A global review of past land use, climate, and active vs. passive restoration effects on forest recovery.
A global review of past land use, climate, and active vs. passive restoration effects on forest recovery.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1371/journal.pone.0171368
复制
发表时间：
2017
期刊：
影响因子：
3.7
通讯作者：
Moreno Mateos D
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Meli P;Holl KD;Rey Benayas JM;Jones HP;Jones PC;Montoya D;Moreno Mateos D
全球森林恢复目标已经确定，但政策制定者和土地管理者缺乏如何投入有限资源实现这些目标的指导原则。我们对全世界自然再生和积极恢复的森林中的166项研究进行了荟萃分析，以回答：（1）植物和动物的丰度和多样性以及生态地球化学功能恢复到什么程度？(2)恢复是否因过去的土地使用、恢复后的时间、森林区域或降水而变化？(3)主动恢复是否比被动恢复更彻底或更快？总体而言，森林显示出很高的恢复水平，但恢复时间取决于测量的度量类型、过去的土地使用和区域。植被恢复迅速，完全，而多样性恢复缓慢，在热带比温带森林。生物地球化学功能恢复后，农业比伐木或采矿缓慢。以前记录的站点大多是被动恢复的，通常恢复得很快。几乎总是通过种植和土壤改良剂或改造地形相结合的方法积极恢复矿区，从而迅速恢复了所评价的指标。主要通过植树等方式积极恢复前农业用地，并没有比被动恢复的地点持续更快或更全面地恢复。我们的研究结果表明，在许多情况下，简单地结束土地使用就足以使森林恢复，但需要更多的研究，直接比较在同一系统中的主动与被动恢复策略的增加值。对积极恢复的投资应根据过去的土地使用、系统的自然恢复能力和每个项目的具体目标进行评估。
Global forest restoration targets have been set, yet policy makers and land managers lack guiding principles on how to invest limited resources to achieve them. We conducted a meta-analysis of 166 studies in naturally regenerating and actively restored forests worldwide to answer: (1) To what extent do floral and faunal abundance and diversity and biogeochemical functions recover? (2) Does recovery vary as a function of past land use, time since restoration, forest region, or precipitation? (3) Does active restoration result in more complete or faster recovery than passive restoration? Overall, forests showed a high level of recovery, but the time to recovery depended on the metric type measured, past land use, and region. Abundance recovered quickly and completely, whereas diversity recovered slower in tropical than in temperate forests. Biogeochemical functions recovered more slowly after agriculture than after logging or mining. Formerly logged sites were mostly passively restored and generally recovered quickly. Mined sites were nearly always actively restored using a combination of planting and either soil amendments or recontouring topography, which resulted in rapid recovery of the metrics evaluated. Actively restoring former agricultural land, primarily by planting trees, did not result in consistently faster or more complete recovery than passively restored sites. Our results suggest that simply ending the land use is sufficient for forests to recover in many cases, but more studies are needed that directly compare the value added of active versus passive restoration strategies in the same system. Investments in active restoration should be evaluated relative to the past land use, the natural resilience of the system, and the specific objectives of each project.