Indicators of restoration success based on plants and

animals

Research supported by:

SECIL – Companhia Geral

de Cal e Cimento

COST ES1104 - Training School: Indicators of Desertification: ear ly warning signsLisbon, 19-23 May 2014

Teresa Mexia, Alice Nunes, Otília Correiatmmexia@fc.ul.pt

CBA – Centro de Biologia Ambiental

Faculdade de Ciências da Universidade de Lisboa

Introduction

Restoration success evaluation

Allows improvements in restoration strategies and the identification of “final” situations

initial goals are achieved (faster) and are more cost-effective

Ecological restoration is the process of assisting the recovery of an ecosystem that has been degraded, damaged, or destroyed. (SER 2004).

Most studies used to focus on plant communities (and soils), however more integrative

approaches have advantages and are becoming more common.

Animals play an essential role on several

ecosystem functions and mechanisms (e.g.

seed dispersal, polinization, soil modifications)

© T. Mexia, 2014

Improve the traditional vegetation-directed success evaluation by adding an animal group, without increasing its complexity and resource demand.

Main goal:

Introduction

- Plants

- Animals

- Beetles

- Small mammals

Task 1

Task 2

Task 3

Two levels:

Common problems: time, resources, experts, money...

© T. Mexia, 2014

Methods

Serra da Arrábida, Portugal

• Natural Park• Natura 2000 site Arrábida-Espichel• well conserved Mediterranean woodland (sub-humid Mediterranean climate)

� High ecological and scenic value:

� Long tradition in limestone quarrying

Maquis (dominated by evergreen sclerophyllous shrubs)

ICNF

Study area:SECIL-Outão quarry

• Active since 1904 (cement plant)

© T. Mexia, 2014

Methods

• complete removal of soil and vegetation (and fauna)

• alteration of original topography• major visual impact

Open quarries One of the most degraded areas to restore

Study area: SECIL-Outão quarry

© T. Mexia, 2014

Methods

Study area: SECIL-Outão quarry

P1

P2

P3Natural area Extraction Restoration (c.30yr)

Rehabilitation actions since 1983:

• a layer of marl is placed in each platform

• plantation of autochthonous woody species

Adjacent natural vegetation (>50 years)

- Planted in the 80’s

- Planted in the 90’s

- Planted in the 2000’s

4 study sites:

• 1 reference site

• 3 sites with different ages

NV

P80

P90

P00© T. Mexia, 2014

Methods

� 15 plots (9m 2) per site:• trees, shrubs and herbs cover• woody species cover, density and maximum height

� 3 plots (0,25m 2) for each 9m2 plot:• herb species and woody seedlings density

Vegetation sampling

© T. Mexia, 2014

Methods

� 15 pitfalls per site� trap content was collected twice a month (3 months)� specimens were sorted and identified :

• to family level (Order Coleoptera)• to species level (Family Carabidae)

� 30 Sherman traps per site� capture-recapture method� 1 trapping period per month (5 days each, 3 months)

Epigean beetles

Small mammals

Animals sampling

© T. Mexia, 2014

Results

PlantsTask 1

� 78 species

� 69 species found in the quarry, 54 natural colonizers

� Similar total plant cover in all sites

• Reference: mainly shrub species

• Older planted sites: shrub and tree species

Reference

reference

P90

> age© T. Mexia, 2014

Sites

P00 P90 P80 NV

Sobs 23 23 22 32

S 6.40±1.64a 5.87±1.64a 8.13±2.17a 12.33±3.06b

H’ 1.36±0.35a 1.06±0.23a 1.24±0.35a 1.89±0.17b

Results

Beetles

� 37 families, 32 families in planted sites – all natural

colonizers

� higher number of families and diversity in the reference site

� all trophic groups represented in planted sites

� increase in abundance with time

Reference> ageRef.> age

Task 2

© T. Mexia, 2014

� 28 species, 19 in planted sites – all natural colonizers

� higher abundance and number of species in the reference site

� most species represented by one or two individuals (20 species)

Results

Beetles – CarabidaeTask 2

Reference Reference

Species richness Abundance

> age > age

© T. Mexia, 2014

- Apodemus sylvaticus

- Crocidura russula

- Mus spretus

- Mus domesticus 2 individuals only

� 4 species:

Small mammalsTask 3

Results

All common species in Arrábida

© T. Mexia, 2014

� Apodemus sylvaticus

• most abundant species

• found in all planted sites

Small mammalsTask 3

Results

� Crocidura russula

• mainly found on the reference site

• planted sites: only in P90 (higher

cover of small shrubs)

� Mus spretus

• found on the reference site

• planted sites: only in the more recent P00

(higher cover of herbs) © T. Mexia, 2014

� Apodemus sylvaticus

• most abundant species

• found in all planted sites

Small mammalsTask 3

Results

Reference> age

March April May

© T. Mexia, 2014

� Mus spretus

Small mammalsTask 3

Results

• found on the reference site

• planted sites: only in the more recent P00 (higher cover of herbs)

Reference> age

March April May

© T. Mexia, 2014

� Crocidura russula

• mainly found on the reference site

• planted sites: only in P90 (higher cover of

small shrubs)

Small mammalsTask 3

Results

March April May

Reference> age

© T. Mexia, 2014

• total vegetation

cover

• decrease in herbs

cover

• woody species (both

planted and natural colonizers)

• abundance

• most families found in

all sites

• all trophic groups

• all species found in the

quarry

• presence and

abundance related with plant cover

• herbs species and

cover

• higher tree cover in

planted sites (non

native Pinus halepensis)

• higher diversity in

reference

• families composition

• not all habitat

requirements seemed to

be present

Plants Small mammals

Development towards the reference

However...

Main conclusions

Beetles

© T. Mexia, 2014

- Information on natural colonization

- Trends in abundance over

time- Some insights on trophic

structure

Main conclusions

Main goal:

3 months of field work:

Small mammals

Beetles

Family level id.

Carabids -species level id.

- Information on natural colonization- Most species represented by 1 or 2 specimens

- Information on natural colonization

- More time needed to set aside population fluctuations

Good complementary group – most informative and practical

Improve the traditional vegetation-directed success evaluation by adding an animal group, without increasing its complexity and resource demand.

© T. Mexia, 2014

Acknowledgements

SECIL

Prof. Otília Correia

Prof. Artur Serrano

Prof. Margarida Santos-Reis

Prof. António Mira

Ana Galantinho

Alice Nunes, Graça Oliveira

Israel Silva, Carlos Aguiar e Mário Boieiro

Alexandra Silva