| Literature DB >> 34294898 |
Nancy Shackelford1,2, Gustavo B Paterno3,4, Daniel E Winkler5, Todd E Erickson6,7, Elizabeth A Leger8, Lauren N Svejcar9, Martin F Breed10, Akasha M Faist11, Peter A Harrison12, Michael F Curran13, Qinfeng Guo14, Anita Kirmer15, Darin J Law16, Kevin Z Mganga17, Seth M Munson18, Lauren M Porensky19, R Emiliano Quiroga20,21, Péter Török22, Claire E Wainwright23, Ali Abdullahi24, Matt A Bahm25, Elizabeth A Ballenger26, Nichole Barger27, Owen W Baughman28, Carina Becker29, Manuel Esteban Lucas-Borja30, Chad S Boyd9, Carla M Burton31, Philip J Burton31, Eman Calleja32, Peter J Carrick33, Alex Caruana32, Charlie D Clements34, Kirk W Davies9, Balázs Deák35, Jessica Drake36, Sandra Dullau15, Joshua Eldridge37, Erin Espeland38, Hannah L Farrell18, Stephen E Fick5, Magda Garbowski39, Enrique G de la Riva40, Peter J Golos7, Penelope A Grey41, Barry Heydenrych42, Patricia M Holmes43, Jeremy J James44, Jayne Jonas-Bratten45, Réka Kiss35, Andrea T Kramer46, Julie E Larson27, Juan Lorite47,48, C Ellery Mayence49, Luis Merino-Martín50, Tamás Miglécz51, Suanne Jane Milton52,53, Thomas A Monaco54, Arlee M Montalvo55, Jose A Navarro-Cano56, Mark W Paschke57, Pablo Luis Peri58, Monica L Pokorny59, Matthew J Rinella60, Nelmarie Saayman61, Merilynn C Schantz62, Tina Parkhurst63, Eric W Seabloom64, Katharine L Stuble65, Shauna M Uselman66, Orsolya Valkó35, Kari Veblen67, Scott Wilson68, Megan Wong69, Zhiwei Xu70, Katharine L Suding27,71.
Abstract
Restoration of degraded drylands is urgently needed to mitigate climate change, reverse desertification and secure livelihoods for the two billion people who live in these areas. Bold global targets have been set for dryland restoration to restore millions of hectares of degraded land. These targets have been questioned as overly ambitious, but without a global evaluation of successes and failures it is impossible to gauge feasibility. Here we examine restoration seeding outcomes across 174 sites on six continents, encompassing 594,065 observations of 671 plant species. Our findings suggest reasons for optimism. Seeding had a positive impact on species presence: in almost a third of all treatments, 100% of species seeded were growing at first monitoring. However, dryland restoration is risky: 17% of projects failed, with no establishment of any seeded species, and consistent declines were found in seeded species as projects matured. Across projects, higher seeding rates and larger seed sizes resulted in a greater probability of recruitment, with further influences on species success including site aridity, taxonomic identity and species life form. Our findings suggest that investigations examining these predictive factors will yield more effective and informed restoration decision-making.Entities:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34294898 DOI: 10.1038/s41559-021-01510-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nat Ecol Evol ISSN: 2397-334X Impact factor: 15.460