Integrating environmental variables by multivariate ordination enables the reliable estimation of mineland rehabilitation status.

Despite the wide variety of variables commonly employed to measure the success of rehabilitation, the assessment and subsequent definition of indicators of environmental rehabilitation status are not simple tasks. The main challenges are comparing rehabilitated sites with target ecosystems as well as integrating individual environmental and eventually collinear variables into a single tractable measure for the state of a system before effective indicators that track rehabilitation may be modeled. Furthermore, a consensus is lacking regarding which and how many variables need to be surveyed for a reliable estimation of rehabilitation status. Here, we propose a multivariate ordination to integrate variables related to ecological processes, vegetation structure, and community diversity into a single estimation of rehabilitation status. As a case, we employed a curated set of 32 environmental variables retrieved from nonrevegetated, rehabilitating and reference sites associated with iron ore mines from the Urucum Massif, Mato Grosso do Sul, Brazil. By integrating this set of environmental variables into a single estimation of rehabilitation status, the proposed multivariate approach is straightforward and able to adequately address collinearity among variables. The proposed methodology allows for the identification of biases towards single variables, surveys or analyses, which is necessary to rank environmental variables regarding their importance to the assessment. Furthermore, we show that bootstrapping permitted the detection of the minimum number of environmental variables necessary to achieve reliable estimations of the rehabilitation status. Finally, we show that the proposed variable integration enables the definition of case-specific environmental indicators for more rapid assessments of mineland rehabilitation. Thus, the proposed multivariate ordination represents a powerful tool to facilitate the diagnosis of rehabilitating sites worldwide provided that sufficient environmental variables related to ecological processes, diversity and vegetation structure are gathered from nonrehabilitated, rehabilitating and reference study sites. By identifying deviations from predicted rehabilitation trajectories and providing assessments for environmental agencies, this proposed multivariate ordination increases the effectiveness of (mineland) rehabilitation.

[1]  A. Kozovits,et al.  Key plant indicators for monitoring areas undergoing restoration: A case study at the Das Velhas River, southeast Brazil , 2017 .

[2]  Susan G. Letcher,et al.  Carbon sequestration potential of second-growth forest regeneration in the Latin American tropics , 2016, Science Advances.

[3]  R. Standish,et al.  Incorporating novelty and novel ecosystems into restoration planning and practice in the 21st century , 2013, Ecological Processes.

[4]  Ronnie Alves,et al.  Descriptor : A metagenomic survey of soil microbial communities along a rehabilitation chronosequence after iron ore mining , 2019 .

[5]  C. Echeverría,et al.  Ecological indicators for assessing ecological success of forest restoration: a world review , 2017 .

[6]  Richard J. Hobbs,et al.  Advances in restoration ecology: rising to the challenges of the coming decades , 2015 .

[7]  K. Gross,et al.  Alternative states and positive feedbacks in restoration ecology. , 2004, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[8]  Takeshi Sasaki,et al.  Evaluating restoration success of a 40-year-old urban forest in reference to mature natural forest , 2018 .

[9]  Alex M. Lechner,et al.  Applying modern ecological methods for monitoring and modelling mine rehabilitation success , 2018 .

[10]  M. M. Moore,et al.  The hierarchy of predictability in ecological restoration: are vegetation structure and functional diversity more predictable than community composition? , 2017 .

[11]  M. Cadotte,et al.  Predicting communities from functional traits. , 2015, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[12]  A. Ramette Multivariate analyses in microbial ecology , 2007, FEMS microbiology ecology.

[13]  Ju-ying Jiao,et al.  Assessing the Ecological Success of Restoration by Afforestation on the Chinese Loess Plateau , 2012 .

[14]  A. Latawiec,et al.  Sustainability Indicators in Practice , 2015 .

[15]  Roger Bivand,et al.  Community ecology in the age of multivariate multiscale spatial analysis , 2012 .

[16]  Andrew Fletcher,et al.  Widening gap between expectations and practice in Australian minesite rehabilitation , 2015 .

[17]  Karen D. Holl,et al.  Functional composition trajectory: a resolution to the debate between Suganuma, Durigan, and Reid , 2016 .

[18]  Paul C. Johnson Extension of Nakagawa & Schielzeth's R2GLMM to random slopes models , 2014, Methods in ecology and evolution.

[19]  M. Symonds,et al.  A brief guide to model selection, multimodel inference and model averaging in behavioural ecology using Akaike’s information criterion , 2010, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[20]  Jeffrey M. Wooldridge,et al.  Introductory Econometrics: A Modern Approach , 1999 .

[21]  Karen D. Holl,et al.  A global review of past land use, climate, and active vs. passive restoration effects on forest recovery , 2017, PloS one.

[22]  F. Bongers,et al.  Multiple successional pathways in human‐modified tropical landscapes: new insights from forest succession, forest fragmentation and landscape ecology research , 2017, Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society.

[23]  Amphibian species and functional diversity as indicators of restoration success in tropical montane forest , 2017, Biodiversity and Conservation.

[24]  J. L. Reid Indicators of success should be sensitive to compositional failures: reply to Suganuma and Durigan , 2015 .

[25]  S. Müller,et al.  Assessing ecosystem functioning in forests undergoing restoration , 2018, Restoration Ecology.

[26]  M. Gastauer,et al.  Mine land rehabilitation: Modern ecological approaches for more sustainable mining , 2018 .

[27]  T. Mitchell Aide,et al.  Restoration Success: How Is It Being Measured? , 2005 .

[28]  M. Palmer,et al.  Ecological Theory and Restoration Ecology , 2016 .

[29]  Zhongke Bai,et al.  Characteristics of labile organic carbon fractions in reclaimed mine soils: Evidence from three reclaimed forests in the Pingshuo opencast coal mine, China. , 2018, The Science of the total environment.

[30]  Y. Lü,et al.  Biodiversity and Ecosystem Functional Enhancement by Forest Restoration: A Meta‐analysis in China , 2017 .

[31]  Melina Gillespie,et al.  Assessing the development of rehabilitated grasslands on post-mined landforms in north west Queensland, Australia , 2012 .

[32]  K. Dixon,et al.  National standards for the practice of ecological restoration in Australia , 2016 .

[33]  Helen T. Murphy,et al.  Measuring the success of reforestation for restoring biodiversity and ecosystem functioning , 2016 .

[34]  Roger Jones,et al.  Ecological processes: A key element in strategies for nature conservation , 2009 .

[35]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[36]  S. Florentine,et al.  Recruitment and functionality traits as bioindicators of ecological restoration success in the Lurg Hills district, Victoria, Australia , 2013, Ecological Processes.

[37]  Johannes Kollmann,et al.  Integrating ecosystem functions into restoration ecology—recent advances and future directions , 2016 .

[38]  T. Mitchell Aide,et al.  Vegetation structure, species diversity, and ecosystem processes as measures of restoration success , 2005 .

[39]  V. Wolters,et al.  Ecosystem services—current challenges and opportunities for ecological research , 2015, Front. Ecol. Evol..

[40]  Michael James Howes,et al.  Evaluating Ecological Restoration Success: A Review of the Literature , 2013 .

[41]  Nandita Singh,et al.  Effect of long term land use systems on fractions of glomalin and soil organic carbon in the Indo-Gangetic plain , 2016 .

[42]  G. Durigan,et al.  Indicators of restoration success in riparian tropical forests using multiple reference ecosystems , 2015 .

[43]  M. Gastauer,et al.  Mine land rehabilitation in Brazil: Goals and techniques in the context of legal requirements , 2018, Ambio.