Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage perennial bioenergy crops to benefit butterflies and moths One study evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of managing perennial bioenergy crops to benefit butterflies and moths. This study was in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in the USA found that plots planted with a diverse mix of bioenergy crops had a greater species richness of butterflies than plots planted with fewer species. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in the USA found that plots planted with a diverse mix of bioenergy crops had a higher abundance of butterflies than plots planted with fewer species. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3918https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3918Thu, 11 Aug 2022 11:12:26 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage vineyards to benefit butterflies and moths Two studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of managing vineyards to benefit butterflies and moths. One study was in each of the USA and Spain. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (2 studies): One of two replicated, site comparison studies (including one paired study) in the USA and Spain found that grass strips between vine rows had a greater species richness of butterflies than the vine rows themselves, and vineyards managed with fewer chemicals had a greater species richness of butterflies than conventionally managed vineyards. The other study found that vineyards managed to encourage native plants, and where insecticide was rarely used, had a similar species richness of butterflies to conventionally managed vineyards. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, paired, site comparison study in the USA found that vineyards managed to encourage native plants, and where insecticide was rarely used, had a greater abundance of butterflies than conventionally managed vineyards. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3919https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3919Thu, 11 Aug 2022 11:19:09 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Grow native trees within perennial crop plantations One study evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of growing native trees within perennial crop plantations. This study was in Costa Rica. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Costa Rica found that coffee farms with a native and a non-native tree species growing within them had a higher diversity of butterflies than coffee farms with a single non-native tree species, but a similar diversity to coffee farms with two non-native tree species. The same study found a similar species richness of butterflies on all farms. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Costa Rica found that coffee farms with a native and a non-native tree species growing within them had a similar abundance of butterflies to coffee farms with one or two non-native tree species. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3920https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3920Thu, 11 Aug 2022 11:25:19 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Increase crop diversity across a farm or farmed landscape      Two studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of increasing crop diversity across a farm or farmed landscape. Both studies were in Switzerland. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (2 studies): Two replicated, site comparison studies in Switzerland found that farms and landscapes with a greater number of habitats or crop types had a similar species richness of butterflies to farms and landscapes with fewer different habitats or crop types. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Switzerland found that farms with a greater number of habitats had a similar abundance of butterflies to farms with fewer different habitats. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3921https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3921Thu, 11 Aug 2022 16:45:18 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Leave uncropped, cultivated margins or plots Four studies evaluated the effects of leaving uncropped, cultivated margins or plots on butterflies and moths. Three were in the UK and one was in Switzerland. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (3 studies): Two of three replicated studies (including one randomized, paired, controlled study, one replicated, randomized, site comparison study, and one site comparison study) in the UK and Switzerland found that farms managed under agri-environment schemes, or with a greater area of in-field agri-environment scheme options, both including uncropped cultivated margins, had a similar species richness of butterflies and moths to conventional farms or farms with a smaller area of in-field options. The other study found that fields with wider margins between crops had higher butterfly species richness in one of two years. POPULATION RESPONSE (4 STUDIES) Abundance (4 studies): One replicated, randomized, site comparison study in the UK found that fields with wider margins between crops had a higher abundance of butterflies in one of two years. One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in the UK found that farms managed under agri-environment schemes (AES), including uncropped cultivated margins, had a higher abundance of butterflies and micro-moths, but a similar abundance of other moths, compared to conventionally managed farms. One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the UK found that farms managed with enhanced AES options, including uncropped, cultivated margins, had a higher abundance of some butterflies, but a lower abundance of other butterflies, than farms with simpler AES management. One replicated, site comparison study in Switzerland found that farms with a larger area of in-field AES options, including uncropped, cultivated plots, had a similar abundance of butterflies to farms with a smaller area of in-field AES options. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3923https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3923Thu, 11 Aug 2022 16:56:56 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Leave unharvested crop headlands within arable fields One study evaluated the effects of leaving unharvested crop headlands within arable fields. This study was in France. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, paired, site comparison study in France found that unharvested alfalfa headlands had a greater species richness of butterflies than harvested alfalfa or wheat fields. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, paired, site comparison study in France found that unharvested alfalfa headlands had a higher abundance of butterflies than harvested alfalfa or wheat fields. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3924https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3924Thu, 11 Aug 2022 17:02:01 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Plant crops in spring rather than autumn We found no studies that evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of planting crops in spring rather than autumn. ‘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%2F3925https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3925Thu, 11 Aug 2022 17:03:02 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Undersow spring cereals, with clover for example Two studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of undersowing spring cereals. One study was in the UK and one was in Switzerland. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (2 studies): One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the UK found that spring barley undersown with a mix of grasses and legumes had a higher species richness of butterflies than extensively or conventionally managed grassland. One replicated, site comparison study in Switzerland found that farms with a larger area of in-field agri-environment scheme options, including undersown cereals, had a similar species richness of butterflies to farms with a smaller area of in-field agri-environment scheme POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the UK found that spring barley undersown with a mix of grasses and legumes had a higher abundance of butterflies, but a lower abundance of caterpillars, than extensively or conventionally managed grassland. One replicated, site comparison study in Switzerland found that farms with a larger area of in-field agri-environment scheme options, including undersown cereals, had a similar abundance of butterflies to farms with a smaller area of in-field agri-environment scheme BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3926https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3926Thu, 11 Aug 2022 17:09:12 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create beetle banks Four studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of creating raised beetle banks in arable fields. All four were in the UK. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (2 studies): One replicated, paired, site comparison study in the UK found that beetle banks and field margins managed under agri-environment schemes had a higher species richness of micro-moths, and a similar species richness of macro-moths, than conventionally managed field margins. One replicated, paired, site comparison study in the UK found that the species richness of butterflies on beetle banks was lower than along hedgerows. POPULATION RESPONSE (4 STUDIES) Abundance (4 studies): Three replicated, site comparison studies (including one paired study) in the UK found that beetle banks had a similar abundance of caterpillars to field margins, crop fields and a range of other field-edge farmland habitats. One of these studies also found that the abundance of adult butterflies was lower on beetle banks than along hedgerows. One replicated, paired, site comparison study in the UK found that beetle banks and field margins managed under agri-environment schemes had a higher abundance of micro-moths, and a similar abundance of macro-moths, than conventionally managed field margins. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3927https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3927Thu, 11 Aug 2022 17:12:17 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage rice field banks to benefit butterflies and moths One study evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of managing rice field banks to benefit butterflies and moths. This study was in Italy. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Italy found that unmown, herbicide-free rice field banks had a greater species richness of butterflies than banks which were mown or sprayed with herbicide. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Italy found that unmown, herbicide-free rice field banks had a higher abundance of butterflies, including large copper, than banks which were mown or sprayed with herbicide. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3928https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3928Thu, 11 Aug 2022 17:33:27 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore arable land to permanent grassland Ten studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of restoring arable land to permanent grassland. Six studies were in the UK, two were in Finland, and one was in each of Switzerland and Taiwan. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (9 STUDIES) Community composition (2 studies): One of two replicated, site comparison studies in the UK and Finland found that grasslands restored from bare soil by seeding developed butterfly communities that were increasingly similar to existing high-quality grasslands over the first 10 years after establishment. The other study found that older grasslands established by sowing with competitive seed mixes had a greater proportion of specialist butterflies than newer grasslands sown with less competitive species which required re-seeding every 4–5 years. Richness/diversity (8 studies): Three replicated, site comparison studies (including two paired studies) in Switzerland, the UK and Taiwan found that 4–5-year-old created grasslands and abandoned cropland had a greater species richness of butterflies, burnet moths and all moths than conventionally managed grassland or cultivated farms. Two of three replicated studies (including one randomized, paired, controlled study and two site comparison studies) in the UK and Finland found that grasslands established by sowing grasses, legumes and other non-woody, broadleaved plants (forbs), or perennial grass mixes, had a higher species richness of butterflies (in one case including other pollinators) than grasslands established with grass-only mixes or less competitive species. The third study found that grasslands established by sowing complex or simple seed mixes, or by natural regeneration, all had a similar species richness of butterflies and day-flying moths, but species richness was higher on grasslands created <10 years ago than on grasslands created >20 years ago. One before-and-after study in the UK found that after the adoption of an Environmentally Sensitive Areas scheme, including reverting arable land to permanent grassland, the species richness of large moths on a farm increased. One replicated, site comparison study in the UK found that over 10 years after restoration, the number of species of butterfly on seeded grassland remained similar each year. POPULATION RESPONSE (7 STUDIES) Abundance (7 studies): Two of three replicated, paired, site comparison studies in the UK and Taiwan found that restored grassland had a higher abundance of moths than conventional grassland or unrestored crop fields, and a similar abundance to semi-natural grasslands, but abundance did not increase with time since restoration. The third study found that abandoned cropland had a similar abundance of butterflies to cultivated farms. Two of three replicated studies (including one randomized, paired, controlled study and two site comparison studies) in the UK and Finland found that grasslands established by sowing grasses, legumes and other non-woody, broadleaved plants (forbs), or perennial grass mixes, had a higher abundance of butterflies (in one case including other pollinators) than grasslands established with grass-only mixes or less competitive species. The third study found that grasslands restored by sowing complex or simple seed mixes, or by natural regeneration, all had a similar abundance of caterpillars. One before-and-after study in the UK found that after the adoption of an Environmentally Sensitive Areas scheme on a farm, including reverting arable land to permanent grassland, the abundance of large moths and five species of butterfly increased, but the abundance of two species of butterfly decreased. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3929https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3929Thu, 11 Aug 2022 18:15:43 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Plant wild bird seed or cover mixture Seven studies evaluated the effects of planting wild bird seed or cover mixture on butterflies and moths. All seven were in the UK. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (4 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (4 studies): Two of three replicated, controlled studies (including two randomized and one paired study) in the UK found that plots sown with wild bird seed mixture had a greater species richness of butterflies than wheat crop or extensively or conventionally managed grassland. The other study found that land managed under an agri-environment scheme, including wild bird seed plots, had a similar species richness of butterflies to conventional farmland. One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the UK found that plots sown with lucerne had a greater species richness of butterflies than plots sown with borage, chicory, sainfoin and fodder radish. POPULATION RESPONSE (7 STUDIES) Abundance (7 studies): Two replicated, controlled studies (including one randomized study) in the UK­ found that plots sown with wild bird seed had a higher abundance of butterflies than wheat crop or extensively or conventionally managed grassland, but that caterpillar abundance was lower in wild bird seed plots than either grassland. Two replicated, site comparison studies in the UK found that the abundance of butterfly and moth caterpillars in wild bird seed plots was similar to a range of other cropped and non-cropped farm habitats. Two replicated, randomized, controlled studies (including one paired study) in the UK found that farms with wild bird seed plots (along with other agri-environment scheme options) had a higher abundance of some butterflies and micro-moths, a similar abundance of macro-moths, but a lower abundance of other butterflies, than farms without agri-environment scheme management. One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the UK found that plots sown with lucerne and red clover had a higher abundance of butterflies than plots sown with borage, chicory and sainfoin. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3930https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3930Thu, 11 Aug 2022 19:22:03 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Produce coffee in shaded plantations Three studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of producing coffee in shaded plantations. Two studies were in Mexico and one was in Puerto Rico. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (2 studies): One paired sites, site comparison study in Mexico found that a plantation with its original canopy but understory replaced with coffee had higher species richness of fruit-eating butterflies than one with its original canopy and understory replaced with coffee and other vegetation or those with canopies replaced with other shading trees and understories replaced with coffee with or without other vegetation. One site comparison study in Mexico found that shaded coffee plantations had a higher species richness of caterpillars than a sun-grown monoculture. POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): Two site comparison studies (including one replicated study) in Puerto Rico and Mexico found that shade-grown coffee plantations had a greater abundance of caterpillars than sun-grown coffee plantations. One of these studies also found that the abundance of coffee leaf miner was similar in shade-grown and sun-grown plantations. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3931https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3931Thu, 11 Aug 2022 19:51:40 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Plant nectar flower mixture/wildflower strips Twenty-three studies evaluated the effects of planting nectar flower mixtures, or wildflower strips, on butterflies and moths. Eleven studies were in the UK, six were in Switzerland, two were in the USA, and one was in each of Sweden, Finland and Germany. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (20 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (20 studies): Eight of thirteen studies (including twelve replicated studies, two randomized studies, five controlled studies, one before-and-after study, and eight site comparison studies) in the UK, Switzerland, Finland and Germany found that sown wildflower strips had a higher species richness and diversity of all butterflies, generalist butterflies, and moths than conventional field margins, unsown margins, cropped fields or conventional grassland. One of these studies also found that the species richness of specialist butterflies was similar in sown wildflower strips, cropped fields and conventional grassland. Four studies found that the species richness of butterflies was similar between sown wildflower strips and cropped fields, cropped margins, unsown strips or extensively managed meadows. The other study found that, five years after sowing wildflower strips, butterfly species richness, but not diversity had increased at one of two study sites. One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in the UK found that the species richness of butterflies and moths was similar on farms managed under agri-environment schemes, including with sown wildflower strips, and on conventionally managed farms. Two replicated studies (including one randomized, controlled study and one site comparison study) in the UK and Sweden found that field margins sown with wildflowers had a greater species richness of butterflies than grass-only field margins. One of two replicated, paired, controlled studies (including one randomized study) in the USA and the UK found that plots sown with a mix of wildflowers had a greater species richness of caterpillars than plots sown with a single flower species. The other study found that plots sown with either complex or simpler flower mixes had a similar species richness of butterflies. Two replicated studies (including one randomized, controlled study) in the UK found that wildflower plots sown with phacelia, borage or lucerne had a higher species richness or diversity of butterflies and moths than plots sown with other flower species. POPULATION RESPONSE (16 STUDIES) Abundance (17 studies): Ten studies (including nine replicated studies, three randomized studies, three controlled studies and seven site comparison studies) in the UK, Switzerland and Finland found that sown wildflower strips had a higher abundance of all butterflies, generalist butterflies, specialist butterflies and meadow brown butterflies than conventional field margins, unsown margins, cropped fields, cropped margins, conventional grassland or extensively managed meadows. However, one of these studies only found this effect in one of two study years. Two of these studies also found that the abundance of specialist butterflies and meadow brown caterpillars was similar in sown wildflower strips and unsown margins, cropped fields and conventional grassland, and one found that the abundance of caterpillars was lower in sown wildflower strips than in conventional grassland. One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in the UK found that the abundance of butterflies and micro-moths was higher on farms managed under agri-environment schemes, including with sown wildflower strips, than on conventionally managed farms, but the abundance of other moths was similar. Two replicated studies (including one randomized, controlled study and one site comparison study) in the UK and Sweden found that field margins sown with wildflowers had a higher abundance of butterflies than grass-only field margins. One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the UK found that farms with wildflower strips (along with other enhanced agri-environment scheme options) had a higher abundance of some butterflies, but a lower abundance of other butterflies, than farms with simpler agri-environment scheme management such as grass-only margins. One of two replicated, paired, controlled studies (including one randomized study) in the USA and the UK found that plots sown with one of three wildflower mixes had a higher abundance of moths than plots sown with two other mixes or a single flower species. The other study found that plots sown with either complex or simple flower mixes had a similar abundance of butterflies. One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the UK found that wildflower plots sown with lucerne had a higher abundance of butterflies than plots sown with borage, chicory or sainfoin. BEHAVIOUR (2 STUDIES) Use (2 studies): Two studies (including one replicated study) in the UK and the USA reported that sown nectar flower plots and tropical milkweed plots were used by six species of butterflies and moths and monarch butterflies and caterpillars. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3932https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3932Fri, 12 Aug 2022 06:26:40 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Replant native vegetation Eleven studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of replanting native vegetation. Five studies were in the USA, two were in New Zealand, and one was in each of Switzerland, Mexico, Ecuador and Brazil. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (5 STUDIES) Community composition (3 studies): One replicated, site comparison study in Ecuador found that native trees planted within recently abandoned pasture and secondary shrubland had a similar community composition of butterflies and moths after 7–8 years, but a subset of communities found on native trees planted within pine plantations, or on saplings regenerating naturally within pristine forest. One replicated, site comparison study in Brazil found that 12–14-year-old replanted and naturally regenerating forests had a different butterfly community to both grazed pasture and remnant forest. One site comparison study in Mexico found that a replanted forest had a different community composition of caterpillars to a naturally regenerating forest. Richness/diversity (5 studies): Four of five site comparison studies (including four replicated studies) in New Zealand, Mexico, Ecuador, Brazil and the USA found that replanted native shrubs, grasses, non-woody broadleaved plants (forbs) and trees had a similar species richness or diversity of butterflies, caterpillars and flower-visiting insects (including butterflies and moths) to vineyards, pasture, naturally regenerating and remnant forests, and remnant prairies. However, one of these studies also found that the species richness of butterflies in replanted native shrubs and grasslands was lower than in remnant native habitat. The fifth study found that, after 7–8 years, native trees planted in pine plantations had a greater species richness of butterflies and moths than trees planted in recently abandoned pasture, but both had a lower species richness than naturally regenerating saplings within pristine forest. POPULATION RESPONSE (6 STUDIES) Abundance (5 studies): Four of five site comparison studies (including four replicated studies) in New Zealand, Mexico and the USA found that replanted native shrubs, grasses, non-woody broadleaved plants (forbs), trees and translocated bamboo rush had a similar abundance of butterflies, caterpillars and flower-visiting insects (including butterflies and moths), and density of Fred the thread moth caterpillars to vineyards, pasture, naturally regenerating forest, remnant prairies and undisturbed bogs. However, one of these studies also found that replanted native shrubs and grasses had a lower abundance of butterflies than remnant native habitat. The fifth study found that common milkweed planted in meadows had fewer monarch butterfly eggs than milkweed planted in private gardens. Survival (2 studies): Two replicated studies (including one randomized, controlled study and one site comparison study) in the USA found that the survival of common sooty winged skipper and monarch butterfly eggs and caterpillars was similar on planted patches of lamb’s-quarters of different sizes, and on common milkweed planted in meadows or private gardens. Condition (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in New Zealand found that Fred the thread moth caterpillars in translocated bamboo rush plants were a similar size to caterpillars in undisturbed bogs. BEHAVIOUR (3 STUDIES) Use (3 studies): Three studies in the USA and Switzerland reported that planted patches of silver lupine, prairie violet and bladder senna were used by wild mission blue and Iolas blue butterflies, and translocated regal fritillaries, for at least three or 4–10 years after planting. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3933https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3933Sat, 13 Aug 2022 14:09:04 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore or create habitat connectivity Six studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of restoring or creating habitat connectivity. Three studies were in the USA, two were in the UK and one was in Sweden. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (4 STUDIES) Abundance (4 studies): Four studies (including one controlled, before-and-after study and one before-and-after study) in the USA and the UK found that restoring connectivity between lupine, bracken, pastures or prairie patches increased the abundance of Karner blue, high brown fritillary, small pearl-bordered fritillary, marsh fritillary and regal fritillary. BEHAVIOUR (2 STUDIES) Use (2 studies): One site comparison study in Sweden reported that grassland strips providing nectar or shelter were each more likely to be used by one of four butterfly species than strips with no resources. One replicated, controlled study in the USA found that common buckeye and variegated fritillary butterflies were more likely to move between connected than unconnected habitat patches. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3934https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3934Sat, 13 Aug 2022 14:42:44 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain or create bare ground Four studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of maintaining or creating bare ground. Two studies were in the UK, and one was in each of the Netherlands and the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after study in the USA found that after 1–2 years, grass field margins disked to create bare ground had a similar species richness of both grassland butterflies and disturbance-tolerant butterflies to undisturbed margins. POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Abundance (3 studies): One replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after study in the USA found that after 1–2 years, grass field margins disked to create bare ground had a higher abundance of disturbance-tolerant, but not grassland, butterflies to undisturbed margins. One replicated, site comparison study in the Netherlands found that Alcon large blue occupied a similar proportion of heathlands managed with sod cutting and unmanaged heathlands. However, the same study found that Alcon large blues were less likely to occur on heathlands where sod cutting and grazing were used together. One site comparison study in the UK found that a sand dune plot which had been stripped of turf and soil supported a translocated population of belted beauty moths, but a plot which had been strimmed and raked did not. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One replicated study in the UK reported that 2-3 years after bare ground plots were created, some were used by caterpillars or adult moths of one or more of the grey carpet, lunar yellow underwing, forester and marbled clover, but none by the basil thyme case-bearer. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3935https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3935Sat, 13 Aug 2022 14:53:35 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore or create forest or woodland Ten studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of restoring or creating forest or woodland. Three studies were in the UK, two studies were in Brazil and one was in each of the USA, Cameroon, Mexico, Malaysia and Costa Rica. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (6 STUDIES) Community composition (4 studies): Three site comparison studies (including two replicated studies) in Mexico, Costa Rica and Brazil found that naturally generating or secondary forest had a different community composition of caterpillars6, geometrid and arctiine moths and butterflies to replanted forest, oil palm plantations, pasture or remnant primary forest. One site comparison study in Brazil found that a 54-year-old restored forest had a higher proportion of fruit-feeding forest butterfly species than 11–22-year-old restored forests, and a similar community composition to a remnant forest. Richness/diversity (6 studies): Three replicated, site comparison studies in Cameroon, Costa Rica and Brazil found that secondary forest had a similar species richness of butterflies and geometrid and arctiine moths to agroforestry plantations, pasture and remnant forest. Two of these studies also found that secondary forest had a greater species richness of butterflies and geometrid and arctiine moths than cropland or oil palm plantations. One of two site comparison studies (including one replicated study) in Brazil and Malaysia found that a 54-year-old restored forest had a lower species richness of fruit-feeding butterflies than 11–22-year-old restored forests. The other study found that 5–60-year-old restored forests had a greater species richness of butterflies than newly restored forests (<3-years-old), but restored forests had a lower species richness than primary forests. One site comparison study in Mexico found that a forest restored by natural regeneration had a similar diversity of caterpillars to a forest restored by planting. POPULATION RESPONSE (6 STUDIES) Abundance (6 studies): Two replicated, site comparison studies in Cameroon and Costa Rica found that secondary forest had a higher abundance of butterflies and geometrid and arctiine moths than cropland or oil palm plantations. One of these studies also found that secondary forest had a similar abundance of butterflies to coffee and cocoa agroforestry, and the other study also found that secondary forest had a lower abundance of geometrid and arctiine moths than primary forest. One site comparison study in Mexico found that a forest restored by natural regeneration had a similar abundance of caterpillars to a forest restored by planting. Two of three studies in the UK reported that where forest had been restored with coppicing, felling and ride management, the number of populations of high brown fritillary, pearl-bordered fritillary, wood white and grizzled skipper stayed the same or increased. The other study found that the number of heath fritillary colonies decreased after management. BEHAVIOUR (3 STUDIES) Use (3 studies): Two studies (including one paired study) in the USA and the UK found that in forest restored with selective logging or coppicing, felling and ride widening orange sulphur and heath fritillary butterflies, but not pine white butterflies, flew into restored areas more than unrestored areas and occupied a greater area than before the sites were restored. One replicated, before-and-after study in the UK reported that in forest restored with coppicing, felling and ride management, high brown fritillary presence was the same or higher than before restoration, and after restoration the butterflies were more likely to be present at sites with high brash and bracken litter coverage.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3936https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3936Sat, 13 Aug 2022 14:54:54 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Replace non-native species of tree/shrub with native species One study evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of replacing non-native species of tree/shrub with native species. This study was in Panama. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Panama found that established plantations of native trees had a similar species richness of butterflies to plantations of exotic trees, but a greater species richness than old growth forest. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Panama found that established plantations of native trees had a similar abundance of butterflies to plantations of exotic trees, but a higher abundance than old growth forest. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3937https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3937Sat, 13 Aug 2022 14:55:09 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Clear or open patches in forests Fourteen studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of clearing or opening patches in forests. Five studies were in the UK, two were in each of Finland and Japan one was in each of Sweden, the USA and Canada and the Czech Republic, and one was a review across Europe. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (6 STUDIES) Community composition (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the UK found that wider woodland rides (and coppiced woodland) contained more unique species of macro-moth than standard width rides or mature forest. Richness/diversity (6 studies): Three replicated studies (including one controlled study, one site comparison study and one paired sites, controlled study) in the UK, Japan and the Czech Republic found that cleared patches in forests had a greater species richness of butterflies but a lower species richness of moths than unmanaged patches, coppiced woodland or closed canopy forest. One of these studies also found that the species richness of butterflies declined over the first three years after clearing. One of two replicated, site comparison studies in the UK and Canada found that larger, but not smaller, cleared patches supported a higher species richness of butterflies than undisturbed forest. The other study found that both wider and standard width rides had a similar species richness of macro-moths to mature forest. One replicated, site comparison study in Japan found that cleared forest patches had a similar species richness of butterflies to semi-natural grassland, although six species were only observed in cleared patches, compared to 15 species only observed in grassland. POPULATION RESPONSE (10 STUDIES) Abundance (10 studies): Five studies (including one replicated, controlled, before-and-after study, one replicated, controlled study and one replicated, site comparison study and two before-and-after studies) in the UK, Finland, Sweden and Japan found that cleared patches in forests, which were also managed with coppicing and grazing, had a higher abundance of butterflies generally, and chequered blue, woodland brown, high brown fritillary and small pearl-bordered fritillary specifically, than before management, or than unmanaged or coppiced areas. One of these studies also found that the abundance of butterflies declined over the first three years after clearing. One of two replicated, site comparison studies in the UK and Canada found that larger, but not smaller, cleared patches had a higher abundance of butterflies than undisturbed forest. The other study found that wider rides had a lower abundance of macro-moths than standard width rides or mature forest. One replicated, site comparison study in the UK found that patches cleared 2–4 years ago had a greater abundance of heath fritillary than patches cleared 7–11 years ago or patches in their first year after clearance. One study in Finland reported that, in an area with selected clearance of pines, a translocated population of baton blue butterflies increased in number over two years. One review across Europe reported that clearing small patches in forests benefitted 19 out of 67 butterfly species of conservation concern. Survival (1 study): One study in Finland reported that, in an area with selected clearance of pines, a translocated population of baton blue survived for at least two years. BEHAVIOUR (2 STUDY) Use (2 studies): One paired sites study in the USA found that orange sulphur butterflies, but not pine whites, flew into areas with selective clearance of pines more often than other areas. One replicated, before-and-after, site comparison study in the UK reported that in cleared patches in forests, which were also managed with cutting, grazing and ride widening, pearl-bordered fritillary and Duke of Burgundy breeding sites increased compared to before management. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3938https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3938Sat, 13 Aug 2022 14:56:39 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Coppice woodland Ten studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of coppicing woodland. Eight studies were in the UK and one was in each of France and Germany. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (4 STUDIES) Community composition (3 studies): Two replicated, site comparison studies in the UK and France found that coppiced woodland of different ages supported different communities of moths and butterflies. One replicated, site comparison study in the UK found that coppiced woodland contained more unique species of macro-moth than mature forest. Richness/diversity (4 studies): One of two replicated, site comparison studies in the UK found that coppiced woodland had a greater species richness of butterflies than unmanaged woodland. The other study found that coppiced woodland had a lower species richness of macro-moths than mature forest, and there was no change in species richness with the age of coppice. One of two replicated, site comparison studies in the UK and France found that woodland coppiced two years ago had a greater species richness of butterflies than woodland coppiced >15 years ago. The other study found that the species richness of moths was similar in woodland coppiced 1–4, 5–8 and 12–20 years ago. POPULATION RESPONSE (10 STUDIES) Abundance (9 studies): Two of four site comparison studies (including three replicated studies and one before-and-after study) in the UK found that coppiced woodland (in one case also legally protected) had a higher abundance of butterflies generally, and of heath fritillary specifically, than unmanaged woodland. One study found that pearl-bordered fritillary and small pearl-bordered fritillary populations were more likely to persist for up to 20 years in coppiced woodland (or woodland with young plantations) than in mature conifer woodland. The fourth study found that the abundance of macro-moths was lower in coppiced woodland than in mature forest, and there was no change in abundance with the age of coppice. Three of four replicated, site comparison studies (including one before-and-after study) in the UK, France and Germany found that the abundance of butterflies generally, heath fritillary specifically, and eastern eggar moth and scarce fritillary caterpillar webs, was higher in woodland coppiced two, two–four, five–seven or 12–15 years ago than in woodland coppiced 5–11 or >15 years ago. The fourth study reported that the abundance of moths was similar in woodland coppiced 1–4, 5–8 and 12–20 years ago. One before-and-after study in the UK reported that after coppicing, along with scrub control, tree felling and grazing, high brown fritillary and small pearl-bordered fritillary abundance increased. Reproductive success (1 study): One before-and-after study in the UK reported that pearl-bordered fritillaries released into coppiced woodland bred at least once. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3939https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3939Sat, 13 Aug 2022 14:56:58 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Thin trees within forests Six studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of thinning trees within forests and woodland. Three studies were in the USA and one was in each of Côte d’Ivoire, Finland and the Czech Republic. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (5 STUDIES) Community composition (1 study): One site comparison study in Côte d’Ivoire found that rarer species of fruit-feeding butterfly were less frequently caught in a forest managed by thinning than in an unmanaged, naturally regenerating forest. Richness/diversity (6 studies): Four studies (including two replicated, paired, controlled, before-and-after studies) in the USA and Finland found that one, two or four years after management, coniferous woodland which had been thinned, along with either prescribed burning, mulching or nearby felling, had a greater species richness of butterflies, or butterflies, diurnal moths and bumblebees combined, than either unmanaged woodland or before management. One site comparison study in Côte d’Ivoire found that a forest managed by thinning had a similar species richness and diversity of fruit-feeding butterflies to an unmanaged, naturally regenerating forest. One replicated, paired sites, controlled study in the Czech Republic found that partially-cleared forest plots had higher butterfly but lower moth species richness than plots of closed-canopy forest. POPULATION RESPONSE (5 STUDIES) Abundance (5 studies): Four studies (including two replicated, paired, controlled, before-and-after studies) in the USA and Finland found that one, two or four years after management, coniferous woodland which had been thinned, along with either prescribed burning, mulching or nearby felling, had a higher abundance of all butterflies, or specialist butterflies, than either unmanaged woodland or before management. One site comparison study in Côte d’Ivoire found that a forest managed by thinning had a similar abundance of fruit-feeding butterflies to an unmanaged, naturally regenerating forest. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3940https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3940Sat, 13 Aug 2022 14:57:16 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create young plantations within mature woodland One study evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of creating young plantations within mature woodland. This study was in the UK. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)   POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the UK found that pearl-bordered fritillary and small pearl-bordered fritillary populations were more likely to persist for up to 20 years in woodlands with larger areas of young plantations (or coppicing) than in mature coniferous (both species) or deciduous (pearl-bordered fritillary only) woodland. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3941https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3941Sat, 13 Aug 2022 14:57:33 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage woodland edges for maximum habitat heterogeneity Two studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of managing woodland edges for maximum habitat heterogeneity. One study was in Belgium and the other was in Finland. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled, before-and-after study in Finland found that two years after felling 5-m-wide woodland edges, and thinning 20-m-wide adjacent forest, the combined species richness of butterflies, diurnal moths and bumblebees was higher than before management or in unmanaged woodland edges. POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): One replicated, site comparison study in Belgium found that scalloped woodland edges had a higher abundance of brown hairstreak eggs than straight woodland edges. One replicated, paired, controlled, before-and-after study in Finland found that two years after felling 5-m-wide woodland edges and thinning 20-m-wide adjacent forest, the abundance of specialist butterflies was higher than before management or on unmanaged woodland edges. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3942https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3942Sat, 13 Aug 2022 14:57:49 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore or create grassland/savannas Six studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of restoring or creating grassland or savanna. Three studies were in the USA, two were in the UK, and one was in Italy. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, paired, site comparison study in Italy found that created semi-natural grasslands had a greater diversity of butterflies than adjacent conifer forests, but a lower diversity than species-rich pastures. POPULATION RESPONSE (4 STUDIES) Abundance (4 studies): Two site comparison studies (including one replicated, paired study) in Italy and the USA found that created semi-natural grasslands and restored grasslands and oak barrens had a higher abundance of butterflies and regal fritillaries than adjacent conifer forests, species-rich pastures or unmanaged or remnant prairies. One site comparison study in the USA found that prairies restored 5–10 years ago by seeding with native species, mowing, and weeding or applying herbicide, had a greater abundance of Fender’s blue eggs than a prairie restored 1–2 years ago, and a similar abundance to remnant prairies. One study in the USA reported that restored prairie supported a translocated population of regal fritillaries for at least three years after restoration. BEHAVIOUR (3 STUDIES) Use (2 studies): One of two replicated, before-and-after studies in the UK reported that following grassland restoration the area occupied by small pearl-bordered fritilliaries increased. The other study reported that following grassland restoration the number of marsh fritillary populations at each site remained the same or increased. Behaviour change (1 study): One site comparison study in the USA found that Fender’s blue butterflies spent a similar proportion of time laying eggs in prairies restored 5–10 years ago by seeding with nectar species, mowing, and weeding or applying herbicide, and in remnant prairies. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3943https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3943Sat, 13 Aug 2022 14:58:03 +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