景观生态学与退化生态系统恢复

退化生态系统的恢复是一项艰巨任务,它需要考虑到所要恢复的退化生态系统的结构,多样性和其动态的整体性和长期性。现在对于退化生态系统恢复研究已经要使生态学家们关注受损生态系统的理论和实际问题。退化生态系统恢复所面临的挑战是理解和利用生态演替理论来完成并加速恢复进程。恢复的主要目标是建立一个自维持的,由不同的群落或生态系统组成的能够满足不同需要如生物保护和粮食生产需要的景观。景观生态学关注于大的空间尺度的生态学问题。景观生态学研究方法可以为退化生态系统恢复实践提供指导。在解决退化生态系统的恢复问题时,景观生态学的方法在理论和实践上是有效的。景观生态学中的核心概念和其一般原理斑块形状、生态系统间相互作用、镶嵌系列等都同退化生态系统的恢复有着密切的关系。如恢复地点的选择和适当的恢复要素的空间配置。在评价退化生态系统的恢复是否取得成功,利用景观生态学也具有重要的意义。景观生态学理论如景观格局与景观异质性理论,干扰理论和尺度理论都能够指导退化生态系统的恢复实践。同样地,退化生态系统的恢复可以为景观生态学的研究提供非常恰当的实验场。寓景观生态学思想于退化生态系统恢复过程是一种新的有效途径。     

Monitoring and evaluating large-scale, ‘open-ended’ habitat creation projects: A journey rather than a destination

Ecological restoration frequently involves setting fixed species or habitat targets to be achieved by prescribed restoration activities or through natural processes. Where no reference systems exist for defining outcomes or where restoration is planned on a large spatial scale, a more ‘open-ended’ approach to defining outcomes may be appropriate. Such approaches require changes to the definition of goals and the design of monitoring and evaluation activities. We suggest that in open-ended projects restoration goals should be framed in terms of promoting natural processes, mobile landscape mosaics and improved ecosystem services. Monitoring can then focus on the biophysical processes that underpin the development of habitat mosaics and the provision of ecosystem services, on the way habitat mosaics change through time and on species that can indicate the changing landscape attributes of connectivity and scale. Stakeholder response should be monitored since an open-ended restoration approach is unusual and can encounter institutional and societal constraints. Evaluation should focus on reporting changing restoration impacts and benefits rather than on achieving a pre-defined concept of ecological success.     

喀斯特石漠化综合治理及其区域恢复效应

国家加大生态保护与建设力度背景下,我国西南喀斯特石漠化面积实现"持续净减少",面临由传统高强度人为干扰向大规模自然恢复与人工造林的转变,石漠化治理也面临转型。现有喀斯特生态研究已阐明了喀斯特脆弱生态系统人为干扰退化机制,初步揭示了生态治理改善生态系统结构与功能的恢复机理,突破了保土集水与植被恢复的适应性石漠化治理技术与模式,评估了石漠化治理显著加速区域植被生长与恢复的固碳效应。但目前石漠化治理面临着治理成效巩固困难、治理技术与模式缺乏区域针对性、大规模低效人工林亟待改造、社会人文驱动机制不清等问题。未来喀斯特生态恢复应聚焦石漠化治理提质增效,从侧重单一生态要素、单一生态过程的研究向多要素综合、多过程综合以及喀斯特地表-地下过程耦合、景观格局与生态过程耦合、生态过程与生态系统服务耦合、自然与人文过程耦合等陆地表层系统集成的方向发展,为我国西南喀斯特地区石漠化治理与扶贫开发成效巩固、乡村振兴与美丽中国战略的实施提供科技支撑。     

Defining the Limits of Restoration: The Need for Realistic Goals

The search for a universal statement of goals for ecological restoration continues to generate discussion and controversy. I discuss the diverse roots of restoration ecology, and show how the complex lineages within the field have led to diverse, and divergent, sets of goals. I then review the three major themes that currently are used to develop statements of goals: restoration of species, restoration of whole ecosystems or landscapes, and the restoration of ecosystem services, and point out both the advantages and the limitations and problems associated with each category. Finally, I suggest that restoration ecology would be better served by recognizing that the diversity of conditions requiring restoration demands much flexibility in goal setting, and that restorationists should seek to develop guidelines for defining the sets of conditions under which different kinds of goals are appropriate. I further suggest that goals would be more easily and more appropriately set if restorationists would set forth at the outset the true scope and limitations of what is possible in a given project. Key words: goal‐setting, wetlands, conservation biology, ecosystem management, ecosystem services, landscape management.     

