Literature DB >> 26310383

Slow recovery of tropical old-field rainforest regrowth and the value and limitations of active restoration.

Luke P Shoo1, Kylie Freebody2, John Kanowski2,3, Carla P Catterall2.   

Abstract

There is current debate about the potential for secondary regrowth to rescue tropical forests from an otherwise inevitable cascade of biodiversity loss due to land clearing and scant evidence to test how well active restoration may accelerate recovery. We used site chronosequences to compare developmental trajectories of vegetation between self-organized (i.e., spontaneous) forest regrowth and biodiversity plantings (established for ecological restoration, with many locally native tree species at high density) in the Australian wet tropics uplands. Across 28 regrowth sites aged 1-59 years, some structural attributes reached reference rainforest levels within 40 years, whereas wood volume and most tested components of native plant species richness (classified by species' origins, family, and ecological functions) reached less than 50% of reference rainforest values. Development of native tree and shrub richness was particularly slow among species that were wind dispersed or animal dispersed with large (>10 mm) seeds. Many species with animal-dispersed seeds were from near-basal evolutionary lineages that contribute to recognized World Heritage values of the study region. Faster recovery was recorded in 25 biodiversity plantings of 1-25 years in which wood volume developed more rapidly; native woody plant species richness reached values similar to reference rainforest and was better represented across all dispersal modes; and species from near-basal plant families were better (although incompletely) represented. Plantings and regrowth showed slow recovery in species richness of vines and epiphytes and in overall resemblance to forest in species composition. Our results can inform decision making about when and where to invest in active restoration and provide strong evidence that protecting old-growth forest is crucially important for sustaining tropical biodiversity.
© 2015 Society for Conservation Biology.

Entities:  

Keywords:  biodiversidad; biodiversity; biomasa; biomass; bosque secundario; chronosequence; cronosecuencia; decision strategy; estategia de decisión; plantación; plantation; reforestación; reforestation; secondary forest

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26310383     DOI: 10.1111/cobi.12606

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Conserv Biol        ISSN: 0888-8892            Impact factor:   6.560


  4 in total

1.  Degraded tropical rain forests possess valuable carbon storage opportunities in a complex, forested landscape.

Authors:  Mohammed Alamgir; Mason J Campbell; Stephen M Turton; Petina L Pert; Will Edwards; William F Laurance
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2016-07-20       Impact factor: 4.379

2.  Ecological restoration success is higher for natural regeneration than for active restoration in tropical forests.

Authors:  Renato Crouzeilles; Mariana S Ferreira; Robin L Chazdon; David B Lindenmayer; Jerônimo B B Sansevero; Lara Monteiro; Alvaro Iribarrem; Agnieszka E Latawiec; Bernardo B N Strassburg
Journal:  Sci Adv       Date:  2017-11-08       Impact factor: 14.136

3.  Comparing the success of active and passive restoration in a tropical cloud forest landscape: A multi-taxa fauna approach.

Authors:  Juan Manuel Díaz-García; Fabiola López-Barrera; Eduardo Pineda; Tarin Toledo-Aceves; Ellen Andresen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-11-10       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Revealing microhabitat requirements of an endangered specialist lizard with LiDAR.

Authors:  Holly S Bradley; Michael D Craig; Adam T Cross; Sean Tomlinson; Michael J Bamford; Philip W Bateman
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-03-25       Impact factor: 4.379

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.