IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v13y2024i12p2023-d1530527.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Vegetation Restoration Patterns Influence the Supply and Interrelations of Grassland Ecosystem Services in Karst Desertification Control

Author

Listed:
  • Shuzhen Song

    (College of Tourism Management, Guizhou University of Commerce, Guiyang 550014, China
    School of Karst Science, Guizhou Normal University, Guiyang 550025, China
    State Engineering Technology Institute for Karst Desertification Control, Guiyang 550025, China)

  • Xingyan Chen

    (School of Karst Science, Guizhou Normal University, Guiyang 550025, China
    State Engineering Technology Institute for Karst Desertification Control, Guiyang 550025, China)

  • Yuehua Song

    (School of Karst Science, Guizhou Normal University, Guiyang 550025, China
    State Engineering Technology Institute for Karst Desertification Control, Guiyang 550025, China)

  • Yongkuan Chi

    (School of Karst Science, Guizhou Normal University, Guiyang 550025, China
    State Engineering Technology Institute for Karst Desertification Control, Guiyang 550025, China)

Abstract

An appropriate vegetation restoration pattern is crucial for maintaining and enhancing ecosystem functions and services in karst rocky desertification control areas. However, it is still unclear whether different vegetation restoration patterns will aggravate the trade-off of grassland ecosystem services in this area. This study focuses on grassland ecosystems in the karst desertification control area, comparing artificial restoration measures ( Dactylis glomerata single-species sowing grassland, DG; Lolium perenne single-species sowing grassland, LP; Lolium perenne + Trifolium repens mixed-species sowing grassland, LT) with natural restoration measures (NG). Seven ecosystem services (forage yield, soil retention, soil water conservation, carbon fixation and release, soil carbon storage, soil nutrient retention, and biodiversity conservation) as well as total ecosystem services were quantified using field monitoring data. The relationships between these services were evaluated through Spearman correlation analysis. The results showed that different vegetation restoration patterns significantly influenced the provisioning, regulating, and supporting services of the grassland ecosystem ( p < 0.001). Three types of relationships were observed (trade-off, synergy, and neutral), but the trade-off relationship was not significant ( p > 0.05). The total ecosystem service of LT (0.79) was significantly higher than that of NG (0.21), DG (0.36), and LP (0.41), with a significant synergy observed between soil nutrient conservation, forage yield, and carbon sequestration and oxygen release ( p < 0.05). Therefore, LT is considered the best vegetation restoration practice for the karst rocky desertification control area compared with other patterns. This study provides theoretical guidance for vegetation restoration in degraded karst ecosystems.

