| Literature DB >> 30854424 |
Danaë M A Rozendaal1,2,3,4, Frans Bongers1, T Mitchell Aide5, Esteban Alvarez-Dávila6,7, Nataly Ascarrunz8, Patricia Balvanera9, Justin M Becknell10, Tony V Bentos11, Pedro H S Brancalion12, George A L Cabral13, Sofia Calvo-Rodriguez14, Jerome Chave15, Ricardo G César12, Robin L Chazdon3,16,17, Richard Condit18, Jorn S Dallinga4, Jarcilene S de Almeida-Cortez13, Ben de Jong19, Alexandre de Oliveira20, Julie S Denslow21, Daisy H Dent22,23, Saara J DeWalt24, Juan Manuel Dupuy25, Sandra M Durán14, Loïc P Dutrieux4,26, Mario M Espírito-Santo27, María C Fandino28, G Wilson Fernandes29, Bryan Finegan30, Hernando García31, Noel Gonzalez32, Vanessa Granda Moser33, Jefferson S Hall18, José Luis Hernández-Stefanoni25, Stephen Hubbell18, Catarina C Jakovac11,16,34, Alma Johanna Hernández31, André B Junqueira16,34,35, Deborah Kennard36, Denis Larpin37, Susan G Letcher38, Juan-Carlos Licona8, Edwin Lebrija-Trejos39, Erika Marín-Spiotta40, Miguel Martínez-Ramos9, Paulo E S Massoca11, Jorge A Meave41, Rita C G Mesquita11, Francisco Mora9, Sandra C Müller42, Rodrigo Muñoz41, Silvio Nolasco de Oliveira Neto43, Natalia Norden31, Yule R F Nunes27, Susana Ochoa-Gaona19, Edgar Ortiz-Malavassi44, Rebecca Ostertag45, Marielos Peña-Claros1, Eduardo A Pérez-García41, Daniel Piotto46, Jennifer S Powers47, José Aguilar-Cano31, Susana Rodriguez-Buritica31, Jorge Rodríguez-Velázquez9, Marco Antonio Romero-Romero41, Jorge Ruíz48,49, Arturo Sanchez-Azofeifa14, Arlete Silva de Almeida50, Whendee L Silver51, Naomi B Schwartz52, William Wayt Thomas53, Marisol Toledo8, Maria Uriarte52, Everardo Valadares de Sá Sampaio54, Michiel van Breugel18,55,56, Hans van der Wal57, Sebastião Venâncio Martins43, Maria D M Veloso27, Hans F M Vester58, Alberto Vicentini11, Ima C G Vieira50, Pedro Villa59,60, G Bruce Williamson11,61, Kátia J Zanini42, Jess Zimmerman62, Lourens Poorter1.
Abstract
Old-growth tropical forests harbor an immense diversity of tree species but are rapidly being cleared, while secondary forests that regrow on abandoned agricultural lands increase in extent. We assess how tree species richness and composition recover during secondary succession across gradients in environmental conditions and anthropogenic disturbance in an unprecedented multisite analysis for the Neotropics. Secondary forests recover remarkably fast in species richness but slowly in species composition. Secondary forests take a median time of five decades to recover the species richness of old-growth forest (80% recovery after 20 years) based on rarefaction analysis. Full recovery of species composition takes centuries (only 34% recovery after 20 years). A dual strategy that maintains both old-growth forests and species-rich secondary forests is therefore crucial for biodiversity conservation in human-modified tropical landscapes.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30854424 PMCID: PMC6402850 DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aau3114
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Adv ISSN: 2375-2548 Impact factor: 14.136
Fig. 1Tree species richness and recovery of Neotropical secondary forests.
(A) Absolute recovery of species richness (number of species per 25 stems). (B) Relative recovery of species richness [% old-growth (OG)] after 20 years. The 56 study sites (45 sites for relative recovery) are indicated; symbol size scales with predicted recovery at 20 years after abandonment. Green shading indicates forest cover in the year 2000 (). Dry forests have an annual rainfall of <1500 mm year−1, moist forests have an annual rainfall of 1500 to 2499 mm year−1, and wet forests have an annual rainfall of ≥2500 mm year−1. (C) Forest recovery in dry tropical forests: secondary forest and old-growth forest plot in a dry forest site in the Atlantic forest in Brazil. (D) Forest recovery in wet tropical forests: secondary forest and old-growth forest plot in the wet forest site Sarapiquí in Costa Rica. Stand age (in years) of the secondary forests is indicated. (E) Forest legacies in an agricultural field in Márques de Comillas, Mexico. Photo credit: M.M.E.-S., D.M.A.R., and M.M.-R.
Fig. 2Absolute recovery of species richness and relative recovery of species richness and composition in relation to stand age for Neotropical secondary forests.
Each line indicates predicted recovery per site based on the site-specific intercept and slope from the mixed-effects models. Lines span the age range of secondary forest per site; symbols indicate the individual plots. Dry forests (annual rainfall of <1500 mm year−1) are indicated in green, moist forests (1500 to 2499 mm year−1) are indicated in light blue, and wet forests (≥2500 mm year−1) are indicated in dark blue. The gray line indicates the average predicted recovery rate for a site that is recovering after shifting cultivation, with all other predictors kept constant at the mean. (A) Rarefied species richness (per 25 stems; n = 56 sites). (B) Relative recovery of rarefied species richness [as a percentage of old-growth (% OG) forest; n = 45 sites]. The black dashed line indicates 100% recovery to the species richness of old-growth forest. (C) Relative recovery of species richness (n = 45 sites) based on the Chao-Jaccard index. The black dashed line indicates 100% recovery to the mean similarity in species composition (0.47 ± 0.040 SE) between old-growth plots in the same site averaged across the 41 sites with at least two old-growth plots to account for within-site variation in composition across old-growth plots.
Fig. 3Effects of stand age, the size of the local old-growth forest species pool, CWA, CEC, forest cover, previous land-use type, and plot size on biodiversity recovery in Neotropical secondary forests.
The size of the local old-growth forest species pool was estimated based on the Chao 1 estimator. Standardized coefficients with bootstrapped 95% confidence intervals are indicated. Negative coefficients indicate a negative relation, and positive coefficients indicate a positive relation. Effect sizes of land-use type comparisons are not directly comparable with those of the other predictors. SC, shifting cultivation; SC and PA, some plots shifting cultivation and some plots pasture; PA, pasture. Filled symbols indicate significant responses, and open symbols indicate nonsignificant responses. (A) Absolute recovery of rarefied species richness (number of species per 25 stems; n = 56 sites). Effects of the local species pool on absolute recovery of rarefied richness were not included, as old-growth plots were not available for all sites. (B) Relative recovery of rarefied richness [% old-growth (OG); n = 45 sites]. (C) Relative recovery of species composition [% OG; based on the Chao-Jaccard index ()], accounting for variation in composition among old-growth plots (n = 45 sites).