TY - JOUR

T1 - Faunal response to revegetation in agricultural areas of Australia: A review

AU - Munro, Nicola T.

AU - Lindenmayer, David B.

AU - Fischer, Jörn

N1 - Cited By (since 1996): 19 Export Date: 18 February 2011 Source: Scopus

PY - 2007/12/1

Y1 - 2007/12/1

N2 - We reviewed the literature on fauna in revegetation in Australian agricultural areas. Of 27 studies, 22 examined birds, with few studies focusing on other faunal groups (four to six studies for each remaining group) and nine examined multiple groups. Existing evidence suggests that revegetation provides habitat for many species of bird and some arboreal marsupials. Species richness of birds was greater in revegetated areas that were large, wide, structurally complex, old and near remnant vegetation. Bats, small terrestrial mammals, reptiles and amphibians did not appear to benefit significantly from revegetation in the short term. Evidence to date suggests that revegetation is not a good replacement of remnant vegetation for many species. Key information gaps exist in the faunal response to (i) revegetation as it ages; (ii) different structural complexities of revegetation; (iii) revegetation that is composed of indigenous vs. non-indigenous plant species; and (iv) revegetation that is in riparian vs. non-riparian locations. In addition, little is known on the value of revegetation for declining or threatened fauna, or of the composition of fauna in revegetation. There is a need to better understand the balance between quantity of revegetation in the landscape, and the quality or complexity of revegetation at the patch scale. Based on current evidence, we recommend revegetation be conducted in patches that are large, wide and structurally complex to maximize the benefits to fauna.

AB - We reviewed the literature on fauna in revegetation in Australian agricultural areas. Of 27 studies, 22 examined birds, with few studies focusing on other faunal groups (four to six studies for each remaining group) and nine examined multiple groups. Existing evidence suggests that revegetation provides habitat for many species of bird and some arboreal marsupials. Species richness of birds was greater in revegetated areas that were large, wide, structurally complex, old and near remnant vegetation. Bats, small terrestrial mammals, reptiles and amphibians did not appear to benefit significantly from revegetation in the short term. Evidence to date suggests that revegetation is not a good replacement of remnant vegetation for many species. Key information gaps exist in the faunal response to (i) revegetation as it ages; (ii) different structural complexities of revegetation; (iii) revegetation that is composed of indigenous vs. non-indigenous plant species; and (iv) revegetation that is in riparian vs. non-riparian locations. In addition, little is known on the value of revegetation for declining or threatened fauna, or of the composition of fauna in revegetation. There is a need to better understand the balance between quantity of revegetation in the landscape, and the quality or complexity of revegetation at the patch scale. Based on current evidence, we recommend revegetation be conducted in patches that are large, wide and structurally complex to maximize the benefits to fauna.

KW - Habitat

KW - Plantation

KW - Restoration

KW - Revegetation

KW - Structural complexity

KW - Environmental planning

KW - Biology

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=35748970721&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - https://www.mendeley.com/catalogue/7155b618-032e-3c63-a775-42ee94a976b8/

U2 - 10.1111/j.1442-8903.2007.00368.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1442-8903.2007.00368.x

M3 - Scientific review articles

VL - 8

SP - 199

EP - 207

JO - Ecological Management and Restoration

JF - Ecological Management and Restoration

SN - 1442-7001

IS - 3

ER -