Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use road closures One study evaluated the effects of using road closures on reptile populations. This study was in Canada. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One replicated study in Canada found that closed roads were not used more by Blanding’s turtles than unclosed roads. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3503https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3503Mon, 06 Dec 2021 17:53:46 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use signage to warn motorists about wildlife presence Five studies evaluated the effects of using signage to warn motorists of wildlife presence on reptile populations. Three studies were in the USA and one was in each of Dominica and Canada. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)   POPULATION RESPONSE (5 STUDIES) Survival (5 studies): One of two before-and-after studies (one replicated and controlled) in the USA found that installing road signs reduced road mortalities of massasaugas in autumn but not summer. The other study found that installing road signs did not reduce road mortalities of painted or Blanding’s turtles. Two before-and-after studies (one replicated) in Canada and the USA found that a combination of installing road signs with either fencing and tunnels or a hybrid nestbox-fencing barrier resulted in fewer road mortalities of massasaugas and diamondback terrapins. One before-and-after study in Dominica found that a combination of using road signs and running an awareness campaign resulted in fewer road mortalities of Antillean iguanas. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3524https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3524Tue, 07 Dec 2021 15:05:28 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use technology and reporting systems to avoid collisions We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of using technology and reporting systems to avoid collisions. ‘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%2F3535https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3535Tue, 07 Dec 2021 16:02:55 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use visual or acoustic deterrents to discourage reptiles from approaching vessels We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of using visual or acoustic deterrents to discourage reptiles from approaching vessels. ‘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%2F3536https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3536Tue, 07 Dec 2021 16:06:10 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use visual deterrents on fishing gear Two studies evaluated the effects of using visual deterrents on fishing gear on reptile populations. One study was off the coast of Mexico and one was in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Behaviour change (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in the USA found that shark-shaped and spherical deterrents had mixed effects on a range of captive loggerhead turtle behaviours. OTHER (1 STUDY) Unwanted catch: (1 study): One replicated, controlled study off the coast of Mexico found that gillnets with floating shark shapes attached to them caught fewer green turtles than unmodified nets. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3553https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3553Wed, 08 Dec 2021 12:30:30 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use non-offset hooks Two studies evaluated the effects of using non-offset hooks on reptile populations. One study was off the Pacific coast of Costa Rica and one was in the north-east Atlantic. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Survival (1 study): One replicated, controlled, paired study in the north-east Atlantic Ocean found that mortality of leatherback turtles was similar when caught with non-offset hooks or offset hooks. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (2 STUDIES) Unwanted catch (2 studies): One of two replicated, paired studies (including one controlled study) off the Pacific coast of Costa Rica and in the north-east Atlantic found that non-offset circle hooks caught a similar number of olive ridley and green turtles compared to offset circle hooks in a shallow-set longline fishery. The other study found that non-offset G-style circle hooks caught fewer leatherback and hard-shell turtles compared to offset Gt-style circle hooks or offset J-hooks in a longline swordfish fishery. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3571https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3571Wed, 08 Dec 2021 15:13:12 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use non-ringed hooks One study evaluated the effects of using non-ringed hooks on reptile populations. This study was in the Mediterranean. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (1 STUDY) Unwanted catch (1 study): One replicated, paired study in the Mediterranean found that when non-ringed circle hooks were used in a swordfish longline fishery fewer loggerhead turtles were caught compared to when ringed hooks were used. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3576https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3576Wed, 08 Dec 2021 15:18:56 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use larger hooks Two studies evaluated the effects of using larger hooks on reptile populations. One study was in the USA and one was in the Eastern Pacific Ocean. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One study in the USA of captive loggerhead turtles found that turtles were less likely to attempt to swallow larger circle hooks than smaller ones. OTHER (1 STUDY) Unwanted catch (1 study): One replicated study in the Eastern Pacific Ocean found that olive ridley turtles were less likely to be caught by swallowing larger hooks than smaller ones. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3578https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3578Wed, 08 Dec 2021 15:21:29 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use sinking lines instead of floating lines We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of using sinking lines instead of floating lines. ‘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%2F3606https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3606Thu, 09 Dec 2021 10:36:58 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use stiffened materials or increase tension of fishing gear We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of using stiffened materials or increasing tension of fishing gear. ‘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%2F3607https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3607Thu, 09 Dec 2021 10:39:10 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use lower profile gillnets with longer/no tie-downs We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of using lower profile gillnets with longer/no tie-downs. ‘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%2F3609https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3609Thu, 09 Dec 2021 10:42:43 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use low intensity lighting Four studies evaluated the effects of using low intensity lighting on reptile populations. Three studies were in the USA1-3 and one was in Malaysia4. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (4 STUDIES) Behaviour change (4 studies): One replicated, controlled study in the USA1 found that reducing the intensity of light sources did not improve loggerhead turtle hatchling seaward orientation. One replicated, site comparison study in Malaysia4 found that green turtle hatchlings in low and moderate ambient artificial light took more direct crawl routes to the sea than hatchlings released in high ambient artificial light. One replicated, controlled study in the USA3 found that in laboratory trials, loggerhead and green turtle hatchlings showed reduced preference for lower intensity light sources. One replicated, site comparison study in the USA2 found mixed effects of embedding streetlights in the road on seaward orientation of loggerhead turtle hatchlings compared to overhead lighting depending on shading by shrubs and weather and lunar phase. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3623https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3623Thu, 09 Dec 2021 13:34:46 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use smaller machinery to log forests We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using smaller machinery to log forests 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%2F3633https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3633Thu, 09 Dec 2021 14:48:35 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use patch retention harvesting instead of clearcutting We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using patch retention harvesting instead of clearcutting 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%2F3634https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3634Thu, 09 Dec 2021 14:49:49 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use shelterwood harvesting Two studies evaluated the effects of shelterwood harvesting on reptile populations. Both studies were in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after study in the USA found that shelterwood harvesting had mixed effects on reptile species richness compared to areas with no management. POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): One replicated, randomized study in the USA found that areas with shelterwood harvesting had a lower abundance of juvenile eastern box turtles than clearcut areas. One replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after study in the USA found that shelterwood harvesting had mixed effects on reptile abundance compared to areas with no management. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3636https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3636Thu, 09 Dec 2021 14:52:24 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use selective logging Three studies evaluated the effects of using selective logging in forests on reptile populations. One study was in each of Brazil, the USA and Mexico. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Mexico found that areas with low intensity selective logging tended to have similar reptile species richness compared to areas with high intensity selective logging. POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): One of two replicated, randomized, controlled studies (including one before-and-after study) in Brazil and the USA found that selective logging intensity had mixed effects on the abundance of three lizard species. The other study found that areas with selective logging had similar reptile abundance compared to areas with combined clearcutting and thinning. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3637https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3637Thu, 09 Dec 2021 14:57:16 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use signs and access restrictions to reduce disturbance One study evaluated the effects on reptile populations of using signs and access restrictions to reduce disturbance. This study was in Turkey. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Reproductive success (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in Turkey found that in an area with signs where sea turtle nests were fenced, nests had higher hatching success than nests from areas with no fencing or signs. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3642https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3642Thu, 09 Dec 2021 15:26:40 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use nest covers to protect against human disturbance Two studies evaluated the effects of using nest covers to protect against human disturbance on reptiles. One study was in the USA and one was in Greece. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Reproductive success (2 studies): One of two replicated, controlled studies (including one paired study) in the USA and Greece found that loggerhead turtle nests that were covered with cages had similar hatching success compared to nests that were not covered. The other study found mixed effects of cages on hatching success of loggerhead turtle nests. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3645https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3645Thu, 09 Dec 2021 15:32:25 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use prescribed burning: Forest, open woodland & savanna Twenty-eight studies evaluated the effects of using prescribed burning in forest, open woodland and savanna on reptile populations. Twenty-four studies were in the USA, three were in Australia and one was in Brazil. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (12 STUDIES) Community composition (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after study in the USA found that in areas with prescribed burning, reptile assemblages became similar to more pristine areas that had historically experienced frequent fires. Richness/diversity (11 studies): Seven studies (including two replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after studies) in the USA and Australia found that burned areas had similar reptile species richness compared to unburned areas. One of the studies also found that burned areas had higher reptile diversity than unburned areas. Two replicated studies (including one randomized, controlled study) in Australia and the USA found that reptile species richness remained similar with time since burning. One of two studies (including one replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after study) in the USA found that burned areas had higher combined reptile and amphibian species richness than unburned areas. The other study found that burned areas had similar combined reptile and amphibian species richness and diversity compared to unburned areas. POPULATION RESPONSE (26 STUDIES) Abundance (23 studies): Nine of 21 studies (including four replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after studies) in the USA and Australia found that burning had mixed effects on the abundance of reptiles, six-lined racerunners and western yellow-bellied racer snakes. Six studies found that burned areas had a higher abundance of reptiles, lizards, black racer snakes and more active gopher tortoise burrows compared to unburned areas. The other six studies found that burned areas had a similar abundance of reptiles, lizards and gopher tortoise burrows compared to unburned areas. One replicated, site comparison study in Australia found that reptile abundance increased with time since burning. One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the USA found that burning in different seasons had mixed effects on the abundance of reptiles. Survival (2 study): One of two studies (one site comparison and one controlled study) in the USA and Brazil found that Texas horned lizard survival was similar in burned and unburned areas. The other study found that burning had mixed effects on survival of an endemic lizard species. Condition (1 study): One site comparison study in the USA found that eastern fence lizards in recently burned areas ran faster than those from areas that were burned less recently or were unburned. BEHAVIOUR (2 STUDIES) Behaviour change (2 studies): One replicated, controlled, before and-after study in the USA found that burning affected overwintering habitat use by gopher tortoises. One replicated, controlled study in the USA found that in burned areas, black racer snakes had higher surface activity than in unburned areas. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3646https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3646Thu, 09 Dec 2021 15:38:33 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use irrigation systems Two studies evaluated the effects of using irrigation systems on reptile populations. Both studies were in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Reproductive success (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in the USA found that hatching success of Agassiz’s desert tortoises was similar in irrigated and non-irrigated enclosures. Survival (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in the USA found that survival of juvenile Agassiz’s desert tortoises was similar in irrigated and non-irrigated enclosures. Condition (2 studies): Two replicated, controlled studies (including one paired study) in the USA found that irrigating nests had mixed effects on growth of Agassiz’s desert tortoises and loggerhead turtles. One of the studies also found that loggerhead turtle hatchlings from nests that were irrigated were larger than those from non-irrigated nests. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3649https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3649Thu, 09 Dec 2021 15:53:32 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use prescribed burning: Grassland & shrubland Fourteen studies evaluated the effects of using prescribed burning in grassland and shrubland on reptile populations. Seven studies were in the USA, four were in Australia and one was in each of South Africa, Argentina and France. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (6 STUDIES) Community composition (1 study): One replicated, before-and-after study in Australia found that reptile species composition was different before and immediately after burning in three grass types and remained different after vegetation grew back in one of three grass types. Richness/diversity (5 studies): Two of three studies (including one replicated, controlled, before-and-after study) in South Africa, Argentina and the USA found that areas with annual burning had similar reptile species richness and diversity compared to unburned areas or that richness was similar across areas with a range of burn frequencies. The other study found that burned areas had higher reptile species richness than unburned areas. One replicated, site comparison study in Australia found that areas burned 1–4 years earlier had lower reptile species richness than areas burned 11–15 years earlier. One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that areas with different burn frequencies had similar reptile species richness and diversity. POPULATION RESPONSE (11 STUDIES) Abundance (11 studies): Three of six studies (including three replicated, randomized, controlled studies) in the USA and Argentina found that burned areas had a similar abundance of lizards, snakes and lizards and combined reptiles and amphibians compared to unburned areas. Two studies found that burning had mixed effects on the abundance of different reptile species and western yellow-bellied racer snakes.The other study found that burned areas had more eastern massasauga rattlesnakes than unburned areas. One replicated, site comparison study in Australia found that areas burned 1–4 years earlier had a lower abundance of reptiles than areas burned 11–15 years earlier. One controlled before-and-after study in the USA found that a burned area had a similar number of four snake species compared to when the area was managed by mowing. One site comparison study in France found that one reptile species was less abundant in areas managed by burning than areas grazed by sheep, whereas the abundance of five other species was similar in all areas. One replicated, before-and-after study in Australia found that immediately after burning, the abundance of reptiles was lower than before burning, but was similar after vegetation grew back. One replicated, randomized, site comparison study in Australia found that small-scale patch burning was associated with increased abundance of sand goanna burrows. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled study in Australia found that some rocky outcrops that were burned were recolonized by pink-tailed worm-lizards. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3651https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3651Thu, 09 Dec 2021 17:11:07 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use prescribed burning: Wetland Two studies evaluated the effects of using prescribed burning in wetlands on reptile populations. One study was in each of the USA and Australia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): One of two controlled studies (including one replicated, randomized study) in the USA and Australia found mixed effects of using prescribed burning in wetlands on the abundance of western yellow-bellied racer snakes. The other study found that found that burned areas had a similar abundance of reptiles and amphibians compared to unburned areas, but that delicate skinks were less abundant in burned areas. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3652https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3652Thu, 09 Dec 2021 17:44:45 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use prescribed burning in combination with vegetation cutting Ten studies evaluated the effects of using prescribed burning in combination with vegetation cutting on reptile populations. Eight studies were in the USA and two were in Australia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (5 STUDIES) Community composition (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after study in the USA found that cutting vegetation prior to burning resulted in reptile assemblages becoming similar to areas with more pristine habitat and a history of frequent fires. Richness/diversity (5 studies): Four of five replicated studies (including three randomized, controlled studies) in Australia and the USA found that areas managed by burning in combination with vegetation cutting had similar reptile species richness compared to either burning only, cutting only or areas that were unmanaged. The other study found that areas of woodland managed by burning and vegetation thinning had higher reptile species richness than unmanaged areas. POPULATION RESPONSE (9 STUDIES) Abundance (9 studies): Four of nine replicated studies (including five randomized, controlled studies) in the USA and Australia found that areas that were managed by burning in combination with vegetation cutting had a higher abundance of overall reptiles, lizards, eastern fence lizards and five-lined skinks compared to areas that were either only burned or unmanaged. Three studies found a similar abundance of overall reptiles, snakes and turtles compared to either burning only, cutting only or unmanaged. Four studies found mixed effects of burning in combination with vegetation cutting on the abundance of reptiles and six-lined racerunners. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3655https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3655Fri, 10 Dec 2021 09:25:56 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use prescribed burning in combination with herbicide application Five studies evaluated the effects of using prescribed burning in combination with herbicide application on reptile populations. Four studies were in the USA and one was in Australia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Community composition (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after study in the USA found that reptile community composition responded differently to herbicide treatment followed by burning or burning alone when compared to unburned areas or areas of more pristine habitat. Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after study in the USA found that areas that were burned in combination with herbicide application had similar combined reptile and amphibian species richness and diversity compared to areas that were managed by burning or herbicide application alone or left unmanaged. POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Abundance (3 studies): Two of three replicated, randomized, controlled studies (including two before-and-after studies) in the USA found mixed effects of burning in combination with herbicide application on the abundance of reptiles and six-lined racerunners. The other study found that areas that were burned in combination with herbicide application had a similar abundance of reptiles compared to areas that were managed by burning or herbicide application alone or left unmanaged. The study also found that the abundance of eastern fence lizards was higher in the first year after burning and herbicide application compared to unmanaged areas, but similar for the next six years. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled study in Australia found that some rocky outcrops that were burned in combination with herbicide application were recolonized by pink-tailed worm-lizards. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3656https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3656Fri, 10 Dec 2021 10:07:33 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use prescribed burning in combination with grazing Five studies evaluated the effects of using prescribed burning in combination with grazing on reptile populations. Two studies were in the USA, two were in Australia and one was in Argentina. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (3 studies): One of two studies (including one site comparison study and one replicated, controlled, before-and-after study) in Argentina and the USA found that areas that were burned in combination with grazing had similar reptile species richness and diversity compared to areas not burned or grazed for 3–12 years. The other study found that areas that were burned in combination with grazing had higher species richness than lightly grazed or unmanaged areas and similar richness compared to areas that were burned only. One before-and-after study in the USA found that an area with annual prescribed burning combined with intensive early-season grazing had similar reptile species richness compared to when it was managed by alternate year prescribed burning with season-long grazing. POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Abundance (3 studies): Two site comparison studies (including one replicated study) in Australia and Argentina found that that burning in combination with grazing had mixed effects on the abundance of reptile species. One replicated, randomized, controlled study in Australia found that areas where invasive para grass was removed by burning in combination with grazing had similar overall reptile and amphibian abundance compared to areas that were only burned or unmanaged. The study also found that the abundance of delicate skinks was lower in areas that were burned and grazed compared to those that were unmanaged. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3657https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3657Fri, 10 Dec 2021 10:27:12 +0000
What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 21

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.


Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape ProgrammeRed List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Mauritian Wildlife Supporting Conservation Leaders
Sustainability Dashboard National Biodiversity Network Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Bat Conservation InternationalPeople trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust