Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Clean waste water before it enters the environmentWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on marsh or swamp vegetation, of cleaning waste water before releasing it into the environment.   ‘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%2F3142https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3142Mon, 05 Apr 2021 14:26:28 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Divert/block/stop polluted water inputsWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on marsh or swamp vegetation, of diverting/blocking/stopping polluted water inputs.   ‘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%2F3143https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3143Mon, 05 Apr 2021 15:12:59 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Slow down input water to allow more time for pollutants to be removedWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on marsh or swamp vegetation, of slowing down input water to allow more time for pollutants to be removed.   ‘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%2F3144https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3144Mon, 05 Apr 2021 15:14:35 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Retain/restore/create vegetation around freshwater marshes Four studies evaluated the effects, on vegetation in freshwater marshes, of retaining/restoring/creating vegetation around them. Three studies were in the USA and one was in China. Two studies were largely based on the same sites. VEGETATION COMMUNITY Community composition (2 studies): Two replicated, site comparison studies in the USA reported that freshwater marshes surrounded by restored upland vegetation contained a different overall plant community, after 1–20 years, to nearby marshes surrounded by natural vegetation. One of the studies also reported differences between marshes in restored vs degraded catchments. Overall richness/diversity (3 studies): One replicated, paired, site comparison study in the USA found that marshes surrounded by restored upland vegetation had greater overall plant species richness than marshes within cropland, and similar richness to marshes within natural grassland. One replicated, site comparison study in the USA reported that freshwater marshes surrounded by restored upland vegetation contained fewer wetland plant species, after 1–20 years, than nearby marshes surrounded by natural vegetation. One before-and-after study of a lakeshore marsh in China reported that after revegetating a polluted input river (along with planting directly into the marsh), overall plant species richness increased. VEGETATION ABUNDANCE Overall abundance (1 study): One replicated, paired, site comparison study in the USA found that marshes surrounded by restored upland vegetation contained more plant biomass than marshes within cropland, but also more plant biomass than marshes within natural grassland. Characteristic plant abundance (1 study): One replicated, paired, site comparison study in the USA found that marshes surrounded by restored upland vegetation typically had greater cover of wetland-characteristic plants than marshes within cropland, and similar cover of these species to marshes within natural grassland. Individual species abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study of pothole wetlands the USA found that wetlands surrounded by restored upland vegetation had greater cover of hybrid cattail Typha x glauca, after 2–7 years, than nearby natural wetlands. VEGETATION STRUCTURE Visual obstruction (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study of pothole wetlands in the USA found that parts of wetlands surrounded by restored upland vegetation created more visual obstruction, after 2–7 years, than the corresponding zone of nearby natural wetlands. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3145https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3145Mon, 05 Apr 2021 15:14:57 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Retain/restore/create vegetation around brackish/salt marshesWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation in brackish/salt marshes, of retaining/restoring/creating vegetation around them.   ‘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%2F3146https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3146Mon, 05 Apr 2021 15:15:10 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Retain/restore/create vegetation around freshwater swampsWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation in freshwater swamps, of retaining/restoring/creating vegetation around them.   ‘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%2F3147https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3147Mon, 05 Apr 2021 15:15:21 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Retain/restore/create vegetation around brackish/saline swampsWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation in brackish/saline swamps, of retaining/restoring/creating vegetation around them.   ‘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%2F3148https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3148Mon, 05 Apr 2021 15:15:30 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use artificial barriers to block pollutionWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on marsh or swamp vegetation, of using artificial barriers to block out pollution.   ‘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%2F3149https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3149Mon, 05 Apr 2021 15:42:15 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Add clean water to reduce pollutionWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation in marshes or swamps, of diverting clean water into them to reduce pollution.   ‘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%2F3150https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3150Mon, 05 Apr 2021 15:46:25 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Introduce plants to marshes or swamps to control pollutionWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on other vegetation, of introducing plants to marshes or swamps with the primary aim of controlling pollution.   ‘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%2F3151https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3151Mon, 05 Apr 2021 15:47:34 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reduce fertilizer or herbicide use: freshwater marshes One study evaluated the effects, on vegetation in freshwater marshes, of reducing the amount of fertilizer or herbicide used in the marshes or adjacent areas. The study was in Brazil. VEGETATION COMMUNITY Community composition (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study of rice fields in Brazil found that the overall plant community composition (excluding rice) was similar in organically farmed fields and conventionally farmed fields, but different from the community in nearby natural marshes. Overall richness/diversity (1 study): The same study found that organically farmed rice fields contained a similar average richness and diversity of wetland plants (at any single point in time) to conventionally farmed rice fields, although more species were recorded in the organic fields over the year of the study. Organically farmed rice fields had lower wetland plant richness and diversity than nearby natural marshes. VEGETATION ABUNDANCE Overall abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study of rice fields in Brazil found that organically farmed fields contained more wetland plant biomass than conventionally farmed fields over the year of the study, but less wetland plant biomass than nearby natural marshes. VEGETATION STRUCTURECollected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3152https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3152Mon, 05 Apr 2021 15:48:02 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reduce fertilizer or herbicide use: brackish/salt marshesWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation in brackish/salt marshes, of reducing the amount of fertilizer or herbicide used in the marshes or adjacent areas.   ‘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%2F3153https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3153Mon, 05 Apr 2021 15:48:23 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reduce fertilizer or herbicide use: freshwater swampsWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation in freshwater swamps, of reducing the amount of fertilizer or herbicide used in the swamps or adjacent areas.   ‘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%2F3154https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3154Mon, 05 Apr 2021 15:48:47 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reduce fertilizer or herbicide use: brackish/saline swampsWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation in brackish/saline swamps, of reducing the amount of fertilizer or herbicide used in the swamps or adjacent areas.   ‘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%2F3155https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3155Mon, 05 Apr 2021 15:48:59 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage fertilizer or herbicide applicationWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation in marshes or swamps, of managing fertilizer or herbicide use in these habitats or adjacent areas.   ‘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%2F3156https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3156Tue, 06 Apr 2021 12:13:49 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Add lime or similar chemicals: freshwater marshes One study evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of adding neutralizing chemicals to freshwater marshes or their catchments. The study was in the USA. VEGETATION COMMUNITY Relative abundance (1 study): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study of marsh vegetation in the USA found that liming had little effect on the relative abundance of plant taxa. For 48 of 49 taxa, differences or similarities in relative abundance between limed and unlimed areas before intervention persisted over two years after intervention. VEGETATION ABUNDANCE Individual species abundance (1 study): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study of marsh vegetation in the USA found that for most plant taxa, differences or similarities in abundance between limed and unlimed areas before intervention persisted over two years following intervention. This was true for 33 of 38 herbaceous plant taxa, eight of eight woody plant taxa, and two of three moss taxa. VEGETATION STRUCTURECollected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3157https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3157Tue, 06 Apr 2021 12:16:26 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Add lime or similar chemicals: brackish/salt marshesWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of adding neutralizing chemicals to brackish/salt marshes or their catchments.   ‘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%2F3158https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3158Tue, 06 Apr 2021 12:16:51 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Add lime or similar chemicals: freshwater swamps One study evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of adding neutralizing chemicals to freshwater swamps or their catchments. The study was in the USA. VEGETATION COMMUNITY Relative abundance (1 study): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study of shrubby wetland vegetation in the USA found that liming had no significant effect on the relative abundance of plant taxa. For 49 of 49 taxa, differences or similarities in relative abundance between limed and unlimed areas before intervention persisted over two years after intervention. VEGETATION ABUNDANCE Individual species abundance (1 study): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study of shrubby wetland vegetation in the USA found that for most plant taxa, differences or similarities in abundance between limed and unlimed areas before intervention persisted over two years following intervention. This was true for 31 of 31 herbaceous plant taxa, 16 of 16 woody plant taxa, and one of two moss taxa. VEGETATION STRUCTURECollected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3159https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3159Tue, 06 Apr 2021 12:17:03 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Add lime or similar chemicals: brackish/saline swampsWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of adding neutralizing chemicals to brackish/saline swamps or their catchments.   ‘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%2F3160https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3160Tue, 06 Apr 2021 12:17:14 +0100
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