Large‐scale forest restoration relies on approaches that are cost‐effective and economically attractive to farmers, and in this context agroforestry systems may be a valuable option. Here, we compared ecological outcomes among (1) 12–15‐year‐old coffee agroforests established with several native shade trees, (2) 12–15‐year‐old high‐diversity restoration plantations, and (3) reference old‐growth forests, within a landscape restoration project in the Pontal do Paranapanema region, in the Atlantic Forest of southeastern Brazil. We compared the aboveground biomass, canopy cover, and abundance, richness, and composition of trees, and the regenerating saplings in the three forest types. In addition, we investigated the landscape drivers of natural regeneration in the restoration plantations and coffee agroforests. Reference forests had a higher abundance of trees and regenerating saplings, but had similar levels of species richness compared to coffee agroforests. High‐diversity agroforests and restoration plantations did not differ in tree abundance. However, compared to restoration plantations, agroforests showed higher abundance and species richness of regenerating saplings, a higher proportion of animal‐dispersed species, and higher canopy cover. The abundance of regenerating saplings declined with increasing density of coffee plants, thus indicating a potential trade‐off between productivity and ecological benefits. High‐diversity coffee agroforests provide a cost‐effective and ecologically viable alternative to high‐diversity native tree plantations for large‐scale forest restoration within agricultural landscapes managed by local communities, and should be included as part of the portfolio of reforestation options used to promote the global agenda on forest and landscape restoration.

中文翻译：

---

种植15年后农林的生态成果和恢复

大规模的森林恢复依赖于具有成本效益且对农民具有经济吸引力的方法，在这种情况下，农林业系统可能是一个有价值的选择。在这里，我们比较了（1）用几棵本地遮荫树建立的12-15岁咖啡农林，（2）12-15岁高多样性恢复人工林和（3）参考旧林的生态结果。森林，在巴西东南部大西洋森林的Pontal do Paranapanema地区的景观恢复项目中。我们比较了三种森林类型中地上生物量，冠层覆盖度，树木的丰度，丰富度和组成以及可再生的树苗。此外，我们调查了恢复人工林和咖啡农林中自然更新的景观驱动因素。参考森林的树木和可再生幼树的丰度更高，但与咖啡农用林相比，其物种丰富度相似。高多样性的农林和恢复人工林的树木丰度没有差异。但是，与恢复性人工林相比，农林造林的再生树苗的丰度和物种丰富度更高，动物分散物种的比例更高，冠层覆盖率更高。随着咖啡树密度的提高，可再生树苗的数量减少，因此表明了生产力和生态效益之间的潜在权衡。对于在当地社区管理的农业景观中进行大规模森林恢复而言，高多样性咖啡农用林提供了一种经济高效且生态上可行的替代方案，可替代高多样性本地人工林，