Study

Effects of short-rotation controlled burning on amphibians and reptiles in pine woodlands

  • Published source details Perry R.W., Rudolph D.C. & Thill R.E. (2012) Effects of short-rotation controlled burning on amphibians and reptiles in pine woodlands. Forest Ecology and Management, 271, 124-131.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Use prescribed burning: Forest, open woodland & savanna

Action Link
Reptile Conservation

Use prescribed fire or modifications to burning regime in forests

Action Link
Amphibian Conservation
  1. Use prescribed burning: Forest, open woodland & savanna

    A replicated, randomized study in 1999–2001 in nine restored pine woodlands in western Arkansas, USA (Perry et al. 2012) found that overall reptile captures did not change during a three-year burning cycle, but some individual species capture rates varied with time after burning. Captures were similar in all years of a three-year burn cycle for overall reptiles (year 1: 79 individuals/stand, year 2: 79, year 3: 76) snakes (31, 33, 39), lizards (47, 44, 36) and turtles (0.7, 1.4, 0.9). Southern black racer snake Coluber constrictor priapus captures were lowest in the burn year (3 individuals/stand) compared to the two subsequent years (7–9). Ground skink Scincella lateralis captures were highest in the burn year (16 individuals/stand) compared to the two subsequent years (7–9). Southern coal skink Eumeces anthracinus pluvialis captures were highest in the second year after burning (0.7 individuals/stand) compared to the previous two years (0.1–0.1) and fence lizard Sceloporus undulatus captures were higher in the year after burning (19 individuals/stand) compared to the burn year (11) but similar to the second year after burning (13). In 1999–2001, nine stands (11–42 ha) were burned on a three-year cycle, so three were burned each year in March–April. Stands had been thinned at least nine years previously and had undergone 3–7 prescribed burns at 2–5-year intervals. Monitoring was undertaken using three drift-fence arrays/stand (15 m) connected to central funnel traps in April–September in 1999–2001.

    (Summarised by: Maggie Watson, Katie Sainsbury)

  2. Use prescribed fire or modifications to burning regime in forests

    A randomized, replicated study in 1999–2001 of nine restored pine woodlands in western Arkansas, USA (Perry, Rudolph & Thill 2012) found that overall numbers of amphibians were highest in the first year after burns compared to the following two years. This was true for total amphibians (1st year: 114; 2nd year: 53; 3rd year: 51/stand) and anurans (1st: 112; 2nd: 51; 3rd: 49). However, this trend was largely due to high numbers of dwarf American toads Bufo americanus charlessmithi in the first year (83 vs 27–31). Fowler’s toads Bufo fowleri were also captured most often in year one stands (2.0 vs 0.1–0.2). Salamanders captures did not differ between years after burn. In 1999–2001, stands (11–42 ha) were burned on a 3-year cycle, so three were burned each year in March–April. Stands had been thinned at least nine years previously and had undergone 3–7 prescribed burns at 2–5 year intervals. Monitoring was undertaken using three drift-fence arrays per stand (15 m) connected to central funnel traps in April–September in 1999–2001.

     

     

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