Conservation Evidence: Evidence Data

Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Brown and black bullheads: Public education No evidence was captured on the impact of education programmes on invasive bullhead 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%2F1086https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1086Tue, 13 Oct 2015 13:15:46 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ponto-Caspian gammarids: Biological control using predatory fish No evidence was captured for the use of predatory fish to control Ponto-Caspian gammarids. '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%2F1087https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1087Tue, 13 Oct 2015 13:23:09 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ponto-Caspian gammarids: Control movement of gammarids A replicated, controlled laboratory study in the USA found that movements of invasive freshwater shrimp slowed down or stopped when they were placed in water that had been exposed to different species of predatory fish, compared to those not exposed to fish. A replicated laboratory study in the UK found carbonating the water stunned invasive killer shrimp. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1088https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1088Tue, 13 Oct 2015 13:28:18 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ponto-Caspian gammarids: Exposure to parasites A replicated, laboratory study in Canada found that an introduced parasitic mould reduced populations of an invasive shrimp. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1089https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1089Tue, 13 Oct 2015 13:30:53 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ponto-Caspian gammarids: Exposure to disease-causing organisms No evidence was captured for the use of disease-causing organisms to control Ponto-Caspian gammarids. '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%2F1090https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1090Tue, 13 Oct 2015 13:31:55 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ponto-Caspian gammarids: Change salinity of the waterOne of two replicated laboratory studies (one controlled) in Canada and the UK found that increasing the salinity level of water killed the majority of invasive shrimp within five hours. One found that increased salinity did not kill invasive killer shrimp.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1091https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1091Tue, 13 Oct 2015 13:36:28 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ponto-Caspian gammarids: Change water temperature A controlled laboratory study from the UK1 found that heating water to >36°C killed all shrimps after 15 minutes exposure and at >43°C all shrimps died immediately. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1092https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1092Tue, 13 Oct 2015 13:38:26 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ponto-Caspian gammarids: Change water pH A controlled laboratory study from the UK found that lowering the pH of water did not kill invasive killer shrimp. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1093https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1093Tue, 13 Oct 2015 13:41:18 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ponto-Caspian gammarids: Dewater (dry out) the habitat A replicated, controlled laboratory study from Poland found that lowering water levels in sand killed three species of invasive freshwater shrimp, although one species required water content levels of 4% and below before it was killed. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1094https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1094Tue, 13 Oct 2015 13:44:55 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ponto-Caspian gammarids: Add chemicals to the water A controlled laboratory study in the UK found that iodine solution, acetic acid, Virkon S and sodium hypochlorite added to freshwater killed invasive killer shrimp, but were considered impractical for field application. Methanol, citric acid, urea, hydrogen peroxide and sucrose did not kill invasive killer shrimp when added to freshwater. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1095https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1095Tue, 13 Oct 2015 13:48:43 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ponto-Caspian gammarids: Cleaning equipment No evidence was captured for the cleaning of equipment to control Ponto-Caspian gammarids. '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%2F1096https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1096Tue, 13 Oct 2015 13:49:53 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ponto-Caspian gammarids: Exchanging ballast water No evidence was captured for exchanging ballast water to control Ponto-Caspian gammarids. '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%2F1097https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1097Tue, 13 Oct 2015 13:51:28 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Skunk cabbage: Biological control using co-evolved, host specific herbivores No evidence was captured on biological control of skunk cabbage using co-evolved, host specific herbivores. '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%2F1098https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1098Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:05:44 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Skunk cabbage: Biological control using native herbivores No evidence was captured on biological control of skunk cabbage using native herbivores. '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%2F1099https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1099Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:07:24 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Skunk cabbage: Biological control using fungal-based herbicides No evidence was captured on biological control of skunk cabbage using fungal-based herbicides. '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%2F1100https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1100Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:08:29 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Skunk cabbage: Physical removal A study in Switzerland found that annual physical removal of recently established skunk cabbage plants over five years removed the entire stock. A study in the Netherlands found that manual removal of mature skunk cabbage plants was effective for a small outbreak of a small-growing plant. A study in Germany reported that after the first four years of a twice yearly full removal programme of skunk cabbage, a large number of plants still needed to be removed each year. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1101https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1101Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:11:52 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Skunk cabbage: Chemical control using herbicides A study in the UK found that two herbicides, glyphosate and 2, 4-D Amine, both killed all skunk cabbage plants in test areas. However, another study in the UK found that although using 2,4-D amine at 9 litres/ha, successfully eradicated skunk cabbage, using glyphosate was unsuccessful at eradicating skunk cabbage, with only limited reduction in growth of the plants. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1102https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1102Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:18:08 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Skunk cabbage: Combination treatment using herbicides and physical removal No evidence was found for use of combination treatment using herbicides and physical removal to control skunk cabbage. '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%2F1103https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1103Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:27:15 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Skunk cabbage: Use of hydrogen peroxide No evidence was found for use of hydrogen peroxide to control skunk cabbage. '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%2F1104https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1104Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:28:18 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Skunk cabbage: Use of liquid nitrogen No evidence was found for use of liquid nitrogen to control skunk cabbage. '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%2F1105https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1105Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:29:18 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Skunk cabbage: Use of flame treatment No evidence was found for use of flame treatment to control skunk cabbage. '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%2F1106https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1106Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:30:10 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Skunk cabbage: Use of a tarpaulin No evidence was found for use of a tarpaulin to control skunk cabbage. '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%2F1107https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1107Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:31:04 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Skunk cabbage: Environmental control (e.g. shading, or promotion of native plants) No evidence was captured on the use of environmental control of skunk cabbage using shading or promotion of competitive native plants. '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%2F1108https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1108Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:32:17 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Skunk cabbage: Public education No evidence was captured on the impact of public education programmes on control of skunk cabbage. '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%2F1109https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1109Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:33:09 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Asian clams: Drain the invaded water body No evidence was captured for the use of dewatering as a management tool for Asian clams. '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%2F1110https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1110Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:41:00 +0100