Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove or control fish by catching Four studies (including two replicated, controlled studies) in the USA found that removing fish by catching them significantly increased abundance of salamanders or frogs or increased recruitment, survival and population growth rate of cascades frog. One before-and-after study in the UK found that fish control had no significant effect on great crested newt populations and fish remained or returned within a few years. One replicated, before-and-after study in Sweden found that fish control did not increase green toad breeding success and fish were soon reintroduced.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F827https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F827Wed, 28 Aug 2013 13:51:49 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Captive breeding harlequin toads (Atelopus species) One review and three of five replicated studies (including one small study) in Colombia, Ecuador, Germany and the USA found that harlequin toads reproduced in captivity. One found that eggs were only produced in captivity by simulating a dry and wet season and one found that successful breeding was difficult. One found that captive-bred harlequin toads were raised successfully to metamorphosis in captivity. Two found that most toads died before or after hatching.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F836https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F836Thu, 29 Aug 2013 13:54:34 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Translocate salamanders (including newts) One review and three before-and-after studies in the UK and USA found that translocated eggs or adults established breeding populations of salamanders or smooth newts. One replicated, before-and-after study in the USA found that one of two salamander species reproduced following translocation of eggs, tadpoles and metamorphs.  One before-and-after study in the USA found that translocated salamander eggs hatched and tadpoles had similar survival rates as in donor ponds.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F860https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F860Fri, 06 Sep 2013 14:03:10 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create ponds for natterjack toads Five before-and-after studies (including three replicated and one controlled study) in the UK and Denmark found that pond creation, along with other interventions, significantly increased natterjack toad populations, or in two cases maintained or increased populations at 75% of sites. One replicated, site comparison study in the UK found that compared to natural ponds, created ponds had lower natterjack toad tadpole mortality from desiccation, but higher mortality from predation by invertebrates.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F866https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F866Tue, 10 Sep 2013 15:47:29 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Prevent turbine blades from turning at low wind speeds ('feathering') Six studies evaluated the effects of preventing turbine blades from turning at low wind speeds on bat populations. Five studies were in the USA and one was in Canada. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (6 STUDIES) Survival (6 studies): Five of six studies (including five replicated, controlled studies and one before-and-after study) in the USA and Canada found that preventing turbine blades from turning at low wind speeds (‘feathering’), or feathering along with increasing the wind speed at which turbines become operational (‘cut-in speed’) resulted in fewer bat fatalities than at conventionally operated turbines. The other study found that automatically feathering turbine blades at low wind speeds did not reduce bat fatalities. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F970https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F970Fri, 20 Dec 2013 12:19:55 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Thin trees after wildfire Five replicated, controlled studies examined the effects of thinning trees in burnt forest areas. Two studies in Spain found that thinning increased plant species richness. One in Canada found that it increased the cover of aspen saplings. One study in the USA found thinning decreased plant biomass and one in Israel found it decreased mortality of pine seedlings. One paired-site study in Canada found that logging after wildfire decreased species richness and diversity of mosses.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1234https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1234Thu, 02 Jun 2016 14:31:10 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Mechanically remove understory vegetation after tree planting Five studies (including three replicated, randomized, controlled studies) in Canada, the USA, France, Panama and Sweden found no effect of controlling understory vegetation on the emergence, survival, growth rate or frost damage in planted seedlings. However, one found removing competing herbs increased seedling biomass. One replicated, controlled study in Canada found that removal of sheep laurel shrubs increased the growth rate and height of planted black spruce seedlings.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1256https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1256Mon, 06 Jun 2016 09:06:01 +0100Collected 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: Soil: Add sewage sludge to the soilOrganic matter (1 study): One replicated, controlled study from the USA found more organic matter in soils with added sewage sludge, compared to soils without it. Nutrients (2 studies): One replicated, controlled study from Spain found more nitrate in soils with added sewage sludge, compared to soils without it. One replicated, randomized, controlled study from Portugal found similar amounts of nitrate in soils with or without added sewage sludge. Soil organisms (2 studies): Two replicated, controlled studies (one randomized) from Spain found similar amounts of microbial biomass in soils with or without added sewage sludge. Soil erosion and aggregation (2 studies): One replicated, controlled study from Spain found less erosion in plots with added sewage sludge, compared to plots without it. One replicated, controlled study from the USA found no difference in stability between soils with or without added sewage sludge. Greenhouse gases (2 studies): Two replicated, controlled studies from Spain and the USA found higher carbon dioxide emissions from soils with added sewage sludge, compared to soils without it. Implementation options (1 study): One replicated, controlled study from Spain found more nitrate in soils with digested sewage sludge, compared to composted or thermally dried sewage sludge.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1364https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1364Tue, 09 May 2017 14:12:57 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Soil: Exclude grazersOrganic matter (1 study): One replicated site comparison in shrublands in Spain found less carbon in soils at ungrazed sites, compared to cow-and-sheep-grazed sites. Nutrients (3 studies): Three replicated studies (one controlled, two site comparisons) from the USA and Spain found less nitrogen in soils in ungrazed areas, compared to sheep- or cattle-grazed areas, in some or all comparisons. One of these studies found more phosphorus in soils at ungrazed sites, compared to grazed sites. Soil organisms (1 study): One controlled study on a streambank in the USA found more nematodes and more diverse nematode communities in an area with goats and sheep excluded. Soil erosion and aggregation (0 studies) Greenhouse gases (3 studies): One replicated site comparison in shrublands in Spain found more carbon dioxide in soils (soil respiration) in ungrazed plots, compared to sheep- or cattle-grazed plots. One replicated, randomized, controlled study in grassland in the USA found similar amounts of carbon dioxide in soils (soil respiration) in ungrazed and cattle-grazed sites. One replicated, randomized, controlled study in wet grasslands in the USA found less methane in soils in ungrazed plots, compared to cattle-grazed plots. Implementation options (1 study): One replicated site comparison in shrubland in Spain found less carbon and nitrogen in untilled soils that were grazed, compared to ungrazed, but found no differences in tilled soils that were grazed or ungrazed.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1375https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1375Mon, 15 May 2017 15:11:34 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Water: Add compost to the soilWater use (0 studies) Water availability (4 studies): Two replicated, randomized, controlled studies from Turkey and the USA found more water in soil with added compost, compared to soil without added compost, in some or all comparisons. One replicated, randomized, controlled study from the USA found similar amounts of water in soil with or without added compost. One replicated, controlled study from Spain found that less water was lost as runoff from soil with added compost, compared to soil without added compost. Pathogens and pesticides (0 studies) Nutrients (2 studies): One replicated, randomized, controlled study from Spain found more nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium in runoff from plots with added compost, compared to plots without added compost. One replicated, randomized, controlled study from Portugal found that more nitrate was leached from plots with added compost, compared to plots without added compost, in one of four comparisons. Sediments (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled study from Spain found more organic matter in runoff from plots with added compost, compared to plots without added compost. Implementation options (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled study from Portugal found that similar amounts of nitrate were leached from plots with or without added compost, if the compost was split into two small applications, compared to one large application.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1377https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1377Mon, 15 May 2017 15:18:09 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Translocate (capture & release) wild primates from development sites to natural habitat elsewhere One study in Malaysia found that the majority of orangutans survived following translocation from a development site to natural habitat, alongside other interventions. Three before-and-after studies in Tanzania, French Guiana, and Madagascar found that a majority of primates survived for 5-30 months following translocation from a development site to natural habitat, alongside other interventions. One study in French Guiana found that a minority of primates survived for at least 18 months. One before-and-after study in India found that rhesus monkeys remained at the sites where they were released following translocation from a development site to natural habitat, alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1558https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1558Fri, 20 Oct 2017 09:44:55 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Carnivores: Feed whole carcasses (with or without organs/gastrointestinal tract) Two replicated, before-and-after studies in the USA found that feeding whole carcasses reduced pacing levels in lions, leopards, snow leopards and cougars. However, it increased pacing in tigers. One replicated, randomized, controlled study in Denmark found that when fed whole rabbit, cheetahs had lower blood protein urea, zinc and vitamin A levels compared to supplemented beef. One replicated before-and-after study in Denmark found that feeding whole rabbit showed lower levels of inflammatory bowel indicators in cheetahs. One replicated, randomized study and one controlled study in the USA found that when fed whole 1 to 3 day old chickens, ocelots had lower digestible energy and fat compared to a commercial diet and African wildcats had had lower organic matter digestibility compared to a ground-chicken diet. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1901https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1901Wed, 24 Jan 2018 09:52:15 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Carnivores: Hide food around enclosure Four replicated, before-and-after studies in the USA, UK and Germany and one before-and-after study of a black bear, leopard cats, bush dogs, maned wolves and Malayan sun bears found that hiding food increased exploring and foraging behaviours. One replicated, before-and-after study and one before-and-after study in the USA found a decrease in stereotypical pacing in leopard cats and black bear. One before-and-after study in the USA found that hiding food reduced the time Canadian lynx spent sleeping during the day. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1915https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1915Wed, 24 Jan 2018 10:47:53 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Install exclusion and escape devices on fishing gear Six studies evaluated the effects of installing exclusion and escape devices on fishing gear on reptile populations. Two studies each were off the coast of Australia, in the Gulf of Carpentaria (Australia) and in the Adriatic Sea. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (2 STUDIES) Use (2 studies): Two replicated studies (including one controlled study) in the Adriatic Sea found that one or two loggerhead turtles were able to escape from a trawl net with an exclusion and escape device. OTHER (5 STUDIES) Unwanted catch (5 studies): Four studies (including two replicated, paired, controlled studies) off the coast of Australia and in the Gulf of Carpentaria (Australia) found that that trawl nets with an exclusion and escape device caught fewer loggerhead turtles or sea turtles and sea snakes compared to unmodified nets. One replicated study in the Adriatic Sea found that no loggerhead turtles were caught by a trawl net with an exclusion and escape device. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3605https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3605Thu, 09 Dec 2021 10:22:38 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Thin trees within forests Six studies evaluated the effects of thinning trees within forests on reptile populations. Three studies were in the USA and one was in each of Brazil, Spain and Australia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (3 studies): Two replicated, controlled studies (including one randomized study) in the USA and Spain found that areas of thinned forest had similar reptile species richness compared to areas with no thinning. One study also found that thinned areas had lower species richness than areas of open habitat. One replicated, controlled study in Australia found that areas of forest thinned 8–20 years previously had higher diversity of reptiles than areas thinned less than eight or more than 20 years previously, or than areas with no thinning. POPULATION RESPONSE (6 STUDIES) Abundance (6 studies): Two of four replicated, controlled studies (including two randomized studies) in Brazil, the USA, and Spain found that areas of thinned forest had a similar abundance of reptiles compared to areas with no thinning. One study found mixed effects of thinning trees on the abundance of three lizard species. The other study found that areas of thinned forest had a higher abundance of reptiles than areas with no thinning. That study also found that areas with the most thinning had a similar abundance of reptiles compared to areas of open habitat. One replicated, controlled study in Australia found that areas of forest thinned 8–20 years previously had a higher abundance of reptiles than areas thinned at other times or areas with no thinning. One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the USA found that areas of thinned forest had a higher abundance of snakes than clearcut forest. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3627https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3627Thu, 09 Dec 2021 13:43:19 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Leave woody debris in forests after logging Six studies evaluated the effects of leaving woody debris in forests after logging on reptile populations. All six studies were in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (5 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (5 studies): Four of five studies (including four replicated, randomized, controlled studies) in the USA found that leaving or removing woody debris did not affect the richness of reptile species, or immigrating reptiles. The other study found that areas where woody debris was left in place had higher reptile species richness than areas where debris was cleared and burned. Three replicated, randomized, controlled studies in the USA found that leaving or removing woody debris did not affect reptile species diversity or overall reptile and amphibian species diversity. POPULATION RESPONSE (5 STUDIES) Abundance (5 studies): Four of five studies (including three replicated, randomized, controlled studies) in the USA found that leaving or removing woody debris did not affect the abundance of reptiles, snakes, snakes and lizards or immigrating reptiles. The other study found that areas where woody debris was left in place had higher reptile abundance than areas where debris was cleared and burned. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3632https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3632Thu, 09 Dec 2021 14:36:01 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Engage local communities in conservation activities Six studies evaluated the effects on reptile populations of engaging local communities in reptile conservation. One study was in each of the Philippines, Mozambique, Brazil, Costa Rica, Australia and Colombia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (5 STUDIES) Abundance (1 study): One site comparison study in Brazil found that areas where community-based management of fishing practices was implemented had a higher abundance of river turtles than areas with no community-based management. Reproductive success (3 studies): Two before-and-after studies (including one site comparison study) in Mozambique and Costa Rica found that after involving the community in monitoring of nesting activity, fewer sea turtle eggs were lost to poaching than before projects began. One replicated, before-and-after study in Australia found that when management of a saltwater crocodile egg harvest passed to an Indigenous management group, the number of eggs collected and hatching success of those eggs was lower than when it was run by an external company. Survival (2 studies): One study in the Philippines found that after rural community members were paid a small incentive to protect Philippine crocodile sanctuaries combined with an education and awareness campaign, fewer crocodiles were killed than before community engagement. One before-and-after study in Mozambique found that during a community-based turtle monitoring project no killing of adults was recorded. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (1 STUDY) Human behaviour change (1 study): One replicated study in Colombia found that in areas where communities were engaged in conservation initiatives relating to turtles, more people reported changing consumption habitats and fewer people reported using turtles for food compared to in areas with no initiatives, however, stated rates of hunting, buying and selling of turtles remained similar. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3681https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3681Fri, 10 Dec 2021 14:15:39 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Legally protect reptile species Six studies evaluated the effects of legally protecting reptile species on their populations. Two studies were in the Netherlands and one was in each of the USA, Australia, the Seychelles and Cape Verde. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): One of two studies (including one replicated, site comparison study and one before-and-after study) in the USA and Australia found that waterbodies where turtle harvesting was prohibited had a similar abundance of red-eared sliders and Texas spiny softshell turtles compared to unprotected waterbodies. The other study found that following legal protection and harvest regulation, the density of saltwater crocodile populations increased. Reproductive success (1 studies): One before-and-after study in the Seychelles found that following legal protection of both green turtles and their habitat, nesting activity increased. Condition (2 studies): Two studies (including one replicated, site comparison study and one before-and-after study) in the USA and Australia found that in areas with legal protection and/or harvest regulation, Texas spiny softshell turtles and saltwater crocodiles were larger than in areas with no protection or before protection began. One study also found that female red-eared sliders were larger, but males were a similar size in protected compared to unprotected waterbodies. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (3 studies) Human behaviour change (3 studies): Two reviews in the Netherlands found that despite legislation protecting reptiles and their habitat, only one of four development projects completed their habitat compensation requirements or that compensatory slow worm habitat was not completed in time. Both studies also found that monitoring data was not available or that the success of a slow worm mitigation translocation could not be assessed. One replicated, before-and-after study in Cape Verde reported that following legal protections combined with public awareness campaigns, self-reported harvesting, selling and purchasing of sea turtles and turtle products decreased. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3705https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3705Mon, 13 Dec 2021 10:32:56 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Clear or open patches in forests Six studies evaluated the effects of removing canopy to create clearings on reptile populations. Two studies were in the USA and one was in each of Sweden, Australia, the UK and France. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in Australia found that rocky outcrops where trees were removed had higher reptile species richness than overgrown outcrops, and similar richness to outcrops that were naturally sun exposed. POPULATION RESPONSE (5 STUDIES) Abundance (4 studies): One of four replicated studies (including three controlled studies) in Sweden, Australia, the UK and the USA found that after clearings and sand patches were created, sand lizard colonized, abundance then declined, but then increased once more, larger clearings were created. One study found that more slow worms and common lizards were found in open areas of woodland maintained by vegetation cutting compared to in coppiced areas. One study found that areas with reduced canopy had more eastern Massassauga rattlesnakes in the first three years after cutting than uncut areas, but similar numbers after four years. The other study found that removing trees from rocky outcrops had mixed effects on reptile abundance. Occupancy (1 study): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in France found that forest areas where the canopy had been opened up were more likely to be occupied by asper vipers than areas with closed canopy. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Behaviour change (1 study): One before-and-after study in the USA found that clearing a patch of canopy in a forest did not affect spotted turtle home range size. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3715https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3715Mon, 13 Dec 2021 15:01:34 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Add woody debris to landscapes Six studies evaluated the effects of adding woody debris to landscapes on reptile populations. Three studies were in Australia, two were in the USA and one was in Indonesia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (5 studies): Four of five studies (including four replicated, randomized, controlled studies) in the USA, Indonesia and Australia found that areas with added woody debris had similar richness and diversity or richness or of reptiles, rare reptiles and snakes and lizards compared to areas with no added debris. The other study found that areas with added woody debris had higher reptile species richness than areas with no added debris. POPULATION RESPONSE (6 STUDIES) Abundance (6 studies): Two of six replicated studies (including four randomized, controlled studies) in Australia, Indonesia and the USA found that areas with added woody debris had a higher abundance of reptiles than areas with no added debris. Three studies found that areas with woody debris had a similar abundance of reptiles and snakes and lizards compared to areas with no added debris. The other study found that pastures with added timber had lower abundance of rare reptile species compared to pastures without timber, but that in pastures with added timber, reptile abundance was higher after 15 months than after 12 months. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3718https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3718Mon, 13 Dec 2021 15:33:28 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create artificial burrows Six studies evaluated the effects of creating artificial burrows on reptile populations. Five studies were in Australia and one was in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (1 study): One controlled, before-and-after study in Australia found that areas with artificial burrows had more pygmy blue tongue lizards than areas with no artificial burrows Reproductive success (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in Australia found that female pygmy bluetongue lizards using artificial burrows produced larger offspring than those using natural burrows. Condition (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in Australia found that female pygmy bluetongue lizards using artificial burrows had better body condition than those using natural burrows. BEHAVIOUR (5 STUDIES) Use (4 studies): Three replicated studies (including one controlled study) in Australia found that artificial burrows were used by resident and translocated pygmy bluetongue lizards. One of the studies also found that pygmy bluetongue lizards preferred artificial burrows with a chamber than burrows with no chamber. One replicated study in the USA found that providing artificial burrows for translocated gopher tortoises resulted in more tortoises settling successfully in the release area. Behaviour change (1 study): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in Australia found that translocated pygmy blue tongue lizards used artificial burrows, and supplementary food affected the amount of time they spend in bare ground areasCollected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3721https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3721Mon, 13 Dec 2021 17:02:44 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create or restore forests Six studies evaluated the effects of creating or restoring forests on reptile populations. Three studies were in the USA, two were in Australia and one was in Mexico. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (3 studies): One of two replicated studies (including one randomized, controlled study) in the USA and Australia found that restored and natural riparian forest had similar reptile species richness. The other study found that restored forest areas had higher reptile species richness than remnant forest areas. One replicated, site comparison study in Australia found that the type of restoration had mixed effects on reptile species richness in tropical and subtropical areas. POPULATION RESPONSE (5 STUDIES) Abundance (5 studies): Two of three replicated studies (including two controlled, before-and-after studies) in the USA and Mexico found that areas of restored forest had similar abundances of snakes and six lizard species as unrestored areas. The other study found that restoring forest stands had mixed effects on the abundance of reptiles. One replicated, site comparison study in Australia found that areas with different restoration types had similar reptile abundance in tropical and subtropical areas. One replicated, randomized, controlled study in Australia found that restored forest areas had higher reptile abundance than remnant forest areas. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3749https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3749Tue, 14 Dec 2021 13:15:47 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Breed reptiles in captivity: Crocodilians Six studies evaluated the effects of breeding crocodilians in captivity. Two studies were in the USA, one was in each of Venezuela, Brazil and China and one was a global review. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (6 STUDIES) Abundance (1 studies): One study in China reported that a captive population of Chinese alligators increased from 10,000 to 15,000 individuals over a 10-year period. Reproductive success (4 studies): Four studies in the USA, Venezuela and Brazil reported that 1–4 captive females crocodilians, including four captive-born broad-snouted caiman, produced clutches of 17–49 eggs, with hatching successes of 35–86% or 6%. Survival (1 studies): One study in Brazil reported that 4% of broad-snouted caiman hatchlings died within one week Condition (1 studies): One global review reported on one study on Chinese alligators that found that captive breeding had a positive effect on genetic variation compared to wild populations. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3757https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3757Tue, 14 Dec 2021 15:32:22 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Relocate nests/eggs for artificial incubation: Crocodilians Six studies evaluated the effects of relocating nests/eggs for artificial incubation on crocodilian populations. Two studies were in the USA and one study was in each of Zimbabwe, Argentina, Venezuela and Australia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (6 STUDIES) Reproductive success (5 studies): Two replicated studies in Zimbabwe and the USA reported that hatching success for 20,000 Nile crocodile eggs and >30,000 American alligator eggs that were artificially incubated was 74% and 61%. Two studies (including one replicated study) in Argentina and Venezuela reported that 43–100% of road-snouted caiman eggs, 66% of American crocodile eggs and 54% of Orinoco crocodile eggs hatched successfully following artificial incubation. One replicated, before-and-after study in Australia reported that hatching success of artificially incubated saltwater crocodile eggs differed when the project was under local compared to external management. Condition (1 study): One replicated, controlled, paired study in the USA found that American alligator eggs relocated for artificial incubation produced larger hatchlings than eggs left in situ. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3799https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3799Wed, 15 Dec 2021 19:14:49 +0000
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