Society for Ecological Restoration Intern a T I O N

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Society for Ecological Restoration Intern a T I O N society for ecological restoration intern a t i o n a l The SER International Primer o n Ecological Restoration Society for Ecological Restoration International Science & Policy Working Group (Version 2: October, 2004)* Section 1: Overview . 1 Section 2: Definition of Ecological Restoration . 3 Section 3: Attributes of Restored Ecosystems . 3 Section 4: Explanations of Terms . 4 Section 5: Reference Ecosystems . 8 Section 6: Exotic Species . 9 Section 7: Monitoring and Evaluation . 10 Section 8: Restoration Planning. 11 Section 9: Relationship Between Restoration Practice and Restoration Ecology . 11 Section 10: Relationship of Restoration to Other Activities . 12 Section 11: Integration of Ecological Restoration into a Larger Program. 13 This document should be cited as: Society for Ecological Restoration International Science & Policy Working Group. 2004. The SER International Primer on Ecological Restoration. www.ser.org & Tucson: Society for Ecological Restoration International. The principal authors of this Primer were André Clewell (Quincy, FL USA), James Aronson (Montpellier, France), and Keith Winterhalder (Sudbury, ON Canada). Clewell initially proposed the Primer and wrote its first draft. Aronson and Winterhalder, in collaboration with Clewell, revised the Primer into its present form. Winterhalder, in his capacity as Chairperson of SER’s Science & Policy Working Group, coordinated this effort and invited other Working Group members to participate. Eric Higgs (Victoria, BC Canada) crafted the Overview sec- tion. Dennis Martinez (Douglas City, CA USA) contributed a position paper that became the basis for text pertaining to cultural ecosystems. Other Working Group members provided critiques and suggestions as the work progressed, including Richard Hobbs (Murdoch, WA Australia), James Harris (London, UK), Carolina Murcia (Cali, Colombia), and John Rieger (San Diego, CA USA). The SPWG acknowledges Eric Higgs, former Chairperson of SER International’s Board of Directors, for his encouragement and for bringing the Primer before SER International’s Directors for its official adoption as an SER International document on 6 April, 2002, by unanimous vote. This document supercedes SER Int e r n a t i o n a l ’s Project Policies that wer e initially published in Res t o r ation Eco l o g y 2(2):132-133, 1994, and that wer e later posted on SER Int e r n a t i o n a l ’s website. This document also supercedes the policy on Project Evaluation that was posted on the SER International website. SER International environmental policies, initially published in Restoration Ecology 1(3):206-207, 1993, remain in effect. *The content of the second version is exactly the same as the first version published in 2002, except that International has been appended to SER's name, photos have been added, and the graphics red e s i g n e d . Version 2 was published simultaneously in print and on the internet at ww w. s e r. o r g . Section 1: Overview cological restoration is an intentional activity Restoration represents an indefinitely long-term Ethat initiates or accelerates the recovery of an commitment of land and resources, and a proposal ecosystem with respect to its health, integrity and to restore an ecosystem requires thoughtful delibera- sustainability. Frequently, the ecosystem that requires tion. Collective decisions are more likely to be hon- restoration has been degraded, damaged, trans- ored and implemented than are those that are made formed or entirely destroyed as the direct or indirect unilaterally. For that reason, it behooves all stake- result of human activities. In some cases, these holders to arrive at the decision to initiate a restora- impacts to ecosystems have been caused or aggravat- tion project by consensus. Once the decision to ed by natural agencies such as wildfire, floods, restore is made, the project requires careful and sys- storms, or volcanic eruption, to the point at which tematic planning and a monitored approach towards the ecosystem cannot recover its predisturbance state ecosystem recovery. The need for planning intensifies or its historic developmental trajectory. when the unit of restoration is a complex land- scape of contiguous ecosystems. Restoration attempts to return an ecosystem to its historic trajec- Interventions employed in t o ry. Historic conditions are restoration vary widely t h e re f o re the ideal start i n g among projects, depending point for re s t o r a t i o n on the extent and dura- design. The re s t o re d tion of past disturbances, ecosystem will not nec- cultural conditions that essarily re c over its for- have shaped the land- mer state, since contem- scape, and contemporary p o r a ry constraints and constraints and opportu- conditions may cause it nities. In the simplest cir- to develop along an cumstances, restoration a l t e red trajectory. The his- consists of removing or modifying a specific distur- toric trajectory