ABSTRACT. The restoration of deforested or degraded areas can contribute to biodiversity conservation and global resilience given the current and projected impacts of climate change. In recent years, a robust array of ecological restoration frameworks have been generated to address restoration challenges at large scales in different ecosystems around the world. Unfortunately, the costs associated with restoration at such scales greatly challenges the implementation of such frameworks. We used landscape ecology principles with multicriteria optimization of landscape resilience and agricultural productivity as a way to mitigate the trade-offs between production and restoration. We used the Cerrado biome in Mato Grosso do Sul State, Brazil, as a case study to apply our framework. We compared three scenarios: minimal legal compliance (MLC); selection by ecological resilience (SER); and selection by restoration cost (SRC). Our results show that increasing the restoration target from MLC (25%) to SER (30%) means moving from 968,316 to 1592 million hectares, which can represent a huge opportunity cost for agricultural lands. However, because costs and resilience are not homogeneously distributed throughout landscapes, we can select areas of intermediate ecological resilience and low cost, for the same restoration area target. This process can reduce potential conflicts and make restoration a more viable process. Our results also reveal some areas that can be particularly important for reconciling agriculture and landscape restoration. Those areas combined high and intermediate resilience and an above average profitability. This could mean that increasing restoration in this area could be very expensive, assuming that our proxy roughly represents the restoration implementation cost. However, there is another important message here, that some areas can be productive at the same time that they maintain levels of resilience above the legal compliance, which facilitates win-win scenarios in human-dominated landscapes.
In this study we have attempted to answer whether there is correspondence between aquatic macroinvertebrate communities and the typological classification of white and clean-water streams in western Amazonia lowlands. We worked within two distinct hydrographic basins: Moa River catchment (clear-water streams) and Azul River catchment (white-water streams) in Serra do Divisor National Park, Acre State, Brazil, sampling 10 streams in each basin. A total of 2,952 individuals were collected, distributed among 134 taxa. Our results show that macroinvertebrate communities, at genus as well as family level, are in concordance to a priori classifications that distinguish between white and clear water streams. The main implication of our results for biomonitoring is that biotic variation between white and clear streams can be partitioned regionally, which would improve the bioassessment accuracy of the Amazonian streams. Resumo: Neste trabalho, nós investigamos se há correspondência entre comunidade de macroinvertebrados e classificação de igarapés em águas claras e brancas no oeste da Amazônia. Nós trabalhos em duas bacias hidrográficas, Rio Moa (águas claras) e Rio Azul (águas brancas) no Parque Nacional da Serra do Divisor, Acre, Brasil, amostrando 10 igarapés em cada bacia. Coletamos 2952 indivíduos, distribuídos em 134 taxa. Nossos resultados mostram que a comunidade de macroinvertebrados, identificada com baixa e alta resolução taxonômica, responde claramente a classificação tipológica de igarapés em águas claras e brancas. A principal implicação dos nossos resultados no âmbito de biomonitoramento é que a partição da variação biótica entre igarapés de águas claras e brancas pode melhorar a racionalidade e implantação de sistemas de avaliação ambiental na Amazônia. Palavras-chaves: insetos aquáticos, biodiversidade, região neotropical, biomonitoramento, Brasil.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.