Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cross compliance standards for all subsidy paymentsApart from the Swiss Ecological Compensation Areas scheme (considered in another section), we found no studies comparing the effects of cross compliance standards with other means of implementing agri-environmental measures, or that considered the effects of cross compliance by monitoring farmland bird populations before and after it was implemented.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F173https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F173Sun, 27 May 2012 14:49:45 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cull bats infected with white-nose syndrome We found no studies that evaluated the effects of culling bats infected with white-nose syndrome 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%2F1012https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1012Fri, 20 Dec 2013 17:47:23 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Crop production: Add sewage sludge to the soilCrop yield (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled study from Spain found higher barley yields in plots with added sewage sludge, compared to plots without it. Crop quality (0 studies) Implementation options (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled study from Spain found higher barley yields in plots with low amounts of added sewage sludge, but not high amounts, compared to plots without added sewage sludge.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1348https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1348Mon, 20 Mar 2017 11:58:57 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Crop production: Add slurry to the soilCrop yield (6 studies): Six replicated, randomized, controlled studies from Spain found higher crop yields in plots with added pig slurry, compared to plots without it, in some comparisons. Crop quality (0 studies) Implementation options (4 studies): Two replicated, randomized, controlled studies from Spain found similar crop yields in plots with digested pig slurry, compared to untreated pig slurry. One replicated, randomized, controlled study from Spain found lower crop yields in plots with less pig slurry, compared to more, but another found similar crop yields with different amounts of pig slurry.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1349https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1349Mon, 20 Mar 2017 12:04:53 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Crop production: Use organic fertilizer instead of inorganicCrop yield (11 studies) Food crops (10 studies): Four replicated studies (three controlled, two randomized; one site comparison) from Italy and Spain found higher yields in plots with organic fertilizer, compared to inorganic fertilizer, in some comparisons. Three replicated, randomized, controlled studies from Spain and the USA found lower yields in plots with organic fertilizer, compared to inorganic fertilizer, in some or all comparisons. Three replicated, randomized, controlled studies from Greece and Spain found similar yields in plots with organic or inorganic fertilizer. Forage crops (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled study from Spain found higher alfalfa yields in plots with organic fertilizer, compared to inorganic, in one of two comparisons. Crop quality (0 studies)  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1350https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1350Mon, 20 Mar 2017 16:57:26 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Crop production: Grow cover crops in arable fieldsCrop yield (24 studies): Six replicated, controlled studies (five randomized) from Spain and the USA found lower cash crop yields in plots with winter cover crops, compared to plots without them, in some comparisons. Three replicated, randomized, controlled studies from Italy and the USA found higher cash crop yields in plots with winter cover crops, compared to plots without them, in some comparisons. Eight replicated, randomized, controlled studies from Italy and the USA found inconsistent differences in cash crop yields (sometimes higher, sometimes lower) between plots with or without cover crops. Seven controlled studies (six replicated, four randomized) from France, Israel, Spain, and the USA found no differences in cash crop yields between plots with or without cover crops. One replicated, randomized, controlled study from the USA found inconsistent differences in cash crop yields between plots with or without summer cover crops. Crop quality (6 studies): Three replicated, controlled studies (two randomized) from Italy, Spain, and the USA found no differences in cash crop quality between plots with or without winter cover crops. Two controlled studies (one replicated and randomized) from the USA found some differences in tomato quality between plots with winter cover crops or fallows. One replicated, randomized, controlled study from the USA found inconsistent differences in cash crop quality between plots with or without winter cover crops. Implementation options (9 studies): Eight studies from Italy, Spain, and the USA found higher cash crop yields in plots that had legumes as winter cover crops, compared to non-legumes. One study from the USA found higher cash crop yields in plots that had a mixture of legumes and grasses, compared to legumes alone.