508 .±. 13 4257 .±. 16 11.9 .±. 0.2 0.41 .± 0.01 0.76 .±. 0.00 1303 .± 8 623 .±. 13 3787 .±. 40 23.7 3844 .± 193 22.9
.±. 0.4
.± 0.6 0.30 + 0.01 0.76 0.33
1540 .± 15 662 .±. 7 1649 ± 13' 667 ± 9
5073 .±. 124 4514 .± 151 3279 .± 34 3547 .± 31 3351 .±. 6 2212 .±. 60 4042 .± 67 4323 .±. 21 3505 .± 31
16.0 .±. 0.2 0.41 + 0.00 .± 0.02
0.80 0.97
+ 0.02 .± 0.02 .±. 0.00 .± 0.02
2252 ± 30 ±25
.±. 0.01 1060 .±. 5
646 .±. 15 641 .± 29 617 ± 9 626 .±. 19 630 .± 5
18.6 16.8
+ 0.6 .±. 0.2
20.8 .± 0.0 18.6 .±. 0.2 13.4 .±. 0.1 16.2 28.4
+ 0.3 .±. 0.2
36.4 .±. 0.1
0.37 .± 0.01 0.85 1839 0.26 0.30 0.30 0.21 0.36 0.39
.± 0.01
.±. 0.01 + 0.02 .±. 0.01 + 0.01 .±. 0.04
0.32 + 0.01
.±. 0.01 1344 .±. 13 1155 .±. 14
0.68 0.70 0.65 0.51
+ 0.01 .±. 0.00 899 .±. 2
0.84 .± 0.01 2125 493 .±. 33
.± 11 749 .±. 11 0.88 .±. 0.01 2093 .±. 9 0.79 + 0.02 1673 ± 5
769 ± 14 662 .±. 13
Mg Mn 73.6 ± 0.1 79.1 .±. 0.2
.±. 2.3 1.7 2.2 .± 0.0 2.4 .± 0.0
17.8 20.1 22.4 20.8 24.7 20.0 32.1
104.1 81.5 110.1 77.3 111.7 126.9 91.6 112.1
.±. 1.4
.±1.1 2.8 ± 0.0 ± 0.4 3.9 .± 0.4 23
+ 0.0 .±. 0.0
± 1.3 2.8 .±. 0.1
.± 0.6
.±. 0.4
.± 1.2 2.8 ± 0.0 29.5 3.4 + 0.0 24.0 2.3 + 0.0 25.2 2.8 ± 0.0 23.1 109.5 ± 1.0
150.9 ± 2.3 3.4 .± 0.0 30.0 27 .±. 0.0 21.7
Na
.±. 2.3 0.45
.± 0.5 0.47
.±. 0.4
.±. 1.2 0.47 0.45
± 0.6 0.48
Zn ± 0.05 .±. 0.01 .± 0.00 .±. 0.01 .±. 0.01
.± 0.1 0.40 .±. 0.01
.±. 0.6
.±. 0.3 0.59 .±. 0.15 0.49 .±. 0.02
.± 0.1 0.40 .± 0.01
.±. 0.9 0.52 .±. 0.1 0.49
.± 0.02 ± 0.01
.±. 1.2
.±. 1.3 0.50 .±. 0.04
%.1 88.9
+ 0.9 .± 0.5 2.9 .±. 0.0 19.4 .±. 0.4
0.44 0.46 0.52
.±. 0.03
.± 0.04
.± 0.04
.± 0.02 85.0 .± 1.1 2.7 ± 0.0 17.2 .± 0.7 94.3 .±. 1.9 2.2
3.1 .±. 0.0 .± 0.1
26.8 .±. 0.6 0.35 102.3 ± 0.1 109.0 .±. 1.8 2.9 .± 0.0
27.7 28.5
125.3 .± 2.5 1.6 ± 0.0 30.1 113.6 .±. 1.4 1.7 .±. 0.0 27.9 87.3 .±. 0.4 1.5 ± 0.0 23.4 97.3 .±. 1.2 1.8 .± 0.0 26.1 98.2 ± 1.6 1.8 .±. 0.0 27.6 69.4 .±. 0.7 1.3 .± 0.0 20.0 110.0 .± 2.7 2.5 .± 0.0 30.5 133.8 .± 0.3' 3.1 .±. 0.0 33.0 121.3 ± 0.9 3.6 .±. 0.0 30.7
.±. 0.7 0.40 .±. 0.01
.±. 0.7 .±. 1.3
0.38 0.51
± 0.00 .±. 0.03
.± 0.5 0.45 .±. 0.02
.±. 0.5 0.36 .± 0.03 ± 0.4 0.40 .±. 0.01 .±. 0.6 0.38
0.28 .±. 0.00 ± 0.01 .±. 1.1
.±. 0.7 0.41 ± 0.01 ± 0.2 0.46 .±. 0.00 .±. 0.6 0.40 .± 0.01
continued ... "' "' "'
APPENDIX lllh: continued ...
Sample Number@ Nt73D4 Nt74D4 Nt75D4 Nt76D4 Nt77D4 Nt78D4 Nt79D4 Nt80D4 Nt81D4
" Nt82D4 Nt83D4 Nt84D4 Nt85D4* Nt86D4 Nt87D4 Nt88D4 Nt89D4 Nt90D4 Nt91D4
Element + sd _(n=3) mgl100g AI Ca Co Cu Fe K Mg Mn Na Zn
3751 ± 44 38.6 ± 0.8 0.29 ± 0.01 0.90 ± 0.03 1479 ± 5 627 ± 28 97.8 ± 0.8 3.4 ± 0.0 22.8 ± 1.9 0.51 .± 0.04 3654 ± 35 33.3 ± 0.5 0.30 ± 0.01 0.85 ± 0.01 1423 ± 9 648 ± 9 92.3 ± 0.7 3.5 ± 0.0 24.0 ± 0.5 0.43 .± 0.00 3419 ± 26 24.5 ± 0.3 0.31 .± 0.01 0.76 .± 0.01 1204 ± 26 619 ± 12 83.1 .± 1.1 28 ± 0.0 23.4 .± 0.0 0.47 ± 0.00 4074 ± 48 78.9 ± 1.7 0.35 ± 0.01 0.93 ± 0.02 1538 ± 33 636 ± 37 130.5 ± 2.9 6.6 ± 0.1 21.1 ± 0.6 0.61 ± 0.08 3821 ± 59 104.0 ± 0.6 0.32 ± 0.02 0.90 ± 0.00 1511 ± 11 570 ± 44 146.4 .± 0.6 6.9 ± 0.0 24.8 ± 0.5 0.54 ± 0.03 3942 ± 82 68.8 ± 1.6 0.36 ± 0.00 0.91 .± 0.02 1552 .± 10 657 ± 24 126.5 ± 1.3 5.9 ± 0.0 25.3 .± 2.2 0.48 ± 0.03 4479 ± 100 93.4 ± 2.4 0.38 .± 0.01 1.00 ± 0.01 1684' ± 9 780 .± 18 126.7 ± 2.2 5.0 ± 0.1 25.6 ± 0.3 0.62 .± 0.02 4554 ± 95 79.5 ± 1.0 0.39 .± 0.01 1.01 ± 0.02 1765 ± 8 762 ± 39 125.9 ± 1.3 5.5 ± 0.1 26.5 ± 0.7 0.63 ± 0.02 4426 .± 35 116.4 .± 1.4 0.37 .± 0.01 0.90 .± 0.01 1633 .± 23 653 .± 24 160.0 .± 21 3.8 .± 0.0 35.1 .± 0.6 0.56 .± 0.03 4722 .± 30 23.5 ± 0.6 0.32 ± 0.01 0.98 .± 0.00 1740 .± 23 651 ± 14 99.1 ± 0.1 2.7 ± 0.0 220 .± 0.0 0.45 ± 0.01 3662 ± 39 30.4 .± 0.4 0.29 .± 0.01 0.76 ± 0.01 1288 .± 3 596 .± 27 91.7 .± 0.7 3.1 .± 0.1 22.1 ± 0.4 0.38 .± 0.01 3165 ± 68 51.7 ± 0.5 0.33 .± 0.01 0.70 ± 0.00 998 ± 13 562 .± 17 90.9 .± 0.7 4.3 ± 0.1 22.8 ± 0.4 0.39 .± 0.01 3322 .± 90 32.1 ± 0.2 0.33 .± 0.03 0.71 ± 0.01 1047 ± 5 572 ± 30 83.5 ± 1.2 3.7 ± 0.0 23.3 ± 1.2 0.37 ± 0.01 3820 .± 72 29.6 .± 0.2 0.34 ± 0.01 0.78 .± 0.01 1326 ± 3 640 ± 23 88.1 ± 0.6 3.3 .± 0.1 22.5 .± 0.5 0.42 .± 0.02 3479 ± 25 29.2 .± 0.3 0.32 .± 0.01 0.70 .± 0.01 1077 .± 2 593 .± 14 85.2 .± 0.6 3.4 .± 0.1 22.3 .± 0.3 0.35 .± o.oo 3606 ± 58 40.6 ± 0.7 0.33 .± 0.01 0.77 ± 0.01 1152 ± 23 610 .± 34 95.7 .± 0.5 3.7 .± 0.1 26.1 .± 0.7 0.41 .± 0.01 3248 .± 29 32.8 .± 0.2 0.30 .± 0.01 0.69 .± 0.01 1052 .± 3 555 .± 26 86.4 .± 0.8 3.4 .± 0.1 23.9 .± 0.8 0.41 .± 0.02 3891 .± 66 40.8 .± 0.5 0.33 .± 0.01 0.82 .± 0.02 1404 .± 9 658 .± 18 91.2 .± 1.5 3.1 .± 0.0 24.7 .± 0.7 0.43 .± 0.03 3528 .± 1~- 29.1 ± __ Q.3 0.31 + 0.02 0.83 + 0.01 1364 + 3 645 + 7 92.4 + 0.8 3.3 .± 0.0 __ 26.4 + 0.3 0.41 .± 0.00
@:for explanation of &le number refer to APPENDIX lh.
