Human land use, including agriculture, is a leading contributor to declining biodiversity worldwide and can leave long‐lasting legacies on ecosystems after cessation. Ecological restoration is an approach to mitigate these impacts. However, little is known about how animal communities and plant–animal interactions respond to the combined effects of land‐use legacies and restoration. We investigated how restoration and agricultural history affect bee (Hymenoptera: Apoidea: Anthophila) communities and pollination function. In 27 paired remnant (no history of agriculture) and post‐agricultural longleaf pine (Pinus palustris Mill.) woodlands, we established 4–10 1‐ha plots (126 total) and experimentally restored half of them, while the other half were left as unrestored controls. Restoration was accomplished through canopy thinning which reinstates open savanna‐like conditions. We collected bees in each plot using a combination of bowl trapping and standardized netting transects. Thinning increased bee abundance by 169% and bee richness by 110%, but agricultural land use had no effect on these variables. Bee community composition was affected by restoration and was marginally affected by agricultural history. To measure pollination function, we conducted a sentinel plant experiment in which potted black mustard (Brassica nigra L.) plants were placed out in a subset of these sites (n = 10) and either bagged to exclude pollinators or left open for pollinator access. Then, we measured fruit and seed set of sentinel plants to compare pollination function among the restoration and land‐use history treatments. Seed set and fruit set of sentinel plants were higher in open than bagged plants, indicating that this model system effectively measured pollination, but we found no differences in pollination based on restoration or agricultural history. These results indicate that although pollinator communities may show clear responses to restoration that are largely independent of prior land‐use impacts, this does not necessarily translate into differences in pollination function after restoration.
Ecological restoration is a global priority, with potential to reverse biodiversity declines and promote ecosystem functioning. Yet, successful restoration is challenged by lingering legacies of past land-use activities, which are pervasive on lands available for restoration. Although legacies can persist for centuries following cessation of human land uses such as agriculture, we currently lack understanding of how land-use legacies affect entire ecosystems, how they influence restoration outcomes, or whether restoration can mitigate legacy effects. Using a large-scale experiment, we evaluated how restoration by tree thinning and land-use legacies from prior cultivation and subsequent conversion to pine plantations affect fire-suppressed longleaf pine savannas. We evaluated 45 ecological properties across four categories: 1) abiotic attributes, 2) organism abundances, 3) species diversity, and 4) species interactions. The effects of restoration and land-use legacies were pervasive, shaping all categories of properties, with restoration effects roughly twice the magnitude of legacy effects. Restoration effects were of comparable magnitude in savannas with and without a history of intensive human land use; however, restoration did not mitigate numerous legacy effects present prior to restoration. As a result, savannas with a history of intensive human land use supported altered properties, especially related to soils, even after restoration. The signature of past human land-use activities can be remarkably persistent in the face of intensive restoration, influencing the outcome of restoration across diverse ecological properties. Understanding and mitigating land-use legacies will maximize the potential to restore degraded ecosystems.
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.