Data set: Restoration_plantings_2y_generalizadas.csv

Access this dataset on Dryad DOI: 10.5061/dryad.k98sf7mn7

Description of the data and file structure

The data set includes the survival and growth rates of 11 old-growth forest tree species after two years of planting across 57 sites in Mexico.

site_id = number of site in the restoration project

latitude = Latitude (decimal degrees, WGS84) of the restoration site where tree saplings were planted. To protect the privacy of participating landowners, the geographic coordinates of restoration sites have been spatially generalized.

longitude = Longitude (decimal degrees, WGS84) of the restoration site where tree saplings were planted. To protect the privacy of participating landowners, the geographic coordinates of restoration sites have been spatially generalized.

Latitude and longitude values correspond to the centroid of each restoration site.Identical coordinates occur because multiple trees or observations were recorded within the same site.

species codes

JP = Juglans pyriformis

PL = Persea longipes

PS = Persea schiedeana

QD = Quercus delgadoana

QM = Quercus meavei

QCa = Quercus calophylla

QCo = Quercus cortesii

QG = Quercus germana

QP = Quercus pinnativenulosa

QS = Quercus sartorii

QX = Quercus xalapensis

elevation = elevation at planting site (m a.s.l.)

CMD = Hargreave’s Climate Moisture Deficit

landuse = pastures, coffee (shaded coffee plantation), secondary forest

care_1 = care provided to the planting during the first year, coded in three categries: (1) no-care, which included planting sites that showed no evidence of active management since establishment. These sites were characterized by dense herbaceous or climber cover surrounding seedlings (often overtopping them), absence of recent weeding, and/or evidence of damage by livestock (e.g. browsing, trampling, or broken stems). No physical barriers (e.g., fencing) or maintenance interventions were observed, (2) limited-care, which corresponded to planting sites that received occasional or irregular management. These sites were free of herbaceous cover at the time of assessment but exhibited signs of previous prolonged vegetation cover (e.g., residual dry biomass, partially suppressed seedlings), or intermittent livestock disturbance. Management actions likely included one weeding event after planting, and/or incomplete livestock exclusion (e.g., damaged or partial fencing), and (3) full-care, which included plantings that received consistent and sustained maintenance throughout the monitoring period. These sites were characterized by repeated vegetation control (typically ≥2 weeding events per year), producing seedlings free from herbaceous competition. In addition, effective livestock exclusion was evident (e.g. intact fencing) and no signs of browsing or trampling were observed..

care_2 = care provided to the planting during the second year, coded in three categries: (1) no-care, which included planting sites that showed no evidence of active management since establishment. These sites were characterized by dense herbaceous or climber cover surrounding seedlings (often overtopping them), absence of recent weeding, and/or evidence of damage by livestock (e.g. browsing, trampling, or broken stems). No physical barriers (e.g., fencing) or maintenance interventions were observed, (2) limited-care, which corresponded to planting sites that received occasional or irregular management. These sites were free of herbaceous cover at the time of assessment but exhibited signs of previous prolonged vegetation cover (e.g., residual dry biomass, partially suppressed seedlings), or intermittent livestock disturbance. Management actions likely included one weeding event after planting, and/or incomplete livestock exclusion (e.g., damaged or partial fencing), and (3) full-care, which included plantings that received consistent and sustained maintenance throughout the monitoring period. These sites were characterized by repeated vegetation control (typically ≥2 weeding events per year), producing seedlings free from herbaceous competition. In addition, effective livestock exclusion was evident (e.g. intact fencing) and no signs of browsing or trampling were observed.

height_0 = tree sapling initial height at planting time (cm)

surv_0 = survival of tree saplings one month after planting (1 = alive, 0 = dead)

surv_1 = survival of tree saplings after one year (1 = alive, 0 = dead)

surv_2 = survival of tree saplings after two years (1 = alive, 0 = dead)

RGR_2 = Relative Growth Rate in height (cm / cm y)

NA = Not available data

The analysis of Survival and Growth can be found in the publication:

Tarin Toledo-Aceves, Emma Villaseñor, H. Adrián Cabrera-Valenzuela, Flor G. Vázquez-Corzas, Estrella Chévez, Silvia Álvarez Clare. 2026. Tree establishment in multifunctional landscapes: environmental gradients and management intensity in tropical montane forest restoration. Ecological Engineering