": n=2.
~ <:>
Appendix Illi: Selected elemental composition or termite mounds sampled at Howard Springs (site 6) and Berrimah (site 7) rollowing
Sample Number@
Nt92H Nt93H* Nt94H Nt95H Nt%H Nt97H Nt98H Nt99H NtlOOH Nt101H Nt102H Nt103H Nt104H Nt105H Nt106H
Nt107B Nt108B Nt109B NtllOB Nt111B
perchloric/nitric acid (4:1) extraction. Species: Nasutiternres lriodiae.
Element .± sd (n=3) mg!lOOg AI Ca Co Cu Fe K Mg Mn
4834 .± 47 60.6 .± 0.6 0.56 .± 0.00 1.35 .± 0.02 3283 .± 32 34.3 .± 1.3 40.6 .± 0.6 3.2 .± 0.1 4725 .± 34 44.6 .± 0.5 0.54 .± 0.03 1.32 .± 0.00 2796 .± 31 30.1 .± 1.6 37.7 .± 0.4 2.8 .± 0.0 4636 .± 40 57.3 .± 0.2 0.54 .± 0.02 1.29 .± 0.01 2475 .± 18 32.5 .± 0.7 43.0 .± 0.5 2.9 .± 0.0 5141 .± 9 82.4 .± 0.3 0.65 .± 0.01 1.54 .± 0.01 3289 .± 41 36.3 .± 0.3 48.6 .± 0.3 5.2 .± 0.1 4960 .± 116 66.4 .± 1.7 0.62 .± 0.02 1.50 .± 0.03 3019 .± 42 39.5 .± 0.6 43.7 .± 0.7 5.0 .± 0.1 5622 .± 56 56.9 .± 0.2 0.70 .± 0.02 1.61 .± 0.01 3300 .± 50 38.7 .± 0.5 46.0 .± 0.5 4.3 .± 0.1 5949 .± 61 80.0 .± 1.0 0.69 .± 0.01 1.54 .± 0.00 3739 .± 147 35.6 .± 0.2 48.5 .± 0.1 3.7 .± 0.0 5703 .± 37 88.1 .± 1.1 0.68 .± 0.03 1.51 .± 0.02 3562 .± 69 35.8 .± 0.5 48.4 .± 0.7 4.0 .± 0.1 5638 .± 28 80.7 .± 0.4 0.67 .± 0.02 1.50 .± 0.00 2927 .± 71 36.7 .± 1.5 48.8 .± 0.1 3.7 .± 0.0 6364 .± 49 113.9 .± 1.1 1.03 .± 0.01 1.69 .± 0.01 3868 .± 132 41.2 .± 0.3 57.2 .± 1.0 5.8 .± 0.0 6509 .± 102 100.3 .± 3.1 1.00 ± 0.02 1.66 ± 0.02 4056 ± 49 41.9 ± 0.5 54.8 .± 1.2 5.9 ± 0.0 6485 ± 154 120.9 .± 3.1 1.03 .± 0.02 1.67 .± 0.02 4205 .± 21 47.0 .± 4.9 64.7 ± 0.9 7.0 ± 0.1 6584 ± 380 89.6 .± 4.3 1.11 .± 0.03 1.93 .± 0.26 4236 .± 102 42.8 .± 5.7 55.8 .± 2.8 6.5 .± 0.1 6717 .± 66 111.4 .± 2.0 1.08 .± 0.01 1.71 .± 0.00 4687 .± 52 44.0 .± 2.9 59.2 .± 1.1 7.7 .± 0.1 6200 .± 85 101.8 ± 0.9 0.95 ± 0.01 1.59 .± 0.01 5288 .± 74 41.1 .± 2.0 57.5 .± 0.8 7.8 .± 0.1
Na Zn 4.9 ± 0.1 0.90 .± 0.01 4.8 .± 0.3 0.67 .± 0.18
0.02 0.02 0.04 0.02 0.05
6.7 .± 0.1 6.5 .± 0.1 6.4 .± 0.0 5.6 .± 0.1 5.4 .± 0.3 5.1 .± 0.2 5.4 .± 0.1 5.9 .± 0.1
0.79 .± 1.14 .± 0.96 ± 1.03 .± 1.17 ± 1.11 0.98 1.21
.± 0.05
.± 0.01
.± 0.01 5.9 .± 0.3 7.9 .± 0.0
1.17 .± 0.04 1.09 .± 0.02
6.0 .± 0.2 1.20 .± 0.05 6.0 .± 0.1 1.18 .± 0.02 5.9 .± 0.1 1.02 .± 0.01
2999 ± 94 97.5 ± 1.9 0.37 .± 0.01 0.83 ± 0.02 882 .± 12 3741 ± 106 78.2 .± 1.0 0.36 .± 0.01 0.93 ± 0.02 1121 .± 14 2972 ± 34 122.5 .± 0.9 0.31 .± 0.00 0.87 .± 0.02 842 .± 19 3412 .± 94 53.3 .± 0.7 0.32 .± 0.01 0.88 .± 0.02 823 .± 11 3529 .± 68 60.3 .± 1.3 0.33 .± 0.01 0.93 .± 0.01 782 .± 5
317 .± 19 65.9 .± 2.0 3.5 .± 0.1 35.3 ± 2.2 369 .± 21 58.5 .± 1.1 3.0 .± 0.1 32.5 .± 1.7 335 .± 4 63.0 .± 0.6 4.0 .± 0.0 38.5 .± 0.7 335 ± 24 52.5 .± 1.8 2.6 .± 0.1 28.7 .± 1.8 347 .± 4 53.9 .± 0.9, 2.9 .± 0.1 32.1 .± 1.5
0.57 .± 0.04 0.68 .± 0.04 0.67 .± 0.02 0.69 + 0.04 0.61 .± 0.01
@:for explanation of sample number refer to APPENDIX Ii. ... "' ~
... i:l
Appendix Illj: Selected elemental composition or termite mounds sampled at Daly River, site 1, rollowing pen:hloric/nitric acid (4:1) extraction. Species: (Tumulitermes hastilis)
Sample Element + sd {n-3~ mgL100g
Number@ AI Ca 0> Cu Fe K Mg Mn Na Zn
Th01D1 2241 .± 25 92.3 .± 3.3 0.32 .± 0.02 0.55 .± 0.01 1297 .± 12 419 ± 12 77.5 ± 1.2 6.5 + 0.0 19.1 ± 1.7 0.42 ± 0.01
Th02D1 2570 + 48 79.8 .± 1.3 0.37 + 0.02 0.69 .± 0.01 1406 .± 115 382 ± 6 70.5 ± 0.8 5.3 .± 0.1 17.9 ± 0.5 0.52 ± 0.01
Th03D1 2280 + 75 34.2 .± 0.7 0.28 .± 0.01 0.50 .± 0.01 1259 .± 10 419 ± 12 57.7 ± 1.4 3.7 .± 0.0 19.8 ± 1.2 0.37 ± 0.01
Th04D1 1969 .± 29 120.2 .± 0.5 0.26 .± 0.01 0.52 .± 0.01 1118 .± 4 384 ± 16 79.5 ± 0.5 5.8 .± 0.1 17.4 .± 0.1 0.35 ± 0.00
Th05DI 1986 .± 44 212.9 .± 3.5 0.28 + 0.01 0.58 . .± 0.01 1166 .± 18 410 ± 22 96.5 ± 0.7 8.3 .± 0.1 17.8 ± 1.2 0.42 ± 0.00
@; for explanation of sample number refer to APPENDIX lj.
