Restoration ecology: tragedy or comedy?
Restoration ecology: tragedy or Restoration ecology: tragedy or comedy?comedy?
James BullockJames BullockJames Bullock
Biodiversity destruction & lossBiodiversity destruction & lossBiodiversity destruction & loss
Biodiversity loss (a UK view) – extinctionsBiodiversity loss (a UK view) Biodiversity loss (a UK view) –– extinctionsextinctions
Lady’s slipper orchid (Cypripedium calceolus)
Critically endangered in the UK
3 sites in the UK
Lady’s slipper orchid (Cypripedium calceolus)
Critically endangered in the UK
3 sites in the UK
Interrupted brome (Bromus interruptus)
Extinct in the wild in the UK
Interrupted brome (Bromus interruptus)
Extinct in the wild in the UK
Habitat loss - UKHabitat loss Habitat loss -- UKUKSemi-natural grasslandSemi-natural grassland
Calcareous grasslandCalcareous grassland
Dorset 1940 Dorset 1940 -- 20072007
Lost/Lost/ExtantExtant
England & WalesEngland & Wales>95% lost 1930 >95% lost 1930 –– 19801980
(Fuller 1987)(Fuller 1987)
Habitat loss – Chilean temperate forestsHabitat loss Habitat loss –– Chilean temperate forestsChilean temperate forests
GB1960-2000
Dorset1930-2007
40 km40 km Native forest. Native forest. 1975: 120,000 ha1975: 120,000 ha2000: 39,000 ha2000: 39,000 ha
Echeverria et al 2006Echeverria et al 2006
Doom & gloom – what can ecologists do?Doom & gloom Doom & gloom –– what can ecologists do?what can ecologists do?
Guardian 2007Guardian 2007
Conserving individual species?Conserving individual species?Conserving individual species?
Habitat restoration - examplesHabitat restoration Habitat restoration -- examplesexamplesPlanting treesPlanting trees Digging out river meandersDigging out river meanders
Amending contaminated soilsAmending contaminated soils Removing alien plantsRemoving alien plants
Restoration Ecology – a difficult historyRestoration Ecology Restoration Ecology –– a difficult historya difficult history- Generally seen as an engineering problem
- Has a poor theoretical basis
- Seen as a series of case studies – experimentation is difficult
- Low scientific impact
- Viewed with suspicion by many conservationists
- Generally seen as an engineering problem
- Has a poor theoretical basis
- Seen as a series of case studies – experimentation is difficult
- Low scientific impact
- Viewed with suspicion by many conservationists
Restoration Ecology – comedy or tragedy?Restoration Ecology Restoration Ecology –– comedy or tragedy?comedy or tragedy?
A happy ending?A happy ending?
Or ‘signifying nothing’?Or ‘signifying nothing’?
1) Experiments to test restoration methods-link to concepts about
assembly rules
1) Experiments to test restoration methods-link to concepts about
assembly rules
Initial Plant Community
(undesirable sp.)
Intermediate Plant Community
(desirable + undesirable sp.)1. Dispersal/presence of seed of target sp.
Seed addition
Seed bank / dispersal
Regional sp. pool
Seed limitation
2. Establishment of target sp.
Nutrients/pH
Resource competition / gap limitation
Hydrology
Soil microbes
Mycorrhizae
Herbivores
Hemiparasites
Managementintervention
Target Plant Community(desirable sp.)