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1351https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1351Tue, 21 Mar 2017 11:54:49 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Crop production: Plant or maintain ground cover in orchards or vineyardsCrop yield (11 studies) Grapes (8 studies): Two replicated, randomized, controlled studies from France and the USA found lower grape yields in plots that were seeded with grass between the vine rows, compared to plots with bare soil between the vine rows, in some or all comparisons. Six replicated, randomized, controlled studies from Italy, Portugal, Spain, and the USA found similar grape yields in plots with or without ground cover between the vine rows. Other crops (3 studies): Two replicated, randomized, controlled studies from Portugal found higher chestnut yields in plots with resident vegetation, compared to plots without ground cover, but found no difference in chestnut yields between plots with seeded cover crops and plots without ground cover. One of these studies also found higher mushroom yields in plots with resident vegetation, compared to plots without ground cover. One replicated, randomized, controlled study from Chile found lower avocado yields in plots that were seeded with grasses and legumes, compared to plots with bare soil.   Crop quality (8 studies) Grapes (6 studies): Five replicated, randomized, controlled studies from Italy, Portugal, and the USA found similar sugar contents in grapes with or without ground cover between the vine rows. Three of these studies found similar pH levels, and two of these studies found no differences in titratable acidity, but two of these studies found lower titratable acidity in grapes with ground cover between the vine rows. One replicated, randomized, controlled study from the USA found heavier grapes with ground cover between the vine rows, but two replicated, randomized, controlled studies from Italy and Spain did not. Two replicated, randomized, controlled studies from Portugal and Spain found other differences in grape quality with ground cover between the vine rows. Other crops (2 studies): One replicated, randomized, controlled study from Portugal found larger chestnuts in plots with ground cover, compared to plots without ground cover. One replicated, randomized, controlled study from Chile found no difference in avocado quality in plots with or without ground cover.   Implementation options (6 studies) Ground cover (5 studies) Grapes (3 studies): One replicated, randomized, controlled study from the USA found similar grape yields in plots with different types of ground cover. However, this study found lighter-weight clusters of grapes in plots with seeded cover crops, compared to resident vegetation, in one of three years, and found inconsistent differences in cluster weights between plots with different types of seeded cover crops. Two replicated, randomized, controlled studies from Spain and the USA found other differences in grape quality between plots with different types of ground cover. Other crops (2 studies): Two replicated, randomized, controlled studies from Portugal found lower chestnut yields in plots with seeded cover crops, compared to resident vegetation. One of these studies also found smaller chestnuts and lower mushroom yields. Tillage (2 studies): One replicated, randomized, controlled study from the USA found higher grape yields, and heavier grape clusters, in plots without tillage between the vine rows, in one of six comparisons. Another replicated, randomized, controlled study from the USA found similar grape yields, with or without tillage between the vine rows. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1352https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1352Thu, 23 Mar 2017 09:24:58 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Crop production: Use crop rotationsCrop yield (8 studies): Four replicated, controlled studies (three randomized) from Italy, Spain, and Turkey found higher crop yields in plots with rotations, compared to monocultures, in some comparisons. Four replicated, randomized, controlled studies from Australia, Portugal, and Spain found similar crop yields in plots with or without rotations. Crop quality (1 study): One replicated, controlled study from Italy found more protein in wheat that was grown in rotation, compared to continuously-grown wheat. Implementation options (2 studies): One study from the USA found higher tomato yields in four-year rotations, compared to two-year rotations. One study from Italy found higher wheat yields in rotations with beans, compared to clover.