APPENDIX lllk: Selected elemental composition or soils (0·10cm depth) sampled at Elliott (siteS), Daly River (1-4), Howard Springs (site 6)
and Berrimab (site 7)1 rollowing perchloric/nitrlc acid (4:1) extraction.
Sample Element .± sd (n=3) mgflOOg Number AI Ca Co Cu Fe K Mg Mn Na Zn
OlE 1614 .± 62 45.6 .± 1.3 0.26 .± 0.03 0.62 .± 0.03 1063 .± 36 88.3 .± 5.2 44.4 .± 1.0 5.90 .± 0.27 4.04 .± 0.27 0.51 .± 0.05 02E 2080 .± 21 48.9 .t 0.6 0.27 .± 0.01 0.74 .± 0.01 1244 .± 13 105.1 .± 2.7 52.2 .t 0.5 6.83 .t 0.18 4.02 .± 0.18 0.66 .± 0.04 03E 1981 .t 5 69.1 .± 0.7 0.32 .t 0.04 0.72 .± 0.03 1208 .± 7 113.1 .± 0.9 54.9 .± 0.5 12.49 .± 0.05 3.98 .± 0.05 0.79 .t 0.06 04E 2559 .± 81 40.8 .t 0.9 0.24 .± 0.02 0.76 .± 0.01 1409 .± 30 108.0 .± 3.3 62.4 .± 1.5 3.88 .± 0.12 4.41 .± 0.25 0.80 .± 0.04
0501 1713 .± 81 7.0 .± 0.3 0.20 .± 0.01 0.39 .± o.oo 957 .± 8 367.4 .± 23.4 31.6 .± 1.9 3.19 .± 0.06 17.32 .± 2.46 0.39 .± 0.01 0601 1838 .± 100 5.4 .± 0.0 0.19 .± 0.01 0.41 .± 0.01 1007 .± 14 421.9 .± 19.1 32.0 .± 1.5 2.39 .± 0.05 19.55 .± 1.91 0.37 .± 0.02 0701 1617 .±. 92 10.7 .±. 03 0.19 .±. 0.01 0.37 .±. 0.00 1070 .±. 8 330.1 .±. 3.5 30.8 .±. 1.1 3.53 .±. 0.07 14.45 .±. 1.69 0.40 ±. 0.01 0801 1663 .± 44 226.5 .± 5.5 0.25 .± 0.00 0.61 .± 0.00 1078 ± 16 388.4 .± 8.2 71.3 .± 0.4 9.29 .± 0.10 15.91 .± 0.72 0.47 .± 0.03 0902 2642 .± 68 11.3 .± 0.0 0.45 .± 0.02 0.68 ± 0.01 1184 .± 19 379.9 .± 10.9 92.9 .± 1.2 3.86 .± 0.10 8.81 .± 0.41 0.77 .± 0.02 1002 3058 .± 72 5.2 .± 0.1 0.47 .± 0.03 0.69 .± 0.01 1200 .± 17 404.4 .± 17.4 93.1 .± 1.7 2.97 .± 0.10 9.60 .± 0.61 0.74 .± 0.01 1102 2842 .± 97 4.1 .± 0.1 0.41 .± 0.01 0.60 .± 0.00 1063 .± 8 385.1 .± 30.0 80.3 .± 2.8 2.41 .± 0.10 9.12 .± 0.29 0.64 .± 0.02 1503 2405 .± 41 12.7 .± 0.3 0.40 .± 0.02 0.70 .± 0.03 2924 .± 76 545.5 .± 34.0 93.0 .± 2.6 10.14 .± 0.17 13.15 .± 0.23 1.18 .± 0.04 1603 2109 .± 108 14.0 .± 0.5 0.33 .± 0.04 0.73 .± 0.01 2725 .± 89 492.6 l 27.3 78.1 .± 2.8 8.88 .± 0.33 12.83 .± 0.56 4.83 .± 0.02 1703 3904 .±. 83 12.9 .± 0.3 0.51 .± 0.01 0.53 .± 0.00 2842 .± 10 942.9 .± 33.6 200.8 .± 1.7 6.62 .± 0.16 14.17 .± 0.26 1.63 .± 0.07 1803 3464 .± 211 5.2 .± 0.0 0.47 .± 0.01 0.49 .± 0.00 2671 .± 64 729.1 .± 49.9 165.8 .± 5.6 5.20 .± 0.08 10.39 .± 1.21 1.82 .± 0.39 1903 4057 .± 85 4.7 .± 0.1 0.53 .± 0.00 0.76 .± 0.01 3134 .± 123 859.9 .± 18.1 193.5 .± 1.5 5.53 .± 0.24 12.13 .± 0.14 1.50 .± 0.07 2003 2515 .± 32 10.1 .± 0.1 0.42 .± 0.02 0.67 .± 0.02 2976 .± 32 577.3 .± 13.6 93.7 .± 1.3 8.56 .± 0.13 13.88 .± 0.17 7.73 .± 0.52 2103 3340 .± 56 5.9 .± 0.1 0.47 .± 0.02 0.70 .± 0.01 2853 .± 45 643.8 .± 50.4 175.0 .± 2.8 5.64 .± 0.12 10.06 .± 0.63 1.46 .± 0.03 2203 3697 .± 151 11.0 .± 0.3 0.45 .± 0.02 0.50 .± 0.01 2347 .± 47 762.2 .± 50.6 157.7 .± 5.2 5.73 .± 0.08 14.12 .± 0.54 1.09 .± 0.07
continued ...
~
APPENDIX lllb: continued •••
Sample Element + sd {n=3) mg/100g Number AI Ca Co Cu Fe K Mg Mn Na Zn
2304 2759 .±. 17 29.7 .±. 0.8 0.30 .±. 0.01 0.61 .±. 0.01 1076 .±. 28 576.8 .±. 19.4 75.2 .±. 0.7 4.11 .± 0.02 20.78 .±. 0.75 0.41 .± 0.00 2404 3208 .±. 180 6.5 .±. 0.3 0.28 .± 0.01 0.71 .±. 0.02 857 .±. 11 652.6 .±. 39.8 67.2 .±. 3.8 2.36 .± 0.06 23.61 .±. 2.63 0.41 .± 0.01 2504 2119 .±. 41 6.5 .±. 0.3 0.23 .±. 0.01 0.43 .±. 0.01 570 .±.' 10 437.8 .±. 13.4 48.4 .± 0.8 1.66 .±. 0.03 16.27 .± 0.83 0.20 .±. 0.01 2604 2107 .±. 25 5.6 .±. 0.1 0.22 .±. 0.01 0.45 .±. 0.00 701 .±. 6 448.4 .±. 5.4 47.6 .±. 0.2 2.24 .±. 0.02 17.01 .±. 0.15 0.22 .±. 0.00 27H 4406 .±. 19 37.4 .± 0.1 0.44 .±. 0.02 1.22 .± 0.01 5114 .± 91 50.3 .±. 1.9 36.7 .±. 0.1 5.49 .± 0.07 4.10 .±. 0.11 1.05 .±. 0.00 28H 5508 .±. 47 101.8 .±. 0.9 0.97 .±. 0.01 1.51 .±. 0.01 5783 .±. 66 28.1 .± 2.2 45.9 .±. 0.3 12.88 .±. 0.21 4.32 .±. 0.16 2.59 .±. 0.22 29H 3789 .±. 29 53.6 .±. 0.5 0.77 .±. 0.01 1.31 .±. 0.02 7371 .±. 187 25.5 .± 0.2 31.2 .±. 0.1 11.50 .±. 0.06 3.77 .±. 0.07 2.69 .±. 0.03 30H 4472 .±. 48 34.4 .±. 0.1 0.46 .±. 0.01 1.09 .±. 0.01 5815 .±. 49 24.0 .±. 0.5 36.3 .±. 0.4 6.32 .±. 0.06 3.75 .± 0.04 1.07 .± 0.03 31B 2711 .± 58 24.9 .± 0.3 0.26 .± 0.01 0.92 .±. 0.01 3223 .± 7 292.9 .±. 17.2 34.4 .±. 1.0 2.11 .±. 0.11 18.62 .±. 0.71 0.56 .±. 0.01 32B 1553 .±. 14 16.0 .±. 0.2 0.27 .±. 0.00 0.46 .±. 0.00 599 .± 8 197.3 .±. 2.6 23.2 .±. 0.2 2.<J7 .±. 0.02 11.72 .±. 0.13 0.33 .±. 0.01 33B 1385 + 24 10.6 + 0.4 0.24 .± 0.02 0.40 .± 0.01 505 .±. 7 178.0 .± 8.9 20.5 .±. 0.2 1.95 .±. 0.08 10.35 .± 0.35 0.24 + 0.02
For selected termite species studied at each site, refer to APPENDIX Ik.
