Restoration Ecology BIO 442/542 Fall 2004

Class meets: Tuesday-Thursday, 8:45 to 10:05 AM, Room LC11

Instructor: George Robinson, Associate Professor, Biological Sciences

BIO 253B Tel 442-4302

e-mail: grobins@albany.edu

Office Hours: Tuesday 10:30-noon, Thursday 10:30-noon, or by appointment

Required text: Restoration Ecology and Sustainable Development (Urbanska et al. Cambridge University Press, 1997, Paper edition 2000)

[Available at Mary Jane’s or Campus Bookstore]

Required supplemental readings: E-Reserves site (password TBA)

.

Grading: 100 points total

Two Exams (2 best scores from 3 exams given, including the final), 30 points each.

Topic Paper (Research Proposal for graduate students), 30 points.

Participation, 10 points.

Class and Laboratory Schedule

Day Date Topic/Assignments Readings_______

Tu 8/31 Course introduction

Nature versus artifice

Ecological principles and their application Handout

Th 9/2 Field trip on campus – DRESS FOR OUTDOORS

Tu 9/7 Land use change and restoration needs Ch 16, Part 1

Nature versus artifice discussion

Th 9/9 The science of restoration Ch 1-2, Part 2a,b

Substrates and soils

Tu 9/14 Substrates and soils Ch 4-6, Part 2b

Th 9/16 NO CLASS

Tu 9/21 Primary and secondary succession Ch 3, 4, Part 3

Th 9/23 Wetlands Ch 13, 14, Part 4

Tu 9/28 Riparian systems Ch 16, Part 4

Questions for Midterm #1 handed out

Th 9/30 Disturbance-dependent systems Ch 3, 9, Part 5

Tu 10/5 Midterm # 1 (one hour)

Th 10/7 Invasive species Part 6

Tu 10/12 Invasive species Part 6

Topic paper/proposal preparation

Th 10/14 Mutualisms: pollination, dispersal Ch 7, 11, Part 7

Tu 10/19 Mutualisms: pollination, dispersal Ch 7, 11, Part 7

Th 10/21 Genetic considerations Part 8

Tu 10/26 Urban ecosystems Part 9

Th 10/28 Choosing end points for restoration Ch 8, 9

Outline of research topic paper due

Questions for Midterm #2 handed out

Tu 11/2 Case studies Ch 9, 10, Part 10

Th 11/4 Midterm #2 (one hour)

Tu 11/9 Case studies Ch 9, 10, Part 10

Th 11/11 Landscape perspectives Part 11

Tu 11/16 Assessment and monitoring Ch 12, Part 12

Th 11/18 Identifying and addressing problems Ch 10, Part 13

Tu 11/23 Ethics, values, and the profession of restoration Part 14

Research topic papers/proposals due

Th 11/25 NO CLASS

Tu 11/30 Restoration economics, politics and policy Ch 15-17, Part 15

Th 12/2 Course wrap-up Discuss papers

Questions for Final Exam handed out

We 12/14 Final Exam 10:30 AM (one hour)

Examinations and assignments

1. Exams (60 pts.)

The two midterm exams and the final will be the same length and carry equal weight. Each will cover 1/3 of the course material. All three will have the following format:

• Half the exam will consist of short answers and definitions; half will consist of extended essay questions, drawn from lectures and readings covering the previous 1/3 of the course.
• One week prior to the exam you will be given a list of questions for preparation. These questions serve as study guides; if you can answer them, you will be well-prepared for the exam.
• From this list, 2 questions will be chosen for the exam, exactly as written.
• Most students will benefit by studying in groups. You are encouraged to discuss these questions with classmates, and draw from any available sources. Your instructor may be consulted for clarification only.
• During each exam, you will be on your own, with no notes allowed.

Your two best scores from the three exams will be counted. Make-up exams will not be given. If you miss either of the first two exams, you must take the third.

2. Topic Paper for Undergraduates (30 pts.) (Graduate students and interested undergraduates will have a different assignment — see below.)

