Crassula helmsii: Use lightproof barriers to control plants

How is the evidence assessed?
  • Effectiveness
    65%
  • Certainty
    50%
  • Harms
    not assessed

Source countries

Key messages

  • Five before-and-after studies in the UK found that covering Crassula helmsii with black sheeting or carpet strips eradicated or severely reduced the cover of the plant. However, C. helmsii was reported to have progressively recolonized two of the sites where it had been had initially been reported as eradicated.

 

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 before-and-after field trial in 2003 at waterbodies in a nature reserve in South Yorkshire, UK (Bridge 2005) reported that covering C. helmsii with black plastic and soil killed all plants, although no statistical tests were carried out. C. helmsii was covered with black plastic and topped with 1 m of soil in March 2003. No details about the area covered, duration of treatment or subsequent monitoring was provided.

    Study and other actions tested
  2. A before-and-after field trial in 2003-2004 at a single pond in Bedfordshire, UK (Wilton-Jones 2005) reported that covering plants with black polythene eradicated C. helmsii, but it recolonized the site within a year and no statistical tests were carried out. Before the trial C. helmsii was estimated to cover 5% of the pond, and was eradicated after the treatment. However, one year after the treatment finished C. helmsii had recolonized the pond. The authors suggest this was due to plants which survived in surrounding areas not covered by the polythene. The 12 m2 pond was covered with opaque black polythene weighed down with stones for six months between autumn 2003 and spring 2004.

    Study and other actions tested
  3. A before-and-after study at a single lake in Dorset, UK (Dawson & Warman 1987) found that covering C. helmsii with dark material killed the plant, although it slowly recolonized, and no statistical tests were carried out. Two months after the dark sheeting was applied, the underlying C. helmsii was killed. However, after this the plant progressively recolonized the site. Typar geotextile sheeting was used to cover 50 m2 of C. helmsii. No control or comparison, and few details of the experiment (e.g. timing, water depth), were provided.

    Study and other actions tested
  4. A before-and-after study in 2000 at a single lake in a nature reserve in Hampshire, UK (Stone 2002) reported that covering with black sheeting killed C. helmsii, although no statistical tests were carried out. Black sheets (20 x 10 m) were secured tightly over submerged and exposed areas of C. helmsii for six months including summer. Few details of the site or methods were provided.

    Study and other actions tested
  5. A before-and-after study in 2002-2004 at a single pond in Surrey, UK (Anonymous 2004) reported that covering C. helmsii with carpet strips followed by the application of glyphosate reduced the area of the plant, although no statistical tests were carried out. One year after glyphosate treatment approximately 80% of C. helmsii had been killed, although it is not clear whether this was a direct result of the use of carpet or was due to herbicide application. In autumn 2002, strips of carpet were placed over C. helmsii and weighted down wherever possible on the pond edge and in shallow water. In July-August 2003 the carpet was removed and the glyphosate-based herbicide Roundup was applied twice.

    Study and other actions tested
Please cite as:

Aldridge, D., Ockendon, N., Rocha, R., Smith, R.K. & Sutherland, W.J. (2019) Some aspects of control of freshwater invasive species. Pages 569-602 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

Control of Freshwater Invasive Species

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Control of Freshwater Invasive Species
Control of Freshwater Invasive Species

Control of Freshwater Invasive Species - Published 2017

Control of Freshwater Invasive Species 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