... ~
APPENDIX lVa: Selected elemental composition of termite mouods sampled at Elliott (site 6) and Daly River (2 & 4) following 0.1 N pepsin- IICI (pll 1.35) extraction
on lmm fraction size samples.
Species: Amitermes vitioms.
Sample Element + sd (n=3) mg/100g
Number@ AI C• Co Cu Fo K Mg Mn N• Zn Fe{II)
Av01E 20.8 .± 0.2 128~ .±1.5 0.09 .± 0.01 0.20 .± 0.00 17.8 ± 0.3 20.6 .± 0.6 26.5 + 0.4 5.24 .± 0.14 1.16 .± 0.23 0.16 .± 0.16 13.3 .± 0.3
Av15E 20.3 .± 0.1 101.4 .± 0.9 0.06 .± 0.01 0.18 .± 0.00 16.0 .± 0.1 21~ .± 0.4 34.1 .± 0.3 2.60 .± 0.04 2.28 .± 0.15 0.06 .± 0.01 10.6 .± 0.2
Aill!l 21.1 .± 0.4 126.6 .± 3.1 0.06 .± 0.01 0.16 .± 0.00 20.9 .± Q3 16.0 .± 0.4 25.5 .± 0.4 3.84 .± 0.06 0.77 .± 0.05 0.09 .± 0.00 15.4 .± Q7
Av31D2 67.7 .± 0.8 32.6 .± 0.5 0.13 .± 0.02 0.17 .± 0.00 154.9 .± 3.7 14.4 .± 0.6 13.1 .± 0.4 5.58 .± 0.17 3.99 .± 0.19 0.20 .± 0.02 78.7 .± 0.9
Av34D2 46.7 .± 0.8 15.3 .± 0.4 0.05 .± 0.01 0.11 .± 0.00 66.1 ± 1.5 7.1 .± 0.4 5.2 .± 0.0 1.91 .± 0.02 1.97 .± 0.16 0.13 .± 0.02 36.3 .± 21
Av39D2 50.5 .± 1.4 24.6 .± 1.0 0.09 .± 0.00 0.13 .± 0.01 117.1 .± 24 7.5 .± 0.5 8.8 .± 0.2 4.74 .± 0.09 2.07 .± 0.17 0.12 .± 0.01 72.4 .± 0.8
Av45D4 30.0 .± 0.3 22.6 .± 0.7 0.05 .± 0.00 0.08 .± 0.00 107.7 ± 0.8 9.9 .± 0.1 16.5 .± 0.3 1.69 .± 0.07 2.91 .± 0.11 nd 24.9 .± 0.7
Av50D4 79.2 .± 1.1 121.3 .± 2.7 0.17 .± 0.01 0.23 .± 0.00 245.3 ± 2.6 30.8 .± 0.3 64.6 .± 0.7 838 .± 0.09 5.47 .± 0.24 0.25 .± 0.03 167.7 .± 2.3
Av61D4 39.3 + 0.4 15.0 + 0.5 0.05 + 0.01 0.14 + 0.00 117.0 + 1.0 8.9 + 0.0 19.1 + 0.2 1.47 + 0.04 4.12 + 0.12 0.08 + 0.00 31.4 + 0.6
@;for explanation of ~.ample number refer to APPENDIX Ia, Ib and Ic.
nd: not detected. Zn detection limit: 0.02 mg/lOOg.
... 8i
... a, a,
APPENDIX IVb: Selected elemental composition of termite mounds sampled at Daly River (sites: 1 & 3) and Howard Springs (site 6), following 0.1 N pepsin- IICI (pH 1.35)
• extraction on 2mm fraction size samples. Species: Tumulitermes pastinator.
Sample Element + sd (n-3) mg!lOOg
Number@ AI Ca Co Cu Fe K Mg Mn Na Zn Fe{II}
Tp02Dl 27.4 .± 0.2 17.9 .± 0.3 nd 0.04 .± 0.00 13.2 .± 0.2 11.4 .± 0.4 10.0 .± 0.1 1.19 .± 0.02 0.82 .± 0.13 0.09 .± 0.04 8.01 .± 0.26
Tp16Dt 25.4 .± 0.2 11.4 .± 0.1 nd 0.03 .± 0.00 9.8 .± 0.0 8.6 .±. 0.1 7.6 .± 0.2 1.24 ± 0.01 0.92 .± 0.09 0.01 .± 0.01 4.52 .± 0.05
Tp23DI 36.5 .±. 0.8 22.0 .±. 1.6 nd 0.05 ± 0.01 16.6 .± 0.5 12-9 .± 0.4 8.2 .± 0.3 1.18 .±. 0.05 3.80 .± 0.22 0.01 .± 0.02 9.72 ± 0.30
Tp34D3 23.7 .±. 0.2 25.0 .± 0.9 0.04 .± 0.01 1.45 .± 0.07 12.3 .± 0.2 20.9 .± 0.8 36.1 .± 0.3 2.36 .± 0.11 1.13 .± 0.05 0.76 .± O.o3 9.31 .± 0.26
Tp36D3 37.1 .± 1.4 15.1 .± 0.1 0.04 .± 0.01 0.95 .± 0.04 29.0 .± 1.3 14.9 .± 0.2 27.3 .± 0.6 1.94 .± 0.00 2.25 .± 0.35 0.82 .± 0.02 20.46 .± 1.32
Tp38D3 27.9 + 0.9 19.4 .± 0.2 0.04 .± 0.00 0.41 .± 0.04 12.6 .± 0.3 16.5 .± 0.8 2.'~ .± 0.4 2.87 .± 0.11 1.94 .± 0.()9 0.39 .± 0.02 8.83 .± 0.37
Tp45H 55.9 .± 0.2 22.1 .± 0.5 0.05 .± 0.00 0.23 .± 0.01 8.5 .± 0.2 4.0 .± 0.3 7.7 .± 0.2 2.65 .± 0.03 0.96 .± 0.20 0.06 .± 0.00 4.75 .± 0.29
Tp60H 39.0 .± 0.3 59.8 .± 1.8 nd 0.13 .± 0.01 10.2 .± 0.1 7.6 .± 0.4 17.9 .± 0.3 1.36 .± 0.02 1.27 .± 0.25 0.11 .± 0.01 9.63 .± 0.23
Tp63H 37.7 + 0.7 27.5 + 0.4 0.01 + 0.02 O.o? _+ 0.00 7.3 + 0.1 3.4 + 0.2 9.2 + 0.1 0.50 + 0.00 0.51 + 0.05 0.04 + 0.00 4.30 + O.o?
