Andrew F. Bennett

Integrating plant- and animal- based perspectives for more effective restoration of biodiversity

Ecological restoration of modified and degraded landscapes is an important challenge for the 21st century, with potential for major gains in the recovery of biodiversity. However, there is a general lack of agreement between plant- and animal-based approaches to restoration, both in theory and practice. Here, we review these approaches, identify limitations from failing to effectively integrate their different perspectives, and suggest ways to improve outcomes for biodiversity recovery in agricultural landscapes. We highlight the need to strengthen collaboration between plant and animal ecologists, to overcome disciplinary and cultural differences, and to achieve a more unified approach to restoration ecology. Explicit consideration of key ecosystem functions, the need to plan at multiple spatial and temporal scales, and the importance of plant–animal interactions can provide a bridge between plant- and animal-based methods. A systematic approach to restoration planning is critical to achieving effective biodiversity outcomes while meeting long-term social and economic needs.

Setting Conservation Targets for Managed Forest Landscapes: Thresholds, incidence functions, and species-specific cues: responses of woodland birds to landscape structure in south-eastern Australia

Looking out from a vantage point across a large tract of forest gives a superficial impression of uniformity: the crowns of canopy trees follow the folds and contours of the landscape to provide a continuous cover of wooded vegetation. But this visual appearance belies the truth: forested landscapes are far from uniform. On closer examination, they comprise a complex mosaic of different vegetation types and and stands of different age-classes, differing structural features, and modified to a varying extent by human land-uses. Forests have a critical role in the conservation of biodiversity throughout the world (Peterken 1996; Laurance and Bierregard 1997; Lindenmayer and Franklin 2002) and a key feature contributing to their conservation value is the response of forest biota to the heterogeneity inherent in forested landscapes (Lindenmayer et al. 2006). Consequently, an understanding of the implications of landscape structure for the maintainance of species and ecological processes is an important foundation for forest management and biodiversity conservation.

Ecological Resistance – Why Mechanisms Matter: A Reply to Sundstrom et al.

How do ecological systems respond when faced with a disturbance? Connell and Ghedini [1] suggested that the ability to anticipate and to manage such responses could benefit from studies that explicitly investigate processes that limit change in ecological communities; that is, processes that enhance resistance to disturbance. They [1] highlighted compensatory effects as a suite of processes that not only buffer against change to species diversity (i.e., density and functional compensation; see review in [2]) but can also buffer against structural change.

The effect of prescribed burning on plant rarity in a temperate forest

Abstract Rare species can play important functional roles, but human‐induced changes to disturbance regimes, such as fire, can inadvertently affect these species. We examined the influence of prescribed burns on the recruitment and diversity of plant species within a temperate forest in southeastern Australia, with a focus on species that were rare prior to burning. Floristic composition was compared among plots in landscapes before and after treatment with prescribed burns differing in the extent of area burnt and season of burn (before–after, control‐impact design). Floristic surveys were conducted before burns, at the end of a decade of drought, and 3 years postburn. We quantified the effect of prescribed burns on species grouped by their frequency within the landscape before burning (common, less common, and rare) and their life‐form attributes (woody perennials, perennial herbs or geophytes, and annual herbs). Burn treatment influenced the response of rare species. In spring‐burn plots, the recruitment of rare annual herbs was promoted, differentiating this treatment from both autumn‐burn and unburnt plots. In autumn‐burn plots, richness of rare species increased across all life‐form groups, although composition remained statistically similar to control plots. Richness of rare woody perennials increased in control plots. For all other life‐form and frequency groups, the floristic composition of landscapes changed between survey years, but there was no effect of burn treatment, suggesting a likely effect of rainfall on species recruitment. A prescribed burn can increase the occurrence of rare species in a landscape, but burn characteristics can affect the promotion of different life‐form groups and thus affect functional diversity. Drought‐breaking rain likely had an overarching effect on floristic composition during our study, highlighting that weather can play a greater role in influencing recruitment and diversity in plant communities than a prescribed burn.

Linking species richness and size diversity in birds and fishes

1979 ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

Linear habitats in rural landscapes have complementary roles in bird conservation

Linear strips of vegetation (e.g., hedges, roadsides) are characteristic of rural environments worldwide. Different types of linear features have distinct structure and landscape context, suggesting they each may offer unique opportunities for conservation in modified landscapes. We compared the avifauna of 76 streamside (riparian) sites and 33 sites in roadside vegetation—two distinctive types of linear features of rural landscapes in southern Australia. There was a marked difference in the composition of the avifauna between these linear features, reflecting their individual context within the landscape. For all response groups—woodland bird species, non-woodland species, waterbirds—riparian vegetation supported a greater species richness per site, and greater cumulative richness across multiple sites, than did roadside vegetation. For woodland species, the assemblage of greatest conservation concern, richness in both riparian and roadside sites increased with increasing width, and decreased with increasing abundance of an aggressive avian competitor. The ubiquity of linear features worldwide means that measures that enhance their conservation value will have widespread benefits. Our results demonstrate that: (1) linear features offer habitat for a broad range of species in rural environments; (2) by supporting distinct assemblages, different types of linear features have complementary roles in nature conservation; (3) wider linear features have a positive influence on species that require vegetated cover; and (4) the fauna of linear features are vulnerable to biotic influences, in this case a native avian competitor.