Effects of reforestation age on moth assemblages in plantations and naturally regenerated forests

  • Published source details Taki H., Yamaura Y., Okochi I., Inoue T., Okabe K. & Makino S. (2010) Effects of reforestation age on moth assemblages in plantations and naturally regenerated forests. Insect Conservation and Diversity, 3, 257-265.


This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Encourage natural regeneration in former plantations or logged forest

Action Link
Butterfly and Moth Conservation
  1. Encourage natural regeneration in former plantations or logged forest

    A replicated, site comparison study in 2001–2002 in 18 forest stands in Ibaraki Prefecture, Japan (Taki et al. 2010) reported that naturally regenerating forests had a higher abundance and species richness of moths than plantations, and found that the moth community changed with forest age. In naturally regenerating forests, 286–979 individuals of 121–220 species/stand were recorded, compared to 68–672 individuals of 50–192 species/stand in plantations (statistical significance not assessed). In naturally regenerating forests, the abundance and species richness of moths was similar between young (abundance: 344–849 individuals/stand; richness: 132–177 species/stand), mature (abundance: 375–979 individuals/stand; richness: 125–220 species/stand) and old (abundance: 286–682 individuals/stand; richness: 121–171 species/stand) forests, but the species community was different (data presented as model results). Six species were associated with young, 71 with mature, and 43 with old naturally regenerating forest. In mature plantations, the abundance (151–672 individuals/stand) and species richness (84–192 species/stand) of moths was higher than in young plantations (abundance: 68–271 individuals/stand; richness: 50–117 species/stand). Ten forest stands (2.5–32.5 ha) had been naturally regenerating for 1–178 years, and eight conifer plantations (2.6–14.3 ha) were planted 1–74 years ago. Forests were divided into three age classes (young: <20 years old; mature: 20–100 years old; old: >100 years old (natural regeneration stands only)). In August 2001–2002, moths were sampled on two nights/year using one 6 W black-light trap in each plantation forest (in 2001) and naturally regenerating stand (in 2002). Species with fewer than three individuals in each forest type were excluded.

    (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