Conservation Evidence: Evidence Data

Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reintroduce laboratory-reared bumblebee colonies to the wildSeven replicated trials have monitored the success of laboratory-reared colonies of bumblebees introduced to the environment. In four of the trials (three in the UK, one in Canada) colonies were left to develop until new queens were produced or the founding queen died. In two of these (both in the UK), the numbers of queens/colony were very low or zero. In two trials, good numbers of new queens were produced. Rates of social parasitism by cuckoo bees Bombus [Psithyrus] spp. in colonies released to the wild are variable. Two replicated trials in Canada and the UK found high rates (25-66% and 79% respectively). The UK trial showed that parasitism was reduced by placing colonies in landscapes with intermediate rather than very high nectar and pollen availability, late, rather than early in the season. Five other replicated trials reported no social parasites. We have not found evidence to compare rates of parasitism in artificial nest boxes with the rate in natural nests. Two replicated trials examined the effects of supplementary feeding for bumblebee colonies placed in the field. One, in Canada, found supplementary feeding improved the reproductive success of captive-reared colonies, but did not reduce their parasite load. The other trial, in the USA, found supplementary feeding did not increase colony productivity. One small scale trial in Norway showed that colonies of the buff-tailed bumblebee B. terrestris prefer to forage more than 100 m from their nest sites. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F52https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F52Thu, 20 May 2010 02:59:51 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reintroduce laboratory-reared bumblebee queens to the wild We have found no evidence for the effects of reintroducing bumblebee queens. '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%2F51https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F51Thu, 20 May 2010 10:18:09 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Rehabilitation of injured and treated birds Two replicated studies from the USA and UK found that 40% and 25% of raptors were released following rehabilitation. The USA study also found that 32% of owls were released. Three replicated studies from the USA all found relatively high survival of released raptors, with only 2.4% of birds being recovered (i.e. found dead, 1) and 66–68% survival over two weeks and six weeks. One study found that mortality rates were higher for owls than raptors. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F476https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F476Thu, 30 Aug 2012 13:15:35 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Release birds in groupsA replicated study from New Zealand found that released black stilts Himantopus novaezelandiae were more likely to move long distances after release if they were released in larger groups. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F634https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F634Sun, 14 Oct 2012 23:34:47 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Release birds in ‘coveys’ A replicated study in Saudi Arabia found that houbara bustard Chlamydotis undulata macqueenii survival was low when chicks were released in coveys with flightless females. A review of cackling goose Branta hutchinsii conservation and a replicated study in England found that geese and grey partridge Perdix perdix releases were more successful for birds released in coveys than for young birds released on their own or adults released in pairs. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F635https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F635Sun, 14 Oct 2012 23:35:50 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Release birds as adults or sub-adults, not juveniles Three replicated studies found that malleefowl Leipoa ocellata, houbara bustards Chlamydotis undulata macqueenii and cackling geese Branta hutchinsii released as sub-adults, not juveniles had higher survival rates. A replicated study from New Zealand found lower survival for black stilts Himantopus novaezelandiae released as sub-adults, compared with juveniles. Two replicated studies from Hawaii and Saudi Arabia found lower survival for Hawaiian geese Branta sandvicensis and bustards released as wing-clipped sub-adults, compared with birds released as juveniles. Three replicated studies found no differences in survival between ducks, vultures and ibises released at different ages, but a second study of the vulture release programme found that birds released when more than three years old had lower reproductive success than birds released at an earlier stage. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F636https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F636Sun, 14 Oct 2012 23:39:47 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Release captive-bred frogs Four of five studies (including one replicated study and one review) in Europe, Hong Kong and the USA found that captive-bred frogs released as tadpoles, juveniles or adults established populations or stable breeding populations at 88-100% of sites, and in some cases colonized new sites. One study found that stable breeding populations were not established. One before-and-after study in Spain found that released captive-bred, captive-reared and translocated frogs established breeding populations at 79% of sites. Three replicated studies in Australia and the USA found that a high proportion of captive-bred frogs released as eggs survived to metamorphosis, some released as tadpoles survived at least the first few months or few released as froglets survived. Three studies (including two replicated studies) in Australia, Italy and the UK and a review in the USA found that captive-bred frogs reproduced at all or 31–33% of release sites, or that there was very limited breeding by released frogs. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F870https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F870Wed, 11 Sep 2013 14:52:42 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Release captive-bred amphibians One review found that 41% of release programmes of captive-bred or head-started amphibians showed evidence of breeding in the wild for multiple generations, 29% showed some evidence of breeding and 12% evidence of survival following release. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F871https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F871Wed, 11 Sep 2013 15:54:35 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reintroduce large herbivores We captured no evidence for the effects of reintroducing large herbivores on forests. '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%2F1188https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1188Thu, 19 May 2016 11:47:47 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reintroduce primates in groups Two studies in Brazil and Thailand found that populations of introduced primates declined after reintroduction in groups, alongside other interventions, while one study in Belize recorded an increase in populations. Two studies in Madagascar and India found that primate populations persisted 4-55 years after reintroduction in groups, alongside other interventions. Seven studies in Brazil, French Guiana, Madagascar, and South Africa found that a minority of primates survived for at least 15 weeks to seven years after reintroduction in groups, alongside other interventions. Seven studies in Belize, Brazil, French Guiana, Madagascar, and South Africa found that a majority of primates survived after between two and thirty months. One study in Madagascar found that introduced black-and-white ruffed lemurs Varecia variegata had similar diets to individuals in a wild population after reintroduction in groups, alongside other interventions. One study in The Gambia found that a population of introduced chimpanzees increased 25 years after reintroduction in groups, alongside other interventions. Four studies in Guinea, Liberia and the Republic of Congo found that the majority of chimpanzees survived for at least two to five years, after reintroduction in groups, alongside other interventions. Two before-and-after studies in Gabon and the Republic of Congo found that the majority of western gorillas survived for at least nine months to four years, after reintroduction in groups, alongside other interventions. One controlled study in Indonesia found that all Sumatran orangutans survived for at least three months after reintroduction in groups, alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1567https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1567Fri, 20 Oct 2017 10:46:09 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reintroduce primates as single/multiple individuals One study in Tanzania found that a reintroduced population of chimpanzees increased in size after reintroduction as single/multiple individuals, alongside other interventions. One study in Senegal found that an infant chimpanzee was reunited with its mother after reintroduction, alongside other interventions. Two studies in Brazil and Thailand found that populations of reintroduced primates declined after reintroduction as single/multiple individuals, alongside other interventions. Four studies in French Guiana, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Vietnam found that a minority of primates survived after between two months and one year after reintroduction as single/multiple individuals, alongside other interventions. One study in Vietnam found that half of introduced primates survived after two months. One study in Brazil found that an abandoned infant muriqui was reunited with its mother after reintroduction as single/multiple individuals, alongside other interventions. One study in Indonesia found that Bornean agile gibbons had similar behaviour and diet to wild populations after reintroduction as single/multiple individuals, alongside other interventions. One controlled study in Malaysia found that a reintroduced population of orangutans declined in size after reintroduction, alongside other interventions. One study in Malaysia found that 98% of orangutans survived release after reintroduction, alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1589https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1589Fri, 20 Oct 2017 13:18:43 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reintroduce primates into habitat where the species is absent One study in The Gambia found that a population of reintroduced chimpanzees increased over 25 years after reintroduction into habitat where the species was absent, alongside other interventions. One controlled study in Indonesia found that all Sumatran orangutans survived for at least three months after reintroduction into habitat where the species was absent, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in the Republic of Congo found that a majority of reintroduced gorillas survived for at least four years after reintroduction into habitat where the species was absent, alongside other interventions. One study in Thailand found that a reintroduced population of lar gibbons declined over three years following reintroduction into habitat where the species was absent, alongside other interventions. One study in India found that a population of reintroduced rhesus monkeys persisted for at least four years after reintroduction. Six studies (including four before-and-after studies) in Belize, Gabon, Madagascar, Malaysia, South Africa, and Vietnam found that a majority of primates survived for two to thirty months after reintroduction into habitat where the species was absent, alongside other interventions. Two studies in Malaysia and Vietnam found that a minority of primates survived after between three months and 12 years. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1590https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1590Fri, 20 Oct 2017 13:38:29 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reintroduce primates into habitat where the species is present Four before-and-after studies in Guinea and the Republic of Congo found that the majority of reintroduced chimpanzees survived for at least one to five years after reintroduction into habitat where the species was present, alongside other interventions. One study in Uganda found that a reintroduced chimpanzee repeatedly returned to human settlements after reintroduction intro habitat where the species was present, alongside other interventions, while a study in Senegal found that a reintroduced chimpanzee was reunited with its mother. One study in Malaysia found that a majority of reintroduced orangutans survived reintroduction intro habitat where the species was present, alongside other interventions. One controlled study in Malaysia found that a reintroduced population of orangutans had declined 33 years after reintroduction into habitat where the species was present, alongside other interventions. One study in Belize found that primate population increased five years after reintroduction into habitat where the species was present, alongside other interventions, while one study in Thailand found that primate population declined post-reintroduction. Six studies in Brazil, French Guiana, Indonesia, Madagascar, and South Africa found that a minority of primates survived for at least fifteen weeks to seven years after reintroduction into habitat where the species was present, alongside other interventions. Five studies in Brazil, French Guiana, Gabon, and South Africa found that a majority of primates survived for at least two months to one year. Two controlled studies in Madagascar and Indonesia found that reintroduced primates had similar diets to individuals in wild populations after reintroduction into habitat where the species was present, alongside other interventions. One controlled study in Indonesia found that reintroduced primates showed similar behaviour to wild individuals after reintroduction into habitat where the species was present, alongside other interventions. One study in Brazil found that a reintroduced muriqui rejoined a wild group after reintroduction into habitat where the species was present, alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1591https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1591Fri, 20 Oct 2017 13:46:00 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reintroduce primates into habitat without predators One study in Tanzania found that a population of reintroduced chimpanzees increased over 16 years following reintroduction into habitat without predators. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1592https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1592Fri, 20 Oct 2017 14:15:01 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reintroduce primates into habitat with predators Two before-and-after studies in Brazil found that most golden lion tamarins reintroduced into habitat with predators, alongside other interventions, did not survive over one to seven years but reproduced succesfully. Three studies, including two before-and-after studies, in the Congo, The Gambia and Guinea, found that most chimpanzees reintroduced into habitat with predators, alongside other interventions, survived over one to five years or increased population numbers. One before-and-after study in Gabon found that most western lowland gorillas reintroduced into habitat with predators, alongside other interventions, survived over nine months. One before-and-after study in Madagascar found that most black-and-white ruffed lemurs reintroduced into habitat with predators did not survive over five years. One study in Madagascar found that all reintroduced lemurs survived over 30 months after being released into habitat with predators, along with other interventions. One study in Gabon found that most mandrills reintroduced into habitat with predators, alongside other interventions, survived over 30 years. Two before-and-after studies in South Africa found that most vervet monkeys reintroduced into habitat with predators, alongside other interventions, survived over six months. Two studies, including one before-and-after study, in Vietnam and Indonesia found that most lorises reintroduced into habitat with predators, alongside other interventions, were assumed dead within approximately one year after being released. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1593https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1593Fri, 20 Oct 2017 14:16:39 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Rehabilitate injured/orphaned primates One before-and-after study in Brazil found that most reintroduced golden lion tamarins did not survive over seven years, despite being rehabilitated, alongside other interventions. Two before-and-after studies in South Africa found that most reintroduced vervet monkeys survived over six months after being rehabilitated before release, alongside other interventions. Two before-and-after studies in the Republic of Congo found that most reintroduced chimpanzees survived over 3.5–5 years after undergoing pre-release rehabilitation, alongside other interventions. One study in The Gambia found that numbers of reintroduced chimpanzees that underwent pre-release rehabilitation, alongside other interventions, increased by 38% over 25 years. One review on bonobos, chimpanzees and gorillas in 13 African countries found that rehabilitated bonobos living in sanctuaries did not reproduce but the reproductive rate of chimpanzees was 14% and of gorillas was 2%. One controlled study in Indonesia found that Bornean agile gibbons that were rehabilitated before release, alongside other interventions, behaved similarly to wild gibbons. One controlled study in Malaysia found that numbers of reintroduced orangutans decreased by 33% over 33 years, despite orangutans being rehabilitated before release. One controlled study in Indonesia found that most