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

Clive McAlpine, Carla Catterall, Ralph MAC NALLY, David Lindenmayer, J Reid, Karen Holl, Andrew Bennett, Rebecca Runting, Kerrie Wilson, Richard Hobbs, Leonie Seabrook, Shaun Cunningham, Atte Moilanen, Martine Maron, Luke Shoo, Ian Lunt, Peter Vesk, Libby Rumpff, Tara Martin, James Thomson & 1 others Hugh Possingham

    Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

    51 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    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
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)37-45
    Number of pages9
    JournalFrontiers in Ecology and the Environment
    Volume14
    Issue number1
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2016

    Fingerprint

    ecological restoration
    biodiversity
    animal
    cultural differences
    animals
    restoration ecology
    ecologists
    twenty first century
    ecosystem function
    planning
    economics
    ecosystems
    agricultural land
    restoration
    methodology

    Cite this

    McAlpine, Clive ; Catterall, Carla ; MAC NALLY, Ralph ; Lindenmayer, David ; Reid, J ; Holl, Karen ; Bennett, Andrew ; Runting, Rebecca ; Wilson, Kerrie ; Hobbs, Richard ; Seabrook, Leonie ; Cunningham, Shaun ; Moilanen, Atte ; Maron, Martine ; Shoo, Luke ; Lunt, Ian ; Vesk, Peter ; Rumpff, Libby ; Martin, Tara ; Thomson, James ; Possingham, Hugh. / Integrating plant- and animal-based perspectives for more effective restoration of biodiversity. In: Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. 2016 ; Vol. 14, No. 1. pp. 37-45.
    @article{a4207da85ad341d2ac54318f66ca47c1,
    title = "Integrating plant- and animal-based perspectives for more effective restoration of biodiversity",
    abstract = "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",
    author = "Clive McAlpine and Carla Catterall and {MAC NALLY}, Ralph and David Lindenmayer and J Reid and Karen Holl and Andrew Bennett and Rebecca Runting and Kerrie Wilson and Richard Hobbs and Leonie Seabrook and Shaun Cunningham and Atte Moilanen and Martine Maron and Luke Shoo and Ian Lunt and Peter Vesk and Libby Rumpff and Tara Martin and James Thomson and Hugh Possingham",
    year = "2016",
    doi = "10.1002/16-0108.1",
    language = "English",
    volume = "14",
    pages = "37--45",
    journal = "Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment",
    issn = "1540-9295",
    publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
    number = "1",

    }

    McAlpine, C, Catterall, C, MAC NALLY, R, Lindenmayer, D, Reid, J, Holl, K, Bennett, A, Runting, R, Wilson, K, Hobbs, R, Seabrook, L, Cunningham, S, Moilanen, A, Maron, M, Shoo, L, Lunt, I, Vesk, P, Rumpff, L, Martin, T, Thomson, J & Possingham, H 2016, 'Integrating plant- and animal-based perspectives for more effective restoration of biodiversity', Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 37-45. https://doi.org/10.1002/16-0108.1

    Integrating plant- and animal-based perspectives for more effective restoration of biodiversity. / McAlpine, Clive; Catterall, Carla; MAC NALLY, Ralph; Lindenmayer, David; Reid, J; Holl, Karen; Bennett, Andrew; Runting, Rebecca; Wilson, Kerrie; Hobbs, Richard; Seabrook, Leonie; Cunningham, Shaun; Moilanen, Atte; Maron, Martine; Shoo, Luke; Lunt, Ian; Vesk, Peter; Rumpff, Libby; Martin, Tara; Thomson, James; Possingham, Hugh.

    In: Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, Vol. 14, No. 1, 2016, p. 37-45.

    Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Integrating plant- and animal-based perspectives for more effective restoration of biodiversity

    AU - McAlpine, Clive

    AU - Catterall, Carla

    AU - MAC NALLY, Ralph

    AU - Lindenmayer, David

    AU - Reid, J

    AU - Holl, Karen

    AU - Bennett, Andrew

    AU - Runting, Rebecca

    AU - Wilson, Kerrie

    AU - Hobbs, Richard

    AU - Seabrook, Leonie

    AU - Cunningham, Shaun

    AU - Moilanen, Atte

    AU - Maron, Martine

    AU - Shoo, Luke

    AU - Lunt, Ian

    AU - Vesk, Peter

    AU - Rumpff, Libby

    AU - Martin, Tara

    AU - Thomson, James

    AU - Possingham, Hugh

    PY - 2016

    Y1 - 2016

    N2 - 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

    AB - 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

    U2 - 10.1002/16-0108.1

    DO - 10.1002/16-0108.1

    M3 - Review article

    VL - 14

    SP - 37

    EP - 45

    JO - Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment

    JF - Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment

    SN - 1540-9295

    IS - 1

    ER -