Hedgerows increase the diversity and modify the composition of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi in Mediterranean agricultural landscapes.

Sustainable agriculture is essential to address global challenges such as climate change and biodiversity loss. Hedgerows enhance aboveground biodiversity and provide ecosystem services, but little is known about their impact on soil biota. Arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) fungi are one of the key components of belowground biodiversity. We compared the diversity and composition of AM fungal communities at four farmland sites located in Central Spain, where 132 soil samples in total were collected to assess soil physical and chemical properties and the AM fungal communities. We compared the richness (number of AM fungal taxa), taxonomic, functional, and phylogenetic diversity, and structure of the AM fungal communities across three farmland habitat types, namely hedgerows, woody crops (olive groves and vineyard), and herbaceous crops (barley, sunflower, and wheat). Our results showed positive effects of hedgerows on most diversity metrics. Almost 60% of the AM fungal taxa were shared among the three farmland habitat types. Hedgerows increased AM fungal taxonomic richness (31%) and alpha diversity (25%), and especially so compared to herbaceous crops (45% and 28%, respectively). Hedgerows harbored elevated proportions of AM fungi with non-ruderal life-history strategies. AM fungal communities were more similar between hedgerows and woody crops than between hedgerows and adjacent herbaceous crops, possibly because of differences in tillage and fertilization. Unexpectedly, hedgerows reduced phylogenetic diversity, which might be related to more selective associations of AM fungi with woody plants than with herbaceous crops. Overall, the results suggest that planting hedgerows contributes to maintain belowground diversity. Thus, European farmers should plant more hedgerows to attain the goals of the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030.

Shifting demographic conflicts across recruitment cohorts in a dynamic post-disturbance landscape.

Seed dispersal effectiveness, which measures the number of adult plant individuals produced by seed dispersal, is the product of the number of seeds dispersed and the probability a seed produces an adult. Directed dispersal to certain habitat types may enhance some stages of recruitment but disfavor others, generating demographic conflicts in plant ontogeny. We asked whether temporal changes in habitat features may affect the distribution of seedlings recruited from dispersed acorns, and whether this could induce shifts in the life-stage conflicts experienced by successive cohorts of naturally recruited plants. As early successional habitats are characterized by rapid change, we used a burnt pine stand in southern Spain to monitor the recruitment and performance of a major tree species (Quercus ilex) across 7 yr in four types of post-fire habitats. These differed in structure and included patches of unburnt forest and three management alternatives of burnt trees: logging, partial cutting, and nonintervention. Young oaks that resprouted after the fire were mainly located near acorn sources, while new seedlings initially emerged mostly in habitats with standing snags due to habitat selection by European jays, Garrulus glandarius, for dispersal. The dead pines gradually collapsed and attracted less dispersal, so subsequent seedling cohorts mainly recruited within patches of unburnt pines. These live pines enhanced the survival of the oaks located beneath their canopy but greatly reduced their growth as compared to the other post-fire habitats, thus representing a demographic conflict that was absent elsewhere. As a consequence of the directional shift in the habitat where seedlings recruited, successive seedling cohorts experienced a gradual improvement in their likelihood of survival but a reduction in growth. The progressive intensification of this life-stage conflict hinged on the reduction of vertical structures in the habitat with standing burnt pines. Recruitment success thus involved temporal variation in the habitat where recruitment occurred, likely resulting from changes in the direction of seed dispersal, and spatial variation in habitat suitability for seedling establishment and growth. Temporal changes in habitat structure can indirectly change the environment in which recruitment occurs, and consequently seed dispersal effectiveness, by shifting the direction of seed dispersal.

A global review of past land use, climate, and active vs. passive restoration effects on forest recovery.

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.

Restoration enhances wetland biodiversity and ecosystem service supply, but results are context-dependent: a meta-analysis.

Wetlands are valuable ecosystems because they harbor a huge biodiversity and provide key services to societies. When natural or human factors degrade wetlands, ecological restoration is often carried out to recover biodiversity and ecosystem services (ES). Although such restorations are routinely performed, we lack systematic, evidence-based assessments of their effectiveness on the recovery of biodiversity and ES. Here we performed a meta-analysis of 70 experimental studies in order to assess the effectiveness of ecological restoration and identify what factors affect it. We compared selected ecosystem performance variables between degraded and restored wetlands and between restored and natural wetlands using response ratios and random-effects categorical modeling. We assessed how context factors such as ecosystem type, main agent of degradation, restoration action, experimental design, and restoration age influenced post-restoration biodiversity and ES. Biodiversity showed excellent recovery, though the precise recovery depended strongly on the type of organisms involved. Restored wetlands showed 36% higher levels of provisioning, regulating and supporting ES than did degraded wetlands. In fact, wetlands showed levels of provisioning and cultural ES similar to those of natural wetlands; however, their levels of supporting and regulating ES were, respectively, 16% and 22% lower than in natural wetlands. Recovery of biodiversity and of ES were positively correlated, indicating a win-win restoration outcome. The extent to which restoration increased biodiversity and ES in degraded wetlands depended primarily on the main agent of degradation, restoration actions, experimental design, and ecosystem type. In contrast, the choice of specific restoration actions alone explained most differences between restored and natural wetlands. These results highlight the importance of comprehensive, multi-factorial assessment to determine the ecological status of degraded, restored and natural wetlands and thereby evaluate the effectiveness of ecological restorations. Future research on wetland restoration should also seek to identify which restoration actions work best for specific habitats.