WHAT THE EVIDENCE SAYS
Standardized surveys at 17 stream transects compared primary forest, regenerating secondary forest on former cacao/pasture land, and actively used agricultural areas. Active sites held the lowest amphibian and reptile diversity. Regenerating sites sometimes showed higher observed richness and diversity than primary forest, but those contrasts were not statistically significant. Canopy and understory structure were important predictors of amphibian assemblages, while reptile patterns reflected broader site conditions.
WHY IT MATTERS / OUR READ
Recovery does not have to recreate a simple monotonic march toward an old-forest richness value. Structural habitat conditions can recover at different rates, and community composition may be more informative than whether one diversity index has returned.
CAVEATS / UNCERTAINTY
Seventeen stream sites provide a useful field gradient but limited replication for broad causal claims. Richness differences between regenerating and primary forest were not statistically significant, and land-use history, stream condition and detectability can all contribute to assemblage differences.
SOURCE
Biotropica — primary study
View original evidence ↗