Aamir Shehzad Khan, Mélina Guêné-Nanchen, Line Rochefort
{"title":"揭开泥炭地的故事:评估加拿大东部受干扰的矿化泥炭地的恢复结果和驱动因素","authors":"Aamir Shehzad Khan, Mélina Guêné-Nanchen, Line Rochefort","doi":"10.1016/j.ecoleng.2024.107496","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The peatland restoration method, the Moss Layer Transfer Technique (MLTT), has been successfully developed and implemented to restore <em>Sphagnum</em>-dominated peatlands in North America. The efficiency of an adapted version of the MLTT using fen plants for minerotrophic (fen) peatland restoration has shown mixed results, especially regarding the recovery of bryophytes. Additionally, due to differences in peat extraction histories, disturbances, restoration techniques, and desired ecological outcomes, European approaches cannot be directly applied to North American peatlands. It has been suggested that active rewetting alone could ensure fen plant regeneration post-restoration. As there is a growing interest in the minerotrophic peatland restoration, fen restoration methods after peat extraction needs to be refined, and the management process stands in need of new approaches. This study presents the first case of an ecosystem-scale fen restoration project in Canada at an industrial peat extraction site. It was restored in the province of Quebec in 2009, testing three different restoration approaches, including active rewetting only – REW, active rewetting, and peat profiling with vegetation removal – REW + PRO, and a combination of active rewetting, peat profiling with vegetation removal, plus mechanical reintroduction of fen plant material (MLTT) – REW + PRO + PLANT. This study aims to compare the pre- and post-restoration (13 years) plant communities using a BACI design (Before and After Control Impact). It focuses on the recovery of bryophyte carpets and evaluates the return of fen species as well as peatland generalists, marsh-swamps, and upland species. At the whole site level, the rewetting action had a prominent impact and major success in terms of an increase in the richness and frequency of peatland vascular plant species, but the recruitment of peatland bryophytes and particularly brown mosses was relatively much less successful. Active rewetting proved relatively practicable compared to the other two restoration methods, but to enhance its efficiency, it should not result in flooding, which could subsequently lead to helophytisation. The different vegetation outcomes of the restoration were influenced by governing factors such as processes associated with restoration methods (e.g., rewetting, pre-existing vegetation removal, and donor material reintroduction) and site-specific physio-chemical and environmental conditions. Our 13 years post-restoration surveys highlight that there are still large knowledge gaps and that increased, robust research into fen restoration is needed.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":11490,"journal":{"name":"Ecological Engineering","volume":"212 ","pages":"Article 107496"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Unfolding a peatland’s story: Assessing the restoration outcomes and driving factors from a disturbed minerotrophic peatland in Eastern Canada\",\"authors\":\"Aamir Shehzad Khan, Mélina Guêné-Nanchen, Line Rochefort\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ecoleng.2024.107496\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>The peatland restoration method, the Moss Layer Transfer Technique (MLTT), has been successfully developed and implemented to restore <em>Sphagnum</em>-dominated peatlands in North America. The efficiency of an adapted version of the MLTT using fen plants for minerotrophic (fen) peatland restoration has shown mixed results, especially regarding the recovery of bryophytes. Additionally, due to differences in peat extraction histories, disturbances, restoration techniques, and desired ecological outcomes, European approaches cannot be directly applied to North American peatlands. It has been suggested that active rewetting alone could ensure fen plant regeneration post-restoration. As there is a growing interest in the minerotrophic peatland restoration, fen restoration methods after peat extraction needs to be refined, and the management process stands in need of new approaches. This study presents the first case of an ecosystem-scale fen restoration project in Canada at an industrial peat extraction site. It was restored in the province of Quebec in 2009, testing three different restoration approaches, including active rewetting only – REW, active rewetting, and peat profiling with vegetation removal – REW + PRO, and a combination of active rewetting, peat profiling with vegetation removal, plus mechanical reintroduction of fen plant material (MLTT) – REW + PRO + PLANT. This study aims to compare the pre- and post-restoration (13 years) plant communities using a BACI design (Before and After Control Impact). It focuses on the recovery of bryophyte carpets and evaluates the return of fen species as well as peatland generalists, marsh-swamps, and upland species. At the whole site level, the rewetting action had a prominent impact and major success in terms of an increase in the richness and frequency of peatland vascular plant species, but the recruitment of peatland bryophytes and particularly brown mosses was relatively much less successful. Active rewetting proved relatively practicable compared to the other two restoration methods, but to enhance its efficiency, it should not result in flooding, which could subsequently lead to helophytisation. The different vegetation outcomes of the restoration were influenced by governing factors such as processes associated with restoration methods (e.g., rewetting, pre-existing vegetation removal, and donor material reintroduction) and site-specific physio-chemical and environmental conditions. Our 13 years post-restoration surveys highlight that there are still large knowledge gaps and that increased, robust research into fen restoration is needed.