Abstract
AbstractTo date, degraded mangrove ecosystem restoration accomplished worldwide primarily aligns towards rehabilitation with monotypic plantations, while ecological restoration principles are rarely followed in these interventions. However, researchers admit that most of these initiatives' success rate is not appreciable often. An integrative framework of ecological restoration for degraded mangroves where site-specific observations could be scientifically rationalized, with co-located reference pristine mangroves as the target ecosystem to achieve is currently distinctively lacking. Through this experimental scale study, we studied the suitability of site-specific strategies to ecologically restore degraded mangrove patches vis-à-vis the conventional mono-species plantations in a highly vulnerable mangrove ecosystem in Indian Sundarbans. This comprehensive restoration framework was trialed in small discrete degraded mangrove patches spanning ~ 65 ha. Site-specific key restoration components applied are statistically validated through RDA analyses and Bayesian t-tests. 25 quantifiable metrics evaluate the restoration success of a ~ 3 ha degraded mangrove patch with Ridgeline distribution, Kolmogorov–Smirnov (K-S) tests, and Mahalanobis Distance (D2) measure to prove the site’s near-equivalence to pristine reference in multiple ecosystem attributes. This restoration intervention irrevocably establishes the greater potential of this framework in the recovery of ecosystem functions and self-sustenance compared to that of predominant monoculture practices for vulnerable mangroves.
Funder
Department of Biotechnology, Government of India; Science and Engineering Research Board, Department of Science and Technology, Government of India
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference133 articles.
1. Nelson, C. R. et al. Standards of Practice to Guide Ecosystem Restoration: A Contribution to the United Nations Decade on Ecosystem Restoration 2021–2030 (FAO, SER & Gland, IUCN CEM, 2024). https://doi.org/10.4060/cc9106en
2. Holling, C. S. & Gunderson, L. H. Resilience and adaptive cycles. In Panarchy: Understanding transformations in human and natural systems (eds Gunderson, L. H. & Holling, C. S.) 25–62 (Island Press, 2002).
3. Du Toit, J. T. & Pettorelli, N. The differences between rewilding and restoring an ecologically degraded landscape. J. Appl. Ecol. 56(11), 2467–2471. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.13487 (2019).
4. Gann, G. D. et al. International principles and standards for the practice of ecological restoration. Restor. Ecol. 27(S1), S1–S46. https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.13035 (2019).
5. FAO, SER & IUCN CEM. Standards of Practice to Guide Ecosystem Restoration. A Contribution to the United Nations Decade on Ecosystem Restoration. Summary Report (Rome, 2023). https://doi.org/10.4060/cc5223en.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献