ORCID Profile
0000-0001-5444-2777
Current Organisation
Western Sydney University
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 20-09-2022
DOI: 10.1002/PPP3.10329
Abstract: Mixed species plantings present an attractive alternative to monoculture reforestation through their added benefits to bio ersity. Yet there is ambiguity in the use of the term ‘bio ersity’ in carbon and bio ersity markets, which may create perverse outcomes when designing schemes and projects. Here, we review how the concept of bio ersity is defined and applied in reforestation projects, and restoration more broadly. Improved transparency around the use of the term bio ersity is urgently needed to provide rigour in emerging market mechanisms, which seek to benefit the environment and people. Reforestation to capture and store atmospheric carbon is increasingly ch ioned as a climate change mitigation policy response. Reforestation plantings have the potential to provide conservation co‐benefits when erse mixtures of native species are planted, and there are growing attempts to monetise bio ersity benefits from carbon reforestation projects, particularly within emerging carbon markets. But what is meant by ‘bio erse’ across different stakeholders and groups implementing and overseeing these projects and how do these perceptions compare with long‐standing scientific definitions? Here, we discuss approaches to, and definitions of, bio ersity in the context of reforestation for carbon sequestration. Our aim is to review how the concept of bio ersity is defined and applied among stakeholders (e.g., governments, carbon certifiers and farmers) and rights holders (i.e., First Nations people) engaging in reforestation, and to identify best‐practice methods for restoring bio ersity in these projects. We find that some stakeholders have a vague understanding of ersity across varying levels of biological organisation (genes to ecosystems). While most understand that bio ersity underpins ecosystem functions and services, many stakeholders may not appreciate the difficulties of restoring bio ersity akin to reference ecosystems. Consequently, bio ersity goals are rarely explicit, and project goals may never be achieved because the levels of restored bio ersity are inadequate to support functional ecosystems and desired ecosystem services. We suggest there is significant value in integrating bio ersity objectives into reforestation projects and setting specific restoration goals with transparent reporting outcomes will pave the way for ensuring reforestation projects have meaningful outcomes for bio ersity, and legitimate incentive payments for bio ersity and natural capital accounting.
Publisher: Center for Open Science
Date: 21-08-2023
Abstract: 1.Native seed supply is a major limiting factor in ecological restoration and revegetation worldwide. New techniques for maximising seed use efficiency are urgently needed to help meet global targets for nature repair in the UN Decade on Restoration. Seed encapsulation (‘coating’ seeds within or on extruded pellets) is a widely used technology in agriculture that can reduce seed wastage and improve plant recruitment, and holds similar promise for restoration. 2.We quantify how seed mass shapes the performance of native seeds (total % seedling emergence) when encapsulated in extruded pellets designed for revegetation. Two glasshouse trials were undertaken using seeds from 30 native Australian plant species. We hypothesised that seed mass would be positively associated with seedling emergence when seeds are placed in the centre of pellets relative to bare-seeded controls, given that larger seeds are typically adapted for conditions mimicked by this encapsulation technique (e.g., darkness, increased depth) and that smaller-seeded species will perform better when positioned at the pellet periphery relative to the centre, where there is more access to light and less exogenous material for smaller seedlings to penetrate.3.Seed mass predicted seedling emergence from the pellet centre (R2 = 0.32 p = 0.002), but not for bare-seeded controls (p = 0.33). Only two large-seeded species (Acacia decurrens and implexa) emerged from the pellet centre in proportions comparable to bare-seeded controls (p = 0.241 and 0.126, respectively). In a subsequent trial, sowing small-seeded species at the pellet periphery significantly increased seedling emergence by 67%, relative to sowing at the pellet centre (p & 0.001 for all species). For half of the species trialled at the pellet periphery, seedling emergence was comparable to that of bare seeds.4.Synthesis and applications. Seed trait data can help make seed encapsulation technology fit-for-purpose in native plant revegetation. Given the precariousness of bio erse seed supply globally, we advocate for encapsulation that protects seeds but takes account of natural variation in seed mass to maximise emergence outcomes for native species.
No related grants have been discovered for Paige Elizabeth Lieurance.