Next Article in Journal
Amphiregulin Upregulation in Visfatin-Stimulated Colorectal Cancer Cells Reduces Sensitivity to 5-Fluororacil Cytotoxicity
Next Article in Special Issue
Spatial Patterns and Environmental Control of Polychaete Communities in the Southwestern Barents Sea
Previous Article in Journal
Evaluation of the Anti-Inflammatory/Immunomodulatory Effect of Teucrium montanum L. Extract in Collagen-Induced Arthritis in Rats
Previous Article in Special Issue
The Utility of the Koala Scat: A Scoping Review
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Biology
Volume 13
Issue 10
10.3390/biology13100820
biology-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Vegetation Succession for 12 Years in a Pond Created Restoratively

by
Chang-Seok Lee
1,*,
Dong-Uk Kim
2,
Bong-Soon Lim
1,
Ji-Eun Seok
1 and
Gyung-Soon Kim
2
1
Department of Bio & Environmental Technology, Seoul Women’s University, Seoul 01797, Republic of Korea
2
National Institute of Ecology, Seocheon 33657, Republic of Korea
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Biology 2024, 13(10), 820; https://doi.org/10.3390/biology13100820
Submission received: 30 September 2024 / Revised: 7 October 2024 / Accepted: 8 October 2024 / Published: 13 October 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Feature Papers in 'Conservation Biology and Biodiversity')
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:

Simple Summary

The Najeoer Pond, which is the object of this study, was created to be utilized as a test bed for the restoration of endangered species and for carrying out ecological education on the pond ecosystem. To achieve these goals, the Najeoer Pond was created for diversity and stability purposes by first securing various water depths imitating natural lagoons and inducing the establishment of various vegetation types according to the depth. As a result of analyzing the vegetation settlement process for 12 years after its creation through vegetation cover, species composition, species diversity, and the ratio of exotic species, and comparing the results with those of natural lagoons, the Najeoer Pond has been shaped to resemble the diversity and stability of natural lagoons. The carbon absorption capacity of the littoral vegetation established around the pond was significantly higher than that of forest vegetation. In this respect, the Najeoer Pond was also deemed to have a high creation effect in terms of ecological function. Therefore, a stable pond with diversity can be created because vegetation diversity can be guaranteed as a result of securing the ecological diversity of various water depths.

Abstract

The Najeoer Pond was created in a rice paddy as a part of a plan to build the National Institute of Ecology. To induce the establishment of various plants, the maximum depth of the pond was 2.0 m, and diverse depths were created with a gentle slope on the pond bed. When introducing vegetation, littoral and emergent vegetation were first introduced to stabilize the space secured for the creation of the pond, whereas the introduction of other vegetation was allowed to develop naturally. In this pond, floating, emergent, wetland, and littoral plants have been established to various degrees, reflecting the water depth and water table. As a result of stand ordination, based on vegetation data obtained from the created Najeoer Pond and a natural lagoon selected as the reference site, the species’ composition resembled that of the reference site. Diversity, based on vegetation type, community, and species, tended to be higher than that of the reference site. The proportion of exotic species increased due to the disturbance that occurred during the pond creation process but continued to decrease as the vegetation introduced during the creation of the pond became established. Considering these results comprehensively, the restorative treatment served to increase both the biological integrity and ecological stability of the pond and, thus, achieved the creation goal from the viewpoint of the pond structure.

1. Introduction

Fast-paced climate and land-use changes are negatively affecting the structure and function of ecosystems [1,2,3,4]. As the quality degradation of ecosystems around the world progresses rapidly, initiatives to mitigate these devastating impacts are increasing [5,6,7] and the topic of ecological restoration is thus receiving ever greater attention worldwide [8,9,10].
As a mountainous country where mountainous areas account for about 65% of the country, Korea does not have a large wetland area. With a continental climate (Asian monsoon climate), most of the rainfall is concentrated in the rainy season, making it difficult to maintain wetlands. In addition, rice, a staple food in Korea, is an aquatic plant; therefore, many wetlands have been converted into rice paddies. However, in recent years, many of these rice fields have been transformed into urban areas [11,12]. Consequently, the wetlands have been severely damaged and they are less able to perform their traditional functions. However, due to recent social changes, caused by economic growth, the level of environmental awareness has increased significantly in these regions, and the restoration of damaged wetlands, including ponds, is actively progressing.
However, except for a few advanced countries in this field, the ecological restoration currently underway simply refines the esthetics rather than performing actual restoration, which is urgently required. It is believed that this low level of ecological restoration is due to insufficient understanding of the true meaning of ecological restoration, as well as negligence in terms of evaluating the effectiveness of restoration [5,13,14,15,16].
Ecological restoration aims to restore intact and healthy natural conditions before they are destroyed irreversibly. In other words, environmental restoration is an ecological technology that heals nature, which has been negatively impacted, by imitating the structure and function of intact nature, and through this, it aims to provide habitats for various wildlife and a future environment for humankind [5,16,17,18,19]. Ecological restoration is considered to improve the productivity of degraded lands, conserve biodiversity, and supplement or reinforce lost or damaged ecosystems [5,6,16,19,20,21,22]. Human aid is sometimes needed to restore damaged ecosystems and prevent further damage, and habitat improvement and the introduction of species may be required to allow the process of recovery to begin [16,19,23,24,25].
Ecological restoration, as a process to help the recovery of ecosystems that have been degraded, damaged, or destroyed, progresses through a series of processes as follows: diagnostic assessment, collection of reference information, preparation of a restoration plan, based on the result of the diagnostic assessment and reference information, restoration implementation, monitoring of the establishment process and adaptive management based on the result, and evaluation of the restoration effects [5,16,19].
Numerous restoration projects are carried out around the world every year; however, the success of restoration is not well known, due to a lack of evaluation of the projects’ effectiveness and limited information regarding their success [13,14,15,26,27]. Without a comprehensive evaluation of a project, the project cannot develop because there is no information about how its achievements differ depending on its approach. Standardized monitoring, evidence-based evaluation, and information delivery are invaluable in terms of planning future projects. Investment in the evaluation of restoration effects will also contribute to increasing the relevance and applicability of ecological research for restoration [8,28,29,30,31]. In this respect, an evaluation of the restoration effect is essential for the development of ecological restoration.
The pond is an important habitat for conserving biodiversity and plays a key role in providing humans with diverse benefits such as climate change mitigation and adaptation, habitat creation and maintenance of biodiversity conservation, water purification, flood mitigation, and cultural benefits [32]. Water-related ecosystems, such as rivers, lakes, and ponds, etc. are ecosystem complex that aquatic zone and littoral zone are combined [33]. The aquatic zone is divided into several zones according to the growth form of the established plants: emergent plants rooted at the bottom, but with other vegetative organs such as leaves and stems and reproductive organs such as flowers in the air; floating-leaved plants rooted at the bottom, but with floating leaves; submerged plants with all organs below the water surface except for the reproductive organs; and free-floating macrophytes with all plant organs including the roots on the water surface. These macrophytes of various growth forms generally occur in different zones of the aquatic area, usually depending on the water depth [34,35,36]. The littoral zone is the land next to the water bodies of ponds. Littoral ecosystems play crucial roles in connecting upland forests and aquatic habitats and have unique functions. The littoral ecosystems surround the pond and protect and promote water quality, aquatic ecosystem health, and shore stability [37,38,39].
However, the littoral zones are often degraded by a variety of human disturbances [33,40,41]. Moreover, the aquatic zone is not equipped with vegetation zones of different growth forms, as it does not have various water depths [42,43]. In this regard, the restoration of the pond to a complete system and the establishment of diversity is required.
This study aims to highlight restoration effects by analyzing the process of establishing a pond created within the campus of the National Institute of Ecology in Korea. The establishment of restorative treatment was analyzed based on changes in vegetation maps, growth forms and species composition, diversity of vegetation types, communities and species, and the percentage of exotic species. The restoration effects were evaluated by comparing the information with that of the reference sites.
We hypothesized that the pond in our study would resemble a natural lagoonscape over time after creation. Evaluating the vegetation changes in a created pond and the carbon absorption capacity over time provides a novel understanding of pond creation evolution and serves as a possible indicator parameter for evaluating the progress or success of pond creation projects. It is also useful to understand how long it could take after pond creation for the pond ecosystem to be comparable to a natural pond, which is helpful for managers responsible for approving, funding, and designing pond creation projects as well as achieving multiple ecosystem service outcomes.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Area

