OPINION ARTICLE
Tertiary succession: a new concept to help
vegetation restoration
Gillian L. Rapson1,2
Restoration is the human activity of manipulating vegetation with the aim of accelerating attainment of stable vegetation. But
current procedures seem to arrest succession instead. A comparison of primary and secondary successions with restoration
activities suggests there is little overlap in these concepts. Thinking of the process of restoration as a tertiary succession helps
highlight managerial options which may improve success, especially by addressing environmental and biological legacies.
Key words: biological legacy, dispersal, disturbance, ecosystem property, function, traits
Implications for Practice
• Arrested successions, such as created by many restoration
projects, need to be accelerated toward normal natural
functioning.
• Tertiary succession is a concept differentiating restoration
activities from natural processes.
• Tertiary succession should change manager’s expecta-
tions of restorations’ progress.
• This concept should facilitating ongoing intervention to
improve restorations’ prospects.
Introduction
Vegetation restoration, particularly of wetlands and forests, is a
crucial strategy in modern humans’ attempts to mitigate the
impacts of anthropic activities and anthropogenic climate
change. Most restoration activities take place on degraded land,
damaged by logging, mining, fire, floods, landslides, or aban-
doned after agricultural conversion (Prach & Walker 2020).
Worldwide, 0.9 billion hectares are currently available for resto-
ration plantings, which could store 205 gigatonnes of carbon
(Bastin et al. 2019). But what successional logic drives vegeta-
tion restoration?
Vegetation Succession
The concept of succession was originated by Eugenius
Warming (1895), the Danish founder of ecology, his publication
translated into English as “Oecology of Plants – an introduction
to the study of plant-communities” (Warming & Vahl 1909).
Succession is the gradual and putatively orderly sequence of
vegetation change through natural processes to reach a stable
or climax vegetation (Clements 1916). Americans Frederic
Clements and Henry Gleason subsequently developed the
January 2023 Restoration Ecology Vol. 31, No. 1, e13683
concept (Gleason 1927; Clements 1928), still debated today
(Walker et al. 2007; Pickett et al. 2009).
Primary succession is the natural process by which a climax
vegetation is ultimately emplaced on new or denuded land,
where no species were originally present (Clements 1916).
Never precisely defined, it is typified by the sequence of
vegetation changes following glacial retreat at Glacier Bay,
Alaska, U.S.A., first reported by John Muir in 1879, and studied
continuously since (e.g., Cooper 1923; Crocker & Major 1955;
Buma et al. 2017). Secondary succession is the natural process
on a site which has been partially, or even completely devege-
tated by a disturbance event. Though much of the above-ground
biomass is removed, some remnants may remain, along with
carbon and nutrients in coarse woody debris (Carmona
et al. 2002). The soil can be largely intact, with retention of
below-ground tissues, seeds, fungi, and microbes and even
invertebrates (Wardle & Peltzer 2007), all facilitating secondary
succession. By contrast, in a primary succession physical space
and light are the only resources certain to be available to incom-
ing plant species. Despite the logic of the terminology, second-
ary succession is not a later stage of primary succession, and it
is possible to have multiple secondary successions commencing
on the same site, though only after an initial primary succession
and equally multiple disturbances.
The Links Between Vegetation Succession and
Restoration
Hobbs et al. (2007) say: “Succession has been, and still mostly
remains, a conceptual construct that aids in the understanding
Author contributions: GLP conceived and wrote the paper.
1
Ecology, School of Natural Sciences, Massey University, Palmerston North,
New Zealand
2
Address correspondence to G. L. Rapson, email g.rapson@massey.ac.nz
© 2022 Society for Ecological Restoration.
doi: 10.1111/rec.13683
1 of 7

Tertiary succession in restoration
of how systems change over time. Restoration is primarily a
practical activity that seeks to achieve outcomes in the most
effective and efficient way possible” (Fig. 1). Thirty-five years
ago, Bradshaw (1987) declared restoration an acid test for our
understanding of succession. And attempts to link the two have
been many (Clements 1949; Luken 1990; Walker et al. 2007;
Pickett et al. 2009), though not necessarily successful
(Luken 1990; Holl 2020; Rapson 2021).
