The conservation of skin, leather and related materials is an area that, until now, has had little representation by the written word in book form. Marion Kite and Roy Thomson, of the Leather ...Conservation Centre, have prepared a text which is both authoritative and comprehensive, including contributions from the leading specialists in their fields, such as Betty Haines, Mary Lou Florian, Ester Cameron and Jim Spriggs.The book covers all aspects of Skin and Leather preservation, from Cuir Bouillie to Bookbindings. There is significant discussion of the technical and chemical elements necessary in conservation, meaning that professional conservators will find the book a vital part of their collection. As part of the Butterworth-Heinemann Black series, the book carries the stamp of approval of the leading figures in the world of Conservation and Museology, and as such it is the only publication available on the topic carrying this immediate mark of authority.
Abstract Resin composites have become the first choice for direct posterior restorations and are increasingly popular among clinicians and patients. Meanwhile, a number of clinical reports in the ...literature have discussed the durability of these restorations over long periods. In this review, we have searched the dental literature looking for clinical trials investigating posterior composite restorations over periods of at least 5 years of follow-up published between 1996 and 2011. The search resulted in 34 selected studies. 90% of the clinical studies indicated that annual failure rates between 1% and 3% can be achieved with Class I and II posterior composite restorations depending on several factors such as tooth type and location, operator, and socioeconomic, demographic, and behavioral elements. The material properties showed a minor effect on longevity. The main reasons for failure in the long term are secondary caries, related to the individual caries risk, and fracture, related to the presence of a lining or the strength of the material used as well as patient factors such as bruxism. Repair is a viable alternative to replacement, and it can increase significantly the lifetime of restorations. As observed in the literature reviewed, a long survival rate for posterior composite restorations can be expected provided that patient, operator and materials factors are taken into account when the restorations are performed.
•Restoration should address underlying causes of degradation.•The Playbook addresses political-economic perspectives within specific contexts.•Ten principles address how to achieve resilient and ...equitable ecosystem restoration.•Local and landscape processes are intricately linked to national and global scales.•Restoration aims to achieve ecologically, socially and economically just landscapes.
The urgency of restoring ecosystems to improve human wellbeing and mitigate climate and biodiversity crises is attracting global attention. The UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration (2021–2030) is a global call to action to support the restoration of degraded ecosystems. And yet, many forest restoration efforts, for instance, have failed to meet restoration goals; indeed, they worsened social precarities and ecological conditions. By merely focusing on symptoms of forest loss and degradation, these interventions have neglected the underlying issues of equity and justice driving forest decline. To address these root causes, thus creating socially just and sustainable solutions, we develop the Political Ecology Playbook for Ecosystem Restoration. We outline a set of ten principles for achieving long-lasting, resilient, and equitable ecosystem restoration. These principles are guided by political ecology, a framework that addresses environmental concerns from a broadly political economic perspective, attending to power, politics, and equity within specific geographic and historical contexts. Drawing on the chain of explanation, this multi-scale, cross-landscapes Playbook aims to produce healthy relationships between people and nature that are ecologically, socially, and economically just – and thus sustainable and resilient – while recognizing the political nature of such relationships. We argue that the Political Ecology Playbook should guide ecosystem restoration worldwide.
The global restoration movement is gaining momentum. International and national leaders are demonstrating unparalleled political will for achieving ambitious targets. However, the knowledge base for ...implementing large‐scale forest and landscape restoration (FLR) needs further development. Besides application of scientific and local knowledge, a broad understanding of the social, economic, and environmental context in which this knowledge is being applied is also needed. To address knowledge gaps and guide implementation of FLR at local to global scales we propose a knowledge creation agenda that we derive from emerging policy goals. We present a holistic approach that addresses food security, ecosystem services, and livelihoods, and that supports implementation by a wide array of actors from farmers and municipalities to corporations and state agencies. Our knowledge creation agenda is based on six broad policy goals, with several associated knowledge gaps for each goal. We recognize that this agenda is simply a starting point and will surely evolve and become more locally focused as the concept of FLR gains ground and as multiple groups of stakeholders engage in the long‐term process of restoring functionality and value to ecosystems and landscapes around the world.