of a seve re l y bance, thereby allowing ecolog- impacted ecosystem may be dif- ical processes to bring about an ficult or impossible to determine independent recovery. For example, with accuracy. Ne ve rtheless, the general removing a dam allows the return of an d i rection and boundaries of that trajectory can historical flooding regime. In more complex circum- be established through a combination of know l e d g e stances, restoration may also require the deliberate of the damaged ecosystem’s pre-existing stru c t u re , reintroduction of native species that have been lost, composition and functioning, studies on compara- and the elimination or control of harmful, invasive ble intact ecosystems, information about re g i o n a l exotic species to the greatest practicable extent. e n v i ronmental conditions, and analysis of other Often, ecosystem degradation or transformation has ecological, cultural and historical re f e rence infor- multiple, protracted sources, and the historical con- mation. These combined sources allow the historic stituents of an ecosystem are substantially lost. t r a j e c t o ry or re f e rence conditions to be chart e d Sometimes the developmental trajectory of a degrad- f rom baseline ecological data and pre d i c t i ve mod- ed ecosystem is blocked altogether, and its recovery els, and its emulation in the restoration pro c e s s through natural processes appears to be delayed should aid in piloting the ecosystem tow a rd s indefinitely. In all of these cases, however, ecological i m p roved health and integrity. restoration aims to initiate or facilitate the resump- www.ser.org SER International Primer on Ecological Restoration 1 tion of those processes which will return the ecosys- accept and even encourage new culturally appropri- tem to its intended trajectory. ate and sustainable practices that take into account contemporary conditions and constraints. In this When the desired trajectory is realized, the ecosys- regard, the North American focus on restoring pris- tem under manipulation may no longer require tine landscapes makes little or no sense in places like external assistance to ensure its future health and Europe where cultural landscapes are the norm, or in integrity, in which case restoration can be considered large parts of Africa, Asia and Latin America, where complete. Nevertheless, the restored ecosystem often ecological restoration is untenable unless it manifest- requires continuing management to counteract the ly bolsters the ecological base for human survival. invasion of opportunist species, the impacts of vari- ous human activities, climate change, and other What makes ecological restoration especially inspir- unforeseeable events. In this respect, a restored ing is that cultural practices and ecological processes ecosystem is no different from an undamaged can be mutually reinforcing. Accordingly, it is not ecosystem of the same kind, and both are likely to surprising that interest in ecological restoration is require some level of ecosystem management. growing rapidly worldwide and that, in most cases, Although ecosystem restoration and ecosys- cultural beliefs and practices are drawn upon tem management form a continuum to help determine and shape of what is and often employ similar sorts of to be performed under the rubric intervention, ecological restora- of restoration. tion aims at assisting or initi- ating recovery, whereas The definition presented on ecosystem management is the next page, the one offi- intended to guarantee the cially endorsed by the continued well-being of Society for Eco l o g i c a l the restored ecosystem Restoration Int e r n a t i o n a l , thereafter. is sufficiently general to al l o w a wide variety of Some ecosystems, partic- ap p r oaches to res t o r a t i o n , ularly in developing coun- while giving prominence to tries, are still managed by the historically rich idea of traditional, sustainable cultur- “rec o ver y.” T al practices. Reciprocity exists in these cultural ecosystems between cultural activities and ecological processes, such that human actions reinforce ecosystem health and sustainability. Many cultural ecosystems have suffered from demographic growth and external pressures of various kinds, and are in need of restoration. The restoration of such ecosys- tems normally includes the concomitant recovery of indigenous ecological management practices, includ- ing support for the cultural survival of indigenous peoples and their languages as living libraries of tra- ditional ecological knowledge. Ecological restoration encourages and may indeed be dependent upon long-term participation of local people. Cultural conditions in traditional cultures are currently undergoing unprecedented global change. To accom- modate this change, ecological restoration may 2 SER International Primer on Ecological Restoration www.ser.org Section 2: 1. The restored ecosystem contains a characteristic assemblage of the species that occur in the refer- efinition of ence ecosystem and that provide appropriate D Ecological community structure.
