Should I plant or should I sow? Restoration outcomes compared across seven riparian revegetation projects

Abstract

Summary To revegetate native plant communities, it is often cheaper to direct seed than to plant nursery‐grown stock. However, the outcomes of direct seeding can be quite variable, and it is unclear whether direct seeding or planting is more likely to facilitate the restoration of diverse plant communities. To address this question, we compared the outcomes of each method across several recent riparian revegetation projects where both direct seeding and tube‐stock planting were used. We surveyed riparian revegetation projects at seven sites within the greater Melbourne area that had been revegetated between 1 and 4 years previously. Sites were all on land previously used for agriculture or degraded public land and ranged in environmental and climatic conditions. Woody plant density, establishment of target species, species richness, species diversity (evenness) and plant heights were assessed. Direct seeding tended to result in higher plant densities and similar species richness, but lower rates of species establishment and diversity compared with planting. A median of 67% of target species established via direct seeding compared with 100% for planting, with direct seeded areas often dominated by one or two species. In general, overall revegetation outcomes were often driven by climatic and site factors, rather than revegetation method. We suggest that to achieve good restoration outcomes from revegetation in riparian areas, a bet‐hedging or combined approach using both sowing and planting may be the best strategy.