Effectiveness of perches in promoting bird-mediated seed dispersal for natural forest regeneration: a systematic review.

IF 3.4 4区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Jelaine L Gan, Matthew J Grainger, Mark David Foster Shirley, Sheena Davis, Molly Watson, Shreya Dube, Marion Pfeifer
{"title":"Effectiveness of perches in promoting bird-mediated seed dispersal for natural forest regeneration: a systematic review.","authors":"Jelaine L Gan, Matthew J Grainger, Mark David Foster Shirley, Sheena Davis, Molly Watson, Shreya Dube, Marion Pfeifer","doi":"10.1186/s13750-025-00363-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Assisted Natural Regeneration (ANR) is an increasingly popular cost-effective approach to restore forests for climate change mitigation and biodiversity conservation. One ANR strategy is the use of perches to attract avian seed dispersers to degraded landscapes for increased seed supply and seedling establishment. This systematic review sought to determine the effectiveness of artificial, semi-natural, and natural perches in promoting natural forest regeneration, specifically in driving four outcomes: seed richness, seed density, seedling richness, and seedling density.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In September 2023, we searched for studies in eight bibliographic sources, which include an organizational library and a web-based search engine, using a refined search string in English. After deduplication, we conducted double screening at title and abstract, then at full text level to check for eligibility (e.g., compared perches versus control). The final list of studies underwent critical appraisal based on risk of bias and method validity, then data extraction. We used Hedges' g as our effect size and fitted each outcome in a three-level meta-regression model. We also tested the effect of matrix type, bioregion, and precipitation variation as modifiers, and conducted sensitivity analysis based on risk of bias and method validity.</p><p><strong>Review findings: </strong>After screening, we accepted a total of 396 studies in 79 articles for the review. The majority of these studies examined seed (49%) and seedling density (28%) outcomes over richness, using mostly natural perches (68%) and, to a lesser frequency, artificial and semi-natural perches. Most studies that included distance to forest edge as a factor reported no effects (n = 68). We then analysed 333 studies in a meta-analysis. Results showed that natural perches had overall positive effects in increasing seed and seedling density and richness, while artificial and semi-natural perches were effective only for seed outcomes. We found high heterogeneity in our models, with perch effectiveness affected by matrix type, bioregion, precipitation variation, method specificity, as well as study quality. In general, perches showed robust positive effects in shrublands and grasslands in tropical, subtropical, and mediterranean biomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The use of perches can be an effective ANR strategy to increase seed rain and seedling establishment in a variety of degraded landscapes. We recommend that natural perches be preserved in the matrix, but in areas lacking these natural features, to explore the use of artificial or semi-natural perches to increase seed rain and follow it up with additional treatments, such as soil amelioration and weeding, to improve seedling establishment. Due to insufficient data, we could not analyse the effect of distance to forest edge as a moderator in our meta-regression models. This gap can be addressed by examining perches placed at increasing distances from the edge and having better data sharing practices. We also emphasize a need for improving the quality of reporting, such as variances and detailed methodologies, in order for research to be useful for systematic reviews and meta-analysis.</p>","PeriodicalId":48621,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Evidence","volume":"14 1","pages":"10"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12166613/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Evidence","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13750-025-00363-8","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Assisted Natural Regeneration (ANR) is an increasingly popular cost-effective approach to restore forests for climate change mitigation and biodiversity conservation. One ANR strategy is the use of perches to attract avian seed dispersers to degraded landscapes for increased seed supply and seedling establishment. This systematic review sought to determine the effectiveness of artificial, semi-natural, and natural perches in promoting natural forest regeneration, specifically in driving four outcomes: seed richness, seed density, seedling richness, and seedling density.

Methods: In September 2023, we searched for studies in eight bibliographic sources, which include an organizational library and a web-based search engine, using a refined search string in English. After deduplication, we conducted double screening at title and abstract, then at full text level to check for eligibility (e.g., compared perches versus control). The final list of studies underwent critical appraisal based on risk of bias and method validity, then data extraction. We used Hedges' g as our effect size and fitted each outcome in a three-level meta-regression model. We also tested the effect of matrix type, bioregion, and precipitation variation as modifiers, and conducted sensitivity analysis based on risk of bias and method validity.

Review findings: After screening, we accepted a total of 396 studies in 79 articles for the review. The majority of these studies examined seed (49%) and seedling density (28%) outcomes over richness, using mostly natural perches (68%) and, to a lesser frequency, artificial and semi-natural perches. Most studies that included distance to forest edge as a factor reported no effects (n = 68). We then analysed 333 studies in a meta-analysis. Results showed that natural perches had overall positive effects in increasing seed and seedling density and richness, while artificial and semi-natural perches were effective only for seed outcomes. We found high heterogeneity in our models, with perch effectiveness affected by matrix type, bioregion, precipitation variation, method specificity, as well as study quality. In general, perches showed robust positive effects in shrublands and grasslands in tropical, subtropical, and mediterranean biomes.

Conclusions: The use of perches can be an effective ANR strategy to increase seed rain and seedling establishment in a variety of degraded landscapes. We recommend that natural perches be preserved in the matrix, but in areas lacking these natural features, to explore the use of artificial or semi-natural perches to increase seed rain and follow it up with additional treatments, such as soil amelioration and weeding, to improve seedling establishment. Due to insufficient data, we could not analyse the effect of distance to forest edge as a moderator in our meta-regression models. This gap can be addressed by examining perches placed at increasing distances from the edge and having better data sharing practices. We also emphasize a need for improving the quality of reporting, such as variances and detailed methodologies, in order for research to be useful for systematic reviews and meta-analysis.

栖木在促进鸟类介导的种子传播和天然林更新中的有效性:系统综述。
背景:辅助自然再生(ANR)是为减缓气候变化和保护生物多样性而恢复森林的一种日益流行的具有成本效益的方法。一个ANR策略是利用栖木吸引鸟类种子传播者到退化的景观,以增加种子供应和幼苗建立。本系统综述旨在确定人工、半天然和天然栖木在促进自然森林更新方面的有效性,特别是在驱动四个结果方面:种子丰富度、种子密度、幼苗丰富度和幼苗密度。方法:在2023年9月,我们使用一个改进的英文搜索字符串在8个书目来源中检索研究,其中包括一个组织图书馆和一个基于web的搜索引擎。在重复数据删除后,我们在标题和摘要上进行了双重筛选,然后在全文水平上检查合格性(例如,比较高位与对照)。最终的研究清单经过了基于偏倚风险和方法有效性的严格评估,然后进行了数据提取。我们使用Hedges' g作为我们的效应大小,并将每个结果拟合在一个三层元回归模型中。我们还测试了基质类型、生物区域和降水变化作为修饰因子的影响,并基于偏倚风险和方法效度进行了敏感性分析。综述结果:经过筛选,我们共接受了79篇文章中的396项研究进行综述。这些研究中的大多数都考察了种子(49%)和幼苗密度(28%)在丰富度方面的结果,主要使用天然栖木(68%),以及较少频率的人工和半自然栖木。大多数将到森林边缘的距离作为一个因素的研究报告没有影响(n = 68)。然后,我们在荟萃分析中分析了333项研究。结果表明,天然栖木在提高种子和幼苗密度和丰富度方面具有总体积极作用,而人工和半天然栖木仅对种子结果有效。我们发现我们的模型具有高度的异质性,其有效性受基质类型、生物区域、降水变化、方法特异性和研究质量的影响。总体而言,栖木在热带、亚热带和地中海生物群系的灌丛和草地中表现出强劲的积极作用。结论:在各种退化景观中,利用栖木是一种有效的ANR策略,可以增加种子降雨和幼苗建立。我们建议在基质中保留天然栖木,但在缺乏这些自然特征的地区,应探索利用人工或半天然栖木来增加种子降雨,并在此基础上进行土壤改良和除草等附加处理,以促进幼苗的形成。由于数据不足,我们无法在meta回归模型中分析到森林边缘的距离作为调节因子的影响。这一差距可以通过检查距离边缘越来越远的栖木和更好的数据共享实践来解决。我们还强调需要提高报告的质量,如方差和详细的方法,以便研究对系统评价和元分析有用。
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
Environmental Evidence
Environmental Evidence Environmental Science-Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
18.20%
发文量
36
审稿时长
17 weeks
期刊介绍: Environmental Evidence is the journal of the Collaboration for Environmental Evidence (CEE). The Journal facilitates rapid publication of evidence syntheses, in the form of Systematic Reviews and Maps conducted to CEE Guidelines and Standards. We focus on the effectiveness of environmental management interventions and the impact of human activities on the environment. Our scope covers all forms of environmental management and human impacts and therefore spans the natural and social sciences. Subjects include water security, agriculture, food security, forestry, fisheries, natural resource management, biodiversity conservation, climate change, ecosystem services, pollution, invasive species, environment and human wellbeing, sustainable energy use, soil management, environmental legislation, environmental education.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信