Recommended publications
  • Priority Actions to Improve Provenance Decision-Making
    Forum Priority Actions to Improve Provenance Decision-Making MARTIN F. BREED, PETER A. HARRISON, ARMIN BISCHOFF, PAULA DURRUTY, NICK J. C. GELLIE, EMILY K. GONZALES, KAYRI HAVENS, MARION KARMANN, FRANCIS F. KILKENNY, SIEGFRIED L. KRAUSS, ANDREW J. LOWE, PEDRO MARQUES, PAUL G. NEVILL, PATI L. VITT, AND ANNA BUCHAROVA Selecting the geographic origin—the provenance—of seed is a key decision in restoration. The last decade has seen a vigorous debate on whether to use local or nonlocal seed. The use of local seed has been the preferred approach because it is expected to maintain local adaptation and avoid deleterious population effects (e.g., maladaptation and outbreeding depression). However, the impacts of habitat fragmentation and climate change on plant populations have driven the debate on whether the local-is-best standard needs changing. This debate has largely been theoretical in nature, which hampers provenance decision-making. Here, we detail cross-sector priority actions to improve provenance decision-making, including embedding provenance trials into restoration projects; developing dynamic, evidence-based provenance policies; and establishing stronger research–practitioner collaborations to facilitate the adoption of research outcomes. We discuss how to tackle these priority actions in order to help satisfy the restoration sector’s requirement for appropriately provenanced seed. Keywords: assisted migration, ecological restoration, local adaptation, restoration genetics he restoration sector’s demand for seed is Williams et al. 2014, Havens et al. 2015, Prober et al. 2015, Tenormous and is rapidly increasing with the growth Breed et al. 2016b, Christmas et al. 2016b). in the global restoration effort (Verdone and Seidl 2017).
    [Show full text]
  • Effects of Human Disturbance on Terrestrial Apex Predators
    diversity Review Effects of Human Disturbance on Terrestrial Apex Predators Andrés Ordiz 1,2,* , Malin Aronsson 1,3, Jens Persson 1 , Ole-Gunnar Støen 4, Jon E. Swenson 2 and Jonas Kindberg 4,5 1 Grimsö Wildlife Research Station, Department of Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, SE-730 91 Riddarhyttan, Sweden; [email protected] (M.A.); [email protected] (J.P.) 2 Faculty of Environmental Sciences and Natural Resource Management, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Postbox 5003, NO-1432 Ås, Norway; [email protected] 3 Department of Zoology, Stockholm University, SE-10691 Stockholm, Sweden 4 Norwegian Institute for Nature Research, NO-7485 Trondheim, Norway; [email protected] (O.-G.S.); [email protected] (J.K.) 5 Department of Wildlife, Fish, and Environmental Studies, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, SE-901 83 Umeå, Sweden * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: The effects of human disturbance spread over virtually all ecosystems and ecological communities on Earth. In this review, we focus on the effects of human disturbance on terrestrial apex predators. We summarize their ecological role in nature and how they respond to different sources of human disturbance. Apex predators control their prey and smaller predators numerically and via behavioral changes to avoid predation risk, which in turn can affect lower trophic levels. Crucially, reducing population numbers and triggering behavioral responses are also the effects that human disturbance causes to apex predators, which may in turn influence their ecological role. Some populations continue to be at the brink of extinction, but others are partially recovering former ranges, via natural recolonization and through reintroductions.