The construction of the National Ecological Institute (abbreviated as NIE hereafter) began as an alternative project not only to conserve the tidal flat but also to develop the region, instead of constructing the Janghang Industrial Complex, which was planned to reclaim the Seocheon tidal flat. To achieve this goal, all facilities in the NIE campus were prepared by thoroughly applying the principle of ecology, particularly restoration ecology. The basis of ecosystem management in the NIE was to induce passive restoration [44,45].
The place where the Najeoer Pond is located was originally rice paddies (Scheme 1). Topographically, this was the bottom of the basin where the NIE research complex was located, where a relatively large amount of water could be collected (Figure 1).
Cheonjin Lagoon is located in Goseong-gun, Gangwon province, central-eastern Korea (Figure 1A). The maximum depth of Cheonjin Lagoon is about 2 m, and from there, it slopes gently toward the land, resulting in various depths and thus various aquatic plants. Cheonjin Lagoon is a place where endangered plants such as Nymphaea tetragona var. minima and Brasenia schreberi are distributed, as well as various aquatic plants and littoral vegetation, established depending on the water depth. Therefore, it is known as the lagoon with the best preservation conditions among the 19 natural lagoons distributed on the east coast of South Korea [46]. In consideration of these ecological conditions, Cheonjin Lagoon was selected as a reference site for this study.

2.2. Creation Practice

The Najeoer Pond was created in the paddy fields. Initially, a pool was formed, the deepest point of which was 2 m, which sloped gently in the paddy field of the flatland. At this time, the topsoil, with fine particles of paddy soil, was stored for future use. After the pool was dug, the bottom was covered with the topsoil of the rice paddy, which was stored to minimize the outflow of water through the floor. Afterwards, various water depths were prepared so that free-floating, floating-leaved, submerged, emergent, wetland, and littoral plants could be evenly established. The introduction of vegetation aimed to emulate the typical vegetation structure of a pond equipped with plant zones with all the aforementioned growth forms. Littoral and emergent vegetation was first introduced to stabilize the space required for the creation of the pond, and the introduction of other vegetation was left to develop naturally.
The reference information relating to the creation of the pond was collected from analyses of the Ramsar registered wetlands, the backwater wetlands of the river, and the successional process of the abandoned rice paddy.

2.3. Vegetation Survey

The aerial images, taken by a drone, were used to identify vegetation types and landscape boundaries. These vegetation types and landscape elements were confirmed by field checks. The landscape attributes were overlapped onto topographical maps at a scale of 1:5000. Patches smaller than 1 mm on the map were excluded from this study because of the uncertainty of their sizes and shapes [47]. Mapping was performed using the ArcView GIS (Geographic Information System), and landscape ecological analyses were conducted using the ArcView GIS software (Version 10.1) [48].
A vegetation survey was conducted before, during, and on the 4th and 12th years after the creation of the pond. Vegetation samples from the created pond and the reference pond were compared using several metrics, including species composition, diversity, and the percentage of exotic species. The vegetation survey was conducted during the summer (i.e., June to August) in all survey years by recording the cover classes of plant species in quadrates that were randomly established [49]. The Braun-Blanquet [50] scale was used to measure plant cover. The ordinal cover of the Braun-Blanquet scale was converted to the median value of the percentage cover range for each cover class and then subjected to a Detrended Correspondence Analysis [51]. For the vegetation survey, quadrates sized 1, 4, and 100 m2 were used for grassland, shrubland, and tree-dominated areas, respectively. Diversity was compared based on the number of vegetation types, communities, and species in the created pond. Species diversity was compared using species rank–abundance curves, which graphically depict patterns of species diversity and dominance [52,53]. The percentage of exotic species was calculated by dividing the number of exotic species by the total number of species [11].