Urgent solutions to global climate change are needed. Ambitious tree‐planting initiatives, many already underway, aim to sequester enormous quantities of carbon to partly compensate for anthropogenic ...CO2 emissions, which are a major cause of rising global temperatures. However, tree planting that is poorly planned and executed could actually increase CO2 emissions and have long‐term, deleterious impacts on biodiversity, landscapes and livelihoods. Here, we highlight the main environmental risks of large‐scale tree planting and propose 10 golden rules, based on some of the most recent ecological research, to implement forest ecosystem restoration that maximizes rates of both carbon sequestration and biodiversity recovery while improving livelihoods. These are as follows: (1) Protect existing forest first; (2) Work together (involving all stakeholders); (3) Aim to maximize biodiversity recovery to meet multiple goals; (4) Select appropriate areas for restoration; (5) Use natural regeneration wherever possible; (6) Select species to maximize biodiversity; (7) Use resilient plant material (with appropriate genetic variability and provenance); (8) Plan ahead for infrastructure, capacity and seed supply; (9) Learn by doing (using an adaptive management approach); and (10) Make it pay (ensuring the economic sustainability of the project). We focus on the design of long‐term strategies to tackle the climate and biodiversity crises and support livelihood needs. We emphasize the role of local communities as sources of indigenous knowledge, and the benefits they could derive from successful reforestation that restores ecosystem functioning and delivers a diverse range of forest products and services. While there is no simple and universal recipe for forest restoration, it is crucial to build upon the currently growing public and private interest in this topic, to ensure interventions provide effective, long‐term carbon sinks and maximize benefits for biodiversity and people.
Ten golden rules_graphical Written Summary:We propose ten golden rules for reforestation to optimize carbon sequestration, biodiversity recovery, and livelihood benefits. These are: (1) Protect existing forest first; (2) Work together (involving all stakeholders); (3) Aim to maximize biodiversity recovery to meet multiple goals; (4) Select appropriate areas for restoration; (5) Use natural regeneration wherever possible; (6) Select species to maximize biodiversity; (7) Use resilient plant material (with appropriate genetic variability and provenance); (8) Plan ahead for infrastructure, capacity and seed supply; (9) Learn by doing (using an adaptive management approach); and (10) Make it pay (ensuring the economic sustainability of the project).
1. Achieving global targets for forest restoration will require cost-effective strategies to return agricultural land to forest, while minimizing implementation costs and negative outcomes for ...agricultural production. 2. We present a landscape approach for optimizing the cost-effectiveness of largescale forest restoration. Across three different landscapes within Brazil's Atlantic Forest biodiversity hotspot, we modelled landscape scenarios based on spatially explicit data on the probability of natural regeneration, restoration costs, land opportunity costs, and forest restoration outcomes for increasing carbon stocking and landscape connectivity. We compare benefits of our cost-reduction approach to the legally mandated riparian restoration and randomly distributed approaches. 3. Compared with riparian prioritization and considering both implementation and opportunity costs, our cost-reduction scenario produced the greatest savings (20.9%) in mechanized agricultural landscapes. 4. When only considering implementation costs, our cost-reduction scenario led to the highest savings (38.4%) in the landscape with highest forest cover where natural regeneration potential is highest and enables cost-effective carbon stocking and connectivity. 5. Synthesis and applications. We present a guide for forest restoration planning that maximizes specific outcomes with minimal costs and reduction of agricultural production. Furthermore, we show how policies could encourage prioritization of low-cost restoration via natural regeneration, increasing cost-effectiveness. While our study focuses on Brazil's Atlantic Forest, the approach can be parameterized for other regions.
