Conservation Evidence: Evidence Data

Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove residential or commercial development from peatlands We found no studies that evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of removing residential or commercial development from peatlands. ‘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%2F1719https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1719Mon, 13 Nov 2017 15:15:53 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Retain/create habitat corridors in developed areas We found no studies that evaluated the effects on peatland vegetation, in habitat patches or within corridors, of maintaining or creating habitat corridors in developed areas. ‘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%2F1720https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1720Mon, 13 Nov 2017 15:22:51 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement ‘mosaic management’ of agriculture We found no studies that evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of implementing mosaic management in agricultural systems. ‘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%2F1729https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1729Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:08:09 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use barriers to keep livestock off ungrazed peatlands We found no studies that evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of using barriers to keep livestock off peatlands that have never (or not recently) been grazed. ‘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%2F1733https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1733Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:20:39 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Change type of livestock We found no studies that evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of changing livestock type. ‘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%2F1736https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1736Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:21:54 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Change season/timing of livestock grazing We found no studies that evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of changing the season or timing of livestock grazing. ‘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%2F1737https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1737Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:22:33 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Retain/create habitat corridors in areas of energy production or mining We found no studies that evaluated the effects on peatland vegetation, in habitat patches or within corridors, of retaining/creating habitat corridors in areas of energy production or mining. ‘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%2F1739https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1739Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:23:11 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Backfill trenches dug for pipelines We found no studies that evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of backfilling pipeline trenches. ‘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%2F1740https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1740Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:24:47 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Retain/create habitat corridors across service corridors We found no studies that evaluated the effects on peatland vegetation, in habitat patches or within corridors, of retaining/creating habitat corridors across service corridors. ‘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%2F1742https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1742Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:25:28 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use herbicide to control problematic plants One study evaluated the effects on peatland vegetation of using herbicide to control problematic plants. The study was in fens. Plant community composition (1 study): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in fens in the USA found that applying herbicide to shrubs (along with other interventions) changed the overall plant community composition. Tree/shrub cover (1 study): The same study found that applying herbicide to shrubs (along with other interventions) could not prevent increases in shrub cover over time. Overall plant richness/diversity (1 study): The same study found that applying herbicide to shrubs (along with other interventions) prevented increases in plant species richness. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1776https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1776Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:44:30 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Introduce an organism to control problematic plants One study evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of introducing an organism (other than large vertebrate grazers) to control problematic plants. The study was in a fen meadow. Plant community composition (1 study): One controlled, before-and-after study in a fen meadow in Belgium found that introducing a parasitic plant altered the overall plant community composition. Vegetation cover (1 study): The same study found that introducing a parasitic plant reduced cover of the dominant sedge but increased moss cover. Overall plant richness/diversity (1 study): The same study found that introducing a parasitic plant increased overall plant species richness. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1777https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1777Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:44:50 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Clean waste water before it enters the environment One study evaluated the effect, on peatland vegetation, of cleaning waste water before it enters the environment. The study was in a fen. Characteristic plants (1 study): One study in a floating fen in the Netherlands found that after input water began to be cleaned (along with other interventions to reduce pollution), cover of mosses characteristic of low nutrient levels increased. Vegetation structure (1 study): The same study found that after input water began to be cleaned (along with other interventions to reduce pollution), vascular plant biomass decreased. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1778https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1778Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:13:46 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Slow down input water to allow more time for pollutants to be removed One study evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of slowing down input water to allow more time for pollutants to be removed. The study was in a fen. Characteristic plants (1 study): One before-and-after study in a floating fen in the Netherlands found that after input water was rerouted on a longer path (along with other interventions to reduce pollution), cover of mosses characteristic of low nutrient levels increased. Vegetation structure (1 study): The same study found that after input water was rerouted on a longer path (along with other interventions to reduce pollution), vascular plant biomass decreased. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1780https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1780Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:14:21 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove pollutants from waste gases before they enter the environment One study evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of removing pollutants from waste gases before release into the environment. The study was in bogs. Plant richness/diversity (1 study): One before-and-after study in bogs in Estonia reported that following installation of dust filters in industrial plants (along with a general reduction in emissions), the number of Sphagnum moss species increased but the total number of plant species decreased. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1789https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1789Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:18:07 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Add lime to reduce acidity and/or increase fertility One study evaluated the effects of liming (without planting) on peatland vegetation. The study was in a fen meadow. N.B. Liming is considered in different contexts here and here. Vegetation structure (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in a fen meadow in the Netherlands found that liming increased overall vegetation biomass (mostly grass). Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1790https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1790Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:18:28 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Pay landowners to protect peatlands One study evaluated the effects on peatland habitats of paying landowners to protect them. The study was of bogs. Peatland habitat (1 study): One review from reported that agri-environment schemes in the UK had mixed effects on bogs, protecting the area of bog habitat in three of six cases. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1799https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1799Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:27:33 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Increase ‘on-the-ground’ protection (e.g. rangers) One study evaluated the effects on peatland habitats of increasing ‘on-the-ground’ protection. The study was in tropical peat swamps. Behaviour change (1 study): One before-and-after study in a peat swamp forest in Indonesia reported that the number of illegal sawmills decreased over two years of anti-logging patrols. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1800https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1800Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:27:48 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reprofile/relandscape peatland (without planting) One study evaluated the effects of reprofiling/relandscaping peatlands (without planting) on peatland vegetation. The study was in degraded bogs (being restored as fens). Plant community composition (1 study): One site comparison study in Canada reported that after five years, reprofiled (and rewetted) bogs contained a different plant community to nearby natural fens. Vegetation cover (1 study): The same study reported that after five years, reprofiled (and rewetted) bogs had lower vegetation cover (Sphagnum moss, other moss and vascular plants) than nearby natural fens. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1807https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1807Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:30:29 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Stabilize peatland surface to help plants colonize One study evaluated the effects of stabilizing the peatland surface (without planting) on peatland vegetation. The study was in a bog. Vegetation cover (1 study): One controlled, before-and-after study in a bog in the UK found that pegging coconut fibre rolls onto almost-bare peat did not affect the development of vegetation cover (total, mosses, shrubs or cottongrasses). Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1815https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1815Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:43:30 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Build artificial bird perches to encourage seed dispersal One study evaluated the effects on peatland vegetation of building artificial bird perches. The study was in a tropical peat swamp. Vegetation cover (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled study in a peat swamp forest in Indonesia found that artificial bird perches had no significant effect on seedling abundance. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1817https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1817Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:44:19 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Irrigate peatland (before/after planting) One study evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of irrigating areas planted with peatland plants. The study was in a bog. Cover (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled, before-and-after study in a bog in Canada found that irrigation increased the number of Sphagnum moss shoots present 1–2 growing seasons after sowing Sphagnum fragments. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1832https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1832Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:52:45 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Add fresh peat to peatland (before planting) One study evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of adding fresh peat before planting peatland plants. The study was in a bog. Cover (1 study): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in a bog New Zealand reported that plots amended with fine peat supported higher cover of two sown plant species than the original (tilled) bog surface. However, for one species fertilization cancelled out this effect. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1837https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1837Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:54:45 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove vegetation that could compete with planted peatland vegetation One study evaluated the effects of removing competing plants to aid planted peatland vegetation. The study was in a bog. Survival (1 study): One controlled study in a bog in the UK reported that some Sphagnum moss survived when sown (in gel beads) into a plot where purple moor grass had previously been cut, but no moss survived in a plot where grass had not been cut. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1840https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1840Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:55:34 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Raise awareness amongst the public (general) One study evaluated the effects of interventions to raise general public awareness about peatlands on knowledge, behaviour, peatland habitats or peatland vegetation. The study reported effects on unspecified peatlands. Behaviour change (1 study): One before-and-after study in the UK reported that following awareness-raising activities, the percentage of the public buying peat-free compost increased. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1844https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1844Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:57:18 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Exclude wild herbivores using physical barriers One study evaluated the effects on peatland vegetation of physically excluding wild herbivores. The study was in a fen meadow. Vegetation cover (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled study in a fen meadow in Poland reported that the effect of boar- and deer exclusion on vascular plant and moss cover depended on other treatments applied to plots. Vegetation structure (1 study): The same study reported that the effect of boar- and deer exclusion on total vegetation biomass depended on other treatments applied to plots. Overall plant richness/diversity (1 study): The same study reported that the effect of boar- and deer exclusion on plant species richness depended on other treatments applied to plots. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1860https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1860Mon, 11 Dec 2017 15:07:26 +0000