This is a term paper reviewing research on one particular topic of plant ecology, using course material and focusing on primary literature. Choose a topic early in the semester. The topic is your choice, and this is a solo project. A topic outline must be submitted by the scheduled deadline, in order to receive feedback and assistance. The format is as follows:

• 10 pages, double-spaced, including references.
• Begin with a title, your name, course number and date.
• Pages must be numbered; staple pages in upper left hand corner.
• Use titles and subheadings to organize your writing.
• State the underlying scientific question clearly, and describe how it arose.
• Describe research methods used to probe the question, and their results.
• Draw your own conclusions, and suggest further research.
• Use the Latin binomial to introduce a species. Common names can be used thereafter.
• Use scientific units for all numerical values.
• Include a minimum of 10 references, using primary scientific papers. A list of appropriate journals and their call numbers can be found on our class EReserves site.
• Cite last names of authors and dates in parentheses; do not use footnotes.
• Try to use your references in a balanced way. Do not rely on one or two references to support most of your paper.
• For your bibliography, use a consistent style format. Choose one from a journal you like.
• Do not use direct quotations; always paraphrase. No exceptions. (Darwin, maybe.)
• Emphasize content over appearance. Keep paper use to a minimum. Plastic covers or color graphics get no extra credit.
• Graphs and tables are welcome, as long as you generated them and they are relevant to your topic. They can provide a useful way to summarize complex information.
• Do not include Internet downloads, no matter how pretty they may be.
• Grammar and spelling will be checked.

Your paper should be written for an audience of young scientists. Clarity and accuracy are most important, so avoid ambiguous phrases (e.g., “this shows that ...”), and make sure that your explanations and arguments are straightforward. If in doubt about any construction, read it aloud and decide whether improvements are required. Use active constructions whenever possible (e.g., instead of, “It has been shown by Smith and Jones (1966) that the ingredient responsible for skin rashes due to contact with poison ivy is urushiol,” write, “Urushiol is the ingredient responsible for skin rashes due to contact with poison ivy (Smith and Jones 1966).”

3. Participation (10 pts.)

You are expected to attend every class and participate actively. For a brief period during each lecture, we will discuss current events relevant to the course, and you are encouraged to introduce topics for discussion. Be prepared to briefly discuss your topic paper in class. If you are very shy, you can also participate by communicating with me outside the classroom.

How to get the very least out of this course

Some students turn in a poor performance unintentionally. Here are some tips that will help you with a deliberate plan to waste your own time and get a poor grade:

• Never read ahead. You can’t possibly understand anything in your textbook or other readings until your professor tells you what they mean.
• Do not join with other students to form study groups to prepare for exams. They will just pick your brains and waste your time.
• Skip the first exam. You don’t have to take it.
• Anonymity protects you. Arrive late, leave early, sit in the rear and keep quiet.
• Begin your topic paper the night before the due date. Don’t use an outline, just write it all at once, creatively.
• Rely exclusively on the Internet for research. Believe everything you read there.
• Better yet, find a paper that you can download and turn in. Your instructor won’t know the difference, and if you get caught what is the worst that can happen?

Graduate Student Research Proposals (30 pts.)

This assignment is an opportunity to explore possibilities if you haven’t begun research, or to develop new expertise, if you have. Be imaginative. You will be rewarded for creativity, but keep your methods practical and your approach realistic. The topic must be relevant to ecological restoration.

Format: In twenty or fewer pages (double-spaced, including maps, tables and figures, plus a bibliography) describe an original research project, designed to answer an ecological question of interest to the field of ecological restoration, as basic or applied as you wish. Include a brief Abstract, an Introduction presenting the research question, a detailed Methods section, and an Interpretation section, describing how possible outcomes would be evaluated, in light of the research question. When in doubt, keep it simple, to avoid confusing the reader (and yourself).

Budget: Include estimates for the major costs of your proposed studies, including salaries, and their total. A few numbers will suffice. Most projects are limited by budget constraints, and it is worth considering potential costs of the research you propose.

Preparation: Submit topics and outlines in advance. We will meet as a group to discuss proposals before and after the submission deadline. Plan to share your ideas and help others with comments and criticism. Guidelines for preparation will be distributed later. Undergraduates may choose this option instead of a topic paper, for extra credit — with instructor’s approval.

Additional readings list (REC = recommended; others are required)

NOTE: Other recommended and a few required readings may be added in lectures. Most required readings will be posted on our ULibrary EReserves site. Some recommended readings are available only on paper copies, available in the Library stacks or from you instructor.

Part 1 Land use change and restoration needs

Dobson, A.P., A.D. Bradshaw, and A.J.M. Baker. 1997. Hopes for the future: Restoration ecology and conservation biology. Science 277: 515-522.

