Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit, cease or prohibit the dumping of untreated sewage We found no studies that evaluated the effects of limiting, ceasing or prohibiting the dumping of untreated sewage on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2178https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2178Tue, 22 Oct 2019 12:29:28 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit, cease or prohibit the dumping of sewage sludge Two studies examined the effects of ceasing or prohibiting the dumping of sewage sludge on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations. One study was in the New York Bight (USA), one in the North Sea (UK).   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Overall community composition (2 studies): One before-and-after, site comparison study in the New York Bight found that after ceasing sewage sludge dumping, overall invertebrate community composition became more similar to less disturbed sites. One replicated, site comparison study in the North Sea found that overall invertebrate community composition changed but remained different to that of natural sites. POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Overall abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the North Sea found that after ceasing sewage sludge dumping, overall invertebrate abundance became similar to that of natural sites. Worm abundance (1 study): One before-and-after, site comparison study in the New York Bight found that after ceasing sewage sludge dumping, abundance of pollution-indicator polychaete worms decreased and became similar to that of natural sites. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2179https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2179Tue, 22 Oct 2019 12:31:08 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Set or improve minimum sewage treatment standards One study examined the effects of improving minimum sewage treatment standards on subtidal benthic invertebrates. The study was in the Bay of Biscay (Spain).   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Overall community composition (1 study): One before-and-after, site comparison study in the Bay of Biscay found that after introducing a secondary treatment of sewage wastewaters, invertebrate community composition at an impacted site did not significantly change compared to unimpacted sites. Overall richness/diversity (1 study): One before-and-after, site comparison study in the Bay of Biscay found that after introducing a secondary treatment of sewage wastewaters, invertebrate richness and diversity at an impacted site did not significantly change compared to unimpacted sites. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Overall abundance (1 study): One before-and-after, site comparison study in the Bay of Biscay found that after introducing a secondary treatment of sewage wastewaters, total cover of invertebrates significantly increased at an impacted site at 8 m but not 3 m depth, compared to unimpacted sites. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2180https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2180Tue, 22 Oct 2019 12:36:42 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit the amount of storm wastewater overflow We found no studies that evaluated the effects of limiting the amount of storm wastewater overflow on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2181https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2181Tue, 22 Oct 2019 12:40:17 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use double hulls to prevent oil spills We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using double hulls to prevent oil spills on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2182https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2182Tue, 22 Oct 2019 12:41:00 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove or clean-up oil pollution following a spill One study examined the effects of removing and cleaning-up oil pollution following a spill on subtidal benthic invertebrates. The study was in the Baltic Proper (Sweden).   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Mollusc condition (1 study): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in the Baltic Proper found that after cleaning-up spilled oil using high pressure hot water, crude oil content increased in mussels and did not naturally decrease over time, and was higher than in mussels from an uncleaned contaminated and a non-contaminated site. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2183https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2183Tue, 22 Oct 2019 12:43:22 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Set regulatory ban on marine burial of nuclear waste We found no studies that evaluated the effects of setting regulatory ban on marine burial of nuclear waste on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2184https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2184Tue, 22 Oct 2019 12:44:09 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cease or prohibit aquaculture activity Two studies examined the effects of ceasing or prohibiting aquaculture activity on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations. Both studies were in the Mediterranean Sea (Italy and Spain).   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Overall community composition (1 study): One before-and-after, site comparison study in the Mediterranean Sea found that after ceasing aquaculture activity invertebrate community composition remained different to that of an unfarmed site. Worm community composition (1 study): One before-and-after, site comparison study in the Mediterranean Sea found that after ceasing aquaculture activity worm community composition community composition remained different to that of an unfarmed site. POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Overall abundance (1 study): One before-and-after, site comparison study in the Mediterranean Sea found that after ceasing aquaculture activity overall invertebrate abundance was similar to an unfarmed site. Worm abundance (1 study): One before-and-after, site comparison study in the Mediterranean Sea found that after ceasing aquaculture activity abundance of health-indicating worms increased, and abundance of pollution-indicating worms decreased. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2185https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2185Tue, 22 Oct 2019 12:46:43 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reduce aquaculture stocking densities We found no studies that evaluated the effects of reducing aquaculture stocking densities on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2186https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2186Tue, 22 Oct 2019 12:55:51 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Locate aquaculture systems in already impacted areas We found no studies that evaluated the effects of locating aquaculture systems in already impacted areas on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2187https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2187Tue, 22 Oct 2019 12:56:48 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Locate aquaculture systems in areas with fast currents We found no studies that evaluated the effects of locating aquaculture systems in areas with fast currents on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2188https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2188Tue, 22 Oct 2019 12:57:27 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Locate aquaculture systems in vegetated areas We found no studies that evaluated the effects of locating aquaculture systems in vegetated locations on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2189https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2189Tue, 22 Oct 2019 12:58:02 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Moor aquaculture cages so they move in response to changing current direction We found no studies that evaluated the effects of mooring aquaculture cages so they move in response to changing current direction on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2190https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2190Tue, 22 Oct 2019 12:58:46 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Leave a fallow period during fish/shellfish farming Three studies examined the effects of leaving a fallow period during fish farming on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations. Two studies were in the Tasman Sea (Australia), and one in the North Pacific Ocean (USA).   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Overall community composition (2 study): Two replicated, before-and-after, site comparison study in the Tasman Sea found that after a fallow period invertebrate community composition became similar to that occurring before the fish were added but remained different to communities at sites without fish farms. Worm community composition (1 study): One replicated, before-and-after, site comparison study in the North Pacific Ocean found that after a fallow period polychaete worm community composition changed but remained different to communities at sites without fish farms. Worm richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, before-and-after, site comparison study in the North Pacific Ocean found that after a fallow period polychaete worm diversity did not change and remained lower compared to sites without fish farms. POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Worm abundance (2 studies): Two replicated, before-and-after, site comparison studies in the Tasman Sea and the North Pacific Ocean found that following a fallow period, abundances of pollution-indicator polychaete worms decreased, but remained higher compared to sites without fish farms. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2191https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2191Tue, 22 Oct 2019 13:02:17 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Improve fish food and pellets to reduce aquaculture waste production We found no studies that evaluated the effects of improving fish food and pellets to reduce aquaculture waste production on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2192https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2192Tue, 22 Oct 2019 13:02:53 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reduce the amount of pesticides used in aquaculture systems We found no studies that evaluated the effects of reducing the amount of pesticides used in aquaculture systems on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2193https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2193Tue, 22 Oct 2019 13:05:17 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reduce the amount of antibiotics used in aquaculture systems We found no studies that evaluated the effects of reducing the amount of antibiotics used in aquaculture systems on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2194https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2194Tue, 22 Oct 2019 13:06:02 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use species from more than one level of a food web in aquaculture systems We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using species from more than one level of a food web in aquaculture systems on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2195https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2195Tue, 22 Oct 2019 13:07:07 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Locate artificial reefs near aquaculture systems (and vice versa) to act as biofilters We found no studies that evaluated the effects of locating artificial reefs near aquaculture systems to act as biofilters on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2196https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2196Tue, 22 Oct 2019 13:07:49 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use other bioremediation methods in aquaculture We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using other bioremediation methods in aquaculture on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2197https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2197Tue, 22 Oct 2019 13:09:12 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Regulate the use, dosage and disposal of agrichemicals We found no studies that evaluated the effects of regulating the use, dosage and disposal of agrichemicals on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2198https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2198Tue, 22 Oct 2019 13:09:55 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Treat wastewater from intensive livestock holdings We found no studies that evaluated the effects of treating wastewater from intensive livestock holdings on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2199https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2199Tue, 22 Oct 2019 13:10:46 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish aquaculture to extract the nutrients from run-offs We found no studies that evaluated the effects of establishing aquaculture to extract the nutrients from run-offs on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2200https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2200Tue, 22 Oct 2019 13:11:28 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create artificial wetlands to reduce the amount of pollutants reaching the sea We found no studies that evaluated the effects of creating artificial wetlands to reduce the amount of pollutants reaching the sea on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.    Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2201https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2201Tue, 22 Oct 2019 13:12:33 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit, cease or prohibit discharge of solid waste overboard from vessels We found no studies that evaluated the effects of limiting, ceasing or prohibiting discharge of solid waste overboard from vessels on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2202https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2202Tue, 22 Oct 2019 13:13:36 +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