Conservation Evidence: Evidence Data

Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create suitable habitats to offset habitat lost within development footprint We found no studies that evaluated the effects of creating suitable habitats to offset habitat lost within a development footprint on reptile 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%2F3480https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3480Fri, 03 Dec 2021 12:00:55 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create uncultivated margins around arable or pasture fields Two studies evaluated the effects of creating uncultivated margins around arable or pasture fields on reptile populations. One study was in Australia and one was in the UK. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Australia found that revegetated linear strips had similar reptile species richness compared to cleared and remnant strips. The study also found that revegetated strips and patches had similar reptile species richness. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Australia found that revegetated linear strips had similar reptile abundance compared to cleared and remnant strips. The study also found that revegetated strips and patches had similar reptile abundance. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One replicated study in the UK found that uncultivated field margins were used by slow worms, common lizards and grass snakes, but not by adders. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3518https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3518Tue, 07 Dec 2021 14:37:16 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Diversify ground vegetation and canopy structure in the habitat around woody crops Two studies evaluated the effects of diversifying ground vegetation and canopy structure in the habitat around woody crops on reptile populations. One study was in Puerto Rico and the other was in Spain. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, paired, site comparison study in Spain found that olive groves with natural ground cover had higher reptile species richness and diversity than those with bare ground, but groves planted with a single species as ground cover had similar richness and diversity as those with bare ground. POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): One replicated, site comparison study in Puerto Rico found that two of three lizard species were less abundant in shade-grown coffee plantations than in sun-grown plantations. One replicated, paired, site comparison study in Spain found that olive groves with ground cover had more reptiles than groves with bare ground. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3526https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3526Tue, 07 Dec 2021 15:18:17 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Enforce regulations to prevent trafficking and trade of reptiles We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of enforcing regulations to prevent trafficking and trade of reptiles. ‘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%2F3540https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3540Tue, 07 Dec 2021 16:50:25 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Deploy fishing gear at different depths Three studies evaluated the effects of deploying fishing gear at different depths on reptile populations. One study was in each of Canada, off the coast of Mexico and the Atlantic. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Survival (1 study): One replicated, randomized, paired study in Canada found that no turtles died in floated nets, but some died in submerged nets. Condition (1 study): One replicated, randomized, paired study in Canada found that turtles caught in floated nets were less at risk of drowning than those caught in submerged nets. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (3 STUDIES) Unwanted catch (3 studies): Two of three studies (including two replicated studies) in Canada, Mexico and the Atlantic found that bottom-set fishing nets with fewer buoys caught fewer sea turtles than standard nets or that fewer loggerhead turtles were caught when longline hooks were set below 22 m deep, but the number of leatherback turtles caught was unaffected by hook depth. The other study found that floated and submerged nets caught a similar number of turtle species. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3547https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3547Wed, 08 Dec 2021 09:29:51 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create walls or barriers to exclude pollutants We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of creating walls or barriers to exclude pollutants. ‘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%2F3570https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3570Wed, 08 Dec 2021 15:12:06 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Contain or recover oil following spills We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of containing or recovering oil following spills. ‘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%2F3574https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3574Wed, 08 Dec 2021 15:15:38 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Enforce compliance to lighting regulations We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of enforcing compliance to lighting regulations. ‘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%2F3597https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3597Wed, 08 Dec 2021 16:28:16 +0000Collected 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: Create fire breaks One study evaluated the effects of creating fire breaks on reptile populations. This study was in Australia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in Australia found that in areas with fire suppression measures combined with fences to exclude predators, reptile abundance increased over time. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3658https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3658Fri, 10 Dec 2021 10:45:04 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Dispose of waste from pet reptile enclosures carefully to prevent spread of disease We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of disposing of waste from pet reptile enclosures carefully to prevent spread of disease. ‘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%2F3701https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3701Fri, 10 Dec 2021 19:00:49 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Control ectoparasites in wild reptile populations One study evaluated the effects on reptile populations of controlling ectoparasites in wild reptile populations. This study was in New Zealand. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Reproductive success (1 study): One controlled study in New Zealand found that McCann’s skinks treated for mites had more successful pregnancies and produced more viable offspring than untreated skinks. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3704https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3704Fri, 10 Dec 2021 19:06:39 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Develop/implement species recovery plans One study evaluated the effects of developing/implementing species recovery plans on reptile populations. This study was in Australia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (1 STUDY) Conservation status (1 study): One controlled, before-and-after, paired study in Australia found that the chance of a species’ conservation status improving or being stable was similar for those with a recovery plan (including three reptile species) and those without a plan (including three reptile species). Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3707https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3707Mon, 13 Dec 2021 11:13:35 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Disturb soil/sediment surface Two studies evaluated the effects of disturbing the soil/sediment surface on reptile populations. One study was in Sweden and the other was in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in Sweden found that after sand patches were created by soil scarification within clearings created by tree felling, sand lizards colonized, abundance then declined, but then increased once more, larger clearings were created. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One randomized study in the USA found that tilled areas were used more frequently by Blanding’s turtles for nesting than mown or weeded areas. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3717https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3717Mon, 13 Dec 2021 15:28:14 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create artificial refuges, hibernacula and aestivation sites Eleven studies evaluated the effects of creating artificial refuges, hibernacula and aestivation sites on reptile populations. Three studies were in each of the UK and Australia, two were in New Zealand and one was in each of the USA, Spain and Italy. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One controlled, before-and-after study in Spain found that areas with refuge logs had higher reptile species richness than areas without refuges. POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Abundance (1 study): One controlled, before-and-after study in Spain found that areas with refuge logs had a higher abundance of reptiles than areas without refuges. Reproductive success (1 study): One study in the UK found that after translocating adders to an artificial hibernaculum, there was evidence of successful reproduction. Survival (1 study): One randomized, controlled, before-and-after study in New Zealand found that in areas with artificial refuges, survival of McCann’s skinks was similar to areas without refuges. BEHAVIOUR (9 STUDIES) Use (9 studies): Nine studies (including one replicated, controlled study and one randomized, controlled study) in the USA, the UK, Australia, New Zealand and Italy found that artificial refuges were used by reptiles, common lizards, adders, common geckos, species of skinks, and by an ocellated lizard to lay a clutch of eggs. Four of the studies also found that some reptiles showed a preference for refuges with certain designs or construction materials. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3720https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3720Mon, 13 Dec 2021 16:36:45 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create artificial burrows Six studies evaluated the effects of creating artificial burrows on reptile populations. Five studies were in Australia and one was in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (1 study): One controlled, before-and-after study in Australia found that areas with artificial burrows had more pygmy blue tongue lizards than areas with no artificial burrows Reproductive success (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in Australia found that female pygmy bluetongue lizards using artificial burrows produced larger offspring than those using natural burrows. Condition (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in Australia found that female pygmy bluetongue lizards using artificial burrows had better body condition than those using natural burrows. BEHAVIOUR (5 STUDIES) Use (4 studies): Three replicated studies (including one controlled study) in Australia found that artificial burrows were used by resident and translocated pygmy bluetongue lizards. One of the studies also found that pygmy bluetongue lizards preferred artificial burrows with a chamber than burrows with no chamber. One replicated study in the USA found that providing artificial burrows for translocated gopher tortoises resulted in more tortoises settling successfully in the release area. Behaviour change (1 study): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in Australia found that translocated pygmy blue tongue lizards used artificial burrows, and supplementary food affected the amount of time they spend in bare ground areasCollected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3721https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3721Mon, 13 Dec 2021 17:02:44 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create or restore ponds Four studies evaluated the effects of creating or restoring ponds on reptile populations. Two studies were in the USA and one was in each of Austria and China. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (4 STUDIES) Use (4 studies): Four studies (including one replicated and one before-and-after study) in Austria, the USA and China reported that following the creation of ponds, in one case 30–60 years after pond creation, or restoration of a river island that included creation of ponds grass snakes and sand lizards were found on the island, and ponds were occupied by mangrove salt marsh snakaes, common snapping turtles and midland painted turtles and Chinese alligators. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3730https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3730Tue, 14 Dec 2021 09:22:24 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create or restore rock outcrops Five studies evaluated the effects of creating or restoring rock outcrops on reptile populations. All five studies were in Australia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, paired sites, controlled study in Australia found that areas restored with artificial rocks had a higher abundance of adult velvet geckos and similar numbers of juveniles compared to unrestored areas. Survival (1 study): One replicated, paired sites, controlled study in Australia found that in areas restored with artificial rocks, juvenile velvet geckos had higher survival rates than in unrestored areas. BEHAVIOUR (4 STUDIES) Use (4 studies): One replicated, randomized, controlled study in Australia found that some restored rocky outcrops were recolonized by pink-tailed worm-lizards. One replicated, controlled study in Australia found that constructed rock outcrops were used by two snake and six lizard species at least as often as natural outcrops. Two replicated studies (including one randomized study) in Australia found that artificial rock outcrops were used by two lizard and one snake species and six lizard and two snake species. One study also found that unshaded artificial rocks were used more frequently by velvet geckos than shaded ones. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3732https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3732Tue, 14 Dec 2021 09:39:06 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create or restore grasslands Four studies evaluated the effects of creating or restoring grasslands on reptile populations. One study was in each of South Africa, China, Australia and the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (2 studies): One replicated, controlled study in Mongolia found that areas of restored grassland had similar species richness compared to unrestored areas. One replicated, site comparison study in South Africa found that an area of restored grassland had lower species richness than natural grassland in three of four comparisons. POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Abundance (3 studies): One of two replicated, controlled studies (including one paired study) in Mongolia and the USA found that areas of restored grassland had higher lizard abundance than unrestored areas. The other study found that areas of restored grassland had fewer snakes than unrestored areas. One replicated, site comparison study in South Africa found that an area of restored grassland had a similar abundance of reptiles compared to two areas of natural grassland. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled study in Australia found that some areas of restored grassland and rocky outcrops were recolonized by pink-tailed worm-lizards. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3737https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3737Tue, 14 Dec 2021 10:05:24 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create or restore savannas One study evaluated the effects of creating or restoring savannas on reptile populations. This study was in Australia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One before-and-after study in Australia found that reptile species richness was higher following restoration of savanna-like habitat on a golf course. POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3739https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3739Tue, 14 Dec 2021 10:15:59 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create or restore forests Six studies evaluated the effects of creating or restoring forests on reptile populations. Three studies were in the USA, two were in Australia and one was in Mexico. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (3 studies): One of two replicated studies (including one randomized, controlled study) in the USA and Australia found that restored and natural riparian forest had similar reptile species richness. The other study found that restored forest areas had higher reptile species richness than remnant forest areas. One replicated, site comparison study in Australia found that the type of restoration had mixed effects on reptile species richness in tropical and subtropical areas. POPULATION RESPONSE (5 STUDIES) Abundance (5 studies): Two of three replicated studies (including two controlled, before-and-after studies) in the USA and Mexico found that areas of restored forest had similar abundances of snakes and six lizard species as unrestored areas. The other study found that restoring forest stands had mixed effects on the abundance of reptiles. One replicated, site comparison study in Australia found that areas with different restoration types had similar reptile abundance in tropical and subtropical areas. One replicated, randomized, controlled study in Australia found that restored forest areas had higher reptile abundance than remnant forest areas. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3749https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3749Tue, 14 Dec 2021 13:15:47 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create or restore shrubland One study evaluated the effects of creating or restoring shrubland on reptile populations. This study was in Mexico. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in Mexico found that areas of restored shrubland had similar reptile and amphibian species richness compared to areas that were not restored. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in Mexico found that areas of restored shrubland had a higher abundance of lizards than areas that were not restored. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3751https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3751Tue, 14 Dec 2021 13:28:55 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create or restore waterways Two studies evaluated the effects of creating or restoring waterways on reptile populations. Both studies were in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Community composition (1 study): One site comparison study in the USA found that restored and pristine streams had similar turtle community composition. POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): One site comparison study in the USA found that restored and pristine streams had a similar abundance of turtles. One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that creating new waterways by redirecting flows during forest restoration had mixed effects of reptile abundance. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3754https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3754Tue, 14 Dec 2021 13:37:31 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create or restore wetlands Seven studies evaluated the effects of creating or restoring wetlands on reptile populations. Six studies were in the USA and one was in Kenya. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (3 studies): One before-and-after, site comparison study in the USA found that reptile species richness and diversity tended to be lower in a restored wetland compared to an undisturbed wetland. One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that created, restored, enhanced and natural wetlands had similar combined reptile and amphibian species richness. One site comparison study in the USA found that created wetlands and adjacent natural forest had similar reptile species richness and diversity. POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Reproductive success (2 studies): One site comparison study in the USA found that a created wetland was used by snapping turtles for egg laying. One before-and-after, site comparison study in the USA found that in a restored wetland, 16 snake, six lizard and eight turtle species successfully reproduced. BEHAVIOUR (4 STUDIES) Use (4 studies): One site comparison study and three before-and-after studies (including one replicated study) in the USA and Kenya found that created or restored wetlands were used by black rat snakes and snapping turtles, turtles, lizards, green grass snakes and terrapins, six or 18 reptile species. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3755https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3755Tue, 14 Dec 2021 13:41:45 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create artificial nests or nesting sites Nine studies evaluated the effects of creating artificial nests or nesting sites on reptile populations. Three studies were in the USA and one study was in each of the Galápagos, Spain, China, Reunion Island, Canada and Jamaica. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (6 STUDIES) Reproductive success (6 studies): Two studies (including one before-and-after study) on Reunion Island and Jamaica found that the number of Reunion day gecko eggs and Jamaican iguana hatchlings at artificial nesting sites increased over time. One of two replicated, controlled studies in Canada and the USA found that hatching success of eggs from four species of freshwater turtle moved to artificial nest sites was higher than for eggs left in natural sites. The other study found that hatching success of diamondback terrapin nests in artificial nest sites compared to natural sites varied depending on the substrate used. One study in Spain found that eggs laid in an artificial nest by an Iberian wall lizard hatched and those placed in artificial nests had high hatching success. One replicated study in the USA found that fewer diamondback terrapin nests were predated in artificial nesting mounds protected with an electric wire than in mounds with no wire. BEHAVIOUR (8 STUDIES) Use (8 studies): Four of seven studies (including one replicated, controlled study) in the Galápagos, Spain, Reunion Island, Canada, the USA and Jamaica found that artificial nest sites were used by captive Galápagos giant tortoises, Iberian wall lizards, four species of freshwater turtle and diamondback terrapins. Two studies found that use of artificial nest sites increased over time for Reunion day geckos and Jamaican iguanas. The other study found that artificial nest sites were used infrequently by northern map turtles. One study in China found that artificial nesting materials were used by some Chinese alligators. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3802https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3802Mon, 20 Dec 2021 10:04:37 +0000