The effectiveness of different planting frameworks for recruitment of tropical rainforest species on ex-rainforest land
- Authors: Florentine, Singarayer , Pohlman, Catherine , Westbrooke, Martin
- Date: 2016
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Restoration Ecology Vol. 24, no. 3 (2016), p. 364-372
- Full Text: false
- Reviewed:
- Description: A long-term rainforest restoration experiment was established on abandoned pasture in northeastern Queensland in 1993 to examine the effectiveness of five different restoration planting methods: (T1) control (no plantings); (T2) pioneer monoculture (planting seedlings of one pioneer species, Homalanthus novoguineensis, Euphorbiaceae); (T3) Homalanthus group framework method (H. novoguineensis and eight other pioneer species); (T4) Alphitonia group framework method (Alphitonia petriei, Rhamnaceae, with eight other pioneer species); and (T5) maximum diversity method (planting pioneers, middle-phase species, and mature-phase species). We investigated temporal patterns in the (1) fate of seedlings originally planted in 1993; (2) natural recruitment of native plant species; and (3) current habitat structure (canopy cover and ground cover of grasses and invasive plants) within each restoration treatment. A total of 97% of seedlings planted in T2 died within the first 13 years and all had died by 2014. A total of 72% of seedlings planted in T3, 55.5% of seedlings planted in T4, and 55% of seedlings planted in T5 also died by 2014. By 2014, 42 species from 21 families had recruited across the experimental site, and the abundance of recruits was almost twice that recorded in 2001 and 2006. Overall, T3, T4, and T5 had the greatest diversity and abundance of recruits. By 2014, canopy cover was greatest in T3, T4, and T5 but grass cover was least in T5. It is concluded that some restoration success measures increase with planting diversity, but overall the rate of recovery is similar in framework species and maximum diversity method. © 2016 Society for Ecological Restoration.
Do primary rainforest tree species recruit into passively and actively restored tropical rainforest?
- Authors: Pohlman, Catherine , Tng, David , Florentine, Singarayer
- Date: 2021
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Forest Ecology and Management Vol. 496, no. (2021), p.
- Full Text: false
- Reviewed:
- Description: Restoring tropical rainforests is becoming increasingly urgent. However, in most restoration plantings it is not possible to include the full suite of species found in the original rainforest. Full recovery of species composition thus depends on the dispersal and recruitment of species that are not planted. In many restoration projects, however, recruitment is dominated by a low diversity of regionally-abundant pioneer species and species with small, easily dispersed seeds. These species are characteristic of secondary rainforest and do not include the far more diverse suite of species characteristic of the original, primary rainforest. Such primary rainforest species are usually more vulnerable to the effects of fragmentation than disturbance-adapted pioneers and thus are of greater conservation concern, as well as being required for the full recovery of many important ecosystem functions. As restoring ecosystem processes is one of the central goals of restoration, this raises the question of which, if any, of the available rainforest restoration methods may be used to promote the recruitment of primary rainforest species. We compared the species composition and functional group composition of recruited trees and shrubs in a 25-year-old restoration experiment with those of the originally planted trees, and with nearby primary rainforest and secondary rainforest reference sites in an area of upland rainforest in north-eastern Australia. Our objective was to compare the performance of four commonly-used restoration methods: (i) unassisted (passive) regeneration, (ii) Pioneer Monoculture plantings, (iii) Framework Method plantings, and (iv) Maximum Diversity plantings. The species composition and functional group composition of recruited individuals within all treatments were similar to those of secondary rainforest and highly dissimilar to both primary rainforest and plantations. Pioneer species, species with small, biotically-dispersed diaspores, and canopy trees were over-represented among both recruited individuals and in secondary rainforest. Conversely, climax species, species with large, biotically-dispersed diaspores, species with abiotically-dispersed diaspores, and understorey trees were under-represented among both recruited individuals and secondary rainforest. Restoration treatments had little effect on the species or functional group composition of recruited individuals. Our results indicate that species from nearby primary rainforest almost completely failed to recruit into any of the restoration treatments. We argue that this failure was most likely due to the absence of frugivores able to disperse larger diaspores from both secondary forest and restored forest in our study site. Further direct management intervention will be required to restore primary rainforest plant species to restored forests in this region. © 2021 Elsevier B.V.