Catalogue of Conservation Reports:
Results from Systematic Searches
Search for evidence
e.g. "frogs chytrid"
311 studies found
Refine
Hide
311 studies found
Download these search results:
0 selected |
|
Order results by:
Study | Published | |
---|---|---|
NARRS report 2007-2012: Establishing the baseline Based on: Wilkinson J.W. & Arnell A.P. (2013) Amphibian and Reptile Conservation (ARC) report, ARC Research Report 13/01. Study Link |
2013 | |
Amphibian conservation in Britain Based on: Wilkinson J.W. & Buckley J. (2012) Froglog (Bulletin of the Amphibian Survival Alliance), 101, 12-13. Study Link |
2012 | |
Changes in lowland wet grassland breeding wader number: the influence of site designation Based on: Wilson A., Pendlebury C. & Vickery J. (2005) British Trust for Ornithology report, BTO Research Report 365. |
2005 | |
Habitat selection and breeding success of Skylarks Alauda arvensis on organic and conventional farmland Based on: Wilson J.D. & Browne S.J. (1993) British Trust for Ornithology report, BTO Research Report 129. |
1993 | |
Practical delivery of farm conservation management in England Based on: Winter M., Mills J. & Wragg A. (2000) Natural England report, English Nature Research Report 393. |
2000 | |
Seasearch surveys in Lyme Bay Based on: Wood C. (Seasearch) (2007) Natural England report. |
2007 | |
Grassland restoration of ecological networks: Evaluating the relative importance of site and landscape characteristics for invertebrate communities in grasslands restored through agri-environment schemes Based on: Woodcock B., Ball S., Amy S., Edwads M., Redhead J., Mountford O., Gregory S., Duffield S., Macgregor N. & Pywell R.F. (2015) Natural England report, DEFRA Report RP01878. |
2015 | |
Evaluating the relative importance of site and landscape characteristics for invertebrate communities in grasslands restored through agri-environment schemes Based on: Woodcock B., Ball S., Amy S., Edwards M., Redhead J., Mountford O., Gregory S., Duffield S., Macgregor N. & Pywell R. (2016) Natural England report, DEFRA Report RP01878. Study Link |
2016 | |
Monitoring of EK21, OK21, HK21 and OHK21 options: Legume and herb-rich swards Based on: Woodcock B., Redhead J., Riding L. & Mitschunas N. (2015) Natural England report, DEFRA Report RP02244. |
2015 | |
The Transportation of the Maximum Gain Salmon Spawning Target from the River Bush (N.I.) to England and Wales Based on: Wyatt R.J. & Barnard S. (1997) Environment Agency report, R&D Technical Report TR W65. |
1997 | |
Treefrog reintroduction project in Latvia Based on: Zvirgzds J. (1998) Froglog (Bulletin of the Amphibian Survival Alliance), 27, 2-3. |
1998 |
Download these search results:
0 selected |
|
Watch this search
If you are familiar with RSS feeds, please click the button below to retrieve the feed URL:
RSS feed for this searchIf you are unfamiliar with RSS feeds, we would suggest reading this BBC article.
Unfortunately, due to the number of feeds we have available, we cannot provide e-mail updates. However, you could use tools such as Feed My Inbox to do this for you.
What are 'Individual studies' and 'Actions'?
Individual studies
An individual study is a summary of a specific scientific study, usually taken from a scientific journal, but also from other resources such as reports. It tells you the background context, the action(s) taken and their consequences.
If you want more detail please look at the original reference.
Actions
Each action page focuses on a particular action you could take to benefit wildlife or ecosystems.
It contains brief (150-200 word) descriptions of relevant studies (context, action(s) taken and their consequences) and one or more key messages.
Key messages show the extent and main conclusions of the available evidence. Using links within key messages, you can look at the paragraphs describing each study to get more detail. Each paragraph allows you to assess the quality of the evidence and how relevant it is to your situation.
Where we found no evidence, we have been unable to assess whether or not an intervention is effective or has any harmful impacts.
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 purchaseThe 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
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.
Go to the Conservation Evidence blog
Who uses Conservation Evidence?
Meet some of the evidence champions
For a full list of, and information about, our champions:
All Evidence ChampionsAbout our champions, why and how to become one:
Become an Evidence ChampionThis website uses Cookies
We use limited Cookies to run the site and to analyse our traffic (none for site vendors). By using this site, you will be providing your consent to our use of Cookies.
Accept & continue1 Select a category
- Birds
- Marshes and Swamps
- Reptiles
- Terrestrial Mammals
- Subtidal benthic invertebrates
- Bats
- Marine and Freshwater Mammals
- Control of Freshwater Invasive Species
- Primates
- Amphibians
- Peatlands
- Butterflies and moths
- Forest
- Farmland
- Shrublands and Heathlands
- Captive Animals
- Marine fish
- Mediterranean Farmland
- Bees
- Marine artificial structures
- Grassland
- Soils
- Aquaculture
- Natural Pest Control
2 Refine category
3 View actions
What concerns you?
Fields with * are required.
Letters are not case-sensitive.