Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38469050›Full record

ArticleEcology and evolution2024

Rewilding soil and litter invertebrates and fungi increases decomposition rates and alters detritivore communities.

Peter Contos, Nicholas P Murphy, Zachary J Kayll, Tamara Morgan, Joshua J Vido, Orsi Decker, Heloise Gibb

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecology and evolution, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Peter ContosDepartment of Environment and Genetics, Centre for Future Landscapes, School of Agriculture, Biomedicine, and Environment La Trobe University Melbourne Victoria Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0006-5790
Nicholas P MurphyDepartment of Environment and Genetics, Centre for Future Landscapes, School of Agriculture, Biomedicine, and Environment La Trobe University Melbourne Victoria Australia.
Zachary J KayllDepartment of Environment and Genetics, Centre for Future Landscapes, School of Agriculture, Biomedicine, and Environment La Trobe University Melbourne Victoria Australia.
Tamara MorganDepartment of Environment and Genetics, Centre for Future Landscapes, School of Agriculture, Biomedicine, and Environment La Trobe University Melbourne Victoria Australia.
Joshua J VidoDepartment of Environment and Genetics, Centre for Future Landscapes, School of Agriculture, Biomedicine, and Environment La Trobe University Melbourne Victoria Australia.
Orsi DeckerDepartment of Environment and Genetics, Centre for Future Landscapes, School of Agriculture, Biomedicine, and Environment La Trobe University Melbourne Victoria Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6280-697X
Heloise GibbDepartment of Environment and Genetics, Centre for Future Landscapes, School of Agriculture, Biomedicine, and Environment La Trobe University Melbourne Victoria Australia.
La Trobe University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Habitat degradation and associated reductions in ecosystem functions can be reversed by reintroducing or 'rewilding' keystone species. Rewilding projects have historically targeted restoration of processes such as grazing regimes or top-down predation effects. Few projects focus on restoring decomposition efficiency, despite the pivotal role decomposition plays in global carbon sequestration and nutrient cycling. Here, we tested whether rewilding entire communities of detritivorous invertebrates and fungi can improve litter decomposition efficiency and restore detritivore communities during ecological restoration. Rewilding was conducted by transplanting leaf litter and soil, including associated invertebrate and fungal communities from species-rich remnant sites into species-poor, and geographically isolated, revegetated farmland sites in a temperate woodland region of southeastern Australia. We compared communities in sites under the following treatments: remnant (conservation area and source of litter transplant), rewilded revegetation (revegetated farmland site with litter transplant) and control revegetation (revegetated site, no transplant). In one 'before' and three 'after' sampling periods, we measured litter decomposition and the abundance and diversity of detritivorous invertebrates and fungi. We quantified the effect of detritivores on the rate of litter decomposition using piecewise Structural Equation Modelling. Decomposition was significantly faster in rewilding sites than in both control and remnant areas and was largely driven by a greater abundance of invertebrate detritivores. Similarly, the abundance of invertebrate detritivores in rewilding revegetation sites exceeded the level of remnant communities, whereas there was little difference between control and remnant sites. In contrast, rewilding did not increase saprotrophic fungi relative abundance/diversity and there was no strong relationship between decomposition and fungal diversity. Our findings suggest the relatively simple act of transplanting leaf litter and soil can increase functional efficiency during restoration and alter community composition. Our methods may prove important across a range of contexts where other restoration methods have failed to restore ecosystem processes to pre-degradation levels.

Indexed as

decompositionecological restorationecosystem processeslitter transplantsrewildingsoil inoculation

Identifiers

PMID38469050
PMCPMC10925487
OpenAlexW4392764493

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.