Soil biota indicators for monitoring the Estonian agri-environmental programme.

  • Published source details Sepp K., Ivask M., Kaasik A., Mikk M. & Peepson A. (2005) Soil biota indicators for monitoring the Estonian agri-environmental programme.. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 108, 264-273.


This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Pay farmers to cover the cost of conservation measures (as in agri-environment schemes)

Action Link
Farmland Conservation
  1. Pay farmers to cover the cost of conservation measures (as in agri-environment schemes)

    A replicated, controlled trial in Estonia (Sepp et al. 2005) found no difference in numbers of earthworms (Lumbricidae) or soil microbial activity between arable soils with and without agri-environment schemes, in the first two years of a pilot agri-environment scheme. There were 32-224 earthworms/m2 of 1-5 species in the Jõgeva County area and 0-614 earthworms/m2 of 0-5 species in the Saare County area. The grey worm Aporrectodea caliginosa was dominant (81-89% of all earthworm individuals) in both areas. As the scheme had been in place for one or two years only, the authors considered these results to be baseline data, showing no initial differences in soils between agri-environment and control areas. The ‘Environmentally Friendly Production Scheme’ required restricted nitrogen fertilizer (100 kg/ha or less), limited field size, at least 15% of the cultivated area to be under legumes or grass and legumes, with cereals not grown for more than three years in a row, uncultivated field margins and maintenance of existing landscape elements, including semi-natural habitats. The pilot scheme began in 2001. For each pilot area, earthworms were monitored in one cereal field on each of ten farms with the Environmentally Friendly Production Scheme, and five farms without it, in an adjacent reference area. Earthworms were sampled by hand-sorting from five soil blocks 50 x 50 x 40 cm. Microbial activity was sampled by estimating the activity of dehydrogenase enzymes (the fluorescein diacetate method).


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