Explore the vast range of titles available.

1. Over the past decades, evidence‐based research has become increasingly important in restoration ecology. Evidence synthesis can be a powerful tool to identify the most effective strategies to conserve and restore ecosystems. However, reviews in the environmental sector have been described as non‐systematic and exhibit a diverse range of approaches. While it is known that environmental syntheses can substantially improve in quality, the reliability of restoration reviews (i.e. the level of confidence an end‐user may place in their methodology) remains poorly known. 2. Given the importance of literature reviews of restoration practice and outcomes for informing management and policy, as well as research, this systematic map protocol aims to scrutinize the peer‐reviewed literature for an assessment of the methodological reliability and reproducibility of restoration reviews. We will use bibliographic databases and search engines to collect studies published in peer‐reviewed journals dealing with the ecological restoration of terrestrial ecosystems. 3. Through a scoping exercise, a search string was developed which was based on a previously prepared test list. The search string was then tested for validity with one independent reference list. After searching, the screening process will be done on the title, and full‐text level and consistency checking will be done on a random subsample by a second assessor, with decisions being compared using the kappa test of agreement. After retrieving studies and checking for relevance to the synthesis, we will appraise the methodological reliability of restoration reviews by applying the Collaboration for Environmental Evidence Assessment Tool – CEESAT. Lastly, we will collect bibliometric information to qualitatively describe the retrieved body of literature, and then key trends in data will be synthesized according to a range of generic questions. 4. To conduct the resulting review, we will follow the procedures specified in this protocol, considering guidelines from the Collaboration for Environmental Evidence and ROSES form. The resulting review will yield a useful overview of applying systematic reviews principles for various end users. At the same time, it will help restoration practitioners to identify critical points where restoration evidence syntheses must be improved to move forward. Environmental reviews exhibit a considerable variation in conduct and reporting. This systematic map protocol aims to assess the reliability of restoration evidence syntheses (in terms of objectivity, comprehensiveness, and transparency) by applying the Collaboration for Environmental Evidence Synthesis Assessment Tool (CEESAT), which consists of a set of criteria designed in alignment with environmental systematic review methodology.

International efforts to restore degraded ecosystems will continue to expand over the coming decades, yet the factors contributing to the effectiveness of long-term restoration across large areas remain largely unexplored. At large scales, outcomes are more complex and synergistic than the additive impacts of individual restoration projects. Here, we propose a cumulative-effects conceptual framework to inform restoration design and implementation and to comprehensively measure ecological outcomes. To evaluate and illustrate this approach, we reviewed long-term restoration in several large coastal and riverine areas across the US: the greater Florida Everglades; Gulf of Mexico coast; lower Columbia River and estuary; Puget Sound; San Francisco Bay and Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta; Missouri River; and northeastern coastal states. Evidence supported eight modes of cumulative effects of interacting restoration projects, which improved outcomes for species and ecosystems at landscape and regional scales. We conclude that cumulative effects, usually measured for ecosystem degradation, are also measurable for ecosystem restoration. The consideration of evidence-based cumulative effects will help managers of large-scale restoration capitalize on positive feedback and reduce countervailing effects.

The Decade on Ecosystem Restoration aims to provide the means and incentives for upscaling restoration efforts worldwide. Although ecosystem restoration is a broad, interdisciplinary concept, effective ecological restoration requires sound ecological knowledge to successfully restore biodiversity and ecosystem services in degraded landscapes. We emphasize the critical role of knowledge and data sharing to inform synthesis for the most robust restoration science possible. Such synthesis is critical for helping restoration ecologists better understand how context affects restoration outcomes, and to increase predictive capacity of restoration actions. This predictive capacity can help to provide better information for evidence‐based decision‐making, and scale‐up approaches to meet ambitious targets for restoration. We advocate for a concerted effort to collate species‐level, fine‐scale, ecological community data from restoration studies across a wide range of environmental and ecological gradients. Well‐articulated associated metadata relevant to experience and social or landscape contexts can further be used to explain outcomes. These data could be carefully curated and made openly available to the restoration community to help to maximize evidence‐based knowledge sharing, enable flexible re‐use of existing data and support predictive capacity in ecological community responses to restoration actions. We detail how integrated data, analysis and knowledge sharing via synthesis can support shared success in restoration ecology by identifying successful and unsuccessful outcomes across diverse systems and scales. We also discuss potential interdisciplinary solutions and approaches to overcome challenges associated with bringing together subfields of restoration practice. Sharing this knowledge and data openly can directly inform actions and help to improve outcomes for the Decade on Ecosystem Restoration. We detail how integrated data, analysis and knowledge sharing via synthesis can support shared success in restoration ecology by identifying successful and unsuccessful outcomes across diverse systems and scales. We also discuss potential interdisciplinary solutions and approaches to overcome challenges associated with bringing together subfields of restoration practice.

ObjectivesTo assess how to control, detect, and treat secondary caries. This review serves to inform a joint ORCA/EFCD consensus process.MethodsSystematic and non-systematic reviews were performed or consulted and narratively synthesized.ResultsSecondary (or recurrent) caries is defined as a lesion associated with restorations or sealants. While the restorative material itself has some influence on secondary caries, further factors like the presence and size of restoration gaps, patients’ caries risk, and the placing dentist’s experience seem more relevant. Current detection methods for secondary caries are only sparsely validated and likely prone for the risk of over-detection. In many patients, it might be prudent to prioritize specific detection methods to avoid invasive overtreatment. Detected secondary caries can be managed either by repair of the defective part of the restoration or its complete replacement.ConclusionsThere is sparse data towards the nature of secondary caries and how to control, detect, and treat it.Clinical significanceDespite often claimed to be a major complication of restorations, there is surprisingly little data on secondary caries. Longer-term studies may be needed to identify differences in secondary caries risk between materials and to identify characteristic features of progressive lesions (i.e., those in need of treatment).

Success stories are rare in conservation science, hindered also by the research-implementation gap, where scientific insights rarely inform practice and practical implementation is rarely evaluated scientifically. Amphibian population declines, driven by multiple stressors, are emblematic of the freshwater biodiversity crisis. Habitat creation is a straightforward conservation action that has been shown to locally benefit amphibians, as well as other taxa, but does it benefit entire amphibian communities at large spatial scales? Here, we evaluate a landscape-scale pond-construction program by fitting dynamic occupancy models to 20 y of monitoring data for 12 pond-breeding amphibian species in the Swiss state Aargau, a densely populated area of the Swiss lowlands with intensive land use. After decades of population declines, the number of occupied ponds increased statewide for 10 out of 12 species, while one species remained stable and one species further declined between 1999 and 2019. Despite regional differences, in 77% of all 43 regional metapopulations, the colonization and subsequent occupation of new ponds stabilized (14%) or increased (63%) metapopulation size. Likely mechanisms include increased habitat availability, restoration of habitat dynamics, and increased connectivity between ponds. Colonization probabilities reflected species-specific preferences for characteristics of ponds and their surroundings, which provides evidence-based information for future pond construction targeting specific species. The relatively simple but landscape-scale and persistent conservation action of constructing hundreds of new ponds halted declines and stabilized or increased the state-wide population size of all but one species, despite ongoing pressures from other stressors in a human-dominated landscape.

Architectural heritage is a testament to human and natural development, and the process of human social development can be glimpsed through the study and exploration of heritage. However, in the long history of human social development, architectural heritage is vanishing, and protecting and restoring such heritage is a pressing issue in contemporary society. This study applies the evidence-based theory of medicine to the virtual restoration practice of architectural heritage, which focuses more on scientific data-driven research and decision-making than does traditional restoration. Combined with the practice of evidence-based medicine, the stages of digital conservation of architectural heritage for virtual restoration based on evidence-based design are investigated, forming a comprehensive knowledge system consisting of clear objectives, evidence-based research, evidence assessment, virtual restoration-guided practice, and post feedback. In addition, it is emphasized that the restoration of architectural heritage should be founded on the outcomes obtained through evidence-based practice that have been translated into evidence, in turn creating a rigorous evidence-based system with high-frequency feedback. The final illustration of the procedure is the Bagong House in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China. The examination of this practice line provides a scientific, humanistic, and practicable theoretical framework for the restoration of architectural heritage and fresh ideas for the restoration of other cultural assets, which have significant practical application value.

Effective decision‐making in the protection of nature should be informed by science. Yet, decision‐makers often choose conservation strategies without consulting all relevant evidence. This is partly due to evidence being hidden behind paywalls, presented in overly technical language, and scattered across various journals. To facilitate direct use of evidence, we developed an interactive platform designed specifically for practitioners, allowing them to explore a wide range of questions. A key innovation we describe in this article is the platform's transformation into a system open to contributions from any scientist or practitioner. We analysed how evidence has accumulated under this new system for the strategy ‘Reforestation and Forest Restoration’. We found that over 1 year of community contributions, 27% of publications found during a more systematic search were added to the platform, indicating a promising trajectory. The future success of the platform will depend on encouraging individual contributions and documenting, as well as mitigating, potential biases. Solution . By transferring the responsibility of sharing the evidence on what works in conservation from a select group of experts to the broader science and practice community, we contribute to addressing the issue of evidence underuse that is still prevalent in conservation, ultimately making it more effective and transparent.

