NARA Discovery
Article Details
← Back to Search Results
Journal Article

Evaluating complementary networks of restoration plantings for landscape‐scale occurrence of temporally dynamic species

Karen Ikin; Ayesha Tulloch; Philip Gibbons; Dean Ansell; Julian Seddon; David Lindenmayer
Conservation Biology · Vol. 30, Issue 5 · pp. 1027-1037 · 2016

Abstract

Multibillion dollar investments in land restoration make it critical that conservation goals are achieved cost‐effectively. Approaches developed for systematic conservation planning offer opportunities to evaluate landscape‐scale, temporally dynamic biodiversity outcomes from restoration and improve on traditional approaches that focus on the most species‐rich plantings. We investigated whether it is possible to apply a complementarity‐based approach to evaluate the extent to which an existing network of restoration plantings meets representation targets. Using a case study of woodland birds of conservation concern in southeastern Australia, we compared complementarity‐based selections of plantings based on temporally dynamic species occurrences with selections based on static species occurrences and selections based on ranking plantings by species richness. The dynamic complementarity approach, which incorporated species occurrences over 5 years, resulted in higher species occurrences and proportion of targets met compared with the static complementarity approach, in which species occurrences were taken at a single point in time. For equivalent cost, the dynamic complementarity approach also always resulted in higher average minimum percent occurrence of species maintained through time and a higher proportion of the bird community meeting representation targets compared with the species‐richness approach. Plantings selected under the complementarity approaches represented the full range of planting attributes, whereas those selected under the species‐richness approach were larger in size. Our results suggest that future restoration policy should not attempt to achieve all conservation goals within individual plantings, but should instead capitalize on restoration opportunities as they arise to achieve collective value of multiple plantings across the landscape. Networks of restoration plantings with complementary attributes of age, size, vegetation structure, and landscape context lead to considerably better outcomes than conventional restoration objectives of site‐scale species richness and are crucial for allocating restoration investment wisely to reach desired conservation goals.

Bibliographic Information

JournalConservation Biology
PublisherWiley
Publication Date2016-10-01
Publication Year2016
Volume30
Issue5
Pages1027-1037
Document TypeJournal Article
Print ISSN0888-8892
eISSN1523-1739
DOI10.1111/cobi.12730
SubjectConservation Science

Access Information

NARA Access Coverage1997-01-01~Current
Journal Homepagehttps://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/loi/15231739
Publisher PageOpen Publisher Page
Full-text access depends on NARA's subscribed coverage and institutional access.