Conservation Evidence: Evidence Data

Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Convert to organic farmingEvidence on the impact of organic farming on wild bees is equivocal. Three replicated trials in Europe or Canada have shown that the abundance of wild bees is higher under organic arable farming than under conventional farming. One of these showed that bee diversity is higher in organically farmed wheat fields and in mown fallow strips adjacent to them. Three replicated trials in Europe or the USA have found no significant difference in the numbers of bumblebees (two trials), bumblebee species (one trial), or wild bees visiting flowering crops (one trial) between conventional and organic arable farms. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F25https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F25Thu, 20 May 2010 07:02:08 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Control weeds without damaging other plants in conservation areas Two studies looked at the effects of controlling weeds on the surrounding vegetation. One study from the UK found that new populations of rare arable plants established following the control of perennial weeds in a nature conservation area. A replicated, controlled and randomized study in the UK found that using grass-specific herbicide reduced grass diversity and resulted in increases in broadleaved plants. Eleven studies investigated different methods of controlling plants. A review found that specific management regimes can reduce the abundance of pernicious weeds in nature conservation areas. Four replicated controlled studies (one also randomized) from Denmark and Germany found cutting and infection with fungal pathogens were effective methods for controlling creeping thistle and one replicated, randomized, controlled trial from the UK found long-term control was achieved by lenient grazing. A replicated, controlled and randomized study in Germany found weevils could be used to infect creeping thistle with systemic rust. One study found a non-native beetle was unsuitable for controlling creeping thistle because it had poor survival in the UK climate. A replicated controlled study found that spraying a high concentration of herbicide killed less than half of broad-leaved dock plants. A replicated, controlled, randomized study found black grass was eliminated with a December treatment of grass-specific herbicide. A small replicated study found that Hebridean sheep grazed more purple moor grass than Swaledale sheep. Two replicated controlled laboratory and grassland studies found negative impacts of the herbicide asulam on green dock beetles. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F123https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F123Tue, 01 Nov 2011 21:27:23 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Control scrub A replicated study from the UK found a negative relationship between the number of young grey partridge per adult and a combined intervention of scrub control, rough grazing and the restoration of various semi-natural habitats. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F127https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F127Mon, 14 Nov 2011 21:51:12 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Control scrub on farmlandA replicated study from the UK found a negative relationship between the number of young grey partridge Perdix perdix per adult and a combined intervention of scrub control, rough grazing and the restoration of various semi-natural habitats. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F197https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F197Wed, 27 Jun 2012 17:55:08 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Coppice trees Of three studies, one, a before-and-after study in the UK found that a population of European nightjars increased following a series of management interventions, including the coppicing of some birch trees. Two before-and-after studies from the UK and the USA found that the use of coppices by some bird species declined over time. The UK study also found that overall species richness decreased with age, but that some species were more abundant in older stands. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F329https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F329Fri, 27 Jul 2012 14:58:36 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Convert or revert arable land to permanent grassland All seven individual studies (including four replicated studies, of which two also controlled and a review) looking at the effects of reverting arable land to grassland found no clear benefit to wildlife. The studies monitored UK birds in winter and summer, wading birds in Denmark, grey partridges, brown hares in the UK, and plants in the Czech Republic. One of the studies, a controlled before-and-after study from the UK, showed that grey partridge numbers fell significantly following the reversion of arable fields to grassland. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F561https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F561Tue, 25 Sep 2012 12:33:31 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Convert to organic farmingThis synopsis includes experimental tests of organic farming only. Comparative studies of existing organic systems are not included. Parasitism and mortality (caused by natural enemies): One of five studies (three replicated, controlled tests and two also randomised) from Europe, North America, Asia and Australasia found that organic farming increased parasitism or natural enemy-induced mortality of pests. Two studies found mixed effects of organic farming and two randomised, replicated, controlled studies found no effect. Natural enemies: Eight of 12 studies (including six randomised, replicated, controlled tests) from Europe, North America Asia and Australasia found more natural enemies under organic farming, although seven of these found effects varied over time or between natural enemy species or groups and/or crops or management practices. Three studies (one randomised, replicated, controlled) found no or inconsistent effects on natural enemies and one study found a negative effect. Pests and diseases: One of eight studies (including five randomised, replicated, controlled tests) found that organic farming reduced pests or disease, but two studies found more pests. Three studies found mixed effects and two studies found no effect. Crop damage: One of seven studies (including five randomised, replicated, controlled tests) found less crop damage in organic fields but two studies found more. One study found a mixed response and three studies found no or inconsistent effects. Weed seed predation and weed abundance: One randomised, replicated, controlled study from the USA found mixed effects of organic farming on weed seed predation by natural enemies. Three randomised, replicated, controlled studies from the USA found more weeds in organically farmed fields, but in one of these studies this effect varied between crops and years. One study found no effect. Yield and profit: Six randomised, replicated, controlled studies measured yields and found one positive effect, one negative effect and one mixed effect, plus no or inconsistent effects in three studies. One study found net profit increased if produce received a premium, but otherwise profit decreased. Another study found a negative or no effect on profit. Crops studied were apple, barley, beans, cabbage, carrot, gourd, maize, mixed vegetables, pea, pepper, safflower, soybean, tomato and wheat.