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1354https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1354Tue, 18 Apr 2017 13:02:25 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Crop production: Use no tillage in arable fieldsCrop yield (23 studies) Crops (22 studies): Eight replicated, controlled studies (seven randomized) from Italy and Spain found higher crop yields in plots with no tillage, compared to conventional tillage, in some or all comparisons. Seven replicated, controlled studies (six randomized) from Italy, Lebanon, Spain, and the USA found lower crop yields in plots with no tillage, compared to conventional tillage, in some or all comparisons. Four replicated, randomized controlled studies from Italy and Spain found inconsistent differences in crop yields (sometimes higher with no tillage, sometimes lower). Three replicated, controlled studies (two randomized) from Italy, Portugal, and Spain found similar crop yields in plots with or without tillage. Crop residues (5 studies): Two replicated, randomized, controlled studies from Lebanon and Spain found higher straw yields in plots with no tillage, compared to conventional tillage, in some comparisons. One replicated, randomized, controlled study from Spain found inconsistent straw yields (sometimes higher with no tillage, sometimes lower). Two replicated, controlled studies (one randomized) from Italy and Spain found similar straw yields in plots with or without tillage. Crop quality (6 studies): One replicated, controlled study from Italy found less protein in wheat grains from plots with no tillage, compared to conventional tillage. One replicated, randomized, controlled study from Spain found heavier cereal grains in plots with no tillage, compared to conventional tillage. Two replicated, randomized, controlled studies from Spain found other differences in crop quality, but two replicated, controlled studies from Italy and the USA did not.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1355https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1355Tue, 18 Apr 2017 14:10:16 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Crop production: Use no tillage instead of reduced tillageCrop yield (15 studies) Cereals (7 studies): Three replicated, randomized, controlled studies from Spain found higher cereal yields in plots with no tillage, compared to reduced tillage. One of these studies also found lower cereal yields in some comparisons. One replicated, randomized, controlled study from Spain found lower cereal yields in plots with no tillage, compared to reduced tillage, in some comparisons. Three replicated, randomized, controlled studies from Australia, Lebanon, and Spain found similar cereal yields in plots with no tillage or reduced tillage, in all comparisons. Fruits and vegetables (3 studies): Three replicated, randomized, controlled studies from Italy found lower fruit or vegetable yields in plots with no tillage, compared to reduced tillage, in some comparisons. Two of these studies also found higher yields, in some comparisons. Legumes (3 studies): Two replicated, controlled studies from Italy and Spain found higher legume yields in plots with no tillage, compared to reduced tillage, in some or all comparisons. One replicated, controlled study from Lebanon found similar legume yields in plots with no tillage, compared to reduced tillage. Oilseeds (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled study from Spain found lower sunflower seed yields in plots with no tillage, compared to reduced tillage, in some comparisons. Crop residues (6 studies): Three replicated, controlled studies from Lebanon and Spain found higher straw yields in plots with no tillage, compared to reduced tillage, in some or all comparisons. One replicated, randomized, controlled study from Spain found lower straw yields in plots with no tillage, compared to reduced tillage. Two replicated, controlled studies from Italy and Spain found similar straw yields in plots with no tillage or reduced tillage. Crop quality (3 studies): One replicated, randomized, controlled study from Spain found larger peas, and more peas in a pod, in plots with no tillage, compared to reduced tillage, in one of four comparisons. One replicated, controlled study from Italy found similarly sized faba beans, and similar numbers of beans in a pod, in plots with no tillage, compared to reduced tillage. One replicated, randomized, controlled study from Spain found differences in the nutritional values of sunflower seeds in plots with no tillage, compared to reduced tillage. · Crop yield (15 studies) o Cereals (7 studies): Three replicated, randomized, controlled studies from Spain2,4,13 found higher cereal yields in plots with no tillage, compared to reduced tillage. One of these studies10410417Angás, P.Lampurlanés, J.Cantero-Martínez, C.Tillage and N fertilization: Effects on N dynamics and Barley yield under semiarid Mediterranean conditionsSoil and Tillage ResearchSoil and Tillage Research59-71871Conservation tillageNitrogen fertilizationN fertilizer efficiencyPhysiological N use efficiency20065//0167-1987http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167198705000991http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2005.02.0362 also found lower cereal yields in some comparisons. One replicated, randomized, controlled study from Spain868617López-Garrido, R.Madejón, E.León-Camacho, M.Girón, I.Moreno, F.Murillo, J. M.Reduced tillage as an alternative to no-tillage under Mediterranean conditions: A case studySoil and Tillage ResearchSoil and Tillage Research40-47140Tillage systemsSoil conditionsCrop performanceSeed qualitySunflower20147//0167-1987http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167198714000300http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2014.02.00811 