Mostly restorationists do not specify how they intend to inter-
act with natural successional processes. If they thought about it,
they might claim to be implementing a secondary succession,
preferably an “accelerated” one. The term “accelerated succes-
sion” was first published by Robinson (1942), though its con-
temporaneous frequency of use suggests it was already widely
established in practice. But what is the logic behind accelerating
a natural succession?
Generally restoration projects involve planting seedlings to
accelerate establishment over the dispersal barrier and past the
very competitive phases of germination and recruitment, where
mortality can be very high (Fig. 2). Once canopy closure is
achieved, the restoration is declared a success (Lockwood &
Pimm 1999; Hobbs et al. 2007), and natural processes are left
to (hopefully) continue the sere. But timely success is not always
achieved, with restorations instead becoming “arrested”
Figure 1. Volunteers plant native trees into a sward of exotic grasses and shrub weeds, created by felling a pine plantation for construction of a cycleway viaduct;
Keeble’s Farm, Massey University, Manawat
u, New Zealand.
2 of 7
1526100x, 2023, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/rec.13683 by Luiz Moraes - CAPES , Wiley Online Library on [04/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
(Phillips 1934), “stuck” (Hobbs et al. 2007), or “stalled”
(Walker & del Moral 2008).
There are many causes for this, such as presence, perhaps
overwhelmingly, of competitive aliens (Holl 2020; Lami
et al. 2021). Prach and Walker (2020) estimated aliens influence
about a quarter of primary successions, though these are less
susceptible to aliens than secondary successions, because less
exposed to anthropic disturbance. The presence of herbivores
can hinder succession (Suzuki et al. 2021), especially if non-
native (Burns et al. 2012). Further, widespread agriculturaliza-
tion causes a paucity of naturally dispersing seeds to furnish
later successional stages (McAlpine et al. 2016), perhaps in par-
allel with a paucity of dispersers (Kelly et al. 2010).
Comparison Between Successions and Restoration
Failure to accelerate succession suggests our thinking is arrested
by the belief that restoration actually triggers such a secondary
succession in the first place. A tabulation of the characteristics
in primary and secondary successions with vegetation restora-
tion suggests there is very little support for such thinking
(Table 1).
Only one similarity in Ecological Situation (Table 1) exists
between secondary succession and vegetation restoration. (The
Restoration Ecology January 2023

Figure 2. Conical juvenile Dacrycarpus dacrydioides (Podocarpaceae) to 15 m on the toe of a scarp above the Mungatungaroa stream. This successful
restoration planting was initiated by Michael Greenwood in 1985; Keeble’s Farm.
previous presence of a primary succession is axiomatic, and so is
unscored). Young only for primary successions, landscape age
does present a match between secondary succession and restora-
tion. Historical anthropic disturbances are generally triggers for
restoration projects (Holl & Aide 2011), even though “[r]estora-
tion is a unique form of disturbance” itself (del Moral
et al. 2007). Prior to restoration actions, exogenous disturbances
often occur with high frequency, perhaps annually in the case of
agriculture, a frequency greater than in most disturbed natural
systems, except perhaps sand-dunes (Villacís Lozada & Rap-
son 2021). Time scale to recovery is slower in secondary succes-
sion (Prach et al. 2016), but hopefully accelerated for
restoration, though this is debatable (see above). A primary suc-
cession probably has one or more trajectories converging on the
site’s climax vegetation (Clements 1916; Phillips 1934), while
secondary succession seems more variable and trajectories
may even be divergent (del Moral et al. 2007). The sere in resto-
ration plantings is pre-determined, at least in theory (Holl 2020),
though the outcome may be unpredictable and equally divergent
(Tognetti et al. 2010), perhaps a partial match with secondary
succession.
In terms of environmental legacies of the site, there are
probably no aspects of secondary succession which overlap
with restoration, though evidence for this is generally lack-
ing. However, Walker and del Moral (2003) and Wardle
and Peltzer (2007) suggest that restoration will have soils
low in nutrients and organics, high in phosphorus, and com-
pacted by vehicle passages. Anthropically modified soils
January 2023 Restoration Ecology
1526100x, 2023, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/rec.13683 by Luiz Moraes - CAPES , Wiley Online Library on [04/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Tertiary succession in restoration
may also contain contaminants (Cavani et al. 2016), amelio-
ration of which has no corollary with natural successional
processes, even if an important part of reclamation activities.
In a process driven by plants, biological legacies are very
important, but again secondary succession shows few matches
with restoration (Table 1). The vegetation being replaced may
be dominated by aliens, particularly if on abandoned farmland,
cropland or old-fields (Tognetti et al. 2010). Natural biomass
is initially low in both restoration and secondary succession,
the latter being initiated by disturbance events, which, defini-
tionally, remove biomass (Grime 1979). Plant species’ diversity
is also low initially, with aliens dominating in both richness and
cover (Boscutti et al. 2017; Lami et al. 2021). In restorations,
native species are routinely added, though often not in suffi-
ciently great diversity to mimic natural systems (Hughes
et al. 2018). Restoration deliberately reduces dispersal con-
straints (Nolan et al. 2021), while K-selected species (with poor
dispersal due to a tradeoff to a seed size favoring establishment
in competitive conditions) normally dominate in secondary suc-
cession (Opler et al. 1980). A large seedbank is similarly present
in secondary succession and restoration, though in restorations,
it is probably comprised of alien or inappropriate species
(Bekker et al. 1997), severely limiting succession. Litter depths
are especially low in restoration situations, often a consequence
of years of biomass removal through harvesting (Novara
et al. 2015), comparable with neither succession. The rich,
fungal-dominated community of a secondary succession is
probably depauperate in restorations, or skewed toward bacteria
3 of 7
 1526100x, 2023, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/rec.13683 by Luiz Moraes - CAPES , Wiley Online Library on [04/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Tertiary succession in restoration

Table 1. Comparison of initial stages of secondary with tertiary succession, with alternative terms. For the latter pair, pink indicates a conflict and green a match,
with lighter shades for possible comparisons; “Successional driver” is not assessed. Primary succession is included for reference.

Types

4 of 7 Restoration Ecology January 2023


and other microbes (Wardle & Peltzer 2007; Cavani et al. 2016).
Soil floras in restorations may be inappropriate for the inplanted
species, lacking essential mycorrhizae or other symbionts
(Koziol & Bever 2017). Similarly resident and transient fauna
are likely inappropriate for the vegetation being restored, and
perhaps aggressively herbivorous without providing seed dis-
persal services (Parker et al. 2006).
Considering ecosystem properties operating in the initial
stages of restorations and secondary successions (Table 1),
the biota is the dominant filter for both (Török et al. 2020).
The filtration spectrum changes from facilitation to competition
in both situations. Hard to evaluate, competition is probably
more important in restoration plantings (Backhaus et al. 2021),
due to resistance by residents, often alien (del Moral
et al. 2007), creating ecosystems impenetrable to natives. How-
ever the use of nurse species, even if alien, is actually facilitative
(Gomez-Aparicio et al. 2004). Functional traits are those
characteristics which affect the adaptability of species
(Bruelheide et al. 2018), general trends of which allow multiple
species to be assigned to guilds with similar operational strate-
gies (Adams 1985). Differences in traits and even guilds
between native and alien species can alter a community’s inva-
sibility (Mahaney et al. 2015; Abella & Chiquoine 2019), but
are seldom intentionally manipulated under restoration (Ruiz-
Jaen & Aide 2005).
