Plant turf

Overall effectiveness category Unknown effectiveness (limited evidence)
Number of studies: 3
Share Tweet Email

View assessment score

How is the evidence assessed?

Effectiveness

62%
Certainty

30%
Harms

0%

Calculating overall effectiveness category

Background information and definitions

Cutting turf from an intact shrubland and planting it at a degraded site effectively transplants part of one shrubland to another one. This intervention may almost instantly restore shrubland habitat in some areas of a site, and over time may allow for the colonization of a site by shrubland plants.

Study locations

Key messages

Two randomized, controlled studies in the UK found that planting turf from intact heathland sites increased the abundance or cover of heathland species. One of these studies also found that planting turf increased the seedling abundance for a majority of heathland plant species.
One randomized, controlled study in the UK found that planting turf increased forb cover, and reduced grass cover.
One randomized, replicated, controlled study in Iceland found that planting large turves from intact heathland sites increased the number of plant species, but smaller turves did not.

About key messages

Key messages provide a descriptive index to studies we have found that test this intervention.

Studies are not directly comparable or of equal value. When making decisions based on this evidence, you should consider factors such as study size, study design, reported metrics and relevance of the study to your situation, rather than simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation.

Supporting evidence from individual studies

A randomized, controlled study in 1988–1993 in a former heathland in Dorset, UK (Pywell et al. 1995) found that planting turf from intact heathland sites increased the number of seedlings for four of seven heathland species after one year, and increased the abundance of five of six heathland species after three years. For four of seven heathland species the number of seedlings in plots where turves were planted was (8–538 seedlings/m²) was higher than in plots turves were not planted (0 seedlings/m²). The abundance of five of six heathland plant species was higher in plots where turves were planted (3–90 shoots/m²) compared to plots no turves were planted (0–4 shoots/m²). In 1989 turves measuring 1.2 m x 2.3 m x 0.15 m were excavated from a nearby mature heathland site and transported to the restoration site. In three 500 m²plots soil was stripped to a depth of 15 cm and turves planted and in three plots no turves were planted. In 1990–1991 the number of seedlings was recorded in seven 0.5 m x 1 m quadrats which were placed in each plot. In 1993 the number of plant shoots was recorded in three 1 m² quadrats which were randomly placed in each plot.
Study and other actions tested
Referenced paper
Pywell R.F., Webb N.R. & Putwain P.D. (1995) A comparison of techniques for restoring heathland on abandoned farmland. Journal of Applied Ecology, 32, 400-411.
A randomized, controlled study in 1988–2005 in a former heathland in Dorset, UK (Pywell et al. 2011) found that planting turf from intact heathland sites increased the cover of heathland species and forbs, and reduced grass cover. After 17 years, cover of heathland species and forbs was higher in plots where turf was planted (heathland: 100%; forbs: 92%) than in plots where it was not (heathland: 16%; forbs: 27%). Grass cover was lower in plots where turf was added (10%) than in plots where it was not (59%). In 1989 turves were excavated from a nearby mature heathland site. Topsoil of three 500 m² plots was removed and turves planted, while in three plots no turves were planted. In 2005 the cover of plants was recorded in four 1 m² quadrats which were randomly placed in each plot.
Study and other actions tested
Referenced paper
Pywell R.F., Meek W.R., Webb N.R., Putwain P.D. & Bullock J.M. (2011) Long-term heathland restoration on former grassland: the results of a 17-year experiment. Biological Conservation, 144, 1602-1609.
A randomized, replicated, controlled study from 2007 to 2009 at two sites in southern Iceland (Aradottir et al. 2012) found that transplanting turf from heathland sites to unvegetated sites had a mixed effect on number of plant species, and the cover of shrubs and grass. After two years, when transplanted turf sizes were larger than 20 cm x 20 cm, the number of plant species was higher in areas with transplanted turf (7 species/plot) than in untreated areas (2 species/plot), but not when turf sizes were smaller (3 species/plot). The cover of shrubs increased when turf was larger than 30 cm x 30 cm (to 1% cover) relative to untreated controls (0%), but not when turf sizes were smaller (0%). Grass cover increased when turf was larger than 30 cm x 30 cm (to 2%) compared to untreated controls (0–1%), but not when turf were smaller than 20 cm x 20 cm. Two unvegetated sites were established in 2007. At one site all vegetation had been removed, while the other site was a roadside verge covered with gravel. At each site turf from a nearby dwarf shrub heathland was planted in 40 randomly located 2 m² plots using different sizes of turf (8 plots for each turf size), with eight further plots left untreated. Vegetation cover of all plant species was recorded yearly between June and August in each 2 m² plot.
Study and other actions tested
Referenced paper
Aradottir A.L. (2012) Turf transplants for restoration of alpine vegetation: does size matter? Journal of Applied Ecology, 49, 439-446.

Please cite as:

Martin, P.A., Rocha, R., Smith, R.K. & Sutherland, W.J. (2020) Shrubland and Heathland Conservation. Pages 483-525 in: W.J. Sutherland, L.V. Dicks, S.O. Petrovan & R.K. Smith (eds) What Works in Conservation 2020. Open Book Publishers, Cambridge, UK.