Create or restore shrubland

Overall effectiveness category Awaiting assessment
Number of studies: 1
Share Tweet Email

View assessment score

How is the evidence assessed?

Effectiveness

not assessed
Certainty

not assessed
Harms

not assessed

Calculating overall effectiveness category

Background information and definitions

Loss of shrubland may be due to a range of factors, including too many grazing animals inhibiting regeneration of shrubs, too few grazing animals or fire suppression leading to reversion to woodland, or invasion by non-native species. Shrubland restoration or creation may benefit reptiles associated with the habitat.

Study locations

Key messages

One study evaluated the effects of creating or restoring shrubland on reptile populations. This study was in Mexico.

COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY)

Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in Mexico found that areas of restored shrubland had similar reptile and amphibian species richness compared to areas that were not restored.

POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY)

Abundance (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in Mexico found that areas of restored shrubland had a higher abundance of lizards than areas that were not restored.

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, controlled study in 2009–2010 in three sites of dry scrub within a wider urban setting in Mexico City, Mexico (San-José et al. 2013) found that restoring shrubland by planting native species, removing invasive plants and constructing rock piles resulted in similar species richness, but higher abundance of lizards compared to a site with no management. Results were not statistically tested, and the effect of each intervention cannot be separated. Restored sites had a similar number of species (4 species of reptiles and amphibians) as the site with no management (3 species of reptiles and amphibians). Higher numbers of lizards were observed in the two restored sites compared to the site with no management (overall abundances not provided). In 2005–2006, restored sites (0.5 and 0.3 ha) were cleared of rubbish and exotic woody vegetation (dominated by Eucalyptus camaldulensis); replanted with native vegetation; and rock piles were constructed (2–3 m diameter and 1.2 m high). The site without management (0.3 ha) had no vegetation removal or planting or rock piles. Sites were surveyed eight times each by slow, random walks between May 2009–2010.
Study and other actions tested
Referenced paper
San-José M., Garmendia A. & Cano-Santana Z. (2013) Vertebrate fauna evaluation after habitat restoration in a reserve within Mexico City. Ecological Restoration, 31, 249-252.

Please cite as:

Sainsbury K.A., Morgan W.H., Watson M., Rotem G., Bouskila A., Smith R.K. & Sutherland W.J. (2021) Reptile Conservation: Global Evidence for the Effects of Interventions for reptiles. Conservation Evidence Series Synopsis. 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:

Reptile Conservation

Related Actions

Actions	Effectiveness	Studies	Category
Restore beaches Action Link	Awaiting assessment	1	Synopsis Link
Create or restore wetlands Action Link	Awaiting assessment	7	Synopsis Link
Create or restore grasslands Action Link	Awaiting assessment	4	Synopsis Link