Conservation Evidence: Evidence Data

Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Convert to organic farmingEvidence on the impact of organic farming on wild bees is equivocal. Three replicated trials in Europe or Canada have shown that the abundance of wild bees is higher under organic arable farming than under conventional farming. One of these showed that bee diversity is higher in organically farmed wheat fields and in mown fallow strips adjacent to them. Three replicated trials in Europe or the USA have found no significant difference in the numbers of bumblebees (two trials), bumblebee species (one trial), or wild bees visiting flowering crops (one trial) between conventional and organic arable farms. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F25https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F25Thu, 20 May 2010 07:02:08 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Control weeds without damaging other plants in conservation areas Two studies looked at the effects of controlling weeds on the surrounding vegetation. One study from the UK found that new populations of rare arable plants established following the control of perennial weeds in a nature conservation area. A replicated, controlled and randomized study in the UK found that using grass-specific herbicide reduced grass diversity and resulted in increases in broadleaved plants. Eleven studies investigated different methods of controlling plants. A review found that specific management regimes can reduce the abundance of pernicious weeds in nature conservation areas. Four replicated controlled studies (one also randomized) from Denmark and Germany found cutting and infection with fungal pathogens were effective methods for controlling creeping thistle and one replicated, randomized, controlled trial from the UK found long-term control was achieved by lenient grazing. A replicated, controlled and randomized study in Germany found weevils could be used to infect creeping thistle with systemic rust. One study found a non-native beetle was unsuitable for controlling creeping thistle because it had poor survival in the UK climate. A replicated controlled study found that spraying a high concentration of herbicide killed less than half of broad-leaved dock plants. A replicated, controlled, randomized study found black grass was eliminated with a December treatment of grass-specific herbicide. A small replicated study found that Hebridean sheep grazed more purple moor grass than Swaledale sheep. Two replicated controlled laboratory and grassland studies found negative impacts of the herbicide asulam on green dock beetles. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F123https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F123Tue, 01 Nov 2011 21:27:23 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Control scrub A replicated study from the UK found a negative relationship between the number of young grey partridge per adult and a combined intervention of scrub control, rough grazing and the restoration of various semi-natural habitats. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F127https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F127Mon, 14 Nov 2011 21:51:12 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Control scrub on farmlandA replicated study from the UK found a negative relationship between the number of young grey partridge Perdix perdix per adult and a combined intervention of scrub control, rough grazing and the restoration of various semi-natural habitats. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F197https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F197Wed, 27 Jun 2012 17:55:08 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Control predators not on islands for seabirds A before-and-after study from New Zealand found an increase in a tern population following intensive trapping of invasive mammals. A before-and-after study from Canada found increases in tern fledging success following gull control. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F385https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F385Wed, 08 Aug 2012 16:42:50 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Control predators not on islands for wildfowl Six out of seven studies, mostly from North America found higher reproductive success of ducks when mammalian predators were removed. A before-and-after study found higher survival of captive-bred brown teal Anas chlorotis following feral cat Felis catus control. One meta-analysis from the USA and Canada found that ducks on sites with mammalian predator removal did not have higher reproductive success and trends in reproductive success were no more positive than on sites without predator control. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F386https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F386Wed, 08 Aug 2012 16:53:51 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Control predators not on islands for waders Three out of four controlled studies in the UK and the USA found some evidence for higher reproductive success or lower predation rates for waders in areas or years with predator removal, although one UK study found that only three of six species investigated had increased reproductive success in years with predator removal. Predators removed were carrion crows Corvus corone, gulls Larus spp., red foxes Vulpes vulpes and cats Felis catus. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F390https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F390Wed, 08 Aug 2012 17:40:34 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Control predators not on islands for songbirds A before-and-after study from New Zealand found that a reintroduced population of New Zealand robins Petroica australis declined without predator control and increased with rat poisoning. Two UK studies, one non-experimental, found increased populations of some species following control of bird and mammal predators. One replicated, controlled study from New Zealand found lower New Zealand robin survival in areas where rodent bait was broadcast, but no difference with controls when dispensers were used. Six studies from New Zealand, Australia, UK found increased nest success or survival (in one case with artificial nests) following bird and mammal predator control. One randomised, replicated and controlled study from the USA found no difference in nest survival in a site with mammalian predator removal. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F392https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F392Thu, 09 Aug 2012 13:08:55 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Convert or revert arable land to permanent grassland All seven individual studies (including four replicated studies, of which two also controlled and a review) looking at the effects of reverting arable land to grassland found no clear benefit to wildlife. The studies monitored UK birds in winter and summer, wading birds in Denmark, grey partridges, brown hares in the UK, and plants in the Czech Republic. One of the studies, a controlled before-and-after study from the UK, showed that grey partridge numbers fell significantly following the reversion of arable fields to grassland. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F561https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F561Tue, 25 Sep 2012 12:33:31 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Control predatory mammals and birds (foxes, crows, stoats and weasels) A total of nine individual studies from France and the UK (including five replicated controlled studies and a systematic review) looked at the effects of removing predators on birds. Three studies found controlling predatory mammals or birds (sometimes alongside other interventions) increased the abundance or population size of some birds. One of these studies from the UK found numbers of nationally declining songbirds increased on a site where predators were controlled, but there was no overall difference in bird abundance, species richness or diversity between predator control and no-control sites. Five studies (two replicated and controlled, two before-and-after trials) from the UK found some evidence for increased productivity, nest or reproductive success or survival of birds following bird or mammal predator control (sometimes alongside other interventions). A randomized, replicated, controlled study found hen harrier breeding success was no different between areas with and without hooded crow removal. A global systematic review including evidence from European farmland found that reproductive success of birds increased with predator removal. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F699https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F699Thu, 20 Dec 2012 13:08:22 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Convert to organic farmingThis synopsis includes experimental tests of organic farming only. Comparative studies of existing organic systems are not included. Parasitism and mortality (caused by natural enemies): One of five studies (three replicated, controlled tests and two also randomised) from Europe, North America, Asia and Australasia found that organic farming increased parasitism or natural enemy-induced mortality of pests. Two studies found mixed effects of organic farming and two randomised, replicated, controlled studies found no effect. Natural enemies: Eight of 12 studies (including six randomised, replicated, controlled tests) from Europe, North America Asia and Australasia found more natural enemies under organic farming, although seven of these found effects varied over time or between natural enemy species or groups and/or crops or management practices. Three studies (one randomised, replicated, controlled) found no or inconsistent effects on natural enemies and one study found a negative effect. Pests and diseases: One of eight studies (including five randomised, replicated, controlled tests) found that organic farming reduced pests or disease, but two studies found more pests. Three studies found mixed effects and two studies found no effect. Crop damage: One of seven studies (including five randomised, replicated, controlled tests) found less crop damage in organic fields but two studies found more. One study found a mixed response and three studies found no or inconsistent effects. Weed seed predation and weed abundance: One randomised, replicated, controlled study from the USA found mixed effects of organic farming on weed seed predation by natural enemies. Three randomised, replicated, controlled studies from the USA found more weeds in organically farmed fields, but in one of these studies this effect varied between crops and years. One study found no effect. Yield and profit: Six randomised, replicated, controlled studies measured yields and found one positive effect, one negative effect and one mixed effect, plus no or inconsistent effects in three studies. One study found net profit increased if produce received a premium, but otherwise profit decreased. Another study found a negative or no effect on profit. Crops studied were apple, barley, beans, cabbage, carrot, gourd, maize, mixed vegetables, pea, pepper, safflower, soybean, tomato and wheat.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F717https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F717Thu, 30 May 2013 09:37:10 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Convert to organic farmingBiodiversity: Four studies in Asia, Europe, and the USA (including two site comparison studies and three replicated trials) found higher numbers, diversity, functional diversity (see background) or activity of soil organisms under organic management. Soil organic carbon: Two replicated trials in Italy and the USA showed that organically managed orchards had higher soil carbon levels compared to conventionally managed orchards. One randomized, replicated trial in the USA found soil carbon was lower under organic management compared to alley cropping. Soil organic matter: One replicated trial in Canada found that soil nutrients were lower in organically managed soils. Yields: One replicated trial in Canada found lower yields in organically managed soils. Two replicated trials in the USA (one also randomized) found that fruit was of a higher quality and more resistant to disease, though smaller or that organic management had mixed effects on yield. SOIL TYPES COVERED: clay, clay loam, fine sandy-loam, loam, sandy loam, sandy-clay loam, silt, silty-clay, silt-loam. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F895https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F895Mon, 30 Sep 2013 11:31:06 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Control traffic and traffic timingBiodiversity: One randomized, replicated study from Poland found higher numbers and bacterial activity under controlled traffic. One replicated site comparison study from Denmark found higher microbial biomass when farm traffic was not controlled Erosion: Five trials from Europe and Australia (including three replicated trials, one controlled before-and after-trial, and one review) found a higher number of pores in the soil, less compaction, reduced runoff and increased water filtration into the soil under controlled traffic. One controlled, replicated trial from India found increased soil crack width when traffic was not controlled. Yield: Two replicated trials from Australia and the USA found increased yield under controlled traffic. SOIL TYPES COVERED: clay, loamy-sand, loamy-silt, sandy loam, silty, silty-clay, silt loam. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F899https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F899Tue, 01 Oct 2013 10:25:04 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Coppice trees We captured no evidence for the effects of tree coppicing 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%2F1190https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1190Thu, 19 May 2016 11:50:11 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Control rodents One controlled study in New Zealand1 found that rodent control decreased native plant species richness and did not affect total plant species richness. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1232https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1232Mon, 23 May 2016 11:19:19 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Coppice trees We found no evidence for the effects of coppicing trees on primate 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%2F1513https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1513Thu, 19 Oct 2017 09:08:54 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Convert to organic agriculture or aquaculture near peatlands We found no studies that evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of converting to organic agriculture or aquaculture near peatlands. ‘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%2F1785https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1785Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:16:38 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Control ticks/fleas/lice in wild mammal populations Two studies evaluated the effects of controlling ticks, fleas or lice in wild mammal populations. Both studies were in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Condition (2 studies): A replicated, paired sites, controlled study in the USA found that a grain-bait insecticide product did not consistently reduce flea burdens on Utah prairie dogs. A controlled study the USA found that treating wolves with ivermectin cleared them of infestations of biting dog lice. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2589https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2589Wed, 10 Jun 2020 17:24:33 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Coppice trees We found no studies that evaluated the effects of coppicing trees on mammals. ‘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%2F2635https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2635Fri, 12 Jun 2020 12:51:07 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Control problematic plants (specific intervention unclear): freshwater marshes or swamps One study evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of controlling problematic plants in freshwater marshes or swamps using unspecified or unclear methods. The study was in the USA. VEGETATION COMMUNITY Overall richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that marshes in which non-native plants were actively controlled had higher overall plant richness and diversity, after three years, than marshes in which non-native plants were not controlled. VEGETATION ABUNDANCE Overall abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that marshes in which non-native plants were actively controlled had similar overall vegetation cover, after three years, to marshes in which non-native plants were not controlled. Individual species abundance (1 study): One study quantified the effect of this action on the abundance of individual plant species, other than those being controlled. The replicated, site comparison study in the USA found, for example, that spikerush Eleocharis cover was greater in marshes where non-native plants were actively controlled than where they were not controlled. VEGETATION STRUCTURECollected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3083https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3083Fri, 02 Apr 2021 17:04:16 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Control problematic plants (specific intervention unclear): brackish/saline marshes or swamps One study evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of controlling problematic plants in brackish/saline marshes or swamps using unspecified or unclear methods. The study was in the USA. VEGETATION COMMUNITY VEGETATION ABUNDANCE Overall abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in salt marshes in the USA found that plots in which common reed Phragmites australis had been controlled 4–10 years previously contained a similar density of plant stems to nearby natural marshes Individual species abundance (1 study): One study quantified the effect of this action on the abundance of individual plant species, other than those being controlled. The replicated, site comparison study in salt marshes in the USA found that plots in which common reed Phragmites australis had been controlled 4–10 years previously had similar cover of saltmarsh cordgrass Spartina patens to nearby natural marshes. VEGETATION STRUCTURE Height (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in salt marshes in the USA found that plots in which common reed Phragmites australis had been controlled 4–10 years previously contained vegetation of similar height to nearby natural marshes. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3084https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3084Fri, 02 Apr 2021 17:04:33 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Control problematic plants (multiple interventions): freshwater marshes or swamps One study evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of controlling problematic plants in freshwater marshes or swamps using >3 combined interventions. The study was in Costa Rica. VEGETATION COMMUNITY Overall extent (1 study): One controlled study in a freshwater marsh in Costa Rica reported that coverage of live vegetation stands was lower in a plot where southern cattail Typha domingensis had been controlled for >15 years than in a plot where cattail had not been controlled. Overall richness/diversity (1 study): The same study reported that a plot in which southern cattail Typha domingensis had been controlled for >15 years had greater plant species richness than a plot where cattail had not been controlled. VEGETATION ABUNDANCE Overall abundance (1 study): One controlled study in a freshwater marsh in Costa Rica reported that a plot in which southern cattail Typha domingensis had been controlled for >15 years had less live vegetation cover than a plot where cattail had not been controlled. VEGETATION STRUCTURECollected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3087https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3087Sat, 03 Apr 2021 14:52:33 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Control problematic plants (multiple interventions): brackish/saline marshes or swampsWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of controlling problematic plants in brackish/saline marshes or swamps using >3 combined interventions. ‘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%2F3088https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3088Sat, 03 Apr 2021 14:52:44 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Coppice trees One study evaluated the effects of coppicing trees on reptile populations. 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 no slow worms or common lizards were found in coppiced areas of woodland, whereas they were found in open areas maintained by vegetation cutting. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3629https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3629Thu, 09 Dec 2021 14:25:21 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Convert to organic farming Thirteen studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of converting to organic farming. Six studies were in Sweden, three were in the UK and one was in each of Canada, Switzerland, Germany and Taiwan. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (13 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (13 studies): Seven of 11 replicated, site comparison studies (including five paired studies) in Sweden, the UK, Canada, Switzerland, Germany and Taiwan found that organic arable farms had a greater species richness of butterflies, burnet moths and all moths than conventionally managed farms. However, three of these studies only found this in intensively managed not in more diverse landscapes,only in the first of three study years, and in farms managed organically for <6 years but not 15–23 years. Four of the studies found that organic arable and mixed farms had a similar species richness of macro-moths and butterflies to conventionally managed farms. Two of these studies also found that on organic and conventionally managed farms within a landscape with a high proportion of organic farms there was higher species richness of butterflies and burnet moths than either type of farm in a landscape with a high proportion of conventional farms. One before-and-after study in the UK found that within 4 years after a mixed farm converted to organic management (along with increasing the proportion of grassland and reducing grazing intensity) the species richness of large moths increased. One replicated, site comparison study in Sweden found that organic mixed farms had a more consistent species richness of butterflies across the farm, but a similar consistency through the summer and between years, compared to conventional farms. POPULATION RESPONSE (12 STUDIES) Abundance (12 studies): Seven of 11 replicated, site comparison studies (including five paired studies) in Sweden, the UK, Canada, Switzerland, Germany and Taiwan found that organic arable farms had a greater abundance of butterflies, burnet moths, and all moths, than conventionally managed farms, and that butterfly abundance increased with time since farms had been converted to organic management. However, three of these studies only found this in intensively managed not in more diverse landscapes, and in farms managed organically for <6 years but not 15–23 years. One of these studies also found that on organic and conventionally managed farms within a landscape with a high proportion of organic farms there was higher abundance of butterflies than either type of farm in a landscape with a high proportion of conventional farms. The other four found that organic arable and mixed farms had a similar abundance of macro-moths and butterflies to conventionally managed farms. One before-and-after study in the UK found that within 4 years after a mixed farm converted to organic management (along with increasing the proportion of grassland and reducing grazing intensity) the total abundance of large moths, and the abundance of lunar underwing moths and 5 out of 23 butterfly species, increased, but the abundance of two butterfly species decreased. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3907https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3907Tue, 09 Aug 2022 18:07:43 +0100