Of the 32 comparisons made in Table 1, only 7 (22%) show a
close or weak match between secondary succession and restora-
tion. And the match with primary succession is even poorer
(18%) with more decided mis-matches, though perhaps the seres
of novel ecosystems (Cole 2019) are closer to primary succes-
sion. Convincingly, restoration, even if successful, cannot be
regarded as engaging a secondary succession. The same conclu-
sion applies to those activities related to restoration, such as
rehabilitation, where successful re-establishment of ecological
processes is valued over historical biotic integrity (SER 2004);
there only Ecosystem Properties (as per Table 1) matter. For rec-
lamation, which has the goal of being useful to humans, the
associated revegetation may entail few of the species historically
present and addition of above-ground biomass is the only crite-
rion valued within Biological Legacies, while ecological engi-
neering lacks even the successional goal of the addition of
biomass. Ecosystem creation engages with Environmental Leg-
acies but may result in novel ecosystems with an unknown tra-
jectory rather than promoting a natural succession.
Conclusion
In common use by the 1900s (Shantz 1906), it is not clear why
the original terminological choice was of “primary” and “sec-
ondary” succession, when “initialising succession” and “regen-
eration succession” would be more intuitive. But since we
humans entrench our ideas (Pickett et al. 2009; Rapson 2018),
we should stick to the same nomenclatural theory, and add “ter-
tiary (3 ) succession” (meaning “restoration succession”) to our
vocabulary, specifically to help our restoration activities. This
terminology should focus managers on factors which can
improve a project’s success. In Table 1, disparities occur under
January 2023 Restoration Ecology
1526100x, 2023, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/rec.13683 by Luiz Moraes - CAPES , Wiley Online Library on [04/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Tertiary succession in restoration
all groupings, but since the “Ecological situation” cannot logi-
cally be changed, the priority requirements clearly are under
“Environmental legacies,” since these relate to the past manage-
ment of the site, and “Biological legacies,” since these represent
the restoration actions plannable or being undertaken. “Ecosys-
tem properties” are sensibly reserved for measures of success
(Ruiz-Jaen & Aide 2005). The common needs highlighted are
that soil condition be considered, more native biodiversity
included, use of duff (containing litter, seed, nutrients, microbes,
fungi, invertebrates, etc.) incorporated, functional groups
balanced, and herbivory, especially of aliens, managed.
Experts have long been aware of these needs. For example,
del Moral et al. (2007) conclude that “restoration tactics should
focus on site amelioration, improving establishment success,
and protecting desirable species from herbivory and competition
during their development,” while Halassy et al. (2019), promot-
ing more interactive interventions, say “targeting the dispersal
and environmental filters in parallel would improve restoration
outcomes.” But too often mangers trust to the “magic” of a
quick, natural fix, free and effort-less, once restoration has been
initiated, not appreciating the need for what SER (2004) referred
to as “more post-installation aftercare.”
“Tertiary succession” should be a helpful concept here in
communications between managers, restorationists, and ecolo-
gists studying vegetation succession, highlighting the unique,
anthropogenic problems a restoration project faces in becoming
a self-propelling successional system, and directing research
needed to promote this.
Acknowledgments
The author thanks Lars and Libby Walker for sharing amazing
mental and physical landscapes, and to Bastow Wilson for clar-
ifying the Clements/Gleason debate. Referees generously gave
useful feedback.
LITERATURE CITED
Abella SR, Chiquoine LP (2019) The good with the bad: when ecological resto-
ration facilitates native and non-native species. Restoration Ecology 27:
343–351. https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.12874
Adams J (1985) The definition and interpretation of guild structure in ecological
communities. Journal of Animal Ecology 54:43–59. https://doi.org/10.
2307/4619
Backhaus L, Albert G, Cuchietti A, Jaimes Nino LM, Fahs N, Lisner A, et al.
(2021) Shift from trait convergence to divergence along old-field succes-
sion. Journal of Vegetation Science 32:e12986. https://doi.org/10.1111/
jvs.12986
Bastin JF, Finegold Y, Garcia C, Mollicone D, Rezende M, Routh D, Zohner CM,
Crowther TW (2019) The global tree restoration potential. Science 365:
76–79. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aax0848
Bekker RM, Verweij GL, Smith RE, Reine R, Bakker JP, Schneider S (1997) Soil
seed banks in European grasslands: does land use affect regeneration per-
spectives? Journal of Applied Ecology 34:1293–1310. https://doi.org/10.