3. Regeneration of target sp.
Pollinators
Seed predators
Dispersal
4. Interspecific competition
5. Mortality of non-target sp.
Interactions
Creating new grassland on arable landCreating new grassland on arable landCreating new grassland on arable land
Experiment at 6 sites across S England Experiment at 6 sites across S England
Seed limitationSeed limitation
High soil nutrientsHigh soil nutrients
Lack of facilitation (Nurse crops)Lack of facilitation (Nurse crops)
Age (Succession)Age (Succession)1
234 5
6Hypothesised limiting factorsHypothesised limiting factors
Pywell et al (2002). J. Appl. EcolPywell et al (2002). J. Appl. EcolPywell et al (2002). J. Appl. Ecol
Over-riding factor = seed limitationOverOver--riding factor = seed limitationriding factor = seed limitationNatural regeneration
Standard seed mix (6-8 species)Standard seed mix (6-8 species) Rich seed mix (25-41 species)Rich seed mix (25-41 species)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
% s
imila
rity
to M
G5
Natural regeneration Standard mix Rich mix
Seed limitation
Pywell et al (2002). J. Appl. EcolPywell et al (2002). J. Appl. EcolPywell et al (2002). J. Appl. Ecol
Diversifying species-poor grasslandDiversifying speciesDiversifying species--poor grasslandpoor grassland
DeturfingHarrowing
Heavy grazingHypothesised important factors• Disturbance intensity• Seed limitation• Management – grazing, hay-making• Soil nutrients• Invert herbivory
Hypothesised important factors• Disturbance intensity• Seed limitation• Management – grazing, hay-making• Soil nutrients• Invert herbivory
Pywell et al (2007). J. Appl. EcolPywell et al (2007). J. Appl. EcolPywell et al (2007). J. Appl. Ecol
DeturfingHarrowing
Heavy grazingMain factor = disturbance intensity19 species added10-13 established in de-turfed3-4 in othersDifficult to diversify
Main factor = disturbance intensity19 species added10-13 established in de-turfed3-4 in othersDifficult to diversify
Pywell et al (2007). J. Appl. EcolPywell et al (2007). J. Appl. EcolPywell et al (2007). J. Appl. Ecol
Diversifying species-poor grasslandDiversifying speciesDiversifying species--poor grasslandpoor grassland
New approaches – Keystone speciesYellow rattle
New approaches New approaches –– Keystone speciesKeystone speciesYellow rattleYellow rattle A hemi-parasite
Typical of species-rich grasslands
Decreases grassland productivity
A hemiA hemi--parasiteparasite
Typical of speciesTypical of species--rich grasslandsrich grasslands
Decreases grassland productivityDecreases grassland productivity
r2 = 0.8***
0
40
80
120
0 50 100 150 200No. Rhinanthus stems
Dry
wt(
g) o
f gra
sses
Pywell et al (2005). J. Appl. EcolPywell et al (2005). J. Appl. EcolPywell et al (2005). J. Appl. Ecol
Rhinanthus increases sown species’ establishmentRhinanthus Rhinanthus increases sown speciesincreases sown species’’ establishmentestablishment
ANCOVA r2 = 0.63***
0123456789
10
0 20 40 60 80 100% frequency of Rhinanthus m-2 2001
Sow
n sp
ecie
s pe
r plo
t 200
2 FrequencyCorrelation Rhinanthus
Achillea millefolium 0.59**
Centaurea nigra 0.59**
Hypochoeris radicata 0.20nsd
Leontodon autumnalis 0.48*
Leontodon hispidus 0.37nsd
Leucanthemum vulgare 0.52*
Lotus corniculatus 0.15nsd
Plantago lanceolata 0.83***
Prunella vulgaris 0.49*
Trifolium dubium 0.56**
Pywell et al (2005). J. Appl. EcolPywell et al (2005). J. Appl. EcolPywell et al (2005). J. Appl. Ecol
- Survey of 80 sites in southern England
- Restored grasslands come to resemble ancient grasslands, but not completely
- Survey of 80 sites in southern England
- Restored grasslands come to resemble ancient grasslands, but not completely
-3
0
3
-2 0 2
Axis 1
Axi
s 2
----- = Age 1-5 years= Age 6-10 years= Age 11-20 years= Age 21-60 years= Combined target sites
Fagan et al. (2008) J. Appl. EcolFagan et al. (2008) J. Appl. EcolFagan et al. (2008) J. Appl. Ecol
2) Can restoration perfectly recreate communities?2) Can restoration perfectly recreate communities?2) Can restoration perfectly recreate communities?
89 restorations across the world – tropical/temperate, aquatic/terrestrial89 restorations across the world – tropical/temperate, aquatic/terrestrial
Global meta-analysis of success in restoration projectsGlobal metaGlobal meta--analysis of success in restoration analysis of success in restoration projectsprojects
Rey Benayas et al. (2009) ScienceRey Benayas et al. (2009) ScienceRey Benayas et al. (2009) Science
MangroveMangrove Subtropical forestSubtropical forestPrairiePrairie
SaltmarshSaltmarsh RiverRiver Coral reefCoral reef
Restorations are only partly successfulRestorations are only partly successfulRestorations are only partly successful
Rey Benayas et al. (2009) ScienceRey Benayas et al. (2009) ScienceRey Benayas et al. (2009) Science
Restored systems have lower biodiversity than target (86%) - but have 44% more biodiversity than degraded systems
But, differences among biomes
Restored systems have lower biodiversity than target (86%) - but have 44% more biodiversity than degraded systems
But, differences among biomes
Restored vs Restored vs DegradedDegraded
Restored vs TargetRestored vs Target
What limits restoration success?Analyse characteristics of poor and well performing species in
grassland restorations
What limits restoration success?Analyse characteristics of poor and well performing species in
grassland restorations
Fagan et al. (2008) J. Appl. Ecol, Pywell et al (2003). J. Appl. EcolFagan et al. (2008) J. Appl. Ecol,Fagan et al. (2008) J. Appl. Ecol, Pywell et al (2003). J. Appl. EcolPywell et al (2003). J. Appl. Ecol
Poor performers• Specialist, stress-tolerating, rare
species with smaller geographic range
Good performers• Generalist, competitive, good-
dispersing species of fertile habitats
Poor performers• Specialist, stress-tolerating, rare
species with smaller geographic range
Good performers• Generalist, competitive, good-
dispersing species of fertile habitats
New work – improving successNew methods to establish “difficult” plantsNew work New work –– improving successimproving successNew methods to establish New methods to establish ““difficultdifficult”” plantsplants
Helianthemum nummulariumHelianthemum nummularium
Campanula glomerataCampanula glomerata
Filipendula vulgarisFilipendula vulgaris
Stachys officinalisStachys officinalis
3) Informing policy about restoration & conservation – agri-environment schemes3) Informing policy about restoration & 3) Informing policy about restoration & conservation conservation –– agriagri--environment schemesenvironment schemes
2,373 ha under HK8 in England 20092,373 ha under HK8 in England 2009
•• Mostly limited engagement with AES Mostly limited engagement with AES objectivesobjectives
•• Or understanding of reasoning behind Or understanding of reasoning behind prescriptionsprescriptions
•• Unintentional breaches & cornerUnintentional breaches & corner--cuttingcutting•• Linked to poor outcomes of AESLinked to poor outcomes of AES•• Problem of scheme based mostly on Problem of scheme based mostly on
monetary incentives?monetary incentives?
Farmer engagement & AESFarmer engagement & AESLinking ecology & social scienceLinking ecology & social science
Improving agri-environment
schemes
Enhancing the success of agri-environment schemes
Farmer Farmer attitude to & attitude to & benefits benefits from AESfrom AES
Biodiversity Biodiversity enhancementenhancement
Landscape contextLandscape contextTraininTrainingg
Application of Application of AES optionsAES options
The FARMCAT project The FARMCAT project Improving agri-environment
schemes
•• Overall, how useful did you find the information presented todayOverall, how useful did you find the information presented today??–– 68% (17 farmers) 68% (17 farmers) –– Very useful (32% useful)Very useful (32% useful)
•• Is the training likely to influence the way you think about Is the training likely to influence the way you think about environmental land management in general?environmental land management in general?–– 93% (26 farmers) 93% (26 farmers) -- YesYes
•• Is the training likely to influence the way you manage your ELS Is the training likely to influence the way you manage your ELS land?land?–– 90% (25 farmers) 90% (25 farmers) -- YesYes
•• Would you recommend this training event to a farming friend?Would you recommend this training event to a farming friend?–– 100% Yes100% Yes
Farmer motivations & trainingFarmer motivations & training
4) Linking restoration with wider societal needs 4) Linking restoration with wider societal needs
The need to consider conservation alongside other objectives The need to consider conservation alongside other objectives
Linking biodiversity & agricultural productionLinking biodiversity & agricultural productionLinking biodiversity & agricultural productionStandard seed mix (6Standard seed mix (6--8 species)8 species) Rich seed mix (25Rich seed mix (25--41 species)41 species)
Higher productivity
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
1 2 3 4 8Year
Prod
uctio
n (t
Dry
Mat
ter h
a -1)
Low diversityHigh diversity
Higher N content
0.8
0.9
1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1 2 3 4Year
% N
con
tent
Low diversityHigh diversity
Bullock et al (2001) Ecol. Lett., (2007). J. Appl. Ecol.Bullock et al (2001) Ecol. Lett., (2007). J. Appl. Ecol.Bullock et al (2001) Ecol. Lett., (2007). J. Appl. Ecol.
Linking biodiversity & agricultural productionLinking biodiversity & agricultural productionLinking biodiversity & agricultural productionStandard seed mix (6Standard seed mix (6--8 species)8 species) Rich seed mix (25Rich seed mix (25--41 species)41 species)
Higher productivity
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
1 2 3 4 8Year
Prod
uctio
n (t
Dry
Mat
ter h
a -1)
Low diversityHigh diversity
Higher N content
0.8
0.9
1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1 2 3 4Year
% N
con
tent
Low diversityHigh diversity
Bullock et al (2001) Ecol. Lett., (2007). J. Appl. Ecol.Bullock et al (2001) Ecol. Lett., (2007). J. Appl. Ecol.Bullock et al (2001) Ecol. Lett., (2007). J. Appl. Ecol.