@; for e11:planation or sample number refer to APPENDIX Id, le and If.
nd: not detected. Co detection limit = 0.02 mgftOOg
APPENDIX lYe: Selected elemental composition of tennite mounds sampled at Daly River (3 & 4) and Howard Springs (site 6), following 0.1N pepsin- IICI (pH 1.35) extraction on 2mm fraction size samples. Spedes: Nasutitermes triodiae.
Sample
Number@
Element + sd (n=3) mg/100g
AI Ca Co Cu
25.8 .± 1.1 17.3 .± 0.4 0.01 .± 0.01 0.12 .± 0.01
29.9 .± 0.6
29.8 + 0.8
23.4 .± 0.6
18.7 .± 0.2
20.7 .± 0.2
29.6 + 0.4
47.4 .± 13
33.3 .± 0.1
0.03 .± 0.00 0.15 .± 0.01
0.02 .± 0.00 033 .± O.Q3
O.o2 .± 0.00 0.09 .± 0.00
o.ot .± o.oo o.o8 .± o.oo 25.1 .± 0.8 24.7 .± 0.3 0.03
20.8 .± 0.5 34.6 .± 0.8 0.04
.± 0.00
.± 0.01
nd
O.o7 .± 0.01
0.09
0.11
.± 0.00
.± 0.02 21.2 .± 1.0 32.2
20.8 .± 1.0 34.8
.± 0.9
.± 1.6 0.08 .± 0.00
12.7
15.8
225
Fe
.± 0.5 24.6
.±. 0.4 243
.± 0.2 25.2
21.7 .± 0.5 60.6
11.0 .± 0.2
12.1 .±. 0.2
30.4
12.9
20.1
623
50.7
K
.± 0.3
.± 03
± 0.2
.± 0.5
.± 0.6
.± 0.2
19.5 .± 0.2 24.6 + 0.0
0.03
0.04
0.03
.± 0.01
.± 0.01
.± 0.01
nd
0.12 .± 0.01 . 30.0
+ 0.6
.± 0.3
.± 0.9
.± 0.2
.± 0.5
.± 0.3
56.8 .± 1.1
51.2 .± 0.4
36.7 .± 0.7
31.7 .± 0.5
73.4
17.3
14.9
15.3
47.7
.± 0.9
.± 0.8
26.1
11.8 .± 0.8
.± 0.1
+ 0.2 16.7 + 0.4 0.03
.± 0.2
.±1.2 31.8
52.8
.± 0.6
.± 0.5
0.03 .± 0.00
.± 0.00
nd
0.12 .± 0.00
0.07
0.08
.± 0.01
.± 0.00
0.07 .±. 0.01
39.5
14.8
43.0
26.9 .± 03
.± 0.7
23.8 .± 0.1 27.8 .± 0.8
17.0 .± 0.2 45.6 + 0.4
9.8 .± 0.1
M_g_____ Mn Na Zn Fe(II)
39.3 .± 0.9 1.63 .±. 0.08 1.66 .± 0.03 0.10 .±. 0.01 10.92 .± 0.32
42.8 .± 0.4 2.22 .± 0.10 2.52 .± 0.28 0.13 .± 0.03 13.18 .± 0.40
88.2 .± 1.9 3.48 .± 0.11 6.30 .± 032 0.25 .± 0.01 18.32 .± 0.43
67.0 .± 1.1 3.29 .± 0.09 16.90 .± 0.37 0.05 .± 0.00 18.09 .± 0.24
42.0 .± 0.7 2.23 .± 0.01 7.68 .±. 0.17 0.09 .± 0.01 8.18 .± 0.20
14.3 .± 0.2 1.40 .± O.ot 3.05 .± 0.14 0.08 .±. 0.01 8.69 .± 0.18
27.1 .± 0.9 2.86 .± 0.03 3.77 .± 0.10 O.o? .± 0.00 23.61 .± 0.66
27.7 .± 0.7 2.11 .± 0.06 5.90 .± 0.25 0.08 .± 0.02 9.82 .± 0.20
32.8 .± 0.9 2.60 .± 0.11 2.36 .± 0.14 0.09 .± 0.00 16.18 .± 0.88
25.6 .± 0.2 2.80 .± 0.07 3.32 .± 0.06 0.14 .± 0.01 18.87 .± 0.16
26.9 .± 0.5 2.73 .± 0.07 1.72 .± 0.03 0.10 .± 0.01 24.75 .±. 0.23
30.2
31.3
50.0
13.3
.± 0.4
.± 0.6
1.15
1.28
.± 0.4 2.15
3.50
5.55
6.83
1.70
.± 0.23
.± 0.18
0.07 .±. 0.01
0.09 .± 0.06
.± 0.10 0.05 .± 0.01
.± 0.09
NtlOD3
Nt12D3
Nt14D3
Nt25D4
Nt26D4
Nt28D4
Nt31D4•
Nt34D4
Nt56D4
NlWD4•
Nt59D4•
Nt65D4
Nt68D4•
Nt72D4
Nt92H
Nt99H
Nt106H
44.4 .± 0.7 793 .± 1.2 nd
0.11
0.14
.± 0.01
.± 0.00
+ 0.00
14.5
16.6
13.8
+ 0.2
.±. 0.1 10.9 .± 0.2 213
.± 0.1
.± 0.2
1.10
1.81
.± 0.03
.± 0.05
.± 0.08
.± 0.03
.± 0.02 1.01 .± 0.03
0.18
0.26 .± 0.02
.±. 0.02
12.43
16.09
12.57
13.58
15.19
1234
.± 0.13
.± 0.15
.± 0.25
.± 0.17
.± 0.36
+ 1.28 53.0 + 0.7 91.7 + 1.9 0.08 + 0.02 0.15
@: [or explanation or sample number refer to APPENDIX Tg, Jh and li.
Underlined: Sample collected on the outside or the mound (0-lcm)
+ 0.3 16.4 + 0.2 23.6 + 0.5 3.35 + 0.09
•: Newly built mound material nd :not detected. Co detection limit =- 0.02 mgllOOg
2.01 + O.o7 0.23 + O.ot
... a, ....
.... ~
Appendix IVd: Selected elemental composition of termite mounds sampled at Daly River (site 1), following 0.1N pepsin-HCI (pll1.35) extraction
on 2mm fraction size samples. Species~ (Tumulitermes luutllls)
Sample Element + sd (n=3) mg/100g
Number@ At Ca Co Cu Fe K Mg Mn Na Zn Fe(II)
Th01D1 34.71 .± 0.27 82.07 .± 0.84 O.o3 .± 0.01 O.Q7 .± 0.00 21.69 .± 0.67 25.44 .± 0.35 32.98 ± 0.33 4.34 .± 0.06 1.92 ± 0.12 0.10 .±. O.ot 19.62 .±. 0.46
Th02D1 35.74 ± 0.43 69.92 ± 2.12 0.04 .± 0.00 O.o7 .± 0.00 20.47 .± 0.40 10.91 ± 0.32 21.34 .± 0.83 3.03 .± 0.12 0.74 ± 0.04 0.16 .±. 0.08 17.38 .± 0.31
Th03Dl 30.13 .±. 033 29.42 .± 1. 15 nd 0.03 .± 0.00 14.36 .± 0.05 13.58 .± 0.11 13.67 ± 0.2.1 1.55 .± 0.05 1.01 ± 0.12 0.05 .± 0.01 1252 .± 0.57
@:for explanation of aample number refer to APPENDIX lj.
nd: not detected. Co detection limit: 0.02 mg/lOOg
APPENDIX IVe: Selected elemental composition of soils (0-10cm depth) sampled at Elliott (site 5), Daly River (sites: 1-4) and lloward Springs (site 6)
following 0.1N pepsin-HCI (pH 1-35) extraction on Zmm fraction size samples.
