Networked and embedded scientific experiments will improve restoration outcomes

Gellie, Nicholas J. C.; Breed, Martin F.; Mortimer, Peter E.; Harrison, Rhett D.; Xu, Jianchu; Lowe, Andrew J.

doi:10.1002/fee.1810

Cited by 46 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Both fish researchers and managers should embrace 'Adaptive Management' and see restoration activities such as water and flow management as scientific 'experiments' from which we can learn (Gellie et al 2018). Both fish researchers and managers should embrace 'Adaptive Management' and see restoration activities such as water and flow management as scientific 'experiments' from which we can learn (Gellie et al 2018).…”

Section: The Futurementioning

confidence: 99%

Fish and flow management in the Murray–Darling Basin: Directions for research

Koehn¹,

Balcombe²,

Zampatti³

2019

Eco Management Restoration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Effective natural resource management requires knowledge exchange between researchers and managers to support evidence‐based decision‐making. To achieve this, there is a need to align research with management and policy needs. This project aimed to identify the flow‐related ecological knowledge needs for freshwater fish to better inform environmental water management in the Murray–Darling Basin, south‐eastern Australia. Our major objective was to provide an up‐to‐date assessment of scientific research and integrate this with the knowledge requirements of relevant managers to guide future research. We reviewed the contemporary scientific literature and engaged managers specifically responsible for delivering flows for fish outcomes via a questionnaire and workshop. Research on fishes of the MDB has generally evolved from single locations and/or times to larger spatio‐temporal scales, including multiple sites, rivers and catchments. There has also been a trend from single life stage studies to incorporation of multiple life stages and population processes. There remain, however, significant deficiencies in knowledge for most native species, many of which are threatened. Four agreed key knowledge gaps were derived from the literature review and managers’ suggestions: (i) population dynamics, (ii) movement, dispersal and connectivity, (iii) survival and recruitment to adults and (iv) recruitment drivers. To inform policy and management, managers desired timely advice, based on robust research and monitoring. Fish species of most relevance to managers were those highly regarded by community stakeholders and whose life histories and population dynamics are potentially influenced by flow. Populations of these mostly large‐bodied, angling species (e.g. Murray Cod, Golden Perch and Silver Perch) have declined, often due to river regulation and, in conjunction with managers’ priorities, are relevant candidates for research to support the management of flow to rehabilitate fish populations in the MDB.

show abstract

Section: The Futurementioning

confidence: 99%

Fish and flow management in the Murray–Darling Basin: Directions for research

Koehn¹,

Balcombe²,

Zampatti³

2019

Eco Management Restoration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Under the 2014 Paris Agreement, the Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) agreed to use Forest and Landscape Restoration (FLR) as a central component of an integrated programme of interventions to restrict global warming to 2°C by growing trees in degraded landscapes to sequester ~1.7 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) equivalent annually (Gellie et al, ). The Bonn Challenge has seen nations agree to restore the ecological functionality of 350 million hectares of deforested and degraded land by 2030 (http://www.bonnchallenge.org).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Secondary forest fragments offer important carbon and biodiversity cobenefits

Matos

Magnago

Miranda

et al. 2019

Global Change Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tropical forests store large amounts of carbon and high biodiversity, but are being degraded at alarming rates. The emerging global Forest and Landscape Restoration (FLR) agenda seeks to limit global climate change by removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere through the growth of trees. In doing so, it may also protect biodiversity as a free cobenefit, which is vital given the massive shortfall in funding for biodiversity conservation. We investigated whether natural forest regeneration on abandoned pastureland offers such cobenefits, focusing for the first time on the recovery of taxonomic diversity (TD), phylogenetic diversity (PD) and functional diversity (FD) of trees, including the recovery of threatened and endemic species richness, within isolated secondary forest (SF) fragments. We focused on the globally threatened Brazilian Atlantic Forest, where commitments have been made to restore 1 million hectares under FLR. Three decades after land abandonment, regenerating forests had recovered ~20% (72 Mg/ha) of the above‐ground carbon stocks of a primary forest (PF), with cattle pasture containing just 3% of stocks relative to PFs. Over this period, SF recovered ~76% of TD, 84% of PD and 96% of FD found within PFs. In addition, SFs had on average recovered 65% of threatened and ~30% of endemic species richness of primary Atlantic forest. Finally, we find positive relationships between carbon stock and tree diversity recovery. Our results emphasize that SF fragments offer cobenefits under FLR and other carbon‐based payments for ecosystem service schemes (e.g. carbon enhancements under REDD+). They also indicate that even isolated patches of SF could help to mitigate climate change and the biodiversity extinction crisis by recovering species of high conservation concern and improving landscape connectivity.

show abstract

“…Defining restoration outcomes is nontrivial and will continue to be a challenge (Diefenderfer et al ; Svejcar & Kildisheva ; Gellie et al ; Henry et al ). Several novel thinking themes were proposed at the meeting.…”

Section: Strategic Issuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There will be indirect ecological and environmental benefits that we will not immediately see or easily quantify. Education, engagement with children, reshaping culture, and distributed, networked science (Gellie et al ) will not always be rapid but certainly promote social and ecological good. Positive perception emerged as a novel tool that should be applied and planned for every restoration effort as proposed in the literature (Bennett ).…”

Section: Strategic Issuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do or do not. There is no try in restoration ecology

Lortie

John

Spangler

2019

Restoration Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Change is a fundamental component of contemporary restoration ecology. The environment, the research, and the ideas in this discipline are rapidly evolving and changing. The California Society for Ecological Restoration annual meeting was an inclusive, diverse meeting that significantly advanced new thinking in the field and provided an exemplar of the value of scientific discourse at meetings. The restoration work in this region also amplified and identified trends in the scientific community at large. A total of three future‐oriented strategic issues emerged from the discourse at this meeting. (1) Restoration ecologists need to consider alternative definitions of local for interventions within a region. (2) Restoration is never complete and must always incorporate people. (3) Indirect outcomes and the process of restoration have merit despite challenges of immediate identification of benefits. The science presented served as a platform for these advanced strategic issue examinations, and the grandest of challenges for restoration ecology necessarily includes people in every equation and embraces values and perceptions over longer time frames.

show abstract

Networked and embedded scientific experiments will improve restoration outcomes

Cited by 46 publications

References 41 publications

Fish and flow management in the Murray–Darling Basin: Directions for research

Fish and flow management in the Murray–Darling Basin: Directions for research

Secondary forest fragments offer important carbon and biodiversity cobenefits

Do or do not. There is no try in restoration ecology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About