Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Drivers of seedling establishment success in dryland restoration efforts

  • Nancy Shackelford
  • , Gustavo B. Paterno
  • , Daniel E. Winkler
  • , Todd E. Erickson
  • , Elizabeth A. Leger
  • , Lauren N. Svejcar
  • , Martin F. Breed
  • , Akasha M. Faist
  • , Peter A. Harrison
  • , Michael F. Curran
  • , Qinfeng Guo
  • , Anita Kirmer
  • , Darin J. Law
  • , Kevin Z. Mganga
  • , Seth M. Munson
  • , Lauren M. Porensky
  • , R. Emiliano Quiroga
  • , Péter Török
  • , Claire E. Wainwright
  • , Ali Abdullahi
  • Matt A. Bahm, Elizabeth A. Ballenger, Nichole Barger, Owen W. Baughman, Carina Becker, Manuel Esteban Lucas-Borja, Chad S. Boyd, Carla M. Burton, Philip J. Burton, Eman Calleja, Peter J. Carrick, Alex Caruana, Charlie D. Clements, Kirk W. Davies, Balázs Deák, Jessica Drake, Sandra Dullau, Joshua Eldridge, Erin Espeland, Hannah L. Farrell, Stephen E. Fick, Magda Garbowski, Enrique G. de la Riva, Peter J. Golos, Penelope A. Grey, Barry Heydenrych, Patricia M. Holmes, Jeremy J. James, Jayne Jonas-Bratten, Réka Kiss, Andrea T. Kramer, Julie E. Larson, Juan Lorite, C. Ellery Mayence, Luis Merino-Martín, Tamás Miglécz, Suanne Jane Milton, Thomas A. Monaco, Arlee M. Montalvo, Jose A. Navarro-Cano, Mark W. Paschke, Pablo Luis Peri, Monica L. Pokorny, Matthew J. Rinella, Nelmarie Saayman, Merilynn C. Schantz, Tina Parkhurst, Eric W. Seabloom, Katharine L. Stuble, Shauna M. Uselman, Orsolya Valkó, Kari Veblen, Scott Wilson, Megan Wong, Zhiwei Xu, Katharine L. Suding
  • University of Victoria BC
  • University of Colorado Boulder
  • Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte
  • Technical University of Munich
  • United States Geological Survey
  • University of Western Australia
  • Kings Park Science
  • University of Nevada, Reno
  • United States Department of Agriculture
  • Flinders University
  • University of Tasmania
  • University of Wyoming
  • Anhalt University of Applied Sciences
  • University of Arizona
  • South Eastern Kenya University
  • Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria
  • Universidad Nacional de Catamarca
  • MTA-DE Lendület Functional and Restoration Ecology Research Group
  • Division of Water Resources
  • Hirola Conservation Programme
  • Natural Resources Conservation Service
  • U.S. Department of the Interior
  • The Nature Conservancy
  • University of Cape Town
  • University of Castilla-La Mancha
  • University of Northern British Columbia
  • Malta College of Arts, Science & Technology
  • Centre for Ecological Research
  • Ngunnawal Country
  • Great Ecology
  • German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig
  • Brandenburg University of Technology
  • City of Cape Town
  • Greening Australia
  • Stellenbosch University
  • California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
  • University of Nebraska at Kearney
  • Chicago Botanic Garden
  • University of Granada
  • New Zealand's Department of Conservation
  • Universidad Rey Juan Carlos
  • ÖMKi - Research Institute of Organic Agriculture
  • Hadison Park
  • Wolwekraal Conservation and Research Organisation (WCRO)
  • Utah State University
  • University of California at Riverside
  • Instituto Nacional de Investigación y Tecnología Agraria y Alimentaria
  • Colorado State University
  • Universidad Nacional de la Patagonia Austral
  • Western Cape Government
  • Bush Heritage Australia
  • University of Minnesota Twin Cities
  • Holden Arboretum
  • University of Regina
  • Federation University Australia
  • Nanjing University

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

191 Scopus citations

Abstract

Restoration of degraded drylands is urgently needed to mitigate climate change, reverse desertification and secure livelihoods for the two billion people who live in these areas. Bold global targets have been set for dryland restoration to restore millions of hectares of degraded land. These targets have been questioned as overly ambitious, but without a global evaluation of successes and failures it is impossible to gauge feasibility. Here we examine restoration seeding outcomes across 174 sites on six continents, encompassing 594,065 observations of 671 plant species. Our findings suggest reasons for optimism. Seeding had a positive impact on species presence: in almost a third of all treatments, 100% of species seeded were growing at first monitoring. However, dryland restoration is risky: 17% of projects failed, with no establishment of any seeded species, and consistent declines were found in seeded species as projects matured. Across projects, higher seeding rates and larger seed sizes resulted in a greater probability of recruitment, with further influences on species success including site aridity, taxonomic identity and species life form. Our findings suggest that investigations examining these predictive factors will yield more effective and informed restoration decision-making.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1283-1290
Number of pages8
JournalNature Ecology and Evolution
Volume5
Issue number9
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 2021

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

  1. SDG 13 - Climate Action
    SDG 13 Climate Action
  2. SDG 15 - Life on Land
    SDG 15 Life on Land

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Drivers of seedling establishment success in dryland restoration efforts'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this