Janzen, D.H. 1998. Gardenification of wildland nature and the human footprint. Science 279: 1312-1313.

REC Imhoff, M.L., L. Bounoua, T. Ricketts, C. Loucks, R. Harriss, and W.T. Lawrence. 2004. Global patterns in human consumption of net primary productivity. Nature 629: 871-873.

Part 2a The science of restoration

Davis, M.A., and L.B. Slobodkin. 2004. The science and values of restoration ecology. Restoration Ecology 12: 1-3.

Imhoff, M.L., L. Bounoua, T. Ricketts, C. Loucks, R. Harriss, and W.T. Lawrence. 2004. Global patterns in human consumption of net primary productivity. Nature 629: 871-873.

Winterhalder, Clewell, and Aronson. 2004. Values and science in restoration – a response to Davis and Slobodkin. Restoration Ecology 12: 4-7.

Part 2b Substrates and soils

REC Amaranthus, M.P., Trappe, J.M., Perry, D.A. 1993. Soil moisture, native revegetation, and Pinus lambertiana seedling survival, growth, and mycorrhiza formation following wildfire and grass seeding. Restoration Ecology: 188-195.

Lal, R. 2004. Soil carbon sequestration and impacts on global climate change and food security. Science 304: 1623-1627.

Wardle, D.A., R.D. Bardgett, J.K. Klironomos, H. Setälä, W.H. van der Putten, and D.H. Wall. 2004. Ecological linkages between aboveground and belowground biota. Science 304: 1629-1633.

REC Pennisi, E. 2004. The secret life of fungi. Science 304: 1620-1622.

Part 3 Soils and substrates

Allen, E.B., M.F. Allen, L. Egerton-Warburton, L. Corkidi, and A. Gomez-Pampa. 2003. Impacts of early- and late-seral mycorrhizae during restoration in seasonal tropical forest, Mexico. Ecological Applications 13: 1701-1717.

Craft, C., P. Megonigal, S. Broome, J. Stevenson, R. Freese, J. Cornell, L. Zheng, and J. Sacco. 2003. The pace of ecosystem development of constructed Spartina alterniflora salt marshes. Ecological Applications 13: 1417-1432.

REC Kettle, W.D., P.M. Rich, K. Kindscher, G.L .Pittman, and P. Fu. 2000. Land use history in ecosystem restoration: A 40-year study in the prairie-forest ecotone. Restoration Ecology 8: 307-317.

REC Tilman, D. 1987. Secondary succession and the pattern of plant dominance along experimental nitrogen gradients. Ecological Monographs 57: 189-214.

Part 4 Wetlands and riparian systems

Bertness, M., B.R. Silliman, and R. Jefferies. 2004. Salt marshes under siege. American Scientist 92: 54-61.

Craft, C., S. Broome, and C. Campbell. 2002. Fifteen years of vegetation and soil development after brackish water marsh creation. Restoration Ecology 10: 248-258.

REC Lowry, D.J. 1990. Restoration and creation of palustrine wetlands associated with riverine systems of the glaciated northeast. Pages 267-278 in: Kusler, J.A., Kentula, M.E. (Ed.), Wetland creation and restoration. Island Press, Boca Raton, Florida.

REC Maltby, E., Dugan, P.J. 1997. Wetland ecosystem protection, management, and restoration: an international perspective. Pages 29-46 in: Davis, S.M., Ogden, J.C. (Ed.), Everglades. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida.

Part 5 Disturbance-dependent systems

Seymour, R.S., A.S. White, and P.G. deMaynadier. 2002. Natural disturbance regimes in northeastern North America – evaluating silvicultural systems using natural scales and frequencies. Forest Ecology and Management 155: 357-367.

REC Sprugel, D.G. 1991. Disturbance, equilibrium, and environmental variability: What is 'natural' vegetation in a changing environment? Biological Conservation 58: 1-18.

Part 6 Invasive species

Brown, B.J., R.J. Mitchell, and S.A. Graham. 2002. Competition for pollination between an invasive species (purple loosestrife) and a native congener. Ecology 83: 2328-2336.

Henneman, M.L., and J. Memmott. 2001. Infiltration of a Hawaiian community by introduced biological control agents. Science 293: 1314-1316.

Lugo, A.E. 2004. The outcome of alien tree invasions in Puerto Rico. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 2: 256-273.

Torchin, M.E., and C.E. Mitchell. 2004. Parasites, pathogens, and invasions by plants and animals. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 2: 183-190.

