review of the use of direct seeding and seedling plantings in restoration: what do we know and where should we go?

QUESTIONS: To select the best method to restore an ecosystem requires an understanding of the various outcomes commonly achieved through different restoration techniques. What method results in the most timely and cost‐effective means of reinstating biodiversity and restoring ecosystem functions and...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Applied vegetation science Vol. 18; no. 4; pp. 561 - 568
Main Authors: Palma, Ana Cristina, Laurance, Susan G.W, Marrs, Rob
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: Malden Opulus Press 01.10.2015
Blackwell Publishing Ltd
John Wiley & Sons Ltd
Wiley Subscription Services, Inc
Subjects:
Aquatic ecosystems
Biodiversity
climate
Climate change
cost effectiveness
Costs
direct seeding
Ecological function
ecological restoration
Ecosystem restoration
Ecosystems
Environmental restoration
Experiments
forests
Global climate
planning
planting
Planting methods
Reforestation
Restoration
Revegetation
savannas
Seeding
Seedlings
Seeds
Species diversity
survival rate
SYNTHESIS
wetlands
ISSN:1402-2001, 1654-109X
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:QUESTIONS: To select the best method to restore an ecosystem requires an understanding of the various outcomes commonly achieved through different restoration techniques. What method results in the most timely and cost‐effective means of reinstating biodiversity and restoring ecosystem functions and services? METHODS: We explored the efficacy and costs of two re‐vegetation techniques commonly used in ecosystem restoration: direct seeding and planting of seedlings. Our analysis focused on 120 scientific peer‐reviewed publications reporting on experiments using seeds or seedlings, and encompassed a range of ecosystems such as wetlands, savannas and forests. We examined current restoration issues, including species diversity, survival, species selection, costs and how future climate change may influence restoration efforts. RESULTS: Direct seeding experiments used more species than seedling studies, yet showed lower survivorship. Species availability is the major constraint in the selection of which species were used, regardless of the approach employed. Although costs are extremely important when planning a restoration project, few published findings report on the economic aspects of ecosystem restoration. Further, we did not find any study addressing the impacts of global climate change on restoration programmes or how studies should consider future shifts in the environment. CONCLUSIONS: Our results highlight the need for restoration experiments to explore more species. Restoration efforts are in need of detailed reporting that includes time frames and costs. We need to consider future climate scenarios that will affect ecosystem restoration efforts.
Bibliography:http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/avsc.12173
Colciencias (Colombian Department for the Administration of Science, Technology and Innovation)
Australian Research Council and Queensland Herbarium
istex:C24C48E508ADD6C6E74EFA520F292CAFFE66EEEE
ArticleID:AVSC12173
ARC Linkage Grant - No. LP110201093
Appendix S1. Data and studies included in the review.
ark:/67375/WNG-BLC24VCR-0
ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
content type line 23
ISSN:1402-2001
1654-109X
DOI:10.1111/avsc.12173