Towards more effective integration of tropical forest restoration and conservation

Conservation and restoration interventions can be mutually reinforcing and are converging through an increased focus on social dimensions. This paper examines how to more effectively integrate the complementary goals of conservation and restoration of tropical forests. Forest conservation and restoration interventions are integral components of a broad approach to forest ecosystem and landscape management that aims to maintain and restore key ecological processes and enhance human well‐being, while minimizing biodiversity loss. The forest transition model provides a useful framework for understanding the relative importance of forest conservation and restoration interventions in different regions. Harmonizing conservation and restoration presents serious challenges for forest policy in tropical countries, particularly regarding the use and management of secondary forests, fallow vegetation, and forests degraded by logging and fire. Research to implement restoration more effectively in tropical regions can be stimulated by transforming questions that initially focused on conservation issues. Examination of papers published in Biotropica from 2000–2018 shows that most studies relevant to tropical forest conservation do not address forest restoration issues. Forest restoration studies, on the other hand, show a consistent association with conservation issues. There is much scope for further integration of conservation and restoration in research, practice, and policy. Securing a sustainable future for tropical forests requires developing and applying integrated approaches to landscape management that effectively combine knowledge and tools from multiple disciplines with practical experience and engagement of local stakeholders. Abstract in Portuguese is available with online material.     

Using Remote Sensing to Evaluate the Influence of Grassland Restoration Activities on Ecosystem Forage Provisioning Services

As valuation of ecosystem goods and services derived from ecological processes becomes increasingly important in environmental decision-making, the need to quantify how restoration activities influence ecosystem function has grown more urgent, particularly within income-generating or subsistence-providing landscapes where economic needs and biodiversity goals must be balanced. However, quantification of restoration effects is often hindered by logistical issues, which include (1) the difficulty of systematically monitoring responses over large areas and (2) lack or loss of comparison sites necessary for assessing treatment effect. We explored the use of remote sensing to quantify the effects of native grass seeding and prescribed burns on ecosystem forage provisioning services within a California (U.S.A.) rangeland landscape. We used Landsat time series to monitor forage (green biomass) dynamics within 296 ha of treatment areas—distributed throughout a 36-km² watershed—for 6 years and to identify post hoc comparison areas when a priori comparisons were lacking. Remote sensing analysis documented gains and losses in forage provisioning services due to restoration efforts and provided critical information for adaptive management. Our results demonstrate the degree to which invaded grasslands can be resistant to change and suggest that increasing the functional complexity of restoration mixes might help increase forage availability and reduce opportunities for weed reinvasion.     

Near‐term impacts of coral restoration on target species,coral reef community structure,and ecological processes

The global decline of corals has created an urgent need for effective, science‐based methods to augment coral populations and restore important ecosystem functions. To meet this challenge, the field of coral restoration has rapidly evolved over the past decade. However, despite widespread efforts to outplant corals and monitor survivorship, there is a shortage of information on the effects of coral restoration on reef communities or important ecosystem functions. To fill this knowledge gap, we examined the effects of restoration on three major criteria: diversity, community structure, and ecological processes. We conducted surveys of four restored sites in the Florida Keys ranging in restoration effort (500–2,300 corals outplanted) paired with surveys of nearby, unmanipulated control sites. Coral restoration successfully enhanced coral populations, increasing coral cover 4‐fold, but manifested in limited differences in coral and fish communities. Some restored sites had higher abundance of herbivorous fish, rates of herbivory, or more juvenile‐sized corals, but these effects were limited to individual reefs. Damselfish were consistently more abundant at restored compared to control sites. Despite augmenting target coral populations, 3 years of coral restoration has not facilitated many of the positive feedbacks that help reinforce coral success. In a time of increasingly frequent disturbances, it is urgent we hasten the speed at which reefs recover important ecological processes, such as herbivory and nutrient cycling, that make reefs more resistant and resilient if we are to achieve long‐term restoration success.     