found lower cereal yields in plots with no tillage, compared to reduced tillage, in some comparisons. Three replicated, randomized, controlled studies from Australia19119117Manalil, SudheeshFlower, KenSoil water conservation and nitrous oxide emissions from different crop sequences and fallow under Mediterranean conditionsSoil and Tillage ResearchSoil and Tillage Research123-129143AustraliaDroughtFallowNitrous oxide201411//0167-1987http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167198714001214http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2014.06.00612, Lebanon777717Yau, S. K.Sidahmed, M.Haidar, M.Conservation versus Conventional Tillage on Performance of Three Different CropsAgronomy JournalAgronomy Journal269-2761022010Madison, WIAmerican Society of Agronomyhttp://dx.doi.org/10.2134/agronj2009.024210.2134/agronj2009.0242English3, and Spain848417Hernanz, J. L.López, R.Navarrete, L.Sánchez-Girón, V.Long-term effects of tillage systems and rotations on soil structural stability and organic carbon stratification in semiarid central SpainSoil and Tillage ResearchSoil and Tillage Research129-141662Long-term effectTillageCrop rotationAggregate stabilitySoil organic carbonSemiarid conditions20027//0167-1987http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167198702000211http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0167-1987(02)00021-11 found similar cereal yields in plots with no tillage or reduced tillage, in all comparisons. o Fruits and vegetables (3 studies): Three replicated, randomized, controlled studies from Italy9,10,15 found lower fruit or vegetable yields in plots with no tillage, compared to reduced tillage, in some comparisons. Two of these studies9,15 also found higher yields, in some comparisons. o Legumes (3 studies): Two replicated, controlled studies from Italy10710717Giambalvo, DarioRuisi, PaoloSaia, SergioDi Miceli, GiuseppeFrenda, Alfonso SalvatoreAmato, GaetanoFaba bean grain yield, N2 fixation, and weed infestation in a long-term tillage experiment under rainfed Mediterranean conditionsPlant and SoilPlant and Soil215-227360120122012//1573-5036http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11104-012-1224-510.1007/s11104-012-1224-57 and Spain838317Santín-Montanyá, M. I.Zambrana, E.Fernández-Getino, A. P.Tenorio, J. L.Dry pea (Pisum sativum L.) yielding and weed infestation response, under different tillage conditionsCrop ProtectionCrop Protection122-12865DiversityLegume-cropsSemi-arid conditionsYieldWeeds201411//0261-2194http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261219414002373http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2014.07.017 Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1358https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1358Fri, 05 May 2017 11:33:13 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Crop production: Use reduced tillage in arable fieldsCrop yield (25 studies) Cereals (16 studies): Nine replicated, controlled studies from Egypt, France, Spain, and Turkey found higher cereal yields in plots with reduced tillage, compared to conventional tillage, in some or all comparisons. Three of these studies also found lower cereal yields in plots with reduced tillage, compared to conventional tillage, in some comparisons. Three replicated, randomized, controlled studies from Lebanon and Spain found lower cereal yields in plots with reduced tillage, compared to conventional tillage. Four replicated, controlled studies from Italy, Spain, and the USA found similar cereal yields in plots with reduced tillage or conventional tillage, in all comparisons. One replicated, randomized, controlled study from Spain found that crops failed in plots with conventional tillage, but not in plots with reduced tillage, in one of three comparisons. Fruits and vegetables (7 studies): Five replicated, randomized, controlled studies from Italy and the USA found higher fruit or vegetable yields in plots with reduced tillage, compared to conventional tillage, in some comparisons. Two of these studies also found lower fruit or vegetable yields in plots with reduced tillage, compared to conventional tillage, in some comparisons. Two replicated, controlled studies from Italy and the USA found similar fruit yields in plots with reduced tillage or conventional tillage, in all comparisons. All fruit or vegetable plots were irrigated, in contrast to most cereal or legume plots. Legumes (3 studies): One replicated, randomized, controlled study from Spain found lower legume yields in plots with reduced tillage, compared to conventional tillage, in one of four comparisons. Two replicated, controlled studies from Italy and Lebanon found similar legume yields in plots with reduced tillage or conventional tillage, in all comparisons. No studies found higher legume yields in plots with reduced tillage, compared to conventional tillage. Oilseeds (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled study from Spain found higher rapeseed yields in plots with reduced tillage, compared to conventional tillage. Crop residues (6 studies): Two replicated, randomized, controlled studies from Lebanon and Spain found lower straw yields in plots with reduced tillage, compared to conventional tillage, in some comparisons. One replicated, randomized, controlled