Cargando…

A meta‐analysis of functional group responses to forest recovery outside of the tropics

Both active and passive forest restoration schemes are used in degraded landscapes across the world to enhance biodiversity and ecosystem service provision. Restoration is increasingly also being implemented in biodiversity offset schemes as compensation for loss of natural habitat to anthropogenic...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Spake, Rebecca, Ezard, Thomas H. G., Martin, Philip A., Newton, Adrian C., Doncaster, C. Patrick
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4973697/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26040756
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12548
_version_ 1782446437523521536
author Spake, Rebecca
Ezard, Thomas H. G.
Martin, Philip A.
Newton, Adrian C.
Doncaster, C. Patrick
author_facet Spake, Rebecca
Ezard, Thomas H. G.
Martin, Philip A.
Newton, Adrian C.
Doncaster, C. Patrick
author_sort Spake, Rebecca
collection PubMed
description Both active and passive forest restoration schemes are used in degraded landscapes across the world to enhance biodiversity and ecosystem service provision. Restoration is increasingly also being implemented in biodiversity offset schemes as compensation for loss of natural habitat to anthropogenic development. This has raised concerns about the value of replacing old‐growth forest with plantations, motivating research on biodiversity recovery as forest stands age. Functional diversity is now advocated as a key metric for restoration success, yet it has received little analytical attention to date. We conducted a meta‐analysis of 90 studies that measured differences in species richness for functional groups of fungi, lichens, and beetles between old‐growth control and planted or secondary treatment forests in temperate, boreal, and Mediterranean regions. We identified functional‐group–specific relationships in the response of species richness to stand age after forest disturbance. Ectomycorrhizal fungi averaged 90 years for recovery to old‐growth values (between 45 years and unrecoverable at 95% prediction limits), and epiphytic lichens took 180 years to reach 90% of old‐growth values (between 140 years and never for recovery to old‐growth values at 95% prediction limits). Non‐saproxylic beetle richness, in contrast, decreased as stand age of broadleaved forests increased. The slow recovery by some functional groups essential to ecosystem functioning makes old‐growth forest an effectively irreplaceable biodiversity resource that should be exempt from biodiversity offsetting initiatives.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4973697
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49736972016-08-17 A meta‐analysis of functional group responses to forest recovery outside of the tropics Spake, Rebecca Ezard, Thomas H. G. Martin, Philip A. Newton, Adrian C. Doncaster, C. Patrick Conserv Biol Contributed Papers Both active and passive forest restoration schemes are used in degraded landscapes across the world to enhance biodiversity and ecosystem service provision. Restoration is increasingly also being implemented in biodiversity offset schemes as compensation for loss of natural habitat to anthropogenic development. This has raised concerns about the value of replacing old‐growth forest with plantations, motivating research on biodiversity recovery as forest stands age. Functional diversity is now advocated as a key metric for restoration success, yet it has received little analytical attention to date. We conducted a meta‐analysis of 90 studies that measured differences in species richness for functional groups of fungi, lichens, and beetles between old‐growth control and planted or secondary treatment forests in temperate, boreal, and Mediterranean regions. We identified functional‐group–specific relationships in the response of species richness to stand age after forest disturbance. Ectomycorrhizal fungi averaged 90 years for recovery to old‐growth values (between 45 years and unrecoverable at 95% prediction limits), and epiphytic lichens took 180 years to reach 90% of old‐growth values (between 140 years and never for recovery to old‐growth values at 95% prediction limits). Non‐saproxylic beetle richness, in contrast, decreased as stand age of broadleaved forests increased. The slow recovery by some functional groups essential to ecosystem functioning makes old‐growth forest an effectively irreplaceable biodiversity resource that should be exempt from biodiversity offsetting initiatives. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2015-06-03 2015-12 /pmc/articles/PMC4973697/ /pubmed/26040756 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12548 Text en © 2015 The Authors Conservation Biology published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of Society for Conservation Biology. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Contributed Papers
Spake, Rebecca
Ezard, Thomas H. G.
Martin, Philip A.
Newton, Adrian C.
Doncaster, C. Patrick
A meta‐analysis of functional group responses to forest recovery outside of the tropics
title A meta‐analysis of functional group responses to forest recovery outside of the tropics
title_full A meta‐analysis of functional group responses to forest recovery outside of the tropics
title_fullStr A meta‐analysis of functional group responses to forest recovery outside of the tropics
title_full_unstemmed A meta‐analysis of functional group responses to forest recovery outside of the tropics
title_short A meta‐analysis of functional group responses to forest recovery outside of the tropics
title_sort meta‐analysis of functional group responses to forest recovery outside of the tropics
topic Contributed Papers
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4973697/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26040756
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12548
work_keys_str_mv AT spakerebecca ametaanalysisoffunctionalgroupresponsestoforestrecoveryoutsideofthetropics
AT ezardthomashg ametaanalysisoffunctionalgroupresponsestoforestrecoveryoutsideofthetropics
AT martinphilipa ametaanalysisoffunctionalgroupresponsestoforestrecoveryoutsideofthetropics
AT newtonadrianc ametaanalysisoffunctionalgroupresponsestoforestrecoveryoutsideofthetropics
AT doncastercpatrick ametaanalysisoffunctionalgroupresponsestoforestrecoveryoutsideofthetropics
AT spakerebecca metaanalysisoffunctionalgroupresponsestoforestrecoveryoutsideofthetropics
AT ezardthomashg metaanalysisoffunctionalgroupresponsestoforestrecoveryoutsideofthetropics
AT martinphilipa metaanalysisoffunctionalgroupresponsestoforestrecoveryoutsideofthetropics
AT newtonadrianc metaanalysisoffunctionalgroupresponsestoforestrecoveryoutsideofthetropics
AT doncastercpatrick metaanalysisoffunctionalgroupresponsestoforestrecoveryoutsideofthetropics