Effects of abiotic restoration through rock addition on invertebrate functional diversity in native temperate grasslands

IF 2.8 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 ECOLOGY Restoration Ecology Pub Date : 2024-05-22 DOI:10.1111/rec.14192
Isobel Roberts, Richard N. C. Milner, Brett Howland, James Lumbers, Maree Gilbert, Annabel L. Smith
{"title":"Effects of abiotic restoration through rock addition on invertebrate functional diversity in native temperate grasslands","authors":"Isobel Roberts, Richard N. C. Milner, Brett Howland, James Lumbers, Maree Gilbert, Annabel L. Smith","doi":"10.1111/rec.14192","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Invertebrates account for over 90% of all described species and provide crucial ecosystem services. Land clearing, including the removal of abiotic habitat features, threatens invertebrate biodiversity, making environmental restoration crucial for conservation. However, little is known about the effects of abiotic restoration compared to the restoration of biotic features. To determine if rock addition increased invertebrate biodiversity, we introduced 120 t of rocks to 10 sites across five grassland reserves in the Australian Capital Territory in a before‐after‐control‐impact design. We sampled invertebrates using pitfall traps before treatment in 2016 and after rock addition in 2019 (during record‐breaking drought). We recorded 29,164 individual invertebrates from 19 orders and undertook a functional trait‐based analysis of rock effects on the invertebrate community. No effects of rock addition were observed on the probability of occurrence, richness, diversity, community similarity, or abundance of any taxonomic or functional group. The abundance of snare‐building spiders and large ants was higher in the control plots at the end of the experiment. These abundance responses in 2019 did not differ from the control or treatment plots in 2016. Thus, some combination of drought and rock addition appears to have neutralized a positive temporal change that was evident without rocks. Despite a regionwide, replicated restoration effort and an extensive functional analysis of invertebrate communities, very little positive response to rock addition was recorded. Rock addition did not have a negative effect on grassland invertebrate biodiversity and may still be beneficial to the long‐term conservation and restoration of vertebrate and invertebrate communities.","PeriodicalId":54487,"journal":{"name":"Restoration Ecology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Restoration Ecology","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.14192","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

Invertebrates account for over 90% of all described species and provide crucial ecosystem services. Land clearing, including the removal of abiotic habitat features, threatens invertebrate biodiversity, making environmental restoration crucial for conservation. However, little is known about the effects of abiotic restoration compared to the restoration of biotic features. To determine if rock addition increased invertebrate biodiversity, we introduced 120 t of rocks to 10 sites across five grassland reserves in the Australian Capital Territory in a before‐after‐control‐impact design. We sampled invertebrates using pitfall traps before treatment in 2016 and after rock addition in 2019 (during record‐breaking drought). We recorded 29,164 individual invertebrates from 19 orders and undertook a functional trait‐based analysis of rock effects on the invertebrate community. No effects of rock addition were observed on the probability of occurrence, richness, diversity, community similarity, or abundance of any taxonomic or functional group. The abundance of snare‐building spiders and large ants was higher in the control plots at the end of the experiment. These abundance responses in 2019 did not differ from the control or treatment plots in 2016. Thus, some combination of drought and rock addition appears to have neutralized a positive temporal change that was evident without rocks. Despite a regionwide, replicated restoration effort and an extensive functional analysis of invertebrate communities, very little positive response to rock addition was recorded. Rock addition did not have a negative effect on grassland invertebrate biodiversity and may still be beneficial to the long‐term conservation and restoration of vertebrate and invertebrate communities.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
通过添加岩石进行非生物修复对原生温带草地无脊椎动物功能多样性的影响
无脊椎动物占所有描述物种的 90% 以上,提供重要的生态系统服务。土地清理,包括非生物栖息地特征的清除,威胁着无脊椎动物的生物多样性,因此环境恢复对保护至关重要。然而,与恢复生物特征相比,人们对非生物性恢复的效果知之甚少。为了确定添加岩石是否会增加无脊椎动物的生物多样性,我们在澳大利亚首都领地的五个草原保护区的 10 个地点引入了 120 吨岩石,并采用了控制影响前后的设计。我们在2016年处理前和2019年(破纪录的干旱期间)添加岩石后使用坑式陷阱对无脊椎动物进行了采样。我们记录了 19 个纲的 29 164 种无脊椎动物个体,并对岩石对无脊椎动物群落的影响进行了基于功能特征的分析。没有观察到岩石添加对任何分类或功能组群的出现概率、丰富度、多样性、群落相似度或丰度有任何影响。实验结束时,对照组地块中的捕食蜘蛛和大蚂蚁的丰度较高。2019 年的这些丰度反应与 2016 年的对照或处理地块没有差异。因此,干旱和添加石块的某种结合似乎中和了在没有石块的情况下显而易见的积极的时间变化。尽管在全区范围内开展了重复性的恢复工作,并对无脊椎动物群落进行了广泛的功能分析,但记录到的对岩石添加的积极反应却很少。岩石的添加并没有对草原无脊椎动物生物多样性产生负面影响,可能仍然有利于脊椎动物和无脊椎动物群落的长期保护和恢复。
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 去求助
来源期刊
Restoration Ecology
Restoration Ecology 环境科学-生态学
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
15.60%
发文量
226
审稿时长
12-24 weeks
期刊介绍: Restoration Ecology fosters the exchange of ideas among the many disciplines involved with ecological restoration. Addressing global concerns and communicating them to the international research community and restoration practitioners, the journal is at the forefront of a vital new direction in science, ecology, and policy. Original papers describe experimental, observational, and theoretical studies on terrestrial, marine, and freshwater systems, and are considered without taxonomic bias. Contributions span the natural sciences, including ecological and biological aspects, as well as the restoration of soil, air and water when set in an ecological context; and the social sciences, including cultural, philosophical, political, educational, economic and historical aspects. Edited by a distinguished panel, the journal continues to be a major conduit for researchers to publish their findings in the fight to not only halt ecological damage, but also to ultimately reverse it.
期刊最新文献
How does restoration ecology consider climate change uncertainties in forested ecosystems? Does decline and recovery process affect clonal and genetic diversity of a coastal plant population? Salt tolerance of native trees relevant to the restoration of degraded landscapes in the Monte region, Argentina Frequency of association: a key indicator for assessing livestock grazing effects on dryland plant interactions, applicable in restoration Low retention of restocked laboratory‐reared long‐spined sea urchins Diadema antillarum due to Spanish hogfish Bodianus rufus predation
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1