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F717https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F717Thu, 30 May 2013 09:37:10 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Convert to organic farmingBiodiversity: Four studies in Asia, Europe, and the USA (including two site comparison studies and three replicated trials) found higher numbers, diversity, functional diversity (see background) or activity of soil organisms under organic management. Soil organic carbon: Two replicated trials in Italy and the USA showed that organically managed orchards had higher soil carbon levels compared to conventionally managed orchards. One randomized, replicated trial in the USA found soil carbon was lower under organic management compared to alley cropping. Soil organic matter: One replicated trial in Canada found that soil nutrients were lower in organically managed soils. Yields: One replicated trial in Canada found lower yields in organically managed soils. Two replicated trials in the USA (one also randomized) found that fruit was of a higher quality and more resistant to disease, though smaller or that organic management had mixed effects on yield. SOIL TYPES COVERED: clay, clay loam, fine sandy-loam, loam, sandy loam, sandy-clay loam, silt, silty-clay, silt-loam. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F895https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F895Mon, 30 Sep 2013 11:31:06 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Control traffic and traffic timingBiodiversity: One randomized, replicated study from Poland found higher numbers and bacterial activity under controlled traffic. One replicated site comparison study from Denmark found higher microbial biomass when farm traffic was not controlled Erosion: Five trials from Europe and Australia (including three replicated trials, one controlled before-and after-trial, and one review) found a higher number of pores in the soil, less compaction, reduced runoff and increased water filtration into the soil under controlled traffic. One controlled, replicated trial from India found increased soil crack width when traffic was not controlled. Yield: Two replicated trials from Australia and the USA found increased yield under controlled traffic. SOIL TYPES COVERED: clay, loamy-sand, loamy-silt, sandy loam, silty, silty-clay, silt loam. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F899https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F899Tue, 01 Oct 2013 10:25:04 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Coppice trees We captured no evidence for the effects of tree coppicing on forests. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1190https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1190Thu, 19 May 2016 11:50:11 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cover the ground with plastic mats after restoration planting One replicated study in Canada found that covering the ground with plastic mats after restoration planting decreased the cover of herbecous plants and grasses. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1239https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1239Fri, 03 Jun 2016 09:35:17 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cover the ground using techniques other than plastic mats after restoration planting One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the USA found that covering the ground with mulch after planting increased total plant cover. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1240https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1240Fri, 03 Jun 2016 09:38:37 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cover the ground with straw after tree planting One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the Czech Republic found that covering the ground with straw, but not bark or fleece, increased the growth rate of planted trees and shrubs. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1266https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1266Fri, 10 Jun 2016 08:44:29 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Coppice trees We found no evidence for the effects of coppicing trees on primate populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1513https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1513Thu, 19 Oct 2017 09:08:54 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Convert to organic agriculture or aquaculture near peatlands We found no studies that evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of converting to organic agriculture or aquaculture near peatlands. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1785https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1785Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:16:38 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cover peatland with organic mulch (without planting) Two studies evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of covering a peatland with organic mulch (without planting). Both studies were in bogs (but in one study, being restored as a fen). Vegetation cover (2 studies): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after study in a bog in Canada found that covering bare peat with straw mulch did not affect cover of fen-characteristic plants. One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in a bog in Australia reported that plots mulched with straw had similar Sphagnum moss cover to unmulched plots. Characteristic plants (1 study): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after study in a bog in Canada found that covering bare peat with straw mulch increased the number of fen characteristic plants present, but did not affect their cover. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1813https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1813Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:38:22 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cover peatland with something other than mulch (without planting) Two studies evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of covering a peatland with something other than mulch (without planting). Both studies were in bogs. Vegetation cover (2 studies): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in a bog in Germany reported that covering bare peat with fleece or fibre mats did not affect the number of seedlings of five herb/shrub species. One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in bogs in Australia reported that recently-burned plots shaded with plastic mesh developed greater cover of native plants, forbs and Sphagnum moss than unshaded plots. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1814https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1814Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:39:22 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cover peatland with organic mulch (after planting) Twelve studies evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of adding organic mulch after planting peatland plants. Nine studies were in bogs (one being restored as a fen). Two studies were in fens. One was in a tropical peat swamp. Germination (1 study): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in a bog in Germany found that mulching after sowing seeds increased germination rates for two species (a grass and a shrub), but had no effect on three other herb species. Survival (3 studies): Two replicated, paired, controlled studies in a fen in Sweden and a bog in the USA reported that mulching increased survival of planted vegetation (mosses or sedges). One replicated, paired, controlled study in Indonesia reported that mulching with oil palm fruits reduced survival of planted peat swamp tree seedlings. Growth (1 study): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after study in a fen in the USA reported that mulching increased growth of transplanted sedges. Cover (9 studies): Six studies (including four replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after) in bogs in Canada and the USA and a fen in Sweden found that mulching after planting increased vegetation cover (specifically total vegetation, total mosses/bryophytes, Sphagnum mosses or vascular plants after 1–3 growing seasons). Three replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after studies in degraded bogs in Canada found that mulching after planting had no effect on vegetation cover (Sphagnum mosses or fen-characteristic plants). Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1828https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1828Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:51:42 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cover peatland with something other than mulch (after planting) Eight studies evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of adding covers (other than mulch) after planting peatland plants. Five studies involved bog plants, two involved fen plants and one involved peat swamp plants. Two of the studies were in greenhouses or nurseries. Germination (1 study): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in a bog in Germany reported mixed effects of fleece and fibre mats on germination of sown herb and shrub seeds (positive or no effect, depending on species). Survival (2 studies): Two replicated, randomized, controlled studies examined the effect, on plant survival, of covering planted areas. One study in a fen in Sweden reported that shading with plastic mesh increased survival of planted mosses. One study in a nursery in Indonesia reported that shading with plastic mesh typically had no effect on survival of peat swamp tree species, but increased survival of some. Growth (3 studies): Three replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after studies examined the effect, on plant growth, of covering planted areas. One study in a greenhouse in Switzerland found that covering planted Sphagnum mosses with transparent plastic sheets or shading mesh increased their growth. One study in a fen in Sweden found that shading with plastic mesh reduced growth of planted fen mosses. One study in a nursery in Indonesia reported that seedlings shaded with plastic mesh grew taller and thinner than unshaded seedlings. Cover (4 studies): Two replicated, paired studies in a fen in Sweden and a bog in Australia reported that shading plots with plastic mesh increased cover of planted mosses. One study in a bog in Canada found that covering sown plots with plastic mesh, not transparent plastic sheets, increased the number of Sphagnum moss shoots. Another study in a bog in Canada reported that shading sown plots with plastic mesh had no effect on cover of vegetation overall, vascular plants, Sphagnum or other moss. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1829https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1829Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:51:57 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Coppice woodland We found no studies that evaluated the effects of coppicing woodland 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%2F1987https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1987Wed, 05 Dec 2018 11:04:54 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Control ticks/fleas/lice in wild mammal populations Two studies evaluated the effects of controlling ticks, fleas or lice in wild mammal populations. Both studies were in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Condition (2 studies): A replicated, paired sites, controlled study in the USA found that a grain-bait insecticide product did not consistently reduce flea burdens on Utah prairie dogs. A controlled study the USA found that treating wolves with ivermectin cleared them of infestations of biting dog lice. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2589https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2589Wed, 10 Jun 2020 17:24:33 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Coppice trees We found no studies that evaluated the effects of coppicing trees on mammals. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2635https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2635Fri, 12 Jun 2020 12:51:07 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Coppice trees One study evaluated the effects of coppicing trees on reptile populations. This study was in the UK. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the UK found that no slow worms or common lizards were found in coppiced areas of woodland, whereas they were found in open areas maintained by vegetation cutting. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3629https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3629Thu, 09 Dec 2021 14:25:21 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Convert to organic farming Thirteen studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of converting to organic farming. Six studies were in Sweden, three were in the UK and one was in each of Canada, Switzerland, Germany and Taiwan. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (13 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (13 studies): Seven of 11 replicated, site comparison studies (including five paired studies) in Sweden, the UK, Canada, Switzerland, Germany and Taiwan found that organic arable farms had a greater species richness of butterflies, burnet moths and all moths than conventionally managed farms. However, three of these studies only found this in intensively managed not in more diverse landscapes,only in the first of three study years, and in farms managed organically for <6 years but not 15–23 years. Four of the studies found that organic arable and mixed farms had a similar species richness of macro-moths and butterflies to conventionally managed farms. Two of these studies also found that on organic and conventionally managed farms within a landscape with a high proportion of organic farms there was higher species richness of butterflies and burnet moths than either type of farm in a landscape with a high proportion of conventional farms. One before-and-after study in the UK found that within 4 years after a mixed farm converted to organic management (along with increasing the proportion of grassland and reducing grazing intensity) the species richness of large moths increased. One replicated, site comparison study in Sweden found that organic mixed farms had a more consistent species richness of butterflies across the farm, but a similar consistency through the summer and between years, compared to conventional farms. POPULATION RESPONSE (12 STUDIES) Abundance (12 studies): Seven of 11 replicated, site comparison studies (including five paired studies) in Sweden, the UK, Canada, Switzerland, Germany and Taiwan found that organic arable farms had a greater abundance of butterflies, burnet moths, and all moths, than conventionally managed farms, and that butterfly abundance increased with time since farms had been converted to organic management. However, three of these studies only found this in intensively managed not in more diverse landscapes, and in farms managed organically for <6 years but not 15–23 years. One of these studies also found that on organic and conventionally managed farms within a landscape with a high proportion of organic farms there was higher abundance of butterflies than either type of farm in a landscape with a high proportion of conventional farms. The other four found that organic arable and mixed farms had a similar abundance of macro-moths and butterflies to conventionally managed farms. One before-and-after study in the UK found that within 4 years after a mixed farm converted to organic management (along with increasing the proportion of grassland and reducing grazing intensity) the total abundance of large moths, and the abundance of lunar underwing moths and 5 out of 23 butterfly species, increased, but the abundance of two butterfly species decreased. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3907https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3907Tue, 09 Aug 2022 18:07:43 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Coppice woodland Ten studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of coppicing woodland. Eight studies were in the UK and one was in each of France and Germany. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (4 STUDIES) Community composition (3 studies): Two replicated, site comparison studies in the UK and France found that coppiced woodland of different ages supported different communities of moths and butterflies. One replicated, site comparison study in the UK found that coppiced woodland contained more unique species of macro-moth than mature forest. Richness/diversity (4 studies): One of two replicated, site comparison studies in the UK found that coppiced woodland had a greater species richness of butterflies than unmanaged woodland. The other study found that coppiced woodland had a lower species richness of macro-moths than mature forest, and there was no change in species richness with the age of coppice. One of two replicated, site comparison studies in the UK and France found that woodland coppiced two years ago had a greater species richness of butterflies than woodland coppiced >15 years ago. The other study found that the species richness of moths was similar in woodland coppiced 1–4, 5–8 and 12–20 years ago. POPULATION RESPONSE (10 STUDIES) Abundance (9 studies): Two of four site comparison studies (including three replicated studies and one before-and-after study) in the UK found that coppiced woodland (in one case also legally protected) had a higher abundance of butterflies generally, and of heath fritillary specifically, than unmanaged woodland. One study found that pearl-bordered fritillary and small pearl-bordered fritillary populations were more likely to persist for up to 20 years in coppiced woodland (or woodland with young plantations) than in mature conifer woodland. The fourth study found that the abundance of macro-moths was lower in coppiced woodland than in mature forest, and there was no change in abundance with the age of coppice. Three of four replicated, site comparison studies (including one before-and-after study) in the UK, France and Germany found that the abundance of butterflies generally, heath fritillary specifically, and eastern eggar moth and scarce fritillary caterpillar webs, was higher in woodland coppiced two, two–four, five–seven or 12–15 years ago than in woodland coppiced 5–11 or >15 years ago. The fourth study reported that the abundance of moths was similar in woodland coppiced 1–4, 5–8 and 12–20 years ago. One before-and-after study in the UK reported that after coppicing, along with scrub control, tree felling and grazing, high brown fritillary and small pearl-bordered fritillary abundance increased. Reproductive success (1 study): One before-and-after study in the UK reported that pearl-bordered fritillaries released into coppiced woodland bred at least once. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3939https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3939Sat, 13 Aug 2022 14:56:58 +0100