Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Recycle or repurpose fluids used in the drilling process We found no studies that evaluated the effects of recycling or repurposing fluids used in the drilling process on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2069https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2069Mon, 21 Oct 2019 13:51:26 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide additional moorings to reduce anchoring We found no studies that evaluated the effects of providing additional moorings to reduce anchoring on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2091https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2091Mon, 21 Oct 2019 15:21:08 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Periodically move and relocate moorings We found no studies that evaluated the effects of periodically moving and relocating moorings on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2093https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2093Mon, 21 Oct 2019 15:22:28 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reduce ships/boats/vessels speed limits We found no studies that evaluated the effects of reducing ships/boats/vessels speed limits on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2095https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2095Mon, 21 Oct 2019 15:24:31 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Purchase fishing permits and/or vessels from fishers We found no studies that evaluated the effects of purchasing fishing permits and/or vessels from fishers on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2114https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2114Tue, 22 Oct 2019 09:44:16 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reduce the number or modify the arrangement of tickler chains/chain mats on trawl nets Three studies examined the effects of reducing the number or modifying the arrangement of tickler chains/chain mats on subtidal benthic invertebrates. All studies were in the North Sea (Germany and Netherlands).   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Overall abundance (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled study in the North Sea found that using a beam trawl with a chain mat caused lower mortality of benthic invertebrates in the trawl tracks compared to using a beam trawl with tickler chains. Unwanted catch abundance (2 studies): One of two replicated, paired, controlled studies in the North Sea found that all three modified parallel tickler chain arrangements reduced the combined amount of non-commercial unwanted invertebrate and fish catch compared to unmodified trawl nets, but the other found that none of three modified parabolic tickler chain arrangements reduced it. OTHER (2 STUDIES) Commercial catch abundance (2 studies): One of two replicated, paired, controlled studies in the North Sea found that three modified parabolic tickler chain arrangements caught similar amounts of commercial species to unmodified nets, but the other found that three modified parallel tickler chain arrangements caught lower amounts. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2140https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2140Tue, 22 Oct 2019 11:02:53 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Release live unwanted catch first before handling commercial species We found no studies that evaluated the effects of releasing live unwanted catch first before handling commercial species on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2150https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2150Tue, 22 Oct 2019 11:21:55 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reduce and/or eradicate aquaculture escapees in the wild We found no studies that evaluated the effects of reducing and/or eradicating aquaculture escapees in the wild on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2161https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2161Tue, 22 Oct 2019 12:12:10 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Prevent the attachment of biofouling organisms/species in aquaculture We found no studies that evaluated the effects of preventing the attachment of biofouling organisms/species in aquaculture on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2162https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2162Tue, 22 Oct 2019 12:12:52 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove biofouling organisms/species in aquaculture We found no studies that evaluated the effects of removing biofouling organisms/species in aquaculture on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2163https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2163Tue, 22 Oct 2019 12:13:36 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reduce aquaculture stocking densities We found no studies that evaluated the effects of reducing aquaculture stocking densities on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2186https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2186Tue, 22 Oct 2019 12:55:51 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reduce the amount of pesticides used in aquaculture systems We found no studies that evaluated the effects of reducing the amount of pesticides used in aquaculture systems on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2193https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2193Tue, 22 Oct 2019 13:05:17 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reduce the amount of antibiotics used in aquaculture systems We found no studies that evaluated the effects of reducing the amount of antibiotics used in aquaculture systems on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2194https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2194Tue, 22 Oct 2019 13:06:02 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Regulate the use, dosage and disposal of agrichemicals We found no studies that evaluated the effects of regulating the use, dosage and disposal of agrichemicals on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2198https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2198Tue, 22 Oct 2019 13:09:55 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Recover lost fishing gear We found no studies that evaluated the effects of recovering lost fishing gear on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2206https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2206Tue, 22 Oct 2019 13:16:34 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reduce underwater noise (other than sonar) We found no studies that evaluated the effects of reducing underwater noise on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2209https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2209Tue, 22 Oct 2019 13:20:54 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove and clean-up shoreline waste disposal sites One study examined the effects of removing and cleaning-up shoreline waste disposal sites on subtidal benthic invertebrates. The study was in the Southern Ocean (Antarctica).   