translocated orangutans that were rehabilitated before release, along with other interventions, survived over three months. One before-and-after, site comparison study in the Congo and Gabon found that most western lowland gorillas that were rehabilitated before release, alongside other interventions, survived over four years. One before-and-after study in Gabon found that one out of two western lowland gorillas that were reintroduced died despite being rehabilitated, alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1597https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1597Fri, 20 Oct 2017 14:47:02 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reinstate the use of traditional burning practices One before and after study in the UK found that prescribed burning initially decreased the cover of most plant species, but that their cover subsequently increased. A systematic review of five studies from the UK found that prescribed burning did not alter species diversity. A replicated, controlled study in the UK found that regeneration of heather was similar in cut and burned areas. A systematic review of five studies, from Europe found that prescribed burning did not alter grass cover relative to heather cover. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1625https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1625Sun, 22 Oct 2017 10:52:02 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Release captive-bred bats We found no studies that evaluated the effects of releasing captive-bred bats on bat populations. ‘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%2F2039https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2039Wed, 05 Dec 2018 18:32:17 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reinstate bat roosts in felled tree trunks One study evaluated the effects of reinstating a bat roost within a felled tree trunk on bat populations. The study was in the UK. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One before-and-after study in the UK found that a roost reinstated by attaching the felled tree trunk to a nearby tree continued to be used by common noctule bats as a maternity roost. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2048https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2048Fri, 07 Dec 2018 12:38:25 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reintroduce top predators to suppress and reduce the impacts of smaller non-native predator and prey species We found no studies that evaluated the effects on mammals of reintroducing top predators to suppress and reduce the impacts of smaller non-native predator and prey species. '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%2F2531https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2531Mon, 08 Jun 2020 16:22:00 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reintroduce overharvested animalsWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on marsh/swamp vegetation, of reintroducing overharvested animals. ‘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%2F3018https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3018Wed, 31 Mar 2021 14:26:34 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Rehabilitate reptiles following oil spills One study evaluated the effects on reptile populations of rehabilitating reptiles following oil spills. This study was in the USA1. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Survival (1 study): One replicated study in the USA1 found that almost all sea turtles that were de-oiled recovered and could be released. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3575https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3575Wed, 08 Dec 2021 15:17:14 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Release accidentally caught (‘bycatch’) reptiles Three studies evaluated the effects on reptile populations of releasing accidentally caught reptiles. One study was in each of the Caribbean Sea, Costa Rica and the Republic of Korea. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Survival (2 studies): One replicated study in the Caribbean Sea found that from a released group of green turtles that included some accidentally caught and some head-started individuals, some survived for at least several months in the wild. One replicated study in the Republic of Korea found that green turtles caught in pound nets all survived for at least two weeks to a year after release. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Behaviour change (1 study): One controlled study off the Pacific coast of Costa Rica found that the behaviour of longline-caught sea turtles following release was broadly similar to free-swimming turtles. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3624https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3624Thu, 09 Dec 2021 13:37:44 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Release animals that modify landscapes (e.g. ecological engineers) We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of releasing animals that modify landscapes (e.g. ecological engineers). ‘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%2F3710https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3710Mon, 13 Dec 2021 13:55:20 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reintroduce mammals as ecosystem engineers One study evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of reintroducing mammals as ecosystem engineers. This study was in Italy. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Italy found that olive groves with wild boar present had a lower species richness of butterflies than groves without wild boar. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Italy found that olive groves with wild boar present had a lower total abundance of butterflies, and a lower abundance of six individual species, but a higher abundance of two species, than groves without wild boar. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3953https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3953Sat, 13 Aug 2022 15:22:41 +0100