IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i9p5421-d806694.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Shifting Limitations to Restoration across Dryland Ecosystems in Hawaiʻi

Author

Listed:
  • Erin J. Questad

    (Biological Sciences Department, California State Polytechnic University, Pomona, CA 91768, USA)

  • Amanda Uowolo

    (Institute of Pacific Islands Forestry, USDA Forest Service, Hilo, HI 96720, USA)

  • Samuel Brooks

    (Institute of Pacific Islands Forestry, USDA Forest Service, Hilo, HI 96720, USA
    Bureau of Land Management, Colton, OR 97017, USA)

  • Susan Cordell

    (Institute of Pacific Islands Forestry, USDA Forest Service, Hilo, HI 96720, USA)

Abstract

Hawaiian dryland ecosystems are important for global biodiversity conservation and contain numerous species threatened with extinction. Over the past century, wildfire frequency and size have increased dramatically because of invasion by fire-promoting non-native invasive species, greatly threatening these ecosystems. Native species restoration is a tool that can disrupt the cycle of increased fire and invasion in lowland dry forest communities, but restoration prescriptions have not been studied systematically in other dryland plant communities. We examined the restoration of three Hawaiian dryland plant communities (a high-productivity Diospyros sandwicensis and Metrosideros polymorpha lowland dry forest (HP), a moderate-productivity Myoporum sandwicense and Sophora chrysophylla dry forest/woodland (MP), and a low-productivity Dodonaea viscosa shrubland (LP)), using a community-assembly framework to understand the abiotic and biotic constraints to species establishment and growth in each community. Because active restoration methods are often needed, at both high and low levels of productivity, we also examined restoration treatments and outcomes across the three sites, which spanned a gradient of rainfall and substrate age. At each site, we used the same factorial field experiment with three factors: habitat quality (high or low), weed control (yes or no), and species addition (none, seeding, or outplanting). Outplants (cohort 1) and seeds were added in the winter of 2009–2010, and outplants were added again in March 2011 (cohort 2). Dispersal limitation was apparent at the LP and HP sites, but was not observed in the MP site, which had, overall, greater native diversity and abundance. Outplant survival was greater in high-quality habitats at the HP site, likely due to reduced abiotic stress. Invasive species were found in greater abundance in certain types of microsites at the LP and MP sites, suggesting that shade or topography can be used to plan restoration and weed-control activities. Overall, active restoration methods improved restoration outcomes at the high- and low-productivity sites, and less so at the moderately productive site. Weed removal and outplanting were effective restoration prescriptions at the LP and HP sites, and habitat quality could also be used to increase survival at the HP site. Active restoration could be a lower priority for moderately invaded, moderate-productivity communities, which have the capability to maintain a native ecosystem state.

Suggested Citation

  • Erin J. Questad & Amanda Uowolo & Samuel Brooks & Susan Cordell, 2022. "Shifting Limitations to Restoration across Dryland Ecosystems in Hawaiʻi," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-15, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:9:p:5421-:d:806694
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/9/5421/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/9/5421/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Julio Campo & Christian P. Giardina & Rodolfo Dirzo, 2023. "Tropical Dry Forest Restoration in an Era of Global Change: Ecological and Social Dimensions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-5, February.

    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:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:9:p:5421-:d:806694. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.