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Overall community composition (1 study): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in the Southern Ocean found that after removing and cleaning-up a disused waste disposal site, invertebrate community composition changed, and no further negative impacts were detected, but communities remained different to natural sites. Overall richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in the Southern Ocean found that after removing and cleaning-up a disused waste disposal site, invertebrate species richness did not change over time and remained different to that of natural sites, but no further negative impacts were detected. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2215https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2215Tue, 22 Oct 2019 13:32:05 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Promote natural carbon sequestration species and/or habitats We found no studies that evaluated the effects of promoting natural carbon sequestration species and/or habitats on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2221https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2221Tue, 22 Oct 2019 13:38:01 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Refill disused borrow pits One study examined the effects of refilling disused borrow pits on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations. The study was in Barnegat Bay estuary (USA).   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Overall richness/diversity (1 study): One before-and-after, site comparison study in Barnegat Bay estuary found that overall invertebrate species richness and diversity increased at a disused borrow pit after being refilled with sediments but remained lower than at a natural non-dredged site. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Overall abundance (1 study): One before-and-after, site comparison study in Barnegat Bay estuary found that overall invertebrate abundance increased at a disused borrow pit after being refilled with sediments but remained lower than at a natural non-dredged site. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2251https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2251Wed, 23 Oct 2019 09:51:36 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide artificial shelters Five studies examined the effects of providing artificial shelters on subtidal benthic invertebrates. Three studies were in the Caribbean Sea (Mexico); one in Florida Bay and one in the Florida Keys (USA).   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Lobster abundance (2 studies): Two replicated, controlled, before-and-after studies in the Caribbean Sea found that abundance of lobsters either increased in plots with artificial shelters but not in plots without, or increased in all plots but more so in plots with artificial shelters than those without. Lobster condition (1 study): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in the Caribbean Sea found that lobsters in plots with artificial shelters were bigger than in plots without. BEHAVIOUR (3 STUDIES) Use (3 studies): Three replicated studies (two controlled) in Florida Bay, the Florida Keys, and the Caribbean Sea, found that artificial shelters were occupied by lobsters and molluscs, that occupancy by lobsters varied with artificial shelter designs, that lobsters occupied artificial shelters more than natural ones (crevices), and that lobsters occupying artificial shelters were larger, had greater nutritional condition, and had similar sex ratio and survival rate, compared to lobsters occupying natural shelters. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2257https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2257Wed, 23 Oct 2019 10:13:10 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Place anthropogenic installations (e.g: windfarms) in an area such that they create artificial habitat and reduce the level of fishing activity We found no studies that evaluated the effects of placing anthropogenic installations in an area such that they reduce the level of fishing activity on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2261https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2261Wed, 23 Oct 2019 10:51:55 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove and relocate habitat-forming (biogenic) species before onset of impactful activities One study examined the effects of removing and relocating habitat-forming species before onset of impactful activities on subtidal benthic invertebrates. The study was in the Fal Estuary (UK).   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Overall community composition (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled study in the Fal Estuary found that invertebrate community composition was different in plots where maërl bed habitat had been removed and relayed compared to undisturbed maërl after five weeks, but similar after 44 weeks. Overall species richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled study in the Fal Estuary found that invertebrate species richness was lower in plots where maërl bed habitat had been removed and relayed compared to undisturbed maërl after five weeks, but similar after 44 weeks. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Overall abundance (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled study in the Fal Estuary found that invertebrate abundance was different in plots where maërl bed habitat had been removed and relayed compared to undisturbed maërl after five weeks, but similar after 44 weeks. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2264https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2264Wed, 23 Oct 2019 11:00:53 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide artificial shelters following release We found no studies that evaluated the effects of providing artificial shelters following the release of species on their populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2272https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2272Wed, 23 Oct 2019 12:48:42 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove and relocate invertebrate species before onset of impactful activities We found no studies that evaluated the effects of removing and relocating invertebrate species before onset of impactful activities on their populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2280https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2280Wed, 23 Oct 2019 13:36:46 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide educational or other training programmes about the marine environment to improve behaviours towards marine invertebrates One study examined the effects of providing educational or other training programmes about the marine environment on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations. The study took place in Hong Kong.   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Behaviour change (1 study): One replicated, before-and-after survey study in Hong Kong found that a conservation education programme on the Asian horseshoe crab in secondary schools significantly increased the students’ behaviour towards Asian horseshoe crab conservation. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2281https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2281Wed, 23 Oct 2019 13:38:47 +0100
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