The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Creating woodland islets to reconcile ecological restoration, conservation, and agricultural land use
Open accessAbstract
Restoration initiatives seek to address widespread deforestation and forest degradation, but face substantial problems. “Passive restoration”, whereby abandoned agricultural land undergoes secondary succession, is often slow, owing to biotic and abiotic limitations. “Active restoration”, chiefly accomplished by planting trees, can be very expensive if large areas are to be restored. We suggest “woodland islets” as an alternative way to achieve ecological restoration in extensive agricultural landscapes, particularly in low-productivity environments. This approach involves the planting of many small, dense blocks of native trees to enhance biodiversity and provide a range of ecosystem services. If the surrounding land is abandoned, the islets act as sources of woodland species and seed, which can accelerate woodland development. Alternatively, if the surrounding area is used for cultivation or pasture, the islets will increase the conservation value of the land and offer the potential for income generation. Here, we review existing approaches to woodland restoration and evaluate the relative strengths and weaknesses of the woodland islets approach.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Global Consequences of Land Use
Foley, J. A., DeFries, R., Asner, G. P., Barford, C., Bonan, G., Carpenter, S. R., Chapin, F. S., Coe, M. T., Daily, G. C., Gibbs, H. K., et al. (2005) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1111772 · Cited by 13,272
Global Forest Resources Assessment 2020
(2020) · doi:10.4060/ca9825en · Cited by 3,408
Mixed biodiversity benefits of agri‐environment schemes in five European countries
Kleijn, D., Baquero, R. A., Clough, Y., Díaz, M., De Esteban, J., Fernández, F., Gabriel, D., Herzog, F., Holzschuh, A., Jöhl, R., et al. (2006) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2005.00869.x · Cited by 1,081
A synthesis of information on rapid land-cover change for the period 1981–2000
LEPERS, E., LAMBIN, E. F., JANETOS, A. C., DeFRIES, R., ACHARD, F., RAMANKUTTY, N., & SCHOLES, R. J. (2005) · BioScience · doi:10.1641/0006-3568(2005)055[0115:asoior]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 478 · cited 2×
“Globally, degradation of land as a consequence of agricultural activities is estimated at about 12 400 000 km2, and ranges between 10–20% in the dryland areas of the planet (Lepers et al. 2005; see also LADA 2007).”
Background
Cited by
Functional landscape heterogeneity and animal biodiversity in agricultural landscapes
Fahrig, L., Baudry, J., Brotons, L., Burel, F. G., Crist, T. O., Fuller, R. J., Sirami, C., Siriwardena, G. M., & Martin, J. (2011) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2010.01559.x · Cited by 1,818
Global biodiversity change: The bad, the good, and the unknown
Pereira, H. M., Navarro, L. M., & Martins, I. S. (2012) · Annual Review of Environment and Resources · doi:10.1146/annurev-environ-042911-093511 · Cited by 777
Tanentzap, A. J., Kirby, K. J., & Goldberg, E. (2012) · Forest Ecology and Management · doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2011.10.005 · Cited by 135
Metadata
- Authors
- Benayas, J. M. R., Bullock, J. M., & Newton, A. C.
- Venue
- Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2008-08
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 329-336
- ISSN
- 1540-9295 (ISSN-L)
- 1540-9309
- OpenAlex
- W2048418011
- Cited by
- 433
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 11.30
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Creating woodland islets to reconcile ecological restoration, conservation, and agricultural land use. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1890/070057
- The paper
- Benayas, J. M. R., Bullock, J. M., & Newton, A. C. (2008). Creating woodland islets to reconcile ecological restoration, conservation, and agricultural land use. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. https://doi.org/10.1890/070057
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.