    [Show full text]
  • Evolutionary Restoration Ecology
    ch06 2/9/06 12:45 PM Page 113 189686 / Island Press / Falk Chapter 6 Evolutionary Restoration Ecology Craig A. Stockwell, Michael T. Kinnison, and Andrew P. Hendry Restoration Ecology and Evolutionary Process Restoration activities have increased dramatically in recent years, creating evolutionary chal- lenges and opportunities. Though restoration has favored a strong focus on the role of habi- tat, concerns surrounding the evolutionary ecology of populations are increasing. In this con- text, previous researchers have considered the importance of preserving extant diversity and maintaining future evolutionary potential (Montalvo et al. 1997; Lesica and Allendorf 1999), but they have usually ignored the prospect of ongoing evolution in real time. However, such contemporary evolution (changes occurring over one to a few hundred generations) appears to be relatively common in nature (Stockwell and Weeks 1999; Bone and Farres 2001; Kin- nison and Hendry 2001; Reznick and Ghalambor 2001; Ashley et al. 2003; Stockwell et al. 2003). Moreover, it is often associated with situations that may prevail in restoration projects, namely the presence of introduced populations and other anthropogenic disturbances (Stockwell and Weeks 1999; Bone and Farres 2001; Reznick and Ghalambor 2001) (Table 6.1). Any restoration program may thus entail consideration of evolution in the past, present, and future. Restoration efforts often involve dramatic and rapid shifts in habitat that may even lead to different ecological states (such as altered fire regimes) (Suding et al. 2003). Genetic variants that evolved within historically different evolutionary contexts (the past) may thus be pitted against novel and mismatched current conditions (the present). The degree of this mismatch should then determine the pattern and strength of selection acting on trait variation in such populations (Box 6.1; Figure 6.1).
    [Show full text]
  • Restoration of Heterogeneous Disturbance Regimes for the Preservation of Endangered Species Steven D
    RESEARCH ARTICLE Restoration of Heterogeneous Disturbance Regimes for the Preservation of Endangered Species Steven D. Warren and Reiner Büttner ABSTRACT Disturbance is a natural component of ecosystems. All species, including threatened and endangered species, evolved in the presence of, and are adapted to natural disturbance regimes that vary in the kind, frequency, severity, and duration of disturbance. We investigated the relationship between the level of visible soil disturbance and the density of four endan- gered plant species on U.S. Army training lands in the German state of Bavaria. Two species, gray hairgrass (Corynephorus canescens) and mudwort (Limosella aquatica), showed marked affinity for or dependency on high levels of recent soil disturbance. The density of fringed gentian (Gentianella ciliata) and shepherd’s cress (Teesdalia nudicaulis) declined with recent disturbance, but appeared to favor older disturbance which could not be quantified by the methods employed in this study. The study illustrates the need to restore and maintain disturbance regimes that are heterogeneous in terms of the intensity of and time since disturbance. Such a restoration strategy has the potential to favor plant species along the entire spectrum of ecological succession, thereby maximizing plant biodiversity and ecosystem stability. Keywords: fringed gentian, gray hairgrass, heterogeneous disturbance hypothesis, mudwort, shepherd’s cress cosystems and the species that create and maintain conditions neces- When the European Commission Einhabit them typically evolve in sary for survival. issued Directive 92/43/EEC (Euro- the presence of quasi-stable distur- The grasslands of northern Europe pean Economic Community 1992) bance regimes which are characterized lie within what would be mostly forest requiring all European Union nations by general patterns of perturbation, in the absence of disturbance.
    [Show full text]
  • Disturbance Processes and Ecosystem Management
    Vegetation Management and Protection Research DISTURBANCE PROCESSES AND ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT The paper was chartered by the Directors of Forest Fire and Atmospheric Sciences Research, Fire and Aviation Management, Forest Pest Management, and Forest Insect and Disease Research in response to an action item identified in the National Action Plan for Implementing Ecosystem Management (February 24, 1994). The authors are: Robert D. Averill, Group Leader, Forest Health Management, Renewable Resources, USDA Forest Service Region 2, 740 Sims St., Lakewood, CO 80225 Louise Larson, Forest Fuels Management Specialist, USDA Forest Service Sierra National Forest, 1600 Tollhouse Road, Clovis, CA 93612 Jim Saveland, Fire Ecologist, USDA Forest Service Forest Fire & Atmospheric Sciences Research P.O. Box 96090, Washington, DC 20090 Philip Wargo, Principal Plant