Comment on "Positive site selection bias in meta-analyses comparing natural regeneration to active forest restoration"

Crouzeilles, RenatoLindenmayer, DavidSansevero, Jerônimo B.B.Ferreira, Mariana S.Iribarrem, AlvaroStrassburg, Bernardo B.N.Chazdon, Robin L.2025-06-022025-06-02ORCID:/0000-0002-4766-4088/work/169578966https://hdl.handle.net/1885/733756454We agree with Reid et al. (Reviews, 4 May 2018, eaas9143), there may be positive site selection bias for natural regeneration in previous meta-analyses comparing tropical forest restoration outcomes within natural regeneration and active restoration sites. However, we also expect positive bias for active restoration sites. Further, we strongly disagree that such bias invalidates conclusions derived from properly controlled meta-analyses.enComment on "Positive site selection bias in meta-analyses comparing natural regeneration to active forest restoration"2018-08-3110.1126/sciadv.aas914385047113549