Conservation Evidence: Evidence Data

Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ponto-Caspian gobies: Biological control using native predators No evidence was captured on the deliberate introduction of a native predator to biologically control gobies. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2F1061https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1061Tue, 13 Oct 2015 12:11:55 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ponto-Caspian gobies: Biological control of beneficial species No evidence was found for reducing or controlling goby population size by reducing the population of co-occurring beneficial species. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2F1062https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1062Tue, 13 Oct 2015 12:13:05 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ponto-Caspian gobies: Application of a biocide No evidence was captured on the use of biocide to control populations of the round goby or the tubenose goby. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2F1063https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1063Tue, 13 Oct 2015 12:14:34 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ponto-Caspian gobies: Habitat manipulation No evidence was captured on the use of habitat manipulation to control invasive goby populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2F1064https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1064Tue, 13 Oct 2015 12:15:40 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ponto-Caspian gobies: Draining invaded waterbodies No evidence was captured for use of draining waterbodies to reduce the population size of invasive gobies. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2F1065https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1065Tue, 13 Oct 2015 12:17:00 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ponto-Caspian gobies: Netting No evidence was captured on the use of seine netting to control goby populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2F1066https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1066Tue, 13 Oct 2015 12:18:10 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ponto-Caspian gobies: Electrofishing No evidence was captured for use of electrofishing to reduce the population size of invasive gobies. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2F1067https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1067Tue, 13 Oct 2015 12:19:17 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ponto-Caspian gobies: Trapping using visual, sound and pheromonal lures No evidence was captured on trapping Ponto-Caspian gobies using sound or pheromonal lures. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2F1069https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1069Tue, 13 Oct 2015 12:21:55 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ponto-Caspian gobies: Increasing carbon dioxide concentrations No evidence was captured on the use of carbon dioxide for management of invasive Ponto-Caspian gobies. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2F1070https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1070Tue, 13 Oct 2015 12:23:27 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ponto-Caspian gobies: Changing salinity A replicated, controlled laboratory study in Canada found 100% mortality of round gobies within 48 hours of exposure to water of 30% salinity. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1072https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1072Tue, 13 Oct 2015 12:27:09 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ponto-Caspian gobies: Changing pH No evidence was captured on the use of pH alteration to control goby populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2F1073https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1073Tue, 13 Oct 2015 12:28:33 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ponto-Caspian gobies: Use of barriers to prevent migration A controlled, replicated field study in the USA, found that an electrical barrier prevented movement of round gobies across it, and that increasing electrical pulse duration and voltage increased effectiveness of the barrier. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1074https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1074Tue, 13 Oct 2015 12:31:01 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ponto-Caspian gobies: Public education No evidence was captured on the impact of education programmes on control of goby populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2F1075https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1075Tue, 13 Oct 2015 12:32:09 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ponto-Caspian gammarids: Biological control using predatory fish No evidence was captured for the use of predatory fish to control Ponto-Caspian gammarids. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2F1087https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1087Tue, 13 Oct 2015 13:23:09 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ponto-Caspian gammarids: Control movement of gammarids A replicated, controlled laboratory study in the USA found that movements of invasive freshwater shrimp slowed down or stopped when they were placed in water that had been exposed to different species of predatory fish, compared to those not exposed to fish. A replicated laboratory study in the UK found carbonating the water stunned invasive killer shrimp. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1088https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1088Tue, 13 Oct 2015 13:28:18 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ponto-Caspian gammarids: Exposure to parasites A replicated, laboratory study in Canada found that an introduced parasitic mould reduced populations of an invasive shrimp. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1089https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1089Tue, 13 Oct 2015 13:30:53 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ponto-Caspian gammarids: Exposure to disease-causing organisms No evidence was captured for the use of disease-causing organisms to control Ponto-Caspian gammarids. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2F1090https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1090Tue, 13 Oct 2015 13:31:55 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ponto-Caspian gammarids: Change salinity of the waterOne of two replicated laboratory studies (one controlled) in Canada and the UK found that increasing the salinity level of water killed the majority of invasive shrimp within five hours. One found that increased salinity did not kill invasive killer shrimp.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1091https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1091Tue, 13 Oct 2015 13:36:28 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ponto-Caspian gammarids: Change water temperature A controlled laboratory study from the UK1 found that heating water to >36°C killed all shrimps after 15 minutes exposure and at >43°C all shrimps died immediately. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1092https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1092Tue, 13 Oct 2015 13:38:26 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ponto-Caspian gammarids: Change water pH A controlled laboratory study from the UK found that lowering the pH of water did not kill invasive killer shrimp. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1093https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1093Tue, 13 Oct 2015 13:41:18 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ponto-Caspian gammarids: Dewater (dry out) the habitat A replicated, controlled laboratory study from Poland found that lowering water levels in sand killed three species of invasive freshwater shrimp, although one species required water content levels of 4% and below before it was killed. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1094https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1094Tue, 13 Oct 2015 13:44:55 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ponto-Caspian gammarids: Add chemicals to the water A controlled laboratory study in the UK found that iodine solution, acetic acid, Virkon S and sodium hypochlorite added to freshwater killed invasive killer shrimp, but were considered impractical for field application. Methanol, citric acid, urea, hydrogen peroxide and sucrose did not kill invasive killer shrimp when added to freshwater. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1095https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1095Tue, 13 Oct 2015 13:48:43 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ponto-Caspian gammarids: Cleaning equipment No evidence was captured for the cleaning of equipment to control Ponto-Caspian gammarids. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2F1096https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1096Tue, 13 Oct 2015 13:49:53 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ponto-Caspian gammarids: Exchanging ballast water No evidence was captured for exchanging ballast water to control Ponto-Caspian gammarids. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2F1097https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1097Tue, 13 Oct 2015 13:51:28 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Pollination: Use no tillage in arable fieldsPollination (0 studies) Crop visitation (0 studies) Pollinator numbers (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled study from the USA found more pollinators in plots with no tillage, compared to deep tillage. Implementation options (0 studies)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1405https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1405Fri, 19 May 2017 09:27:47 +0100