2307/2405239
Boscutti F, Vianello A, Bozzato F, Casolo V (2017) Vegetation structure, species
life span, and exotic status elucidate plant succession in a limestone quarry
reclamation. Restoration Ecology 25:595–604. https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.
12476
5 of 7

Tertiary succession in restoration
Bradshaw AD (1987) Restoration: an acid test for ecology. Pages 23–29. In:
Jordan WR III, Gilpin M, Aber JD (eds) Restoration ecology. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, UK
Bruelheide H, Dengler J, Purschke O, Lenoir J, Jiménez-Alfaro B,
Hennekens SM, et al. (2018) Global trait–environment relationships of
plant communities. Nature Ecology & Evolution 2:1906–1917. https://
doi.org/10.1038/s41559-018-0699-8
Buma B, Bisbing S, Krapek J, Wright G (2017) A foundation of ecology redis-
covered: 100 years of succession on the William S. Cooper plots in Glacier
Bay, Alaska. Ecology 98:1513–1523. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecy.1848
Burns B, Innes J, Day T (2012) The use and potential of pest-proof fencing for
ecosystem restoration and fauna conservation in New Zealand. Pages
65–90. In: Somers MJ, Hayward MW (eds) Fencing for conservation:
65 restriction of evolutionary potential or a riposte to threatening pro-
cesses?. New York, NY: Springer Science+Business Media
Carmona MR, Armesto JJ, Aravena JC, Pérez CA (2002) Coarse woody debris
biomass in successional and primary temperate forests in Chiloé Island,
Chile. Forest Ecology and Management 164:265–275. https://doi.org/10.
1016/S0378-1127(01)00602-8
Cavani L, Manici LM, Caputo F, Peruzzi E, Ciavatta C (2016) Ecological resto-
ration of a copper polluted vineyard: long-term impact of farmland aban-
donment on soil bio-chemical properties and microbial communities.
Journal of Environmental Management 182:37–47. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.jenvman.2016.07.050
Clements FE (1916) Plant succession: an analysis of the development of vegeta-
tion. Washington, DC: Carnegie Institution of Washington. https://doi.org/
10.5962/bhl.title.56234
Clements FE (1928) Plant succession and indicators. HW Wilson, New York
Clements FE (1949) Plant succession and human problems. Pages 1–21. In:
Allred BW, Clements ES (eds) Dynamics of vegetation. HW Wilson Com-
pany, New York
Cole CA (2019) Created ecosystems and the concept of succession. Landscape
Journal 38:75–85. https://doi.org/10.3368/lj.38.1-2.75
Cooper WS (1923) The recent ecological history of Glacier Bay, Alaska. Ecology
4:93–128. https://doi.org/10.2307/1929485
Crocker RL, Major J (1955) Soil development in relation to vegetation and sur-
face age at Glacier Bay, Alaska. Journal of Ecology 43:427–448. https://
doi.org/10.2307/2257005
del Moral R, Walker LR, Bakker JP (2007) Insights gained from succession for the
restoration of landscape structure and function. Pages 19–44. In: Walker LR,
Walker J, Hobbs RJ (eds) Linking restoration and ecological succession.
Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-35303-6_2
Gleason HA (1927) Further views on the succession-concept. Ecology 8:299–
326. https://doi.org/10.2307/1929332
Gomez-Aparicio L, Zamora R, G omez JM, H odar JA, Castro J, Baraza E (2004)
Applying plant facilitation to forest restoration: a meta-analysis of the use
of shrubs as nurse plants. Ecological Applications 14:1128–1138. https://
doi.org/10.1890/03-5084
Grime JP (1979) Plant strategies and vegetation processes. John Wiley & Sons,
London, UK
Halassy M, Botta-Dukat Z, Csecserits A, Szitar K, Török K (2019) Trait-based
approach confirms the importance of propagule limitation and assembly
rules in old-field restoration. Restoration Ecology 27:840–849. https://
doi.org/10.1111/rec.12929
Hobbs RJ, Walker LR, Walker J (2007) Integrating restoration and succession.
