45
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Structural and Functional Loss in Restored Wetland Ecosystems

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          In restored wetland ecosystems with apparently natural hydrology and biological structure, biogeochemical function may remain degraded, even a century after restoration efforts.

          Abstract

          Wetlands are among the most productive and economically valuable ecosystems in the world. However, because of human activities, over half of the wetland ecosystems existing in North America, Europe, Australia, and China in the early 20th century have been lost. Ecological restoration to recover critical ecosystem services has been widely attempted, but the degree of actual recovery of ecosystem functioning and structure from these efforts remains uncertain. Our results from a meta-analysis of 621 wetland sites from throughout the world show that even a century after restoration efforts, biological structure (driven mostly by plant assemblages), and biogeochemical functioning (driven primarily by the storage of carbon in wetland soils), remained on average 26% and 23% lower, respectively, than in reference sites. Either recovery has been very slow, or postdisturbance systems have moved towards alternative states that differ from reference conditions. We also found significant effects of environmental settings on the rate and degree of recovery. Large wetland areas (>100 ha) and wetlands restored in warm (temperate and tropical) climates recovered more rapidly than smaller wetlands and wetlands restored in cold climates. Also, wetlands experiencing more (riverine and tidal) hydrologic exchange recovered more rapidly than depressional wetlands. Restoration performance is limited: current restoration practice fails to recover original levels of wetland ecosystem functions, even after many decades. If restoration as currently practiced is used to justify further degradation, global loss of wetland ecosystem function and structure will spread.

          Author Summary

          Wetlands, which include tropical mangroves and boreal peatlands, are among the most valuable ecosystems in the world because they provide critical ecosystem goods and services, such as carbon storage, biodiversity conservation, fish production, water purification, and erosion control. As global change accelerates the loss of wetlands, attempts are increasing to restore this fragile habitat and its associated functioning. There has been no global evaluation, however, of how effective such restoration efforts have been. Here, we present a meta-analysis of the biological structure (driven mostly by plant communities) and biogeochemical functioning (driven primarily by the storage of carbon in wetland soils) of 621 wetland sites. Our analysis suggests that even a century after restoration efforts, these parameters remained on average 26% and 23% (respectively) lower in restored or created wetlands than in reference wetlands. Our results also indicate that ecosystem size and the environmental setting significantly affect the rate of recovery. Recovery may be more likely and more rapid if more than 100 contiguous hectares of habitat are restored. In warm climates, and in settings linked to riverine or tidal flows, recovery can also proceed more rapidly. In general, however, once disturbed, wetlands either recover very slowly or move towards alternative states that differ from reference conditions. Thus, current restoration practice and wetland mitigation policies will maintain and likely accelerate the global loss of wetland ecosystem functions.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 78

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Alternative states and positive feedbacks in restoration ecology.

          There is increasing interest in developing better predictive tools and a broader conceptual framework to guide the restoration of degraded land. Traditionally, restoration efforts have focused on re-establishing historical disturbance regimes or abiotic conditions, relying on successional processes to guide the recovery of biotic communities. However, strong feedbacks between biotic factors and the physical environment can alter the efficacy of these successional-based management efforts. Recent experimental work indicates that some degraded systems are resilient to traditional restoration efforts owing to constraints such as changes in landscape connectivity and organization, loss of native species pools, shifts in species dominance, trophic interactions and/or invasion by exotics, and concomitant effects on biogeochemical processes. Models of alternative ecosystem states that incorporate system thresholds and feedbacks are now being applied to the dynamics of recovery in degraded systems and are suggesting ways in which restoration can identify, prioritize and address these constraints.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Enhancement of biodiversity and ecosystem services by ecological restoration: a meta-analysis.

            Ecological restoration is widely used to reverse the environmental degradation caused by human activities. However, the effectiveness of restoration actions in increasing provision of both biodiversity and ecosystem services has not been evaluated systematically. A meta-analysis of 89 restoration assessments in a wide range of ecosystem types across the globe indicates that ecological restoration increased provision of biodiversity and ecosystem services by 44 and 25%, respectively. However, values of both remained lower in restored versus intact reference ecosystems. Increases in biodiversity and ecosystem service measures after restoration were positively correlated. Results indicate that restoration actions focused on enhancing biodiversity should support increased provision of ecosystem services, particularly in tropical terrestrial biomes.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Plant functional traits and soil carbon sequestration in contrasting biomes.

              Plant functional traits control a variety of terrestrial ecosystem processes, including soil carbon storage which is a key component of the global carbon cycle. Plant traits regulate net soil carbon storage by controlling carbon assimilation, its transfer and storage in belowground biomass, and its release from soil through respiration, fire and leaching. However, our mechanistic understanding of these processes is incomplete. Here, we present a mechanistic framework, based on the plant traits that drive soil carbon inputs and outputs, for understanding how alteration of vegetation composition will affect soil carbon sequestration under global changes. First, we show direct and indirect plant trait effects on soil carbon input and output through autotrophs and heterotrophs, and through modification of abiotic conditions, which need to be considered to determine the local carbon sequestration potential. Second, we explore how the composition of key plant traits and soil biota related to carbon input, release and storage prevail in different biomes across the globe, and address the biome-specific mechanisms by which plant trait composition may impact on soil carbon sequestration. We propose that a trait-based approach will help to develop strategies to preserve and promote carbon sequestration.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Academic Editor
                Journal
                PLoS Biol
                plos
                plosbiol
                PLoS Biology
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, USA )
                1544-9173
                1545-7885
                January 2012
                January 2012
                24 January 2012
                : 10
                : 1
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Integrative Biology Department, University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, California, United States of America
                [2 ]Jasper Ridge Biological Preserve, Stanford University, Woodside, California, United States of America
                [3 ]Department of Conservation of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Restoration, Pyrenean Institute of Ecology – CSIC, Zaragoza, Spain
                [4 ]UMR CNRS 7205, Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris, France
                McGill University, Canada
                Author notes

                The author(s) have made the following declarations about their contributions: Conceived and designed the experiments: DMM MEP. Analyzed the data: DMM. Wrote the paper: DMM MEP. Performed the meta-analysis: DMM RY. Interpreted and discussed results from the meta-analysis: DMM MEP FAC.

                Article
                PBIOLOGY-D-11-02175
                10.1371/journal.pbio.1001247
                3265451
                22291572
                e3420c9f-778f-4be0-a47f-a3a623ac7bd5
                Moreno Mateos et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
                Page count
                Pages: 8
                Categories
                Research Article
                Biology
                Ecology
                Ecological Environments
                Ecological Metrics
                Ecosystems

                Life sciences

                Comments

                Comment on this article