3. Results

3.1. Changes in Vegetation Cover

No vegetation types could be expressed as a vegetation map in the rice fields before the creation of the Najeoer Pond. The creation of this pond, which was implemented in 2011, was carried out by introducing the Z. latifolia community, the P. australis community, and the S. pierotii community. During the 4th year after its creation, in addition to the three vegetation types introduced, the T. japonica community and the Leersia japonica community established themselves naturally. During the 12th year after the creation of the pond, the T. orientalis community and the M. sacchariflorus community were established naturally (Figure 2).

3.2. Changes in Species Composition

As a result of stand ordination, based on vegetation data collected from the rice fields before the creation of the Najeoer Pond, the arrangement of the stands was distributed in the following order: Persicaria thunbergii community, Echinochloa crusgalli var. echinatum community, and Alopecurus aequalis community from left to right on Axis I. During its year of creation, the Z. latifolia community, the S. pierotii community—Panicum bisulcatum community—Kummerowia striata community—B. frondosa community, and the P. australis community were arranged in the aforementioned order from left to right on Axis I. During the 4th year, the vegetation types were arranged in the following order: S. pierotii community—K. striata community, P. australis community—Amphicarpaea bracteata subsp. edgeworthii community, Miscanthus sacchariflorus community, and Z. latifolia community—Leersia japonica community—T. japonica community from left to right on Axis I. During the 12th year, the S. pierotii community—M. sacchariflorus community, Leersia sayanuka community—A. bracteata subsp. edgeworthii community—H. japonicus community—Calamagrostis epigeios community—P. australis community, Z. latifolia community—Juncus effusus var. decipiens community, T. orientalis community—L. japonica community, and the T. japonica community were distributed in the aforementioned order from left to right on Axis I. As shown above, in the results of stand ordination, based on the vegetation data, the arrangement of the stands tended to reflect the water depth at which each stand was located without any relation to the survey year (Figure 3).
On the other hand, compared to the growth form of the dominant species making up the plant community that emerged, floating-leaved, emergent, wetland, and littoral plants appeared in the Najeoer Pond; however, the plant community dominated by wetland plants did not appear in Cheonjin Lagoon (Figure 3).
As a result of stand ordination based on vegetation data collected from the natural Cheonjin Lagoon, the arrangement of the stands was distributed in the order of the Nymphaea tetragona var. minima community, the Brasenia schreberi community, the Potamogeton wrightii community—Trapa japonica community, the Nymphoides peltata community—Zizania latifolia community, and the Phragmites australis community—Salix pierotii community—S. integra community, as shown from left to right on Axis I (Figure 4). Plant communities, formed by floating-leaved plants, such as the Nymphaea tetragona var. minima community, the Potamogeton wrightii community, the Brasenia schreberi community, the Trapa japonica community, and the Nymphoides peltata community, tended to be arranged in the aforementioned order from the lower to the upper sections on Axis II (Figure 4).
As a result of stand ordination, based on vegetation data collected from both the created Najeoer Pond and the natural Cheonjin Lagoon, the species composition of vegetation established on both sites was found to be very similar except for the floating-leaved plant zone (Figure 4).
The results of stand ordination were expressed by classifying the growth form of the dominant species (Figure 5). The results show that in both the created Najeoer Pond and the natural Cheonjin Lagoon, communities dominated by floating-leaved plants, emergent plants, wetland plants, and littoral plants have become established, and their spatial distribution depends on the water depth.

3.3. Changes in Species Diversity

The number of vegetation types, plant communities, and plant species in the created Nanjeoer Pond increased from 0 to 7, 0 to 12, and 36 to 96, respectively (Figure 6). The numbers of communities and species that appeared in the Cheonjin Lagoon were 9 and 76, respectively, and the community and species diversity of the created Najeoer Pond was greater than that of the natural Cheonjin Lagoon (Figure 6).
As a result of analyzing the change in species diversity by the species rank–dominance curve, the species diversity showed an increasing trend over time after the creation of the pond, as shown in the aforementioned results. When comparing the species diversity of communities, this diversity was higher in the littoral plant communities compared to the aquatic plant communities, and the species diversity tended to be lower as the plant communities were established at a greater depth in both the created Najeoer Pond and the natural Cheonjin Lagoon (Figure 7).

3.4. Percentage of Exotic Plant Species

In the early stage of the creation of the pond, the ratio of exotic species increased significantly, due to the disturbance that occurred during the creation process. However, during the years after creation, this ratio decreased as the vegetation introduced became established (Figure 8).

4. Discussion

4.1. Spatial Distribution of Vegetation in the Created Najeoer Pond

The spatial structure of the pond as a landscape is divided into the aquatic zone and the littoral zone. The aquatic zone can be classified into the emergent, floating-leaved, submerged, and free-floating macrophyte zones, depending on their manner of growth. These various types of macroplants usually occur in different zones of the aquatic area depending on the water depth, with the emergent plants located closest to the shore, followed by the floating-leaved macrophytes and the submerged plants. Free-floating macrophytes can occur anywhere on the water surface of the system [34,35,36].
The terrestrial plant zone is divided into the wetland and littoral plant zones. The wetland plant zone is usually distinguished by the presence of shrubs and other vegetation that does not tolerate wet conditions. The littoral zone is the land next to the water bodies of ponds. Littoral ecosystems play various and unique roles by connecting upland forests and aquatic habitats. The littoral ecosystems that surround the pond protect the aquatic ecosystem and contribute to the health and stability of the system [37,38,39]. The pond shoreline and littoral zone are interconnected and work together to maintain clean water and a healthy, functioning ecosystem [34,35,36].
The vegetation maps of the Najeoer Pond during its year of creation show that the Z. latifolia community and the P. australis community are the emergent plants, and the S. pierotii community became established as the littoral plant (Figure 2). Since then, the T. japonica community, the L. japonica community, the T. orientalis community, and the M. sacchariflorus community have been added. In addition, wetland plants such as the Calamagrostis epigeios community and the Juncus effusus var. decipiens community have appeared, as well as littoral plants such as the H. japonicus community and the Amphicarpaea bracteata subsp. edgeworthii community, and floating plants such as S. polyrhiza (Figure 3), but they are not shown on the vegetation map because they did not form a sufficiently large community.
Based on these results, it was determined that the created Najeoer Pond comprised a complete spatial structure except for the submerged plant zone [34,35,36]. The eco-diversity that the plants of these various growth forms established depending on the water depth and the water table can contribute to the biodiversity of the created Najeoer Pond [36,45,54]. In fact, the numbers of communities and species investigated in the Najeoer Pond were higher than those of the Cheonjin Lagoon, which was selected as a reference site (Figure 5). The diversity of the plant community in ponds is maximized when emergent and submerged plants cover 50–80% of the pond, and more than 90% of the littoral zone is covered by vegetation. The buffer zone provides essential reproduction, wintering, and shelter for wildlife [35,36,55,56].
In addition, a healthy pond is usually covered with macrophytes appearing from the open waters through the shoreline to the littoral zone, such as submerged, free-floating, leaf-floating, emergent, wetland, and littoral plants. On the other hand, if it is degraded by eutrophication, the coverage of macrophytes decreases, whereas the coverage of phytoplankton significantly increases. In reality, the introduction of macrophytes purifies water, regulates the biological structure, and controls eutrophication in a lake [57]. Considering these results, the complete structure of aquatic ecosystems could be recommended as a means of managing water quality in countries where water quality problems are relatively severe due to the use of land for cultivating rice.