Sample Element + sd (n-3) mg!IOOg
Number AI ca Co Cu Fe K Mg Mn No Zn Fe{II)
OlE 9.50 .±. 0.32 45.70 .±. 1.26 nd O.o7 .±. 0.01 4.95 .±. 0.33 9.79 .±. 0.27 10.21 .±. 0.04 1.71 .±. 0.03 0.83 .±. 0.38 nd 0.76 .±. 0.09
02E 12.08 .±. 0.31 50.35 .±. 0.42 0.02 .±. 0.00 0.10 .±. 0.01 5.72 .±. 0.38 10.42 .±. 0.14 13JJ6 .±. 0.20 2.26 .±. 0.02 0.87 .±. 0.26 nd 0.91 .± 0.03
0501 26.28 .±. 0.54 2.78 .± 0.33 nd 0.01 .± 0.02 5.63 .± 0.46 2.35 .± 0.27 0.35 .± 0.01 0.46 .±. 036 0.55 .±. 0.45 0.10 .± 0.10 1.98 .± 0.20
0701 37.86 .±. 0.25 5.44 .±. 0.08 nd 0.01 .t. 0.01 7.45 .± 0.21 2.23 .± 0.19 0.69 .±. 0.04 0.27 ± 0.00 0.57 .± 0.08 0.02 .± 0.02 2.23 .±. O.o7
0902 49.00 .± 1.86 6.83 .± 0.15 0.04 .± 0.00 0.12 .± 0.01 34.82 .± 2.80 4.63 .;tO.o9 3.44 .±. 0.11 0.89 .± 0.03 0.26 .±. 0.04 0.03 .± 0.00 5.03 .±. 0.21
1002 51.51 .± 1.04 1.74 ± 0.08 0.03 .±. 0.01 0.09 .±. 0.01 16.33 .±. 0.51 2.91 .± 0.45 0.94 .± 0.03 0.31 .±. 0.01 1.28 .±. 0.02 0.03 .± 0.01 3.34 .± 0.04
1703 27.13 .± 0.56 9.30 .± 0.10 nd 0.05 .±. 0.01 13.91 .±. 0.72 9.35 .± 0.11 18.92 .± 0.03 0.94 .±. 0.04 1.77 .± 0.12 0.14 .± 0.03 7.21 .± 0.46
2203 35.24 .±. 0.16 6.56 .± 0.06 0.04 .± 0.01 0.11 .± 0.01 32.61 + 0.14 5.28 .t. 0.13 8.61 .±. 0.11 0.77 ± 0.01 1.17 .± 0.35 nd 4.99 .±. 0.51 2404 47.31 .±. 0.71 2.63 .± 0.05 0.02 .± 0.00 0.09 .± 0.01 33.56 .± 1.01 7.16 .±. 0.11 4.43 .±. 0.04 0.15 .±. 0.00 1.58 .±. 0.36 0.04 ± 0.00 7.63 .± 0.49
2604 26.59 .± 0.42 2.52 .± O.o? 0.02 .± 0.01 0.04 .±. 0.01 15.69 .±. 0.34 4.53 .±. 0.36 3.22 .± 0.05 0.13 .±. 0.01 1.35 .±. 0.32 0.03 .±. 0.02 5.33 ± 0.22 27H 46.37 .± 1.02 31.54 ± 0.54 nd 0.09 .±. 0.00 5.33 .±. 0.19 5.03 .± OJJ6 7.76 ± 0.12 1.17 .±. 0.05 1.08 .± 0.03 0.48 .±. 0.04 3.53 _±0.22
29H 69.26 + 2.18 43.63 + 2.97 0.06 + 0.01 0.10 + 0.00 7.16 + 0.30 1.90 + 0.06 5.75 + 0.31 2.17 + 0.09 1.21 + 0.14 1.91 + 0.06 4.19 + 0.26
For selected termite specie!! studied at each site, refer to APPENDIX lk. nd: not detected. Co and Zn detection limit • 0.02 mg/IOOg
.... ~
.... ... <:>
APPENDIX Va: Selected elemental composition of termite mounds sampled at Elliott (site 5), Daly River (sites: 2 & 4) following 0.1 N pepsln-JICI
(pll1.35) extraction and neutralisation (pH 7.50), puformed on 2mm fraction size samples.
Species: Amitermes vitiosus.
Sample Element + sd (n=3) mg/100g
Number AI Ca Co Cu Fe K Mg Mn Zn Fe(Il) A vOlE 0.70 .t 0.24 119.4 ± 0.9 0.05 .±. 0.01 0.07 .± Q.()() 0.39 ± 0.15 18.5 .±. 0.4 25.0 .± 0.7 4.00 ± 0.32 nd nd Avt5E 0.89 .±. 0.09 93.0 .±. 1.7 nd 0.06 .±. 0.01 0.10 ± 0.10 19.7 .±. 0.3 30.8 .± 0.9 1.36 ± 0.32 nd nd Av22E 1.68 ± 0.46 111.5 ± 0.2 0.03 .±. 0.00 0.07 .± 0.01 1.50 .± 0.75 13.9 .± 0.2 23.2 .± 1.3 2.51 ± 0.54 nd 2.01 .±. 0.27 Av3102 0.37 ± 0.17 27.1 ±1.1 0.03 ± 0.01 0.05 .±. 0.02 0.73 ± 0.06 14.0 .± 0.1 11.5 ± 0.4 2.65 ± 0.37 nd 0.84 ± 0.10 Av34D2 0.94 ± 0.57 12.5 ±0.8 nd nd 0.35 ± 0.16 5.9 ± 0.2 4.6 .± 0.1 0.80 ± 0.31 nd 1.31 ± 0.29 Av39D2 0.94 ± 0.53 20.3 .±. 1.6 nd 0.04 .±. 0.00 1.64 .±. 0.27 7.3 .± 1.0 7.7 .± 0.4 221 ± 0.55 nd nd Av4504 1.19 .± 0.29 17.5 ± 0.2 nd nd 3.68 ± 1.36 9.6 ± 1.8 14.4 ± 0.1 0.78 ± 0.06 nd 0.40 .± 0.01 Av5004 231 .± 0.38 87.4 .± 26 0.04 .± 0.00 0.07 .± 0.01 8.99 .± 286 29.0 .± 0.4 54.0 .± 1.1 3.20 .± 0.50 nd nd Av61D4 0.44 + 0.16 11.9 + 0.2 nd 0.04 _± 0.01 0.77 _± 0.31 7.8 _± 0.2 16.5 + 0.2 0.54 +_ 0.03 nd nd
@:for explanation of sample refer to Appendix Ia, lb and !c.
nd: not detected. Detection limit (mg/lOOg): A1 = 0.05; Co and Zn = 0.02
Cu = 0.01; Fe .. 0.06; Fe(li) = 0.2.
APPENDIX Vb• Selected elemental composition of termite mounds sampled at Daly River (1 & 3) and lloward Springs (site 6), following
O.LN pepsin-IICI (pH 1.35) extraction and neutralisation (pll 7.50) on 2mm fraction size samples.
Species: Tumulilermes pastinalor.
Sample Element + sd (n-3) mg/100g
Number@ AI Ca Co Cu Fe K M~ Mn Zn Tp02D1 0.56 ..±. 0.2 17.3 .± 0.3 nd 0.01 .± 0.01 0.04 .± 0.1 10.7 .± 0.4 9.3 .± 0.2 0.83 .± 0.03 nd Tp16Dl 0.88 .± 0.3 10.8 .± 0.2 nd nd 0.11 .± 0.1 8.3 .± 0.3 7.0 .± 0.1 0.80 + 0.05 nd Tp23Dl 0.70 .±. 0.2 19.8 .± 1.0 nd 0.01 .± 0.02 0.23 .±. 0.1 12.4 .±. 0.5 7.3 .± 0.2 0.74 .± 0.01 nd Tp34D3 0.74 ± 0.3 18.8 .± 0.3 nd 0.10 .±. 0.00 nd 17.3 .± 0.5 22.4 .±. 0.4 2.32 .±. 0.09 nd Tp36D3 0.65 .±. 0.2 24.6 .±. 0.8 nd 0.21 .± 0.04 nd 14.9 .± 0.3 33.6 .±. 1.8 1.74 .± 0.47 nd Tp38D3 1.57 ± 1.7 14.4 .± 0.4 nd 0.13 .± 0.01 nd 15.5 .± 0.2 25.1 .± 1.9 1.27 .±. 0.35 nd Tp45H 1.12 .±. 1.4 19.9 .± 0.6 nd 0.03 .± 0.00 nd 3.5 .± 0.4 7.1 .±. 0.1 1.77 .± 0.23 nd Tp60H 1.22 .±. 0.5 57.4 .± 1.8 nd 0.05 .± 0.00 0.09 .± 0.0 7.1 .± 0.9 17.9 .±. 0.4 0.95 .± 0.05 nd Tp63H 0.54 + 0.3 27.9 + 0.7 nd nd nd 20 + 0.1 9.0 + 0.2 0.36 + 0.05 nd
@; for explanation of sample refer to Appendix Id, Ie and Ir.
