Conservation Evidence: Evidence Data

Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Procambarus crayfish control: Trapping and removal One controlled, replicated study in Italy found that baiting traps with food (tinned meat) trapped the most red swamp crayfish compared to the use of male and female pheromones or the control (no bait). Over half of all crayfish caught were found in traps baited with food. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1029https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1029Fri, 03 Jul 2015 15:14:42 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Procambarus crayfish control: Encouraging predators Two replicated, controlled studies in Italy found that eels fed on the red swamp crayfish and reduced population size. One replicated, controlled study from France in 2001 found that pike predated red swamp crayfish. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1030https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1030Fri, 03 Jul 2015 15:15:43 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Procambarus crayfish control: Trapping combined with encouragement of predators A before-and-after study in Switzerland found that introducing predators, combined with trapping significantly reduced red swamp crayfish populations in a pond. A second replicated, controlled study from Italy demonstrated that trapping and predation in combination was more effective at reducing red swamp crayfish populations than predation alone. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1031https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1031Fri, 03 Jul 2015 15:16:05 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Procambarus crayfish control: Sterilization of males One replicated laboratory study in Italy found that exposing male red swamp crayfish to X-rays reduced the number of offspring they produced by 43%. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1032https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1032Fri, 03 Jul 2015 15:16:20 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Procambarus crayfish control: Removal of food source No evidence was captured on the effect of removing food sources as a control tool for Procambarus crayfish. '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%2F1033https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1033Fri, 03 Jul 2015 15:16:38 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Procambarus crayfish control: Draining the waterway No evidence was captured on the effect of draining the waterway as a control tool for Procambarus crayfish. '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%2F1034https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1034Fri, 03 Jul 2015 15:16:57 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Procambarus crayfish control: Remove the crayfish by electrofishing No evidence was captured on the effect of electrofishing as a control tool for Procambarus crayfish. '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%2F1035https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1035Fri, 03 Jul 2015 15:17:11 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Procambarus crayfish control: Add chemicals to the water One replicated, controlled study in Italy found that red swamp crayfish could be killed using the natural pyrethrum Pyblast at a concentration of 0.05 mg/l, but that application to drained crayfish burrows was not effective. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1036https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1036Fri, 03 Jul 2015 15:17:25 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Procambarus crayfish control: Create barriers A before-and-after study conducted between 2007 and 2010 in Spain found that the use of concrete dams across a stream, specifically designed with features to prevent red swamp crayfish from crawling over them, were effective at containing spread of the population upstream. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1037https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1037Fri, 03 Jul 2015 15:18:00 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Procambarus crayfish control: Relocate vulnerable crayfish No evidence was captured for the effect of relocating native species as a management tool against the effects of Procambarus crayfish. '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%2F1038https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1038Fri, 03 Jul 2015 15:18:14 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: American bullfrog control: Biological control using native predators One replicated, controlled study conducted in Belgium found the introduction of the northern pike led to a strong decline in bullfrog tadpole numbers. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1039https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1039Fri, 03 Jul 2015 15:18:58 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: American bullfrog control: Biological control of co-occurring beneficial species No evidence was captured on the effects of removing co-occurring beneficial species on the control of American bullfrogs. '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%2F1040https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1040Fri, 03 Jul 2015 15:19:09 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: American bullfrog control: Habitat modification No evidence was captured on the effects of habitat modification on the control of American bullfrogs. '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%2F1041https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1041Fri, 03 Jul 2015 15:19:26 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: American bullfrog control: Draining ponds and altering the length of time for which the pond contains water No evidence was captured on the effects of draining ponds or altering the length of time for which ponds contain water on the control of American bullfrogs. '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%2F1042https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1042Fri, 03 Jul 2015 15:20:07 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: American bullfrog control: Pond destruction No evidence was captured on the effects of pond destruction on the control of American bullfrogs. '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%2F1043https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1043Fri, 03 Jul 2015 15:20:20 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: American bullfrog control: Fencing No evidence was captured on the effects of fencing on the control of American bullfrogs. '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%2F1044https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1044Fri, 03 Jul 2015 15:20:33 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: American bullfrog control: Direct removal of adults One replicated study in Belgium found catchability of adult bullfrogs in small shallow ponds using one double fyke net for 24 h to be very low. One small study in the USA found that bullfrog adults can be captured overnight in a single trap floating on the water surface. One replicated, controlled study in the USA found that bullfrog populations rapidly rebounded following intensive removal of the adults. One before-and-after study in France found a significant reduction in the number of recorded adults and juveniles following the shooting of metamorphosed individuals before reproduction, when carried out as part of a combination treatment. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1045https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1045Fri, 03 Jul 2015 15:20:46 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: American bullfrog control: Direct removal of juveniles One replicated study in Belgium found double fyke nets were effective in catching bullfrog tadpoles in small shallow ponds. One before-and-after study in France found a significant reduction in the number of recorded adults and juveniles following the removal of juveniles by trapping, when carried out as part of a combination treatment. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1046https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1046Fri, 03 Jul 2015 15:20:59 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: American bullfrog control: Collection of egg clutches Despite reference to removal of egg clutches in some studies using bilge pumps or nets, no evidence was captured on the effects of egg collection on American bullfrogs. '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%2F1047https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1047Fri, 03 Jul 2015 15:21:15 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: American bullfrog control: Application of a biocide One replicated, controlled study in the USA found a number of chemicals killed American bullfrogs, including caffeine (10% solution), chloroxylenol (5% solution), and a combined treatment of Permethrin (4.6% solution) and Rotenone (1% solution). Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1048https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1048Fri, 03 Jul 2015 15:21:26 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: American bullfrog control: Public education No evidence was captured on the effects of public education on the control of American bullfrogs. '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%2F1049https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1049Fri, 03 Jul 2015 15:21:38 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Brown and black bullheads: Application of a biocide A study in the UK reported that use of a piscicide containing rotenone achieved eradication of black bullhead. A study in the USA found that rotenone successfully eradicated black bullhead, but one of two ponds required two separate doses. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1050https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1050Wed, 07 Oct 2015 10:41:27 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Brown and black bullheads: Netting A replicated study from 1999-2000 in shallow interconnected ponds in a nature reserve in Belgium1 found that double fyke nets could be used to significantly reduce the population of brown bullhead measuring over 8cm Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1051https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1051Wed, 07 Oct 2015 10:51:53 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Brown and black bullheads: Biological control using native predators No evidence was found on the impact of native predators 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%2F1053https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1053Sun, 11 Oct 2015 20:12:08 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Red-eared terrapin: Direct removal of adults A replicated field study in Spain found that Aranzadi turtle traps were effective in trapping red-eared terrapins from a river but did not eradicate the population. A study in the British Virgin Islands found that using sein nets to trap adults and juveniles was not successful in eradicating the population. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1055https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1055Tue, 13 Oct 2015 11:56:26 +0100