In contrast to the depth of knowledge available for the enhancement of plant species diversity and ecosystem services through ecological restoration, our understanding of how ecological restoration ...impacts genetic diversity (GD) of plant species has not yet been synthesized.
We performed a global meta‐analysis to examine whether ecological restoration improved GD of plant species in restored populations. First, we compared the GD of restored populations with reference or degraded populations. Second, we explored whether the influence of ecological restoration on plant GD varies between species with different characteristics (life form and threat status), between different restoration strategies (active/passive, seeding/planting, mixture/non‐mixture) or between different restoration times (<50 and ≥ 50 years; with an average of 29.3 years).
The GD of restored populations was significantly lower (HE, 1.06%; PPB, 5.10%, and SWI, 4.95%) than in reference populations but was comparable to degraded populations. The inbreeding coefficient (FIS, the proportion by which the heterozygosity of an individual is reduced by inbreeding) was consistently comparable between restored populations and reference or degraded populations.
Woody species but not herbs and forest but not grassland ecosystem had significantly lower GD in restored populations than in reference populations. Passive but not active restoration, seeding rather than planting, and mixing materials from different sources rather than using a single source, all significantly increased the GD of restored populations. When the restoration time was ≥50 years, in contrast to <50 years, GD was comparable between the restored and reference populations.
Synthesis and applications. In general, ecological restoration did not significantly improve the GD of plant species compared to reference or degraded populations. This might be due in part to the relatively short restoration time. Using passive restoration, seeding, and mixed sources could significantly increase the GD of restored populations. We emphasize that GD should not be treated as a minor cobenefit of ecological restoration for other purposes and that the recovery of GD should be listed as a vital goal in future ecological restoration with plant species.
摘要
虽然生态恢复对植物物种多样性和生态系统服务的促进作用已得到深入的研究和综述，但是生态恢复对植物遗传多样性的恢复效果尚未得到系统的总结。
本研究采用Meta分析来揭示全球范围内生态恢复是否促进被恢复植物种群的遗传多样性。首先，我们比较了被恢复植物种群与参照或退化种群的遗传多样性。其次，我们探索了植物特性(生活型和受威胁状况)、恢复策略(主动与被动修复、直接播种与活体种植、多种源与单种源)和恢复时间(小于与不小于50年；平均恢复时间为29.3年)对植物遗传多样性恢复效果的影响。
被恢复植物种群的遗传多样性显著低于参照种群(预期杂合度HE，低1.06%；多态性位点百分比PPB，5.10%；香农‐维纳指数SWI，4.95%)，但是与退化种群相当。被恢复植物种群的近交系数(FIS)与参照和退化种群均相当。
木本而非草本植物、森林而非草地生态系统的被恢复植物种群的遗传多样性显著低于参照种群。被动而非主动恢复、直接播种而非活体种植、多种源混合而非单种源可以显著提高被恢复植物种群的遗传多样性。当恢复时间小于50年时，被恢复植物种群的遗传多样性显著低于参照种群，而当恢复时间大于等于50年时，被恢复种群的遗传多样性与参照种群相当。
总的来说，与参照和退化种群相比，生态恢复并未显著提高被恢复植物种群的遗传多样性，部分原因可能是生态恢复时间相对较短。在条件允许的情况下，采用被动恢复、直接播种和多种源混合的策略可以显著提高被恢复植物种群的遗传多样性。本研究强调，在未来涉及植物的生态恢复中，需将植物种群的遗传多样性恢复作为一个重要目标。
In general, ecological restoration did not significantly improve the GD of plant species compared to reference or degraded populations. This might be due in part to the relatively short restoration time. Using passive restoration, seeding, and mixed sources could significantly increase the GD of restored populations. We emphasize that GD should not be treated as a minor cobenefit of ecological restoration for other purposes and that the recovery of GD should be listed as a vital goal in future ecological restoration with plant species.
PDF
