Conservation Evidence: Evidence Data

Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use repellents on baits for predator control A replicated, randomised and controlled experiment in the USA found that methyl anthanilate and aminoacetophenone did not reduce consumption of baits by American kestrels Falco sparverius. A replicated, randomised and controlled experiment in New Zealand found that treating baits with pulegone or Avex™ reduced pecking rates in North Island robins Petroica australis longipes. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F159https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F159Tue, 15 May 2012 13:51:05 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use raptor models to deter birds and so reduce incidental mortalityA single paired sites study in Spain found no evidence that raptor models were effective in deterring birds from crossing power lines and may even have attracted some species to the area. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F266https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F266Thu, 19 Jul 2012 14:53:56 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use repellents to deter birds from landing on pools polluted by miningA randomised, replicated and controlled ex situ trial from the USA found that fewer common starlings Sturnus vulgaris consumed contaminated water when it was treated with repellents, compared to untreated water. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F453https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F453Wed, 29 Aug 2012 13:51:48 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use puppets to increase the survival or growth of hand-reared chicksThree replicated studies from the USA and Saudi Arabia found that corvids and bustards raised using puppets did not have higher survival, dispersal or growth than conventionally hand-reared chicks. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F617https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F617Sun, 14 Oct 2012 12:43:41 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use prescribed fire to remove invasive plant species We found no evidence for the effects of using prescribed fire to remove invasive plant species 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%2F1196https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1196Thu, 19 May 2016 13:11:33 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use prescribed fire: effects on mature trees Four of eight studies (including two replicated, randomized, controlled studies) from the USA found that prescribed fire decreased tree cover, density and diversity. One study found it increased tree cover and three found no effect or mixed effects of prescribed fire on cover and density of trees. Seven studies from the USA (including one replicated, randomized, controlled study) found that prescribed fire increased tree mortality. One of three studies from the USA (including one replicated, controlled study) found that prescribed fire increased tree size while two found no effect of prescribed fire on tree size. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1217https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1217Fri, 20 May 2016 14:09:36 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use prescribed fire: effects on young trees Five of 15 studies (including four replicated, randomized, controlled studies) from Canada, France and the USA found that prescribed fire increased the density and biomass of young trees. Two studies found that fire decreased new tree density. Eight found no effect or mixed effects depending on the tree species, location and fire frequency. Two of the above studies found mixed effects of prescribed fire on species diversity of young trees depending on the location. Two replicated, controlled studies from the USA found mixed effects of prescribed fire on the survival of young trees. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1220https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1220Fri, 20 May 2016 14:45:40 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use prescribed fire: effect on understory plants Eight of 22 studies (including seven replicated, randomized, controlled studies) from the USA, Australia and Canada found that prescribed fire increased the cover, density and biomass of understory plants. Six of the studies found it decreased plant cover. Eight found no effect or mixed effects on cover and density of understory plants. Fourteen of 24 studies (including ten replicated, randomized, controlled studies) from the USA, Australia, France and West Africa found that prescribed fire increased species richness and diversity of understory plants. One study found that it decreased species richness. Nine found no effect or mixed effects on species richness and diversity of understory plants. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1221https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1221Mon, 23 May 2016 08:21:42 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use prescribed fire to maintain or restore disturbance Three studies evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of using prescribed fire to maintain or restore disturbance. Two studies were in fens and one was in a bog. N.B. Prescribed burning in peatlands with no history of disturbance is considered as a separate action. Characteristic plants (1 study): One replicated before-and-after study in a fen in the UK reported that burning (along with other interventions) had no effect on cover of fen-characteristic mosses or herbs. Herb cover (2 studies): One replicated, controlled study in a fen in the USA reported that burning reduced forb cover and increased sedge/rush cover, but had no effect on grass cover. In contrast, one replicated before-and-after study in a fen in the UK reported that burning (along with other interventions) reduced grass/sedge/rush cover. Tree/shrub cover (2 studies): Two replicated studies in fens in the USA and the UK reported that burning (sometimes along with other interventions) reduced tree/shrub cover. Overall plant richness/diversity (3 studies): Two replicated, controlled studies in a fen in the USA and a bog in New Zealand found that burning increased plant species richness or diversity. However, one replicated before-and-after study in a fen in the UK reported that burning (along with other interventions) typically had no effect on plant species richness and diversity. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1763https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1763Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:37:27 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use red lighting rather than other lighting colours Three studies evaluated the effects of red lighting on bat populations. Two studies were in the Netherlands and one was in the UK. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): One replicated, controlled, site comparison study in the Netherlands found that red lighting resulted in higher activity (relative abundance) for one of three bat species groups than white or green lighting. One site comparison study in the Netherlands found that culverts illuminated with red light had similar activity of commuting Daubenton’s bats as culverts illuminated with white or green light. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Behaviour (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in the UK found that more soprano pipistrelles emerged from a roost when lit with red light than when lit with white light, but no difference was found between red and blue lights. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2021https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2021Wed, 05 Dec 2018 18:06:28 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use repellent on slug pellets to reduce non-target poisoning One study evaluated the effects on mammals of using repellent on slug pellets to reduce non-target poisoning. This study was in the UK. KEY COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): A replicated, controlled study in the UK found that, at some concentrations, food treated with a bitter substance was consumed less by wood mice but not by bank voles or common shrews. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2390https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2390Thu, 28 May 2020 09:09:33 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use repellents to reduce cable gnawing One study evaluated the effects of using repellents to reduce cable gnawing. This study was in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (1 STUDY) Human-wildlife conflict (1 study): A randomized, replicated, controlled study in the USA found that repellents only deterred cable gnawing by northern pocket gophers when encased in shrink-tubing. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2502https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2502Thu, 04 Jun 2020 15:42:16 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use repellents that taste bad (‘contact repellents’) to deter crop or property damage by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict Twelve studies evaluated the effects of using repellents that taste bad (‘contact repellents’) to deter crop or property damage by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict. Nine studies were in the USA, two were in the UK and one was in Italy. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (12 STUDIES) Human-wildlife conflict (12 studies): Five of 11 controlled studies (including 10 replicated studies), in the USA, Italy and the UK, of a range of contact repellents, found that they reduced herbivory or consumption of baits. The other six studies reported mixed results with at least some repellents at some concentrations deterring herbivory, sometimes for limited periods. A replicated, controlled study in the USA found that a repellent did not prevent chewing damage by coyotes. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2509https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2509Thu, 04 Jun 2020 16:44:38 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use repellents that smell bad (‘area repellents’) to deter crop or property damage by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict One study evaluated the effects of using repellents that smell bad (‘area repellents’) to deter crop or property damage by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict. This study was in the UK. KEY COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (1 STUDY) Human-wildlife conflict (1 study): A randomized, replicated, controlled study in the UK found that a repellent reduced use of treated areas by moles. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2511https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2511Fri, 05 Jun 2020 09:28:02 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use reward removal to prevent non-target species from entering traps One study evaluated the effects on mammals of using reward removal to prevent non-target species from entering traps. This study was in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Behaviour change (1 study): A replicated, controlled study in the USA found that when reward removal was practiced, the rate of San Clemente Island fox entry into traps set for feral cats was reduced. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2537https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2537Mon, 08 Jun 2020 16:50:53 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use reflective collars or paint on mammals to reduce collisions with road vehicles We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using reflective collars or paint on mammals to reduce collisions with road vehicles. ‘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%2F2619https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2619Fri, 12 Jun 2020 09:31:06 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use real-time automated tools at renewable energy sites to detect marine and freshwater mammals and allow operations to be stopped or modified We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using real-time automated tools at renewable energy sites to detect marine and freshwater mammals and allow operations to be stopped or modified. ‘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%2F2749https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2749Tue, 02 Feb 2021 16:49:29 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use real-time automated tools on board vessels to detect mammals and allow vessel course or speed to be altered We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using real-time automated tools on board vessels to detect mammals and allow vessel course or speed to be altered. ‘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%2F2756https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2756Tue, 02 Feb 2021 17:00:08 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use remote tools to detect mammals in an area and allow vessel course or speed to be altered We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using remote tools to detect mammals in an area and allow vessel course or speed to be altered. ‘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%2F2757https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2757Tue, 02 Feb 2021 17:01:20 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use prescribed fire to maintain or restore disturbance: freshwater marshes Fifteen studies evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of using prescribed fire to maintain or restore disturbance in freshwater marshes. Ten studies were in the USA. Two studies, based on one experimental set-up, were in the Netherlands. There was one study in each of the UK, Romania and South Africa. VEGETATION COMMUNITY Community composition (4 studies): Of four replicated, controlled studies (three also before-and-after) in freshwater wetlands in the USA, two found that burning (sometimes along with other interventions) significantly affected the overall plant community composition in the following 2–5 years. The other two studies found that burning had no clear or significant effect on the overall plant community composition over the following two years. One of these studies also found that the plant community in burned marshes was less similar to pristine local marshes than the plant community in unburned marshes, after two years. Overall richness/diversity (8 studies): Four replicated, paired, controlled studies in freshwater marshes/wet meadows in the UK and the USA found that burning had no significant effect on overall plant species richness and/or diversity over 1–2 growing seasons. However, three replicated, paired, controlled studies in the UK and the USA reported that burning increased plant species richness or diversity after 1–3 growing seasons. Two replicated studies (including one paired, site comparison) in the USA and South Africa reported that burning reduced plant species richness or diversity after 1–3 growing seasons. However, the study in the USA also reported that burning increased richness after 4–8 growing seasons. VEGETATION ABUNDANCE Overall abundance (5 studies): Four studies (including two randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after) in freshwater marshes/wet meadows in the USA found that prescribed burning had no significant effect on overall vegetation abundance (biomass or cover) after 1–3 growing seasons. One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in a freshwater marsh in the USA reported that burned plots contained less vegetation biomass, one year after the latest burn, than unburned plots. Characteristic plant abundance (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after study of overgrown freshwater marshes in the USA reported that of 26 plant taxa that became more frequent after burning (along with other interventions), 16 were obligate wetland taxa. Herb abundance (1 study): One replicated, paired, site comparison study of sedge meadows in the USA found that burned meadows typically contained similar cover of herbaceous plant groups (grasses, sedges/rushes and forbs) to unburned meadows, after 1–8 growing seasons. Tree/shrub abundance (2 studies): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after study in a degraded, shrubby wet prairie the USA found that over three years, burning reduced woody plant cover. One replicated, before-and-after study of freshwater marshes within a forest plantation in South Africa reported that burning never increased overall tree density five months later, although the precise effect apparently depended on site wetness. Algae/phytoplankton abundance (1 study): One controlled study in a freshwater marsh in the USA found that burned plots contained a greater abundance (cover and biomass) of surface-encrusting algae, over the following 72 days, than unburned plots. Individual species abundance (9 studies): Nine studies quantified the effect of this action on the abundance of individual plant species. The nine studies (including eight controlled or site comparison) in the Netherlands, the UK, the USA, Romania and South Africa reported mixed effects of burning on dominant herbaceous species, depending on the species, metric, site conditions and/or time after burning. VEGETATION STRUCTURE Height (5 studies): Four studies (including one replicated, randomized, paired, controlled) – in reedbeds in the UK and Romania, a marsh in the USA and freshwater marshes within a forest plantation in South Africa – found that burned plots contained shorter vegetation than unburned plots in the subsequent growing season. One study in a marsh in the USA reported that over the 50 days after prescribed burning, the average height of sawgrass Cladium jamaicense increased. Diameter/perimeter/area (3 studies): Two replicated, paired, controlled studies in reedbeds in the Netherlands and the UK found that common reed Phragmites australis stems were typically thicker in spring-burned plots than unburned plots, in the subsequent growing season. However, one site comparison study of reedbeds in Romania found that common reed stems were thinner in winter-burned plots than unburned plots, in the following spring. OTHER Survival (1 study): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after study in a degraded, shrubby wet prairie the USA found that woody plants had a lower survival rate, after one year, in burned plots than in unburned plots. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3054https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3054Fri, 02 Apr 2021 08:55:35 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use prescribed fire to maintain or restore disturbance: brackish/salt marshes Ten studies evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of using prescribed fire to maintain or restore disturbance in brackish/salt marshes. Seven studies were in the USA. Two studies were in Argentina but based on the same experimental set-up. One study was in Guadeloupe. VEGETATION COMMUNITY Community composition (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled study in a salt marsh in Argentina reported that burned plots had a different overall plant community composition to unburned plots, five months after burning. The same was true in one of two comparisons 17 months after burning. Overall richness/diversity (5 studies): Three studies (including one replicated, paired, controlled) in brackish marshes in the USA and Guadeloupe reported that burning had no significant effect on overall plant species richness, measured approximately 10 weeks to 2 years after the latest burn. In one of the studies, the effects of burning and legal protection were not separated. One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after study in brackish marshes in the USA reported that burning typically had no significant effect on changes in plant species richness over two years. One replicated, paired, controlled study in a salt marsh in Argentina reported that burned plots had greater overall plant species richness and diversity than unburned plots, 5–17 months after burning. Characteristic plant richness/diversity (1 study): One study of a coastal marsh in the USA reported that over three years after restoration – involving a prescribed burn along with restoration of tidal exchange – the number of salt-tolerant plant species increased, whilst the number of freshwater plant species decreased. VEGETATION ABUNDANCE Overall abundance (5 studies): Three replicated studies (one also randomized, paired, controlled) in brackish marshes in the USA found that overall vegetation biomass was lower in burned than unburned plots, 10 weeks or 1 year after the latest burn. One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after study in alkali marshes in the USA found that a single prescribed burn had no significant effect on overall vegetation biomass: there was a similar change over two years in burned and unburned plots. One replicated, paired, controlled study in a salt marsh in Argentina found that the effect of a single prescribed burn on the frequency of seedlings depended on the time since burning, but that seedlings were more frequent in burned than unburned plots after 9–12 months. Characteristic plant abundance (1 study): One study of a coastal marsh in the USA found that over three years after restoration – involving a prescribed burn along with restoration of tidal exchange – the cover of salt-tolerant plant species increased, whilst the cover of freshwater plant species decreased. Individual species abundance (7 studies): Seven studies quantified the effect of this action on the abundance of individual plant species. For example, five studies quantified the effects of prescribed burning on the abundance of dominant cordgrasses Spartina sp. in brackish and salt marshes in the USA and Argentina. Two replicated, paired, controlled studies found that cordgrass abundance (biomass or cover) was lower in burned than unburned plots, between 10 weeks and 17 months after the latest burn. However, one replicated, paired, site comparison study found that burning typically had no significant effect on cordgrass biomass or density after 2–8 months. One replicated, before-and-after study found that cordgrass biomass was lower, but cover greater, one year after burning than before. One study reported mixed effects on cordgrass cover across two marshes. VEGETATION STRUCTURE Height (2 studies): Two studies (one controlled, one site comparison) in brackish marshes in the USA and Guadeloupe reported that the height of dominant grass-like plants was lower in burned than unburned areas for up to 1–2 years after the latest burn. The study in the USA reported recovery, to a slightly greater height than in unburned areas, after three years. The study in Guadeloupe also reported that the tallest trees in burned marshes were shorter than the tallest trees in unburned marshes. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3055https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3055Fri, 02 Apr 2021 08:57:38 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use prescribed fire to maintain or restore disturbance: freshwater swamps Two studies evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of using prescribed fire to maintain or restore disturbance in freshwater swamps. Both studies were in the USA. VEGETATION COMMUNITY Tree/shrub richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that shrub-dominated wetlands burned every three years contained fewer species of mature tree than unburned wetlands, but a similar number of shrub and sapling species. VEGETATION ABUNDANCE Overall abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study of bottomland swamps in the USA found that swamps burned every 2–3 years had a similar overall density of midstory and understory vegetation to unburned swamps. Herb abundance (2 studies): One replicated, site comparison study of shrub-dominated wetlands in the USA found that wetlands burned every three years had greater cover of grasses than unburned wetlands, but statistically similar cover of forbs and ferns. Another replicated, site comparison study of bottomland swamps in the USA found that swamps burned every 2–3 years had a similar density of understory grasses to unburned swamps. Tree/shrub abundance (2 studies): One replicated, site comparison study of shrub-dominated wetlands in the USA found that wetlands burned every three years had greater cover of shrubs than unburned wetlands. Another replicated, site comparison study of bottomland swamps in the USA found that swamps burned every 2–3 years had a similar density of shrubs, vines and other woody plants to unburned swamps. VEGETATION STRUCTURE Height (2 studies): One replicated, site comparison study of bottomland swamps in the USA found that swamps burned every 2–3 years had a shorter tree canopy than unburned swamps – but a similar-height midstory and understory. Another replicated, site comparison study of shrub-dominated wetlands in the USA found that the tree canopy was a similar height in wetlands burned every three years and unburned wetlands. Basal area (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study of bottomland swamps in the USA found that swamps burned every 2–3 years had a similar basal area of trees to unburned swamps. Canopy cover (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study of shrub-dominated wetlands in the USA found that wetlands burned every three years had less canopy cover than unburned wetlands. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3056https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3056Fri, 02 Apr 2021 08:57:49 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use prescribed fire to maintain or restore disturbance: brackish/saline swampsWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of using prescribed fire to maintain or restore disturbance in brackish/saline swamps. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3057https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3057Fri, 02 Apr 2021 08:58:02 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use prescribed fire to maintain or restore disturbance in forests Five studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of using prescribed fire to maintain or restore disturbance in forests. Four studies were in the USA and one was in Australia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (4 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (4 studies): Three of four studies (including one replicated study, one paired study, two controlled studies, two before-and-after studies, and one site comparison study) in the USA found that coniferous forest restored 1–2 years ago by burning (in combination with thinning) or burned once within the last 20 years, had a higher species richness of butterflies than unburned forest. The fourth study found that mixed forest and shrubland sites which had been burned the year before had similar butterfly species richness to unburned sites. POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Abundance (3 studies): Two studies (including one controlled, before-and-after study and one site comparison study) in the USA found that pine forest restored 1–2 years ago by burning (in combination with thinning) had a higher abundance of butterflies than unburned forest. One replicated, before-and-after study in Australia reported that in the spring after selective burning of eucalyptus forest there were fewer Eltham copper caterpillars than before. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3877https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3877Wed, 20 Jul 2022 18:19:12 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use prescribed fire to maintain or restore disturbance in grasslands or other open habitats Thirteen studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of using prescribed fire to maintain or restore disturbance in grasslands or other open habitats. Eight studies were in the USA, three were in the UK, one was in South Africa and one was a review across Europe. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Community composition (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that pastures managed by patch-burning had a similar butterfly community to rotationally or continuously grazed pastures. Richness/diversity (3 studies): Two replicated, before-and-after studies (including one randomized, controlled study and one paired sites, site comparison study) in the USA found that shrubland plots and grass field margins managed by burning had a similar species richness of butterflies to those which were unburned. One replicated, site comparison study in the USA reported that pastures managed by patch-burning had a lower species richness of butterflies than rotationally grazed pastures, a similar richness to rotationally grazed and mown pastures, and a higher species richness than continuously grazed pastures. POPULATION RESPONSE (12 STUDIES) Abundance (12 studies): Four of nine studies (including six replicated studies, two randomized studies, two paired sites studies, three controlled studies, two before-and-after studies, and five site comparison studies) in the UK, South Africa and the USA found that the abundance of heath fritillary adults, marsh fritillary caterpillar webs and Fender’s blue caterpillars and eggs was higher (sometimes after initial reductions in abundance) on heathland, fen meadows and prairies one or more years after management by burning than before burning, or compared to unburned or grazed land, although the total population of Fender’s blue declined in adjacent burned and unburned areas. Three studies found that the abundance of Brenton blue butterfly eggs and adults, rosy marsh moth caterpillars and regal fritillary adults was lower on a bog and prairies managed by burning than on unburned land, at least one and five years after burning. One study found that grass field margins managed by burning had a similar abundance of butterflies to unburned field margins. The seventh study found that abundance of Powershiek skipperling to burning, along with haying and idling, depended on the site’s vegetation characteristics. Two replicated, site comparison studies in the USA found that two prairie specialists (regal fritillary and arogos skipper) and three out of nine butterfly species were less abundant in prairies or pastures managed by burning than in prairies managed by haying or grazed pastures. These studies also found that the abundance of generalist and migrant species, and of purplish copper, was higher in burned prairies or pastures than hayed prairies or grazed pastures. One review across Europe reported that occasional burning on grassland benefitted 10 out of 67 butterfly species of conservation concern. Survival (1 study): One replicated, paired sites, controlled study in the USA found that in prairie plots burned one year before, Fender’s blue butterfly caterpillars had lower survival than in unburned plots. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the UK found that a similar proportion of fen meadows were occupied by marsh fritillary caterpillars whether they were managed by burning, grazing or were unmanaged. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3882https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3882Mon, 25 Jul 2022 12:37:11 +0100