Diversification of the urban forest—Can we afford to exclude exotic tree species?

Sjöman, Henrik; Morgenroth, Justin; Sjöman, Johanna Deak; Sæbø, Arne; Kowarik, Ingo

doi:10.1016/j.ufug.2016.06.011

Cited by 120 publications

(102 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We now provide additional data that may help to enhance the synergies between ES provision and biodiversity conservation/restoration within a more comprehensive context of "biodiversity-led" [15] GI planning. With regard to the ultimate aim of GI projects and the desired ES provision, a different degree of consistency in terms of biogeographic representativeness and ecological coherence should, however, be expected [97]. Therefore, the various tiers allow the interventions to be assessed on a scale that ranges from markedly to weakly consistent (e.g., in terms of native status and degree of representativeness from the local to the regional scale), and may be defined as critical when inconsistent species and communities are expected to have strong negative impacts [98] on the layout of urban biodiversity (as in the cases shown in Figure 3).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Combining the Conservation of Biodiversity with the Provision of Ecosystem Services in Urban Green Infrastructure Planning: Critical Features Arising from a Case Study in the Metropolitan Area of Rome

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A large number of green infrastructure (GI) projects have recently been proposed, planned and implemented in European cities following the adoption of the GI strategy by the EU Commission in 2013. Although this policy tool is closely related to biodiversity conservation targets, some doubts have arisen as regards the ability of current urban GI to provide beneficial effects not only for human societies but also for the ecological systems that host them. The aim of this work is to review the features that should be considered critical when searching for solutions that simultaneously support biodiversity and guarantee the provision of ecosystem services (ES) in urban areas. Starting from a case study in the metropolitan area of Rome, we highlight the role of urban trees and forests as proxies for overall biodiversity and as main ecosystem service providers. We look beyond the individual functional features of plant species and vegetation communities to promote the biogeographic representativity, ecological coherence and landscape connectivity of new or restored GI elements.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Combining the Conservation of Biodiversity with the Provision of Ecosystem Services in Urban Green Infrastructure Planning: Critical Features Arising from a Case Study in the Metropolitan Area of Rome

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…city-or regional-scale) planting initiatives 28,65 . At local scale, plant diversity with respect to existing or planned GI in surrounding local areas is considered to be more important for long-term resilience under a changing climate and urban landscape 7,68 .…”

Section: Disadvantageous Aspects Of Gi For Air Qualitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Designing vegetation barriers for urban air pollution abatement: a practical review for appropriate plant species selection

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Vegetation can form a barrier between traffic emissions and adjacent areas, but the optimal configuration and plant composition of such green infrastructure (GI) are currently unclear. We examined the literature on aspects of GI that influence ambient air quality, with a particular focus on vegetation barriers in open-road environments. Findings were critically evaluated in order to identify principles for effective barrier design, and recommendations regarding plant selection were established with reference to relevant spatial scales. As an initial investigation into viable species for UK urban GI, we compiled data on 12 influential traits for 61 tree species, and created a supplementary plant selection framework. We found that if the scale of the intervention, the context and conditions of the site and the target air pollutant type are appreciated, the selection of plants that exhibit certain biophysical traits can enhance air pollution mitigation. For super-micrometre particles, advantageous leaf micromorphological traits include the presence of trichomes and ridges or grooves. Stomatal characteristics are more significant for sub-micrometre particle and gaseous pollutant uptake, although we found a comparative dearth of studies into such pollutants. Generally advantageous macromorphological traits include small leaf size and high leaf complexity, but optimal vegetation height, form and density depend on planting configuration with respect to the immediate physical environment. Biogenic volatile organic compound and pollen emissions can be minimised by appropriate species selection, although their significance varies with scale and context. While this review assembled evidence-based recommendations for practitioners, several important areas for future research were identified.

show abstract

“…As far as ecosystem services, this concept clearly incorporates the role of ecosystems in urban areas, from tree cover attenuating the urban heat island to gardens providing nourishment and recreation. In these cases, it becomes unavoidable to consider the role of omnipresent non-native species in contributing to ecosystem services, social benefits, and possibly to biodiversity conservation (Kowarik 2011;Sjöman et al 2016). Invasive species might contribute to such services, but also to dis-services (Shackleton et al 2016;Vas et al 2017).…”

Section: What Lies Behind the Urban Turnmentioning

confidence: 99%

Invasion ecology goes to town: from disdain to sympathy

Cavin

Kull

2017

Biol Invasions

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How can one understand the increasing interest in "urban invasions", or biological invasions in urban environments? We argue that interest in urban invasions echoes a broader evolution in how ecologists view "the city" in relation to "the natural". Previously stark categorical distinctions between urban and natural, human and wild, city and ecology have foundered. Drawing on conceptual material and an analysis of key texts, we first show how the ecological sciences in generaland then invasion science in particularpreviously had a blind spot for cities, despite a number of important historical and continental European exceptions. Then, we document the advent of an urban turn in ecology and, more recently, in invasion ecology, and how this has challenged fundamental concepts about "nativity", "naturalness", and human agency in nature. The urban turn necessitates more explicit and direct attention to human roles and judgements. Ecology has moved from contempt (or indifference) for cities, towards interest or even sympathy.

show abstract

Diversification of the urban forest—Can we afford to exclude exotic tree species?

Cited by 120 publications

References 38 publications

Combining the Conservation of Biodiversity with the Provision of Ecosystem Services in Urban Green Infrastructure Planning: Critical Features Arising from a Case Study in the Metropolitan Area of Rome

Combining the Conservation of Biodiversity with the Provision of Ecosystem Services in Urban Green Infrastructure Planning: Critical Features Arising from a Case Study in the Metropolitan Area of Rome

Designing vegetation barriers for urban air pollution abatement: a practical review for appropriate plant species selection

Invasion ecology goes to town: from disdain to sympathy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About