Search

Restoration outcomes are variable, which impairs our ability to plan projects, meet goals, and predict restoration outcomes. Understanding the drivers of this variation is an important research need, especially within urban ecosystems, which support altered abiotic and biotic conditions and face higher rates of loss and degradation than non‐urban areas. Despite the importance of urban areas for restoration, research and practice have largely focused on non‐urban areas. It is unclear if we can extend current knowledge from restoration ecology to urban systems. Here, we surveyed 30 urban prairie restoration plantings across southern Michigan. We collected plant community and site condition data (e.g. soil attributes) and we quantified landscape context as the percentage of urban land surrounding each site. Variation in plant community composition among restorations was related primarily to site‐level factors, such as soil compaction, texture, and water‐holding capacity, rather than landscape context. Non‐prairie species were structured primarily by the local site conditions. There was an increase in non‐prairie richness for sites that experienced warmer local climate conditions, while there was a decrease in non‐prairie richness for sites where soils were less compacted, sandier, and had elevated water‐holding capacity. Prairie species richness responded oppositely. Overall, our study revealed specific factors structuring restoration outcomes in urban contexts and illustrated the importance of local site conditions, not surrounding landscape context, for shaping plant community composition. Restoration practices developed in non‐urban areas should be extended to urban contexts to better understand the impact of local site conditions on plant community development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Empirical studies on peer review bias are primarily conducted by people from privileged groups and with affiliations with the journals studied. Data access is one major barrier to conducting peer review research. Accordingly, we propose pathways to broaden access to peer review data to people from more diverse backgrounds. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]