Pages 168–179. In: Walker LR, Walker J, Hobbs RJ (eds) Linking restora-
tion and ecological succession. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/
10.1007/978-0-387-35303-6_8
Holl KD (2020) Primer of ecological restoration. Island Press, Washington D.C.
Holl KD, Aide TM (2011) When and where to actively restore ecosystems? For-
est Ecology and Management 261:1558–1563. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
foreco.2010.07.004
Hughes AR, Grabowski JH, Leslie HM, Scyphers S, Williams SL (2018) Inclu-
sion of biodiversity in habitat restoration policy to facilitate ecosystem
6 of 7
1526100x, 2023, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/rec.13683 by Luiz Moraes - CAPES , Wiley Online Library on [04/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
recovery. Conservation Letters 11:e12419. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.
12419
Kelly D, Ladley JJ, Robertson AW, Anderson SH, Wotton DM, Wiser SK (2010)
Mutualisms with the wreckage of an avifauna: the status of bird pollination
and fruit-dispersal in New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Ecology 34:
66–85
Koziol L, Bever JD (2017) The missing link in grassland restoration: arbuscular
mycorrhizal fungi inoculation increases plant diversity and accelerates suc-
cession. Journal of Applied Ecology 54:1301–1309. https://doi.org/10.
1111/1365-2664.12843
Lami F, Vitti S, Marini L, Pellegrini E, Casolo V, Trotta G, Sigura M, Boscutti F
(2021) Habitat type and community age as barriers to alien plant invasions
in coastal species-habitat networks. Ecological Indicators 133:108450.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.108450
Lockwood JL, Pimm SL (1999) When does restoration succeed? Pages 363–392.
In: Weiher E, Keddy P (eds) Ecological assembly: advances, perspectives,
retreats. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. https://doi.org/10.
1017/CBO9780511542237.014
Luken JO (1990) Directing ecological succession. Chapman and Hall,
London, UK
Mahaney WM, Gross KL, Blackwood CB, Smemo KA (2015) Impacts of prairie
grass species restoration on plant community invasibility and soil processes
in abandoned agricultural fields. Applied Vegetation Science 18:99–109.
https://doi.org/10.1111/avsc.12128
McAlpine C, Catterall CP, Nally RM, Lindenmayer D, Reid JL, Holl KD, et al.
(2016) Integrating plant- and animal-based perspectives for more effective
restoration of biodiversity. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 14:
37–45. https://doi.org/10.1002/16-0108.1
Nolan M, Dewees S, Ma Lucero S (2021) Identifying effective restoration
approaches to maximize plant establishment in California grasslands
through a meta-analysis. Restoration Ecology 29:e13370. https://doi.org/
10.1111/rec.13370
Novara A, Rühl J, La Mantia T, Gristina L, La Bella S, Tuttolomondo T (2015)
Litter contribution to soil organic carbon in the processes of agriculture
abandon. Solid Earth 6:425–432. https://doi.org/10.5194/se-6-425-2015
Opler PA, Baker HG, Frankie GW (1980) Plant reproductive characteristics dur-
ing secondary succession in neotropical lowland forest ecosystems. Biotro-
pica 12:40–46. https://doi.org/10.2307/2388155
Parker JD, Burkepile DE, Hay ME (2006) Opposing effects of native and exotic
herbivores on plant invasions. Science 311:1459–1461. https://doi.org/10.
1126/science.1121407
Phillips J (1934) Succession, development, the climax, and the complex organ-
ism: an analysis of concepts. Part I. Journal of Ecology 22:554–571.
https://doi.org/10.2307/2256189
Pickett S, Cadenasso ML, Meiners SJ (2009) Ever since Clements: from succes-
sion to vegetation dynamics and understanding to intervention. Applied
Vegetation Science 12:9–21. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1654-109X.2009.
