Study

Diminishing Returns from Higher Density Restoration Seedings Suggest Trade-offs in Pollinator Seed Mixes

  • Published source details Wilkerson M.L., Ward K.L., Williams N.M., Ullmann K.S. & Young T.P. (2014) Diminishing Returns from Higher Density Restoration Seedings Suggest Trade-offs in Pollinator Seed Mixes. Restoration Ecology, 22, 782-789

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Other biodiversity: Plant flowers

Action Link
Mediterranean Farmland

Pollination: Plant flowers

Action Link
Mediterranean Farmland
  1. Other biodiversity: Plant flowers

    A replicated study in 2008–2010 in farmland in the Central Valley, California, USA, found that a higher percentage of flower species persisted over time in flower plots that were planted with higher amounts of seed. Plants: Eight of nine species persisted for two years. Six species persisted for three years. Implementation options: Over the two years that followed planting, a higher percentage of species persisted in plots that were planted with two to four times as much seed (2x–4x) as the plots that were planted with the least seed (1x: 17–60%; 2x: 33–74%; 4x: 35–77%), but there was not a significant difference between the plots with 2x and 4x. The amount of seed planted had a significant effect on the percentage cover of plants, but it was not clear which treatments were significantly different from one another (data reported as log aggregate forb cover). Methods: Nine plots (1 x 8 m) were sown with the seeds of nine flower species in each of six hedgerows.

     

  2. Pollination: Plant flowers

    A replicated study in 2009–2011 in farmland in the Central Valley, California, USA, found more bees and bee species on one species of flowering plant than on five other species. Implementation options: Gum plant Grindelia camporum attracted more individuals and species of native bees than did five other species of flowering plants (190–220 vs 0–60 individuals; 10–11 vs 1–6 species). Methods: At each of three sites, five plots were planted with mixtures of native forbs in October 2009. Plots were 3 x 15 m. Bees on flowers were netted once/month (20 minutes/sample, April–September 2010–2011).

     

Output references

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, terrestrial 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 18

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 Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust