A global review of past land use, climate, and active vs. passive restoration effects on forest recovery

PLoS ONE

Volumn 12, Issue 2, 2017, Pages

  Meli, Paula ^a,b,k   Holl, Karen D ^c   Benayas, José María Rey ^b,d   Jones, Holly P ^e   Jones, Peter C ^e   Montoya, Daniel ^f,g,h   Mateos, David Moreno ^b,i,j  

^a Natura y Ecosistemas Mexicanos AC   (Mexico)

^b Fundación Internacional Para la Restauración de Ecosistemas   (Spain)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF ALCALÁ   (Spain)

^e NORTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^f Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique and Paul Sabatier University   (France)

^g CEMAGREF   (France)

^h UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL   (United Kingdom)

ⁱ BASQUE CENTRE FOR CLIMATE CHANGE BC3   (Spain)

^j BASQUE FOUNDATION FOR SCIENCE   (Spain)

^k UNIVERSITY OF SÃO PAULO   (Brazil)

more..

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AGRICULTURAL LAND; CLIMATE; HUMAN; INVESTMENT; LOGGING; META ANALYSIS; MINING; PRECIPITATION; SOIL AMENDMENT; TEMPERATE DECIDUOUS FOREST; TOPOGRAPHY; AGRICULTURE; ECOSYSTEM; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; FOREST;

AGRICULTURE; CLIMATE; CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES; ECOSYSTEM; FORESTS;

EID: 85011340407     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0171368     Document Type: Review

References (65)

1. Lindenmayer DB, Franklin JF, Lohmus A, Baker SC, Bauhus J, Beese W, et al. A major shift to the retention approach for forestry can help resolve some global forest sustainability issues. Conservation Letters. 2012; 5(6):421-31.
2. Minnemayer S, Laestadius L, Sizer N. A world of opportunity. Washington, DC.: World Resources Institute; 2011.
3. United Nations. New York Declaration on Forests 2014 [25 October 2016]. http://www.un.org/climatechange/summit/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2014/07/New-York-Declaration-on-Forest-%E2% 80%93-Action-Statement-and-Action-Plan.pdf.
4. Convention on Biological Diversity. Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 and the Aichi Targets 2012 [25 October 2016]. www.cbd.int/doc/strategic-plan/2011-2020/Aichi-Targets-EN.pdf.
5. Stanturf JA, Palik BJ, Dumroese RK. Contemporary forest restoration: A review emphasizing function. For Ecol Manag. 2014; 331:292-323.
6. Bonner MTL, Schmidt S, Shoo LP. A meta-analytical global comparison of aboveground biomass accumulation between tropical secondary forests and monoculture plantations. For Ecol Manag. 2013; 291:73-86.
7. Martin PA, Newton AC, Bullock JM. Carbon pools recover more quickly than plant biodiversity in tropical secondary forests. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 2013; 280 (1773):20132236. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2013.2236 PMID: 24197410
8. Cole LES, Bhagwat SA, Willis KJ. Recovery and resilience of tropical forests after disturbance. Nat Commun. 2014; 5
9. Curran M, Hellweg S, Beck J. Is there any empirical support for biodiversity offset policy? Ecol Appl. 2014; 24(4):617-32. PMID: 24988764
10. Holl KD, Aide TM. When and where to actively restore ecosystems? For Ecol Manag. 2011; 261 (10):1558-63.
11. Chazdon RL. Second growth: The promise of tropical forest renegeration in an age of deforestation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 2014.
12. Crouzeilles R, Curran M, Ferreira MS, Lindenmayer DB, Grelle CEV, Rey Benayas JM. A global metaanalysis on the ecological drivers of forest restoration success. Nature Communications. 2016; 7:11666. doi: 10.1038/ncomms11666 PMID: 27193756
13. Guariguata MR, Chazdon RL, Denslow JS, Dupuy JM, Anderson L. Structure and floristics of secondary and old-growth forest stands in lowland Costa Rica. Plant Ecol. 1997; 132:107-20.
14. Letcher SG, Chazdon RL. Rapid recovery of biomass, species richness, and species composition in a forest chronosequence in northeastern Costa Rica. Biotropica. 2009; 41(5):608-17.
15. Holl KD. Tropical forest restoration. In: Van Andel J, Aronson J, editors. Restor Ecol. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing; 2012. p. 103-14.
16. Rey Benayas JM, Newton AC, Diaz A, Bullock JM. Enhancement of biodiversity and ecosystem services by ecological restoration: A meta-analysis. Science. 2009; 325:1121-4. doi: 10.1126/science. 1172460 PMID: 19644076
17. Suganuma MS, de Assis GB, Durigan G. Changes in plant species composition and functional traits along the successional trajectory of a restored patch of Atlantic Forest. Community Ecol. 2014; 15 (1):27-36.
18. Laganiere J, Angers DA, Pare D. Carbon accumulation in agricultural soils after afforestation: A metaanalysis. Global Change Biology. 2010; 16(1):439-53.
19. Knoke T, Bendix J, Pohle P, Hamer U, Hildebrandt P, Roos K, et al. Afforestation or intense pasturing improve the ecological and economic value of abandoned tropical farmlands. Nature Communications. 2014; 5:5612. doi: 10.1038/ncomms6612 PMID: 25425182
20. Sampaio AB, Holl KD, Scariot A. Does restoration enhance regeneration of seasonal deciduous forests in pastures in central Brazil? Restor Ecol. 2007; 15(3):462-71.
21. Dodson EK, Ares A, Puettmann KJ. Early responses to thinning treatments designed to accelerate late successional forest structure in young coniferous stands of western Oregon, USA. Canadian Journal of Forest Research-Revue Canadienne De Recherche Forestiere. 2012; 42(2):345-55.
22. Holl KD, Stout VM, Reid JL, Zahawi RA. Testing heterogeneity-diversity relationships in tropical forest restoration. Oecologia. 2013; 173:569-78. doi: 10.1007/s00442-013-2632-9 PMID: 23525802
23. Lu N, Fu BJ, Jin TT, Chang RY. Trade-off analyses of multiple ecosystem services by plantations along a precipitation gradient across Loess Plateau landscapes. Landsc Ecol. 2014; 29(10):1697-708.
24. Birch JC, Newton AC, Aquino CA, Cantarello E, Echeverra C, Kitzberger T, et al. Cost-effectiveness of dryland forest restoration evaluated by spatial analysis of ecosystem services. PNAS. 2010; 107 (50):21925-30. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1003369107 PMID: 21106761
25. Society for Ecology Restoration Science & Policy Working Group. The SER primer on ecological restoration 2004 [28 September 2009]. http://www.ser.org/resources/resources-detail-view/serinternational-primer-on-ecological-restoration.
26. Jones HP, Schmitz OJ. Rapid recovery of damaged ecosystems. PLoS ONE. 2009; 4(5):e5653. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0005653 PMID: 19471645
27. Meli P, Benayas JMR, Balvanera P, Ramos MM. Restoration enhances wetland biodiversity and ecosystem service supply, but results are context-dependent: A meta-analysis. PloS one. 2014; 9(4): e93507. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0093507 PMID: 24743348
28. Gurevitch J, Hedges LV. Statistical issues in ecological meta-analyses. Ecology. 1999; 80(4):1142-9.
29. Lajeunesse MJ, Forbes MR. Variable reporting and quantitative reviews: A comparison of three metaanalytical techniques. Ecol Lett. 2003; 6(5):448-54.
30. Wang MC, Bushman BJ. Using the normal quantile plot to explore meta-analytic data sets. Psychological Methods. 1998; 3(1):46-54.
31. Akaike H. Information theory and an extension of the maximum likelihood principle. In: Petrov BN, Caski F, editors. Prooceedings of the Second International Symposium on Information Theory. Budapest: Akademiai Kiado; 1973. p. 267-81.
32. Nakagawa S, Santos ESA. Methodological issues and advances in biological meta-analysis. Evol Ecol. 2012; 26(5):1253-74.
33. Mundry R. Issues in information theory-based statistical inference-a commentary from a frequentist's perspective. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 2011; 65(1):57-68.
34. Galipaud M, Gillingham MAF, David M, Dechaume-Moncharmont FX. Ecologists overestimate the importance of predictor variables in model averaging: A plea for cautious interpretations. Methods in Ecology and Evolution. 2014; 5(10):983-91.
35. Burnham KP, Anderson DR. Model selection and inference: A practical information-theoretic approach. 2nd Edition ed. New York: Springer; 2002.
36. Symonds MRE, Moussalli A. A brief guide to model selection, multimodel inference and model averaging in behavioural ecology using Akaike's information criterion. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 2011; 65(1):13-21.
37. Zuur AF, Ieno EN, Walker NJ, Saveliev AA, Smith GM. Mixed effects models and extensions in ecology with R. New York: Springer; 2009.
38. Pinheiro J, Bates D, DebRoy S, Sarkar D. nlme: Linear and Nonlinear Mixed Effects Models. R package version 3.1-121 2015. CRAN.R-project.org/package = nlme.
39. Barton K. MuMIn: Multi-Model Inference, R Package Version 1.9.13 2013. http://CRAN.Rproject.org/package=MuMIn.
40. Wickham H. ggplot2: elegant graphics for data analysis. New York: Springer-Verlag; 2009.
41. Moreno-Mateos D, Power ME, Comin FA, Yockteng R. Structural and functional loss in restored wetland ecosystems. PLoS Biol. 2012; 10(1):e1001247. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1001247 PMID: 22291572
42. Montoya D, Rogers L, Memmott J. Emerging perspectives in the restoration of biodiversity-based ecosystem services. Trends Ecol Evol. 2012; 27(12):666-72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2012.07.004. PMID: 22883537
43. Holl KD. Long-term vegetation recovery on reclaimed coal surface mines in the eastern USA. J Appl Ecol. 2002; 39(6):960-70.
44. Gibb H, Cunningham SA. Restoration of trophic structure in an assemblage of omnivores, considering a revegetation chronosequence. J Appl Ecol. 2013; 50(2):449-58.
45. Nakagoshi N, Wada S. POpulation-structure and succession in temperate forests of southwestern Japan. Vegetatio. 1990; 87(1):73-84.
46. Barral MP, Rey Benayas JM, Meli P, Maceira NO. Quantifying the impacts of ecological restoration on biodiversity and ecosystem services in agroecosystems: A global meta-analysis. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment. 2015; 202(0):223-31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2015.01.009.
47. Bullock JM, Aronson J, Newton AC, Pywell RF, Rey-Benayas JM. Restoration of ecosystem services and biodiversity: conflicts and opportunities. Trends Ecol Evol. 2011; 26(10):541-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2011.06.011. PMID: 21782273
48. Marin-Spiotta E, Cusack DF, Ostertag R, Silver wL. Trends in above and belowground carbon with forest regrowth after agricultural abandonment in the neotropics. In: Myster R, editor. Post-agricultural succession in the neotropics. New York: Springer; 2008. p. 22-72.
49. Graham SA, Craft CB, McCormick PV, Aldous A. Forms and accumulation of soil P in natural and recently restored peatlands-Upper Klamath Lake, Oregon, USA. Wetlands. 2005; 25(3):594-606.
50. Holl KD, Zahawi RA. Factors explaining variability in woody above-ground biomass accumulation in restored tropical forest. For Ecol Manag. 2014; 319(0):36-43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2014. 01.024.
51. Whisenant SG. Repairing damaged wildlands: A process-oriented, landscape-approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1999.
52. Moreno-Mateos D, Meli P, Vara-Rodriguez MI, Aronson J. Ecosystem response to interventions: lessons from restored and created wetland ecosystems. J Appl Ecol. 2015; 52(6):1528-37.
53. Plieninger T, Hui C, Gaertner M, Huntsinger L. The impact of land abandonment on species richness and abundance in the Mediterranean Basin: A meta-analysis. PloS one. 2014; 9(5):e98355. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0098355 PMID: 24865979
54. Queiroz C, Beilin R, Folke C, Lindborg R. Farmland abandonment: threat or opportunity for biodiversity conservation? A global review. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. 2014; 12(5):288-96.
55. Burton JI, Ares A, Olson DH, Puettmann KJ. Management trade-off between aboveground carbon storage and understory plant species richness in temperate forests. Ecol Appl. 2013; 23(6):1297-310. PMID: 24147403
56. Schwenk WS, Donovan TM, Keeton WS, Nunery JS. Carbon storage, timber production, and biodiversity: comparing ecosystem services with multi-criteria decision analysis. Ecol Appl. 2012; 22(5):1612-27. PMID: 22908717
57. Norden N, Angarita HA, Bongers F, Martinez-Ramos M, Granzow-de la Cerda I, Breugel M, et al. Successional dynamics in Neotropical forests are as uncertain as they are predictable. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2015; 112(26):8013-8. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1500403112 PMID: 26080411
58. Le HD, Smith C, Herbohn J, Harrison S. More than just trees: Assessing reforestation success in tropical developing countries. Journal of Rural Studies. 2012; 28(1):5-19.
59. Alexander S, Nelson CR, Aronson J, Lamb D, Cliquet A, Erwin KL, et al. Opportunities and challenges for ecological restoration within REDD+. Restor Ecol. 2011; 19(6):683-9.
60. Holl KD, Cairns J Jr. Monitoring and appraisal. In: Perrow MR, Davy AJ, editors. Handbook of Ecological Restoration, Vol 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2002. p. 411-32.
61. Belote RT, Jones RH, Wieboldt TF. Compositional stability and diversity of vascular plant communities following logging disturbance in Appalachian forests. Ecol Appl. 2012; 22(2):502-16. PMID: 22611850
62. Chazdon RL, Guariguata MR. Natural regeneration as a tool for large-scale forest restoration in the tropics: prospects and challenges. Biotropica. 2016; 48(6):716-30.
63. Brancalion PHS, Schweizer D, Gaudare U, Mangueira JR, Lamonato F, Farah FT, et al. Balancing economic costs and ecological outcomes of passive and active restoration in agricultural landscapes: The case of Brazil. Biotropica. 2016; 48(6):856-67.
64. Shoo LP, Catterall CP. Stimulating natural regeneration of tropical forest on degraded land: approaches, outcomes, and information gaps. Restor Ecol. 2013; 21(6):670-7.
65. Walker LR, Wardle DA, Bardgett RD, Clarkson BD. The use of chronosequences in studies of ecological succession and soil development. J Ecol. 2010; 98(4):725-36.