Search

The declaration of the United Nations Decade on Ecosystem Restoration 2020–2030 has established the need to focus on human rights in restoration initiatives, including gender equality. Although this goal raises a need to monitor gender biases on ecosystem restoration, we still lack basic gender information and evaluations on the current situation. The main purpose of this study is to analyze gender bias in ecosystem restoration covering three dimensions: research, outreach, and practice. We used scientific publications from the Restoration Ecology journal, mentions of these articles in Altmetric Explorer and Twitter, and projects from the Society for Ecological Restoration's database. First, we study gender bias among people leading ecosystem restoration initiatives in the three dimensions. Second, we assessed factors that could influence gender bias, including year, target ecosystem, and socioeconomic country development. Third, we analyzed whether the impact of scientific knowledge in society depends on the gender of the scientific team. Our results indicate that men were primary leaders in research, outreach, and practice initiatives in ecosystem restoration. There seems to be a trend over time toward equality in research, but gender inequality is still present in most types of ecosystems, with women leading more projects in more developed countries. The impact of scientific knowledge is independent of the author's gender, but research of male senior authors seems to reach society more easily. This broad perspective of inequality in the three dimensions can evolve toward gender equality, by applying gender approaches in restoration policies and initiatives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Isotope-based approaches to study plant water sources rely on the assumption that root water uptake and within-plant water transport are non-fractionating processes. However, a growing number of studies have reported offsets between plant and source water stable isotope composition, for a wide range of ecosystems. These isotopic offsets can result in the erroneous attribution of source water used by plants and potential overestimations of groundwater uptake by the vegetation. We conducted a global meta-analysis to quantify the magnitude of these plant-source water isotopic offsets and explore whether their variability could be explained by either biotic or abiotic factors. Our database compiled 112 studies, spanning arctic to tropical biomes that reported the dual water isotope composition (δ²H and δ18O) of plant (stem) and source water, including soil water. We calculated ²H offsets in two ways: a line conditioned excess (LC-excess) that describes the ²H deviation from the local meteoric water line, and a soil water line conditioned excess (SW-excess), that describes the deviation from the soil water line, for each sampling campaign within each study. We tested for the effects of climate (air temperature and soil water content), soil class and plant traits (growth form, leaf habit, wood density and parenchyma fraction and mycorrhizal habit) on LC-excess and SW-excess. Globally, stem water was more depleted in ²H than soil water (SW- excess < 0) by 3.02 ± 0.65 ‰. In 95% of the cases where SW-excess was negative, LC-excess was negative, indicating that the uptake of water from mobile pools was unlikely to explain the observed soil-plant water isotopic offsets. SW-excess was more negative in cold and wet sites, whereas it was more positive in warm sites. Soil class and plant traits did not have any significant effect on SW-excess. The climatic effects on SW-excess suggest that methodological artefacts are unlikely to be the sole cause of observed isotopic offsets. Instead, our results support the idea that these offsets are caused by isotopic heterogeneity within plant stems whose relative importance will depend on soil and plant water status and evaporative demand. Our results would imply that plant-source water isotopic offsets may lead to inaccuracies when using the isotopic composition of bulk stem water as a proxy to infer plant water sources. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]