Active restoration after three decades: Seed addition increases native dominance compared to landscape‐scale secondary succession
Rattachement africain : au, us, gb. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
Abstract Active restoration often aims to accelerate ecosystem recovery. However, active restoration may not be worthwhile if its effects are overwhelmed by changes that occur passively. Moreover, it can be challenging to separate the effects of passive processes, such as dispersal and natural succession, from active restoration efforts. We assess the 24‐year impact of actively restoring a Minnesota old‐field grassland via seed addition of native tallgrass prairie species. We compared the abundance of four functional plant groups in actively restored plots against abundances in three reference classes: (1) unrestored plots undergoing passive recovery within the same old field, (2) passively recovering plots in two nearby old fields of similar age and (3) a chronosequence of 21 old fields within the same landscape. Active restoration led to a higher abundance of native grasses and forbs in the 36 m2 treatment plots. Seed addition was more effective if the original vegetation was first removed using herbicide, burning and tilling. However, long‐term conclusions about the efficacy of active restoration varied widely depending on the choice of reference class. In our small‐scale restoration experiment, native abundance was similarly high in both the actively restored and reference plots after 24 years, suggesting either (1) passive recovery or (2) local dispersal of native species from nearby treatment plots (i.e. cross‐contamination). In contrast, a comparison with two nearby reference fields suggested active restoration resulted in much higher native abundance relative to passive recovery. A smaller, positive effect was detected when we compared actively restored plots to the chronosequence of old fields. In the chronosequence, many passively recovering old fields had transitioned to native grass dominance naturally, although active restoration appeared to increase native forb abundance. Synthesis and applications: Our findings highlight the importance of using scale‐appropriate references for assessing the efficacy and need for active restoration. Comparing actively restored plots with the surrounding landscape, we found that active restoration and passive recovery led to similar plant communities after 24 years. Because local dispersal from actively restored sites can nearby references, caution should be exercised when evaluating long‐term restoration projects using only small‐scale experiments.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Active restoration after three decades: Seed addition increases native dominance compared to landscape‐scale secondary succession
- Date Crossref
- 07/10/2024
- Éditeur
- Wiley
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Où se fait cette recherche
-
University of Canberra Centre for Conservation Ecology and Genomics pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
UNSW Sydney pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
ACT Government pays non établi dans la noticeOrganisme public
-
Agricultural Research Service - Plains Area pays non établi dans la noticeOrganisme public
-
Leverhulme Trust pays non établi dans la noticeOrganisation à but non lucratif
-
University of York Leverhulme Centre for Anthropocene Biodiversity pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
Australian National University pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
The University of Melbourne pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
King's College London Department of Geography pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
Ecology Research Centre University of New South Wales Sydney New South Wales Australia Evolution & pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
Rangeland Resources and Systems Research Unit USDA Agricultural Research Service Fort Collins Colorado USA pays non établi dans la noticeStructure de recherche
-
Fenner School of Environment & pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
Centre for Conservation Ecology and Genomics — University of Canberra, UNSW Sydney et ACT Government, avec 9 autres affiliations.
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.