4.2. Creation Effects Based on Species Composition and Species Diversity

The process of restoration can be examined in terms of ecosystem structure and function [58,59], as both are heavily affected by devastation. The fundamental goal of restoration is to return damaged habitats or ecosystems to conditions close to those before they were damaged. While a complete restoration means a return to that state, there are also other levels of restoration, such as partial recovery or replacement by other systems [16,17,20,60]. In order to effectively restore degraded ecosystems or protect existing high-quality areas, it is necessary to set the properties of normal and healthy ecosystems as a reference [16,19,61]. One way of setting criteria to assess the success or failure of restoration is to define the normal biological integrity of a system and then measure its deviation from it. Integrity refers to an intact state, or a complete or unfragmented quality or condition. Biological integrity is defined as the ability to support and maintain a balanced, intact, adaptable biological system with all the elements and processes expected in the natural habitat of an area [62,63].
To evaluate the created Najeoer Pond, the ecological attributes of the pond need to be compared with those from an undisturbed reference [64,65,66]. In the present study, we compared the species composition, biodiversity, and exotic species ratio of the created Najeoer Pond with those of the natural Cheonjin Lagoon. The species composition of the created Najeoer Pond resembled the Cheonjin Lagoon (Figure 4) and diversity was higher (Figure 5), while the exotic species rate was lower compared to that of the Cheonjin Lagoon (Figure 8). Based on these results, the creation of the Najeoer Pond contributed to enhancing both biological integrity and ecological stability, and, consequently, it could be determined that this project made strides towards achieving its goal.
Biodiversity significantly increased in Najeoer Pond after its creation (Figure 3). The importance of biodiversity is based on a variety of values, including various ecological functions that bring stability to the environment [67]. Biodiversity reflects the heterogeneity of a habitat or the eco-diversity [54,68,69,70]. High biodiversity is also an indicator of the integrity of an environment, demonstrating that it is healthy and has all the necessary components [71]. The increased biodiversity of the created Najeoer Pond is due to the various water depths secured through restorative treatment. In ponds, water depth is one of the most important factors affecting vegetation establishment and community assembly [72,73,74]. A variety of water depths has been proposed to increase species diversity in created ponds [73,74,75]. In addition, Kim et al. [76], An et al. [77], and Choi et al. [78] clarified that vegetation diversity is closely related to the heterogeneity of water depth.

4.3. Evaluation of Effectiveness Based on the Exotic Species Ratio

In the early stages of the creation of the pond, the number of exotic species increased significantly due to the disturbance that occurred during the creation practice. Over the years after creation, this number decreased as the vegetation introduced for creation became established (Figure 6). Exotic species often extend their habitat range beyond their early settlements by leveraging favorable life history strategies [79,80,81]. The disturbed sites are usually known as the sites that exotic species with opportunistic or ruderal life history strategies favor [79,80,81], whereas a natural ecosystem with a complete system is resistant to the invasion of exotic species [81]. From these facts, we can confirm that ecological restoration heals disturbed areas and returns them to a stable state. In practice, restoration efforts often aim to restore the biodiversity and function of ecosystems lost due to disturbances [16,82]. In this context, ecological restoration that restores the intact nature of ponds by rectifying the damage could be a preventive measure against the invasion and expansion of exotic species [83,84,85,86,87]. The results of this study also demonstrate the principle of invasion ecology, namely that disturbances induce the invasion of exotic species and that intact natural ecosystems are resistant to the invasion of exotic species [79,81,88].

5. Conclusions

As a result of analyzing the establishment process of the created Najeoer Pond from before its creation to the 12th year after creation, its species composition began to resemble that of the natural reference lagoon. In addition, diversity in terms of vegetation type and the number of plant communities and species increased continuously over the years after the pond’s creation, reaching a level similar to that of the natural lagoon. The various water depths could be considered as factors increasing biodiversity. The percentage of the exotic species significantly increased, due to the disturbance that occurred during the creation process. However, this decreased as the vegetation introduced for pond creation was established, and maintained a lower level than that of the natural lake. This result is due to the securing of biological integrity and ecological stability through ecological restoration. Consequently, restorative treatment serves to increase both biological integrity and ecological stability and meets the restoration goal. As a result, it can be determined that restoration as a process is currently in progress in the created Najeoer Pond.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, C.-S.L.; methodology, B.-S.L. and J.-E.S.; validation, B.-S.L. and J.-E.S.; formal analysis, D.-U.K. and G.-S.K.; investigation, C.-S.L., D.-U.K., and B.-S.L.; data curation, B.-S.L. and J.-E.S.; writing—original draft preparation, C.-S.L.; writing—review and editing, C.-S.L.; visualization, J.-E.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was supported by the Korea Environment Industry & Technology Institute (KEITI) through the Wetland Ecosystem Value Evaluation and Carbon Absorption Value Promotion Technology Development Project, funded by the Korea Ministry of Environment (2022003630002).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author.

