Aim The biophysical impacts of invasive Australian acacias and their effects on ecosystem services are explored and used to develop a framework for improved restoration practices.Location South Africa, Portugal and Chile.Methods A conceptual model of ecosystem responses to the increasing severity (density and duration) of invasions was developed from the literature and our knowledge of how these impacts affect options for restoration. Case studies are used to identify similarities and differences between three regions severely affected by invasions of Australian acacias: Acacia dealbata in Chile, Acacia longifolia in Portugal and Acacia saligna in South Africa.Results Australian acacias have a wide range of impacts on ecosystems that increase with time and disturbance, transform ecosystems and alter and reduce ecosystem service delivery. A shared trait is the accumulation of massive seed banks, which enables them to become dominant after disturbances. Ecosystem trajectories and recovery potential suggest that there are important thresholds in ecosystem state and resilience. When these are crossed, options for restoration are radically altered; in many cases, autogenic (self-driven and self-sustaining) recovery to a pre-invasion condition is inhibited, necessitating active intervention to restore composition and function.Main conclusions The conceptual model demonstrates the degree, nature and reversibility of ecosystem degradation and identifies key actions needed to restore ecosystems to desired states. Control and restoration operations, particularly active restoration, require substantial short-to medium-term investments, which can reduce losses of biodiversity and ecosystem services, and the costs to society in the long term. Increasing restoration effectiveness will require further research into linkages between impacts and restoration. This research should involve scientists, practitioners and managers engaged in invasive plant control and restoration programmes, together with society as both the investors in, and beneficiaries of, more effective restoration.

No abstract

Salt marsh and mangrove have been recognized as being among the most valuable ecosystem types globally in terms of their supply of ecosystem services and support for human livelihoods. These coastal ecosystems are also susceptible to the impacts of climate change and rising sea levels, with evidence of global shifts in the distribution of mangroves, including encroachment into salt marshes. The encroachment of woody mangrove shrubs and trees into herbaceous salt marshes may represent a substantial change in ecosystem structure, although resulting impacts on ecosystem functions and service provisions are largely unknown. In this review, we assess changes in ecosystem services associated with mangrove encroachment. While there is quantitative evidence to suggest that mangrove encroachment may enhance carbon storage and the capacity of a wetland to increase surface elevation in response to sea-level rise, for most services there has been no direct assessment of encroachment impact. On the basis of current understanding of ecosystem structure and function, we theorize that mangrove encroachment may increase nutrient storage and improve storm protection, but cause declines in habitat availability for fauna requiring open vegetation structure (such as migratory birds and foraging bats) as well as the recreational and cultural activities associated with this fauna (e.g., birdwatching and/or hunting). Changes to provisional services such as fisheries productivity and cultural services are likely to be site specific and dependent on the species involved. We discuss the need for explicit experimental testing of the effects of encroachment on ecosystem services in order to address key knowledge gaps, and present an overview of the options available to coastal resource managers during a time of environmental change.

Allelopathy has been suggested as a mechanism promoting the monoculture formation of some invasive exotic plants. Previous studies have shown that hydrophobic extracts of the roots and soil of exotic bitou bush (Chrysanthemoides monilifera spp. rotundata (DC.) T. Norl.) inhibited the seedling growth of five Australian native plants, including the dominant acacia (Acacia longifolia var. sophorae (Labill.) F. Muell.). Based on this finding, we compared the hydrophobic root and soil chemical profiles of bitou bush and acacia to determine whether bitou bush roots release allelopathic compounds that are novel to the invaded system. We detected three compounds that were exclusive to the bitou bush root and soil, and seven compounds that were common to the bitou bush and acacia roots but only present in the bitou bush soil. The compounds unique to the bitou bush invaded soil were all sesquiand diterpenes. Several of these compounds were found to inhibit the seedling growth of a native sedge, Isolepis nodosa (Rott.) R. Br. Of particular interest are the sesquiterpenes: b-maaliene, a-isocomene, b-isocomene, d-cadinene, 5-hydroxycalamenene and 5-methoxycalamenene which were found in high concentrations in the bitou bush root and soil extracts and exhibited phytotoxic activity. Therefore, we present evidence to suggest that bitou bush exudes low molecular weight volatile compounds into the soil which inhibit native plant seedling growth. The reduced establishment of native plants via allelopathy is likely to create space and contribute to the invasion of bitou bush on the eastern Australian coast.

Summary This paper synthesises the lessons learnt and challenges encountered when applying Indigenous and non-Indigenous knowledge and methods in natural and cultural resource management (NCRM) in northern and central Australia. We primarily draw on the papers within this special issue of Ecological Management & Restoration, which originated largely from the Indigenous land management symposium at the 2010 Ecological Society of Australia conference. Many of the papers and therefore this article discuss practical experiences that offer insight for enhanced on-ground cross-cultural NCRM and can inform broader thinking and theoretical critiques. A wider literature is also drawn upon to substantiate the points and broaden the scope of the synthesis. Four key themes for consideration in collaborative cross-cultural NCRM are discussed. They are as follows: 1. The differences in environmental philosophy between Indigenous and non-Indigenous cultures which profoundly shape perceptions of environmental management; 2. Cross-cultural awareness of Indigenous and non-Indigenous knowledge and methods; 3. The mechanics of two-way approaches to ecological research and managing country (NCRM as perceived by Indigenous people) and 4. Operational challenges for Indigenous NCRM organisations. To conclude, we point out five broad principles for managing country using Indigenous and non-Indigenous knowledge: (i) Recognise the validity of both Indigenous and non-Indigenous environmental philosophies; (ii) Create more opportunities for improved cross-cultural understanding, respect and collaborations; (iii) Involve Indigenous people and their knowledge and interests at all stages of the Indigenous NCRM project or research (including planning, design, implementation, communication and evaluation); (iv) Ensure that time and continuity of effort and resources are available (to undertake participatory processes and for trust-building and innovation) and (v) Establish high-level political support through legal and policy frameworks to maintain continuity of government commitment to Indigenous NCRM.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract