Remove, control or exclude invertebrate herbivores
-
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 replicated, site comparison study in 1995–1998 in 28 woodland sites in Argyll, UK (Feber et al 2011) found that at sites fenced to exclude grazing animals there was a higher density of pearl-bordered fritillary butterflies Boloria Euphrosyne than at unfenced sites. In sites within woodland that were fenced to exclude deer there was a higher density of pearl-bordered fritillaries (6.8 butterflies/hectare) than at sites where deer were not excluded (3.7 butterflies/ha). In woodland edge sites where fencing excluded deer, there was a higher density of pearl-bordered fritillaries (10.7 butterflies/ha) than where deer were not excluded and sheep were grazing (0.1 butterflies/ha). In May and June 1998 mark-release-recapture surveys of pearl-bordered fritillaries were conducted at the 28 sites of woodland and woodland edge in Lochawe. Within this area were two woods designated in 1995–1996 under the Woodland Grant Scheme and fenced to exclude deer (6 sampling sites in woodland, 12 at woodland edge). These were compared to other woodland sites without deer fencing (3 sites) and woodland edge sites without fencing which were also sheep grazed (7 sites).
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