nd: not detected. Detection limit (mg/lOOg); Co and Zn = 0.02; Fe(II) .. 0.2
Fe(ll) nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd
"' .... ~
APPENDIX Vc: Selected elemental composition of termite mounds sampled at Daly River (sites: 3 & 4) and Howard Springs (site 6), following 0.1N pepsfn-IICI ... extraction and neutralisation (pll 7.50) on 2mm fraction size samples. Species: Nasutitermes triodiae. tj
Sample
Number@
Element + sd (n=3) mg1100g
Nt!OD3 Nt12D3 Nt1403
AI Ca
0.55 ± 0.12 16.8 .± 0.4 .± 0.3 0.67
0.79 .± 0.06 .± 0.26
19.4 27.5 ± 0.6 0-03
Co
nd nd .± 0.01
0.01 0-03 0.11
Cu
.± 0.02
.± 0.03
.± 0.01 " Nt25D4
Nt26D4 Nt2804 Nt31D4' Nt34D4 Nt56D4 Nt59D4' Nt65D4
10.79 .± 2.84 42.7 .± 0.3 0.03 .± 0.00 0.07 .± 0.00 2.57 .± 0.20 26.9 .± 0.0 0.34 .± 0.32 21.1 .± 0.6 3.44 .± 2.43 29.7 .± 0.6 3.10 .± 0.64 31.6 .± 0.6 1.39 .± 0.33 30.2 .± 1.4 0. 75 .± 0.38 21.4 .± 0.3 1.80 .± 1.50 15.8 + 0.9
nd nd nd nd nd nd nd
_Nt68D4' 0.90 .± 0.20 14.7 .± 0.4 nd Nt72D4 4.64 .± 0.18 30.4 .± 0.9 0.02 .± 0.02 Nt92H 1.37 .± 0.85 50.4 .± 1.9 nd Nt99H 231 .± 0.30 78.5 .± 2.4 nd Nt106H 0.90 + 0.18 80.2 + 1.2 0.02 + 0.01 @ : [or explanation or sample re[er to Appendix lg, lh and Ii
Underlined: sample collected on the outside o( the mound (0-lcm)
• : Newly built mound material .
0.03 .± 0.00 0.03 .± 0.01 0.05 .± 0.00 0.05 .± 0.01 0.03 .± 0.00 0.04 .± 0.00 0.02 .± 0.01 0.03 .± 0.00 0.05 .± 0.01 0.03 .± 0.00 0.06 .± 0.00 0.05 + 0.00
Fe K Mg Mn Zn 0.16 .± 0.06 13.3 34.6 .± 2. 7 0.97 + 0.33 0.12 .± 0.04 13.6
.± 0.2
.± 0.8 37.3
85.7 .± 3.5 .± 2.2
1.38
2.90 .± 0.48 .± 0.09
nd nd nd nd nd
0.79 9.56 1.45
4.48
.± 0.39 23.1 .± 0.5 + 0.59 .± 0.16 nd .± 2.14
57.1 63.1
.± 0.4 60.0 .± 3.3 2.40 .± 0.49
.± 28 34.7 .± 0.6 1.77 .± 0.05 50.1 .± 0.7 11.8 .± 1.2 0.78 .± 0.26 0.04 58.1 .± 1.2 24.2 .± 0.5 1.90
.± 0.04
t.99 .± 0.22 0.48 .± 0.45
50.7 36.8
.± 1.4 27.7 .± 1.3 1.70
.± 0.7 28.4 .± 1.3 .± 0.3
1.28 1.68
.± 0.06
.± 0.05
.± 0.36
.± 0.24
0.03 .± 0.03 nd nd
31.7 .± 0.5 22.9 nd 0.81 0.83
.± 0.04
.± 0.21 27.2 .± 0.2 26.3 .± 1.5 0.68 .± 0.32 0.04 .± 0.01 1.44 .± 0.19 27.8 .± 1.6 28.0 .± 0.8 4.80 .± 0.53 44.7 .± 0.5 48.5 .± 1.3 0.20 .± 0.05 9.6 .± 1.2 12.6 .± 0.6 0.82 .± 0.06 10.6
nd 16.1 ~ : n=Z
+ 0.4 + 114
20.4 2113
.± 0.4 + 113
0.79 .± 0.10 0.01 .± 0.03 1.76 .± 0.06 nd 0.68 .± 0.13 nd 1.26 .± 0.08 nd 213 + 0.05 nd
nd: not detected. Detection limit (mgflOOg): Q, and Zn = 0.02; Cu = 0.01;
Fef!J) nd nd
0.32 .± 0.11 nd
0.41 .± 0.05 nd
0.61 .± 0.12 0.45 .± 0.02 0.41 .± 0.02 0.40 ± 0.10 0.37 .± 0.03 0.44 .± 0.01 0.45 ± 0.03
nd 0.24 ± 0.02
nd
Appendix Vd: Selected elemental composition or termite mounds sampled at Daly River (site 1) (Tumulitermes hastilis)
rollowing 0.1N pepsin-HCI {pH 1.35) extraction and neutralisation (pH 7.50) on 2mm rractJon size samples.
Sample
Number@ AI Ca Co
ThOID1 275 ± 0.31 71.65 ± 2.19 nd
Th02D1 3.56 ± 2.25 61.n ± 2.03 nd
Th03D1 2.35 .± 1.57 26.00 .± 0.63 nd
@: (or explanation of sample number refer to APPENDIX Jj.
nd: not detected. Co and Zn detection limit: 0.02 mg/lOOg
Element +
Cu
0.01 ± 0.01
0.02 .± 0.02
0.02 .± 0.02
sd (n=3) mg/100g
Fe K Mg Mn
2.61 .± 0.11 25.75 .± 2.80 30.26 ± 1.01 3.02 .± 0.17
2.33 .± 0.73 10.02 .± 0.40 18.89 .± 0.44 209 ± 0.14
1.26 .± 0.36 12.81 .± 0.69 11.88 .± 0.06 1.00 ± 0.04
Zn FeQI)
nd 0.55 .± 0.04
nd 0.55 .± 0.10
nd 0.52 .± 0.06
... <;!
.... ~
APPENDIX Ve: Selected elemental composition of soils (0-lOcm depth) sampled at Elliott (site 5), Daly River (sites: 1-4) and Jloward Springs (site 6),
following O.lNpepsin-IICI (pll1.35) extraction and neutralisation (pll 7.50) on 2mm fraction size samples.
Sample Element + sd (n~3) mg/!OOg
Number AI Ca Co Cu Fe K Mg Mn Zn Fe(II) OlE 0.60 .±. 0.14 42.29 .± 1.57 nd nd nd 1.13 .±. 0.21 9.38 .± 0.24 1.23 .± 0.02 nd nd 02E 0.62 .± 0.17 45.65 .±. 1.19 nd nd nd 7.80 .±. 0.95 11.75 .±. 0.37 1.68 .±. 0.11 nd nd 0501 0.52 .± 0.07 2.83 .± 0.03 nd nd nd nd 0.56 .±. 0.01 0.19 .±. 0.02 nd nd 0701 0.73 .± 0.11 5.51 .±. 0.32 nd nd nd nd 0.79 .±. 0.11 0.12 .±. 0.04 nd nd 09D2 0.05 .±. 0.09 5.65 + 0.14 nd nd nd 5.40 .±. 0.70 2.45 .±. 0.13 0.40 .± 0.12 nd · nd 10D2 0.86 .±. 0.21 1.54 .± 0.04 0.02 .±. 0.00 nd nd 0.72 .± 0.62 0.48 .±. 0.01 0.06 .±. 0.01 nd nd 17D3 0.26 .± 0.01 7.86 .±. 0.02 nd 0.01 .±. 0.01 nd 8.49 .±. 0.47 16.14 ± 0.24 0.63 .±. 0.02 nd nd 22D3 0.28 .±. 0.07 5.57 .±. 0.11 nd nd nd 4.18 .±. 0.30 7.17 .±. 0.19 0.41 .±. 0.04 nd nd 24D4 nd 2.27 .± 0.08 nd nd nd 8.50 .±. 209 3.55 .± 0.10 0.03 .± 0.01 nd nd 26D4 nd 1.91 .± 0.11 nd nd nd 6.96 .±. 2.88 2.46 .±. 0.07 O.D3 .±. 0.01 nd nd 27H 0.92 .±. 0.22 27.81 .±. 1.77 nd nd nd 3.23 .±. 0.61 6.26 .±. 0.85 0.64 .±. 0.15 nd nd 29H 0.91 + 0.09 39.16 + 3.08 0.03 + 0.01 nd nd 1.72 + 0.95 4.67 + 0.49 1.37 + 0.15 nd nd
For selected tennite spedes studied at each site, refer to APPENDIX lk..
nd: not detected. Detection limit (mgllOOg): AI and K = 0.05; Co and Zn = 0.02
Cu = 0.01; Fe = 0.06; Fe(II) = 0.2
"----... .----~ ----.