Acknowledgments

I would like to express my sincere gratitude to the National Institute of Ecology construction team for their hard work in restoring the Najeoer Pond during the construction of the National Institute of Ecology. I would also like to thank the National Institute of Ecology for allowing me to carry out this study on the National Institute of Ecology campus.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Grimm, N.B.; Chapin, F.S., III; Bierwagen, B.; Gonzalez, P.; Groffman, P.M.; Luo, Y.; Melton, F.; Nadelhoffer, K.; Pairis, A.; Raymond, P.A.; et al. The Impacts of Climate Change on Ecosystem Structure and Function. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2013, 11, 474–482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. He, X.; Liang, J.; Zeng, G.; Yuan, Y.; Li, X. The Effects of Interaction between Climate Change and Land-Use/Cover Change on Biodiversity-Related Ecosystem Services. Glob. Chall. 2019, 3, 1800095. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Weiskopf, S.R.; Rubenstein, M.A.; Crozier, L.G.; Gaichas, S.; Griffis, R.; Halofsky, J.E.; Hyde, K.J.W.; Morelli, T.L.; Morisette, J.T.; Muñoz, R.C.; et al. Climate Change Effects on Biodiversity, Ecosystems, Ecosystem Services, and Natural Resource Management in the United States. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 733, 137782. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Shivanna, K.R. Climate Change and Its Impact on Biodiversity and Human Welfare. Proc. Indian Natl. Sci. Acad. 2022, 88, 160–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Gann, G.D.; McDonald, T.; Walder, B.; Aronson, J.; Nelson, C.R.; Jonson, J.; Hallett, J.G.; Eisenberg, C.; Guariguata, M.R.; Liu, J. International Principles and Standards for the Practice of Ecological Restoration. Restor. Ecol. 2019, 27, S1–S46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Adla, K.; Dejan, K.; Neira, D.; Dragana, Š. Chapter 9—Degradation of Ecosystems and Loss of Ecosystem Services. In One Health; Prata, J.C., Ribeiro, A.I., Rocha-Santos, T., Eds.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2022; pp. 281–327. ISBN 978-0-12-822794-7. [Google Scholar]
  7. Jenny, J.-P.; Anneville, O.; Arnaud, F.; Baulaz, Y.; Bouffard, D.; Domaizon, I.; Bocaniov, S.A.; Chèvre, N.; Dittrich, M.; Dorioz, J.-M.; et al. Scientists’ Warning to Humanity: Rapid Degradation of the World’s Large Lakes. J. Great Lakes Res. 2020, 46, 686–702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Nilsson, C.; Aradottir, A.L.; Hagen, D.; Halldórsson, G.; Høegh, K.; Mitchell, R.J.; Raulund-Rasmussen, K.; Svavarsdóttir, K.; Tolvanen, A.; Wilson, S.D. Evaluating the Process of Ecological Restoration. Ecol. Soc. 2016, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Peng, J.; Xu, D.; Xu, Z.; Tang, H.; Jiang, H.; Dong, J.; Liu, Y. Ten Key Issues for Ecological Restoration of Territorial Space. Natl. Sci. Rev. 2024, 11, nwae176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Wei, X.; Song, W.; Shao, Y.; Cai, X. Progress of Ecological Restoration Research Based on Bibliometric Analysis. Int. J. Environ. Res Public Health 2022, 20, 520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Lee, H.; An, J.H.; Shin, H.C.; Lee, C.S. Assessment of Restoration Effects and Invasive Potential Based on Vegetation Dynamics of Pitch Pine (Pinus rigida Mill.) Plantation in Korea. Forests 2020, 11, 568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. An, J.H.; Lim, B.S.; Seol, J.; Kim, A.R.; Lim, C.H.; Moon, J.S.; Lee, C.S. Evaluation on the Restoration Effects in the River Restoration Projects Practiced in South Korea. Water 2022, 14, 2739. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Kondolf, G.M.; Anderson, S.; Lave, R.; Pagano, L.; Merenlender, A.; Bernhardt, E.S. Two Decades of River Restoration in California: What Can We Learn? Restor. Ecol. 2007, 15, 516–523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Palmer, M.; Allan, J.D.; Meyer, J.; Bernhardt, E.S. River Restoration in the Twenty-First Century: Data and Experiential Knowledge to Inform Future Efforts. Restor. Ecol. 2007, 15, 472–481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Tischew, S.; Baasch, A.; Conrad, M.K.; Kirmer, A. Evaluating Restoration Success of Frequently Implemented Compensation Measures: Results and Demands for Control Procedures. Restor. Ecol. 2010, 18, 467–480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. McDonald, T.; Gann, G.; Jonson, J.; Dixon, K. International Standards for the Practice of Ecological Restoration–Including Principles and Key Concepts; Society for Ecological Restoration: Washington, DC, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  17. Aronson, J.; Floret, C.; Le Floc’h, E.; Ovalle, C.; Pontanier, R. Restoration and Rehabilitation of Degraded Ecosystems in Arid and Semi-arid Lands. I. A View from the South. Restor. Ecol. 1993, 1, 8–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Berger, J.J. Ecological Restoration and Nonindigenous Plant Species: A Review. Restor. Ecol. 1993, 1, 74–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. SERI Primer: Society for Ecological Restoration International. Science & Policy Working Group the SER International Primer on Ecological Restoration. Soc. Ecol. Restor. Int. 2004. Available online: http://www.ser-rrc.org/resource/the-ser-international-primer-on/ (accessed on 20 August 2024).
  20. Bradshaw, A. Ecological Principles and Land Reclamation Practice. Landsc. Plan. 1984, 11, 35–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Hobbs, R.J.; Norton, D.A. Towards a Conceptual Framework for Restoration Ecology. Restor. Ecol. 1996, 4, 93–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Atkinson, J.; Brudvig, L.A.; Mallen-Cooper, M.; Nakagawa, S.; Moles, A.T.; Bonser, S.P. Terrestrial Ecosystem Restoration Increases Biodiversity and Reduces Its Variability, but Not to Reference Levels: A Global Meta-Analysis. Ecol. Lett. 2022, 25, 1725–1737. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Gunn, J.; Keller, W.; Negusanti, J.; Potvin, R.; Beckett, P.; Winterhalder, K. Ecosystem Recovery after Emission Reductions: Sudbury, Canada. Water Air Soil Pollut. 1995, 85, 1783–1788. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Temperton, V.M.; Hobbs, R.J.; Nuttle, T.; Halle, S. Assembly Rules and Restoration Ecology: Bridging the Gap between Theory and Practice; Island Press: Covelo, CA, USA, 2004; Volume 5, 464p. [Google Scholar]