Suggested Citation

  • Shuzhen Song & Xingyan Chen & Yuehua Song & Yongkuan Chi, 2024. "Vegetation Restoration Patterns Influence the Supply and Interrelations of Grassland Ecosystem Services in Karst Desertification Control," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-16, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:12:p:2023-:d:1530527
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/12/2023/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/12/2023/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Costanza, Robert & de Groot, Rudolf & Braat, Leon & Kubiszewski, Ida & Fioramonti, Lorenzo & Sutton, Paul & Farber, Steve & Grasso, Monica, 2017. "Twenty years of ecosystem services: How far have we come and how far do we still need to go?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(PA), pages 1-16.
    2. Anu Eskelinen & W. Stanley Harpole & Maria-Theresa Jessen & Risto Virtanen & Yann Hautier, 2022. "Light competition drives herbivore and nutrient effects on plant diversity," Nature, Nature, vol. 611(7935), pages 301-305, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Aryal, Kishor & Maraseni, Tek & Apan, Armando, 2023. "Examining policy−institution−program (PIP) responses against the drivers of ecosystem dynamics. A chronological review (1960–2020) from Nepal," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    2. Liu, Duan & Tang, Runcheng & Xie, Jun & Tian, Jingjing & Shi, Rui & Zhang, Kai, 2020. "Valuation of ecosystem services of rice–fish coculture systems in Ruyuan County, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    3. Yajing Shao & Xuefeng Yuan & Chaoqun Ma & Ruifang Ma & Zhaoxia Ren, 2020. "Quantifying the Spatial Association between Land Use Change and Ecosystem Services Value: A Case Study in Xi’an, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-20, May.
    4. Pietrzyk-Kaszyńska, Agata & Olszańska, Agnieszka & Rechciński, Marcin & Tusznio, Joanna & Grodzińska-Jurczak, Małgorzata, 2022. "Divergent or convergent? Prioritization and spatial representation of ecosystem services as perceived by conservation professionals and local leaders," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    5. Robbie Maris & Mark Holmes, 2023. "Economic Growth Theory and Natural Resource Constraints: A Stocktake and Critical Assessment," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 56(2), pages 255-268, June.
    6. van der Hoff, Richard & Nascimento, Nathália & Fabrício-Neto, Ailton & Jaramillo-Giraldo, Carolina & Ambrosio, Geanderson & Arieira, Julia & Afonso Nobre, Carlos & Rajão, Raoni, 2022. "Policy-oriented ecosystem services research on tropical forests in South America: A systematic literature review," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    7. Joel C. Creed & Laura Sol Aranda & Júlia Gomes de Sousa & Caio Barros Brito do Bem & Beatriz Sant’Anna Vasconcelos Marafiga Dutra & Marianna Lanari & Virgínia Eduarda de Sousa & Karine M. Magalhães & , 2023. "A Synthesis of Provision and Impact in Seagrass Ecosystem Services in the Brazilian Southwest Atlantic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(20), pages 1-19, October.
    8. Wanxu Chen & Guangqing Chi & Jiangfeng Li, 2020. "Ecosystem Services and Their Driving Forces in the Middle Reaches of the Yangtze River Urban Agglomerations, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(10), pages 1-19, May.
    9. O'Sullivan, Jane N., 2020. "The social and environmental influences of population growth rate and demographic pressure deserve greater attention in ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    10. Nicolás Ruiz, Néstor & Suárez Alonso, María Luisa & Vidal-Abarca, María Rosario, 2021. "Contributions of dry rivers to human well-being: A global review for future research," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    11. Moreno-Llorca, R. & Vaz, A.S. & Herrero, J. & Millares, A. & Bonet-García, F.J. & Alcaraz-Segura, D., 2020. "Multi-scale evolution of ecosystem services’ supply in Sierra Nevada (Spain): An assessment over the last half-century," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    12. Xiaoyu Li & Shudan Gong & Qingdong Shi & Yuan Fang, 2023. "A Review of Ecosystem Services Based on Bibliometric Analysis: Progress, Challenges, and Future Directions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(23), pages 1-18, November.
    13. Daniels, Silvie & Bellmore, J. Ryan & Benjamin, Joseph R. & Witters, Nele & Vangronsveld, Jaco & Van Passel, Steven, 2018. "Quantification of the Indirect Use Value of Functional Group Diversity Based on the Ecological Role of Species in the Ecosystem," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 181-194.
    14. Lau, Jacqueline D. & Hicks, Christina C. & Gurney, Georgina G. & Cinner, Joshua E., 2018. "Disaggregating ecosystem service values and priorities by wealth, age, and education," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PA), pages 91-98.
    15. Shujun Liu & Xinzhuan Yao & Degang Zhao & Litang Lu, 2021. "Evaluation of the ecological benefits of tea gardens in Meitan County, China, using the InVEST model," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(5), pages 7140-7155, May.
    16. Dai, Xuhuan & Li, Bo & Zheng, Hua & Yang, Yanzheng & Yang, Zihan & Peng, Chenchen, 2023. "Can sedentarization decrease the dependence of pastoral livelihoods on ecosystem services?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    17. Egor Selivanov & Petra Hlaváčková, 2021. "Methods for monetary valuation of ecosystem services: A scoping review," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 67(11), pages 499-511.
    18. Wei Jiang & Rainer Marggraf, 2021. "Making Intangibles Tangible: Identifying Manifestations of Cultural Ecosystem Services in a Cultural Landscape," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-14, December.
    19. Xinxin Fu & Xiaofeng Wang & Jitao Zhou & Jiahao Ma, 2021. "Optimizing the Production-Living-Ecological Space for Reducing the Ecosystem Services Deficit," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-17, September.
    20. Pierre E. Galand & Hans-Joachim Ruscheweyh & Guillem Salazar & Corentin Hochart & Nicolas Henry & Benjamin C. C. Hume & Pedro H. Oliveira & Aude Perdereau & Karine Labadie & Caroline Belser & Emilie B, 2023. "Diversity of the Pacific Ocean coral reef microbiome," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-13, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:12:p:2023-:d:1530527. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.