Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorMehlhoop, Anne Catriona
dc.contributor.authorSkrindo, Astrid Brekke
dc.contributor.authorEvju, Marianne
dc.contributor.authorHagen, Dagmar
dc.coverage.spatialsoutheast Norwayen_US
dc.date.accessioned2022-08-04T11:14:30Z
dc.date.available2022-08-04T11:14:30Z
dc.date.created2022-08-01T14:55:28Z
dc.date.issued2022
dc.identifier.issn1402-2001
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11250/3010135
dc.description.abstractAims: The area influenced by road construction is large, and measures to re-establish vegetation in disturbed areas are routinely carried out to reduce impacts on biodiversity. However, goals of mitigation measures are often unclear, and the effects on biodiversity of mitigation measures is rarely monitored. We assessed the effects of different revegetation treatments (natural revegetation, seeding, planting) on vegetation development along highways, and on wildlife crossings of different age. Location: Highways in southeast Norway. Methods: We collected data on vascular plant species, vegetation cover and height, soil grain size and organic matter content, and compared the species composition, richness, and diversity of the restored sites with reference plots in the adjacent target vegetation (mature forest). Results: Our results show a significantly higher richness and diversity in restored plots compared to reference plots, and an increased similarity of species composition over time. Species composition was most similar to reference plots in naturally revegetated plots and seeding seemed to reduce both species and functional trait composition similarity. Conclusions: It is unrealistic that the defined target vegetation will develop on restored sites. Defining a realistic and achievable target vegetation for each road construction project in relation to land use, adjacent vegetation type and successional stage, as e.g., forest edge instead of forest, would be useful. While this may require more effort for management it will translate to higher mitigation success. ecological restoration, mitigation measures, natural recovery, revegetation, road construction, vegetation developmenten_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.rightsNavngivelse-Ikkekommersiell 4.0 Internasjonal*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/deed.no*
dc.subjectecological restorationen_US
dc.subjectmitigation measuresen_US
dc.subjectnatural recoveryen_US
dc.subjectrevegetationen_US
dc.subjectroad constructionen_US
dc.subjectvegetation developmenten_US
dc.titleBest practice—Is natural revegetation sufficient to achieve mitigation goals in road construction?en_US
dc.title.alternativeBest practice—Is natural revegetation sufficient to achieve mitigation goals in road construction?en_US
dc.typePeer revieweden_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionen_US
dc.rights.holder© 2022 The Authorsen_US
dc.subject.nsiVDP::Zoologiske og botaniske fag: 480en_US
dc.subject.nsiVDP::Zoology and botany: 480en_US
dc.source.journalApplied Vegetation Scienceen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/avsc.12673
dc.identifier.cristin2040413
dc.relation.projectNorges forskningsråd: 272413en_US
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
cristin.qualitycode1


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel

Navngivelse-Ikkekommersiell 4.0 Internasjonal
Med mindre annet er angitt, så er denne innførselen lisensiert som Navngivelse-Ikkekommersiell 4.0 Internasjonal