The Ridgefield Multiple Ecosystem Services Experiment: Can restoration of former agricultural land achieve multiple outcomes?

Perring, Michael P.; Standish, Rachel J.; Hulvey, Kristin B.; Lach, Lori; Morald, Tim K.; Parsons, R. W.; Didham, Raphaël K.; Hobbs, Richard J.

doi:10.1016/j.agee.2012.02.016

Cited by 60 publications

(75 citation statements)

References 75 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This test-bed concept has been utilized in the design of an experiment in the wheatbelt of south-west Western Australia, where we (the authors) and others are investigating how compositional differences among restored assemblages of native species influence ecosystem function on degraded agricultural land (Perring et al 2012). Habitat fragmentation and climate change, together with nonnative species and high nutrient levels, can prevent the recovery of historical ecosystems (e.g., Prober and Smith 2009;Pywell et al 2007).…”

Section: Novelty and Novel Ecosystemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Functional groups are defined by rooting depth at maturity and nutrient acquisition traits including whether plants form cluster-roots, fix nitrogen, and/or associate with arbuscular and ectomycorrhizal fungi (see also Table two in Perring et al 2012). In addition to a gradient of species and functional richness, two experimentally manipulated environmental changes increase abiotic and biotic novelty.…”

Section: The Ridgefield Multiple Ecosystem Services Experiment: a Tesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We defined functions in terms of ecosystem processes and concentrated on how we might design restoration plantings to support such processes, particularly those valued by people, i.e., ecosystem services (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005). Thus we developed the Ridgefield Multiple Ecosystem Services Experiment, which will include measurement of these services: carbon sequestration, invasion resistance to weeds, and reduction of excess soil nutrients to avoid eutrophication (Perring et al 2012). …”

Section: Novelty and Novel Ecosystemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Incorporating novelty and novel ecosystems into restoration planning and practice in the 21st century

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Novelty pervades the biosphere. In some cases, potentially irreversible abiotic and/or biotic changes have led to the crossing of thresholds and thus the formation of "novel ecosystems." Their widespread emergence (particularly on land) and the presence of continued environmental change challenge a traditional restoration goal of restoring an historical ecosystem. Instead, we argue that restoration could broaden its frame of reference to consider how novel ecosystems might be used to maintain global biodiversity and provide ecosystem services and, in doing so, save potentially wasted efforts in attempting to fulfil traditional goals. Here we explore this contention in more depth by addressing: Are novel ecosystems innovative planning or lowering the bar? We show that novel ecosystems were not innovative planning in their original conception. On the contrary, they were recognized as ecosystems that were recalcitrant to traditional restoration approaches, coupled with an awareness that they had arisen inadvertently through deliberate human activity, either on-or off-site. Their recalcitrance to traditional restoration suggests that alternative goals may exist for these ecosystems using sometimes innovative intervention. This management may include biodiversity conservation or restoration for ecological function. We elucidate the latter aspect with reference to an experiment in the wheatbelt of Western Australia-The Ridgefield Multiple Ecosystem Services Experiment-the design of which has been informed by ecological theory and the acceptance of novelty as an ecosystem component. Although novel ecosystems do provide opportunities to broaden restoration planning and practice, and ultimately maintain and conserve global biodiversity in this era of environmental change, they necessarily "lower the bar" in restoration if the bar is considered to be the historical ecosystem. However, in these times of flux, such a bar is increasingly untenable. Instead, careful and appropriate interventions are required at local, regional, and global scales. These interventions need to take history into account, use ecological and evolutionary theory to inform their design, and be mindful of valid concerns such as hubris. Careful interventions thus provide an opportunity for broadening restoration's framework to focus on maintaining global biodiversity and delivering ecosystem services as well as the traditional goals of restoring historical ecosystems.

show abstract

Section: Novelty and Novel Ecosystemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Ridgefield Multiple Ecosystem Services Experiment: a Tesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Novelty and Novel Ecosystemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Incorporating novelty and novel ecosystems into restoration planning and practice in the 21st century

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Effect traits may be used in restoration to set functional targets to provide specific ecosystem services (Montoya et al 2012, Perring et al 2012). Biodiversity and ecosystem function studies have established clear links between functional composition and varied ecosystem services (Lavorel and Grigulis 2012) but there are few examples in a restoration context (e.g., Doherty et al 2011).…”

Section: Moving From Compositional To Functional Goals In a Changing mentioning

confidence: 99%

Advances in restoration ecology: rising to the challenges of the coming decades

et al. 2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Simultaneous environmental changes challenge biodiversity persistence and human wellbeing. The science and practice of restoration ecology, in collaboration with other disciplines, can contribute to overcoming these challenges. This endeavor requires a solid conceptual foundation based in empirical research which confronts, tests and influences theoretical developments. We review conceptual developments in restoration ecology over the last 30 years. We frame our review in the context of changing restoration goals which reflect increased societal awareness of the scale of environmental degradation and the recognition that inter-disciplinary approaches are needed to tackle environmental problems. Restoration ecology now encompasses facilitative interactions and network dynamics, trophic cascades, and above-and belowground linkages. It operates in a non-equilibrium, alternative states framework, at the landscape scale, and in response to changing environmental, economic and social conditions. Progress has been marked by conceptual advances in the fields of trait-environment relationships, community assembly, and understanding the links between biodiversity and ecosystem functioning. Conceptual and practical advances have been enhanced by applying evolving technologies, including treatments to increase seed germination and overcome recruitment bottlenecks, high throughput DNA sequencing to elucidate soil community structure and function, and advances in satellite technology and GPS tracking to monitor habitat use. The synthesis of these technologies with systematic reviews of context dependencies in restoration success, model based analyses and consideration of complex socioecological systems will allow generalizations to inform evidence based interventions. Ongoing challenges include setting realistic, socially acceptable goals for restoration under changing environmental conditions, and prioritizing actions in an increasingly space-competitive world. Ethical questions also surround the use of genetically modified material, translocations, taxon substitutions, and de-extinction, in restoration ecology. Addressing these issues, as the Ecological Society of America looks to its next century, will require current and future generations of researchers and practitioners, including economists, engineers, philosophers, landscape architects, social scientists and restoration ecologists, to work together with communities and governments to rise to the environmental challenges of the coming decades.

show abstract

“…However, there is a growing awareness of values that can be derived from ecosystems and beyond their boundaries. In this way, novel ecosystems may have a potential for realising, for example, ecosystem services provision (Hulvey et al 2013;Perring et al 2012), perhaps new (cultural) services that were not present historically (Collier 2014). This provides an opportunity for developing innovative methods for research and exploration resulting in more targeted planning and management.…”

Section: Novel Ecosystems and Social-ecological Resilience Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Novel ecosystems and social-ecological resilience

Collier

2015

Landscape Ecol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Ridgefield Multiple Ecosystem Services Experiment: Can restoration of former agricultural land achieve multiple outcomes?

Cited by 60 publications

References 75 publications

Incorporating novelty and novel ecosystems into restoration planning and practice in the 21st century

Incorporating novelty and novel ecosystems into restoration planning and practice in the 21st century

Advances in restoration ecology: rising to the challenges of the coming decades

Novel ecosystems and social-ecological resilience

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About