REC Zink, T.A., M.F. Allen, B. Heindl-Tenhunen, and E.B. Allen. 1995. The effect of a disturbance corridor on an ecological reserve. Restoration Ecology 3: 304-310.

REC Minchinton, T.E., and M.D. Bertness. Disturbance-mediated competition and the spread of Phragmites australis in a coastal marsh. Ecological Applications 13: 1400-1416.

Part 7 Mutualisms

Da Silva, J.M.C., C. Uhl, and G. Murray. 1996. Plant succession, landscape management, and the ecology of frugivorous birds in abandoned Amazonian pastures. Conservation Biology 10: 491-503.

Wunderle, J.M. 1997. The role of animal seed dispersal in accelerating native forest regeneration on degraded tropical lands. Forest Ecology and Management 99: 223-235.

REC Holl, K.D. 1995. Nectar resources and their influence on butterfly communities on reclaimed coal surface mines. Restoration Ecology 3: 76-85.

Part 8 Genetic considerations

Jones, T.A. 2003. The restoration gene pool concept: Beyond the native versus non-native debate. Restoration Ecology 11: 281-290.

Lesica, P., Allendorf, F.W. 1999. Ecological genetics and the restoration of plant communities: mix or match? Restoration Ecology 7: 42-50.

Rice, K.J., and N.C. Emery. 2003. Managing microevolution: restoration in the face of global change. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. 1: 469-478.

REC Handel, S.N., Robinson, G.R., and Beattie, A.J. (1994) Biodiversity resources for ecological restoration. Restoration Ecology 2: 230-241.

REC Knapp, E.E., Rice, K.J. 1996. Genetic structure and gene flow in Elymus glaucus (blue wildrye): implications for native grassland restoration. Restoration Ecology 4: 1-10.

Part 9 Urban ecosystems

Bastin, L., and C.D. Thomas. 1999. The distribution of plant species in urban vegetation fragments. Landscape Ecology 14: 493-507.

Donnelly, R., and J.M. Marzluff. 2004. Importance of reserve size and landscape context to urban bird conservation. Conservation Biology 18: 733-745.

Paul, M.L., and J.L. Meyer. 2001. Streams in the urban landscape. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 32: 333-365.

Groffman, P.M., and Eight Others. 2003. Down by the riverside: Urban riparian ecology. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 1: 315-321.

REC Purcell, A.H., C. Friedrich, and V.H. Resh. 2002. An assessment of a small urban stream restoration project in northern California. Restoration Ecology 10: 685-694.

REC Novak, A.B., and Y.Q. Wang. 2004. Effects of suburban sprawl on Rhode Island’s forests: A Landsat view from 1972-1999. Northeastern Naturalist 11: 67-74.

Part 10 Case studies

Allen, W.H. 1988. Biocultural restoration of a tropical forest. BioScience 38: 156-160.

REC Clark, T.W. 1994. Restoration of the endangered black-footed ferret: a 20-year overview. Pages 272- 297 in: Bowles, M.L., Whelan, C.J. , Editor, Restoration of Endangered Species. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.

REC Holling, C.S., Gunderson, L.H., Walters, C.J. 1997. The structure and dynamics of the Everglade system: guidelines for ecosystem restoration. Pages 741-756 in: Davis, S.M., Ogden, J.C. (Ed.), Everglades. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida.

REC Matsil, M.A., Feller, M.J. 1996. Natural areas restoration in New York City. Restoration and Management Notes 13: 5-14.

Part 11 Landscape perspectives

Heilman, G.E. Jr., J.S. Strittholt, N.C. Slosser, and D.A. Dellasala. 2002. Forest fragmentation of the conterminous United States: Assessing forest intactness through road density and spatial characteristics. BioScience 52: 411-422.

Robinson, G.R. and Handel, S.N. 2000. Spatial and temporal patterns of recruitment in an urban woodland restoration. Ecological Applications 10:174-188.

REC White, P.S. 1996. Spatial and biological scales in reintroduction. Pages 49-86 in: Falk, D.A., Millar, C.I., Olwell, M. (Ed.), Restoring Diversity. Island Press, Washington DC.

Part 12 Assessment and monitoring

Mas, A.H., and T.V. Dietsch. 2003. An index of management intensity for coffee agroecosystems to evaluate butterfly species richness. Ecological Applications 13: 1491-1501.