  25. Mutillod, C.; Buisson, É.; Mahy, G.; Jaunatre, R.; Bullock, J.M.; Tatin, L.; Dutoit, T. Ecological Restoration and Rewilding: Two Approaches with Complementary Goals? Biol. Rev. 2024, 99, 820–836. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Martin, D.M. Ecological Restoration Should Be Redefined for the Twenty-First Century. Restor. Ecol. 2017, 25, 668–673. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Ward, M.; Beheshti, K. Lessons Learned from over Thirty Years of Eelgrass Restoration on the US West Coast. Ecosphere 2023, 14, e4642. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Palmer, M.A.; Filoso, S. Environmental Markets: The Power of Regulation Response. Science 2009, 326, 1061–1062. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Lindenmayer, D.B.; Likens, G.E.; Franklin, J.F. Rapid Responses to Facilitate Ecological Discoveries from Major Disturbances. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2010, 8, 527–532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Suding, K. Toward an Era of Restoration in Ecology: Successes, Failures, and Opportunities Ahead. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 2011, 42, 465–487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Evangelista de Oliveira, R.; Lex Engel, V.; Loiola, P.; Moraes, L.; de Souza Vismara, E. Top 10 Indicators for Evaluating Restoration Trajectories in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest. Ecol. Indic. 2021, 127, 107652. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Cuenca-Cambronero, M.; Blicharska, M.; Perrin, J.-A.; Davidson, T.A.; Oertli, B.; Lago, M.; Beklioglu, M.; Meerhoff, M.; Arim, M.; Teixeira, J. Challenges and Opportunities in the Use of Ponds and Pondscapes as Nature-Based Solutions. Hydrobiologia 2023, 850, 3257–3271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Goodwin, C.N.; Hawkins, C.P.; Kershner, J.L. Riparian Restoration in the Western United States: Oveview and Perspecive. Restor. Ecol. 1997, 5, 4–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. McCarty, T. Pond Ecology. Available online: https://extension.psu.edu/pond-ecology (accessed on 12 June 2024).
  35. NRCS (Natural Resources Conservation Services); WHC (Wildlife Habitat Council). Farm Pond Ecosystems; NRCS and WHC: Washington, DC, USA, 2006; 12p. [Google Scholar]
  36. Reddy, M.T.; Sivaraj, N.; Kamala, V.; Pandravada, S.R.; Sunil, N.; Dikshit, N. Classification, Characterization and Comparison of Aquatic Ecosystems in the Landscape of Adilabad District, Telangana, Deccan Region, India. Open Access Libr. J. 2018, 5, 1–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Naiman, R.J.; Decamps, H. The Ecology of Interfaces: Littoral Zones. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 1997, 28, 621–658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Fitch, L. Littoral Areas: A User’s Guide to Health; Cows and Fish Program: Lethbridge, AB, Canada, 2003; ISBN 0-7785-2305-5. [Google Scholar]
  39. Ranalli, A.; Macalady, D. The Importance of the Riparian Zone and In-Stream Processes in Nitrate Attenuation in Undisturbed and Agricultural Watersheds—A Review of the Scientific Literature. J. Hydrol. 2010, 389, 406–415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Graziano, M.P.; Deguire, A.K.; Surasinghe, T.D. Riparian Buffers as a Critical Landscape Feature: Insights for Riverscape Conservation and Policy Renovations. Diversity 2022, 14, 172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Richardson, D.M.; Holmes, P.M.; Esler, K.J.; Galatowitsch, S.M.; Stromberg, J.C.; Kirkman, S.P.; Pyšek, P.; Hobbs, R.J. Riparian Vegetation: Degradation, Alien Plant Invasions, and Restoration Prospects. Divers. Distrib. 2007, 13, 126–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. de Souza Queiroz, C.; da Silva, F.R.; de Cerqueira Rossa-Feres, D. The Relationship between Pond Habitat Depth and Functional Tadpole Diversity in an Agricultural Landscape. R. Soc. Open Sci. 2015, 2, 150165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Wen, Z.; Wang, H.; Shan, H.; Cao, Y.; Tan, L.; Zhu, T.; Cai, Q.; Ni, L.; Zhang, X.; Chou, Q.; et al. Water Depth Modulates the Species Richness–Biomass Relationship in Submerged Macrophytes. Front. Environ. Sci. 2023, 11, 1115119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Lee, C.; Ahn, J.; Pee, J.; Lee, S.; Lee, J. Futuristic Direction of River Restoration in Korea under Changing Climate Change. J. Restor. Ecol. 2011, 2, 137–143. [Google Scholar]
  45. Kim, A.R.; Lim, B.S.; Seol, J.; Lee, C.S. Principle of Restoration Ecology Reflected in the Process Creating the National Institute of Ecology. J. Ecol. Environ. 2021, 45, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Jeong, Y.I.; Hong, B.R.; Kim, Y.C.; Lee, K.S. Distribution, Life History and Growth Characteristics of the Utricularia japonica Makino in the East Coastal Lagoon, Korea. Korean J. Ecol. Environ. 2016, 49, 110–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Küchler, A.; Zonneveld, I. Vegetation Mapping; Kluwer Academic Publishers: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1988. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. ESRI. Arcview GIS; Environmental System Research Institute: Redlands, CA, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  49. Ellenberg, D.; Mueller-Dombois, D. Aims and Methods of Vegetation Ecology; John Willy & Sons: NY, USA, 1974; 547p. [Google Scholar]
  50. Braun-Blanquet, J. Pflanzensoziologie; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1964; 864p. [Google Scholar]
  51. Hill, M. A FORTRAN Program for Detrended Correspondence Analysis and Reciprocal Averaging; Ecology and Systematics, Cornell University: Ithaca, NY, USA, 1979; 51p. [Google Scholar]
  52. Kent, M.; Coker, P. Vegetation Description and Data Analysis: A Practical Approach; John Wiley & Sons: New York, NY, USA, 1992; ISBN 0-8493-7756-0. [Google Scholar]
  53. Magurran, A.E. Measuring Biological Diversity; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2004; 256p. [Google Scholar]
