Reference vegetation for restoration? Three vegetation maps compared across 76 nature reserves in Uganda and Kenya

IF 2.7 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 ECOLOGY
Ecosphere Pub Date : 2024-10-14 DOI:10.1002/ecs2.70030
Jens-Peter Barnekow Lillesø, Davide Barsotti, James Kalema, Paulo van Breugel, Fabio Pedercini, Lars Graudal, Ramni Jamnadass, Roeland Kindt
{"title":"Reference vegetation for restoration? Three vegetation maps compared across 76 nature reserves in Uganda and Kenya","authors":"Jens-Peter Barnekow Lillesø,&nbsp;Davide Barsotti,&nbsp;James Kalema,&nbsp;Paulo van Breugel,&nbsp;Fabio Pedercini,&nbsp;Lars Graudal,&nbsp;Ramni Jamnadass,&nbsp;Roeland Kindt","doi":"10.1002/ecs2.70030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Forest and landscape restoration are increasingly popular nature-based solutions to mitigate climate change and safeguard biodiversity. Restoration planning and monitoring implies that a reference ecosystem has been defined to which the restored site can be compared, but how to best select such reference? We tested three different potential natural vegetation (PNV) maps of the same areas in Kenya and Uganda for their utility as ecological references with independent data that were not used when those maps were made. These independent datasets included presence observations of woody species from 76 sites in forest reserves in Kenya and Uganda, and classification of surveyed species into a system that included “forest-only” and “nonforest-only” ecological types. Our tests show that (1) the three vegetation maps largely agree on the environmental envelopes/ranges within which forests occur. (2) There are large differences in how well the maps predict the presence of forest-only species. (3) Two maps, based on empirical observations (V4A and White), predict forest types well, whereas the third, based on climate envelopes only (NS), performs poorly. (4) A large area in Uganda is potentially in one of two alternative stable states. We conclude that it is possible to evaluate the utility of PNV maps at a more detailed scale than the level of biome and ecoregion. This indicates that it is possible to map PNV at scales required for reference for restoration and management of forest vegetation. We recommend that empirically based maps of potential natural vegetation are used in restoration planning (biome and PNV maps based on climate envelopes alone may be unreliable tools) as a baseline model for predicting the distribution of reference ecosystems under current and future conditions. It could conveniently be done by deconstructing the existing biome maps, supported by rapid botanical surveys.</p>","PeriodicalId":48930,"journal":{"name":"Ecosphere","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ecs2.70030","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecosphere","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ecs2.70030","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Forest and landscape restoration are increasingly popular nature-based solutions to mitigate climate change and safeguard biodiversity. Restoration planning and monitoring implies that a reference ecosystem has been defined to which the restored site can be compared, but how to best select such reference? We tested three different potential natural vegetation (PNV) maps of the same areas in Kenya and Uganda for their utility as ecological references with independent data that were not used when those maps were made. These independent datasets included presence observations of woody species from 76 sites in forest reserves in Kenya and Uganda, and classification of surveyed species into a system that included “forest-only” and “nonforest-only” ecological types. Our tests show that (1) the three vegetation maps largely agree on the environmental envelopes/ranges within which forests occur. (2) There are large differences in how well the maps predict the presence of forest-only species. (3) Two maps, based on empirical observations (V4A and White), predict forest types well, whereas the third, based on climate envelopes only (NS), performs poorly. (4) A large area in Uganda is potentially in one of two alternative stable states. We conclude that it is possible to evaluate the utility of PNV maps at a more detailed scale than the level of biome and ecoregion. This indicates that it is possible to map PNV at scales required for reference for restoration and management of forest vegetation. We recommend that empirically based maps of potential natural vegetation are used in restoration planning (biome and PNV maps based on climate envelopes alone may be unreliable tools) as a baseline model for predicting the distribution of reference ecosystems under current and future conditions. It could conveniently be done by deconstructing the existing biome maps, supported by rapid botanical surveys.

Abstract Image

恢复的参考植被?比较乌干达和肯尼亚 76 个自然保护区的三种植被图
森林和景观恢复是越来越受欢迎的基于自然的解决方案,以减缓气候变化和保护生物多样性。恢复规划和监测意味着已经确定了一个参照生态系统,可以将恢复地点与之进行比较,但如何才能最好地选择这种参照呢?我们对肯尼亚和乌干达相同地区的三幅不同的潜在自然植被(PNV)地图进行了测试,以确定它们作为生态参照物的实用性。这些独立数据集包括肯尼亚和乌干达森林保护区内 76 个地点的木本物种存在观测数据,以及将调查物种划分为包括 "纯森林 "和 "非纯森林 "生态类型的系统。我们的测试表明:(1) 三种植被图在森林出现的环境范围上基本一致。(2)在预测纯林物种的存在方面,三种地图存在很大差异。(3) 两幅基于经验观测的地图(V4A 和 White)对森林类型的预测较好,而第三幅仅基于气候包络(NS)的地图则表现较差。(4) 乌干达的大片地区有可能处于两种可供选择的稳定状态之一。我们的结论是,可以在比生物群落和生态区更详细的尺度上评估 PNV 地图的实用性。这表明,在森林植被恢复和管理所需的参考尺度上绘制 PNV 地图是可行的。我们建议在恢复规划中使用基于经验的潜在自然植被地图(仅基于气候包络的生物群落和 PNV 地图可能是不可靠的工具),作为预测当前和未来条件下参考生态系统分布的基线模型。可以通过解构现有的生物群落图,并辅以快速植物调查,方便地完成这项工作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Ecosphere
Ecosphere ECOLOGY-
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
3.70%
发文量
378
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊介绍: The scope of Ecosphere is as broad as the science of ecology itself. The journal welcomes submissions from all sub-disciplines of ecological science, as well as interdisciplinary studies relating to ecology. The journal''s goal is to provide a rapid-publication, online-only, open-access alternative to ESA''s other journals, while maintaining the rigorous standards of peer review for which ESA publications are renowned.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信