When is restoration not?: Incorporating landscape-scale processes to restore self-sustaining ecosystems in coastal wetland restoration

With increasing restoration initiatives for coastal wetlands, the question of ‘What are we restoring to?’ becomes more pressing. The goal of this paper is to explore restoration concepts, examples, and challenges from the Pacific and Gulf coasts. One of the fundamental concepts explored is change over time – either in the controlling processes or the restoration structure – and how such changes can be meshed with the goals of various restoration efforts. We subsequently review the concepts of ecosystem trajectories, alternative restoration approaches, and the ideal attributes of functional self-sustaining restoration in the context of realities of restoration planning, design, and implementation. These realities include the dynamics of the ecosystems being restored, very real constraints that are imposed by the contemporary physical and human landscape, and the need to plan for the long term development of restoration sites recognizing that both project performance and expectations may change over time.     

区域生态安全格局:概念与理论基础

提出区域生态安全格局概念的提出 ,适应了生态系统恢复和生物多样性保护的发展需求。针对区域生态环境问题 ,通过干扰排除以及空间格局规划和管理 ,能够保护和恢复生物多样性 ,维持生态系统结构、功能和过程的完整性 ,实现对区域生态环境问题的有效控制和持续改善。区域生态安全格局的研究对象具有针对性、研究尺度具有区域性、研究问题具有系统性、研究手段具有主动性。它强调区域尺度的生物多样性保护、退化生态系统恢复及其空间合理配置、生态系统健康的维持、景观生态格局的优化、以及对社会经济发展需求的满足。它更加强调格局与过程安全及其整体集成 ,将生态系统管理对策落实到具体的空间地域上 ,实现管理效果的直观可视。相关理论 ,景观生态学、干扰生态学、保护生物学、恢复生态学、生态经济学、生态伦理学、和复合生态系统理论等为其提供了坚实的理论基础。区域生态安全格局不存在一个固定标准 ,人类对生态系统服务功能需求的不断变化是生态系统管理的根本原因。实现区域生态安全不但要以社会、经济、文化、道德、法律、和法规为手段 ,更要以其不断发展对生态系统服务功能的新需求为目标逐步进行。区域生态安全格局研究对于解决区域生态环境问题具有不可替代的作用 ,具有广阔应用前景。     

Do We Practice What We Preach? Goal Setting for Ecological Restoration

Over the last decade, several research and opinion pieces have challenged the tenets of restoration ecology but a lack of centralized data has impeded assessment of how scientific developments relate to on‐the‐ground restoration. In response, the Society for Ecological Restoration (SER) launched the Global Restoration Network (GRN) to catalog worldwide restoration efforts. We reviewed over 200 GRN projects to identify the goals governing restoration and the frequency with which they are measured. We used the SER Primer on Ecological Restoration to frame our analysis, categorizing goals by SER's attributes of restored ecosystems. We developed additional attributes to characterize goals not encompassed by the SER‐defined attributes. Nearly all projects included goals related to ecosystem form, namely similarity to reference conditions and the presence of indigenous species, and these goals were frequently measured. Most projects included goals related to ecosystem function, and many highlighted interactions between abiotic and biotic factors by either modifying abiotic conditions to support focal species or manipulating species to achieve desired ecosystem functions. Few projects had goals related to ecosystem stability, whereas the majority of projects had goals related to social values. Although less frequently measured, social goals were described as important for long‐term project success. In conclusion, science and practice frequently aligned on goals related to ecosystem composition and function, but scientific guidelines on resilience and self‐sustainability appear insufficient to guide practice. In contrast, the common inclusion of goals for human well‐being indicates that, if intended to advise practice, restoration guidelines should give direction on social goals.     

Restoration Success: How Is It Being Measured?

The criteria of restoration success should be clearly established to evaluate restoration projects. Recently, the Society of Ecological Restoration International (SER) has produced a Primer that includes ecosystem attributes that should be considered when evaluating restoration success. To determine how restoration success has been evaluated in restoration projects, we reviewed articles published in Restoration Ecology (Vols. 1[1]–11[4]). Specifically, we addressed the following questions: (1) what measures of ecosystem attributes are assessed and (2) how are these measures used to determine restoration success. No study has measured all the SER Primer attributes, but most studies did include at least one measure in each of three general categories of the ecosystem attributes: diversity, vegetation structure, and ecological processes. Most of the reviewed studies are using multiple measures to evaluate restoration success, but we would encourage future projects to include: (1) at least two variables within each of the three ecosystem attributes that clearly related to ecosystem functioning and (2) at least two reference sites to capture the variation that exist in ecosystems.     

Modeling the suitability of wetland restoration potential at the watershed scale

Despite the fact that landscape level processes dominate wetland ecosystem development and sustainability, restoration decisions (including those for compensatory mitigation) are typically made on a project-by-project basis. Watershed planning designed to strategically restore wetlands has the potential to provide dramatic benefits by restoring ecosystem-level processes (functions) that maintain water resource integrity. We developed a GIS-based model to predict the suitability for wetland restoration for all locations in the Cuyahoga River watershed (2107 km²), in northeastern Ohio (U.S.A.). The model offers a useful tool to focus and set goals for wetland restoration efforts in a spatially explicit way. A two-phase approach was used: the first is to develop criteria, or environmental indicators, to identify the total population of sites suitable for wetland restoration. Locations are identified where restoration has a high likelihood of success and will be sustainable over the long term. Criteria used include hydric soils, land use, topography, stream order, and a saturation index based on slope and flow accumulation in each grid cell in the model. The second phase “filters” the total population of available sites in order to prioritize them according to their potential to contribute to water resource integrity once restored. We generated three versions of the suitability model depicting restoration potential. All versions rely on the same criteria but vary in how the factors were weighted or the hydrology criterion was calculated.     

Habitat Loss,Fragmentation, and Restoration

The loss and fragmentation of habitat is a major threat to the continued survival of many species. We argue that, by including spatial processes in restoration management plans, the effects of habitat loss and fragmentation can be offset. Yet few management plans take into account spatial effects of habitat conservation/restoration despite the importance of spatial dynamics in species conservation and recovery plans. Tilman et al. (1997) found a “restoration lag” in simulations of species restoration when randomly selecting habitat for restoration. Other studies have suggested that the placement of restored habitat can overcome effects of habitat loss and fragmentation. Here we report the findings of simulations that examine different regional management strategies, focusing on habitat selection. We find that nonrandom restoration practices such as restoring only habitat that is adjacent to those occupied by the target species can dramatically reduce or negate any restoration lag. In fact, we find that the increase in patch occupancy of the landscape can be greater than two-fold in the adjacent versus the random scenarios after only two restoration events, and this increase can be as great as six-fold during the early restoration phase. Many restoration efforts have limitations on both funds and available sites for restoration, necessitating high potential success on any restoration efforts. The incorporation of spatial analyses in restoration management may drastically improve a species' chance of recovery. Therefore, general principles that incorporate spatial processes and sensible management are needed to guide specific restoration efforts.     

Linking ecological theory with stream restoration

1. Faced with widespread degradation of riverine ecosystems, stream restoration has greatly increased. Such restoration is rarely planned and executed with inputs from ecological theory. In this paper, we seek to identify principles from ecological theory that have been, or could be, used to guide stream restoration. 2. In attempts to re‐establish populations, knowledge of the species’ life history, habitat template and spatio‐temporal scope is critical. In many cases dispersal will be a critical process in maintaining viable populations at the landscape scale, and special attention should be given to the unique geometry of stream systems 3. One way by which organisms survive natural disturbances is by the use of refugia, many forms of which may have been lost with degradation. Restoring refugia may therefore be critical to survival of target populations, particularly in facilitating resilience to ongoing anthropogenic disturbance regimes. 4. Restoring connectivity, especially longitudinal connectivity, has been a major restoration goal. In restoring lateral connectivity there has been an increasing awareness of the riparian zone as a critical transition zone between streams and their catchments. 5. Increased knowledge of food web structure – bottom‐up versus top‐down control, trophic cascades and subsidies – are yet to be applied to stream restoration efforts. 6. In restoration, species are drawn from the regional species pool. Having overcome dispersal and environmental constraints (filters), species persistence may be governed by local internal dynamics, which are referred to as assembly rules. 7. While restoration projects often define goals and endpoints, the succession pathways and mechanisms (e.g. facilitation) by which these may be achieved are rarely considered. This occurs in spite of a large of body of general theory on which to draw. 8. Stream restoration has neglected ecosystem processes. The concept that increasing biodiversity increases ecosystem functioning is very relevant to stream restoration. Whether biodiversity affects ecosystem processes, such as decomposition, in streams is equivocal. 9. Considering the spatial scale of restoration projects is critical to success. Success is more likely with large‐scale projects, but they will often be infeasible in terms of the available resources and conflicts of interest. Small‐scale restoration may remedy specific problems. In general, restoration should occur at the appropriate spatial scale such that restoration is not reversed by the prevailing disturbance regime. 10. The effectiveness and predictability of stream ecosystem restoration will improve with an increased understanding of the processes by which ecosystems develop and are maintained. Ideas from general ecological theory can clearly be better incorporated into stream restoration projects. This will provide a twofold benefit in providing an opportunity both to improve restoration outcomes and to test ecological theory.     