-"' 0 0 ~
' "' E ~
<(
-"' 0 0 ~
' "' E ~
"' 0
-"' 0 0 ~
' "' E ~
0 0
Pepsin-HCI (pH 1.35)
75 Site 1 Site2 Site3
60
45
30
15
0 Tp Th s Av s Tp Nt s Av Nt s Av s Tp Nt s
150 Site 1 Site2 Site3 Site4 SiteS Site6
100
50
0 Tp Th s M s Tp Nt s Av Nt s Av s Tp Nt s
0.15 Site 1 Site2 Site3 Site4 SiteS Site6
0.10
0.05
0.00 -'--,-~ Th S ~ S ~ ~ S ~ Nt S ~ S ~ ~ S
SPECIES I SOIL
275
APPENDIX VI-A Graphic representations of the soil - mound effects (mean ± SE) on element concentrations (mgllOOg) following the in vitro test on termitaria of Amitermes vitiosus (Av), Tumub1ermes pastinator (Tp), Tumulitermes hastilis (Th), Nasutitermes triodiae (Nt), and soil (S) (S) (0-IOcm), sampled at sites 1-6, following pepsin-HCI (pH 1.35) extractions: aluminium, calcium and cobalt.
276
-"' 0
Pepsin-HCI (pH 1.35)
1.30 -,-----,----,---,---,.----,------, Site 1 Site2 Site3 Slte4 Site 5 SiteS
1.04
0 0.78 ~
d, 5 0.52 ::> 0
-"' 0
0.26
0.00 I "i" C(l ..,.. I ~ Th S ~ S ~ M S ~ M S ~ S ~ M S
225-,-----,---,---,----,---,---~ Site 1 Site2 Site3
180
0 135 ~
E "' lL
g 0 ~
' "' E ~
=
90
45
0 I B!lll ~ Th S ~ S ~ M S ~ M S ~ S ~ M S
100 Sb6 Site 5 Site 3 Site 4 Site 1 Site 2
80
60
40
;f 20
0 I 171 171 "? I 171 "7' I ~ Th S ~ S ~ M S ~ Nl S ~ S ~ M S
APPENDIX VI-B
SPECIES I SOIL
Graphic representations of the soil • mound effects (mean ± SE) on element concentrations (mg/IOOg) following the in vitro test on tennitaria of Amitermes vitiosus (Av), Tumulitermes pastinator (Tp), Tumulitermes hastilis (Th}, Nasutitermes triodiae (Nt), and soil (S) (0-IOcm), sampled at sites 1-6, following pepsin-HCI (pH 1.35) extractions: copper, iron and iron (ii).
APPENDIX VI-C
SPECIES I SOIL
Graphic representations of the soil • mound effects (mean ± SE) on element concentrations (mgllOOg) following the in vitro test on tennitaria of Amitermes vitiosus (Av), Tumulitermes pastinator (Tp), Tumu/itermes hastilis (Th). Nasutitermes triodiae (Nt), and soil (S) (0-lOcm), sampled at sites 1-6, following pepsin-HCI (pH 1.35) extractions: potassium, magnesium and manganese.
278
12 Site 1
10
-CD 8 0 0 ~
' 6 CD E -"' 4 z
2
0
1.75 Site 1
I 1.40 -CD
0 0 ~
1.05
' CD E 0.70 -c N
0.35
0.00
APPENDIX VI- D
Pepsin-HCI (pH 1 .35)
I Site 2,/ Site3
I Site2j Site3 I Site4 j SiteS j SiteS
SPECIES I SOIL
Graphic representations of the soil - mound effects (mean ± SE) on element concentrations (mg!IOOg) following the in vitro test on tennitaria of Amitermes vitiosus (Av), Tumulitermes pastinator (Tp), Tumulitermes hastilis {Th), Nasutitermes triodiae (Nt), and soil (S) (0-lOcm), sampled at sites 1-6, following pepsin-HCI (pH 1.35) extractions: sodium and zinc
0
APPENDIX VII-A
Nt S Av S Tp Nt S
Site 5 Site 6
Graphic representations of the soil ~ mound effects (mean ± SE) on element concentrations (mg/1 OOg) following the in · vitro test on termitaria of Amitermes vitiosus (Av),Tumu/itermes pastinator {Tp), Tumu/itermes hastilis (Th), Nasutitermes triodiae (Nt} and soil (S) (0-!0m),sampled at sites l-6, following pepsin-HCI (phl.35) extractions and neutralisation (pH 7 .5): aluminium, calcium and cobalt.
280 pH 7.5 Filtrate
0.20 -,----,.---,------.----c--r----,
c;, 0.15 0 0 ~
' ~ 010 -::> 0 0.05
Q.QQ I ep
Site 4 SiteS Site 6
Av Nt S Av S Tp Nt S
7.50 -,----,-----,----r--,---,-------,-------, Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 6
c;, 0
6.00
0 4.50 ~
do s 300
" u_
1.50
000 I '1" Tp Th S Av S Tp Nt S s
0.7 B I Sitol I Site2 I Sit• 3 I h•I• I <a. • I oa. < I - 060 OJ 0 0 :::: 0.45
]' 030 -
" u_ 0.15
1;j;1 I I 1;j;1 I tj'l tj'l I 0.00 I 1 I I I I I I
APPENDIX Vll-B
~ S ~ M S ~ M S ~ S ~ M S
SPECIES I SOIL
Graphic representations of the soil - mound effects (mean ± SE) on element concentrations (mg/1 OOg) following the in vitro test on termitaria of Amitermes vitiosus (Av),Tumulitermes pastinator (Tp), Tumulitermes hastilis (Th), Nasutitermes triodiae (Nt), and soil (S) (0-l Om),sampled at sites I-6, following pepsin-HC (ph 1.35) extractions and neutralisation (pH 7 .5): copper, iron and iron (Ii).
60 Site 1
50 ~ 40 a> 0 0 30 ~
' a> 20 E -
" 10
0
-10 Tp Th
0
APPENDIX Vli-C
pH 7.5 Filtrate 281
Sitel Site 3 Site 5 Site 6
Av s Tp Nt s Av Nt
s
SPECIES I SOIL
Graphic representations of the soil - mound effects (mean ± SE) on element concentrations (mg/1 OOg) following the in vitro test on termitaria of Amitermes vitiosus (Av),Tumu/itermes pastinator (Tp), Tumulitermes hastilis (Th), Nasutitermes triodiae (Nt), and soil (S) (0-lOm),sampled at sites 1-6; following pepsin-HCI (phl.35) extractions and neutralisation (pH 7.5): potassium, magnesium and manganese.
282
pH 7.5 Filtrate
O.D1 Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 5 Site6
0.01 -Ol 0 0 001 ~ . a, 5 000 c N 000
000 ~ Th S ~ S ~ M S ~ M S ~ S ~ M S
SPECIES I SOIL
APPENDIX VII-D Graphic representations of the soil - mound effects (mean ± SE) on element concentrations (mg/IOOg) following the in vitro test on termitaria of Amitermes vitiosus (Av),Tumulitermes pastinator (Tp), Tumu/itermes hasti/is (Th), Nasutitermes triodiae (Nt), and soil (S) (0-IOm), -sampled at sites 1-6, following pepsin-HCI (phl.35) extractions and neutralisation (pH 7.5): zinc