REC Brown, S.C. 1999. Vegetation similarity and avifauna food value of restored and natural marshes in northern New York. Restoration Ecology 7: 56-68.

REC Keller, W., Yan, N.D. 1998. Biological recovery from lake acidification: zooplankton communities as a model of patterns and processes. Restoration Ecology 6: 364-375.

Part 13 Identifying and addressing problems

Kisecker, J.M., L.K. Belden, K. Shea, and M.J. Rubbo. 2004. Amphibian decline and emerging diseases. American Scientist 92: 139-147.

Longcore, T., and C. Rich. 2004. Ecological light pollution. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 2: 181-199.

Pederson, B.A., and B.S. Wallis. 2004. Effects of white-tailed deer herbivory on forest gap dynamics in a wildlife preserve, Pennsylvania, USA. Natural Areas Journal 24: 81-94.

Schindler, D.W. 1997. Commentary. Liming to restore acidified lakes and streams: A typical approach to restoring damaged ecosystems? Restoration Ecology 5: 1-6.

Part 14 Ethics, values, and the profession of restoration

Hobbs, R.J. (and Five Commentators) 2004. Restoration ecology: The challenge of social values and expectations. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 2: 43-48.

Pimm, S.L., and 32 Others. 2001. Can we defy nature's end? Science 293: 2207-2208.

REC Elliot, R. 1997. Naturalness, intrinsic value and restoration ecology. Naturalness and restoration ecology. Pages 116-161 in: Faking Nature. T.J. International Ltd, Padstow, Cornwall.

Part 15 Restoration economics, politics and policy

REC Willard, D.E., Klarquist, J. 1995. Mitigation banks: a strategy for sustainable ecosystem function. Pages 97-131 in: Cairns, J. Jr., (Ed.), Rehabilitating damaged ecosystems. CRC Press, Inc., Boca Raton, Florida.

REC Janzen, D.H. 1992. The Neotropics. Restoration and Management Notes 10: 8-13.

REC Noss, R.F. 1991. Wilderness recovery: Thinking big in restoration ecology. The Environmental Professional 13: 225-234.

Ecological principles with application to Restoration Ecology

1. Ecological restoration aims to recapitulate natural ecosystems, complex mixes of biotic and abiotic components, through which energy flows and nutrients cycle. Ecosystems are the sum of interrelationships among their components (soil, water, nutrients, producers, consumers, decomposers).

2. The functions of an ecosystem (photosynthesis, production, predation, decomposition, nutrient cycling) can be studied independently of ecosystem structure (species diversity, populations dynamics, interspecific interactions), although function and structure are not independent.

3. Ecosystems tend toward maturity, as they pass from less complex to more complex states. Early stages are characterized by relatively high net energy flow per unit of biomass and high net production. Later stages are characterized by low net energy flow per unit biomass and low net production, as most of the energy goes into maintenance.

4. When an ecosystem is chronically disturbed, or exploited, organizational maturity declines. After disturbance, structural properties usually take longer to restore than functional properties.

5. The basic structural assemblage of an ecosystem is the population, a group of individuals of the same species lineage that live in proximity and share genes.

6. There appear to be limits to the similarity among co-existing species.

7. Natural populations tend to oscillate in size, and the lifetime of an average population is brief, relative to evolutionary time. Small populations tend to fail more often than large populations. Dispersal appears to be necessary for long-term survival of a species.

8. Species interact as individuals and populations; interactions can be positive (mutualistic) or negative (antagonistic). Restoration projects often fail because negative interactions are overwhelming or positive interactions are missing.

9. Environmental changes and fluctuations (e.g., climate, interspecific interactions, resource depletion) drive population oscillations, and act as selective pressures upon the population. Populations that survive environmental change often evolve, with changes in gene frequencies that can lead to the formation of new ecological species.

10. Ecological communities (assemblages of species, often defined according to a trophic level) can be durable or short-lived. Their co-existence may depend on environmental stability (old growth forests, salt marshes) or environmental variability (fire-dependent communities).

11. Ecosystems with more species are more likely to contain more “winners,” more species that can respond positively to environmental change, including the ability to rebound more quickly when exploited. Simplified, homogenized ecosystems, such as those that contain a few common “weedy” species, are more prone to a change or loss of function.

12. A key difference between agriculture and ecological restoration is that restoration aims to produce self-sustaining ecosystems that do not require extensive management