Culmulative income differences
£0
£200
£400
£600
£800
£1,000
£1,200
£1,400
£1,600
£1,800
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8Year
Inco
me
ha-1
from
hay
(200
6 pr
ices
)
Low diversityHigh diversity
Restoration and ecosystem servicesThe ecosystem service concept
Restoration and ecosystem servicesThe ecosystem service concept
From Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
From Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
Haines-Young & PotvinHaines-Young & Potvin
Restoration and ecosystem servicesThe ecosystem service concept
Restoration and ecosystem servicesThe ecosystem service concept
Leading to valuation of ecosystem servicesLeading to valuation of ecosystem services
From TEEBFrom TEEBFrom TEEB
Outstanding questions
- How is biodiversity linked to ecosystem services?
- Can restoration be used to enhance biodversity & ecosystem services
Outstanding questionsOutstanding questions
-- How is biodiversity linked to How is biodiversity linked to ecosystem services?ecosystem services?
-- Can restoration be used to Can restoration be used to enhance biodversity & enhance biodversity & ecosystem servicesecosystem services
From Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
From Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
89 restorations across the world – tropical/temperate, aquatic/terrestrial89 restorations across the world – tropical/temperate, aquatic/terrestrial
Global meta-analysis of ecosystem services in restoration projectsGlobal metaGlobal meta--analysis of ecosystem services in analysis of ecosystem services in restoration projectsrestoration projects
Rey Benayas et al. (2009) ScienceRey Benayas et al. (2009) ScienceRey Benayas et al. (2009) Science
MangroveMangrove Subtropical forestSubtropical forestPrairiePrairie
SaltmarshSaltmarsh RiverRiver Coral reefCoral reef
Provisioning Provisioning ServicesServices
Regulating Regulating ServicesServices
Supporting Supporting ServicesServices
Commercial crab Commercial crab production production
Thermal buffer Thermal buffer capacitycapacity
Soil compactionSoil compaction
Fish biomassFish biomass Runoff Runoff coefficientcoefficient
Total CTotal C
Density of Density of commercial treescommercial trees
Water qualityWater quality SalinitySalinity
Eel abundanceEel abundance Total PbTotal Pb Soil respirationSoil respiration
Preference by Preference by livestocklivestock
SedimentationSedimentation Denitrification Denitrification potentialpotential
Relating function measures to services(Biodiversity = all trophic levels)
Relating function measures to servicesRelating function measures to services(Biodiversity = all trophic levels)(Biodiversity = all trophic levels)
Restorations are (partly) successfulRestorations are (partly) successfulRestorations are (partly) successful
Rey Benayas et al. (2009) ScienceRey Benayas et al. (2009) ScienceRey Benayas et al. (2009) Science
- Degraded systems have ~55% biodiversity & services of pristine systems
- Biodiversity increased by restoration (144%)
- Services increased by restoration (125%)
- But pristine systems are better than restored (~80%)
- Degraded systems have ~55% biodiversity & services of pristine systems
- Biodiversity increased by restoration (144%)
- Services increased by restoration (125%)
- But pristine systems are better than restored (~80%)
Increasing biodiversity correlated with increasing servicesIncreasing biodiversity correlated with Increasing biodiversity correlated with increasing servicesincreasing services
Rey Benayas et al. (2009) ScienceRey Benayas et al. (2009) ScienceRey Benayas et al. (2009) Science
- Important evidence for link between biodiversity & services
- Restoration can enhance both simultaneously
- Important evidence for link between biodiversity & services
- Restoration can enhance both simultaneously
New policy:Restoration to enhance biodiversity & ecosystem servicesNew policy:New policy:Restoration to enhance biodiversity & ecosystem servicesRestoration to enhance biodiversity & ecosystem services
New experimentEffects of added plants on:
•Production: amount & quality
•Butterflies, bumblebees•Birds•Nutrient leaching•Soil structure •Carbon dynamics
New experimentEffects of added plants on:
•Production: amount & quality
•Butterflies, bumblebees•Birds•Nutrient leaching•Soil structure •Carbon dynamics
Using Ecosystem Services to calculate value Using Ecosystem Services to calculate value of restorationsof restorations
TEEB preliminary data (not mine!)TEEB preliminary data (not mine!)
Ecological restorationEcological restorationEcological restoration A happy ending?A happy ending?
Restoration methods are improving & have a scientific basis
Restoration is supported by policy (AES, UKBAP, REDD)
Restoration can be used to enhance biodiversity & ecosystem services
Is it cost effective…?
Maintenance of existing habitat remains the best policy
Restoration methods are improving & have a scientific basis
Restoration is supported by policy (AES, UKBAP, REDD)
Restoration can be used to enhance biodiversity & ecosystem services
Is it cost effective…?
Maintenance of existing habitat remains the best policy