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11490,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ecological Engineering\",\"volume\":\"212 \",\"pages\":\"Article 107496\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ecological Engineering\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925857424003215\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/10 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecological Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925857424003215","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
泥炭地恢复方法——苔藓层转移技术(MLTT)已被成功开发并实施,以恢复北美泥炭地的泥炭地。利用沼泽植物恢复泥炭地的改良版MLTT的效率显示出喜忧参半的结果,特别是在苔藓植物恢复方面。此外,由于泥炭提取历史、干扰、恢复技术和期望的生态结果的差异,欧洲方法不能直接应用于北美泥炭地。已有研究表明,单靠主动复湿可以保证植物恢复后的再生。随着人们对矿化泥炭地恢复的兴趣日益浓厚,泥炭提取后的泥炭恢复方法需要改进,管理过程需要新的途径。本研究提出了一个生态系统规模的泥炭恢复项目在加拿大的工业泥炭提取现场的第一个案例。它于2009年在魁北克省进行了修复,测试了三种不同的修复方法,包括仅主动再湿(REW),主动再湿和泥炭剖面与植被去除(REW + PRO),以及主动再湿,泥炭剖面与植被去除(MLTT)的组合- REW + PRO + plant。本研究旨在使用BACI设计(控制影响前后)比较修复前后(13年)的植物群落。它侧重于苔藓地毯的恢复,并评估沼泽物种以及泥炭地通用物种,沼泽沼泽和高地物种的回归。在整个立地水平上,复湿作用对泥炭地维管植物种类的丰富度和频率的增加有显著的影响和主要的成功,但对泥炭地苔藓植物,特别是棕色苔藓植物的补充相对不太成功。与其他两种恢复方法相比,主动再润湿被证明是相对可行的,但为了提高其效率,它不应导致水淹,否则可能导致植生。植被恢复的不同结果受到一些控制因素的影响,如与恢复方法相关的过程(例如,再湿润、原有植被移除和供体材料的重新引入)以及特定地点的物理化学和环境条件。我们在恢复后的13年调查强调,仍然存在很大的知识差距,需要对沼泽恢复进行更多、更有力的研究。
Unfolding a peatland’s story: Assessing the restoration outcomes and driving factors from a disturbed minerotrophic peatland in Eastern Canada
The peatland restoration method, the Moss Layer Transfer Technique (MLTT), has been successfully developed and implemented to restore Sphagnum-dominated peatlands in North America. The efficiency of an adapted version of the MLTT using fen plants for minerotrophic (fen) peatland restoration has shown mixed results, especially regarding the recovery of bryophytes. Additionally, due to differences in peat extraction histories, disturbances, restoration techniques, and desired ecological outcomes, European approaches cannot be directly applied to North American peatlands. It has been suggested that active rewetting alone could ensure fen plant regeneration post-restoration. As there is a growing interest in the minerotrophic peatland restoration, fen restoration methods after peat extraction needs to be refined, and the management process stands in need of new approaches. This study presents the first case of an ecosystem-scale fen restoration project in Canada at an industrial peat extraction site. It was restored in the province of Quebec in 2009, testing three different restoration approaches, including active rewetting only – REW, active rewetting, and peat profiling with vegetation removal – REW + PRO, and a combination of active rewetting, peat profiling with vegetation removal, plus mechanical reintroduction of fen plant material (MLTT) – REW + PRO + PLANT. This study aims to compare the pre- and post-restoration (13 years) plant communities using a BACI design (Before and After Control Impact). It focuses on the recovery of bryophyte carpets and evaluates the return of fen species as well as peatland generalists, marsh-swamps, and upland species. At the whole site level, the rewetting action had a prominent impact and major success in terms of an increase in the richness and frequency of peatland vascular plant species, but the recruitment of peatland bryophytes and particularly brown mosses was relatively much less successful. Active rewetting proved relatively practicable compared to the other two restoration methods, but to enhance its efficiency, it should not result in flooding, which could subsequently lead to helophytisation. The different vegetation outcomes of the restoration were influenced by governing factors such as processes associated with restoration methods (e.g., rewetting, pre-existing vegetation removal, and donor material reintroduction) and site-specific physio-chemical and environmental conditions. Our 13 years post-restoration surveys highlight that there are still large knowledge gaps and that increased, robust research into fen restoration is needed.
期刊介绍:
Ecological engineering has been defined as the design of ecosystems for the mutual benefit of humans and nature. The journal is meant for ecologists who, because of their research interests or occupation, are involved in designing, monitoring, or restoring ecosystems, and can serve as a bridge between ecologists and engineers.
Specific topics covered in the journal include: habitat reconstruction; ecotechnology; synthetic ecology; bioengineering; restoration ecology; ecology conservation; ecosystem rehabilitation; stream and river restoration; reclamation ecology; non-renewable resource conservation. Descriptions of specific applications of ecological engineering are acceptable only when situated within context of adding novelty to current research and emphasizing ecosystem restoration. We do not accept purely descriptive reports on ecosystem structures (such as vegetation surveys), purely physical assessment of materials that can be used for ecological restoration, small-model studies carried out in the laboratory or greenhouse with artificial (waste)water or crop studies, or case studies on conventional wastewater treatment and eutrophication that do not offer an ecosystem restoration approach within the paper.