01019.x
Prach K, Tichý L, Lencova K, Adamek M, Koutecký T, Sadlo J, et al. (2016)
Does succession run towards potential natural vegetation? An analysis
across seres. Journal of Vegetation Science 27:515–523. https://doi.org/
10.1111/jvs.12383
Prach K, Walker LR (2020) Comparative plant succession among terrestrial
biomes of the world. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108561167
Rapson GL (2018) Changing methodology results in operational drift in the
meaning of leaf area index, necessitating implementation of foliage layer
index. Ecology and Evolution 8:638–644. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.
3662
Rapson GL (2021) Testing the acid in plant succession. Conservation Biology 35:
1704–1705. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13825
Robinson R (1942) Some ecological aspects of afforestation and forestry in Great
Britain. Forestry: An International Journal of Forest Research 16:1–12.
https://doi.org/10.1093/forestry/16.1.1
Restoration Ecology January 2023

Ruiz-Jaen MC, Aide TM (2005) Restoration success: how is it being measured?
Restoration Ecology 13:569–577. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1526-100X.
2005.00072.x
SER (2004) Society for Ecological Restoration International Science & policy
working group. In: The SER international primer on ecological restoration.
Society for Ecological Restoration International, Tuscon. www.ser.org
Shantz HL (1906) A study of the vegetation of the Mesa region east of Pike’s
peak: the Bouteloua formation. II. Development of the formation. Botanical
Gazette 42:179–207. https://doi.org/10.1086/328960
Suzuki M, Karukome T, Fujihira K, Mitsugi M, Hisamoto, Y. (2021) Clear-
cutting triggers regeneration of abandoned secondary forests but risks alter-
native successional trajectories with high deer density. Applied Vegetation
Science, 24(3), e12596. https://doi.org/10.1111/avsc.12596
Tognetti PM, Chaneton EJ, Omacini M, Trebino HJ, Le on RJ (2010) Exotic
vs. native plant dominance over 20 years of old-field succession on set-
aside farmland in Argentina. Biological Conservation 143:2494–2503.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2010.06.016
Török P, Bullock James MJM, Jiménez-Alfaro B, Sonkoly J (2020) The impor-
tance of dispersal and species establishment in vegetation dynamics and
resilience. Journal of Vegetation Science 31:935–942. https://doi.org/10.
1111/jvs.12958
Coordinating Editor: Stephen Murphy
January 2023 Restoration Ecology
1526100x, 2023, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/rec.13683 by Luiz Moraes - CAPES , Wiley Online Library on [04/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Tertiary succession in restoration
Villacís Lozada SP, Rapson GL (2021) Morphodynamics of short-lived
wetlands of coastal dune slacks, Manawat
u, New Zealand. Wetlands
Ecology and Management 29:1–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11273-
020-09776-3
Walker LR, del Moral R (2003) Primary succession and ecosystem rehabilitation.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. https://doi.org/10.1017/
CBO9780511615078
Walker LR, del Moral R (2008) Lessons from primary succession for restoration
of severely damaged habitats. Applied Vegetation Science 12:55–67.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1654-109X.2009.01002.x
Walker LR, Walker J, Hobbs RJ (2007) Linking restoration and ecological suc-
cession. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-35303-6
Wardle DA, Peltzer DA (2007) Aboveground-belowground linkages, ecosystem
development, and ecosystem restoration. Pages 45–68. In: Walker LR,
Walker J, Hobbs RJ (eds) Linking restoration and ecological succession.
Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-35303-6_3
Warming E (1895) Pages 335. Plantesamfund – Grundtræk af den økologiske
Plantegeografi. P.G. Philipsens Forlag, Copenhagen, Denmark
Warming E, Vahl M (1909) Pages 422. Oecology of plants – an introduction to
the study of plant-communities. Clarendon Press, Oxford, UK. https://
doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.160223
Received: 17 November, 2021; First decision: 16 February, 2022; Revised: 22
February, 2022; Accepted: 16 March, 2022
7 of 7