  54. Naveh, Z. From Biodiversity to Ecodiversity: A Landscape-ecology Approach to Conservation and Restoration. Restor. Ecol. 1994, 2, 180–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Hsu, C.-H.; Chou, J.-Y.; Fang, W.-T. Habitat Selection of Wintering Birds in Farm Ponds in Taoyuan, Taiwan. Animals 2019, 9, 113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Vest, J.L.; Haukos, D.A.; Niemuth, N.D.; Setash, C.M.; Gammonley, J.H.; Devries, J.H.; Dahlgren, D.K. Waterfowl and Wetland Birds. In Rangeland Wildlife Ecology and Conservation; McNew, L.B., Dahlgren, D.K., Beck, J.L., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Germany, 2023; pp. 417–469. ISBN 978-3-031-34037-6. [Google Scholar]
  57. Xu, F.-L. Application of Ecological and Thermodynamic Indicators for the Assessment of Lack Ecosystem Health. In Handbook of Ecological Indicators for Assessment of Ecosystem Health; Taylor & Francis: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2005; pp. 127–151. [Google Scholar]
  58. Lake, P.S.; Bond, N.; Reich, P. Linking Ecological Theory with Stream Restoration. Freshw. Biol. 2007, 52, 597–615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Hobbs, R.J.; Cramer, V.A. Restoration Ecology: Interventionist Approaches for Restoring and Maintaining Ecosystem Function in the Face of Rapid Environmental Change. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 2008, 33, 39–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Bradshaw, Y.W. Urbanization and Underdevelopment: A Global Study of Modernization, Urban Bias, and Economic Dependency. Am. Sociol. Rev. 1987, 52, 224–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Lüderitz, V.; Jüpner, R.; Müller, S.; Feld, C.K. Renaturalization of Streams and Rivers—The Special Importance of Integrated Ecological Methods in Measurement of Success. An Example from Saxony-Anhalt (Germany). Limnologica 2004, 34, 249–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Karr, J.R. Ecological Integrity and Ecological Health Are Not the Same. In Engineering within Ecological Constraints; National Academy Press: Washington, DC, USA, 1996; pp. 97–109. [Google Scholar]
  63. Lee, C.-S.; Cho, Y.-C.; Shin, H.-C.; Lee, S.-M.; Oh, W.-S.; Park, S.; Seol, E.-S.; Lee, C.-H.; Eom, A.-H.; Cho, H.-J. An Evaluation of the Effects of Rehabilitation Practiced in Coal Mining Spoils in Korea: 2. An Evaluation Based on the Physicochemical Properties of Soil. J. Ecol. Environ. 2008, 31, 23–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. White, P.S.; Walker, J.L. Approximating Nature’s Variation: Selecting and Using Reference Information in Restoration Ecology. Restor. Ecol. 1997, 5, 338–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Whittier, T.R.; Stoddard, J.L.; Larsen, D.P.; Herlihy, A.T. Selecting Reference Sites for Stream Biological Assessments: Best Professional Judgment or Objective Criteria. J. N. Am. Benthol. Soc. 2007, 26, 349–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Gilvear, D.; Bryant, R. Analysis of Remotely Sensed Data for Fluvial Geomorphology and River Science. In Tools in Fluvial Geomorphology; Kondolf, G.M., Piegay, H., Eds.; John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2016; pp. 103–132. ISBN 978-0-470-68405-4. [Google Scholar]
  67. Naess, A. Ecosophy and Gestalt Ontology. Trumpeter 1989, 6. Available online: https://trumpeter.athabascau.ca/index.php/trumpet/article/view/756 (accessed on 20 August 2024).
  68. Romme, W.H. Fire and Landscape Diversity in Subalpine Forests of Yellowstone National Park. Ecol. Monogr. 1982, 52, 199–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Lim, C.H.; Kim, G.S.; An, J.H.; You, B.H.; Bae, Y.S.; Byun, H.G.; Lee, C.S. Relationship between Biodiversity and Landscape Structure in the Gyungan Stream Basin, Central Korea. Entomol. Res. 2016, 46, 260–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. An, J.H.; Lim, C.H.; Jung, S.H.; Kim, A.R.; Lee, C.S. Effects of climate change on biodiversity and measures for them. J. Wetl. Res. 2016, 18, 474–480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Meffe, G.; Carroll, R. Principles of Conservation Biology, 2nd ed.; Sinauer Associates, Inc: Sunderland, MA, USA, 1997; 729p. [Google Scholar]
  72. van der Valk, A.G. Succession in Wetlands: A Gleasonian Appraoch. Ecology 1981, 62, 688–696. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Oertli, B.; Parris, K.M. Toward Management of Urban Ponds for Freshwater Biodiversity. Ecosphere 2019, 10, e02810. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Bélanger, L.; Maisonneuve, C.; Rodrigue, J. Avian Use of Dairy Farm Ponds and Landowners’ Perceptions of Their Management for Wildlife Conservation. Birds 2021, 2, 476–491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Ahn, C.; Dee, S. Early Development of Plant Community in a Created Mitigation Wetland as Affected by Introduced Hydrologic Design Elements. Ecol. Eng. 2011, 37, 1324–1333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Kim, S.H.; Nam, J.M.; Kim, J.G. Establishment Strategy of a Rare Wetland Species Sparganium erectum in Korea. J Ecol. Environ. 2017, 41, 27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. An, Y.; Gao, Y.; Tong, S. Emergence and Growth Performance of Bolboschoenus planiculmis Varied in Response to Water Level and Soil Planting Depth: Implications for Wetland Restoration Using Tuber Transplantation. Aquat. Bot. 2018, 148, 10–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Choi, H.; Kim, H.; Nam, B.E.; Bae, Y.J.; Kim, J.G. Effect of Initial Planting on Vegetation Establishment in Different Depth Zones of Constructed Farm Ponds. Restor. Ecol. 2022, 30, e13488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Mooney, H.A. Invasive Alien Species: A New Synthesis; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2005; pp. 1–15. [Google Scholar]