Natural regeneration as a tool for large‐scale forest restoration in the tropics: prospects and challenges

A major global effort to enable cost‐effective natural regeneration is needed to achieve ambitious forest and landscape restoration goals. Natural forest regeneration can potentially play a major role in large‐scale landscape restoration in tropical regions. Here, we focus on the conditions that favor natural regeneration within tropical forest landscapes. We illustrate cases where large‐scale natural regeneration followed forest clearing and non‐forest land use, and describe the social and ecological factors that drove these local forest transitions. The self‐organizing processes that create naturally regenerating forests and natural regeneration in planted forests promote local genetic adaptation, foster native species with known traditional uses, create spatial and temporal heterogeneity, and sustain local biodiversity and biotic interactions. These features confer greater ecosystem resilience in the face of future shocks and disturbances. We discuss economic, social, and legal issues that challenge natural regeneration in tropical landscapes. We conclude by suggesting ways to enable natural regeneration to become an effective tool for implementing large‐scale forest and landscape restoration. Major research and policy priorities include: identifying and modeling the ecological and economic conditions where natural regeneration is a viable and favorable land‐use option, developing monitoring protocols for natural regeneration that can be carried out by local communities, and developing enabling incentives, governance structures, and regulatory conditions that promote the stewardship of naturally regenerating forests. Aligning restoration goals and practices with natural regeneration can achieve the best possible outcome for achieving multiple social and environmental benefits at minimal cost.     

The acceptable range of variation within the desirable stable state as a measure of restoration success

It is standard practice to compare the status of performance indicators between restoration and reference sites to monitor restoration progress and demonstrate restoration success. However, standard methods for defining the reference ecosystem, selecting reference sites, and measuring success are surprisingly lacking. Our study develops these methods based on the acceptable range of variation (ARV) within the desirable stable (reference) state as a measure of restoration success. The method (1) constrains application to the contemporary landscape to avoid the problematic historical range of variation concept and idealized restoration targets; (2) acknowledges the theory of alternative stable states and ecosystem dynamics and posits that the reference ecosystem should be clearly defined as a desirable stable (reference) state; and (3) shows that identifying an acceptable thematic (classification) scale and an acceptable management timeframe is essential to defining the desirable stable (reference) state. We present two approaches to calculating an ARV and a simulation method to explore reference site replication sufficiency. We apply the methods to two contrasting Australian restoration case studies and recommend that routine adoption of these methods would make a significant contribution to the science and practice of restoration ecology and to the assessment of restoration success.     

The Scale of Successional Models and Restoration Objectives

Successional models are used to predict how restoration projects will achieve their goals. These models have been developed on different spatial and temporal scales and consequently emphasize different types of dynamics. This paper focuses on the restoration goal of self-sustainability, but only in the context of a long-term goal. Because of the temporal scale of this goal, we must consider the impact of processes arising outside of the restoration site as of greater importance than restoration itself. Because ecological systems are open, restoration sites will be subjected to many external influential processes. Depending on the landscape context, the impact of these processes may not be noticeable, or, at the other extreme, they may prevent the achievement of restoration objectives. A second issue is to emphasize the nature of processes in the long term, that they are a complex of characteristics such as magnitude, frequency, and extent. Ecological systems are only adapted to a range of values in each of these characteristics. Restoration often combines goals that are of different scales. Models appropriate to these goals need consideration.     

The Use of Extant Non-Indigenous Tortoises as a Restoration Tool to Replace Extinct Ecosystem Engineers

We argue that the introduction of non-native extant tortoises as ecological replacements for extinct giant tortoises is a realistic restoration management scheme, which is easy to implement. We discuss how the recent extinctions of endemic giant Cylindraspis tortoises on the Mascarene Islands have left a legacy of ecosystem dysfunction threatening the remnants of native biota, focusing on the island of Mauritius because this is where most has been inferred about plant–tortoise interactions. There is a pressing need to restore and preserve several Mauritian habitats and plant communities that suffer from ecosystem dysfunction. We discuss ongoing restoration efforts on the Mauritian offshore Round Island, which provide a case study highlighting how tortoise substitutes are being used in an experimental and hypothesis-driven conservation and restoration project. The immediate conservation concern was to prevent the extinction and further degradation of Round Island's threatened flora and fauna. In the long term, the introduction of tortoises to Round Island will lead to valuable management and restoration insights for subsequent larger-scale mainland restoration projects. This case study further highlights the feasibility, versatility and low-risk nature of using tortoises in restoration programs, with particular reference to their introduction to island ecosystems. Overall, the use of extant tortoises as replacements for extinct ones is a good example of how conservation and restoration biology concepts applied at a smaller scale can be microcosms for more grandiose schemes and addresses more immediate conservation priorities than large-scale ecosystem rewilding projects.     

Mangrove Restoration: Do We Know Enough?

Mangrove restoration projects have been attempted, with mixed results, throughout the world. In this paper, I first examine goals of existing mangrove restoration projects and determine whether these goals are clear and adequate, and whether or not they account for the full range of biological diversity and ecological processes of mangrove ecosystems. Many restored mangrove forests resemble forest plantations rather than truly integrated ecosystems, but mangrove plantations can be a first step toward mangrove rehabilitation. Mangrove restoration projects that involve associated aquaculture or mariculture operations tend to be more likely to approximate the biological diversity and ecological processes of undisturbed mangrove ecosystems than are projects that focus only on the trees. These integrated restoration projects also provide a higher economic return than do silvicultural projects alone. Second, I briefly assess whether existing ecological data are sufficient to undergird successful restoration of mangal and define criteria for determining whether or not a mangrove ecosystem has been restored successfully. These criteria include characteristics of vegetation (forest) structure, levels of primary production, composition of associated animal communities, and hydrology. Finally, I suggest ways to improve mangrove restoration projects and identify key research needs required to support these efforts. Ecological theories derived from other wetland and upland systems rarely have been applied to either “basic” or “applied” mangrove forest studies, to the detriment of restoration projects, whereas lessons from restoration of the relatively species‐poor mangrove ecosystems could be beneficially applied to restoration projects in other contexts. An international database of mangrove restoration projects would reduce the likelihood that unsuccessful restoration projects would be repeated elsewhere. Clear criteria for evaluating success, greater accessibility of information by managers in the developing world, intensified international cooperation, and application of relevant ecological theories will improve the success rate of mangrove restoration projects.     

Some Remarks on the Socio-Cultural Background of Restoration Ecology

Restoration ecology plays an important role in nature conservation policy in Europe today. It establishes the scientific basis for restoring ecosystems altered or destroyed by man to a more “natural” state. The goals of restoration ecology can generally be described in terms of increased biodiversity, enhanced water retention capacity, avoidance of soil erosion, etc. In practice, however, a discrepancy exists between the high ideals of restoration goals and reality, where one often encounters limiting factors. These limiting factors can include the conflict between different restoration goals, the unpredictability of restoration goals owing to long‐term effects and stochastic events, the insufficient social acceptance of landscape changes during restoration processes, and the use of restoration processes themselves (e.g., undisturbed succession, certain management measures like impoverishment of fertilized areas) as restoration goals in place of a certain resource quality (such as species composition, population sizes, water quality). Two examples from southern Germany show that restoration goals in European cultural landscapes can only be implemented successfully when they are integrated into the respective land use systems.