Establish long-term cover on erodible cropland

Overall effectiveness category Unknown effectiveness (limited evidence)
Number of studies: 1
Share Tweet Email

View assessment score

How is the evidence assessed?

Effectiveness

7%
Certainty

27%
Harms

0%

Calculating overall effectiveness category

Background information and definitions

Establishing long-term cover on cropland that is highly susceptible to erosion may be carried out for a number of reasons including conserving soil fertility, limiting carbon emissions and enhancing habitat for biodiversity. The provision of long-term cover has potential to benefit mammals that are able to exploit increased shelter and food resources.

Study locations

Key messages

One study evaluated the effects on mammals of establishing long-term cover on erodible cropland. This study was in the USA.

COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY)

Abundance (1 study): A replicated, site comparison study in the USA, found that establishing long-term cover on erodible cropland did not increase the abundance of eastern cottontails.

BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)

About key messages

Key messages provide a descriptive index to studies we have found that test this intervention.

Studies are not directly comparable or of equal value. When making decisions based on this evidence, you should consider factors such as study size, study design, reported metrics and relevance of the study to your situation, rather than simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation.

Supporting evidence from individual studies

A replicated, site comparison study in 1989–1990 on six areas of mostly arable farmland in Nebraska, USA (King & Savidge 1995) found that establishing long-term cover on erodible cropland was not associated with increased abundance of eastern cottontails Sylvilagus floridanus. The number of cottontails counted in areas with 18–21% long-term cover (2.1–6.7 cottontails/block) did not differ significantly from that in areas with 2–3% long-term cover (4.1–8.8 cottontails/block). Within six 23-km² farmland blocks, the proportion of land managed under an agri-environment scheme aimed at diversifying long-term cover types and reducing crop production was determined. In three blocks, 18–21% of cropland was in the scheme and in the other three, 2–3% was in the scheme. Long-term cover, established under 10-year contracts, included establishment of grasses and legumes. Live cottontails were counted from a vehicle while driving at 30–40 km/h, in May and June of 1989 and 1990.
Study and other actions tested
Referenced paper
King J.W. & Savidge J.A. (1995) Effects of the Conservation Reserve Program on wildlife in southeast Nebraska. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 23, 377-385.

Please cite as:

Littlewood, N.A., Rocha, R., Smith, R.K., Martin, P.A., Lockhart, S.L., Schoonover, R.F., Wilman, E., Bladon, A.J., Sainsbury, K.A., Pimm S. and Sutherland, W.J. (2020) Terrestrial Mammal Conservation: Global Evidence for the Effects of Interventions for terrestrial mammals excluding bats and primates. Synopses of Conservation Evidence Series. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Terrestrial Mammal Conservation

Related Actions

Actions	Effectiveness	Studies	Category
Establish long-term cover on erodible cropland Action Link	Unknown effectiveness (limited evidence)	1	Synopsis Link
Plant crops to provide supplementary food for mammals Action Link	Beneficial	4	Synopsis Link
Create beetle banks on farmland Action Link	Unknown effectiveness (limited evidence)	1	Synopsis Link