The adverse impacts of ecosystem degradation have raised the need for forest landscape restoration (FLR) to be included in international sustainability agendas. However, the path towards successful FLR implementation faces numerous biophysical, socioeconomic and governance challenges because FLR operates within complex socioecological systems. In the present study, we review and discuss FLR challenges in the context of global environmental change. We propose a roadmap consisting of five interlinked steps to overcome these challenges: (1) advancing ecological knowledge supporting FLR, (2) adapting FLR management to environmental change through strengthening globally distributed experimental networks, (3) implementing modelling approaches, (4) improving socioeconomic and governance dimensions, and (5) developing evidence-based knowledge platforms. The roadmap offers an iterative and adaptive framework for the continuous evaluation and improvement of FLR strategies and outcomes.

In aquatic systems, biological invasions can result in adverse ecological effects. Management techniques available for non-native fish removal programs (including eradication and population size control) vary widely, but include chemicals, harvest regimes, physical removal, or biological control. For management agencies, deciding on what non-native fish removal program to use has been challenging because there is little reliable information about the relative effectiveness of these measures in controlling or eradicating non-native fish. We conducted a systematic review, including a critical appraisal of study validity, to assess the effectiveness of different non-native fish removal methods and to identify the factors that influence the overall success rate of each type of method. We found 95 relevant studies, generating 158 data sets. The evidence base was dominated by poorly documented studies with inadequate experimental designs (76% of removal projects). When the management goal was non-native fish eradication, chemical treatments were relatively successful (antimycin 89%; rotenone 75%) compared with other interventions. Electrofishing and passive removal measure studies indicated successful eradication was possible (58% each) but required intensive effort and multiple treatments over a number of years. Of these studies with sufficient information, electrofishing had the highest success for population size control (56% of data sets). Overall, inadequate data quality and completeness severely limited our ability to make strong conclusions about the relationships between non-native fish abundance and different methods of eradication and population control and the factors influencing the overall success rate of each method. Our review highlights that there is considerable scope for improving our evaluations of non-native fish removal methods. It is recommended that programs should have explicitly stated objectives, better data reporting, and study designs that (when possible and appropriate) incorporate replicated and controlled investigations with rigorous, long-term quantitative monitoring. Future research on the effectiveness of non-native fish removal methods should focus on: (i) the efficacy of existing or potentially new removal measures in larger, more complex environments; (ii) a broader range of removal measures in general; and (iii) phenotypic characteristics of individual fish within a population that fail to be eradicated or controlled. Dans les systèmes aquatiques, les invasions biologiques peuvent entraîner des effets écologiques défavorables. Les techniques de gestion disponibles pour les programmes de retrait de poissons non indigènes (incluant l’éradication et le contrôle de taille de population) varient énormément, mais incluent les produits chimiques, les régimes de pêche, le retrait physique ou le contrôle biologique. Pour les agences de gestion, le choix du programme de retrait de poissons non indigènes à utiliser est compliqué parce qu’il y a peu d’informations fiables sur l’efficacité relative de ces mesures au niveau du contrôle ou de l’éradication du poisson non indigène. Nous avons fait une revue systématique, y compris une évaluation critique de validité des conclusions d’étude, afin d’évaluer l’efficacité des différentes méthodes de retrait de poissons non indigènes et d’établir les facteurs qui influent sur le taux de réussite global de chaque type de méthodes. Nous avons trouvé 95 études pertinentes, donnant 158 ensembles de données. L’assise factuelle comprenait une prépondérance d’études mal documentées avec des conceptions expérimentales inadéquates (76 % de projets de retrait). Quand le but de gestion était l’éradication de poissons non indigènes, les traitements chimiques avaient une réussite relativement bonne (antimycine 89 %; roténone 75 %) comparativement à d’autres interventions. Les études de mesure de pêche à l’électricité et de retrait passif ont indiqué que l’éradication réussie était possible (58 % chacun) mais elle exigeait un effort intense et des traitements multiples au cours d’un certain nombre d’années. De ces études ayant des informations suffisantes, la pêche à l’électricité avait le plus haut taux de succès en matière de contrôle de taille de population (56 % des ensembles de données). En général, la qualité inadéquate et l’aspect incomplet des données ont sévèrement limité notre capacité de tirer des conclusions probantes des relations entre l’abondance de poissons non indigènes et les différentes méthodes d’éradication et de régulation des populations et les facteurs influant sur le taux de réussite global de chaque méthode. Les points culminants de notre revue mettent en lumière qu’il y a une marge considérable pour améliorer nos évaluations de méthodes de retrait de poissons non indigènes. On recommande que les programmes aient des objectifs explicites clairement formulés, une meilleure communication des données et des modèles d’étude qui (lorsque possible et approprié) incorporent des examens reproduits et contrôlés au moyen de surveillance quantitative rigoureuse à long terme. La recherche future sur l’efficacité des méthodes de retrait de poissons non indigènes devrait être centrée sur : (i) l’efficacité des mesures de retrait existantes ou potentiellement nouvelles dans des environnements plus grands, plus complexes; (ii) une gamme plus large de mesures de retrait en général et (iii) les caractéristiques phénotypiques de poisson individuel dans une population qui échappe à la suppression ou au contrôle.