Re-plant native trees in logged areas
-
Overall effectiveness category Evidence not assessed
-
Number of studies: 1
View assessment score
Hide assessment score
How is the evidence assessed?
-
Effectiveness
not assessed -
Certainty
not assessed -
Harms
not assessed
Study locations
Supporting evidence from individual studies
A site comparison study in 2007 and 2009 in an area of moist forest in the Central Region, Ghana (Sáfián et al 2011) found that after nine years, an area replanted Species richness was similar in nine-year-old replanted forest (54), naturally regenerated secondary forest (51) and a clear-cut area (53), all of which had fewer species than primary forest (62). However, using statistical models, replanted forest had lower estimated species richness (66–75) than the clear-cut area (66–75 vs 77–128). Butterfly community diversity was lower in all three diversity metrics in replanted forest than clear-cut or primary forest, and in two of three metrics than secondary forest (data presented as diversity indices). Differences between habitat types were not tested statistically. Butterfly community compositions in the replanted forest, naturally regenerated secondary forest and primary forest were more similar to each other than to the clear-cut area, but replanted forest and naturally regenerated secondary forest community were more similar to each other than to the primary forest (data presented as similarity index results). Four habitat patches were surveyed, all within a 40 ha area and ~250 m apart from each other, on the boundary of Kakum National Park: young forest planted nine years ago with Ceiba pentandra, Chlorophora excelsa, Terminalia ivoriensis and Khaya ivoriensis, middle-aged naturally regenerated secondary forest, old primary forest and an area which was previously primary forest but was clear cut one year prior to the first surveying year. Patch size was not given. Eight banana-baited traps were established 30 m apart in each of the sampled patches, and operated for 12 consecutive days, three times each in 2007 and 2009. Butterflies were collected from traps daily.
Study and other actions tested
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:
Butterfly and Moth Conservation
Butterfly and Moth Conservation - Published 2023
Butterfly and Moth Synopsis