The upcoming Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) meeting, and adoption of the new Global Biodiversity Framework, represent an opportunity to transform humanity's relationship with nature. Restoring nature while meeting human needs requires a bold vision, including mainstreaming biodiversity conservation in society. We present a framework that could support this: the Mitigation and Conservation Hierarchy. This places the Mitigation Hierarchy for mitigating and compensating the biodiversity impacts of developments (1, avoid; 2, minimize; 3, restore; and 4, offset, toward a target such as "no net loss" of biodiversity) within a broader framing encompassing all conservation actions. We illustrate its application by national governments, sub-national levels (specifically the city of London, a fishery, and Indigenous groups), companies, and individuals. The Mitigation and Conservation Hierarchy supports the choice of actions to conserve and restore nature, and evaluation of the effectiveness of those actions, across sectors and scales. It can guide actions toward a sustainable future for people and nature, supporting the CBD's vision. THE NEED FOR TRANSFORMATIVE CHANGE FOR BIODIVERSITYThere is overwhelming evidence that human actions are driving a crisis for biodiversity, and that transformative change is needed. 1,2 The post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework should be agreed at the UN Convention on Biological Diversity's (CBD) upcoming 15th Conference of the Parties. The Global Biodiversity Framework will hopefully provide the necessary impetus for transformative change not just for nations but for corporations, industries, and the general public. The idea of integrating a "net outcomes" ambition into this global plan has gained ground, [3][4][5] with conservation organizations calling for a "nature-positive" Global Goal for Nature by 2050 (https://www. naturepositive.org).Ambitious conservation goals must translate into real-world action. 6,7 Very few elements of the CBD's existing Strategic Plan for Biodiversity for 2011-2020 have been successfully ll

No abstract

SUMMARYInitially non-mycorrhizal seedlings of birch {Betula pendula Roth.) were grown for a season around two 11-year-old birch trees on an experimental site south of Edinburgh. Some seedlings (non-isolated) were planted in undisturbed positions, others (trenched) in volumes of soil isolated from the mature tree by trenches, and yet others (cored) in cores of soil (8x10 cm diameter) that had been removed and replaced immediately.Mycorrhizas of Lactarius pubescens (Fr. ex Krombh.) Fr., Lactarius glyciosmus (Fr. ex Fr.) Fr., and Leccinum scabrum (Bull, ex Fr.) S. F. Gray and Leccinum roseofracta Watl. developed abundantly on the non-isolated seedlings but usually very poorly on the trenched and cored seedlings. That some development of Leccinum mycorrhizas occurred in trenched areas is attributed to incomplete severance of roots. In contrast, mycorrhizas of other fungi, for example Hebeloma spp. and Inocybe spp., developed most abundantly on trenched and cored seedlings rather than on non-isolated seedlings.The results demonstrate an important difference between types of ectomycorrhizal fungus. Lactarius and Leccinum spp. seem to depend on a continuing supply of photosynthate from a mature tree in order to colonize seedling roots, whereas several other mycorrhizal fungi show no such dependence. The results also indicate an important role for mycelial strands in establishment of mycorrhizas by some fungi {Lactarius pubescens and Leccinum spp.) and thus parallel previous reports on the importance of mycelial strands in colonization of substrata by saprophytic and pathogenic fungi.

No abstract

No abstract