A synthesis of evidence for the effects of interventions to conserve peatland vegetation : overview and critical discussion

IF 1.5 4区 环境科学与生态学 Q4 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Mires and Peat Pub Date : 2019-01-01 DOI:10.19189/MAP.2018.OMB.379
N. G. Taylor, P. Grillas, Fennessy, E. Goodyer, Llb Graham, E. Karofeld, R. Lindsay, David A. Locky, N. Ockendon, A. Rial, S.. Ross, Rebecca K. Smith, R. Diggelen, J. Whinam, W. Sutherland
{"title":"A synthesis of evidence for the effects of interventions to conserve peatland vegetation : overview and critical discussion","authors":"N. G. Taylor, P. Grillas, Fennessy, E. Goodyer, Llb Graham, E. Karofeld, R. Lindsay, David A. Locky, N. Ockendon, A. Rial, S.. Ross, Rebecca K. Smith, R. Diggelen, J. Whinam, W. Sutherland","doi":"10.19189/MAP.2018.OMB.379","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Peatlands are valuable but threatened ecosystems. Intervention to tackle direct threats is often necessary, but should be informed by scientific evidence to ensure it is effective and efficient. Here we discuss a recent synthesis of evidence for the effects of interventions to conserve peatland vegetation - a fundamental component of healthy, functioning peatland ecosystems. The synthesis is unique in its broad scope (global evidence for a comprehensive list of 125 interventions) and practitioner-focused outputs (short narrative summaries in plain English, integrated into a searchable online database). Systematic literature searches, supplemented by recommendations from an international advisory board, identified 162 publications containing 296 distinct tests of 66 of the interventions. Most of the articles studied open bogs or fens in Europe or North America. Only 36 interventions were supported by sufficient evidence to assess their overall effectiveness. Most of these interventions (85 %) had positive effects, overall, on peatland vegetation - although this figure is likely to have been inflated by publication bias. We discuss how to use the synthesis, critically, to inform conservation decisions. Reflecting on the content of the synthesis we make suggestions for the future of peatland conservation, from monitoring over appropriate timeframes to routinely publishing results to build up the evidence base.","PeriodicalId":48721,"journal":{"name":"Mires and Peat","volume":"24 1","pages":"1-21"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"19","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mires and Peat","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.19189/MAP.2018.OMB.379","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 19

Abstract

Peatlands are valuable but threatened ecosystems. Intervention to tackle direct threats is often necessary, but should be informed by scientific evidence to ensure it is effective and efficient. Here we discuss a recent synthesis of evidence for the effects of interventions to conserve peatland vegetation - a fundamental component of healthy, functioning peatland ecosystems. The synthesis is unique in its broad scope (global evidence for a comprehensive list of 125 interventions) and practitioner-focused outputs (short narrative summaries in plain English, integrated into a searchable online database). Systematic literature searches, supplemented by recommendations from an international advisory board, identified 162 publications containing 296 distinct tests of 66 of the interventions. Most of the articles studied open bogs or fens in Europe or North America. Only 36 interventions were supported by sufficient evidence to assess their overall effectiveness. Most of these interventions (85 %) had positive effects, overall, on peatland vegetation - although this figure is likely to have been inflated by publication bias. We discuss how to use the synthesis, critically, to inform conservation decisions. Reflecting on the content of the synthesis we make suggestions for the future of peatland conservation, from monitoring over appropriate timeframes to routinely publishing results to build up the evidence base.
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
保护泥炭地植被的干预措施效果的证据综合:概述和批判性讨论
泥炭地是有价值但受到威胁的生态系统。应对直接威胁的干预往往是必要的,但应以科学证据为依据,以确保干预的有效性和效率。在这里,我们讨论了最近对保护泥炭地植被的干预措施的影响的综合证据-泥炭地生态系统健康,功能的基本组成部分。该综合报告的独特之处在于其范围广泛(125项干预措施综合清单的全球证据)和以从业者为重点的产出(简明英语的简短叙述摘要,整合到可搜索的在线数据库中)。系统的文献检索,辅以国际咨询委员会的建议,确定了162份出版物,其中包含66种干预措施的296种不同试验。大多数文章研究的是欧洲或北美的开阔沼泽或沼泽。只有36项干预措施有足够的证据来评估其总体有效性。总的来说,这些干预措施中的大多数(85%)对泥炭地植被产生了积极影响——尽管这个数字可能因发表偏倚而被夸大了。我们讨论了如何批判性地使用合成来为保护决策提供信息。考虑到综合报告的内容,我们对泥炭地保护的未来提出了建议,从在适当的时间框架内进行监测到定期发布结果以建立证据基础。
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
Mires and Peat
Mires and Peat ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES-
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
16.70%
发文量
0
审稿时长
33 weeks
期刊介绍: Mires and Peat is a peer-reviewed internet journal focusing specifically on mires, peatlands and peat. As a truly “free-to-users” publication (i.e. NO CHARGES to authors OR readers), it is immediately accessible to readers and potential authors worldwide. It is published jointly by the International Peatland Society (IPS) and the International Mire Conservation Group (IMCG). Mires and Peat is indexed by Thomson Reuters Web of Science (2017 Impact Factors: 1.326 [two-year] and 1.638 [five-year]), Elsevier Scopus, EBSCO Environment Complete, CABI Abstracts, CSA Proquest (including their Aquatic Science and Fisheries Abstracts ASFA, Ecology, Entomology, Animal Behavior, Aqualine and Pollution databases) and Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ). Mires and Peat also participates in the CABI Full Text Repository, and subscribes to the Portico E-journal Preservation Service (LTPA). Mires and Peat publishes high-quality research papers on all aspects of peatland science, technology and wise use, including: ecology, hydrology, survey, inventory, classification, functions and values of mires and peatlands; scientific, economic and human aspects of the management of peatlands for agriculture, forestry, nature conservation, environmental protection, peat extraction, industrial development and other purposes; biological, physical and chemical characteristics of peat; and climate change and peatlands. Short communications and review articles on these and related topics will also be considered; and suggestions for special issues of the Journal based on the proceedings of conferences, seminars, symposia and workshops will be welcomed. The submission of material by authors and from countries whose work would otherwise be inaccessible to the international community is particularly encouraged.
期刊最新文献
Towards net zero CO2 in 2050: an emission reduction pathway for organic soils in Germany Ecohydrological analysis of a South African through-flow mire: Vankervelsvlei revisited Soil CO2 emissions and net primary production of an oil palm plantation established on tropical peat Plant community assembly is predicted by an environmental gradient in high-altitude wetlands in the semiarid western bolivian andes Moth Responses to forest-to-bog restoration
×
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