The recognition that we are in the distinct new epoch of the Anthropocene suggests the necessity for ecological restoration to play a substantial role in repairing the Earth's damaged ecosystems. Moreover, the precious yet limited resources devoted to restoration need to be used wisely. To do so, we call for the ecological restoration community to embrace the concept of evidence-based restoration. Evidence-based restoration involves the use of rigorous, repeatable, and transparent methods (i.e. systematic reviews) to identify and amass relevant knowledge sources, critically evaluate the science, and synthesize the credible science to yield robust policy and/or management advice needed to restore the Earth's ecosystems. There are now several examples of restoration-relevant systematic reviews that have identified instances where restoration is entirely ineffective. Systematic reviews also serve as a tool to identify the knowledge gaps and the type of science needed (e.g. repeatable, appropriate replication, use of controls) to improve the evidence base. The restoration community, including both scientists and practitioners, needs to make evidence-based restoration a reality so that we can move from best intentions and acting with so-called "purpose" to acting for meaningful impact. Doing so has the potential to serve as a rallying point for reframing the Anthropocene as a so-called "good" epoch.

No abstract

Contemporary conservation problems are typically positioned at the interface of complex ecological and human systems. Traditional approaches aiming to compartmentalize a phenomenon within the confines of a single discipline and failing to engage non-science partners are outmoded and cannot identify solutions that have traction in the social, economic, and political arenas in which conservation actions must operate. As a result, conservation science teams must adopt multiple disciplinary approaches that bridge not only academic disciplines but also the political and social realms and engage relevant partners. Five reasons are presented that outline why conservation problems demand multiple disciplinary approaches in order to move forward because: (i) socio-ecological systems are complex, (ii) multiple perspectives are better than one, (iii) the results of research must influence practice, (iv) the heterogeneity of scale necessitates it, and (v) conservation involves compromise. Presenting reasons that support multiple disciplinarity demands a review of the barriers that impede this process, as we are far from attaining a model or framework that is applicable in all contexts. Two challenges that impede multiple disciplinarity are discussed, in addition to pragmatic solutions that conservation scientists and practitioners can adopt in their work. Overall, conservation researchers and practitioners are encouraged to explore the multiple disciplinary dimensions of their respective realms to more effectively solve problems in biodiversity and sustainability.

Fish sedation facilitates safer handling of fish during scientific research or fisheries assessment practices, thus limiting risk of injury to fish and reducing stress responses. In recent years, there has been growing interest in using electricity to sedate fish; two methods include (1) lower‐voltage, non‐pulsed‐DC fish handling gloves (FHGs) that tend to only sedate fish while the gloves are touching the animal; and (2) a comparatively high‐voltage, pulsed‐DC Portable Electrosedation System (PES) that leads to galvanonarcosis. This study compared the physiological consequences of exposure to FHGs and PES in teleost fish. Bluegills Lepomis macrochirus and Largemouth Bass Micropterus salmoides were exposed to FHGs, PES, or a handling control for a 3‐min simulated surgery. Blood was then sampled at 0.5 and 4.5 h postexposure and was analyzed for blood glucose, blood lactate, and plasma cortisol concentrations. Opercular rates were monitored during surgery, at 2 min postsurgery, and 0.5 h postsurgery. At 24 h postsurgery, time to exhaustion (via a standardized swimming chase protocol) was assessed. Fish exposed to FHGs tended to exhibit lower opercular rates than fish that were sedated with the PES during simulated surgery. Cortisol levels of Largemouth Bass treated with FHGs were higher than those of fish sedated with the PES. Glucose levels recorded for Bluegills at 4.5 h postsurgery were higher with FHGs than with the PES. In both species, lactate was lower for fish treated with FHGs than for those treated with the PES. At 24 h posttreatment, Bluegills sedated with FHGs exhibited a longer time to exhaustion than those subjected to the PES, whereas Largemouth Bass sedated with the PES exhibited a longer time to exhaustion than those sedated with FHGs. Physiological responses to treatments were inconsistent between species. Further investigation to determine the optimal electrosedation method is required.

Commercially available electrosedation apparatuses (e.g., the Smith-Root Portable Electroanesthesia System [PES]) are growing in popularity within the fisheries research community. This technology can be used to immobilize fish rapidly and does not require a withdrawal period before fish are released. A number of studies examined how various settings (e.g., duration, frequency, voltage) influence the performance of the PES for fish sedation, but comparatively less is known about the role of fish orientation and position on the efficacy of electrosedation within the PES. We compared recovery times of Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus upon manipulation of three variables: orientation of fish, electric field size (i.e., spacing between the anode and cathode), and fish proximity relative to the anode. Fish were individually exposed to pulsed DC with a standardized frequency (100 Hz), voltage (90 V), and shock duration (3 s). Full recovery time was significantly longer for fish oriented at horizontal angles (0 and 180 ) than at acute angles (45 and 135 ). Significant interactions were found between orientation and electrode spacing, as well as between orientation and fish proximity. These findings are pertinent to researchers in the field looking to optimize recovery time for a quick release after surgery, tagging, or any other time fish sedation is required.