Pathologist, USDA Forest Service Northeastern Center for Forest Health Research, 51 Mill Pond Road, Hamden, CT 06514 Jerry Williams, Assistant Director, Fire Operations, USDA Forest Service Fire & Aviation Management Staff, P.O. Box 96090, Washington, DC 20090 Melvin Bellinger, retired, made significant contributions. Abstract This paper is intended to broaden awareness and help develop consensus among USDA Forest Service scientists and resource managers about the role and significance of disturbance in ecosystem dynamics and, hence, resource management. To have an effective ecosystem management policy, resource managers and the public must understand the nature of ecological resiliency and stability and the role of natural disturbance on sustainability. Disturbances are common and important in virtually all ecosystems. Executive Summary "Ecosystems are not defined so much by the objects they contain as by the processes that regulate them" -- Christensen and others 1989 Awareness and understanding of disturbance ecology and the role disturbance plays in ecosystem dynamics, and the ability to communicate that information, is essential in understanding ecosystem potentials and the consequences of management choices.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Changing Disturbance Regimes, Ecological Memory, and Forest Resilience 2 3 4 Authors: Jill F
    1 Changing disturbance regimes, ecological memory, and forest resilience 2 3 4 Authors: Jill F. Johnstone1*§, Craig D. Allen2, Jerry F. Franklin3, Lee E. Frelich4, Brian J. 5 Harvey5, Philip E. Higuera6, Michelle C. Mack7, Ross K. Meentemeyer8, Margaret R. Metz9, 6 George L. W. Perry10, Tania Schoennagel11, and Monica G. Turner12§ 7 8 Affiliations: 9 1. Department of Biology, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5E2 Canada 10 2. U.S. Geological Survey, Fort Collins Science Center, Jemez Mountains Field Station, Los 11 Alamos, NM 87544 USA 12 3. College of Forest Resources, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195 USA 13 4. Department of Forest Resources, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108 USA 14 5. Department of Geography, University of Colorado-Boulder, Boulder, CO 80309 USA 15 6. Department of Ecosystem and Conservation Sciences, University of Montana, Missoula, MT 16 59812 USA 17 7. Center for Ecosystem Science and Society and Department of Biology, Northern Arizona 18 University, Flagstaff, AZ 86011 USA 19 8. Department of Forestry & Environmental Resources, North Carolina State University, 20 Raleigh, NC 27695 USA 21 9. Department of Biology, Lewis and Clark College, Portland, OR 97219 USA 22 10. School of Environment, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand 23 11. Department of Geography and INSTAAR, University of Colorado-Boulder, Boulder, CO 24 80309 USA 25 12. Department of Zoology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53717 26 27 * corresponding author: [email protected]; 28 § co-leaders of this manuscript 29 30 Running title: Changing disturbance and forest resilience 31 1 32 33 Abstract 34 Ecological memory is central to ecosystem response to disturbance.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Publication
    Caesar Kleberg A Publication of the Caesar Kleberg Wildlife ResearchTracks Institute CAESAR KLEBERG WILDLIFE RESEARCH INSTITUTE TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY - KINGSVILLE 1 Caesar Kleberg Volume 5 | Issue 2 | Fall 2020 In This Issue 3 From the Director Tracks 4 Restoration: Just What Do You Mean By That? 8 The Unique Nature of Colonial-nesting Waterbirds 12 Texas Horned Lizard 8 Detectives Learn More About CKWRI The Caesar Kleberg Wildlife Research Institute at 16 Donor Spotlight: Texas A&M University-Kingsville is a Master’s and Mike Reynolds Ph.D. Program and is the leading wildlife research organization in Texas and one of the finest in the nation. Established in 1981 by a grant from the Caesar Kleberg 20 Fawn Survival and Foundation for Wildlife Conservation, its mission is Recruitment in South Texas to provide science-based information for enhancing the conservation and management of Texas wildlife. 23 Alumni Spotlight: J. Dale James Visit our Website www.ckwri.tamuk.edu Caesar Kleberg Wildlife Research Institute Texas A&M University-Kingsville 700 University Blvd., MSC 218 Kingsville, Texas 78363 4 (361) 593-3922 Follow us! Facebook: @CKWRI Twitter: @CKWRI Instagram: ckwri_official Cover Photo by iStock 2 Magazine Design and Layout by Gina Cavazos Caesar Kleberg From the Director The overarching mission of the Caesar Kleberg Wildlife Research Institute is to promote wildlife conservation. We do this primarily by conducting research and producing knowledge to benefit wildlife managers and land stewards. We also promote wildlife conservation by training the next generation of wildlife biologists Tracks through our graduate education programs. However, producing knowledge and trained professionals is not enough.
