A primary goal of ecological restoration is to increase biodiversity in degraded ecosystems. However, the success of restoration ecology is often assessed by measuring the response of a single ...functional group or trophic level to restoration, without considering how restoration affects multitrophic interactions that shape biodiversity. An ecosystem-wide approach to restoration is therefore necessary to understand whether animal responses to restoration, such as changes in biodiversity, are facilitated by changes in plant communities (plant-driven effects) or disturbance and succession resulting from restoration activities (management-driven effects). Furthermore, most restoration ecology studies focus on how restoration alters taxonomic diversity, while less attention is paid to the response of functional and phylogenetic diversity in restored ecosystems. Here, we compared the strength of plant-driven and management-driven effects of restoration on four animal communities (ground beetles, dung beetles, snakes, and small mammals) in a chronosequence of restored tallgrass prairie, where sites varied in management history (prescribed fire and bison reintroduction). Our analyses indicate that management-driven effects on animal communities were six-times stronger than effects mediated through changes in plant biodiversity. Additionally, we demonstrate that restoration can simultaneously have positive and negative effects on biodiversity through different pathways, which may help reconcile variation in restoration outcomes. Furthermore, animal taxonomic and phylogenetic diversity responded differently to restoration, suggesting that restoration plans might benefit from considering multiple dimensions of animal biodiversity. We conclude that metrics of plant diversity alone may not be adequate to assess the success of restoration in reassembling functional ecosystems.
Moonlight structures activity patterns of many nocturnal species. Bright moonlight often limits the activity of nocturnal prey, but dense vegetation weakens this effect. Using 8 years of ...live‐trapping data, we asked whether reintroduced megaherbivores (Bison bison) indirectly altered moonlight avoidance by small mammals in tallgrass prairies. In plots with bison, plants intercepted 20% less light, allowing more moonlight to reach ground level. During nights with no moonlight, Peromyscus maniculatus activity was similar in plots with and without bison. During nights with peak moonlight, P. maniculatus activity was four times greater in plots without bison compared to plots with bison. Conversely, Microtus ochrogaster activity was twice as great during full moons compared to new moons, but only in plots with bison. We also equipped a subset of traps with temperature sensors to estimate trap‐entry time. Although M. ochrogaster was more active on bright nights, most activity occurred before moonrise or after moonset, avoiding periods of bright moonlight. We conclude that megaherbivores play an unappreciated but important indirect role in tallgrass prairies by inducing behavioral shifts in other animal species. Because overlap in activity patterns can predict the likelihood of predator–prey encounters, such activity shifts have important implications for trophic interactions throughout restored prairie food webs. Additional work to understand interspecific and intraspecific variation in response to moonlight may improve efforts to forecast changes in community assembly due to restoration and land‐use change.
PDF
