Study

The effect of reduced-impact logging on fruit-feeding butterflies in Central Amazon, Brazil

  • Published source details Ribeiro D.B. & Freitas A.V.L. (2012) The effect of reduced-impact logging on fruit-feeding butterflies in Central Amazon, Brazil. Journal of Insect Conservation, 16, 733-744.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Use selective or reduced impact logging instead of conventional logging

Action Link
Butterfly and Moth Conservation
  1. Use selective or reduced impact logging instead of conventional logging

    A site comparison study in 2007 in a rainforest in Amazon State, Brazil (Ribeiro & Freitas 2012) found that forests managed by reduced impact logging had a higher abundance, but similar species richness and diversity, of butterflies than unlogged, primary forest. In a forest managed by reduced impact logging, the abundance of butterflies (644 individuals) was higher than in an unlogged forest (447 individuals), but the species richness was not significantly different between reduced impact logging (62 species) and unlogged (54 species) forest. The diversity of butterflies was also similar between forest types (data presented as model results). See paper for individual species results. An 8,100-ha area of forest was managed under reduced impact logging for three years. Trees of 70 valuable species, >50 cm diameter at breast height, were selected and harvested by directional felling. A maximum of six trees/ha could be felled every 30 years. A 7,500-ha primary forest, which had never been logged, was also studied. From July–November 2007, butterflies were sampled for 14 days/month using 50 baited traps/forest. Traps were placed in groups of ten, 900 m apart. Within each group, traps were 100 m apart and alternated between the understorey (1.5 m above ground) and the canopy (20 m above ground). Traps were visited every 48 hours to replace bait and collect captured butterflies.

    (Summarised by: Andrew Bladon)

Output references
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