    [Show full text]
  • Disturbance Versus Restoration
    Disturbance and Restoration of Streams P. S. Lake Prelude “One of the penalties of an ecological education is that one lives alone in a world of wounds. Much of the damage inflicted on land is quite invisible to laymen.” Aldo Leopold “Round River. From the Journals of Aldo Leopold” ed., L. B. Leopold. Oxford U.P. 1953. Read: 1963. Lake George Mining Co., 1952, Captains Flat, N.S.W. Molonglo River. Heavy metals (Z+Cu) + AMD. Black (Lake 1963) clear (Norris 1985) ---Sloane & Norris (2002) Aberfoyle Tin NL, 1982. Rossarden, Tasmania. Tin and Tungsten (W). Cd, Zn. South Esk River, 1974 Lake Pedder, south west Tasmania. • Pristine, remote lake with a remarkable, glacial sand beach, endemic fish (Galaxias pedderensis) and ~5 spp., of invertebrates. • Flooded by two dams to produce hydro-electricity in 1973 • Sampled annually for 21 years. • Initial “trophic upsurge” then a steady decline to paucity. Ecological Disturbance • Interest triggered by Connell J.H (1978) Intermediate Disturbance Hypothesis • Disturbances are forces with the potential capability to disrupt populations, communities and ecosystems. Defined by their type, strength, duration and spatial extent---not by their impacts. • Pulse, Press (Bender et al., 1984) and Ramp disturbances (Lake 2000) and responses. Disturbances within Disturbances • Distinct disturbances nested within enveloping disturbances. – Droughts—ramps of water loss, high temperatures, low water quality, loss of connectivity etc. – Climate change with ramps (sea level rise, temperature increase, acidification). Compound Disturbances • Natural e.g. drought and fire – Effect on streams: recovery from catchment-riparian fire impact exacerbated by drought cf., fire alone. (Verkaik et al., 2015). – Sites: Idaho, Catalonia, Victoria, Australia.
    [Show full text]
  • The Effects of Disturbance and Succession on Wildlife Habitat And
    This file was created by scanning the printed publication. Errors identified by the software have been corrected; however, some errors may remain. 11 The Effects of Disturbance K EVIN S. McKELVEY and Succession on Wildlife Habitat and Animal Communities his chapter discusses the study of disturbance and al l affect both the postdisturbance wildlife community Tsuccession as they relate to wildlife. As such, the and, more importantly, the trajectory of the postdistur­ discussion is confined to those disturbance processes bance community. Even for well-studied species, co­ that change the physical attributes of habitat, leading herent understandings of their relationships to distur­ to a postdisturbance trajectory. However, even with bance across time and space are therefore often vague. this narrowing of the scope of disturbances discussed, Commonly, we look at successional changes in habi­ there remain formidable obstacles prior to any co­ tat quality by using spatial samples of different ages as if herent discussion of disturbance. The first, and most they were a temporal series, which implies spatiotem­ fundamental, is definitional: what constitutes distur­ poral constancy in successional dynamics. This assump­ bance and succession, and what is habitat? The con­ tion has served wildlife research well, but in the face of cepts of disturbance, habitat, and succession are highly directional climate change and the nearly continuous scale-dependent; disturbances at one scale become addition of exotic species, this approach is becoming part of continuous processes at a larger scale, and ideas increasingly untenable. We need to embrace the idea associated with succession require assumptions of con­ that postdisturbance succession is increasingly unlikely stancy, which become highly problematic as spatiotem­ to produce communities similar to those that the dis­ poral scales increase.
