Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore/create peatland vegetation (multiple interventions) Nine studies evaluated the effects of multiple restoration interventions (other than the moss layer transfer technique) on peatland vegetation. Six studies were in bogs (one being restored as a fen). One study was in a fen. Two studies were in unspecified or mixed peatlands. Plant community composition (3 studies): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in the UK reported that the overall plant community composition differed between restored and unrestored bogs. One replicated, controlled, site comparison study in Estonia found that restored and natural bogs contained more similar plant communities than unrestored and natural bogs. However, one site comparison study in Canada reported that after five years, bogs being restored as fens contained a different plant community to natural fens. Characteristic plants (1 study): One controlled study in a fen in France reported that restoration interventions increased cover of fen-characteristic plants. Moss cover (7 studies): Five studies (including one replicated, paired, controlled, before-and-after) in bogs or other peatlands in the UK, Estonia and Canada found that restoration interventions increased total moss (or bryophyte) cover. Two studies (one replicated and controlled) in bogs in the Czech Republic and Estonia reported that restoration interventions increased Sphagnum moss cover, but one replicated before-and-after study in bogs in the UK reported no change in Sphagnum cover following intervention. Two site comparison studies in Canada reported that after 1–15 years, restored areas had lower moss cover than natural fens. Herb cover (5 studies): Five studies (one replicated, paired, controlled, before-and-after) in bogs or other peatlands in the Czech Republic, the UK, Estonia and Canada reported that restoration interventions increased cover of herbaceous plants, including cottongrass and other grass-like plants. Overall vegetation cover (3 studies): Three studies (one replicated, controlled, before-and-after) in bogs in the UK and France reported that restoration interventions increased overall vegetation cover. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1803https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1803Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:29:14 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore/create peatland vegetation using the moss layer transfer technique Four studies evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of restoration using the moss layer transfer technique (as defined in the Background section). All four studies were based on bogs in Canada. Three studies were based on one experimental set-up that was included in the other, larger study. Plant community composition (2 studies): One replicated study in bogs in Canada reported that the majority of restored areas developed a community of bog-characteristic plant species within 11 years. One controlled, before-and-after study in a bog in Canada reported that a restored area (included in the previous study) developed a more peatland-characteristic plant community over time, and relative to an unrestored area. Vegetation cover (2 studies): Two controlled studies in one bog in Canada reported that a restored area had greater moss or bryophyte cover (including Sphagnum) than an unrestored area after 4–8 years. The restored area also had greater herb cover (including cottongrass), but less shrub cover, than the unrestored area. One of the studies reported that vegetation in the restored area became more similar to local natural bogs. Overall plant richness/diversity (1 study): One controlled, before-and-after study in a bog in Canada reported that a restored area contained more plant species than an unrestored area. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1804https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1804Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:29:33 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Fill/block ditches to create conditions suitable for peatland plants (without planting) Three studies evaluated the effects of filling or blocking ditches (without planting) on peatland vegetation within them. Two studies were in bogs and one was in a fen. Vegetation cover (3 studies): Two studies in a bog in the UK and a fen in the USA reported that blocked or filled ditches were colonized by herbs and bryophytes within 2–3 years. In the USA, vegetation cover (total, bryophyte, forb, grass and sedge) was restored to natural, undisturbed levels. One replicated study in bogs in the UK reported that plants had not colonized blocked gullies after six months. Overall plant richness/diversity (1 study): One site comparison study in a fen in the USA found that a filled ditch contained more plant species than adjacent undisturbed fen, after two years. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1805https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1805Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:29:55 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Excavate pools (without planting) Two studies evaluated the effects of excavating pools (without planting) on peatland vegetation. Both studies were based on the same experimental set-up in bogs in Canada. Plant community composition (1 study): One replicated, before-and-after, site comparison study in bogs in Canada reported that excavated pools were colonized by peatland vegetation over 4–6 years, but contained different plant communities to natural pools. In particular, cattail was more common in created pools. Vegetation cover (1 study): One replicated, before-and-after, site comparison study in bogs in Canada reported that after four years, created pools had less cover than natural pools of Sphagnum moss, herbs and shrubs. Overall plant richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, before-and-after, site comparison study in bogs in Canada reported that after six years, created pools contained a similar number of plant species to natural pools. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1806https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1806Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:30:10 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reprofile/relandscape peatland (without planting) One study evaluated the effects of reprofiling/relandscaping peatlands (without planting) on peatland vegetation. The study was in degraded bogs (being restored as fens). Plant community composition (1 study): One site comparison study in Canada reported that after five years, reprofiled (and rewetted) bogs contained a different plant community to nearby natural fens. Vegetation cover (1 study): The same study reported that after five years, reprofiled (and rewetted) bogs had lower vegetation cover (Sphagnum moss, other moss and vascular plants) than nearby natural fens. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1807https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1807Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:30:29 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Roughen peat surface to create microclimates (without planting) We found no studies that evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of roughening the peat surface to create microclimates (without planting afterwards). ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1808https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1808Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:30:48 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove upper layer of peat/soil (without planting) Ten studies evaluated the effects of removing the upper layer of peat or soil (without planting afterwards) on peatland vegetation. Nine studies were in fens or fen meadows and one was in an unspecified peatland. Plant community composition (6 studies): Five studies (including one replicated, randomized, paired, controlled) in a peatland in the USA and fens or fen meadows in the Netherlands and Poland reported that plots stripped of topsoil developed plant communities with a different composition to those in unstripped peatlands. In one study, the effect of stripping was not separated from the effect of rewetting. Two studies in fen meadows in Germany and Poland reported that the depth of soil stripping affected plant community development. Characteristic plants (5 studies): Four studies in fen meadows in Germany and the Netherlands, and a peatland in the USA, reported that stripping soil increased cover of wetland-characteristic or peatland-characteristic plants plants after 4–13 years. In the Netherlands, the effect of stripping was not separated from the effect of rewetting. One replicated site comparison study in fens in Belgium and the Netherlands found that stripping soil increased fen-characteristic plant richness. Herb cover (4 studies): Three studies (including one replicated, paired, controlled) in fens or fen meadows in Germany, the UK and Poland found that stripping soil increased cover of rushes, reeds or sedges after 2–6 years. However, one controlled study in a fen meadow in the Netherlands reported that stripping soil had no effect on sedge or bentgrass cover after five years. Two controlled studies in a fen meadow in the Netherlands and a fen in the UK found that stripping soil reduced purple moor grass cover for 2–5 years. Vegetation structure (3 studies): Two studies in fens or fen meadows in the Netherlands and Belgium found that stripping soil reduced vegetation biomass (total or herbs) for up to 18 years. One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in a peatland in the USA found that stripping soil had no effect on vegetation biomass after four years. Overall plant richness/diversity (6 studies): Three studies (including one replicated, paired, controlled) in fens or fen meadows in the UK, Belgium and the Netherlands reported that stripping soil increased total plant species richness over 2–18 years. In one study, the effect of stripping was not separated from the effect of rewetting. One replicated, controlled study in a fen in Poland found that stripping soil had no effect on plant species richness after three years. One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in a peatland in the USA found that stripping soil increased plant species richness and diversity, after four years, in one field but decreased it in another. One replicated study in a fen meadow in Poland reported that plant species richness increased over time, after stripping soil. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1809https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1809Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:31:06 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Bury upper layer of peat/soil (without planting) We found no studies that evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of burying the upper layer of peat or soil (without planting afterwards). ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1810https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1810Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:31:22 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Disturb peatland surface to encourage growth of desirable plants (without planting) Two studies evaluated the effects of disturbing the peat surface (without planting) on peatland vegetation. Both studies were in fens. Plant community composition (2 studies): Two replicated, paired, controlled, before-and-after studies (one also randomized) in fens in Germany and Sweden reported that soil disturbance affected development of the plant community over 2–3 years. In Germany, disturbed plots developed greater cover of weedy species from the seed bank than undisturbed plots. In Sweden, the community in disturbed and undisturbed plots became less similar over time.  Characteristic plants (2 studies): The same two studies reported that wetland- or fen-characteristic plant species colonized plots that had been disrturbed (along with other interventions). The study in Germany noted that peat-forming species did not colonize the fen. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1811https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1811Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:31:40 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Add inorganic fertilizer (without planting) Three studies evaluated the effects of adding inorganic fertilizer (without planting) on peatland vegetation. Two studies were in bogs and one was in a fen meadow. Vegetation cover (1 study): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after study in a bog in New Zealand reported that fertilizing typically increased total vegetation cover. Vegetation structure (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled study in a fen meadow in the Netherlands found that fertilizing with phosphorous typically increased total above-ground vegetation biomass, but other chemicals typically had no effect. Overall plant richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after study in a bog in New Zealand reported that fertilizing typically increased plant species richness. Growth (1 study): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in a bog in Germany found that fertilizing with phosphorous typically increased herb and shrub growth rate, but other chemicals had no effect. Other (3 studies): Three replicated, controlled studies in a fen meadow in Germany and bogs in Germany and New Zealand reported that effects of fertilizer on peatland were more common when phosphorous was added, than when nitrogen or potassium were added. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1812https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1812Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:37:10 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cover peatland with organic mulch (without planting) Two studies evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of covering a peatland with organic mulch (without planting). Both studies were in bogs (but in one study, being restored as a fen). Vegetation cover (2 studies): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after study in a bog in Canada found that covering bare peat with straw mulch did not affect cover of fen-characteristic plants. One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in a bog in Australia reported that plots mulched with straw had similar Sphagnum moss cover to unmulched plots. Characteristic plants (1 study): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after study in a bog in Canada found that covering bare peat with straw mulch increased the number of fen characteristic plants present, but did not affect their cover. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1813https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1813Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:38:22 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cover peatland with something other than mulch (without planting) Two studies evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of covering a peatland with something other than mulch (without planting). Both studies were in bogs. Vegetation cover (2 studies): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in a bog in Germany reported that covering bare peat with fleece or fibre mats did not affect the number of seedlings of five herb/shrub species. One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in bogs in Australia reported that recently-burned plots shaded with plastic mesh developed greater cover of native plants, forbs and Sphagnum moss than unshaded plots. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1814https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1814Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:39:22 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Stabilize peatland surface to help plants colonize One study evaluated the effects of stabilizing the peatland surface (without planting) on peatland vegetation. The study was in a bog. Vegetation cover (1 study): One controlled, before-and-after study in a bog in the UK found that pegging coconut fibre rolls onto almost-bare peat did not affect the development of vegetation cover (total, mosses, shrubs or cottongrasses). Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1815https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1815Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:43:30 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Introduce nurse plants (without planting peatland vegetation) We found no studies that evaluated the effects of introducing nurse plants on naturally colonizing, focal peatland vegetation. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1816https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1816Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:44:02 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Build artificial bird perches to encourage seed dispersal One study evaluated the effects on peatland vegetation of building artificial bird perches. The study was in a tropical peat swamp. Vegetation cover (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled study in a peat swamp forest in Indonesia found that artificial bird perches had no significant effect on seedling abundance. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1817https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1817Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:44:19 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Directly plant peatland mosses Seven studies evaluated the effects on peatland vegetation of planting mosses. Six studies were in bogs and one was in a fen. Survival (1 study): One study in Lithuania reported that of 50 Sphagnum-dominated sods planted into a rewetted bog, 47 survived for one year. Growth (2 studies): Two before-and-after studies in a fen in the Netherlands and bog pools in the UK reported that mosses grew after planting. Moss cover (5 studies): Five before-and-after studies in a fen in the Netherlands and bogs in Germany, Ireland, Estonia and Australia reported that after planting mosses, the area covered by moss increased in at least some cases. The study in the Netherlands reported spread of planted moss beyond the introduction site. The study in Australia was also controlled and reported that planted plots developed greater Sphagnum moss cover than unplanted plots. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1818https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1818Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:44:34 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Directly plant peatland herbs Five studies evaluated the effects on peatland vegetation of planting herbaceous plants. Three studies were in fens or fen meadows and two were in bogs. Survival (3 studies): Three replicated studies in a fen meadow in the Netherlands and fens in the USA reported that planted herbs survived over 2–3 years. However, for six of nine species only a minority of individuals survived. Growth (2 studies): Two replicated before-and-after studies in a bog in Germany and fens in the USA reported that individual planted herbs grew. Vegetation cover (1 study): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in Canada found that planting herbs had no effect on moss, herb or shrub cover in created bog pools relative to natural colonization. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1819https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1819Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:44:55 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Directly plant peatland trees/shrubs Eleven studies evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of planting trees/shrubs to restore or create forested/shrubby peatland. Seven studies were in tropical peat swamps, three in bogs and one in a fen. Survival (10 studies): Eight studies (seven replicated) in peat swamp forests in Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia and bogs in Canada reported that the majority of planted trees/shrubs survived over periods between 10 weeks and 13 years. Species with <50% survival included Dacryodes, poplar and katok. One replicated study in a fen in the USA reported that most planted willow cuttings died within two years. One study in a peat swamp forest in Indonesia reported <5% survival of planted trees after five months, following unusually deep flooding. Growth (5 studies): Four studies (including two replicated, before-and-after) in peat swamp forests in Thailand, Indonesia and Malaysia reported that planted trees grew. One replicated before-and-after study in bogs in Canada reported that planted shrubs grew. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1820https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1820Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:45:21 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Add mosses to peatland surface Thirteen studies evaluated the effects of adding mosses or moss fragments onto peatland surfaces. Eleven were in bogs and two in were in fens. One study was a continuation of an earlier study. Three of the studies involved sowing moss in gel beads. Sphagnum moss cover (12 studies): Eleven studies in bogs in the UK, Canada, Finland and Germany and fens the USA reported that Sphagnum moss was present, after 1–4 growing seasons, in at least some plots sown with Sphagnum. Cover ranged from negligible to >90%. Six of these studies were controlled and found that Sphagnum cover or abundance was higher in sown than unsown plots. One of the studies reported that Sphagnum only survived in one of three sites, and only when plots were mulched. One additional study in Canada found that adding Sphagnum to bog pools did not affect Sphagnum Other moss cover (4 studies): Four studies (including one replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after) in bogs in Canada and fens in Sweden and the USA reported that mosses or bryophytes other than Sphagnum were present, after 2–3 growing seasons, in at least some plots sown with moss fragments. Cover ranged from negligible to 76%. In the fens in Sweden and the USA, moss cover was low (<1%) unless the plots were mulched, shaded or limed. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1821https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1821Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:45:38 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Add mixed vegetation to peatland surface Eighteen studies evaluated the effects on peatland vegetation of spreading mixed vegetation onto the peatland surface. All 18 studies were in bogs (two being restored as fens). One study was a continuation of an earlier study. Characteristic plants (1 study): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after study in a degraded bog in Canada found that adding fen vegetation increased the number and cover of fen-characteristic plant species. Sphagnum moss cover (17 studies): Seventeen replicated studies (five also randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after) in bogs in Canada, the USA and Estonia reported that Sphagnum moss was present, after 1–6 growing seasons, in at least some plots sown with vegetation containing Sphagnum. Cover ranged from <1 to 73%. Six of the studies were controlled and found that Sphagnum cover was higher in sown than unsown plots. Five of the studies reported that Sphagnum cover was very low (<1%) unless plots were mulched after spreading fragments. Other moss cover (8 studies): Eight replicated studies (seven before-and-after, one controlled) in bogs in Canada, the USA and Estonia reported that mosses or bryophytes other than Sphagnum were present, after 1–6 growing seasons, in at least some plots sown with mixed peatland vegetation. Cover was <1–65%. Vascular plant cover (10 studies): Ten replicated studies in Canada, the USA and Estonia reported that vascular plants appeared following addition of mixed vegetation fragments to bogs. Two of the studies were controlled: one found that vascular plant cover was significantly higher in sown than unsown plots, but one found that sowing peatland vegetation did not affect herb cover. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1822https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1822Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:45:54 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Introduce seeds of peatland herbs Ten studies evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of introducing seeds of herbaceous peatland plants. Seven studies were in fens or fen meadows, two in bogs and one in unspecified peatland. Germination (2 studies): Two replicated studies reported that some planted herb seeds germinated. In a bog in Germany three of four species germinated, but in a fen in the USA only one of seven species germinated. Characteristic plants (3 studies): Three studies (two controlled) in fen meadows in Germany and a peatland in China reported that wetland-characteristic or peatland-characteristic plants colonized plots where herb seeds were sown (sometimes along with other interventions). Herb cover (4 studies): Three before-and-after studies (one also replicated, randomized, paired, controlled) in a bog in New Zealand, fen meadows in Switzerland and a peatland in China reported that plots sown with herb seeds developed cover of the sown herbs (and in New Zealand, greater cover than unsown plots). In China, the effect of sowing was not separated from the effects of other interventions. One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in a fen in the USA found that plots sown with herb (and shrub) seeds developed similar herb cover to plots that were not sown. Overall vegetation cover (3 studies): Of three replicated, controlled studies, one in a fen in the USA found that sowing herb (and shrub) seeds increased total vegetation cover. One study in a bog in New Zealand found that sowing herb seeds had no effect on total vegetation cover. One study in a fen meadow in Poland found that the effect of adding seed-rich hay depended on other treatments applied to plots. Overall plant richness/diversity (4 studies): Two replicated, controlled studies in fens in the USA and Poland found that sowing herb seeds had no effect on plant species richness (total or vascular). Two replicated, controlled, before-and-after studies in a bog in New Zealand and a fen meadow in Poland each reported inconsistent effects of herb sowing on total plant species richness. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1823https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1823Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:46:08 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Introduce seeds of peatland trees/shrubs Five studies evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of introducing seeds of peatland trees/shrubs to restore or create forested/shrubby peatland. Three studies were in bogs and two were in fens. Germination (2 studies): Two replicated studies in a bog in Germany and a fen in the USA reported germination of heather and willow seeds, respectively, in at least some sown plots. Survival (2 studies): One replicated study in a bog in Germany reported survival of some heather seedlings over two years. One replicated study in a fen in the USA reported that all germinated willow seedlings died within one month. Shrub cover (3 studies): Two studies (one replicated, randomized, paired, controlled) in bogs in New Zealand and Estonia reported that plots sown with shrub seeds (sometimes along with other interventions) developed greater cover of some shrubs than plots that were not sown: sown manuka or naturally colonizing heather (but not sown cranberry). One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in a fen in the USA found that plots sown with shrub (and herb) seeds developed similar overall shrub cover to unsown plots within two years. Overall vegetation cover (3 studies): Two replicated, randomized, paired, controlled studies in a bog in New Zealand and a fen in the USA reported that plots sown with shrub (and herb) seeds developed greater total vegetation cover than unsown plots after two years. One site comparison study in bogs in Estonia reported that sowing shrub seeds (along with fertilization) had no effect on total vegetation cover after 25 years. Overall plant richness/diversity (3 studies): One site comparison study in bogs in Estonia reported that sowing shrub seeds (along with fertilization) increased plant species richness. However, one replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in a bog in New Zealand reported that plots sown with shrub seeds typically contained fewer plant species than plots that were not sown. One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in a fen in the USA found that sowing shrub (and herb) seeds had no effect on plant species richness. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1824https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1824Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:46:23 +0000
What Works 2021 cover

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, 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 the latest volume: Volume 21

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.

Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape ProgrammeRed List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Mauritian Wildlife Supporting Conservation Leaders
Sustainability Dashboard National Biodiversity Network Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Bat Conservation InternationalPeople trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust
For a full list of, and information about, our champions:
All Evidence Champions
About our champions, why and how to become one:
Become an Evidence Champion

This website uses Cookies

We use limited Cookies to run the site and to analyse our traffic (none for site vendors). By using this site, you will be providing your consent to our use of Cookies.

Accept & continue