ArticleLandscape ecology2025
Using old fields for new purposes: ecosystem service outcomes of restoring marginal agricultural land to forests.
Article in Landscape ecology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Context: Human activities, particularly intensive agriculture, have caused significant environmental degradation, reduced ecosystem diversity, and increased vulnerability to global change. Recent international policies, such as the Global Biodiversity Framework's 30 × 30 target, advocate for nature-based solutions (NbS) such as ecological restoration to address these impacts. In agricultural landscapes, however, there are concerns that restoration may impact food production. Objectives: We investigated how forest restoration, as an NbS, changes the supply of ecosystem services (ES), including potential trade offs with agricultural output. Using the Montérégie region of Québec (southeastern Canada) as a case study, we assessed the influence of restoration extent, spatial configuration, and the original agricultural site conditions on the ES outcomes. Methods: We modeled ES outcomes for seven ES (crop production, maple syrup production, deer hunting, water quality, carbon storage, pollination, and outdoor recreation) under nine scenarios, which varied by total amount of the landscape restored (3.3%, 10.8%, 30%) and initial conditions of the agricultural fields restored (randomly selected, degraded agricultural field, or abandoned agricultural field). Results: Our findings indicate that increasing the amount of land restored enhances provision of most ES, though improvement varied by service. The initial condition of restored sites minimally influences ES outcomes. However, the spatial pattern of restoration plays a significant role in determining ES delivery, as restored sites enhance most ES through spillover effects up to 500 m. Conclusion: This study underscores the potential for combining landscape ecology approaches and ES tools to forecast NbS outcomes and inform landscape planning. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10980-025-02121-0.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.