Conservation Evidence: Evidence Data

Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore species-rich grassland vegetationOne replicated controlled trial in Scotland showed that species-rich grassland managed under agri-environment schemes attracted more nest-searching queen bumblebees but fewer foraging queens in the spring than unmanaged grassland. Three small trials, two in the UK and one in Germany, found that restored species-rich grasslands had similar flower-visiting insect communities (dominated by bees and/or flies) to paired ancient species-rich grasslands. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F8https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F8Thu, 20 May 2010 07:08:34 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restrict certain pesticidesOne site comparison study in Italy showed that a reduction in the number of solitary bee species in late summer associated with repeated applications of the insecticide fenitrothion can be avoided by not applying the insecticide. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F26https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F26Thu, 20 May 2010 17:07:09 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore species-rich grassland on road vergesOne replicated controlled trial showed that road verges planted with native prairie vegetation in Kansas, USA supported a greater number and diversity of bees than frequently mown grassed verges. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F30https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F30Thu, 20 May 2010 18:38:51 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore/create species-rich, semi-natural grassland Twenty-eight studies monitored the effects on wildlife of restoring species-rich grassland. Of these, 20 from Finland, Germany, Lithuania, Sweden, Switzerland and the UK (15 replicated of which eight controlled and three also randomized) found restoring species-rich grassland resulted in higher ground beetle abundance, increased plant species richness, farmland bird abundance, pollinating insect density and diversity and earthworm abundance than other types of grassland, or that restored grasslands had similar abundance and species richness of insects to old traditionally managed sites. Seven studies from Denmark, Finland, Sweden, Switzerland and the UK (five replicated and controlled, two also randomized) found that efforts to restore species-rich grassland had no clear effect on the species richness or abundance of plants, beetles, or the abundance of butterflies and moths. Three replicated studies from Sweden and the UK (one also controlled and two site comparisons) found that restored grassland had a lower diversity and frequency of certain plant species, and attracted fewer foraging queen bumblebees than continuously grazed or unmanaged grasslands. We captured 40 studies (including 19 replicated and controlled studies of which six were also randomized, and six reviews) from nine European countries that found ten different techniques used alone or in combinations were effective for restoring species-rich grassland. Effective techniques included: grazing, introducing plant species, hay spreading and mowing. We found 22 studies from seven European countries that included information on the length of time taken to restore grassland communities (including 16 replicated trials of which nine also controlled and three reviews). Six studies saw positive signs of restoration in less than five years, 11 studies within 10 years and two studies found restoration took more than 10 years. Six studies found limited or slow changes in plant communities following restoration. Two studies from Germany and the UK (one replicated controlled trial) found differences in vegetation between restored and existing species-rich grasslands nine or 60 years after restoration. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F133https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F133Tue, 15 Nov 2011 18:41:52 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restrict certain pesticides or other agricultural chemicals for birdsA small scale study found that Pyrazophos reduced chick food abundance more than other foliar fungicides. A before-and-after study from Spain found that the population of griffon vultures Gyps fulvus increased in the study area following multiple interventions including the banning of strychnine. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F455https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F455Wed, 29 Aug 2012 14:24:27 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restrict certain pesticides A small scale study in the UK found that using the fungicides Propiconazole and Triadimefon reduced chick food insect abundance less than using Pyrazophos. A replicated, controlled trial in Switzerland found that applying metaldehyde slug pellets in a 50 cm band along the field edge adjacent to wildflower strips provided equivalent crop protection to broadcasting the pellets across the whole field. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F565https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F565Fri, 28 Sep 2012 15:37:14 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore ponds Fifteen studies investigated the effectiveness of pond restoration for amphibians. One replicated, before-and-after study in Denmark found that pond restoration had mixed effects on European tree frog population numbers depending on site. One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in the UK found that pond restoration did not increase great crested newt populations. Six replicated, before-and-after studies (including one controlled and one site comparison study) in Denmark, Estonia, Italy and the UK found that pond restoration and creation increased numbers of amphibian species, maintained or increased populations, or increased pond occupancy and ponds with breeding success. One found that numbers of species did not increase. Two before-and-after studies (including one replicated study) in Estonia found that pond restoration, along with terrestrial habitat management, maintained or increased populations of natterjack toads. One systematic review in the UK found that there was no conclusive evidence that mitigation, which often included pond restoration, resulted in self-sustaining great crested newt populations. One small, replicated study in the USA found that pond restoration had mixed effects on spotted salamander hatching success depending on restoration method. One replicated, before-and-after study in the UK found that restoration increased the number of ponds used by breeding natterjack toads. One replicated study in Sweden found that following restoration green toads only reproduced in one of 10 ponds. Three before-and-after studies (including one replicated, controlled study) in Denmark and Italy found that restored and created ponds were colonized by 1–7 species, with 6–65% of ponds colonized and 35% used for breeding. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F878https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F878Thu, 12 Sep 2013 15:17:02 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore wetland Seventeen studies investigated the effectiveness of wetland restoration for amphibians. Ten site comparison studies (including eight replicated studies) in Canada and the USA compared amphibian numbers in restored and natural wetlands. Eight found that amphibian abundance, numbers of species and species composition were similar. Two found that the number of species or abundance was lower and species composition different in restored wetlands. One found that restored wetlands were used more or less depending on the habitat surrounding natural wetlands. One global review found that in 89% of cases, restored and created wetlands had similar or higher amphibian abundance or numbers of species to natural wetlands. Seven of nine studies (including six site comparison and/or replicated studies) in Canada, Taiwan and the USA found that wetland restoration increased numbers of amphibian species, with breeding populations establishing in some cases. Three found that numbers of species or abundance did not increase with restoration. Two found mixed effects, with restoration maintaining or increasing abundance of individual species. Three replicated studies (including two site comparison studies) in the USA found that numbers of species in restored wetlands were affected by wetland size, proximity to source ponds and seasonality, but not wetland age. Three studies (including two replicated, site comparison studies) in Taiwan and the USA found that restored wetlands were colonized by three to eight amphibian species. One before-and-after study in the USA found that three target species did not recolonize restored wetlands. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F879https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F879Thu, 12 Sep 2013 15:34:57 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore wood pastures (e.g. introducing grazing) One replicated paired study in Sweden found that partial harvesting in abandoned wood pastures increased tree seedling density, survival and growth. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1164https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1164Wed, 18 May 2016 15:51:35 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore woodland herbaceous plants using transplants and nursery plugs We found no evidence for the effect of using transplants and nursery plugs 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%2F1203https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1203Thu, 19 May 2016 13:29:52 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore/create habitat connectivity between shrublands We found no studies that evaluated the effects of restoring or creating habitat connectivity between shrublands 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%2F1677https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1677Mon, 23 Oct 2017 09:04:44 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore/create peatlands in areas that will be climatically suitable in the future We found no studies that evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of restoring or creating peatlands in areas that will be climatically suitable in the future. ‘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%2F1795https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1795Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:21:18 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore/create peatland vegetation (multiple interventions) Nine studies evaluated the effects of multiple restoration interventions (other than the moss layer transfer technique) on peatland vegetation. Six studies were in bogs (one being restored as a fen). One study was in a fen. Two studies were in unspecified or mixed peatlands. Plant community composition (3 studies): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in the UK reported that the overall plant community composition differed between restored and unrestored bogs. One replicated, controlled, site comparison study in Estonia found that restored and natural bogs contained more similar plant communities than unrestored and natural bogs. However, one site comparison study in Canada reported that after five years, bogs being restored as fens contained a different plant community to natural fens. Characteristic plants (1 study): One controlled study in a fen in France reported that restoration interventions increased cover of fen-characteristic plants. Moss cover (7 studies): Five studies (including one replicated, paired, controlled, before-and-after) in bogs or other peatlands in the UK, Estonia and Canada found that restoration interventions increased total moss (or bryophyte) cover. Two studies (one replicated and controlled) in bogs in the Czech Republic and Estonia reported that restoration interventions increased Sphagnum moss cover, but one replicated before-and-after study in bogs in the UK reported no change in Sphagnum cover following intervention. Two site comparison studies in Canada reported that after 1–15 years, restored areas had lower moss cover than natural fens. Herb cover (5 studies): Five studies (one replicated, paired, controlled, before-and-after) in bogs or other peatlands in the Czech Republic, the UK, Estonia and Canada reported that restoration interventions increased cover of herbaceous plants, including cottongrass and other grass-like plants. Overall vegetation cover (3 studies): Three studies (one replicated, controlled, before-and-after) in bogs in the UK and France reported that restoration interventions increased overall vegetation cover. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1803https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1803Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:29:14 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore/create peatland vegetation using the moss layer transfer technique Four studies evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of restoration using the moss layer transfer technique (as defined in the Background section). All four studies were based on bogs in Canada. Three studies were based on one experimental set-up that was included in the other, larger study. Plant community composition (2 studies): One replicated study in bogs in Canada reported that the majority of restored areas developed a community of bog-characteristic plant species within 11 years. One controlled, before-and-after study in a bog in Canada reported that a restored area (included in the previous study) developed a more peatland-characteristic plant community over time, and relative to an unrestored area. Vegetation cover (2 studies): Two controlled studies in one bog in Canada reported that a restored area had greater moss or bryophyte cover (including Sphagnum) than an unrestored area after 4–8 years. The restored area also had greater herb cover (including cottongrass), but less shrub cover, than the unrestored area. One of the studies reported that vegetation in the restored area became more similar to local natural bogs. Overall plant richness/diversity (1 study): One controlled, before-and-after study in a bog in Canada reported that a restored area contained more plant species than an unrestored area. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1804https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1804Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:29:33 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restrict artificial lighting in caves and around cave entrances One study evaluated the effects of restricting artificial lighting in caves on bat populations. The study was in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Behaviour change (1 study): One controlled study in the USA found that using low intensity white lights or red lights in caves resulted in fewer bat flights than with full white lighting, but the number of bat movements was similar between all three light treatments. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1994https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1994Wed, 05 Dec 2018 12:50:27 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restrict capture of marine and freshwater mammals for research or aquariums and zoos We found no studies that evaluated the effects of restricting capture of marine and freshwater mammals for research or aquariums and zoos. ‘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%2F2782https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2782Thu, 04 Feb 2021 16:17:27 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore/create freshwater marshes in areas that will be climatically suitable in the futureWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of restoring or creating freshwater marshes in areas expected to be climatically suitable in the future. ‘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%2F3186https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3186Tue, 06 Apr 2021 17:10:52 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore/create brackish/salt marshes in areas that will be climatically suitable in the futureWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of restoring or creating brackish/salt marshes in areas expected to be climatically suitable in the future. ‘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%2F3187https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3187Tue, 06 Apr 2021 17:11:12 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore/create freshwater swamps in areas that will be climatically suitable in the futureWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of restoring or creating freshwater swamps in areas expected to be climatically suitable in the future. ‘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%2F3188https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3188Tue, 06 Apr 2021 17:11:23 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore/create brackish/saline swamps in areas that will be climatically suitable in the future One study evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of restoring or creating brackish/saline swamps in areas expected to be climatically suitable in the future. The study was in South Africa. VEGETATION COMMUNITY Overall extent (1 study): One before-and-after study in an estuary in South Africa reported that over 42 years after planting mangrove trees just beyond their current range, the area of mangrove forests increased. VEGETATION ABUNDANCE VEGETATION STRUCTURECollected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3189https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3189Tue, 06 Apr 2021 17:11:31 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore/create freshwater marshes or swamps (specific action unclear) Twenty-five studies evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of restoring/creating freshwater marshes or swamps using unclear or incompletely described actions. Twenty-three studies were in the USA. Two were in Canada. Two of the studies used the same set of wetlands. VEGETATION COMMUNITY Community types (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the USA reported that created wetlands had greater coverage of herbaceous vegetation after 7–8 years than natural wetlands, but lower coverage of forest and shrubby vegetation. Community composition (17 studies): Four replicated, site comparison studies in the USA found that the overall plant community composition in created freshwater wetlands differed from the community in natural wetlands, after 1–21 years. Two replicated, site comparison studies in the USA and Canada reported mixed effects of freshwater marsh restoration/creation on overall algal or plant community composition, depending on the habitat and use of mining waste during creation. Of four replicated, site comparison studies in the USA and Canada, three reported lower quality vegetation in restored/created wetlands than in natural wetlands, but one reported similar vegetation quality in created and natural wetlands. Two replicated, site comparison studies in the USA found that created marshes developed a plant community characteristic of similar wetness to natural marshes within 4–21 years – but in one study, this was only true for created marshes >10 years old. Seven replicated studies in the USA simply quantified the composition, quality or wetness of the plant community up to 22 years after wetland restoration/creation. Overall richness/diversity (17 studies): Eleven replicated studies, in the USA and Canada, compared overall plant richness/diversity in created/restored and natural/unmanaged freshwater wetlands. Five of the studies found that created/restored wetlands typically had similar plant taxonomic richness to natural/unmanaged wetlands. Three of the studies reported lower species richness in created than natural wetlands after 1–18 years. Two of the studies reported higher species richness in created than natural wetlands after 1–21 years. The final study reported mixed effects of marsh creation on plant species richness, depending on the vegetation zone and use of mining waste during creation. Two of the studies reported identical results for plant diversity as for richness (similar or greater in created vs natural wetlands) but one study found that the effect of management on plant diversity depended on the timing of drawdown. Six replicated studies in the USA simply quantified overall plant species richness and/or diversity over 1–16 years after wetland restoration/creation. Native richness/diversity (3 studies): Of two replicated, site comparison studies of freshwater wetlands in the USA, one found that restored/created wetlands contained more native plant species than natural wetlands after 1–11 years. The other found that restored wetlands contained fewer native plant species than natural wetlands after 2–8 years. One replicated study of swamp restoration sites in the USA simply quantified native plant richness over 1–8 years after intervention. VEGETATION ABUNDANCE Overall abundance (7 studies): Six replicated studies, all in the USA, compared overall vegetation abundance in created/restored and natural wetlands. Four of the studies found that created/restored freshwater wetlands contained less vegetation (cover or biomass) than natural wetlands after 1–18 years. Two of the studies found that created and natural fresh/brackish/saline wetlands contained a similar amount of vegetation (overall cover and density; wetland plant cover) after >1 year. One of these studies reported that restored wetlands had lower vegetation cover than natural marshes – but this reflected management goals. One replicated study in the USA simply quantified total vegetation cover and biomass 3–10 years after marsh creation. Herb abundance (2 studies): One replicated, site comparison study in the USA reported that created wetlands had greater overall cover of herb species, after 7–8 years, than natural wetlands. One replicated study in the USA simply quantified herb biomass in wetland restoration sites after 7–22 years. Tree/shrub abundance (1 study): One replicated study in the USA simply quantified the density of woody vegetation in wetland restoration sites after 7–22 years. Algae/phytoplankton abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that ≤15-year-old restored freshwater marshes contained a similar phytoplankton biomass to natural marshes. Individual species abundance (9 studies): Nine studies quantified the effect of this action on the abundance of individual plant species. For example, one replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that created and natural freshwater marshes supported a similar abundance of pickerelweed Pontederia cordata after 1–11 years. VEGETATION STRUCTURECollected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3190https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3190Wed, 07 Apr 2021 07:27:57 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore/create brackish/saline marshes or swamps (specific action unclear) Seven studies evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of restoring/creating brackish/saline marshes or swamps using unclear or incompletely described actions. Four studies were in the USA. There was one study in each of Australia, Canada and Indonesia. VEGETATION COMMUNITY Community composition (4 studies): Three replicated, site comparison studies in the USA and Australia reported that the overall plant or algal community composition in restored/created marshes typically became more like natural reference marshes over time. One replicated, site comparison study of fresh/brackish wetlands in Canada reported that the overall plant community was lower quality in restored/created sites than natural sites, after ≥3 years. Overall richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study of salt marshes in the USA found that created marshes had similar overall plant diversity, after 1–14 years, to natural marshes. Created marshes had lower plant species richness than natural marshes on average, but richness became more similar to natural marshes with time since creation. Algae/phytoplankton richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, paired, site comparison study of brackish/saline marshes in the USA reported that restored and natural marshes contained a similar number of algal species, and found that they had similar algal diversity, after 1–28 years. VEGETATION ABUNDANCE Overall abundance (2 studies): One replicated, site comparison study of salt marshes in the USA found that created marshes contained less overall plant biomass, after 1–14 years, than natural marshes – but that biomass increased with time since creation. One replicated, site comparison study of fresh/brackish/saline marshes in the USA found that created (but not restored) marshes had similar overall vegetation cover to natural marshes. Both created and restored marshes had similar cover of wetland vegetation to natural marshes. Herb abundance (2 studies): One replicated, paired, site comparison study of brackish/saline marshes in the USA reported that restored marshes contained a greater density of cordgrasses Spartina than natural marshes in six of eight comparisons. Vegetation was surveyed 1–28 years after restoration, which involved planting cordgrasses. One replicated, paired site comparison study in the USA reported that created intertidal wetlands contained more smooth cordgrass Spartina alterniflora than nearby natural mangrove forests for around 13 years. Tree/shrub abundance (2 studies): One replicated, paired site comparison study in the USA reported that created intertidal wetlands contained fewer adult mangrove trees than nearby natural mangrove forests for up to 20 years – but predicted equivalence within 55 years. One replicated study in Indonesia simply quantified the density of tree seedlings three years after restoration of former mangrove ponds. Algae/phytoplankton abundance (1 study): One paired, site comparison study of brackish/saline marshes in the USA reported that older restored marshes (≥26 years old) contained a similar or greater abundance of algae to natural marshes, whereas younger restored marshes (<13 years old) contained less algae than natural marshes. VEGETATION STRUCTURE Diameter/perimeter/area (1 study): One replicated, paired site comparison study in the USA reported that created intertidal wetlands contained thinner adult mangrove trees than nearby natural mangrove forests for up to 20 years – but predicted equivalence within 25 years. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3191https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3191Wed, 07 Apr 2021 07:28:08 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore/create freshwater marshes or swamps (multiple actions) Seventeen studies evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of using >3 combined actions to restore/create freshwater marshes or swamps. Fourteen studies were in the USA. There was one study in each of Canada, the UK and East Africa. There was overlap in the sites used in three studies. VEGETATION COMMUNITY Overall extent (1 study): One before-and-after study in Canada reported that the area of emergent vegetation in a marsh was greater after 5–6 years of intervention than in the year before. Community composition (5 studies): Two replicated, site comparison studies in the USA found that restored/created freshwater wetlands contained different overall plant communities to natural or reference wetlands, after 1–8 years. Two site comparison studies in the USA reported similarity in species composition between restored/created and natural wetlands. Similarity ranged from 35% to 79% after 1–5 years. One study in the USA simply quantified the plant community composition of different pools within a marsh, two years after its creation. Overall richness/diversity (16 studies): Three studies (including one replicated, before-and-after, site comparison) of freshwater wetlands in the USA and Canada reported that multiple restoration actions increased overall or emergent plant species richness over 1–6 years. Another replicated, before-and-after, site comparison study in the USA reported that the effect of restoration on plant species richness varied between years. Two replicated, site comparison studies in the USA found that restored/created wetlands had similar plant species richness to natural or reference wetlands, after 1–8 years. One site comparison study in the USA reported that a created wetland contained fewer plant species than nearby natural marshes, after two years. Nine studies (four replicated, one before-and-after) in the USA and the UK simply quantified overall plant species richness and/or diversity approximately 1–10 years after intervention. Characteristic plant richness/diversity (6 studies): One replicated, before-and-after, site comparison study of freshwater wetlands in the USA reported that multiple restoration actions increased the richness of wetland-characteristic plant species over three subsequent years. Five studies (two replicated) in the USA simply quantified wetland-characteristic plant richness up to 10 years after intervention. VEGETATION ABUNDANCE Overall abundance (4 studies): Two replicated, before-and-after studies (one also a site comparison) of freshwater wetlands in the USA reported that multiple restoration actions reduced overall vegetation cover over the five subsequent years. Two replicated studies in the USA simply quantified overall vegetation cover for up to six years after intervention. Characteristic plant abundance (3 studies): Two replicated, before-and-after studies (one also a site comparison) of freshwater wetlands in the USA reported that multiple restoration actions did not increase the cover of wetland-characteristic vegetation over three subsequent years. One of the studies also monitored in the fifth (wetter) year after restoration, and reported greater cover of wetland-characteristic vegetation than before restoration. One replicated study on the same set of wetlands in the USA simply quantified wetland-characteristic vegetation cover for up to three years after intervention. Herb abundance (3 studies): One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that restored wet prairies had similar grass and forb cover to remnant prairies after 3–8 years. Another replicated, site comparison study in the USA reported that created dune slacks had greater cover of annual herbs after three years than mature natural slacks, but similar cover of perennial herbs and floating aquatic herbs. One replicated, before-and-after study in the USA reported greater herb cover 1–5 years after restoration of freshwater wetlands than before. Tree/shrub abundance (3 studies): One replicated, site comparison study in the USA reported that created dune slacks had similar cover of trees and shrubs, after three years, to mature natural slacks. One replicated, before-and-after study in the USA reported lower cover of woody vegetation 1–5 years after restoration of freshwater wetlands than before. One replicated study in the USA simply quantified woody plant cover 1–2 years after intervention. Individual species abundance (10 studies): Ten studies quantified the effect of this action on the abundance of individual plant species. For example, the replicated, site comparison study in East Africa reported that the biomass of papyrus Cyperus papyrus in created marshes was within the range of natural marshes in the region after 18 months. VEGETATION STRUCTURECollected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3192https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3192Wed, 07 Apr 2021 12:22:17 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore/create brackish/saline marshes or swamps (multiple actions) Eight studies evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of using >3 combined actions to restore/create brackish/saline marshes or swamps. Six studies were in the USA. One was in Singapore. One was in Indonesia. Three studies were based on the same experimental set-up. VEGETATION COMMUNITY Overall extent (1 study): One study of a coastal site in the USA reported that the coverage of mangrove vegetation increased, and the coverage of herbaceous vegetation declined, over five years after intervention (intended to restore mangrove forest). Overall richness/diversity (3 studies): Three studies of one salt marsh restoration site in the USA simply quantified plant species richness for up to 13 growing seasons after intervention. Tree/shrub richness/diversity (1 study): One site comparison study in Indonesia reported that a restored aquaculture pond contained a similar number of mangrove species to nearby reference forests, just 6–7 months after intervention. Some trees may have been present before intervention. VEGETATION ABUNDANCE Overall abundance (4 studies): One replicated, paired, site comparison study of salt marshes in the USA found that restored marshes had similar overall vegetation cover to natural marshes after 9–20 years. Three studies of one salt marsh restoration site in the USA simply quantified overall vegetation abundance for up to 13 growing seasons after intervention. Tree/shrub abundance (3 studies): One replicated, paired, site comparison study of salt marshes in the USA found that restored marshes had similar, limited shrub cover to natural marshes after 9–20 years. One site comparison study of mangrove forests in Singapore reported that a created mangrove forest supported lower above-ground biomass than mature natural forests after ≥15 years. One study in Indonesia simply counted the number of mangrove trees present 6–7 months after intervention. Individual species abundance (4 studies): Four studies in estuaries in the USA simply quantified the abundance of individual plant species for up to 13 growing seasons after intervention. VEGETATION STRUCTURE Overall structure (1 study): One replicated, paired, site comparison study of salt marshes in the USA found that restored marshes had less cover of short vegetation and greater cover of medium-height vegetation than natural marshes after 9–20 years. Restored and natural marshes had similar cover of tall vegetation. Height (2 studies): One study of a created mangrove forest in Singapore reported that the average height of surviving mangrove saplings increased over five years. One study of a salt marsh restoration site in the USA reported that maximum vegetation height did not clearly increase between the third and twelfth/thirteenth growing seasons after intervention. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3193https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3193Wed, 07 Apr 2021 12:22:32 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restrict certain pesticides or other agricultural chemicals Five studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of restricting the use of certain pesticides or other agricultural chemicals. Three studies were in the UK, and one was in each of Germany and Italy. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (3 studies): Two replicated, site comparison studies in the UK and Italy found that arable field margins and rice field banks which were not sprayed with the herbicide glyphosate had a greater species richness of butterflies than margins and banks sprayed once/year for 1–3 years. One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the UK found that grass strips which were not sprayed with the herbicide fluazifop-P-butyl had a similar species richness of butterflies to strips sprayed once. POPULATION RESPONSE (5 STUDIES) Abundance (5 studies): Three replicated, site comparison studies (including two randomized studies) in the UK and Italy found that arable field margins and rice field banks which were not sprayed with the herbicide glyphosate had a higher total abundance of butterflies, and of meadow brown and large copper specifically, than margins and banks sprayed once/year for 1–3 years. One controlled study in Germany found that white campion plants sprayed with water had a higher abundance of lychnis moth eggs and caterpillars after one night than plants sprayed with the insecticide Karate Zeon. One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the UK found that grass strips which were not sprayed with the herbicide fluazifop-P-butyl had a similar abundance of butterflies to strips sprayed once. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3896https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3896Tue, 09 Aug 2022 13:23:40 +0100