    [Show full text]
  • Key Restoration Methods of a Polluted River Ecosystem
    Key Restoration Methods of a Polluted River Chalachew Yenew* Ecosystem: A Systematic Review Environmental Health Science, Social and Population Health (SPH) Unit, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, Debre Tabor University, Ethiopia Abstract Background: River is one of a freshwater ecosystem that plays an important role in people's living, aquatic and terrestrial living organisms, and agricultural production. Compared to other ecosystems, rivers support a disproportionately large number of *Corresponding author: plant and animal species. However, excessive human activities have busted the original Chalachew Yenew ecological balance by polluting the river ecosystem. As a result, partial or total affected the structure and functions of the river ecosystem. This review aimed to investigate the major ecological restoration methods of the polluted river ecosystem. [email protected] Methods: We have adopted the procedures from the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The required data were Environmental Health Science, Social and collected via a literature search of MEDLINE/PubMed, Google Scholar, Science Direct, Population Health (SPH) Unit, College of EMBASE, HINARI, and Cochrane Library from the 9th of September, 2019 to the 5th Medicine and Health Sciences, Debre Tabor of March, 2020 using combined terms. Articles were included in our review; only if University, Ethiopia it assessed empirically and comparison and contrast between two or more different restoration methods. This review; it is mainly included published research articles, national reports, and annual reports and excluded opinion essays. Citation: Yenew C (2021) Key Restoration Results: Commonly used methods for restoration of polluted rivers around the Methods of a Polluted River Ecosystem: A globe could be categorized depending on the physical, chemical, and biological Systematic Review.
    [Show full text]
  • Are Socioeconomic Benefits of Restoration Adequately Quantified?
    REVIEW ARTICLE Are Socioeconomic Benefits of Restoration Adequately Quantified? A Meta-analysis of Recent Papers (2000–2008) in Restoration Ecology and 12 Other Scientific Journals James Aronson,1,2 James N. Blignaut,3 Suzanne J. Milton,4 David Le Maitre,5 Karen J. Esler,6 Amandine Limouzin,1 Christelle Fontaine,1 Martin P. de Wit,7,8 Worship Mugido,9 Philip Prinsloo,8 Leandri van der Elst,8 and Ned Lederer8 Abstract journals. We readily acknowledge that aquatic ecosystems Many ecosystems have been transformed, or degraded are under-represented, and that the largely inaccessible by human use, and restoration offers an opportunity to gray literature was ignored. Within these constraints, we recover services and benefits, not to mention intrinsic val- found clear evidence that restoration practitioners are fail- ues. We assessed whether restoration scientists and prac- ing to signal links between ecological restoration, society, titioners use their projects to demonstrate the benefits and policy, and are underselling the evidence of benefits restoration can provide in their peer-reviewed publications. of restoration as a worthwhile investment for society. We We evaluated a sample of the academic literature to deter- discuss this assertion and illustrate it with samples of our mine whether links are made explicit between ecological findings—with regards to (1) the geographical and institu- restoration, society, and public policy related to natural tional affiliations of authors; (2) the choice of ecosystems capital. We analyzed 1,582 peer-reviewed papers dealing studied, methods employed, monitoring schemes applied, with ecological restoration published between 1 January and the spatial scale of studies; and (3) weak links to pay- 2000 and 30 September 2008 in 13 leading scientific jour- ments for ecosystem service setups, agriculture, and rami- nals.
    [Show full text]
  • Effects of Habitat Disturbance on Tropical Forest Biodiversity
    Effects of habitat disturbance on tropical forest biodiversity John Alroya,1 aDepartment of Biological Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney NSW 2109, Australia Edited by Hugh P. Possingham, University of Queensland, St. Lucia QLD 4072, Australia and approved April 4, 2017 (received for review July 22, 2016) It is widely expected that habitat destruction in the tropics will cause Ecologists do make extensive use of methods that remove a mass extinction in coming years, but the potential magnitude of sampling biases, but such research has focused almost entirely on the loss is unclear. Existing literature has focused on estimating local samples. Many of these standardization analyses (8, 17, 18, global extinction rates indirectly or on quantifying effects only at 21) have used species counts interpolated to a least common local and regional scales. This paper directly predicts global losses in denominator level by means of the long-established method of 11 groups of organisms that would ensue from disturbance of all rarefaction (22, 23), which is problematic because rarefaction remaining tropical forest habitats. The results are based on applying compresses differences between samples (24). a highly accurate method of estimating species richness to 875 eco- However, the compression problem can be solved using meth- logical samples. About 41% of the tree and animal species in this ods of either interpolation or extrapolation. Four different ap- dataset are absent from disturbed habitats, even though most proaches are used in this paper (Methods). Two are analytical samples do still represent forests of some kind. The individual figures subsampling methods that seek to make samples comparable by are 30% for trees and 8–65% for 10 animal groups.
    [Show full text]