A synthesis dataset describing dryland agricultural restoration practices

In January 2020, Scopus and Web of Science were queried using the following terms: [restoration* desert* vegetation*] OR [restoration* grassland* desert*] OR [restoration desert* plant*] OR [restoration "agricultural lands"] OR ["restoration techniques" desert*] OR ["passive restoration" desert* plant*] OR ["active restoration" desert* plant*] OR [revegetation abandoned desert*] OR [restoration "agricult*land*" desert* plant*] OR [restoration dryland* vegetation] OR [restoration semiarid* plant*] OR [restoration arid* plant*].After review for data and related evidence associated with dryland restoration of agricultural lands, a total of 42 articles and 1,427 independent observations are listed here.The study list is provided.Meta-datawo primary elements from each article were described. (1) The specific restoration practice implemented (e.g. natural recovery of vegetation).(2) the restoration goal (hereafter restoration outcome) pursued by the implementation of that restoration practice (e.g. vegetation restoration).Active restoration practices included those that involved direct human interventions. Passive restoration practices were classified into the following categories based on their primary focus: soil, vegetation, and grazing exclusion (i.e. passive because grazing was removed, and no other interventions were applied).Outcomes for active and passive restoration practices were grouped into the following categories: soil, vegetation, animals, and habitat.The habitat category included measures of both soil and vegetation restoration reported together, or measures of general community structure, such as plant productivity and species evenness. study.ID is a unique identifier for each study and is the key that links data to the study list providedID is the independent data instance reportedexp.length is in dayscategory of study including disturbance to paradigm are terms applied by this research teamThe hypothesis is as proposed by the primary study authors in each instance.N.sites is the total number of independent study sites spatially, n.t and n.c are the number of sample units at the lowest resolution reported in the study such as plots, mean and error as reported in primary studies or extracted from figures, and lat long as reported by authors. MAP and MAT were provided by authors or derived using the geolocation provided sourced from WorldClim.The aridity.index is the deMartonne estimate of site-level aridity per study.Spatial grain is the spatial extent of study reported in metres.

于2020年1月，通过Scopus和Web of Science数据库，采用以下检索词进行了查询：[restoration* desert* vegetation*] OR [restoration* grassland* desert*] OR [restoration desert* plant*] OR [restoration "agricultural lands"] OR ["restoration techniques" desert*] OR ["passive restoration" desert* plant*] OR ["active restoration" desert* plant*] OR [revegetation abandoned desert*] OR [restoration "agricult*land*" desert* plant*] OR [restoration dryland* vegetation] OR [restoration semiarid* plant*] OR [restoration arid* plant*]。经过对干旱地区农业土地恢复相关数据及其相关证据的审查，共列出42篇文章和1,427个独立观测数据。本研究清单已提供。每篇文章的元数据包括以下主要元素：（1）具体实施的恢复实践（例如，植被的自然恢复）。（2）通过实施该恢复实践所追求的恢复目标（以下简称恢复成果）（例如，植被恢复）。主动恢复实践包括涉及直接人类干预的实践。被动恢复实践根据其主要焦点被分为以下类别：土壤、植被和放牧排除（即被动恢复，因为放牧被移除，且未应用其他干预措施）。主动和被动恢复实践的结果被归类为以下类别：土壤、植被、动物和栖息地。栖息地类别包括报告的土壤和植被恢复措施，或一般群落结构的措施，如植物生产力和物种均匀度。study.ID是每个研究的唯一标识符，是连接数据到提供的研究清单的关键。ID是报告的独立数据实例。exp.length以天为单位。研究类别包括对范式扰动的描述，是研究团队应用的相关术语。假设是每个实例中主要研究作者提出的假设。N.sites是独立研究站点的总数，n.t和n.c是研究报告中最低分辨率下的样本单元数量，如地块、平均值和误差（由主要研究或从图表中提取），以及作者报告的经纬度。MAP和MAT由作者提供或使用来自WorldClim的地理位置提供的数据推导而来。aridity.index是每项研究的地点水平干旱度（deMartonne估计）。空间粒度是报告中研究的空间范围，单位为米。