Action

Cover the ground with straw after tree planting

How is the evidence assessed?
  • Effectiveness
    75%
  • Certainty
    20%
  • Harms
    0%

Source countries

Key messages

  • One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the Czech Republic found that covering the ground with straw, but not bark or fleece, increased the growth rate of planted trees and shrubs.

 

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

  1. A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 2000-2005 in temperate broadleaf woodland in the Czech Republic (1) found that covering the ground with straw mulch increased the growth rate of planted trees and shrubs, but covering with bark or fleece mulches did not. Five years after planting, the average growth of trees and shrubs was higher with straw mulch (226 cm) than with bark mulch (124 cm), fleece mulch (100 cm) or no mulch (80 cm). In 2000, seedlings of a mixture of 128 tree and 190 shrub species were planted in each of four 600 m2 plots. Each plot was divided into four 150 m2 subplots that were randomly assigned to four treatments: straw mulch (planting and covering the whole area with a 0.3 m layer of straw mulch); bark mulch (planting in a previously established grassland and applying a 0.2 m layer of fresh bark in 0.4 m rows); fleece mulch (planting in a previously established grassland and applying layers of 0.4 m wide synthetic fleece in rows); no mulch (planting in a previously established grassland). Plants were measured in 2005.

    Study and other actions tested
Please cite as:

Agra H., Schowanek S., Carmel Y., Smith R.K. & Ne’eman G. (2019) Forest Conservation. Pages 331-347 in: W.J. Sutherland, L.V. Dicks, N. Ockendon, S.O. Petrovan & R.K. Smith (eds) What Works in Conservation 2019. Open Book Publishers, Cambridge, UK.

 

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

Forest Conservation

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Forest Conservation
Forest Conservation

Forest Conservation - Published 2016

Forest synopsis

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, terrestrial mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read latest volume: Volume 17

Go to the CE Journal

Subscribe to our newsletter

Please add your details if you are interested in receiving updates from the Conservation Evidence team about new papers, synopses and opportunities.

Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust