Search for: All records

Although decades of research suggest that higher species richness improves ecosystem functioning and stability, planted forests are predominantly monocultures. To determine whether diversification of plantations would enhance aboveground carbon storage, we systematically reviewed over 11,360 publications, and acquired data from a global network of tree diversity experiments. We compiled a maximum dataset of 79 monoculture to mixed comparisons from 21 sites with all variables needed for a meta-analysis. We assessed aboveground carbon stocks in mixed-species planted forests vs. (a) the average of monocultures, (b) the best monoculture, and (c) commercial species monocultures, and examined potential mechanisms driving differences in carbon stocks between mixtures and monocultures. On average, we found that aboveground carbon stocks in mixed planted forests were 70% higher than the average monoculture, 77% higher than commercial monocultures, and 25% higher than the best performing monocultures, although the latter was not statistically significant. Overyielding was highest in four-species mixtures (richness range 2–6 species), but otherwise none of the potential mechanisms we examined (nitrogen-fixer present vs. absent; native vs. non-native/mixed origin; tree diversity experiment vs. forestry plantation) consistently explained variation in the diversity effects. Our results, predominantly from young stands, thus suggest that diversification could be a very promising solution for increasing the carbon sequestration of planted forests and represent a call to action for more data to increase confidence in these results and elucidate methods to overcome any operational challenges and costs associated with diversification. 

Tree plantings have the potential to increase species diversity and sequester carbon, yet planting failure and early mortality pose significant barriers to their success. Biodiversity‐ecosystem function theory suggests that diverse tree plantings could improve survival outcomes through either the portfolio or facilitation effect, yet there remain few tests of this hypothesis. Here, we use a large‐scale tree‐diversity experiment (BiodiversiTREE), with monitoring of nearly 8,000 individual trees to test whether (1) tree species diversity increases survival rates, (2) tree diversity stabilizes the risk of planting failure, and/or (3) diversity effects are important relative to other common drivers of seedling mortality (e.g. herbivory and soil moisture). We found that only species identity significantly impacted the likelihood of survival, not plant functional diversity nor plot species richness nor phylogenetic diversity. There were minor effects of elevation and soil moisture on survival, but both explained a very small amount of variation in the data (r²_marg ≤ 0.011). Higher tree diversity did, however, strongly reduce variation in survival across plots, with nearly 2‐fold higher coefficients of variation in monocultures (30.4%, 28.4–32.6% 95% bootstrapped confidence interval) compared to 4‐ (16.3%, 13.8–18.7%) and 12‐species plots (12.8%, 10.8–14.7%). Ultimately, our results suggest that employing diverse species can lower the risk of planting failure (i.e. the portfolio effect), but that species selection still plays a large role in early establishment. 

Large-scale global reforestation goals have been proposed to help mitigate climate change and provide other ecosystem services. To explore reforestation potential in the United States, we used GIS analyses, surveys of nursery managers and foresters, and literature synthesis to assess the opportunities and challenges associated with meeting proposed reforestation goals. We considered a scenario where 26 million hectares (64 million acres) of natural and agricultural lands are reforested by 2040 with 30 billion trees at an estimated cost of $33 ($24–$53) billion USD. Cost per hectare will vary by region, site conditions, and other factors. This scenario would require increasing the number of tree seedlings produced each year by 1.7 billion, a 2.3-fold increase over current nursery production levels. Additional investment (not included in the reforestation cost estimate) will be needed to expand capacity for seed collection, seedling production, workforce development, and improvements in pre- and post-planting practices. Achieving this scenario will require public support for investing in these activities and incentives for landowners.