Hawaiian dry forests currently occupy a small fraction of their former range, and worldwide tropical dry forests are one of the most human-altered systems. Many small-scale projects have been successful in restoring native dry forests in abandoned pastures and degraded woodlands by outplanting after invasive species removal, but this is a costly approach. In this project, we tested forest restoration techniques involving broadcasting seeds pretreated to enhance germination and applying herbicide to reduce non-native grass competition. We compared three treatments: broadcast seeding, herbicide, and broadcast seeding combined with herbicide. After two years our study results suggest that broadcast seeding and the favorable microclimate created by eliminating invasive grasses through herbicide application may increase native seed germination and survival and promote higher species diversity.

Hawaiian dryland ecosystems are important for global biodiversity conservation and contain numerous species threatened with extinction. Over the past century, wildfire frequency and size have increased dramatically because of invasion by fire-promoting non-native invasive species, greatly threatening these ecosystems. Native species restoration is a tool that can disrupt the cycle of increased fire and invasion in lowland dry forest communities, but restoration prescriptions have not been studied systematically in other dryland plant communities. We examined the restoration of three Hawaiian dryland plant communities (a high-productivity Diospyros sandwicensis and Metrosideros polymorpha lowland dry forest (HP), a moderate-productivity Myoporum sandwicense and Sophora chrysophylla dry forest/woodland (MP), and a low-productivity Dodonaea viscosa shrubland (LP)), using a community-assembly framework to understand the abiotic and biotic constraints to species establishment and growth in each community. Because active restoration methods are often needed, at both high and low levels of productivity, we also examined restoration treatments and outcomes across the three sites, which spanned a gradient of rainfall and substrate age. At each site, we used the same factorial field experiment with three factors: habitat quality (high or low), weed control (yes or no), and species addition (none, seeding, or outplanting). Outplants (cohort 1) and seeds were added in the winter of 2009–2010, and outplants were added again in March 2011 (cohort 2). Dispersal limitation was apparent at the LP and HP sites, but was not observed in the MP site, which had, overall, greater native diversity and abundance. Outplant survival was greater in high-quality habitats at the HP site, likely due to reduced abiotic stress. Invasive species were found in greater abundance in certain types of microsites at the LP and MP sites, suggesting that shade or topography can be used to plan restoration and weed-control activities. Overall, active restoration methods improved restoration outcomes at the high- and low-productivity sites, and less so at the moderately productive site. Weed removal and outplanting were effective restoration prescriptions at the LP and HP sites, and habitat quality could also be used to increase survival at the HP site. Active restoration could be a lower priority for moderately invaded, moderate-productivity communities, which have the capability to maintain a native ecosystem state.