study from Spain found higher straw yields in plots with reduced tillage, compared to conventional tillage, in some comparisons. Two replicated, controlled studies from Italy and Spain found similar straw yields in plots with reduced tillage or conventional tillage, in all comparisons. One replicated, randomized, controlled study from the USA found higher cover crop biomass in plots with reduced tillage, compared to conventional tillage. Crop quality (7 studies): One replicated, randomized, controlled study from Spain found that sunflower seeds had more oil, more monounsaturated fatty acid, and less polyunsaturated fatty acid in plots with reduced tillage, compared to conventional tillage. One replicated, controlled study from Italy found that wheat had a lower protein content in plots with reduced tillage, compared to conventional tillage. Two replicated, controlled studies from Italy and Turkey found similar seed weights in plots with reduced tillage, compared to conventional tillage. One replicated, randomized, controlled study from the USA found that lettuce or broccoli plants were larger in plots with reduced tillage, compared to conventional tillage, in some comparisons, but they were smaller in other comparisons. Implementation options (2 studies): One replicated, randomized, controlled study from Egypt found higher wheat yields in plots that were tilled at slower speeds. One replicated, randomized, controlled study from Turkey found higher wheat yields, but lower vetch yields, in plots with one type of reduced tillage (rototilling and disking), compared to another type (double disking).Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1359https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1359Fri, 05 May 2017 12:03:43 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Crop production: Plant flowersCrop yield (2 studies): One replicated, controlled study from Spain found higher crop yields in coriander plants next to planted flower strips, compared to coriander plants next to unplanted field margins. One replicated, randomized, controlled study from Italy found higher crop yields in tomatoes next to planted flower strips, compared to tomatoes next to bare ground, in some comparisons. Crop quality (0 studies) Implementation options (3 studies): One replicated, randomized, controlled study from the USA found smaller lettuces in fields planted with flowers, in five out of six configurations. One replicated, controlled study from Spain found higher coriander yields next to field margins planted with more flower species, compared to fewer flower species. One replicated, randomized, controlled study from Italy found lower crop yields in tomatoes next to field margins planted with more flower species, compared to fewer flower species, in some comparisons.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1360https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1360Fri, 05 May 2017 15:10:52 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Crop production: Plant hedgerowsCrop yield (1 study): One replicated, paired site comparison from the USA found similar crop yields in fields with hedgerows and fields with bare/weedy edges. Crop quality (0 studies)  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1361https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1361Fri, 05 May 2017 15:41:01 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cut and apply herbicide to control bracken One randomized, controlled study in the UK found that cutting and applying herbicide to control bracken did not alter heather biomass. One randomized, controlled, before-and-after trial in Norway found that cutting and applying herbicide increased heather cover. One randomized, replicated, controlled, paired study in the UK found that cutting and using herbicide had no significant effect on the cover of seven plant species. One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the UK found that cutting bracken followed by applying herbicide increased plant species richness when compared with applying herbicide followed by cutting. Three randomized, controlled studies (one also a before-and-after trial, and one of which was a paired study) in the UK and Norway found that cutting and applying herbicide reduced bracken biomass or cover. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1654https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1654Sun, 22 Oct 2017 14:42:14 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cut and burn bracken We found no studies that evaluated the effects of cutting and burning bracken on shrublands. '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%2F1655https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1655Sun, 22 Oct 2017 14:47:54 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cut bracken and rotovate One controlled study in the UK found that cutting followed by rotovating to control bracken did not increase total plant biomass or biomass of heather. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1656https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1656Sun, 22 Oct 2017 14:50:23 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cut and use prescribed burning to control grass One randomized, replicated, controlled, paired, before-and-after study in the UK found that burning and cutting to reduce the cover of purple moor grass reduced cover of common heather but did not reduce cover of purple moor grass. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1724https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1724Wed, 22 Nov 2017 16:30:40 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cut large trees/shrubs to maintain or restore disturbance Two studies evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of cutting large trees/shrubs to maintain or restore disturbance. One study was in a forested fen and one was in an open fen. N.B. Cutting large trees/shrubs in peatlands with no history of disturbance is considered as a separate action. Plant community composition (1 study): One before-and-after, site comparison study in a fen in Poland found that in an area where shrubs were removed (along with other interventions), the plant community composition became more like a target fen meadow. Characteristic plants (1 study): One before-and-after, site comparison study in a fen in Poland found that in an area where shrubs were removed (along with other interventions), the abundance of fen meadow plant species increased. Vegetation cover (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled study in forested fen in the USA found that cutting and removing trees increased herb cover, but had no effect on shrub cover. Vegetation structure (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled study in a peat swamp in the USA found that cutting and removing trees increased herb biomass and height. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1761https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1761Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:36:20 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cull disease-infected animals One study evaluated the effects on mammals of culling disease-infected animals. This study was in Tasmania. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Condition (1 study): A before-and-after, site comparison study in Tasmania found that culling disease-infected Tasmanian devils resulted in fewer animals with large tumours associated with late stages of the disease. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2586https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2586Wed, 10 Jun 2020 16:02:00 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cut large trees/shrubs to maintain or restore disturbance: freshwater marshes Four studies evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of cutting large trees/shrubs to maintain or restore disturbance in freshwater marshes. Three studies were in the USA. One was in Germany. VEGETATION COMMUNITY Community types (1 study): One study of a riparian wet meadow in Germany reported changes in the area of plant community types over four years after cutting trees/shrubs (along with grazing). Community composition (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after study aiming to restore freshwater marshes in the USA found that cutting trees (along with other interventions) significantly affected the overall plant community composition over the following five years. Overall richness/diversity (1 study): One study of a riparian wet meadow in Germany reported that plant species richness increased over four years after cutting trees/shrubs (along with grazing). VEGETATION ABUNDANCE Overall abundance (2 studies): Of two replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after studies in the USA, one found that cutting and removing woody plants from a degraded wet prairie had no significant effect on overall vegetation cover three years later. The other study was in wet patches of a pine forest and found that understory vegetation cover increased more, over one year, where trees were thinned than where they were not thinned. Characteristic plant abundance (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after study of overgrown freshwater marshes in the USA reported that of 26 plant taxa that became more frequent after cutting trees (along with other interventions), 16 were obligate wetland taxa. Herb abundance (1 study): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after study in wet patches of a pine forest in the USA found that cover of sedges Carex increased more, over one year, where trees were thinned than where they were not thinned. Tree/shrub abundance (2 studies): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after study of a wet prairie in the USA found that woody plant cover declined, over three years, in plots where trees/shrubs were cut – but increased in plots where trees/shrubs were not cut. One study of a riparian wet meadow in Germany simply reported that some trees/shrubs regrew over four years after cutting trees/shrubs (along with grazing). Individual species abundance (1 study): One study quantified the effect of this action on the abundance of individual plant species. The replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after study of a wet prairie in the USA found, for example, that cutting trees and shrubs had no significant effect on cover of the dominant herbaceous plant, tussock grass Deschampsia cespitosa, three years later. VEGETATION STRUCTURE Height (1 study): One site comparison study of a riparian wet meadow in Germany reported that an area in which trees/shrubs were cut back (along with reinstating cattle grazing) contained shorter vegetation than an adjacent unmanaged area. OTHER Survival (2 studies): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in a wet prairie in the USA found that cutting woody plants did not significantly affect their survival in the following year. One study of a riparian wet meadow in Germany simply reported that 20% of black alder Alder glutinosa trees were still alive after being cut back and grazed for four years. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3046https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3046Thu, 01 Apr 2021 19:06:56 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cut large trees/shrubs to maintain or restore disturbance: brackish/salt marshesWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of cutting large trees/shrubs to maintain or restore disturbance in brackish/salt marshes.   ‘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%2F3047https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3047Thu, 01 Apr 2021 19:10:37 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cut large trees/shrubs to maintain or restore disturbance: freshwater swamps One study evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of cutting large trees/shrubs to maintain or restore disturbance in freshwater swamps. The study was in the USA. VEGETATION COMMUNITY   VEGETATION ABUNDANCE Herb abundance (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after, site comparison study of freshwater swamps in the USA found that cutting woody vegetation (and applying herbicide) had no significant effect on herbaceous ground cover one year later: there were similar changes in treated and untreated swamps. VEGETATION STRUCTURE Basal area (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after, site comparison study of freshwater swamps in the USA found that cutting woody vegetation (and applying herbicide) had no significant effect on the basal area of woody vegetation one year later: there were similar changes in treated and untreated swamps. Canopy cover (1 study): The same study found that cutting woody vegetation (and applying herbicide) reduced canopy cover – to similar levels as in high-quality swamps after one year. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3048https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3048Thu, 01 Apr 2021 19:10:54 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cut large trees/shrubs to maintain or restore disturbance: brackish/saline swampsWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of cutting large trees/shrubs to maintain or restore disturbance in brackish/saline swamps.   ‘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%2F3049https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3049Thu, 01 Apr 2021 19:11:08 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cut or burn oil-contaminated vegetation: brackish/salt marshes Two studies evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of cutting or burning oil-contaminated vegetation in brackish/salt marshes. One study reviewed multiple cases from the UK and the USA. The other study was in Brazil. VEGETATION COMMUNITY   VEGETATION ABUNDANCE Overall abundance (1 study): One review of studies in oil-contaminated salt marshes in the UK and the USA reported that in eight of eight cases with quantitative comparisons between cut and uncut areas, cutting had no clear benefit for vegetation abundance (density, biomass or cover) over 8–29 months of recovery. Individual species abundance (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled, site comparison study in oil-contaminated brackish/salt marshes in Brazil found that smooth cordgrass Spartina alterniflora density and biomass were never greater in cut than uncut plots (and typically similar under each treatment), over nine months after cutting. VEGETATION STRUCTURE Height (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled, site comparison study in oil-contaminated brackish/saline marshes in Brazil found that smooth cordgrass Spartina alterniflora was never taller in cut than uncut plots (typically similar height under each treatment) over nine months after cutting. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3175https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3175Tue, 06 Apr 2021 13:41:15 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cut or burn oil-contaminated vegetation: brackish/saline swampsWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of cutting or burning oil-contaminated vegetation in brackish/saline swamps.   ‘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%2F3177https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3177Tue, 06 Apr 2021 13:41:47 +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
For a full list of, and information about, our champions:
All Evidence Champions
About our champions, why and how to become one:
Become an Evidence Champion

This website uses Cookies

We use limited Cookies to run the site and to analyse our traffic (none for site vendors). By using this site, you will be providing your consent to our use of Cookies.

Accept & continue