  80. Rawlins, J.K.; Roundy, B.A.; Davis, S.M.; Egget, D. Predicting Germination in Semi-Arid Wildland Seedbeds. I. Thermal Germination Models. Environ. Exp. Bot. 2012, 76, 60–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Lim, B.S.; Seok, J.E.; Lim, C.H.; Kim, G.S.; Shin, H.C.; Lee, C.S. Distribution, Effect, and Control of Exotic Plants in Republic of Korea. Biology 2023, 12, 826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  82. Gaiarsa, M.P.; Bascompte, J. Hidden Effects of Habitat Restoration on the Persistence of Pollination Networks. Ecol. Lett. 2022, 25, 2132–2141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  83. Correll, D.L. Principles of Planning and Establishment of Buffer Zones. Ecol. Eng. 2005, 24, 433–439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Weidlich, E.W.; Flórido, F.G.; Sorrini, T.B.; Brancalion, P.H. Controlling Invasive Plant Species in Ecological Restoration: A Global Review. J. Appl. Ecol. 2020, 57, 1806–1817. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Meyer, S.E.; Callaham, M.A.; Stewart, J.E.; Warren, S.D. Invasive Species Response to Natural and Anthropogenic Disturbance. In Invasive Species in Forests and Rangelands of the United States: A Comprehensive Science Synthesis for the United States Forest Sector; Springer: Cham, Germany, 2021; pp. 85–110. [Google Scholar]
  86. Rai, P.K. Environmental Degradation by Invasive Alien Plants in the Anthropocene: Challenges and Prospects for Sustainable Restoration. Anthr. Sci. 2022, 1, 5–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Kim, D.-U.; Lim, B.-S.; Seok, J.-E.; Kim, G.-S.; Moon, J.-S.; Lim, C.-H.; Lee, C.-S. Evaluation of the 20-Year Restoration Process in an Air-Pollution-Damaged Forest near the Ulsan Industrial Complex, Korea. Forests 2023, 14, 1565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. McNeely, J.A. Cities and Protected Areas: An Oxymoron or a Partnership. Parks 2001, 11, 1–3. [Google Scholar]
Biology 13 00820 sch001
Scheme 1. Images before the creation (top), at the time of creation (center), and current image (bottom) of the Najeoer Pond in NIE.
Scheme 1. Images before the creation (top), at the time of creation (center), and current image (bottom) of the Najeoer Pond in NIE.
Biology 13 00820 sch001
Biology 13 00820 g001
Figure 1. Maps show the location of the studied ponds. The red circle indicates a study site. (A,B) indicate the geographical and local locations of the study site, respectively.
Figure 1. Maps show the location of the studied ponds. The red circle indicates a study site. (A,B) indicate the geographical and local locations of the study site, respectively.
Biology 13 00820 g001
Biology 13 00820 g002
Figure 2. Maps showing the changes in vegetation cover during the establishment process of the created Najeoer Pond.
Figure 2. Maps showing the changes in vegetation cover during the establishment process of the created Najeoer Pond.
Biology 13 00820 g002
Biology 13 00820 g003
Figure 3. Ordination of plant communities established over time in the created Najeoer Pond.
Figure 3. Ordination of plant communities established over time in the created Najeoer Pond.
Biology 13 00820 g003
Biology 13 00820 g004
Figure 4. DCA ordination of stands, based on vegetation data collected from both the created Najeoer Pond and the natural Cheonjin Lagoon. The left and right diagrams compare the spatial distribution of plant communities and sites, respectively.
Figure 4. DCA ordination of stands, based on vegetation data collected from both the created Najeoer Pond and the natural Cheonjin Lagoon. The left and right diagrams compare the spatial distribution of plant communities and sites, respectively.
Biology 13 00820 g004
Biology 13 00820 g005
Figure 5. DCA ordination of stands based on vegetation data collected from the created Najeoer Pond and the natural Cheonjin Lagoon. The different colors indicate the groups by growth form.
Figure 5. DCA ordination of stands based on vegetation data collected from the created Najeoer Pond and the natural Cheonjin Lagoon. The different colors indicate the groups by growth form.
Biology 13 00820 g005
Biology 13 00820 g006
Figure 6. Changes in the number of vegetation types (A), communities (B), and species (C) in the years after the creation of the Najeoer Pond. The dotted lines in B and C represent the results of the reference site, Cheonjin Lagoon.
Figure 6. Changes in the number of vegetation types (A), communities (B), and species (C) in the years after the creation of the Najeoer Pond. The dotted lines in B and C represent the results of the reference site, Cheonjin Lagoon.
Biology 13 00820 g006
Biology 13 00820 g007
Figure 7. Comparisons of species rank–dominance curves among plant communities established before creation, during the year of creation, 4 years after creation, and 12 years after creation of the Najeoer Pond and in the Cheonjin Lagoon.
Figure 7. Comparisons of species rank–dominance curves among plant communities established before creation, during the year of creation, 4 years after creation, and 12 years after creation of the Najeoer Pond and in the Cheonjin Lagoon.
Biology 13 00820 g007
Biology 13 00820 g008
Figure 8. The change in exotic plant ratios in the created Najeoer Pond. The dotted line represents the results of the reference site, Cheonjin Lagoon.
Figure 8. The change in exotic plant ratios in the created Najeoer Pond. The dotted line represents the results of the reference site, Cheonjin Lagoon.
Biology 13 00820 g008
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Lee, C.-S.; Kim, D.-U.; Lim, B.-S.; Seok, J.-E.; Kim, G.-S. Vegetation Succession for 12 Years in a Pond Created Restoratively. Biology 2024, 13, 820. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology13100820

AMA Style

Lee C-S, Kim D-U, Lim B-S, Seok J-E, Kim G-S. Vegetation Succession for 12 Years in a Pond Created Restoratively. Biology. 2024; 13(10):820. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology13100820

Chicago/Turabian Style

Lee, Chang-Seok, Dong-Uk Kim, Bong-Soon Lim, Ji-Eun Seok, and Gyung-Soon Kim. 2024. "Vegetation Succession for 12 Years in a Pond Created Restoratively" Biology 13, no. 10: 820. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology13100820

APA Style

Lee, C. -S., Kim, D. -U., Lim, B. -S., Seok, J. -E., & Kim, G. -S. (2024). Vegetation Succession for 12 Years in a Pond Created Restoratively. Biology, 13(10), 820. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology13100820

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop